Commento su Genesi 6:28

AND IT CAME TO PASS, WHEN MEN BEGAN TO MULTIPLY ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH. When Scripture mentioned Noah and his sons and wanted to begin the account of the flood, it said that as soon as men began to multiply they began to sin, and they continued their sinful ways for many years until Noah was four hundred and eighty years⁴⁹⁰Noah begot children at the age of 500 (Verse 32 in Chapter 5). Twenty years before, G-d decreed the advent of the flood. (See Rashi here, Verse 3.) of age. Then the Holy One, blessed be He, decreed against them that “His spirit will not abide in them forever,”⁴⁹¹See Verse 3. but that He will prolong their years until their measure of sin is full, for such is the way of G-d’s judgment.

ויהי כי החל האדם, a reference to the human species.

ויהי כי החל האדם לרוב על פני האדמה ובנות יולדו להם, the Torah speaks of the “daughters who were born to men” as an introduction to the fact that the human species multiplied on the face of the earth. Seeing that there were a disproportionate number of girls being born, the species increased quickly.

(1-2) Es wird uns hier der Grund der Verschlechterung des Menschengeschlechts in einer Vermischung zweier Menschenklassen gezeigt, der ׳בני האלקי und der בנות האדם. Wir haben eben zuvor zwei Geschlechtsreihen kennen gelernt. Eine kainitische Menschenentwickelung, die ohne Gott eine Existenz auf Erden auf Grund von Erfindungen und Industrie anstrebt, die an sich berechtigt, hier aber, ohne Gott, nur in Verzweiflung und Trostlosigkeit endet. Dem gegenüber ein sethitisches Geschlecht, an dessen Spitze nochmals der ganze göttliche Stempel, die Kraft und der Segen der reinen Bestimmung, die Gott dem Menschen ursprünglich erteilt hat, wiederholt steht, — דמות צלם ,ברכה ,אדם, — auch die — um des Folgenden willen — doppelt wichtige gleiche Ebenbürtigkeit und Bedeutung des weiblichen Geschlechts זכר ונקבה בראם u.s.w. Von jenem, dem kainitischen Geschlecht, in welchem "das Göttliche völlig verlöscht" wurde, מחויאל, waren die בנות האדם. Dieses, das sethitische Geschlecht, in welchem sich der göttliche Stempel vererbte, waren die בני האלקים. In ihm trat, wie wir gesehen, das Göttliche, wenn auch nicht zur völligen Rettung des Menschengeschlechtes, doch immer wieder hervor. Dass aber in diesem Geschlechte der Fortschritt zum Göttlichen nicht so stetig und sicher, wie das Abwärtsschreiten zum Verderben im kainitischen gewesen, das kam daher, weil sie sich nicht rein gehalten, weil sie sich mit dem kainitischen Geschlechte vermischten, sich Frauen aus dem kainitischen Geschlechte nahmen. Es heißt: "Als die Menschen sich zu vermehren anfingen —" früher war nicht große Wahl in Stiftung der Ehen, aber jetzt hätte das sethitische Geschlecht sich rein halten können, "da sahen die Söhne des göttlichen Geschlechtes die Töchter des anderen Geschlechtes, dass sie gut — wohl טבת מראה, schön — waren", sie sahen nicht auf die Abstammung des Weibes, nicht auf die Kinder, die sie von so erzogenen Frauen erwarten konnten, sahen nur das Weib an, und diese gefielen ihnen. Das Verderben lag nicht in den Frauen, sondern in der Abstammung: מכל אשר בחרו, in diesem "מ", in dem Woher, sie hielten sich nicht in dem Geschlechte der בני אלקי׳.

ובנות ילדו להם, there was not really any need to tell us this, seeing that the species cannot survived without females and males. The entire story concerns the females, seeing that the male elite made the mistake of intermarrying with physically attractive, but otherwise morally inferior females, as a result of which the entire human race became progressively more corrupt.

Man hat allerdings immer in dieser Beziehung das Vergehen gesucht, allein man erblickte es in dem ויקחו, in welchem man ein Rauben und in dem Ganzen ein unzüchtiges Treiben zu finden glaubte. לקח אשה bezeichnet aber vielmehr überall ein eheliches Verhältnis und ist der eigentliche Ausdruck für Heiraten. Die Sünde, die aber notwendig in diesem Satze, des Folgenden willen, angegeben sein muss, dürfte daher nur in dem "מכל אשר בחרו" zu suchen sein. Sie verheirateten sich mit Frauen, ohne zu bedenken, woher sie sie nahmen. Darin also die Sünde.

Die Folgen hätten segensreich sein können, wenn es möglich gewesen wäre, dass die Abkömmlinge des göttlichen Stammes die Keime des Schlechten, die die Gattin ins Haus brachte, durch den in ihnen mächtigen göttlichen Geist hätten überwältigen können. Allein das Wagestück ist immer ein zu großes. Es wird immer die Frage sein, welches Moment in den Kindern das überwiegende sein wird, und ob nicht je länger die Vermischung dauert, um so mehr die Depravierung sich fortpflanzt. Der folgende Vers gibt uns Aufschluss, wie das Problem sich hier löste.

These are the generations of Noah. Noah etc. The text wants to praise Noah for having been whole from his beginning until his end. And this is why it is said, "These are the generations of Noah. Noah..." This intends to emphasize [Noah's wholeness] from his beginning until his end, he was of one value and of singularly similar acts. And an explanation for this reason that the text says "A righteous man he was in his generations" is that he was as such in generations when people are not seen as righteous--throughout all of this, as if in all of his generations, both in the generation of his youth and in the generation of his old age. Throughout them all, he was of one character. He was a righteous man in all of the generations that passed over him. And the text says "complete" (tamim), for he was not like some of the righteous people who have erred and in the end changed course and turned over (towards righteousness). Rather, he had always been 'complete,' for he had no blemish or perversion. And, if you were to say, "How is it possible for him to have had this [quality]?" Then, say that the reason for this is "Noah walked with God." This is to say, that he never had any dealing with a human creature, but he would spend all day alone [i.e., with God]. And for this, he had the power to be saved from those [humans] and did not sin at all. Proof has been brought for his isolation, for the whole world had engaged in sexually illicit actions, and that is how they had many sons and daughters, and, as such, it says, "It was when the human species began to increase." Indeed, Noah did not produce offspring until he had reached 600 years of age, and all that he produced was three sons and nothing more, and all of this is to teach about his isolation. And for this, the text doubly mentioned their generations here, for the text said indeed, "in all of the world," and this is why the text said, "the land became corrupt etc."

בני האלהים THE SONS OF ELOHIM — The sons of princes and rulers (Genesis Rabbah 26:15). Another explanation of בני האלהים is that these were princely angels who came as messengers from God: they, too, intermingled with them (the daughters of men). Wherever the word אלהים occurs in the Scriptures it signifies authority, and the following passages prove this: (Exodus 4:16) “and thou shalt be his (אלהים) master”, and (Exodus 7:1) “See, I have made the (אלהים) a master.”

BNEI HA’ELOHIM. The sons of princes and rulers. This is the language of Rashi, and so it is in Bereshith Rabbah.⁴⁹²26:8. If so, Scripture relates that the judges whose duty it was to administer justice among them committed open violence without anyone interfering.

ויראו בני האלוהים, the sons of the judges, the elite of the species who are here referred to as אלוהים, just as in Exodus 22,27 אלוהים לא תקלל, “you must not curse a judge.” There are numerous similar examples in the Torah of the attribute אלוהים being applied to morally high ranking human beings. Onkelos also translates it in this vein when he speaks of בני רברביא. The explanations offered that the Torah refers to Uzza and Uzael are very far fetched. (compare Torah shleymah on this verse). [The two aforementioned are supposed to have been angels who had voted against the creation of man and who belittled man’s effort to conquer the evil urge. They were supposedly punished by being consigned to earth to experience life on earth by themselves. Instead of proving their superiority, they were the first to succumb to the allurement of physically attractive females. Their request to return to the celestial regions was denied by G’d. Ed.]
According to Bereshit Rabbah 26,5 Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai cursed anyone who translated the words בני האלוהים as “the sons of G’d.” He added that when the elite of the people are themselves guilty of the sins they want the common man to refrain from, their efforts are doomed to start with. Another reason offered why these people were referred to as בני האלוהים, (according to both Rabbi Chaninah and Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish, is that these were the people enjoying carefree long lives, free from sickness and other impediments. [This may have given them the illusion of being able to get away with whatever they felt like doing. Ed.] Rav Hunna, quoting Rabbi Yossi, says that these people were granted such long lives in order to enable them to study the sky, observe the orbits of the stars and make calculations resulting in our calendar.

ויראו בני האלוקים,” the ‘sons’ of G’d saw, etc.” The expression בני האלוקים, refers to the elite of the society in those days, the law enforcers and judges. The Torah informs us that the very people charged with maintaining the functioning of an orderly, law abiding society, were the first to take the law into their own hands whenever it suited their purpose. Abuse of power leads to anarchy.

When they improved (מטיבין) her appearance. This is similar to the expression מטיבין את הנרות. It means this because טֹבֹת conveys that they just now became fair, similar to ועפרון ישֵׁב (23:10), conveying that Ephron just now sat. Furthermore, טבת without a vav is a singular expression, implying that not all women were fair, only individual women — the beautified brides. But if it were written טובות, a plural expression, it would imply that the women were always fair, i.e., beautified.

ויראו בני האלוהים את בנות האדם כי טובות הנה, ויקחו להם נשים מכל אשר בחרו. We have already explained that the noun אלוהים is a noun which is sometimes applied to G’d, and sometimes to certain people, and sometimes to phenomena which some people worship even though they have nothing divine about them, In Genesis 1,1 בראשית ברא אלוקים, it is clearly a reference to G’d. In Genesis 20,3 ויבא אלוהים אל אבימלך, it is a reference to an angel, seeing that he carried out a mission on behalf of G’d. In Exodus 22,8 עד האלוהים יבא דבר שניהם, it is a reference to a judge, a human being. The term is also applied to select human beings of a spiritually high level, such as when David quotes G’d in Psalms 82,6 אני אמרתי אלהים אתם, I used to say that you (man) are “divine,” (until you sinned). In our verse here, the Torah in speaking of בני האלוהים, refers to the elite of the human species at the time. In our verse it is a reference to the male elite, the judges.

בני אלהים, according to Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai,(in B’reshit Rabbah 26,5) the word אלהים here is to be understood as: “judges.” He was very angry at people who translated this expression as “sons of G-d.” The question remains why, the other Rabbis translated the word as they did? The answer given by both Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish and Rabbi Yochanan is that these people lived untroubled lives of tremendous length, so that they could easily have been confused with children whom G-d Himself had sired.

כי טבת הנה THAT THEY WERE FAIR — Rabbi Judan said, “It is written here טבת, for when they were being made to appear “good” by being decked out to be taken beneath the marriage canopy one of the lords would come and carry her off first (Genesis Rabbah 26:5).

‘KI’ (WHEN) THEY WERE FAIR. [The meaning of the word ki here] is the same as in the verses: ‘Ki’ (when) thou seest the ass of him that hateth thee;⁴⁹³Exodus 23:5. ‘ki’ (when) a bird’s nest chance to be before thee.⁴⁹⁴Deuteronomy 22:6. When the daughters of men were fair, they would take them forcibly as wives for themselves. Thus Scripture tells of the violence and mentions further, whomsoever they chose, in order to include those who were married to others. Scripture, however, did not mention the prohibition concerning them clearly, and the punishment decreed upon them was only because of the violence,⁴⁹⁵Further, Verse 13. because this is a reasoned concept and does not require the Torah to prohibit it.

את בנות האדם, the daughters of the weaker specimen of the human race. The women were unable to resist the physically superior specimen referred to as בני האלוהים, and as a result if fancied by the latter, they would be taken by them as wives or concubines against their will, and the will of even their husbands. [The Torah describes the first time the law of the “survival of the fittest” was practiced by the human race. The result was the deluge. Ed.] The term אדם next to the term אלוהים simply compares the weak to the strong In the Sifri¸ (Behaalotcha 86) the point is made that when ordinary individuals observed that the judges took the law into their own hands, they reasoned that they themselves would most certainly be able to get away with the same thing, seeing that the judges are supposed to set a good example.
Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra understands the expression בני אלוהים, as referring to spiritually superior people, people who knew what G’d expected of them. They chose wives according to what they perceived was suitable for them basing themselves on their reading of astrology. As a result of such careful mating, their offspring were in many instances giants, etc., as we read about at the end of our verse. It is possible that they took women of their choice even against the will of these women.

Even a man or an animal. [Rashi knows this] because it says נשים מכל אשר בחרו. The word נשים implies “even a married woman,” while אשר בחרו implies “even a man or an animal.” (Re’m) Re’m asks: It says in Kiddushin 13a that they did not commit adultery. [Why then does Rashi say, “even a married woman”?] Nachalas Yaakov answers: It seems that only the sons of rulers committed adultery, not the common people, because נשים מכל אשר בחרו refers back to: “The sons of the rulers saw.” That is why Rashi says, “The head ruler would then enter and have relations....” However, Re’m suggests that these might be two conflicting opinions.

מכל אשר בחרו OF ALL WHOM THEY CHOOSE — even if it were a married woman or a man or an animal (Genesis Rabbah 26:5).

כי טובות הנה, Rabbi Yudan, noting the defective spelling of the word טובות as טבת claims that this is a transitive form of the verb, and that the judges when handing over the virgin bride to her prospective husband would first sleep with her. The missing letters ו in the word טבת refer to these girls having been deprived of their hymen.

מכל אשר בחרו, as they were extremely intelligent, they selected for themselves wives who were equally intelligent or almost so, so that their children would enjoy the genetic benefits of their superior intelligence and physical strength.

ויקחו להם נשים, a reference to married women.

מכל אשר בחרו, the word מכל, “from all,” includes homosexual unions, and mating between man and beast.

לא ידון רוחי באדם MY SPIRIT SHALL NOT STRIVE AGAINST MAN — My Spirit shall not be in a state of discontent and shall not strive with Myself because of man.

‘BESHAGAM’ (FOR THAT ALSO) HE IS FLESH. It is as if beshagam were written beshegam with a segol under the shin. And Rashi explained: “This quality is also in him, that he is only flesh, and yet he is not humble before Me. What would he do if he were made of fire or some hard substance.” This explanation has neither rhyme nor reason.
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained that G-d said, “My spirit will not abide in man forever because of this violence and also because man is flesh, and when he reaches a certain age he disintegrates.” Ibn Ezra thus understands the verse as if it said, gam beshehu basar (also because he is flesh). But what need is there for stating this contention when it is known that they were but flesh.⁴⁹⁶Psalms 78:39. and death had been decreed on them, as it says, For dust thou art, and unto dust shalt thou return?⁴⁹⁷Above, 3:19.
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that G-d said: “My spirit shall not abide in man forever because man also is flesh as all flesh that creepeth upon the earth in the forms of fowl and cattle and beast, and it is not fitting that the spirit of G-d be within him.” The purport is to state that G-d made man upright⁴⁹⁸Ecclesiastes 7:29. to be like the ministering angels by virtue of the soul He gave him. But he was drawn after the flesh and corporeal desires; he is like the beasts that perish,⁴⁹⁹Psalms 49:13. and therefore the spirit of G-d will no longer be sheathed in him for he is corporeal and not godly. However, He will prolong for them [this withdrawal of spirit] if they repent. The sense of this verse is thus similar to [the verse in Psalm 49]: So He remembered that they were but flesh, a wind that passeth away, and cometh not again.

לא ידון, G’d says that He cannot continue to weigh if to destroy mankind or not constantly, בשגם, although He is making allowances בשר, for the fact that they are largely composed of flesh; nonetheless they keep deteriorating so that He is forced to put an end to them.

לא ידון רוחי באדם לעולם בשגם הוא בשר, it is intolerable that there will continue the argument, strife before Me allowing (the angels?) to claim that although seeing that man has been endowed with divine qualities he must be punished, whereas his close ties to physical earth must be considered as excuses for his conduct, entitling him to continued mercy, and indulgence by Me.

ויאמר השם לא ידון רוחי. G'd said: "My spirit will not abide in man permanently." This verse needs someone to explain it. Our sages have given numerous explanations to it without explaining the plain meaning of the verse. It appears that the Torah wishes to tell us that a change occurred in G'd's dealing with man. During the lifetime of Adam, Eve, Cain and Abel, G'd personally had rebuked man for any misdemeanour. When man's deeds became increasingly repulsive to G'd, He decided not to deal with them on such an intimate basis.

ויאמר ה' לא ידון רוחי באדם לעולם, G’d either said this to Himself, or to Noach. My father of blessed memory (Joseph Kimchi) explained the line לא ידון in the same sense as the word מדון in Proverbs 15,18 as referring to a struggle, strife. The soul G’d had blown into Adam’s nostrils was meant as an antidote to the pull of the raw material man was made of. The body, basically is in tow of the animalistic urges of the animals, something natural, seeing that man’s own body is made of the same raw material as are the animals. G’d now decided to grant man an extension of 120 years to do תשובה, repentance, failing which He would wipe out mankind from the earth. Other commentators, including Ibn Ezra, explain the word ידון as related to נדנה in Chronicles I 21,27 וישב חרבו אל נדנה, “he returned his sword to its sheath.” Actually, if correct, the word ידון should have been spelled with a dagesh in the letterד, replacing the missing letter נ, however, in this instance, instead of such a dagesh, the Torah simply omitted the letter נ at the beginning, as it did in Genesis 25,29 ויזד יעקב נזיד where the letter נ in front of the letter ז has also been omitted. At any rate, the meaning of the expression is that G’d would not let His spirit rest until both man’s body and spirit would be wiped out.
Rabbi Yishmael son of Yossi, (Bereshit Rabbah 26,6) understood this verse as G’d saying that when the time would come to share out reward to the righteous, these people would not participate in it. He was speaking of ידון in the sense of “passing judgment.” Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish as well as his colleague Rabbi Yannai, said that there is no such thing as the popular concept of a hell, gehinnom, lasting a long time, but that at the time when G’d passes out judgment the wicked will be burned by the fiery heat of a flame. They based themselves on Maleachi 3,19 הנה יום בא בוער כתנור, “here a day will come when the fire will burn as in a furnace.” The other sages said that there most certainly is such a thing as gehinnom, as we have a verse in Isaiah 31,9 נאום ה' אשר אור לו בציון ותנור לו בירושלים, “says the Lord Who has a fire in Zion and an oven in Jerusalem.” Rabbi Yehudah bar Ila-i claims there is neither a specific day, nor a specific place such as gehinnom, but fire will come forth from the very bodies of the wicked and will consume them with its heat. He based himself on Isaiah 33,11 תהרו חשש תלדו קש רוחכם אש תאכלתם, “you shall conceive hay, give birth to straw; My breath will devour you like fire.”
We have also written what the sages of the Midrash wrote concerning the matter of gehinnom in connection with Genesis 1,31 וירא אלוקים את כל אשר עשה והנה טוב מאד, “G’d saw all that He had made and here it was very good;” the point made there was that the word טוב refers to Gan Eden, whereas the expression טוב מאד, refers to gehinnom. [refer to page 72 in my translation. Ed.] Rabbi Yehudah in the name of Rabbi Ila-i (also in Bereshit Rabbah 26,6) interprets the words לא ידון רוחי עוד, that “these wicked spirits of man will never be allowed to come to rest before Me.” Various sages concur that the generation destroyed during the deluge will neither be judged for an afterlife during the time that the world awaits its own rejuvenation, nor will it be judged (if any are fit) to be resurrected in the world following the interval between our present world being turned into chaos and the subsequent resurrection of the deserving from the former world. (Sanhedrin 107)

בשגם הוא בשר, “seeing that he is part flesh.” According to Rashi G’d said that if man, made partially of soft issue such as flesh, did not bring himself to humble himself in His Presence, how much worse would he be if made of a hard substance or of fire? Ibn Ezra claims that G’d said: “My spirit will never prevail within man, on account of this sin (the practice of indiscriminate violence) coupled with the fact that the raw material he is made of, i.e. flesh, which will cause him to die so that only his spirit (soul) will return to Me.” [once his spirit leaves him his flesh will decompose. Ed Maimonides explains the meaning of the verse to be that G’d’s spirit will never prevail in man seeing that the fact that he too is made of flesh like all other moving creatures, ensures that he will die just as all creatures die and disintegrate. He therefore does not deserve that G’d’s spirit be at home within him. What Maimonides means is that whereas G’d had given man a divine soul such as He gave to the angels, they had chosen to prefer to emphasise the physical part of themselves, be more like the animals so that they do not deserve the gift G’d had given them.

לא ידון רוחי באדם לעולם, “My spirit will not contend evermore concerning Man, etc.” Actually, the word ידון is derived from נדנה, a word which we encounter in Daniel 7,15 אנא דניאל בגוא נדנה, “I, Daniel, my spirit was uneasy in its sheath;” the sheath of a sword is called either נדנה or תיק. In a similar manner the body is the sheath of the soul. What our verse means is that “My Spirit,” i.e. the soul, will not ever find a permanent home within the body of Man. The composition of Man’s body after it had become corrupt is simply not fit to be a permanent home for such a lofty intelligent spirit as the soul.

His days shall be. Hashem saw that their long life spans were not to their benefit because after years of struggle the body inevitably defeated the soul, dragging it down to its own level.

Due to manAccordingly,] the ב of באדם is similar to (29:20): “So Yaakov worked for Rochel (ברחל),” which means “due to Rochel.”

והיו ימיו מאה ועשרים שנה, it is possible that G’d extended their life spans for another 120 years, seeing the measure of their sin was not yet full. We have the Torah on record as the Emorites’ measure of sin not being complete, and that as a result of this the Israelites could not yet dispossess them (Genesis 15,16). Abusing one’s G’d given tzelem is something that cannot be allowed to continue indefinitely. David already summed this up in Psalms 82,6 when he quoted G’d as saying: אני אמרתי אלוהים אתם ובני עליון כלכם, אכן כאדם תמותון, “I had said that you are all divine beings, sons of the most High; all of you, but you shall die as men do, etc.”

Als diese Vermischung überhand nahm, sprach Gott: לא ידון רוחי באדם לעולם בשגם הוא בשר. Es kann nicht heißen: Mein Geist soll nicht ewig wider den Menschen streiten. Abgesehen davon, dass דון nie mit — konstruiert wird (ידין בגוים heißt: unter den Völkern, in ihrer Mitte), dass das Zeitwort דון auch wohl kaum sonst streiten, sondern nur richten heißt, so gehört hier dem Akzente nach רוחי zu באדם und bildet einen Begriff mit ihm. רוחי בארם ist vielmehr das Subjekt des Satzes: Mein Geist in dem Menschen, d. i. der göttliche Geist, den ich dem Menschen eingehaucht habe, dieser Geist sollte der דַיָן sein, die Stimme Gottes, die den Menschen im Menschen selber richtet. "Die Seele des Menschen selbst ist die Gotteslampe, mit der Gott hineinleuchtet in des Menschen geheimstes Innere" die Handlungen des Menschen nicht nur sieht, sondern auch beurteilt. Auf diesem den Menschen selbst richtenden Gottesgeist im Menschen beruht es, dass, trotz der Vermischung, auf einen Kenan doch ein Mahalallel folgt usw. dass auf ein gesunkenes Geschlecht stets ein gehobenes wieder folgen kann. Allein dieser Richter ist auch der Bestechung zugänglich, er lässt sich einschläfern, es ist sogar möglich, dass seine Stimme immer mehr betäubt, dass das Sinnliche im Laufe von Generationen immer mehr in dem Menschen geweckt werde, und der Richtergeist im Menschen endlich sein Amt niederlege. Nicht umsonst stellt das göttliche Gesetz die Keuschheits- und Ehegesetze so sehr in den Vordergrund. Es wird uns hier gezeigt, wie sie das Wach- bleiben des Gottesgeistes im Menschen bedingen. Als Gott sah, dass die Söhne des göttlichen Geschlechts ohne Wahl bei ihrer Verheiratung vorangingen, sprach er "Nun wird mein Geist im Menschen sein Richteramt nicht ewig üben". Das bisherige Verhältnis, in welchem die Entwicklung, wenn gleich keine stetig aufsteigende, doch auch keine stetig abwärts steigende, sondern mehr eine Wellenlinie bildete, wird nicht mehr lange so andauern, בשגם הוא בשר, indem ja der Mensch auch sinnlich ist, dem רוח steht ja auch בשר im Menschen gegenüber, dem Gottesgeiste der für Sinnlichkeit empfang■ liche Leib, und dieser im reinen Menschen durch Unterordnung des בשר unter den רוח ד׳ באדם zu endende Gegensatz, kann durch eine solche fortgesetzte, dem Göttlichen keine Rechnung tragende Vermischung auch mit dem Gegenteil, mit der Begrabung des Geistes durch den Leib enden, und wird, wenn dies ewig so fortgeht, sicherlich damit enden. Darum setzte Gott diesem Treiben eine Frist von 120 Jahren. So lange soll noch der Versuch dieses Kampfes währen.

לא ידון רוחי באדם לעולם, “My spirit will not rule within man forever;” this is a metaphor describing G–d as withholding man’s souls from participating in an afterlife after they had returned for Divine judgment. An alternate explanation: “I will no longer equip man with a heavenly soul.” (B’reyshit Rabbah 26,6.)

לא ידון רוחי באדם, “My spirit will not predominate within man;” according to Rashi, the meaning of this phrase is that G-d feels that He will not continue for much longer to entertain conflicting emotions concerning the future of mankind in such conditions; we find a similar construction as here in Job:2,3 where G-d is on record as telling Satan that nowhere on earth can there be found a man as righteous Job. An alternate exegesis of this phrase: the philological background is נדן ותיק, “returning one sword to its sheath,” quoted by Ibn Ezra, but not attributed to a source that he revealed. The “sheath,” would be man’s body. In other words, man would be reduced to being a body without Divine spirit.

לעולם ALWAYS — for a long time. Behold, My Spirit has been contending within Me whether to destroy or whether to show mercy: such contending (deliberation) shall not be forever — meaning, for a long time.

והיו ימיו, he will be given a certain length of time within which to repent his sins;

My breath shall not abide in man forever. "The spirit of man" is that individual spirit which God implanted into each person, that is, human intellect. A degree above this is one who merits the spirit to understand Torah. Be aware that someone whose desires overcome his intellect, which is the "spirit of man," this normal desire becomes second nature until it destroys his intellect and the "spirit of man" and his intellect then changes to base desire. This will be explained more later on. This is what is meant by God saying "my spirit will not dwell," similar to what our sages say (Berakhot 61b) "A righteous person is judged by his good inclination and an evil person is judged by his evil inclination." "Judged" means that it guides him and he perceives the world and decides what to do based on it. And in God's language "will not dwell" means, my spirit will not guide man, that is, the spirit which I implanted in each person which is the human intellect.

בשגם, the letter ש has the vowel patach, just as the letter ש in Judges 5,10 שקמתי דבורה. The meaning is that “seeing it too is but flesh (and no better than the beasts.).” In other words: “the reason why My spirit will not prevail within man is due to the fact that man like beasts are only flesh.” Even though G’d had implanted man with a divine soul, this soul had been unable to assert itself within him. As a result, G’d said, “I will give him another 120 years during which he has a chance to improve himself, failing which his fate is sealed.” We do not know the special significance of the number 120. This was G’d’s arbitrary decision.

For a long time. You might ask: Why cannot לעולם mean literally, forever? The answer is: Then the verse would imply that Hashem’s spirit will not contend forever, only for a long time. But, afterward it is written, “His days shall be one hundred and twenty years”! This implies that right away, Hashem [tentatively] decreed upon them [to perish after one hundred and twenty years, if they do not repent]. Thus Rashi explains לעולם as “For a long time.” Accordingly, it means that His spirit will not contend for a long time. Rather, [He will tentatively decree upon them] right away.

The word רוחי in our verse therefore means "My Presence." Man had forfeited the privilege of proximity to G'd's Presence. G'd's Presence withdrew from man in direct proportion to his deeds. As long as G'd had confronted man directly whenever He had reason to rebuke them they were on the spiritual level of prophets. When man began to profane himself (meaning of החל in 6,1), he no longer enjoyed that status. In the course of time outstanding individuals, צדיקים, appeared on earth. These individuals succeeded in restoring a closer relationship between man and G'd. After the destruction of the Temple there were no more prophets; the most that remained were individuals who possessed a degree of what our sages describe as רוח הקודש, a measure of holy spirit. Ever since Israel's eyes closed, we no longer have even ריח הקודש, a holy fragrance, not to mention רוח הקודש. The absence of this line of direct communication from G'd is the greatest misfortune for those of us who thirst for at least a fragrance of the holiness of our Father in heaven in order to revive our spirits. The curse we speak about originated with the generation of the deluge. G'd supplies the reason for this in our verse. בשר בשגם הוא, man added to his abominations by adding the sin of בשר, adultery to his other sins. G'd hates sexual permissiveness more than anything else. As a result G'd resented having to communicate directly with such people.

בשגם הוא בשר, this word is an acrostic, the numerical value of its letters totalling 345, as does the numerical value of the letters in the word משה, (Moses) Moses lived for 120 years, meaning that he demonstrated that during 120 years on earth the human being can attain earthly perfection. This presupposes that such a human being had lived by the laws of the Torah. If man had not become corrupted, he could have attained such perfection by his own efforts without having to observe all the laws of the Torah, but it would have taken longer. This is why originally he was allowed to live to almost become one thousand years old. Once man only has a לב בשר, “a heart of flesh,” this process had to be drastically changed. [I have borrowed from the commentary of Rabbi Elie Munk in his “The call of the Torah.” Ed.]

לעולם, for an interminably long period. Compare use of the word לעולם, in Samuel I 1,22. [When Chanah made this vow concerning her son Samuel, she did not use the word as meaning: “forever,” as in: לעולם ועד. Ed.] In Exodus 21,6 where the Torah speaks of the servant who had his ear pierced continuing to serve the same master: לעולם, the meaning also could not possibly have been: “forever.”

בשגם הוא בשר FOR THAT HE ALSO IS FLESH — This is the same as בְּשָׁגַּם — that is to say: because this quality is also in him viz., that he is only flesh, and yet he does not humble himself before Me; what would he do if he were of fire or of some other resisting matter! Similarly we find שַׁ for שָׁ, (Judges 5:7) עד שַׁקמתי דבורה “Until I Deborah arose”, where it is the same as שָׁקמתי; so also (Judges 6:17) שַׁאתה מדבר עמי “that it is thou who talkest with me”, where it is the same as שָׁאתה — so also here.

מאה ועשרים שנה, during which time Noach would have time to construct the ark, and by doing so rebuking and warning people of what is in store for them. (compare Sanhedrin 108)

Whether to destroy or to show mercyhis implies that Hashem did not yet decide definitely to destroy them. But why did Rashi not say that לא ידון רוחי means, “I will not wait anymore for man”? Furthermore, how does Rashi know [that it means Hashem’s spirit was undecided]? The answer is: Otherwise it would imply that Hashem already decided definitely to destroy. And this is not so, for only later it is written (v. 7): “I will obliterate mankind,” and that is the first Divine utterance [on this matter]. But beforehand He did not decide [definitely] to destroy.

The characteristic of the righteous is that they refine the body to give it spiritual content. The characteristic of the wicked is that they do the reverse. They degrade the spirit making it the tool of the body. This leads to the destruction of the universe. G'd referred to this when He said: "My spirit will not find satisfaction in them forever more," not even in the world of eternity. This is because they have turned even their spirit into a tool of the flesh. The Talmud (Sanhedrin 108) states that the people who were destroyed by the deluge do not enjoy a life in the Hereafter.

בשגם הוא בשר, seeing that he is composed only of “flesh,” i.e. a combination of components that will not endure forever. Seeing that he was not meant to live forever anyways, he might as well have his normal lifespan shortened, as longevity did not inspire him to be loyal to his Creator. On the contrary, the illusion of living forever contributed to his feeling unaccountable to Me. (G-d).

והיו ימיו וגו THEREFORE HIS DAYS SHALL BE etc. — For 120 years I will be long-suffering with them, and if they repent not I shall bring a flood upon them. If, now, you object, saying that from the birth of Japheth until the Flood there were only 100 years, remember that there is no “earlier” or “later” in the Torah (events are not always related in chronological order) (Pesachim 6b): the decree (regarding the Flood) was issued twenty years before Noah had any children — so we find in Seder Olam. There are many Midrashic explanations of the words לא ידון but this is transparently its plain sense.

With a segol. I.e., if the shin has a segol it becomes an expression of גם. Similarly, שַקמתי (Shoftim 5:7) is like שֶקמתי, and שַאתה (ibid 6:17) is like שֶאתה. Rashi added the words זאת בו because otherwise the verse implies another [creature] of flesh, and “also” man is of flesh. But there is no other [creature spoken of here].

Another way of understanding our verse is based on the use of the term רוחי. Whereas G'd frequently cancels an evil decree due to considerations of His attribute of Mercy, in this case G'd announced that the decree was irrevocable. Normally, G'd applies the attribute of Mercy because He keeps in mind that man is a mixture of flesh and spirit. In this particular case G'd gave notice בשגם הוא בשר, that the decree was final although man is also flesh.

והיו ימיו מאה ועשרים שנה, “and his (average) life span shall be one hundred and twenty years.” On this Rashi comments that the Torah is not restricted to report events in their chronological order. When we learned in Pessachim 6, that when the subject is a single one, the rule of the Torah not being bound to report them in chronological order does not apply, so that here we would be faced with a contradiction, this is not so. We are dealing here with two separate subjects. Consider that from the birth of Yephet until the onset of the deluge only 100 years had elapsed, seeing the Torah testified that Noach, who was 600 years old at the outbreak of the deluge, had only married and become a father at the age of five hundred. The Torah was concerned with the moral image of Noach, and so that the world would not be able to say that Noach had sired a child knowing that it would perish after he knew already that G-d would destroy the human race, (Genesis 6,7) the Torah reported Noach’s having sired Shem already before it referred to G-d’s resolve to destroy the human race. G-d’s decision to destroy mankind (bar Noach and his family) had not been revealed to anyone including Noach until 6,13. Rashi offers a similar commentary on Genesis 11,32, where the death of Avraham’s father is reported at an age of 205 years, before it reported Avram’s moving to the land of Canaan, although Terach lived on after Avram’s leaving him for another 40 years. Had his death been reported in chronological order, some people would have faulted Avram for abandoning an aged father in Charan. As it is reported, the subject of Terach had already been concluded.

Still another meaning addresses G'd's practice of paying the reward or punishment in the Hereafter, the righteous receiving his share in that world and the wicked descending to Gehinom. In this case, G'd gave notice to the wicked that they would not be judged after death but that since they had tainted their spirit as much as their flesh their spirit would also undergo the afflictions normally reserved only for the flesh. The 120 years G'd speaks about is the period needed to allow the righteous of that generation such as Methuselah to live out their allotted lifespan in full. The Zohar on Genesis 7,22 explained: "all that had a soul of living spirit in its nostrils, of all that were on dry land died," as a reference to the righteous who died on dry land, before the onset of the deluge.

Another message contained in our verse is that henceforth G'd would never again apply the attribute of Mercy exclusively. The verse is introduced with G'd speaking in His capacity of the attribute of Mercy, ויאמר השם. It switches immediately to tell us that His spirit, i.e. that of mercy would not anymore abide in this world completely. G'd attributed part of the corruption in His world to His having exercised too much mercy. He had allowed man to indulge his greed too much. From now on G'd reserved more of His mercy for the Hereafter. As a result of this change of emphasis, even such a righteous man as our patriarch Jacob was not allowed to enjoy the benefits of this world in tranquillity. As soon as Jacob set out to so so, he experienced all the trouble with his favourite son Joseph (compare Rashi on Genesis 37,2).

הנפילים THE GIANTS — Thy were called נפילים because they fell (נפלו) and caused the downfall of (הפילו) the world (Genesis Rabbah 26:7).

THE NEPHILIM. Rashi comments: “[They were called nephilim because] they fell (naphlu) and caused the downfall (hipilu) of the world.” This is found in Bereshith Rabbah.⁵⁰⁰26:7. The masters of language⁵⁰¹Found in R’dak. say that they [the Nephilim] were so called because the heart of man fell from fear of them. The same applies to the word ha’eimim.⁵⁰²Genesis 14:5. Eimah means terror. The Eimim thus induced terror into the hearts of those who saw them.

הנפילים היו בארץ בימים ההם, these giants were not about until the last 120 years which G’d had assigned man as a grace period within which to do teshuvah וגם אחר כן, as well as thereafter, i.e. they did not repent and mend their ways at all.

הנפילין, this verse must be understood as attached to the previous verse (2) in which the mating habits of the בני האלוהים had been discussed. After the Torah had criticised the manner in which the physically stronger males grabbed their women, G’d now gave them another 120 years and no more to improve their ways. The people described as נפילים were a group of giants. The reason why they are not described as such, but as “fallen,” is that people who took one look at these giants were apt to fall down ((נפל in sheer fright of such powerful potential opponents. Examples of similar use of the root נפל can be found in Job 14,18 ואולם הר נופל, “even if the mountain were to fall” a truly frightening experience. The Torah simply relates that during these latter days before the deluge there were people of gigantic size These were just a few individuals .

הנפילים היו בארץ, “the Nephilim were on earth at that time.” According to Rashi these creatures had fallen from heaven (in disgrace) and had in turn caused people on earth to fall from their spiritual level to a spiritually still lower level. The name נפילים corresponds to the Hebrew word ענקים, “giants.” At any rate, ordinary people were frightened of these “giants.” Other commentators simply understand the term נפילים as representing human beings who, due to their imposing stature, made everyone fall down before them in a state of fear. Rabbi Joseph Kimchi explains the word נפילים as meaning גדולים, “great men, giants.” He quotes Job 14,18 ואולם הר נופל יבול as a parallel, i.e. that even the most powerful and great phenomena (such a tall mountains) on earth will ultimately fall, collapse.

So called because they “fell.” I.e., they were killed.

מכל אשר יעשה מגפן היין, the Torah does not write גפן without adding a modifier, as this could have led to confusion seeing that there are other kinds of גפן such as גפן שדה from which we get certain wild gourds. (Kings II 4,39) The angel instructing Shimshon’s mother regarding her abstaining from grapes and grape-based products also emphasises גפן היין, the vine from which wine is derived. (Judges 13,14) In that chapter the angel elaborates by telling Manoach’s wife that she must not eat anything that comes from the grapevine, nor drink wine or other intoxicant. He warns her once more to strictly adhere to his instructions. The instructions are couched in what is known in the rules of exegesis by Rabbi Yishmael as כלל, general rule, followed by another כלל followed by details, פרט.
The instructions to Shimshon’s mother how to conduct herself during her pregnancy reflect the concept that the food we ingest is converted by the body into blood, whence it becomes milk, whence it is transferred to the baby in his mother’s milk making an indelible imprint even on the baby’s personality. Seeing that the type of Nazirite which Shimshon was supposed to be began while he was still a fetus in his mother’s womb, as per the prediction of the angel there in verse 5, his mother had to abstain from all the things which a Nazirite has to abstain from.
Alternatively, there is a second general rule in that chapter, one which applied only to Shimshon himself and not to his mother, the requirement not to cut off any of the hair of his head. This rule had not been repeated by Manoach’s wife to her husband when she told him about the angel’s appearance. She had only told her husband that the son she would bear was to be a Nazirite all his life. When the angel returned a second time, he only spelled out what Manoach’s wife was to abstain from. The only reason why the angel repeated some details was that the first time he had not told Manoach’s wife to abstain from ritually impure foods, only from wine and intoxicating drink. On the first occasion he had not even forbidden Manoach’s wife to eat grapes during her pregnancy. [Perhaps the story is an illustration of what our sages teach that a “repetition” in the Scriptures automatically includes a new dimension which had not been mentioned the first time, so that in effect there is no such thing as a “repetition.” Ed.]

Das im Vorhergehenden allgemein Ausgesprochene wird in diesem Vers in einem einzelnen Beispiele noch klarer gemacht, das unseren Vätern, in deren Zeiten noch Reste der "Nephilim" lebten, noch anschaulicher sein konnte. — נפילים. Woher dem Begriff Riesen der Name נפילים geworden, lässt sich nicht mit großer Zuversicht beantworten. נפל, fallen; diesem Begriffe wohnt allerdings in der Regel das Merkmal der Schwäche bei. Es bezeichnet jedoch auch das Stürzen eines Übermächtigen auf ein Schwächeres. So נפל פחדם עליהם. Auch von der überwältigenden Macht der Gottesbegeisterung: ׳ותפל עלי יד ד Ferner: beim Eintritt von etwas Zufälligem, außerhalb der Berechnung Liegendem: איך יפול הדבר. Einmal auch von Ismael: על פני כל אחיו נפל. Vielleicht bezeichnet נפל hier, dass jemand, oder etwas seiner ganzen Umgebung außer aller Berechnung in den Weg fällt, wie vom Himmel geworfen; Ismael war ein פרא אדם, also: die außergewöhnliche, nicht in die gewöhnliche Ordnung der Dinge sich einreihende Macht Ismaels. Möglich, dass נפילים also genannt wurden wegen ihrer alles andere zu überstürzen drohenden, ganz außergewöhnlichen körperlichen Macht und Größe. Vielleicht liegt in וארץ רפאים תפיל (Jes. 26, 19), dem תפיל die Bedeutung נפילים-schaffen zu Grunde, und wäre dann der Sinn des Verses כי טל אורות טליך וארץ רפאים תפיל: die Größen, die dein Tau weckt, sind geistige, lichtige Größen; die Erde weiß nur Riesenleiber gigantisch hervorzurufen. Wenn im Begriffe נפילים das Ungewöhnliche, Seltene enthalten ist, so ists selbstverständlich, dass der Name erst zu einer Zeit vorkommen kann, in welcher das übrige Menschengeschlecht schon kleiner war. Zur Zeit der Abfassung der תורה gab es noch Abkömmlinge der Nephilim. In der vor- sündflutlichen Zeit waren die Nephilim nichts Ungewöhnliches. "הנפילים היו בארץ בימים ההם, ."die jetzt als Nephilim Angestaunten waren in jener Zeit gewöhnlich auf Erden׳ In dem kainitischen Geschlecht, in welchem das rein Geistige völlig zu Grabe getragen war, entwickelte sich das Körperliche zur Riesengröße. Hätte nun die Vermischung die gewünschte Frucht getragen, so hätte das Geistige, das der Vater der Mutter gebracht, das Körperliche überwunden und sich dienstbar gemacht. Es wären geistige Heroen entstanden; der Geist zehrt an körperlicher Kraft und verbraucht viel zu seiner Arbeit. Aber, heißt es, וגם אחרי כן. usw., auch nachher, nachdem schon die בנות האדם ihnen, d. i. den Vätern vom göttlichen Geschlecht, Kinder geboren hatten (weshalb das von dem Vater in die Ehe gebrachte Göttliche hätte überwiegen sollen), ward das Geistige von dem leiblich Sinnlichen überwuchert. Diese Verbindung der beiden Geschlechter trug somit die Keime des Abfalls und der Entheiligung in das Geschlecht der ׳.בני האלקי המה הגבורים, aus dieser Verbindung gingen die "Heroen der ältesten Zeit" hervor, die zwar manchmal ihre Zeitgenossen auch an Geist überragten, bei denen aber größtenteils der Geist im Dienste gewaltiger Körperkraft stand.

הנפלים, “of outstanding stature;” the absence of the letter א in this word which we would have expected to have been spelled הנפלאים, is not unique; we find it also in Exodus 33,16: ונפלינו אני ועמך, “and we, Your people will be outstanding;”

In Hebrew the giants are usually called בימים ההם .ענקים IN THOSE DAYS — In the days of the generations of Enosh and the sons of Cain (Genesis Rabbah 26:7).

וגם אחרי כן אשר יבואו בני האלוהים אל בנות האדם, and also after the elite had made a point of mating with the physically attractive בנות האדם there were even more numerous such giants who reflected the genes of their fathers in size and the allure of their mothers in beauty. והמה הגבורים אשר מעולם, these were the ones always remembered in later times as the heroic people of their time אשר מעולם אנשי שם, people whose reputation survived their disappearance from the earth. After the deluge survivors realised that it had been displeasing in the eyes of G’d for those people to have devoted themselves to all the physical pleasures of the world and to aim at enlarging the size of their bodies as well as aiming to increase the number of years they lived on earth. [After all they had perished, and normal sized individuals, such as Noach’s family had survived. Ed.] The physical desires of the survivors of the deluge were far less powerful than that of their forebears so that gradually also their lifespan diminished, i.e. their entire hold on matters physical became a less dominant concern. People in the generations after the deluge, in spite of their other failings, gradually resumed a lifestyle that had been normal before the excesses that the בני אלוהים had indulged in. When the Israelites came to the land of Canaan there were only a very few of the former giants still surviving, mostly concentrated around Hebron (Joshua 15,14) Our sages have a tradition that there were only four such giants still alive at that time. (Joshua 14,15) In the time of David there appear to have been a few such men in Gat (Samuel II 21,15) Concerning Og, the King of Bashan, the Bible testifies that he had been a remnant of this race of these antediluvian giants (Joshua 13,12). It is possible that those survivors still practiced a lifestyle reminiscent of their antediluvian forebears.

בני אלוקים, “the elite of mankind.” The male children of the most outstanding members of human society. These young men would look at the daughters of their morally inferior contemporaries and be consumed with lust for them, so that they would rape them and the result would be more such physically alluring females.

And caused the downfall of the world. I.e., their descendants copied their evil deeds and were killed as well [in the Flood of Noach]. Rashi is saying that the giants in the days of Enosh and the sons of Kayin were killed (“fell from the world”) when the ocean rose upon them.

IN THOSE DAYS. Rashi comments: “in the days of the generation of Enosh. AND ALSO AFTER THAT. Although they witnessed the destruction of the generation of Enosh when the ocean rose and flooded a third of the world, still they did not humble themselves and take a lesson from them.”
Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained: “also after the flood, since the sons of Anak⁵⁰³Numbers 13:33. The giants. were of the family of bnei ha’elohim.” If so, we must say that either the wives of Noah’s sons were of their [the Nephilim’s] descendants and resembled them or that ibn Ezra will accept the statement of the Rabbi⁵⁰⁴Rabbi Yochanan (Niddah 61 a). who advanced the interpretation that Og⁵⁰⁵Og, King of Bashan (Numbers 21:33). It is he, according to Rabbi Yochanan, of whom Scripture says: And there came one that had escaped (Genesis 14:13); i.e., escaped from the flood. escaped from the flood, to which Rabbi Abraham will add that others too escaped with him [since the verse states: “The ‘Nephilim’ — (in the plural) — were in the earth…and also after that”, which Ibn Ezra interprets as meaning after the flood].
The correct interpretation appears to me to be that Adam and his wife are called bnei ha’elohim because they were G-d’s handiwork and He was their father; they had no father besides Him. And he [Adam] begot many children, as it is written, And he begot sons and daughters.⁵⁰⁶Above, 5:4. Now these men, first to be born of a father and mother, were of great perfection in height and strength because they were born in the likeness of their father, as it is written concerning Seth, And he [Adam] begot a son in his own likeness, after his image.⁵⁰⁷Ibid., Verse 3. And it is possible that all the children of the first generations — Adam, Seth, Enosh — were called bnei ha’elohim because these three men were in the likeness of G-d. But then the worship of idols commenced, and there came upon men a weakness and slackness.
And so they said in Bereshith Rabbah:⁵⁰⁸24:6. “This is the book of the generations of Adam.⁵⁰⁹Above, 5:1. Are not the first ones toldoth (offspring)! But what are they? [They are in the image and likeness of] G-d. They raised a question before Aba Kohen Bardela: ‘Adam, Seth, Enosh?’ At first, he was silent, but then he said to them: ‘Up to here [Seth] they were in the image and likeness of G-d; after that, Kenan, vexers.’”⁵¹⁰Kenan, vexers. Enosh’s son was Kenan (Above, 5:9), which name is interpreted as having the same root as the word kanteir (he who makes himself disagreeable).
Now when men began to multiply and daughters were born to them, the men of these first generations were in their strength, and because of their great desire they would choose the beautiful women of tall stature and good health. Now first Scripture tells that by force they took them unto themselves as wives, and afterwards it tells that they came in a promiscuous manner to the daughters of men who were not of that high degree, and the matter was not known until they begot children for them, and everyone recognized that they were not the offspring of other people but that they had been born to these bnei ha’elohim because these children were very tall. They were, however, inferior to their fathers in height and strength, [This is the meaning of the name Nephilim — inferior ones], just as the word Nephilim is used in the expression: I am not ‘nophel’ (inferior) to you.⁵¹¹Job 12:3. Still they were mighty men in comparison with the rest of the people. And Scripture tells that this happened in the first generation to those who were called bnei ha’elohim because they were of absolute perfection, and it is they who caused the daughters of men to beget nephilim (inferior ones); and also after that, for the nephilim themselves begot nephilim from them.
The meaning of the expression, that were of old, is that after the flood, the men, upon seeing the mighty, would remember these nephilim and say: “There have already been mightier men than these in the ages which were before us.” They were the men of renown in all generations afterward. This is a fitting explanation of this chapter. But the Midrash of Rabbi Eliezer the Great,⁵¹²Chapter 22. in the chapters concerning the angels that fell from their place of holiness in heaven — as is mentioned in the Gemara of Tractate Yoma —⁵¹³67b. fits into the language of the verse more than all other interpretations. But it would necessitate delving at length into the secret of this subject.

היו בארץ בימים ההם, “were prominent on earth at that time.” This is a reference to conditions discussed by the Torah previously, which had been introduced with the words: ויהי כי החל האדם in 6,1.

וגם אחרי כן AND ALSO AFTER THAT — Although they witnessed the destruction of the generation of Enosh when the Ocean rose and flooded a third part of the world, yet the generation of the Flood did not humble itself and take a lesson from them (Genesis Rabbah 26).

אשר יבאו, “who would be intimate with them.” According to Rashi the subject are the sons of the בני האלוקים Nachmanides explains that Adam and Chavah are here referred to as בני האלוקים, “the children of G’d,” as they had been the direct product of G’d’s creative activity, and they had no physical father. Adam and Chavah in turn, had many sons and daughters as the Torah reports in These children of Adam and Chavah were in a class by themselves, seeing that their father had passed on to them a great deal of the genes of the genetically perfect first man on earth. It is possible that the first pair of humans and their immediate sons were referred to as בני האלוקים, as they more than any subsequent human reflected what was calledצלם אלוקים at the time when G’d created the first pair of human beings. These people never engaged in idol worship, whereas their offspring already began to see in other powers on earth deities of a kind, albeit surrogates of the Creator. In keeping with this tendency of people to deify powers of nature, their own physical dimensions and strength declined, as a form of punishment. When the human population increased on earth and there began to be competition for good looking female partners, the men of earlier generations, due to their superior prowess, overpowered their more poorly endowed competitors, and they grabbed themselves whatever they chose. Originally, they married such girls even against their will, but eventually their morals deteriorated to such a degree that they raped girls without offering marriage, and generally this did not come to light until the features of the children born from such illegal liaisons did not resemble either of their parents, but showed genetic likeness to the members of the giants. The word מעולם, normally understood as meaning “from time immemorial,” is the Torah’s way of hinting that in the future whenever a human being would for some reason be of such outsize dimensions as the giants of former times, people would speak of giants having lived prior to the deluge; the appearance of this phenomenon would trigger memories of the stories which had been handed down from generation about the existence of such a race at one time.

In Hebrew it means giants. I.e., נפילים is an adjective, conveying that their great might caused people to fall. (Maharshal)

וגם אחרי כן, “and also subsequently.” Even after G-d had expressed His anger at man’s conduct on earth, as described in: 6,3, Man had not leaned to submit to the supremacy of its Creator as testified to by verse two which described their disrespect for holy matrimony, i.e. the status of a wife as inalienably linked to her husband was completely ignored by the physically superior men wishing to possess women to whom they were attracted.

אשר יבאו WHEN [THE SONS OF GOD] CAME IN, they (the women) bore children, giants like them (the fathers) (Genesis Rabbah 26:7).

In the days of Enosh and sons of Kayin. It seems that the primary explanation [of בני האלהים is “angels”, see Rashi on v. 2. This] is how Rashi explains נפילים in Parshas Shelach (Bamidbar 13:33), where he says they were “giants, descended from Shamchazai and Azael, who fell from heaven in the generation of Enosh.” Accordingly, when Rashi says the giants “fell from the world,” it means from the upper world, i.e., heaven. (Nachalas Yaakov)

אנשי השם, “men of great reputation; Rabbi Acha, in B’reshit Rabbah 26,7, contrasting our verse with Job 30,8 in which these people are described as בני נבל גם בני בלי שם נכאו מן הארץ, “scoundrels, nobodies, stricken from the earth,” queries the way the Torah here refers to these wicked people as: “somebodies;” He therefore understands the word השם in our verse as meaning that השמו: “they desecrated the world and as a result were הושמו, eliminated from it. [From the root: שמם to desolate. Ed.]

הגבורים MIGHTY — in rebellion against God.

Though they saw... Meaning, even afterward they were wicked and sinful. Some ask: [How can Rashi say, “Though they saw...?] In Parshas Eikev, on “And you will perish quickly” (Devarim 11:17), Rashi explains that the generation of the Flood had no one to learn from! (Nachalas Yaakov, see further explanation there)

אנשי שם MEN OF RENOWN (literally, men of name) — Men who bore distinctive names: עירד, מחויאל, מתושאל being so named because these names have reference to their destruction, for they were wiped out and torn out from the world (מחוי-אל would signify “wiped-out-by-God”, מתושאל “Torn-out-by-God). Another explanation is that they were men of devastation (אנשי שם-מון) — who devastated the world (Genesis Rabbah 26:7).

Giants like them. Rashi is explaining why there were giants in the generation of the Flood as well. Although the [original] giants were wiped out when the ocean flooded upon them, the בני אלהים came to the daughters of man and they gave birth to giants like them.

On account of their destruction for they were wiped out. מחויאל is from נימוחו, meaning “wiped out.” מתושאל is from הותשו, meaning “torn out.” [Rashi knows that אנשי השם means על שם אבדן] because ordinarily it means “men of renown,” whereas these people were wicked.

כי רבה רעת האדם, a reference to the past,

וירא השם כי רבת רעת האדם, G'd saw that man's wickedness on earth kept increasing. G'd regretted that He had made man on earth. Why was the evil man did connected to "the earth?" The wording of the Torah gives the impression that man perpetrated evil deeds on the body of the earth, whereas their wickedness consisted primarily of violence and sexual perversions as per 6,11-12. While it is justified to describe the theft of land as violence and evil perpetrated on the earth, this is a mere technicality, a minor detail. Why did the Torah not simply say: "G'd regretted having made man," instead of saying that "G'd regretted having made man on earth?" This leads us to believe that if only G'd had made man elsewhere He would not now have had reason to regret it. Surely this is not what the Torah meant to tell us!

'וירא ה, seeing that the time G’d had allocated to the people to improve their ways had elapsed, G’d saw that nothing had changed. רק רע כל היום, the words וכל יצר, refer to both man’s urges, the urge to do good, and the urge to do evil. The urge to do good had succumbed to the evil urge, completely. The Torah here calls the planning of wicked deeds based on impulses יצר לב, the urge of the heart. The reason is that the heart is perceived as the origin of all impulses be they good or be they evil in nature. The reason why G’d gave them 120 years extension, although He was well aware that they would not do teshuvah, was only in order for man to learn from G’d’s attributes, and to adopt this attribute for himself. Just as G’d allowed man plenty of time to improve his ways, so man, when dealing with his fellow, should also not be impatient, but allow enough time for people to rethink their evil attitudes.
When G’d created the human race He wanted it to be good completely, or at least predominantly. If mankind would turn to be completely evil it could not endure, seeing that G’d had chosen the good. When He saw that the generation preceding the deluge was thoroughly evil, especially in their inter-personal relations, their use of violence as a legitimate tool to gain their ends, their deeds threatened to undermine the foundations upon which G’d had built His universe. He therefore decided to destroy all those who were evil and to save only the few good ones, so that these survivors could form the nucleus of a better human race after the deluge. G’d had found Noach, his sons, and their wives to be good and they were chosen to provide the seed for future generations. Lemech, Noach’s father had died already 5 years prior to the deluge, and Metushelach, Noach’s grandfather, another good man, had lived his life to the full before the onset of the deluge. As a result of these two men having died, there were no righteous people left on earth other than Noach and his family.

Adonoy saw. Hashem saw that even reducing their life spans to 120 years did not cause them to repent. This was because their sins were the result of ideology as well as appetite.

Im רע liegt der Begriff des Bruches im Gegensatz zum שלם und תמים. Nicht ohne Grund heißt es wohl בארץ, nicht bloß באדמה, der Trägerin des Menschenwirkens. Gott hat die Erdwelt geschaffen und den Menschen als seinen Stellvertreter in sie gesetzt. Allein durch das Bisherige war ein "großer Bruch" in die Harmonie der Erdwelt gebracht. Es ist die Frage, ob רעת האדם die Schlechtigkeit oder das Unheil (Un-Heil, heil: ganz, ebenso wie רע) bezeichnet, das der Mensch in die Erdwelt brachte. Wir glauben, das letztere. Als Gott herniederblickte, war durch den Menschen bereits das größte Unheil auf die Erde gebracht, die Gegenwart war also schon über alle Maßen schlecht, und für die Zukunft: כל יֵצֶר מחשבות לבו רק רע כל היום.

כי רבה רעת האדם, “for man’s wickedness had become very great;” it is futile to ask that seeing that G-d has foreknowledge of all that man will do, creating him had been an exercise in futility to start with; why had G-d bothered? The answer is that everything is under the control of heaven except man’s decision to live in awe of the Creator or to defy Him. Seeing that G-d had decided to create a creature equipped with free will, He had simultaneously abrogated His right to interfere as long as man’s use of his freedom did not threaten to undo His universe. The reader is reminded of Deuteronomy 10,12, where Moses tells the people that G-d “asks” the people to revere Him; he did not say that G-d had “commanded” the people to revere Him. He also quoted G-d as expressing the wish that the people could maintain their moral high, as expressed after the revelation at Mount Sinai. In other words, He Himself had restricted His freedom in matters of religious belief of His creature. (Deuteronomy 5,26) “May they always be of such mind, to revere Me, etc.”A third verse spelling out the choice before all of us is found in Deut.30,14: “see I have given before you this day, life and goodness, or death and evil.”

וכל יצר לב האדם, a reference to the future (when it would not improve)

How do we understand G'd's "regretting" anything? Did not Bileam describe G'd (Numbers 23,19) as not ever regretting anything! Besides, what is the point of describing G'd as "saddened?" If this feeling had to be mentioned at all, it should have been mentioned after G'd had carried out His revenge on all the rebellious human beings and had wiped them out. The Torah addresses itself to the four elements man is composed of, fire, air, water and dust. These elements differ in importance and value, the lowliest one being dust seeing it is murky, opaque. The next higher category is water, followed by fire, followed by air or spirit which is the highest ranking of these elements. Although all creatures contain all four elements, different elements predominate in different creatures. The fish are made mostly of water, the birds mostly of air; this is why they can fly and hardly need to rest on earth. The salamander is a creature in which the element of fire predominates. Man is the only creature in which the lowest of the element, dust, predominates. The Torah reported G'd as having fashioned man "dust from the earth" (2,7). This accounts for man's primary habitat being earth. Man cannot live permanently either in the air, the water, or in fire. G'd had numerous reasons for arranging things in this way, one of them being the concept of מדרגות וסולם, that the universe consists of different levels and a ladder. In order for man to rise from one level to another it is important that the ladder which is the means for that spiritual ascent be firmly planted on earth.

יֵצֶר In unglückseliger Weise hat man dieses Wort durch "Trieb" übersetzt, als ob es im Menschen eine Gewalt gebe, die ihn zum Bösen treibe. Daraus hat sich sodann jene trostlose Anschauung gestaltet, auf welcher eine große "religiöse" Genossenschaft beruht, jene Anschauung von der Gewalt des Bösen, in dessen Macht der Mensch angeblich ruht und aus der er erst durch einen gewissen Glauben gerettet werden könne. Aus diesem Wörtchen יֵצֶר ward somit ein fester Strick gedreht, der die Menschheit knebelt, und doch ist nichts ferner von dieser Vorstellung als eben dieses Wort.

When G'd observed that man's wickedness kept increasing, He realised that the fact that man was based on the lowest of the four elements was one of the causes. Also, his habitat was on earth which consists largely of the element of dust. This is the meaning of G'd saying that He saw that man's wickedness on earth had increased greatly. This is why G'd "regretted" not having made man primarily of a more refined element. The Torah prefaced G'd's "regret" by stating that man's thoughts were only concerned with evil all day long, and He attributed this to the fact that man was not made predominantly of one of the more refined elements. G'd's "sadness" refers to the impediments that man's raw material posed to his attaining the objectives His Creator had planned for him. This is why the Torah did not say ויתעצב בלבו, but ויתעצב אל לבו. The word אל alludes to the ambitions G'd had harboured for man when He created him G'd did not want to change the ambitions He had entertained for man for reasons best known to Him; this is why He did not redesign man from one of the other three elements but rather allowed almost the whole species to perish in order to persevere with His original plan. Man's corruption did cause a severe setback to G'd's hopes and timetable. While it is perfectly true that the term "He regretted" is not appropriate for the Creator who has foreseen everything, the Torah is entitled to use the term because of the twin attribute of Mercy and Justice that G'd manifests. When man acts in accordance with the wishes of His Creator the attribute of Justice agrees to G'd giving predominance to His attribute of Mercy. When man rebels, the reverse is the case. Our verse describes that the attribute of Mercy preferred that man had never been made instead of agreeing that man should now be judged by the attribute of Justice. G'd was "saddened" as this was not sufficient reason to consider the whole universe as a failure, a wasted effort.

Schon in der Wurzel יצר liegt ja durchaus nichts Zwingendes, sondern Bildendes. Allein die Form יֵצֶר ist ja gar nicht aktiv, sondern passiv, es heißt ja nicht das Bildende, sondern das Gebildete, und wollte man יצר mit: treiben übersetzen, so wäre es ja nicht: was den Menschen treibt, sondern: was der Mensch treibt! יֵצֶר steht ja offenbar dem יוצֵר wie das Geschöpf dem Schöpfer, das Werk dem Bildner gegenüber: ויֵצֶר אמר ליוֹצְרו (Jes. 29, 16). יֵצֶר ist somit wie Stoff, כחמר ביד היוצר. dem יֵצֶר untergeordnet, und יֵצֶר מחשבות; ist: das Gebilde unserer Gedanken.

We may also understand the passage in connection with what Maimonides wrote in chapter 5 of his הלכות תשובה. "G'd and His knowledge are one and the same [not like man whose perceptive powers are outside his essence. Ed.]. We are unable to understand this properly, just as we lack comprehension of how G'd can know every detail of the future without such knowledge robbing man of his freedom of decision. All we know as a certainty is that G'd does not interfere with man's free choice. The ראב"ד, with characteristic lack of deference, adds that Maimonides is incorrect, that G'd's perceptions are similar to someone foretelling the future by means of a horoscope. Maimonides is surely closer to the truth as G'd's perceptions cannot be compared to man's. Who would dare suggest that G'd obtains knowledge from outside sources, through trial and error and all the other methods used by us to define the character of what we see, hear, or touch. G'd is able to deny, i.e. totally ignore and remain unaffected by knowledge He had previously acquired. It is this the רמב"ם had in mind when he wrote that man cannot comprehend the manner in which G'd perceives. When Bileam declared (Numbers 23,21) that G'd had not seen any iniquity in Jacob, he referred to exactly this ability of G'd to totally ignore something that He knew was going to occur in the future.

Unsere Seele ist ein חושב, ein Weber (חשב Grundbedeutung: verbinden, kombinieren, חשב האפור), der Stoff ist ihr gegeben. Als gefügiger Stoff liegen alle Anlagen in ihrer Hand, gute und böse; die Seele hat sie zu verbinden, Gestalten daraus zu machen, צורות: unsere Ideale, und diese צורות sind: יֵצֶר das Gebilde unserer webenden Seele. Aus dem gegebenen Stoff können wir machen was wir wollen. Gott hat uns aber zugleich die "Muster" gegeben, nach denen wir weben sollen. Tun wir dies, so ist alles gut. Der חושב kann keines Fadens, keiner Farbe entbehren. An angewiesener Stelle und in vorgewiesener Weise ist alles gut. יֵצֶר, die Idee, die Vorstellung dessen, was wir erreichen können, lockt uns allerdings, es zu erreichen, allein dies ,יֵצֶר selbst haben wir gemacht. Ist die von uns gebildete "Idee" (ja buchstäblich יֵצֶר Ιδέα, das Gestaltete, das Bild) eine gute, so streben wir zum Guten, und umgekehrt. So heißen die Bilder, die Vorstellungen der Seele in Job in ausgeprägter passiver Form ja geradezu ויצֻרַי כצל כולם :יְעצורים (Job 17. 8), meine Vorstellungen, die Bilder, die ich in meinem Innern konstruiere, sind wie ein Schatten. So nannte David die freudige Hingebung an Gott, die שמחה להתנרב, die das Volk bei den Spenden zum Tempelbau bewährte: יצר מחשבות לבב העם, und betete: שמרה זאת, d.i. die שמחה להתנדב, bewahre diese freudige Hingebung für immer zur Idee der Gedanken des Herzens deines Volkes, d. h. mache, dass die Gedanken des Herzens deines Volkes zu allen Zeiten den Entschluss zu einer solchen Hingebung bilden mögen. (Chron. 1. 29, 18).

We can therefore say that at the time G'd created man He totally excluded from His conscious mind all and any sins that man would ever commit. He did so for two reasons. 1) G'd is good and does not dwell on evil. This reason does not suffice, however, because G'd needs to know what will happen and what will be the ultimate outcome of what happens now. 2) G'd excludes such future events from His consciousness so that the wicked cannot claim they had been programmed by G'd due to His omniscience, and that therefore they are not culpable for their evil deeds. The wicked believe in what we call "self-fulfilling prophecies," and they consider G'd's foreknowledge as belonging to that category. This concept is part of the verse (1,31): "G'd looked at all He had done and here it was very good." G'd "saw" i.e. foresaw, only what was good, i.e. the deeds of the righteous. Of course you will ask: "if so how could G'd punish someone for a deed that He had not seen?" The Torah tells us that at at this point in time G'd chose to look at the deeds of the wicked; what He saw caused Him to regret that He had for so long ignored these deeds in order that His knowledge would not become a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Hier heißt es also: schon in der Gegenwart war das durch den Menschen in die Welt gebrachte Unheil groß, und hinsichtlich dessen, was noch von ihm zu erwarten, was jetzt nur noch als Gedankenbild in ihm wohnte, war "jedes Gebilde der Gedanken seines Herzens nur schlecht den ganzen Tag, oder alle Tage". Schon der Ausdruck כל יצר beweist, dass hier nicht von dem sogenannten bösen Triebe die Rede sein kann. Von ihm, der nur einer ist, lässt sich nicht sagen, jeder, wohl aber von den Ideen und Vorstellungen; ebenso ist nur bei diesen das: רק an seinem Platze. Jedes Ideal, das sie anstrebten, hatte auch nicht eine einzige gute Seite, und diese, nur das Schlechte anstrebende Richtung war zu jeder Zeit, somit also in allen Lebensbeziehungen, dieselbe.

וינחם ה' כי עשה AND THE LORD REPENTED THAT HE HAD MADE — (The first word is connected with that which means “comfort”) It was a consolation to Him that He had created man on earth, for had he been one of the heavenly beings he would have incited them also to rebel against God (Genesis Rabbah 27:4).

AND THE ETERNAL REPENTED… AND IT GRIEVED HIM AT HIS HEART. The Torah speaks in the language of men. The purport is that they rebelled, and grieved His holy spirit⁵¹⁴Isaiah 63:10. with their sins. The sense of the expression at His heart is that He did not tell this to a prophet, a messenger of G-d. This expression is also found with respect to thinking, just as: to speak to my heart,⁵¹⁵Genesis 24:45. and other similar expressions.
In Bereshith Rabbah⁵¹⁶27:6. there is a significant matter concerning this, expressed by a parable which the Rabbis bring of an agent and an architect.⁵¹⁷Rabbi Berachyah said: “It is like a king who had a palace built by an architect, and when he saw it, it displeased him. Against whom is he to complain? Surely against the architect.” Rabbi Assi said: “It is like one who traded through an agent and suffered a loss. Whom does he blame? The agent. Here too It grieved Him at His heart.” This constitutes a great secret which is not permitted to be written down. The one who knows it will understand why here the Tetragrammaton is written while in the whole of the rest of the chapter and the account of the flood, the name Elokim is used.

ויתעצב אל לבו, seeing that G’d does not want even the guilty to die instead of finding their way back. The opposite “emotion” of G’d to the one expressed here is found in Psalms 104,31 ישמח ה' במעשיו, “the Lord ‘enjoys’ the deeds of His creatures.”

That He had made man. Note that it does not say that He repented that He created man, but only that He made him — i.e. that He allowed him to become so numerous. Hashem knew from the start that a creature made of earth could only be brought to perfection after much tending and pruning.

'וינחם ה, the expression, וינחם, “He was sorry, He regretted,” has been chosen by the Torah in order for human beings to have at least an inkling of what G’d’s feelings were when He faced destroying His handiwork. Clearly, such emotions as “regret” are not part of G’d’s vocabulary. We have it on the authority Samuel I 15 29 that human feelings such as regret, frustration, are not feelings which can be attributed To Him.

וינחם ה' ויתעצב אל לבו, “G’d reconsidered and was saddened right to His heart.” The Torah employs the syntax used by human beings when they regret something they have done. Basically, the Torah writes that the conduct of the humans, their insurrection against the Creator’s basic rules, resulted in their causing G’d’s Holy Spirit to reconsider if they deserved to continue living.

He would have caused them to rebel. Man caused the animals and beasts to rebel, as they all became perverted [see Rashi on v. 7]. Had man been in heaven, he would have caused the heavenly beings to rebel as well!

וינחם. Die Bedeutung von נחם siehe oben 5, 29. Man hat an dieser von Gott ausgesprochenen Sinnesänderung Anstand genommen, insbesondere im Hinblick auf den Satz: לא איש אל ויכזב ובן אדם ויתנחם. Es scheint aber ein Unterschied zu sein, zwischen הִנָחם und הִתְנַחם. Ersteres ist die durch äußere Veranlassung hervorgerufene Sinnesänderung, so bei Saul: נחמתי. Gott hat freilich Saul zum König eingesetzt; allein als Saul sich der ferneren Herrschaft unwürdig machte, ward auch Gott durch Sauls Veränderung zu einer Änderung seiner Bestimmung veranlasst. Ebenso auch umgekehrt וינחם ד׳ על הרעה. Der Mensch aber ändert seinen Entschluss von Innen heraus, ohne äußere Veranlassung, also הִתְנַהם, darum heißt es von Gott לא איש וגו׳ ובן אדם ויתנהם. Nur einmal heißt es am Schlusse von ועל עבדיו :האזינו יתנהם (und so auch im Anklang an diese Stelle Ps. 135. 14) und da ist es bedeutsam: auch wenn sie nicht durch תשובה Gott zur Änderung seines Entschlusses veranlassen, wird Gott aus eigenem Antriebe die Änderung ihres bisherigen Geschickes beschließen, und die גאולה bringen; es ist dies die גאולה בעתה, wenn לא זכו.

ויתעצב אל לבו, “His heart was saddened.” According to Rabbi Acha bar Chanina in Breyshit Rabbah 27 when G–d watched as His earth appeared to head for destruction, He felt as if a mourner who has lost a dear relative. An alternate interpretation of this expression: the subject in this verse is man, who mourns only from the heart like a person who had placed leavening in his dough, and who says to himself when the dough did not rise: “it was I who made the recipe, therefore it is I who must accept the blame if the product is unsatisfactory, seeing that I was aware that it contained a potentially dangerous ingredient.” [The “leavening” is a metaphor for the evil urge within man, that G–d gave man when He made him. It was a calculated risk that G–d had been aware of from the outset. Ed.]

'וינחם ה, the expression: נחם, נחמה is used in three different contexts; 1) deliberate failure to fulfill a vow, such as when it could not be fulfilled as the person who had made it does not have the means to do so. 2) He has simply changed his mind. 3) It is used repeatedly in connection with G-d having second thoughts about something He had done. G-d’s having second thoughts works in two directions as we know from: רגע אדבר על גוי לנתוש ולנתוץ ושב הגוי מרעתו ונחמתי על הטובה,“at one moment I may decree that a nation or a kingdom shall be uprooted and pulled down and destroyed; but if that nation against which I had made the decree, turns back from its wickedness, I change My mind concerning the punishment I planned to bring on it. (Jeremiah 18,79) [I am sure all my readers are familiar with the story of Jonah and the whale, and how G-d changed His mind about the fate of Nineveh when He observed how they repented. Ed.] There is no need here to repeated how G-d “repented” the decree He had issued against the Jewish people after they had made the golden calf and had danced around it calling it a deity. G-d had “regretted” allowing Shaul to have been crowned king, and He ordered Samuel to anoint his successor. (Samuel I 15,11 and subsequent.)at one moment I may decree that a nation or a kingdom shall be uprooted and pulled down and destroyed; but if that nation against which I had made the decree, turns back from its wickedness, I change My mind concerning the punishment I planned to bring on it. (Jeremiah 18,79) [I am sure all my readers are familiar with the story of Jonah and the whale, and how G-d changed His mind about the fate of Nineveh when He observed how they repented. Ed.] There is no need here to repeated how G-d “repented” the decree He had issued against the Jewish people after they had made the golden calf and had danced around it calling it a deity. G-d had “regretted” allowing Shaul to have been crowned king, and He ordered Samuel to anoint his successor. (Samuel I 15,11 and subsequent.) As to the statement by Bileam in Numbers 23,21, that what distinguishes the Jewish G-d from other deities is that: ובן אדם כי יתנחם “neither is He like a human being who changes his mind,” there the word is used in the reflexive mode, i.e. the human being who initiates his own change of mind, whereas when changing G-d’s mind is the issue, this was always forced upon G-d from the outside. He does not allow Himself the luxury of changing His mind as an act of pique, completely unprovoked.

ויתעצב GRIEVED HIM — means, in the mind of God man became an object to be troubled (punished): it entered God’s heart to grieve him. This is how the Targum of Onkelos understands the verse. Another explanation of verse 6: וינחם AND [THE LORD] REPENTED — The thoughts of God turned from Divine mercy to Divine justice: He considered what to do with man whom He had made on the earth. Wherever this term is used in the Scripture it means “considering what to do”. Examples are: (Numbers 18:19) “nor the son of man that He should consider (ויתנחם)”; (Deuteronomy 32:36) “and reconsider (ויתנחם) regarding His servants”; (Exodus 32:14) “and the Lord reconsidered (וינחם) regarding the evil”; (1 Samuel 15:2) “I am reconsidering (נחמתי) that I have set up Saul to be king” — all these passages denote a change of mind.

ויתעצב אל לבו, this too, is a figure of speech, seeing that G’d does not know such emotional ups and downs as joy and sadness. While David in Psalms 104,31 speaks of ישמח ה' במעשיו, he too uses such “emotions” of G’d only as a figure of speech. It is his way of describing G’d’s reactions to seeing that His plans had worked out. Similarly, here, the Torah describes G’d’s reaction when His plans had not worked out. [G’d’s plans not working out can only happen due to the freedom of choice with which He endowed man. Ed.] In other words, the Torah, in telling us about G’d’s reactions, here and elsewhere, reflects the impressions gained by the teller of the story. אל לבו, we are told in Bereshit Rabbah 27,4 that a gentile asked Rabbi Yehoshua ben Korchah if it is not true that the Jews claim that their G’d knows all that is going to happen in advance. Rabbi Yehoshua answered in the affirmative. Thereupon the gentile quoted this verse as proof that if G’d had known all of this in advance, how could He have been saddened by it. Rabbi Yehoshua asked the gentile if he had ever have a son born to him. The gentile said that indeed he was the father of a son. He then asked him: “what did you do when he was born?” The gentile replied that he was very happy when he heard the news. Thereupon Rabbi Yehoshua asked the gentile: “did you not know that the son would die one day, and if so why were you happy that another mortal was born?” The gentile answered that there is a time to rejoice and a time to be sad. Rabbi Yehoshua told the gentile that G’d, in spite of His foreknowledge, reacts in a similar manner. G’d was in mourning for the destruction of His handiwork, as we know from 7,10. The reason the Torah makes mention of the words ויתעצב אל לבו and these seven days, is to teach us that the words אבל and עצב can be used interchangeably, i.e. they describe a state of mourning.

The man. In His heart. Of Hashem. [Rashi explains as he does] because otherwise ויתעצב contradicts what is written before: וינחם, which means, “Hashem was comforted.” Rashi is saying that ויתעצב means [not “grieved” but] “loathsome”, i.e., man became loathsome in the heart of Hashem, [and He decided] to destroy him. Maharshal explains: Since it says that Hashem was comforted, ויתעצב must refer to man. Thus Rashi explains that man was ויתעצב to Hashem. But according to Rashi’s alternate explanation, that Hashem’s thought turned from Divine Mercy to Divine Justice, ויתעצב refers to Hashem [i.e., He mourned].

ויתעצב אל לבו, hier התפעל, nicht עצב .נפעל siehe oben 3, 16. התעצב: ein schmerzliches Gefühl der Entsagung empfinden. So von den Söhnen Jakobs; als die Familienreinheit durch die an der Schwester verübte Schandtat gemordet war, da war das erste Gefühl nicht Zorn über das geschehene Unrecht, sondern: ויתעצבו, sie fühlten schmerzlich, dass ihre bisherige Perle, die Reinheit und Unschuld der jüdischen Töchter, nun verloren sei; erst das zweite Gefühl war Zorn. Da dieser Schmerz aus der Art und Weise entsprang, wie sie den Vorgang auffassten, somit seine Quelle in ihrem Innern hatte, steht התפעל und nicht נפעל. Ebenso hier. — Hinsichtlich des אל־, (nicht: התעצב אֶל־ (ב־, haben wir eine Analogie bei Jonathan: נעצב אל דור (Sam. 1. 20. 34), es bezeichnet somit den Gegenstand, in Beziehung auf welchen man den Schmerz empfindet. Wörtlich würde es also hier heißen: "Er füllte sich mit schmerzlicher Entsagung in Beziehung auf sein Herz". לב ד׳ bezeichnet aber das Innigste, das von Gott in Beziehung zum Menschen gesagt werden kann. והיו עיני ולבי שם כל הימים, seine Liebe, seine Empfindung wird dort weilen, nicht bloß seine Vorsehung. Hier also לבו, — menschlich gesprochen — die Freude, die Gott an dem gegenseitigen Gedeihen des Menschen und der Erde haben wollte, — ישמח ד׳ במעשיו — und auf die er jetzt verzichten musste. Der Erdwelt wäre die Fortexistenz des Menschen Unheil gewesen, darum וינחם וגו׳; allein Gottes Herz — menschlich gesprochen — war dasselbe geblieben. "Es tat ihm wehe, dass er auf die von seinem Herzen gewünschte segensreiche Fortexistenz des Menschen auf Erden verzichten musste." —

ויתעצב אל לבו, “He was saddened to have listened to the advice to create man;”A different exegesis: the words: אל לבו refer to the heart of man; G-d felt saddened on account of man’s heart, i.e. the constantly evil thoughts that he entertained. We find a similar construction in Samuel I 20,34 כי נעצב אל דוד כי הכלמו אביו, “he was saddened on account that his father had humiliated him.” (Yonathan about his father the King, humiliating his bosom fried David) Still another exegesis of our verse: Whenever the root עצב occurs it refers to mourning or something akin to it. Example: כי נעצב המלך על בנו, “for the king mourned over the los of his son.” (Samuel II 19,3, about the death of Avshalom) In our verse the Torah describes G-d as mourning the world He had created and which He now had to completely restructure. If you were to ask how it is possible to mourn people who had not died yet, this rule applies only to mortal human beings who cannot be sure of any event in the future until it materializes; G-d Who foresees developments clearly, can be saddened and in a state of mourning even before the actual event has taken place. Still another interpretation of our verse; the human race had become something only worthy of sadness and distaste.

ויתעצב אל לבו AND IT GRIEVED HIM AT HIS HEART— He mourned at the failure of His handiwork. Similarly (2 Samuel 19:3) ‘The king grieved (נעצב) for his son”. (Similarly here: God grieved for his (man’s) heart: that it had changed from good to bad). The following extract from the Midrash Rabbah I am writing in order that you may know how to refute the arguments of certain heretics: A gentile once asked Rabbi Joshua, the son of Korcha, saying to him, “Do you not admit that the Holy One, blessed be He, knows what is to happen in the future?” He replied, “Yes.” The gentile retorted, “But is it not written ‘and He was grieved in His heart’?” He answered: “Have you ever had a son born to you?” The reply was “Yes.” He asked (the gentile): “And what did you do?” He replied: “I rejoiced and I made others rejoice also.” The Rabbi asked him: “But did you not know that he must die?” The heathen replied: “At the time of joy, let there be joy, at the time of mourning let there be mourning”. The Rabbi then said: “Such, too, is the way of the Holy One, blessed be He: although it was clear to Him that in the end men would sin and would be destroyed, He did not refrain from creating them for the sake of the righteous men who were to issue from them” (Genesis Rabbah 27:4).

בארץ, the reason the Torah writes this word, which does not appear to tell us something we did not know, is to remind us that the root of the problem of man becoming so corrupt in spite of his having been equipped with a divine soul, is that he was constructed from and anchored in the earth, in the “lower” universe. This is unlike the אדם העליוני, superior man. This is why G’d did not need consolation for people of Noach’s calibre.

What to do with man. Rashi is saying that originally, Hashem did not intend to do anything with man. But now He intended to investigate what do to with him. Rashi does not mean that He now decided to do evil, and decreed the Flood. This cannot be, because only afterwards it is written (v. 7), “Adonoy said, ‘I will obliterate mankind,’” and that is His first utterance [on this matter]. “I will obliterate mankind” does not come to explain the turning of Hashem’s thought, i.e., that it turned from Mercy to Justice. For if so, v. 7 should say: “And He said, ‘I will obliterate mankind.’” Why does it say, “Adonoy said, ‘I will obliterate...’”? Clearly, it is the beginning of His utterance. Since it is the beginning, this implies that [in this verse,] He had not yet passed judgment on man. Rather, He was investigating what to do with man. (Re’m)

Hinsichtlich dieser und ähnlicher anthropomorphistischen Ausdrücke von Gott gestatten wir uns eine allgemeine Bemerkung. Man hat so lange an diesen Ausdrücken herum philosophiert, um jeden Gedanken an eine Körperlichkeit zu entfernen, bis man zuletzt der Gefahr nahe kam, selbst die Persönlichkeit Gottes zu verflüchtigen. Wenn das die Absicht der תורה wäre, hätte sie derartige Ausdrücke leicht vermeiden können. Allein diese letztere Gefahr ist größer als die erstere. Diese zwei Ausdrücke retten die zwei wesentlichsten Begriffe: die Freiheit Gottes und die Freiheit des Menschen. Nicht umsonst heißt es: Als Gott sah usw. Es war die Schlechtigkeit des Menschen nicht notwendig. Es musste ein Schauen Gottes vorangehen, ehe Gott es wusste: dieser Ausdruck gewährleistet uns also das Bewusstsein der menschlichen Freiheit. Und das Geschick, das den Menschen trifft, tritt nicht in Folge einer physischen Kausalität ein; es geht ein prüfender Rathschluss Gottes voran, der Ratschluss selbst schmerzt den Beschließenden. Alles dies setzt die Persönlichkeit und Freiheit Gottes voraus und hält diese dem Bewusstsein rein. Schon ראב"ד, einer unserer jüdischsten Denker, ist der Ansicht, dass dieses Bewusstsein von der Persönlichkeit Gottes viel wichtiger sei, als die Spekulation darüber, ob man dies oder jenes von Gott prädizieren könne.

I rejoiced and made everyone joyful. Meaning, I rejoiced myself and also made others joyful.

So it is with acts of Hashem. Question: How could the Rabbi compare the acts of Hashem to the acts of flesh and blood? The answer is: This was only to deflect the heretic’s challenge. But in truth, Hashem’s reason was “For the sake of the righteous...” (Maharshal)

For the sake of the righteous. This [is an alternative explanation, and] means to say: “Furthermore, for the sake of the righteous...” Otherwise the parable does not fit the message. For no benefit came from the son; it was a case of, “At the time of joy let there be joy.” But benefit does come from the wicked, since the righteous descend from them. Perforce, Rashi means to say, “Furthermore...” (Re’m)

ויאמר ה' אמחה את האדם AND GOD SAID I WILL BLOT OUT THE MAN — He is dust and I shall bring water upon him and blot him out: that is why this root מחה is used (it expresses the idea of sponging out by means of wet or dampness) (Genesis Rabbah 28:2).

ויאמר השם אמחה את האדם. G'd said: I will wipe out man. G'd had to repeat here once more that He "regretted" having made man so that we would understand that G'd's regret expressed in the previous verse was not because of man's deeds, but concerned man's creation per se. Had G'd wanted to wipe out mankind only because of their deeds, anyone who had not committed a serious sin would not have been affected by the decree to wipe out man. This would comprise all the people under twenty years of age. If the decree was due to G'd's regret at having made man at all, everybody would be included in the decree. In view of the fact that the Torah tells us through the repeated use of the word נחמתי that every human being was included in the decree, the Torah had to continue immediately and tell us that there was one single exception, namely Noach. The Torah tells us that Noach "found favour in the eyes of G'd," i.e. not on account of his deeds. Once G'd had decided that He "regretted" having made man Noach's good deeds would have had no impact on his fate. He needed an act of grace by G'd to save him. The fact that G'd granted Noach grace does not mean that he did not deserve to survive based on his good deeds. There are certain categories of מצות, good deeds, which secure a person grace in the eyes of G'd. G'd has deliberately refrained from telling us which מצות fall into that category because otherwise everybody would merely concentrate on performing those commandments.

'ויאמר ה, G’d either said this to Himself, or to Noach.

They, too, perverted. This raises a question: Why did the verse not [equate them and] write, “Man and beast”? Thus Rashi offered the alternate explanation, which raises another question: Why did the verse not [make the beasts secondary and] say: “Man, and beast as well”? Thus Rashi offered the first explanation [as both are needed]. (Maharshal)

הי dieselbe Barmherzigkeit, die den Menschen dahingestellt hatte, sprach jetzt den Beschluss seiner Vernichtung aus. Die Entartung war eine so große, dass die Vertilgung selbst ein Akt der Barmherzigkeit war. Selbst in dem Augenblicke der Vernichtung spricht sich die Größe des Menschen aus, indem seine Vernichtung die Vernichtung der ganzen lebenden Erdwelt nach sich zieht. Die Erde wohl nicht, aber פני האדמה, die Oberfläche gehört als Boden seiner Bestimmung dem Menschen. Kein bloß physisches Band verknüpft den Menschen mit den Dingen. Es besteht auch eine moralische Beziehung zwischen ihnen. Wenn der Mensch sinkt, trauert und welkt die Erde. Diese Tatsache geht durch alle Bücher תנך^. Es heißt ferner nicht אמחה את האדם absolut, sondern mit dem Beisatz: מעל פני האדמה. Es ist damit die Möglichkeit nicht ausgeschlossen, dass selbst diese Vernichtung nur eine relative gewesen, Entfernung von der Erdwelt. Ob aber nicht selbst da das Göttliche im Menschen noch aufbewahrt, für andere Räume, andere Verhältnisse, das wagen wir nur fragend anzudeuten. Der Wortausdruck bezeichnet jedenfalls nur eine relative Vernichtung.—

אמחה את האדם “I’ll dissolve the human species;” according to Rashi we must understand this as the human species consisting of earth and therefore subject to annihilation by water. G–d said that He would use water to bring about the dissolution of the human race. The expression used by the Torah according to Rashi to illustrate this is therefore מחוי, “dissolution,” instead of other words for destruction such as השמדה or כליה.

אמחה את האדם, “I shall wipe out the human race;” when G-d had created the human He had not prefaced this with the singular mode: אעשה, “I shall make,” but He had said: נעשה, “let us make,” as He had consulted with the angels about that project. As soon as He had created them the angels had belittled this creature, saying: מה אנוש כי תזכרנו, “what is so special about the human race that You, G-d, should devote so much time and effort to its creation?” (Psalms 8,5) This is why He did not consult them about wiping out the human race. A few hundred years later, when man had built the Tower, G-d once more consulted with the angels about what punishment to administer to these people who had developed such arrogance. (compare Genesis 11,7: הבה נרדה ובבלה שפתם, “let us descend and confuse their language.”

מאדם ועד בהמה — FROM MAN, TO BEAST — These also corrupted their way (Genesis Rabbah 28:8). Another explanation is: All things were created on man’s account; when he ceases to be, what need of them? (Sanhedrin 108a)

אמחה את האדם אשר בראתי, the prefix ה before the word אדם is meant to tell us that G’d did not mean to wipe out the human species, אדם, but only האדם, seeing that some humans were allowed to survive. In supplying a rationale why the means used to wipe out all these people was the water, Rabbi Berechyah in Bereshit Rabbah 28,2 describes G’d as saying to Himself, that seeing He had made man out of earth, the only element (of the four that man is made of) which could neutralise earth is water. The words מאדם עד בהמה, included the free roaming beasts on earth, חיה, whereas the word רמש refers to the small creatures as we explained already on 1,25-26. Why were all these creatures wiped out also? What had they done to deserve this? They had only been created for the sake of man. If there was no purpose for man on earth, neither was there a purpose for all of these living creatures. Furthermore, seeing that the waters would cover the habitat of all these creatures they would die unless saved by a special miracle. The concern of G’d for all those creatures does not extend to each of them individually, but only to the survival of each of their species. G’d ensured that the species would survive by commanding Noach to take them into the ark with him, or at least to accept all those that came to the ark voluntarily, in pairs. If you were to ask why the deluge had to cover the entire surface of the earth and not only the areas inhabited by man, if G’d had done this, man could have escaped to uninhabited regions and survived thus foiling G’d’s plan. This is why even the highest mountains had to be covered by the waters to prevent anyone from escaping to the mountain peaks. Some of our sages (Sanhedrin 108) claim that the animals had become corrupt, copying man’s corrupt ways, so that they too deserved to die in their own right. They had become guilty of mating with species not their own, thus frustrating G’d’s plan that each species remain pure. Other sages (on the same folio) agree with the first opinion we offered, i.e. that in the absence of man on earth there was no purpose in the earth being populated by animals.

Die Weisen geben im Midrasch zu מחה einen Aufschluss, der nicht von geringer Bedeutung sein dürfte. מחה heißt nach ihnen eine völlige Auflösung. Vielleicht ist מחה verwandt mit מהה, wovon nur noch מה vorkommt, das Formlose, nicht für die Erkenntnis Dastehende. Also nicht bloß Tod und Verwesung der Muskeln wird verhängt, sondern auch der Gebeine, ja selbst der sonst nach den Weisen nie verwesende Teil der Gebeine wird hier gänzlich aufgelöst. Bei dieser völligen Auflösung ist es denn um so weniger auffallend, warum sich keine, oder nach der allerneuesten Annahme, warum sich so wenig Reste der vorsündflutlichen Menschheit vorfinden sollen. Ohnehin hat nach der Ansicht der Weisen Leidenschaftlichkeit Einfluss auf raschere Verwesung der Gebeine (Sabbat 152 b), und kann dies bei der Verderbnis dieses Geschlechtes in noch höherem Maße der Fall gewesen sein.

כי נחמתי כי עשיתי, this is how G-d referred to sinful man; but when man was loyal and G-d fearing, He boasted with their loyalty, lauding them for their steadfastness and refusal to regret having accepted the Torah; (compare Numbers 23,21, לא איש אל ויכזב ובן אדם כי יתנחם, “I am not disappointed in this people. It does not cause Me any regrets.” (loosely translated by this Editor) We find in that verse another allusion that change in attitude always first occurs in G-d’s creature, never in G-d, so that what appears as G-d changing course is really only His reaction to man’s perversity.

כי נחמתי כי עשיתים means for I have thought out what to do because I have made them. (Cf. this with Rashi’s second explanation of וינחם 5:6).

Während so ein ganzes Menschengeschlecht zu Grabe ging, heißt es:

BUT NOAH FOUND GRACE IN THE EYES OF THE ETERNAL. The meaning thereof is that all his deeds were pleasing and sweet before Him. Similarly: For thou hast found grace in My sight, and I know thee by name.⁵¹⁸Exodus 33:17. This is like the verses: And He gave him favor in the sight of the keeper of the prison;⁵¹⁹Genesis 39:21. And Esther obtained favor in the sight of all of them that looked upon her.⁵²⁰Esther 2:15. Scripture mentions this in contrast to what it said concerning his [Noah’s] generation, namely, that all their deeds brought grief before Him, blessed be He. But of Noah it says that he found grace in His eyes, and afterwards it tells⁵²¹In the following Seder Noach. why he was pleasing before G-d: because he was a perfectly righteous man.
Noach

But Noach found favor (chen). Chen implies groundless favor. Because Noach did not actively spread knowledge of Hashem he was not worthy that others should be saved on his account. Thus it was an act of groundless favor to him that his sons and daughters-in-law were spared.

'ונח מצא חן בעיני ה, he found favour due to good deeds performed by him. The Torah uses the same expression in Exodus 33,17 when G’d tells Moses that he had found favour in His eyes. His deeds had been pleasing to G’d. In Bereshit Rabbah 28,9, Rabbi Acha son of Kahana expresses surprise at the words ונח מצא חן בעיני ה', saying that the wording implies that Noach, in his own right, could not have claimed the right of survival, except for the circumstance that he “found favour in the eyes of the Lord, i.e. G’d had to search for a reason to let him survive. [He bases himself on the whole verse being superfluous, as Noach’s merits are discussed in the following verses. Rabbi Einhorn’s comment on that Midrash. Ed.]

ונח מצא חן, “but Noach had found favour, etc.” Bereshit Rabbah 28,9 points out that even Noach, strictly speaking, had not deserved that G’d perform miracles for him to save him, but as he was fortunate in finding favour in G’d’s eyes, [either because he had fathered Shem, and eventually an Avraham was born to that family, or that in accordance with the dictum that the attribute of justice is always tempered with the application of the attribute of mercy, he was the one to whom the attribute of mercy could be applied. The entire statement has as its basis the letter ו in the word ונח, which suggests that actually he too was included in the previous statement נחמתי כי עשיתם, “I am sorry that I have made them” Ed.]

ונח מצא חן בעיני ה', “and Noach had found favor in the eyes of the Lord.” This means simply that the wicked deserved to be wiped out whereas righteous Noach deserved to be saved as he had found favour in the eyes of G-d All the Torah does here was to explain the principle of reward and punishment. This is also what Solomon had in mind when he said in Proverbs 22,1 נבחר שם מעושר רב מכסף ומזהב חן טוב, “A good name is to be chosen rather than riches, grace is better than silver or gold.”

But Noach found favor. If Noach had remained among his contemporaries he too would have been corrupted. Thus Hashem destroyed the entire generation only to save him. If, on the other hand, there had been no righteous person the world would have been spared, for Hashem only performs cruel acts if they will produce a positive result.

ונח מצא חן בעיני ד׳, nicht: Noa fand Gnade, in dem Sinn, dass er ver schont blieb. מצא חן בעיני־ heißt nie: Gnade bei jemandem finden, dass dieser ihn mit Strafe etc. verschone. Vielmehr steht es überall, wo von jemandem für jemanden eine Gewährung, eine Willfahrung, eine Begünstigung zu erwarten steht. So wenn Abraham wünscht, dass die Engel bei ihm einkehren sollen, wenn die Ägypter das Volk beschenken sollen usw. Es ist zwischen Gott und dem Menschen eigentlich das Allerhöchste, das der Mensch Gott gegenüber erreichen kann. So bei Mosche למען אמצא חן בעיניך, damit ich wisse, was ich zu tun habe, um auch ferner deines Wohlwollens würdig zu sein. — Wurzel von חנן :חן, verwandt mit ענן, rad. von ענן, Wolke, die die Bedingung der Fruchtbarkeit und des Gedeihens für die Erde in sich trägt. Die Wolke ist für den Ort, über dem sie schwebt, dasjenige, von dem dieser alles zu erwarten hat. Verwandt ferner mit הנן, wovon חֵן, die Partikel des Darreichens. חנן heißt: zu jemandem geistig in dasselbe Verhältnis treten, in welchem die Wolke zur Erde steht. חֵן ist noch nicht das gewährte Wohlwollen, sondern die Würdigkeit dazu. Nun heißt es nicht לפני, sondern בעיני־, nach der Beurteilung, der Einsicht. Wenn jemand so ist, dass Gott ihm חונן sein könne, so hat er מצא — .חן בעיניו ist in den meisten Fällen nicht ein zufälliges Finden, sondern das Erreichen eines erstrebten Zieles. Daher מצא vom Erreichen derjenigen geistigen Güter, חכמה ,דעת. usw., die nie zufällig, die nur nach ernstem Streben zu erlangen sind. So auch von den Schickungen Gottes, die den Menschen treffen, weil sie ihn aufsuchen, 2) את כל התלאה אשר מצאתם בדרך. B. M. 18,8). So das: 4) ,הצאן ובקר ישחט להם ומצא להם. B.M. 11,22), "und wird es ihnen das (von ihnen gewollte) Ziel erreichen? So auch מצא חן בעיני ד׳ nicht zufällig. Es kommt nur bei denen vor, die Gott mit ganz besonderen Kräften und Mitteln für ganz besondere Zwecke ausrüstet, so Mosche, so Israel (מצא חן במדבר) so auch hier von Noa: Während alles entartet war, so dass es vernichtet werden musste, "ward Noa in der Beurteilung Gottes würdig befunden, auf ihn das ganze Rettungswerk der Zukunft zu übertragen." In ihm konzentrierte sich alles, was Gottes "Herz" für die Menschheit gewollt. Er hatte alle Keime in die Zukunft hinüber zu retten. —

Es ist ein durchschauernder Gedanke, dass als Produkt von 1600 Jahren Menschengeschichte nur ein Mann mit seiner Familie dasteht, und auf diesem einen Manne Gott sein Menschheitwerk fortführt. Nicht umsonst wird noch später auf diese Phase in der Gotteswaltung zurückgeblickt. Wenn David Gott in allem Furchtbaren und Erhabenen, in allem Schönen und Großen, in allem Erschütternden und Herrlichen besungen hat, schließt er mit dem Gedanken: so mannigfaltig der Wechsel in der Natur und Menschenwelt erscheint, so unerschüttert bleibt doch allem diesem Wechsel gegenüber in seinem Walten und seinen Plänen Gott. Er "saß" der Sündflut gegenüber und selbst als die ganze Menschheit zu Grunde ging, blieb Er מלך, und sein מלכות, sein Menschheiterziehungsplan, blieb unerschüttert. Und also unerschütterlich wie Gott allem Wechsel gegenüber steht, so fest und unerschütterlich will Gott alle werden lassen, die sich ihm als sein Volk hingebend anschließen, und diese Festigkeit führt nicht zum Kampfe, stört nicht den Frieden, sie ist die einzige Bedingung des Friedens: ד׳ למבול ישב וישב ד׳ מלך לעולם, ד׳ עוז לעמו יתן ד׳ יברך את עמו בשלום.

אלה תולדת נח נח איש צדיק THESE ARE THE PROGENY OF NOAH: NOAH WAS A RIGHTEOUS MAN — Since the text mentions him it sings his praise, in accordance with what is said, (Proverbs 10:7) “The mention of the righteous shall be for a blessing.” Another explanation is: since after stating “These are the progeny of Noah”, it does not at once mention the names of his children but declares that he “was a righteous man”, Scripture thereby teaches you that the real progeny of righteous people are their good deeds (Genesis Rabbah 30:6).

THESE ARE ‘TOLDOTH’ NOAH. Commentators¹Ibn Ezra and R’dak. These commentators felt the difficulty in explaining toldoth to mean “progeny” or “generations” since it further states, And Noah begot three sons. have explained the word toldoth to mean “his experiences” [or “his events”] much the same as the sense of: what a day ‘yeiled’ (may bring forth).²Proverbs 27:1.
In this way the word toldoth refers to the entire section [since all the events of the flood are occurrences in the life of Noah]. But this does not appear to me to be correct since the external events in the life of a person, [over which he has no control], are not his toldoth.
The correct interpretation is that the word toldoth here retains its literal meaning of “progeny,” just as, These are ‘toldoth’ (the progeny of) the sons of Noah;³Genesis 10:1. And these are ‘toldoth’ (the progeny of) Ishmael.⁴Ibid., 25:12. Thus Scripture is saying, “These are the progeny of Noah: Shem, Ham, and Japheth.”
Scripture however repeats, And Noah begot three sons,⁵Verse 10. because [at the end of the first verse] it interrupted by saying, Noah was a righteous man, and whole-hearted, in order to inform us why He commanded him concerning the ark. And even though Scripture has already stated above, And Noah was five hundred years old; and Noah begot Shem, Ham, and Japheth,⁶Above, 5:32. it returns to mention them a second time in order to relate that Noah was unlike all his ancestors who begot daughters and sons. This is the meaning of the words, three sons;⁵Verse 10. Scripture mentions their number in order to say that these three alone were his progeny, and they were saved by his merit, and by them was the whole earth overspread.⁷Genesis 9:19.

אלה תולדות נח, his later descendants.

אלה תולדת נח, Theses are the generations of Noach. When the Torah uses the term "these," it usually intends to exclude something, i.e. "these generations and not any others." In this instance there was no need for the Torah to use the term "these," as we already know that all the generations were doomed. For this reason the sages understand the word to teach us that the principal "generations," i.e. descendants of a person, are man's good deeds. They therefore read the verse as if there were no comma between the words נח, נח to indicate that Noach's descendants were his good deeds (Bereshit Rabbah 30,6). The Midrash was careful to say that the "principal" descendants of the righteous are their good deeds; naturally they also have other descendants. When the good deeds of Noach are described by the word אלה, this is only in contrast with those of the word תולדת at the beginning of chapter 5.

אלה תולדות נח, נח איש צדיק תמים היה בדורותיו, the meaning of the word תולדות is similar to “history of,” i.e. this it what happened to Noach, etc. It concerns both the deluge and what came after. We encounter the same pattern when the Torah introduced a paragraph with the words אלה תולדות יעקב, יוסף in Genesis 37,2 where this is an introduction to history related to Yaakov’s family. In Proverbs 27,1 we have a verse concluding with the words “the day will give birth to.” The root ילד is the root of the word תולדה and תולדות, i.e. it refers to future developments. Developments are matters that are the result of days following one another.

תולדות נח, a reference to his history, commencing with his own life and continuing with that of his offspring.

אלה תולדות נח, “these are the offspring of Noach.” Some commentators understand the word תולדות as referring to important events in the life of Noach, similar to Genesis 10,1 ואלה תולדת בני נח, or אלה תולדות השמים in Genesis The fact that the Torah repeated the words ויולד נח וגו', that Noach begat 3 sons, information we had been told already in Genesis 5,32 is due to the interruption of the Torah’s narrative by telling us that Noach was a righteous man and that this accounted for his and his family being spared during the deluge. Seeing that Noach begat only three sons, as opposed to most of his contemporaries, the Torah wishes to emphasise this point. Even during the 350 years which he lived on after the deluge he sired no more children. These three sons alone were his biological offspring and they were saved because of that (not their own merit).

Since it mentions him, it tells of his praiseworthiness. The Re’m writes that Scripture repeats Noach’s progeny here, though it already mentioned it in the last Parshah, to tell us that he fathered only these — he did not have more children later, who were unworthy of entering the ark. But the Nachalas Yaakov disagrees, since Rashi explained above (5:32) that Noach did not begin to have children until age 500 so they would still be young at the time of the Flood and thus be saved even if they were wicked. Rather, the Torah mentions his progeny again here to tell us that they were righteous. For it says here אלה תולדות, [rather than ואלה], thereby disqualifying what preceeded: the generation of the Flood. [See Rashi on ואלה המשפטים, Shemos 21:1.] In other words, Noach’s progeny are called תולדות but those of the generation of the Flood do not deserve to be called תולדות.

אלה תולדת נח. Wie oben mit אלה תולדת השמים והארץ eine neue Reihe der Entwicklungen eingeführt wird, so hier eine neue Reihe der Menschenentwicklung. Die bisherige Menschheit geht ihrem Untergang entgegen. Noa ist ein zweiter Adam und steht an der Spitze eines neuen Menschengeschlechts.

אלה תולדת נח נח, “these are the generations of Noach, Noach;” why has the name of Noach been repeated here twice? He was exemplary vis a vis spiritual beings in the heavenly spheres as well as vis a vis his contemporaries on earth. (B’reshit Rabbah, 30,4) The meaning is to tell us that whenever we encounter such a construction of a person’s name appearing twice in a row, it is to remind us that the person concerned was a righteous person. An example for this is found in Genesis 2,11, where the name Avraham appears twice in a row. This interpretation has been challenged in the Jerusalem Talmud where it is pointed out that we find the same repetition of a man’s name applied to Avraham’s father Terach, a renowned idolater and seller of heathen images (Genesis 11,27) The answer provided by B’reshit Rabbah is that Terach, though an idolater had become a penitent. It is this very fact that convinced our sages that he had become a penitent before his death. This also explains why Avraham was told by G–d in Genesis 15,15, that he would join his fathers in the hereafter.

אלה תולדות נח, “These are the descendants of Noach;” according to B’reshit Rabbah 30,3, whenever a paragraph commences with the word: אלה, this is equivalent to dissociating what occurs from then on with what had been discussed previously; Noach, was not a continuation of the history of mankind up until now, but represents a 180 degree turn from that history. Whereas the generations prior to him progressed toward their destruction, he represented a new beginning for mankind. He founded a new type of human being.

בדורותיו IN HIS GENERATIONS — Some of our Rabbis explain it (this word) to his credit: he was righteous even in his generation; it follows that had he lived in a generation of righteous people he would have been even more righteous owing to the force of good example. Others, however, explain it to his discredit: in comparison with his own generation he was accounted righteous, but had he lived in the generation of Abraham he would have been accounted as of no importance (cf. Sanhedrin 108a).

צדיק, in his deeds,

נח, the name occurs three times in the same verse, when a single mention of his name would have sufficed. In Numbers 8,19 the name בני ישראל occurs 5 times in one verse. According to Tanchuma 5 on our parshah such apparently needless repetitions are an expression of special affection by the writer for the subject described. Such formulations are referred to by Rashi in Numbers 8,19), as well as by Ibn Ezra as צחות הלשון, “stylistic purity.” [repeating Noach’s name 3 times indicates his popularity with G’d at that time. Ed.]

איש צדיק תמים היה, “he was a perfectly righteous man.” The meaning of the expression צדיק תמים is that he was a righteous man among other righteous men, i.e. had been found righteous when coming up for judgment. When a person such as Noach is found righteous, his erstwhile sins, potential causes for punishment, are converted into righteousness. This is the meaning of the verse (Deut. 25,1) והצדיקו את הצדיק והרשיעו את הרשע, “they (the judges) will exonerate the righteous (totally) and condemn the wicked.” In the case of Avraham, of whom G’d said that He knows him to be practicing and teaching צדקה ומשפט, (Genesis 18,18) He bestowed two kinds of praise upon him, צדקה, a practicing צדיק, and משפט, the meting out of משפט by tempering it with mercy, רחמים. Ibn Ezra understands the word צדיק as referring to Noach’s deeds, and תמים as referring to his motivation. [his righteousness was not prompted by self-serving considerations. Ed.] When the Torah continues that Noach walked with G’d, ויתהלך נח את האלוקים, this means that he did not even allow himself to be guided by astrology and similar considerations, but followed directly in the paths of G’d to the extent that they had been revealed. He certainly did not practice any form of idolatry. Alternatively, the Torah describes Noach here as a prophet, seeing that the formulation אחרי ה' תלכו ואותו תיראו”follow the Lord and remain in awe of Him,” is used by the Torah to describe the prophet who distances himself from idolatry.

That the main progeny of the righteous... It seems that Rashi means as follows. It is written, “These are the progeny of Noach,” and then it explains, “Noach was a righteous man,” thus we see that good deeds are also called progeny. And it first states, “Noach was a righteous man,” and only afterwards, “Noach fathered three sons,” thus we see that good deeds are the main progeny.

Another meaning of the sequence נח נח, is illustrated in an imaginary conversation between Moses and Noach reported in Devarim Rabbah 11,3. In that conversation Noach claimed to have been greater than Moses because he was saved during the deluge. Moses retorted that Noach had not been able to save anyone other than himself, whereas he had saved his generation after the sin of the golden calf. The word אלה accordingly describes the limited value of Noach's good deeds. They sufficed only to save himself. The additional word בדורתיו further underlines that Noach did not succeed to make penitents out of his peers. His sons who were considered as his "branches" are therefore included in the name Noach. The Torah accords Noach a compliment which it did not accord to righteous people who had lived before his time. Noach's righteous predecessors all had other righteous people to model themselves after, something that did not apply to Noach. He grew up surrounded only by wicked people. The word אלה therefore also has a positive connotation in that it sets Noach's pious conduct apart from all those who had preceded him.

HE WAS A RIGHTEOUS MAN AND WHOLE-HEARTED. Scripture mentions that he was guiltless and perfect in his righteousness in order to inform us that he was worthy to be saved from the flood without any punishment whatever since he was whole-hearted in righteousness. For a tzadik (a righteous person) is one who is found guiltless in judgment as opposed to the wicked person, as Scripture says, And they come unto judgment, and the judges judge them, by justifying the righteous, and condemning the wicked;⁸Deuteronomy 25:1. and also, For Thou art just in all that has come upon us, for Thou hast dealt truly;⁹Nehemiah 9:33. similarly, In righteousness shalt thou judge thy neighbor.¹⁰Leviticus 19:15. But in the case of Abraham, concerning whom it says, that he will command his children to do ‘tz’dakah’ and ‘mishpat,’¹¹Genesis 18:19. Scripture praises him for righteousness which is synonymous with judgment, and for mercy which is synonymous with tz’dakah.¹²Ramban is thus saying that where Scripture uses tzedek alone it means “guiltless in judgment,” but in the case of Abraham where in addition to tzedek (or tz’dakah) Scripture also mentions mishpat, (judgment) mishpat of necessity means “guiltless in judgment,” while tz’dakah in this case means “mercifulness.”
And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said, “Righteous in deeds; whole-hearted in his heart.” However, it is written, Thou art whole-hearted in thy ways;¹³Ezekiel 28:15. [the term “whole-hearted” is thus used in connection with “ways” and not with matters of the heart].
Now after Scripture said that Noah was a righteous man, meaning that he was neither a man of violence nor one who perverted his ways as did the guilty ones of his generation, it further said that he walked with the glorious Name,¹⁴See Deuteronomy 28:58. fearing Him alone. He was not enticed by the astrologers, enchanters and soothsayers, and surely not by idolatry, and he paid no heed to them at all; to G-d alone he did always cleave, and he walked in the way G-d chose or taught him for he was a prophet. This is analogous in meaning to the verse, After the Eternal your G-d shall ye walk, and Him shall ye fear,¹⁵Ibid., 13:5. which is stated in connection with the removal of him who prophesies to encourage the worship of idols and gives a sign or wonder to verify his words, as I will explain. I will again mention this in connection with the verse, Walk before Me, and be thou whole-hearted,¹⁶Genesis 17:1. if He Who is perfect in knowledge¹⁷See Job 36:4. will be with me.
Now since Noah was a righteous man and undeserving of punishment, it was fitting that his sons and his household be saved by his merit for if his sons were to perish, it would have been a punishment upon him. Or it may be said that he was a perfectly righteous man, and his sons and household were also righteous since he taught them; this is analogous to that which is written concerning Abraham: For I have known him, to the end that he may command his children and his household.¹¹Genesis 18:19.

Indem aber nicht sofort seine Kinder, sondern er selbst gleichsam als seine erste תולדה genannt wird, gibt dies den Weisen Gelegenheit zu der Bemerkung, dass das erste Produkt des Menschen, die erste Frucht seiner Arbeit, sein eigener Charakter ist, und nun zumal in einer Zeit, wie diejenige Noa׳s, in welcher es gewiß der höchsten auf sich selbst gerichteten Energie bedurfte, sich aus der allgemeinen Verderbnis für das Reine und Gute emporzuretten. Da ist sicherlich das erste und das edelste Erzeugnis des Braven: er selbst. איש צדיק תמים, das sind die Charakterseiten, durch welche Noa מצא חן בעיני ד׳, und die Gott zugleich als Saatkörner des künftigen Menschengeschlechtes in diesem neuen Stammvater erwählte.

איש, “a man;” The author of Midrash Tanchuma (2) on this parshah, commences this paragraph with a quotation from Proverbs 11,30: פרי צדיק עץ חיים, ולוקח נפשות חכם, usually translated as “the fruit of the righteous is a tree of life, a wise man captivates people.” According to Tanchuma, the meaning of Solomon there was to tell us that if someone dies without leaving behind children to posterity this is a disgrace and he bewails his fate. G–d in this case, when the departed person had been a righteous person, consoles him by telling him that the Torah he had studied while on earth will be considered by Him as his fruit. This is why the verse speaks of עץ חיים, “a tree of life,” instead of referring to the righteous person’s sons that he left behind. The Torah has been referred to as עץ חיים in Proverbs 3,18. Our sages relate that Noach did not die until he saw the earth having become settled by man and until all the seventy nations resulting from his loins be it directly or indirectly had become earth’s civilisation (after the destruction of the Tower) Of all the righteous people mentioned in the Bible the only one who was ever referred to as a צדיק תמים, “a perfectly righteous human being” Noach is the only one complimented in such a fashion. According to a statement in B’reshit Rabbah 30,8 anyone of whom the Torah ever used the adjective תמים, perfect, concluded his life after a multiple of seven years. [Just as a sh’mittah cycle is unit of seven years. Ed.] Rabbi Yitzchok son of Avraham, points out that this cannot be true as both Avraham and Noach to whom these attributes were applied died at 175 years and 950 years, both not multiples of seven. The Rabbi’s words therefore must be understood as multiples commencing with when the attribute תמים was applied to the persons concerned; in the case of Noach he had acquired that title when he was commanded to build the ark, 120 years before the deluge commenced. Since he survived after that for the 350 years we get a total of 470 years, from which we need to deduct the year he spent in the ark, -not really a year of life- and we have a multiple of seven year cycles, i.e. 67 times 7 equals 469. Avraham had been 99 years of age when he had another 77 years to live.

תולדות נח, the word תולדות, refers to happenings and their causes. For instance: Proverbs 27,1 כי לא תדע מה ילד היום, “for you do not know what the day will bring.” Rashi offers the same interpretation concerning the line: אלה תולדות יעקב, יוסף, “these are the descendants of Yaakov, Joseph.” (Genesis 37,2). The Torah now readies itself to record the history of mankind as if it had commenced with Noach, and it attributes events that will be described as the direct or indirect result of Noach’s influence on them. It sums up the difference by describing Noach as a righteous man, when compared with his ancestors. It attributes the demise of his ancestors as basically due to their wickedness, [even though a few individuals in each generation had not been wicked. Ed.]

את האלהים התהלך נח NOAH WALKED WITH GOD — In the case of Abraham Scripture says, (Genesis 24:40) ‘‘[God] before whom I walked”; Noah needed God’s support to uphold him in righteousness, Abraham drew his moral strength from himself and walked in his righteousness by his own effort (Genesis Rabbah 30:10).

תמים, in his attitudes,

צדיק, his deeds all reflected fairness, charitable considerations, in contrast to those of his contemporaries who were men of violence.

בדורותיו, “in his generations.” According to Rashi some commentators consider this word a compliment to Noach, whereas others see in it a veiled criticism. [relative righteousness compared to his contemporaries. Ed.] Nachmanides explains the word as meaning what any reader would assume, i.e. that during the generations Noach lived he was the only one who was righteous and wholehearted in his relations with his Creator. He explains the line (Genesis 7,1) “כי אותך ראיתי צדיק בדור הזה, “for you I have seen righteous in this generation” in he same vein, i.e. no one else is worth saving from the oncoming deluge. The reason the Torah uses the plural mode for the word בדורותיו is the fact that Noach’s life time spanned several generations during all of which mankind had become successively more corrupt. Do not raise the question that Methuselah who died only few days before the onset of the deluge (according to our sages) was also a righteous man. The Torah did not deny that he was righteous, but only states that there was no other righteous man whom G’d deemed worth saving at the time in question. According to yet other commentators the word בדורותיו refers to the generation preceding the deluge as well as to those following it.

There are others who infer from it to his discredit. Question: How can they infer his discredit, if he was righteous? The answer is: They derive it from, “Noach walked with Elokim,” which Rashi explains [to mean, “Noach required support to uphold him”]. But those who infer his praise interpret “with Elokim” differently, as follows. It is written about Avraham, “Elokim, before whom I walked,” implying that Avraham was not with Hashem all the time. He was busy with people, drawing them to Hashem. But Noach was not busy with the people of his generation since they were completely wicked. Thus it is written, “Noach walked with Elokim.” I.e., he was busy with nothing else but with Hashem. (Maharshal) Alternatively, those who infer “praise” are answering the question: Why did it not say בדורו [singular]? It is because בדורותיו [plural] implies that in all the ten generations from Adam until Noach, Noach was the righteous and flawless man. But those who infer “discredit” explain it as follows: Relative to the deeds of these generations, [he was righteous]. But had he lived in the generation of Avraham... Alternatively, those who infer “praise” explain “in his generations” to refer to the ten generations from Adam until Noach. And those who infer “discredit” explain it to refer to the ten generations from Noach until Avraham — but had he lived in the generation of Avraham... (Nachalas Yaakov) Both views agree that Noach was righteous only as compared to his generation, not completely righteous. For had he lived in a righteous generation, [all agree that] he surely would have been more righteous. These views differ only over the interpretation of “In his generations.” One holds that it comes to praise him: even in those wicked generations, where he could have learned from their wickedness, he remained righteous — and surely had he lived in a righteous generation. And the other view holds as explained earlier. All agree that in a righteous generation, his present level of righteousness would have been considered insignificant. And all agree that had he been in a righteous generation, he in fact would have been more righteous. For growing up among the righteous is not like growing up among the wicked. [You might ask:] Why does one infer “praise” and the other infer “discredit,” if there is no clear proof either way? [The answer is:] The one who infers “praise” holds that בדורותיו refers to היה, which immediately precedes it. Thus the verse is telling us that in his wicked generations, he remained righteous — certainly had he lived in a righteous generation. And the one who infers “discredit” holds that בדורותיו refers back to צדיק. Thus the verse is saying, “He was righteous in his generations” — relative to his generations. This is undoubtedly to his discredit. (Re’m) One might ask: If the Torah (7:8) does not even mention an impure animal’s discredit [see Bava Basra 123a], why does one view infer a tzaddik’s discredit from our verse? The answer is: The verse implies the [wicked] generation’s discredit, not Noach’s. It is saying that in this generation, even a tzaddik like Noach required Hashem’s support, unlike Avraham [in his generation]. Clearly, it was an inferior generation. (Divrei Dovid)

There is another message contained in this verse which is commented upon in Bereshit Rabbah 25,2. The Midrash discusses whether Noach's name was in itself blissful, or whether in view of Noach's righteous way of life the blessings he conferred on earth were subsequently reflected in his name. Here is some of the discussion: "When G'd created Adam He invested him with a full range of authority. The cow obeyed the ploughman, the furrow co-operated with the plough. As soon as Adam sinned, the cow no longer responded to its owner, nor did the earth respond to the plough. This situation continued until the time of Noach. Once Noach appeared on earth the situation changed in man's favour. Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish added that until Noach the waters would flood the earth, something that stopped during Noach's time. At any rate, the name Noach is repeated in our verse to indicate the beneficial effect his existence had on the well being of his peers. The repetition of the word תולדת and the use of the word איש are an allusion to the fact that Noach was איש האדמה, an outstanding farmer (as is stated explicitly after the deluge (9,20). Our sages (Tanchuma Bereshit 11) find Noach's successful impact on farming alluded to in 5,29 where his father Lemech predicts that his son Noach will provide relief for עצבון ידינו, "the painful labour of our hands." The fact that Noach was born without a foreskin gave rise to these hopes. Apparently Noach invented a usable plough. The word צדיק hints that the righteous is the foundation of the universe, that without a righteous person the universe would forfeit its reason for existence. But for Noach the earth would have perished at the time of the deluge. The word חמים should be understood in the same vein as the Talmud Avodah Zarah 10 explains it. The Talmud understands the word צדיק as a reference to Noach's deeds, whereas the word תמים is a reference to Noach's lifestyle, his attitudes [as opposed to understanding the word as an adjective describing his righteousness. Ed.] All of this is additional praise for Noach who was able to perfect his personality in the face of such wicked contemporaries. Noach did far more than could have been expected of him. Our sages call such conduct לפנים משורת הדין. According to Samuel II, 22,27 G'd acts loyally with the loyal, whereas He uses wile in dealing with the perverse. According to this yardstick Noach would have been free to do likewise, but he chose to be more considerate than required by law. When the Torah describes Noach's perfection as בדורותיו this means that his goodness was recognised even by the people of his time. The plural in the expression בדורותיו reminds us that the average person's lifespan involves three generations. He lives during part of his father's generation, his contemporaries, and during part of his children's generation. Noach was unique during all these three generations; the only righteous member of a former generation that he shared time on earth with was his grandfather Methuselah. When the Torah tells us את האלוקים התהלך נח, that Noach walked with G'd, this means that even vis a vis G'd Noach's conduct was very constructive. Our sages tell us in connection with Noach's offering after the deluge (8,21) וירח השם את ריח הניחוח, that Noach's name is alluded to in the word ניחוח. The reason the Torah repeats the name Noach at the beginning is to refer to this second dimension of Noach's beneficial effect on mankind, when G'd decided not to bring another deluge ever, due to Noach's gratitude. The reason the Torah uses the verb הלך when describing Noach's conduct vis-a-vis G'd is because G'd describes a desirable conduct by man in those terms in Deut. 28,9. When the Torah here employs the reflexive התהלך, this merely emphasises that Noach kept walking with G'd. He provided pleasure to His Creator all the time, something which found its ultimate expression in his sacrifice after the deluge.

IN HIS GENERATIONS. Some of our Rabbis explained it to his credit, [i.e., he was righteous despite his generation]; it follows all the more had he lived in a generation of righteous people. Others explain it to his discredit. [In comparison with his own generation he was considered righteous, but had he lived in the generation of Abraham he would not have been considered of any consequence.] Thus the language of Rashi.
The correct interpretation according to the plain meaning of Scripture appears to be that he alone was a righteous man in those generations, there being no righteous or whole-hearted men except him in those generations. In a similar sense is the verse, For thee I have seen righteous before Me in this generation,¹⁸Genesis 7:1. meaning that there is no other in the generation worthy of being saved. Scripture says, in his generations —[using the plural form]— because many generations passed since the time men had become corrupted, and there was no righteous man besides him. Let not the word of our Rabbis concerning Methuselah,¹⁹Bereshith Rabbah 32:10. [which said that he was a righteous man], cause you difficulty for Scripture tells only that there was no righteous man worthy of being saved from the flood in all those generations except Noah.

איש. Nach der Bemerkung unserer Weisen wird in תנ"ך mit dem Namen איש nicht gespielt. Wen das Gotteswort einen Mann nennt, war ein Mann, ein erprobter Charakter, צדיק מומחה, und wer hätte mehr Proben fester Männlichkeit zu bestehen gehabt als Noa in seinem bisherigen 600jährigen Wandel in Mitte der wechselnden Geschlechter! — השחתת דרך und חמס, Sittenverderbnis und Unredlichkeit, sittliches und soziales Verderbnis wird uns sofort als Gepräge seiner Zeit geschildert; dem gegenüber war Noa צדיק und צדיק ,תמים im Gegensatz zu חמס, und תמים im Gegensatz zu צדק .השחתת דרך heißt: den Personen und Verhältnissen um uns das ihnen Ge- bührende leisten. (Es ist insofern laut- und begriffe-verwandt mit dem chald. שדך: befriedigen, genügeleisten). Der צדיק fasst alles objektiv, nichts vom Standpunkte seines Interesses, alles vom Standpunkte seiner Pflicht auf. Es ist zunächst die soziale Gerechtigkeit, und steht daher vorzugsweise mit פעל und עשה, mit Ausdrücken der Handlung, der Tat in Verbindung, עשה צדקה ,פעולת צדיק, עשה צדקה usw. — תמים dagegen ist vorzugsweise mit הלך und דרך verbunden. דרך ist zunächst diejenige Entwicklung, die der Mensch zur Vollendung seiner eigenen Persönlichkeit durchmacht, in der man von Stufe zu Stufe fortschreitet (verwandt mit מדרגה ,דרג). Während in der Handlung die Rücksicht auf die eigene Persönlichkeit zurücktritt, ist in דרך die Befriedigung und Vollendung der eigenen Persönlichkeit das Ziel, das somit ebenfalls die ganze sinnliche Entfaltung mit umfasst. תמים דרך ist derjenige, der selbst auf dem Wege dieser sinnlichen Entfaltung rein bleibt. Die Verwandtschaft mit דמם: sich jeder Äußerung, jeder Bewegung enthalten, und mit dem chald. טמם, verschlossen sein, dürfte für תמם den Grundbegriff der Selbstbeherrschung geben, die alles Streben von innen heraus unter der Herrschaft des einen sittlichen Wollens zusammenhält, und sich durch keinen äußeren Reiz etwas entreißen, somit sich nicht sittlich mangelhaft machen lässt.

היה, “he was;” whenever this expression is used in connection with a person, it implies that he saw a new world, i.e. he became privy to entirely new perspectives in his life. Noach certainly experienced a new world, and Joseph of whom the same word is used became the person responsible for saving the whole nation of Egypt from perishing by hunger. Moses had a similar experience, (Exodus 3,1 at the burning bush) so did Job (Job 1,1) when becoming subjected to sudden and terrible trials to test his faith in the Lord.

איש צדיק, תמים היה, “a righteous man, basically perfect.” This is the reason why Noach had found favour in the eyes of his Creator.

התהלך HE WALKED — This word is in the past tense. The following is the usage of this verbal form: in the “heavy” (כבד) conjugation one grammatical form is used both as future (i. e. the imperative, since the imperative calls for on action to be done in the future relative to the time when the command is given) and as past tense e. g., (13:17) קום התהלך “arise walk” is future (i. e. imperative); התהלך נח “Noah walked” (in this passage) is past; (1 Samuel 12:19) התפלל בעד עבדיך “Pray for thy servants” is future (i. e. imperative) and (1 Kings 8:42) ובא והתפלל אל הבית הזה “When he shall come and shall pray toward this house” is past, only that the ו at the beginning of the word changes the tense into the future (it is Vav conversive).

בדורותיו, according to the generations during which he lived. They included part of the generation of Metushelach, of Lemech, and those during the 600 years preceding the deluge.

תמים, perfect, without flaw; according to Tanchuma 5, he was born circumcised.

Concerning Avraham it says: [“Elokim,] before whom I walked.” According to Rashi, “Noach walked with Elokim” implies that Noach walked with Hashem alone. Noach separated himself from people since they were all wicked and he feared he would learn from their wicked deeds. For Noach was not so righteous and he needed support, so he “walked with Elokim,” i.e., where there was only Hashem. But Avraham’s righteousness was strong on his own, as he was completely righteous. He went among the wicked to reprove them and convert them, and he did not fear that he might learn from their [wicked] deeds. Thus [Rashi says] he did not need support.

בדרתיו die doppelte Auffassung: in seiner Zeit war er ein Gerechter, oder: selbst in seiner Zeit blieb er gerecht, ist wahrscheinlich in beiden Beziehungen wahr. Sicherlich bleibt ein solcher Kampf, wie ihn Noa zu bestehen hatte, nicht ohne schwächenden Einfluß auf den Charakter. Sicherlich wiegt aber auch auf anderer Seite das in solcher Zeit bewährte kleinere Maß von Sittlichkeit und Rechtschaffenheit ungleich schwerer auf Gottes Wage, als das größere in irgend einer besseren Zeit. Bezeichnend ist es, dass das בדרתיו bei תמים und nicht bei צדיק hervorgehoben ist. Es ist ungleich schwerer, in einer unsittlichen Zeit sittlich, als in einer unredlichen redlich zu bleiben.

תמים, according to bar Chataya in B’reshit 30,8, the meaning of this word is that the people named all lived a number of years which divide into the number 7. Noach lived 350 years after being called תמים, i.e. 50 times seven, Avraham 175, i.e. 25 times seven, etc. [The commentators on Midrash Rabbah elaborate on that strange sounding definition of תמים. Ed.]

בדורותיו, both in the time of his generation, and the generation following him after the deluge. [this is the reason for the plural ending יו in the word בדורותיו. Ed.] Noach lived for 350 years after the deluge, so that he was a reminder of the deluge to at least 8-9 generations after him. In fact, Avraham was already 58 years old when Noach died, and he was the 10th generation counting from Noach. An easy way to remember this is the line that אברהם בן נח, “Avraham was a son of Noach“ (family member, as all people before the Torah was given) the numerical value of the letters in the name נח have a combined value of 58. According to Bereshit Rabbah 30,9 the word בדורותיו refers to three specific generations, that of Enosh, that of the deluge, and the generation of the Tower of Babel, and the scattering of mankind and the division into many languages.

Past tense. It is in the התפעל conjugation.

Dass Noa איש צדיק war, wurzelte in seiner Sittenreinheit, und diese Sittenreinheit wurzelte in dem Grunde des Ganzen, in dem את האלקי׳ התהלך, in dem sich an Gottes Hand führen lassen. Während es von den späteren Größen heißt, dass sie vor Gott, als seine Boten, gewandelt, heißt es von ihm, dass er mit Gott gewandelt, dass er, auf den Umgang mit den ihn verlachenden Zeitgenossen Verzicht leistend, nur Gott sich anschloß und eben dadurch "נח" derjenige ward, in welchem die zukunftlose Menschheit eine Zukunft gewann.

את האלוקים התהלך נח, he walked in G’d’s way trying to be helpful to others, and to instruct and if necessary to rebuke them, as our sages pointed out. This is also in accordance with what the historian Berussi Hacaldaii (3rd century B.C.) wrote about him.

היה, anyone in the Holy Scriptures of whom it is said: היה, experienced a new world, i.e. radical changes in the world. In the case of Noach, he was a witness to the destruction of earth and its inhabitants during the year he spent in the ark, only to become a witness to its renewal after he emerged from the ark. Joseph at one time was a lowly second rate shepherd with his brothers, יוסף היה רועה את אחיו, and became the second most powerful man in Egypt, whose population he saved from starvation. Moses was a shepherd for his fatherinlaw, ומשה היה רועה, yesterday he had had to flee for his life, and subsequently he rose to lead his people into freedom and greatness. Job started out as a wealthy man, איש היה בארץ עוץ איוב שמו, was reduced to absolute misery and destitution, only to rise again to be even greater than originally. (Job 42,10)

את האלוקים התהלך נח, a description of how Noach cleaved to his Creator. All his actions were designed to please his Creator. The reason why this is so remarkable is that it demonstrated the preponderance of his intellect over his baser urges, especially so as it would have been both more convenient for him and more socially advantageous for him to conform to the cultural mores of his time.

In the כבד form. I.e., since the ל of התהלך has a dagesh, it is a כבד form.

The vav at the beginning changes it to the future. I.e., without the vav in והתפלל, it also would be past tense. But I was taught that Rashi is referring to the vav of ובא. For if it would say בא והתפלל then perforce it would be past tense [in spite of the vav, and would mean, “He came and prayed”], similar to פעל ועשה and יצר וברא. But since it says ובא, this changes it to the future. (Kitzur Mizrachi)

SHEM, HAM, AND JAPHETH. It appears to me that Japheth was the oldest, as it is said, the brother of Japheth the elder,²⁰Genesis 10:21. and so in counting their generations, Scripture mentions the children of Japheth first.²¹Ibid., 10:2. Ham was the youngest of all, as it is said, And [Noah] knew what his youngest son had done unto him.²²Ibid., 9:24. Here, however, Scripture mentions Shem first because of his superiority and then Ham, for they were born in that order. Thus Japheth is left at the end. But Scripture did not want to say, “Shem and Japheth and Ham,” because in that case all of them would have been mentioned out of the order of their birth, and Japheth had no outstanding quality to merit that the order of birth be dispensed with on his account. Shem, however, is mentioned here first because of his superiority even though in the account of the generations he is last.²⁰Genesis 10:21. Similarly, [we find the verses]: The sons of Abraham: Isaac and Ishmael;²³I Chronicles 1:28. Here too Isaac is mentioned first because of his superiority although Ishmael was older. And I gave to Isaac Jacob and Esau.²⁴Joshua 24:4. This also is similar to the above case.

ויולד נח, as soon as he began to rebuke his fellowmen he was granted children

ויולד נח שלשה בנים. Noach fathered three sons. Why did the Torah have to repeat here that Noach fathered three sons when we have been told this already in 5,32? The mention of the number "three" seems quite superfluous in view of the fact that the Torah tells us the name of each son. Surely we can count up to three! Why did Noach's name have to be repeated? No one else is the subject here! The word בנים, sons, also seems superfluous. All the Torah had to write was: "Noach fathered Shem, Cham, and Yephet." Why did the Torah add the word את in front of each of the names?

ויולד נח, why does the Torah mention this now when it had already told us about his three sons in 5,32? The Torah wanted us to know that these sons were born after Noach had already been certified by the Torah as “walking with G’d.” Mention of these sons here indicates that he raised his sons to believe in G’d and to walk in His ways, also. Had his sons not been good people they would not have been saved at the time of the deluge, even though their father was a righteous person. We have already cited Ezekiel 14,20 in which we were told that Noach’s merits did not suffice to save others beyond himself and his wife.

את שם, את חם,ואת יפת, “Sem, Cham and Yaphet.” Yaphet was the oldest. We know this because the Torah writes יפת הגדול, (Genesis 10,21) The reason why here the Torah mentions Sem first is because he was the spiritually outstanding one of Noach’s sons, whereas Cham was the spiritually most inferior, and he is mentioned immediately after Sem, as he followed him in the order of their birth. Had the Torah listed them in the order: Sem, Yaphet, Cham, not even one of them would have been mentioned in the order of their births. Yaphet did not possess a special distinction which would have justified changing the order of their names on that account.

את שם, את חם, ואת יפת, “Shem, Cham and Yaphet.” Yaphet appears to have been the eldest of the three brothers seeing that in 10,21 the Torah refers to אחי יפת הגדול, ”brother of the senior, Yaphet.” Cham appears to have been the youngest seeing the Torah writes in 9,24 וידע את אשר עשה לו בנו הקטן, “and he became aware of what his younger son had done to him.” The reason the Torah mentions Shem first was because he was the most outstanding of Noach’s children. This is why Yaphet had to be mentioned only after Shem

Noa war schon 500 Jahre alt, als er Kinder erzeugte. Alle seine Vorfahren und Zeitgenossen standen viel früher als Familienväter da. Die Vermutung liegt sehr nahe, dass Noa bisher gefürchtet hatte, Kinder zu bekommen, sich nicht zutraute, in solcher Zeit ein reines Haus zu gründen und brave und sittenreine Kinder zu erziehen. Erst 20 Jahre nachdem das Ende verkündet war, nachdem er sich 500 Jahre geübt hatte, vereinzelt und allein mit Gott zu wandeln, sich selbst ehelos und familienlos aus der allgemeinen Verderbnis zu retten, wagte er, Vater von Kindern zu werden, und die Wiederholung des Namens Noa dürfte lehren, dass auch dieser Schritt von ihm nur in dem Bewusstsein seiner Bestimmung, "Noach" zu werden, geschehen.

ויולד נח שלשה בנים, “Noach fathered three sons;” the Torah repeated this, having told us this already in 5,32, as it wanted to tell us that Noach was righteous in the generations prior to the deluge and after the deluge.

In view of our explanation that the Torah considered Noach's good deeds his principal descendants, and that it was on that account that Noach had found favour in the eyes of G'd, our verse is necessary. Had the Torah failed to repeat the information contained in 5,32, we would not have considered his three sons as a positive accomplishment on Noach's part. The Torah does not report anything positive or negative about these sons. We would have thought these three sons as unfit either on account of their own poor characters or because Noach had not fathered them in order to fulfil G'd's commandment. The Torah therefore lists the birth of these three sons immediately after the list of Noach's good deeds so as to include them in that list. I have found in the Midrash that Noach foresaw that his sons would anger G'd and as a result he decided there was no point in siring children during the first five hundred years of his life. At that point G'd commanded Noach to marry and to have children. He had children in order to keep alive the human species. I believe that this Midrash interpreted the words את האלוקים התהלך נח to mean that Noach thought he was approaching death; therefore he sired children before it was too late. Another meaning of these words could be that Noach realised he would soon be judged by the attribute of Justice for failing to have sired children. This is why he hastened to get married and to sire children to rectify his sin of omission. Another reason for Noach's tardiness in marrying and raising a family (according to several Midrashim) is that G'd commanded Noach to build the ark when he was 480 years old. The deluge would occur in another 120 years. In those days children were not held accountable for their sins until they were one hundred years old. Noach wanted to insure that when the deluge came his children deserved to be saved because they had not reached the age when G'd held them responsible for their deeds. Hence he waited until he was 500 years old before he sired any children (Compare Bereshit Rabbah 26,2 based on Isaiah 65,20). Accordingly, Noach's eldest son would be under 100 years old at the beginning of the deluge.

שלשה בנים drei Söhne: die Stammväter der neuen Menschheit werden also dreiteilig eingeführt. Wenn bei näherer Betrachtung diese Namen eine verschiedene Charakteristik dieser Menschen-Stammväter verraten, so liegt darin der hohe Trost: wie verschieden auch die einzelnen Menschenstämme geartet erscheinen, so hat diese Verschiedenheit schon vor der Sündflut bestanden, sie war also von Gott mit hinüber gerettet, es muß also mit in dem Plane Gottes liegen, das Ziel der Menschheit trotz aller Verschiedenheit der Nationalitäten, ja vielleicht durch Zusammenwirken aller verschiedenen Nationalitäten, herbeizuführen — es wurden gleich ein שם, ein חם, ein יפת mit in die Arche gerettet.

The reason Noach's name is mentioned once more a) is to demonstrate again that he brought a new-found מנוחה rest or satisfaction to life on earth, b) to remind us that were it not for their father, these sons would not have been saved. Surely there were many youngsters below the age of one hundred at the time the deluge started and none of those were spared. I refer the reader to my comment on the words: "I have seen you to be a righteous person in this generation (7,1)." The three times את which appeared at first glance as superfluous refer to the wives of Noach's sons who were also saved only on account of Noach. If the sons of Noach per se did not warrant saving, why did G'd consider it necessary to repeat the report of the three sons that were born to Noach prior to the deluge?

Betrachten wir diese Namen, die uns schon in den Söhnen des איש צריק תמים drei verschiedene Richtungen entgegen führen:

We have to fall back on Sanhedrin 69 where the Talmud proves that the list of Noach's sons presented by the Torah is not according to their seniority but is based on the sons' relative intelligence. Shem is mentioned first as he was the most intelligent. If this were not so he could not have been described as one hundred years old when he sired Arpachshad two years after the deluge (11,10). If the Torah had not mentioned the extra word בנים, but had merely given their names, we would have concluded that the list of their names was according to the order of their births.

שֵם: Name, Begriff des Objekts. Die ganze Weisheit des Menschen bestand ja ursprünglich und besteht ja in Wahrheit auch heute noch darin, dass er den Dingen Namen zu geben, d. h. dass er ihren Begriff auszusprechen und ihnen damit ihren "geistigen Raum", ihr שָם, anzuweisen vermag. שֵם weist daher jedenfalls auf eine geistige Tätigkeit, auf ein Erkennen, Begriff- und Namengeben.

חָם, rad. חמם, verwandt mit אמם — .עמם ,המם ,אמם, in אֵם und אִם, bezeichnet, dass ein Wesen die Bedingung von etwas anderem in sich trägt. Daher אֵם: die Mutter, und אִם: die Kausalitätspartikel. Kommt das in dem einen unentwickelt Liegende in Bewegung, zur Entwicklung, so entsteht המם: die unruhige Bewegung, das Gähren. Diese Bewegung hat zwei Ausläufer, entweder: חמם, dass die Masse glühend wird, sich verzehrt, dann entsteht nichts neues; oder עמם, es tritt die Geburt ein, es entsteht ein Neues, ein Anderes neben dem einen. Jedenfalls bedeutet חם das Heisse, die aufgeregte sinnliche Bewegung.

יפת von יפת verwandt mit פתה, Grundbedeutung: offen stehen wie פתח. Davon פתי: der allen äußeren Eindrücken offen steht, sich von ihnen überwältigen lässt. מופת: eine Erscheinung, die den andern überwältigt, sein Inneres für etwas gewinnt. Verwandt auch mit יפה, das Schöne, Ansprechende. Jedenfalls, während שֵם den Begriff des Geistigen, חם das Glühende, Aufgeregte, die höchste Sinnlichkeit bedeutet, entspricht יֶפֶת dem Gemüt, der Phantasie, die für das Schöne empfänglich ist. Möglich sogar, dass יפת einfach von יפה stammt, wie צֶפֶת, Chron. II. 3, der Überzug der Säulenkrone, von צפה, דֶלֶת die Türe, von דלה, schöpfen, aufnehmen und ausgießen; die Türe ist das Ventil am Hause, durch das ihm sein Inhalt gegeben und genommen wird.

Wir haben also hier drei Seiten, die das ganze Seelenleben des Menschen ausmachen. Im gesunden Zustande ordnen sich alle drei einem höheren Prinzipe unter, und gelangen wie bei Noa in ׳התהלך את האלקי zur reinsten Potenz des Geistes, in תמים zur reinsten Potenz des Sinnlichen und in צדיק zur reinsten Gestaltung alles Wollens und Strebens. Getrennt wird שֵם: der Denkende, חָם: der Sinnliche und ניפת der dem Schönen Nachstrebende. שם soll dazu kommen: ׳:חם ,להתהלך את ד להיות תמים, und יפת statt von dem Ideal des Schönen, sich von dem Ideal des Guten leiten zu lassen und צדיק zu werden, während, wo die Richtung יפת vorherrschend hervortritt, die Sinnlichkeit allerdings vor Rohheit durch den Maßstab des "Anständigen" geschützt sein, allein der an die Lebenstätigkeit gelegte Maßstab immer nur ein subjektiver bleiben wird. Wir werden noch später in direkterer Weise auf diese charakteristische Grundverschiedenheit der neuen Völkerstämme zurückgeführt, und haben dies hier nur berührt, um hervorzuheben, wie diese künftig sich ausprägenden Nationalverschiedenheiten nicht als Entartung zu betrachten seien, sondern schon mit in die Arche hineingebracht wurden. Zeigt uns daher die Geschichte, geistig begabten oder gemütveredelten Völkern gegenüber, auch solche, bei denen glühende Sinnlichkeit vorherrschend erscheint, so darf uns dies nicht in der Überzeugung irre machen, dass alle die verschiedenen Menschenrassen für ein einziges hohes Menschenideal geschaffen sind und diesem Ziele entgegenreifen, jenem Ziele, dass: ומלאה הארץ דעה את ד׳ וגו׳

ותשחת [THE EARTH] WAS CORRUPT — It means lewdness and idolatry, as (Deuteronomy 4:16) פן תשחיתון “lest ye deal corruptly” (the following words show that this refers to idolatry) and as ‘כי השחית כל בשר וגו “for all flesh had corrupted etc.” (in next verse of this chapter where Rashi states that this has reference to lewdness) (Sanhedrin 57a).

ותשחת הארץ. The earth had become corrupt. This entire verse is superfluous in view of 6,5. If the Torah only wanted to spell out details of man's sins, this too had been spelled out in greater detail in the previous passage. If the Torah wanted to add the element of violence perpetrated by man on earth, that is all that needed mentioning here. Besides, why did the Torah switch to the use of the name אלוקים, the attribute of Justice, whereas in 6,5 G'd's attribute of Mercy is used? What do the words לפני האלוקים in our verse add to our understanding? Why does the Torah repeat once more in 6,12 that "G'd saw, etc.?" The Torah certainly did not need to tell us that G'd had become aware of man's sins, as we all know that He is aware of all this?

ותשחת הארץ, the people on earth had become corrupted; we have a similar formulation in Exodus 1,2 where the Torah writes of the Israelites ותמלא הארץ, and the meaning cannot be that the whole earth was filled with Israelites. There are many examples of similar stylistic formulations used in the Torah.

Lewdness and idolatry. I.e., since either one could be described as ותשחת, the verse means both.

שחת ist der Begriff des Verderbens, nicht des Vernichtens. Es ist das Zerstören eines guten Zustandes, das Hindern und das in das Gegenteil verkehren eines zum guten Gedeihen bestimmten Gegenstandes. Grundbedeutung von שחת: Grube, und zwar nicht etwa zum nützlichen Zwecke des Aufbewahrens, sondern um einen seines Weges zu einem Ziele Schreitenden in diesem Wege zu unterbrechen und zum Untergange zu bringen. Verwandt mil שחד: Bestechung. שחד ist eine, der auf das Recht gerichteten Beurteilung des Richters gegrabene Grube, die die Einsicht und das Ürteil des Richters auf diesem Wege unterbricht, von ihrem Ziele zurückhält und zum Falle bringt. So spricht auch שחט sowohl die Wirkung als die Prozedur als eine solche aus, die den, bis dahin in vollständig unangegriffener Entwicklung gewesenen Lebensprozeß durch plötzliche Hemmung des Weges unterbricht, der den Organismus mit der Außenwelt, Luft und Nahrung zuführend, in Verbindung setzt. Der Querschnitt über Luft- und Speiseröhre macht ein שחת in diesem Wege. Von dieser Grundbedeutung des שחת begreift sich׳s, warum שחת vorzugsweise mit דרך verbunden ist. הִשָחֵת allgemein heißt: auf seinem Wege zum Heile unterbrochen, und von diesem hinabgezogen sein. הַשְחִית דֶרֶך setzt voraus, dass der ganze Lebensweg, auch die auf das Sinnliche gewendete Lebensrichtung an sich nur zum sittlichen Heile führt; Unsittlichkeit ist die Grube, die diese an sich zum Heile führende Richtung ins Verderben hinabzieht. — חמס: ein solches Unrecht, das nicht durch menschliches Gericht gefasst werden kann, אינו יוצא בדינים, das aber, fort und fort geübt, nach und nach den Nächsten begräbt. So: ,ויחמוס כגן שכו ויחמס כגפן בסרו (Klagel. 2, 6. Job 15, 33). Wenn die Beere des Weinstocks unreif abfällt, so hat er חמס gegen die junge Beere geübt, nicht auf einmal, sondern indem er ihr nach und nach die Nahrung entzog, bis sie abfiel; ebenso der Garten gegen sein Gehege. Verwandt mit חמץ: Essig, diejenige Verderbnis, die nicht auf einmal geschieht; nur nach und nach geht der Wein in Essig über. Nun heißt es hier bedeutungsvoll: Die Erde ward vor dem Angesichte Gottes verderbt, und da ward die Erde des Unrechts voll. Es war zuerst Sittenverderbnis, Vergehen, bei denen man die bürgerliche Gesellschaft nicht beteiligt glaubt. Ob die Jugend ausschweifend, die Ehen sittlich faul, dabei, meint man, könne Handel und Wandel blühen und redlicher Verkehr fortbestehen. Allein wenn erst vor Gott die Erde verderbt ist, dann vermögen alle menschlichen Einrichtungen die Gesellschaft nicht vor Untergang zu retten. Mit גול, mit offenbarem Raub wird sich nie die Gesellschaft füllen, dagegen weiß sie sich durch Kerker und Strafgewalt zu schützen. Allein an חמס, an der mit Schlauheit gepaarten Unrecht- fertigkeit geht sie zu Grunde, wogegen nicht menschlicher Arm, wogegen nur die vor Gott sich selber richtende Gewissenhaftigkeit zu schützen vermag. Diesen Kern des Menschen tötet die Unsittlichkeit, und mit ihr ist auch dem bürgerlichen Heil das Grab gegraben. החמס קם למטה רשע, heißt es in Jecheskiel (7, 11) "die durch Sittenlosigkeit erzeugte Gewissenlosigkeit wird zuletzt ihre eigene Rute, לא מהם das Unheil kommt nicht aus dem natürlichen Menschen selbst, kommt nicht מהמונם, nicht aus der Überfüllung, kommt nicht מֵהֶמֵהֶם, kommt nicht aus den gegenseitigen sozialen Beziehungen (dem doppelten ולא נה בהם ,(מֵהֶם es liegt überhaupt nicht das Elend in den Menschen als solchen, sondern es ist das חמם, an dem sie zu Grunde gehen, wodurch die ganze Gesellschaft חמץ wird, in gährende Fäulnis endet."

ותשחת הארץ לפני האלוהים, the words: לפני האלוקים at first glance appear unnecessary; however these words are providing the clue to the moral disintegration of mankind. It started at the top, because the בני האלוהים, high ranking individuals, mentioned in Genesis 2,6, had set an example of depravity; it did not take long for them to be copied by the people at large. Noach was the only one who “swam against the stream.” בארץ, they raped women against their will.

ותמלא הארץ חמס AND THE EARTH WAS FILLED WITH VIOLENCE — means robbery.

לפני האלוקים, this expression is meant to inform us that G’d does indeed watch over the actions of His creatures in the “lower” regions of His universe not only in a general way, but sometimes even over the deeds of individuals; now He saw that the human species had become thoroughly corrupted. This is the meaning of the word ותמלא in our verse.

Robbery. [Rashi is explaining that] חמסן is different from the Rabbinic term חמסן, which refers to someone who pays [for what he forcibly takes]. But the Scriptural term חמסן includes outright robbery. See Bava Kama 62a.

We must understand the passage along the lines of the Mishnah Avot 4,11 that when a person violates a single commandment he acquires one accuser for himself. The "accuser" is to be understood as a destructive power (angel). This destructive power is not unleashed until the Supreme Judge of the whole universe has given a verdict concerning the person guilty of a misdemeanour. This is the deeper meaning of every time the Torah speaks about a sinner "carrying his guilt" (Leviticus 5,17 et al). Once G'd has pronounced judgment, He unleashes these accumulated destructive forces. When the prophet Jeremiah 2,19 says: תיסרך רעתך, "your wickedness will discipline you," he refers to these destructive forces which our sins have created and which G'd unleashes after having judged us. We have to appreciate that although G'd holds the accuser in check so that he cannot yet harm us, this applies only as long as our sins are relatively few or minor. If our sins keep accumulating, they exert pressure on the Heavenly Court so that the perpetrator of the sin may find himself the victim of some of these accusers even before final judgment has been decreed upon him. When the Torah speaks of "the earth had become corrupted before G'd," this means that before G'd had completed judging everyone individually, the collective total of the destructive powers created by man's sins was such that the destructive forces already dominated the earth. The reason the Torah speaks about הארץ is to tell us that the corruption had penetrated earth itself.

ותמלא הארץ חמס, there is a discussion between the sages as to the difference in meaning between the word: חמס (violence) and the word גזל (robbery) when used in the Holy Scriptures. According to Rabbi Chaninah, the difference is m erely in the amount m isappropriated by violent m eans. If the object one robs is worth more than a certain ancient copper coin, known as p’rutah, the term חמס is used, whereas if it is worth less than that, the Torah refers to it as גזל. The people of the generation of the deluge devised a nefarious scheme of avoiding to become guilty of having misappropriated at one time more than the worth of a prutah. When someone brought a basket full of fruit to market offering to sell it, he would be mobbed by people each of whom helped himself to less than the value of that coin. By using this subterfuge, the party helping himself to fruit without paying for it, escaped being cited before a judge, who did not entertain claims below that amount. How did G-d outwit these people? He would deprive them of the excess wealth they had accumulated by such means at the times they died. (This is how Ibn Ezra interprets Job 4,21 which he explains as G-d depriving such “robbers” of the excess money they had accumulated at the time they died, so that they would be punished by not having benefited by Torah knowledge (according to our author).[If I understand the author correctly, he means that when people use their Torah knowledge in order to escape their responsibilities, then instead of getting credit for their Torah studies, they will find that their abuse of Torah had been counterproductive; they will be worse off than if they had not studied Torah. Ed.] Another interpretation understands the word as indulging in sexual misconduct, basing itself on Jeremiah 51,35: חמסי ושארי על בבל, “let the violence done to me and my kindred be visited upon Babylon.”A third interpretation understands the word חמס as an alternate for idolatry, quoting Ezekiel 8,17: כי מלאו את הארץ חמס להכעיסני, “that they must fill the land with the abominations in order to anger Me;” (these have been described in the verses preceding this one)?Lastly, some commentators understand the word חמס as applying to shedding innocent blood, basing itself on Joel 4,19: מחמס בני יהודה אשר שפכו דם נקי בארצם, “from the חמס of the inhabitants of the Kingdom of Yehudah who spilled innocent blood in their land.”

The Torah said in the previous verse: "the earth had become full of this corruption in the form of violence." Why did the Torah reverse this sequence? It should first have stated what G'd saw, and afterwards the extent of the corruption. As it is, the Torah tells us of the effect before telling us of the cause! The inverted method of reporting is to emphasise that even after the earth had already become full of corruption, all of which is subsumed under the heading "violence," man added further abominations to those already perpetrated. Although it is G'd's virtue to forgive or suspend punishment (נושא עון) until the time He sits in judgment, the sins of this generation were such that G'd could no longer practice this virtue. It was somewhat similar to when Cain had said to G'd that he found his penalty too hard to bear. He had used the term גדול עוני מנשוא, "is my guilt too great to forgive (4,13)?" Alternatively, the words ותשחת הארץ refer to the actual deeds, which caused the earth to become full of destructive agents all of which are described as חמס. G'd informed Noach (6,13) of this when He told him that קץ כל בשר בא לפני, that "the end for all flesh is approaching." According to the Zohar this means that the destructive forces created by man's sins which are called קץ have appeared before G'd demanding the speedy destruction of the perpetrators of all this evil. The Torah tells us for how long G'd restrained the attribute of Justice. This is why we have repeated references to G'd's awareness of man's wickedness ever since 6,5. When the Torah here finally uses the word אלוקים to describe G'd, it is to give notice that the attribute of Mercy itself had turned into one demanding that justice be done.

ותמלא הארץ חמס. The earth was filled with violence. There is a Midrash which illustrates the violence perpetrated by describing how people each helped themselves to a lupine out of a bowl that was set on the table. The Rabbis could not understand why the example mentioned shows that mankind was exterminated for a robbery involving such a minute amount. According to halachah theft of an amount worth less than a פרוטה, a certain small coin, is not subject to prosecution! I believe that the Midrash wanted to demonstrate that not only were the people of that generation guilty of violating all the seven Noachide commandments, but of something additional. They were sophisticated enough to engage in the kind of theft that was not subject to prosecution because the stolen goods came into their possession indirectly. According to Maimonides chapter nine of Hilchot Melachim even merely withholding wages from a labourer was subject to the death penalty in those days. Nonetheless the people of that generation were astute enough to borrow, i.e. to secure themselves credit and to draw on these credits in amounts of less than the value of the coin mentioned. This did not make them subject to prosecution if they failed to repay the credits. According to others it did not constitute robbery as long as the object was given to them willingly by its owner. Here in our verse the Torah may have alluded to all these kinds of robbery.

כי השחית כל בשר FOR ALL FLESH HAD CORRUPTED — even cattle, beasts and fowl did not consort with their own species (Genesis Rabbah 28:8).

FOR ALL FLESH HAD CORRUPTED THEIR WAY. If we were to explain all flesh in its usual sense and thus say that even cattle, beasts and fowl corrupted their way by consorting with other species, as Rashi has explained, we must then say that the expression, for the earth is filled with violence through them,²⁵Verse 13. does not mean “because of all of them” but only because of some of them [since “violence” does not apply to beasts and cattle], and Scripture tells of the punishment of man alone [even though all flesh corrupted their way]. Or we may say that the cattle, beasts, and fowl also did not follow their natural instincts, and all cattle seized prey and all fowl became birds of prey; thus they too committed violence.
By way of the simple meaning of Scripture, all flesh means “all men.” Further on Scripture says explicitly: all flesh wherein is the breath of life;²⁶Genesis 7:15. and of every living thing of all flesh,²⁷Ibid., 6:19. meaning all living bodies. But here it says all flesh, meaning all people. Similarly [we find the verses]: All flesh shall come to worship before Me,²⁸Isaiah 66:23. [meaning “all people”]; Or when the flesh hath in the skin thereof,²⁹Leviticus 13:24. [where again reference is only to people].

והנה נשחתה, without external influences, as a natural consequence, not due to man’s ecologically criminal behaviour. Although on the surface, there appeared to be no connection, man’s corruption resulted in the corruption of his habitat. The language used here by the Torah is comparable to Isaiah 47,2 וטחני קמח, “and grind meal.” One does not grind flour, but one grinds grain into flour. The prophet spoke about the end product. The Torah also spoke about the end product of man’s corruption bringing in its wake, though invisibly, the destruction of the earth’s crust.

וירא, a continuation of the words לפני האלוקים in the last verse.
כי השחית, the same as והנה נשחתה, i.e. a passive not a transitive hiphil.
כל בשר, all of mankind. We find the same expression in Psalms 145,21 ויברך כל בשר, as referring not to all that lives, but to all of mankind. The same expression also appears in this sense in Isaiah 66,23 יבא כל בשר, “all of mankind will come, etc.”

כי השחית כל בשר, “for all flesh has become corrupt.” According to Rashi the use of the transitive mode השחית, tells us that the animal kingdom copied man and became corrupt also, seeing that man had defied the G’d given laws of nature and substituted a mode of conduct of his own making. This was most manifest in their mating habits including indiscriminate mating with other species. Nachmanides writes that according to Rashi the line כי מלאה הארץ חמס מפניהם, “for the earth has become filled with violence on their account,” cannot apply to the animals but only to man. Violence is not a form of corruption when practiced by the beasts. (Genesis 6,13) Alternatively, the verse does apply to both man and beast, and the beasts and birds had learned to become predators after observing the conduct of man. According to the plain meaning of the text, the wordsכל בשר apply only to human beings, just as they do in verse 17 לשחת כל בשר אשר בו רוח חיים, “to destroy all flesh which possesses the spirit of life (a soul).” When the Torah uses the words כל בשר again in verse 19 where the creatures to be brought into the ark are listed, the expression refers exclusively to members of the animal kingdom.

וירא אלוקים את הארץ, ”G-d saw the earth, etc.” At this point the Torah reverts to G-d’s name אלוקים to indicate that the attribute of Justice enters the picture at this stage. Seeing that the sins of that generation were so great the attribute of Justice was poised over them.

Consorted with dissimilar species. Rashi knows this because it is written דרכו, which implies lewdness, as it is written (Mishlei 30:19): “The דרך (way) of a man with a young woman.” Rashi did not mention fish because it is written, “On the earth” — excluding fish in the sea.

Da sah Gott die Erde an, und sie, die Erde als solche, nicht als kosmischer Weltkörper, als welcher sie außer Betracht der תורה steht, sondern insofern ihre Oberfläche Träger des Menschenwirkens ist, sie war in ihrer reinen Entwicklung gehemmt, indem ihre dem Menschen gespendeten Kräfte und Güter in den Dienst des Sittenverderbnisses aufgingen.

כי השחית כל בשר את דרכו, “for all flesh had corrupted its behaviour on earth. This is a reference to sexual perversions as in Proverbs 30,19, ודרך גבר בעלמה, “and the way of a man with a virgin.” Mankind had already been commanded since the 6th day of creation: תוצא הארץ נפש חיה למינה. בהמה ורמש וחיתו ארץ למינה, “let the earth produce living creatures each according to its kind; cattle, creeping things, and wild beasts, each according to its kind. This made it clear that bestiality, homosexuality, lesbianism and all other kinds of unnatural sexual behaviour is considered by the Lord as an abomination, and had been so since creation. “When I will now destroy man I am only applying the same yardstick man applied when indulging in unnatural sexual practices which do not result in populating My earth.

את דרכו, its norms as established at the time of creation. Just as man cleaving to his wife (only) is described as a norm in Genesis 2,24, so there were other norms all of which were violated by the generation of the deluge. In retribution, G’d now violates the norms that applied to the conditions prevailing on our planet.

”כל בשר, “all flesh,” excluding the fish; seeing that fish had not become corrupted, they were spared; this is why the Torah emphasised that כל אשר בחרבה מתו, that “all the creatures whose habitat was the dry land had died.” (Genesis 8,22).

קץ כל בשר THE END OF ALL FLESH — Wherever you find lewdness and idolatry, punishment of an indiscriminate character comes upon the world killing good and bad alike (Genesis Rabbah 26:5).

VIOLENCE, that is, robbery and oppression. Now G-d gave Noah the explanation [that the flood was due to the fact that the “the earth is filled with] violence” and did not mention “the corruption of the way” [recorded in the preceding verse] because violence is a sin that is known and widely publicized. Our Rabbis have said³⁰Sanhedrin 108a. that it was on account of the sin of violence that their fate was sealed. The reason for it is that the prohibition against violence is a rational commandment,³¹Likewise Ramban above 6:2. See also Yehudah Halevi’s Al Khazari, II, 48, that “the rational laws are the basis and preamble of the divine law, preceding it in character and time, and being indispensable in the administration of every human society.” (Hirschfeld’s translation.) there being no need for a prophet to admonish them against it. Besides, it is evil committed against both heaven and mankind. Thus He informed Noah of the sin for which the end is come — the doom is reached.³²See Ezekiel 7:6-7.

The end of all flesh. That is, the end of their 120 year reprieve.

ויאמר אלוקים קץ כל בשר, G'd said: "The end of all flesh, etc." If we accept the sages' interpretation that the "violence" mentioned here comprised such sins as bloodshed, incest, and idolatry, we can understand the harshness of the retribution. If however, the word חמס refers to robbery with violence (compare Rashi based on Sanhedrin 108), why would the victims of the robbery suffer the same fate as the perpetrators of the crime?

ויאמר...קץ כל בשר, the time had arrived for their destruction from the world. The destruction which G’d had threatened before allowing for the 120 years grace period. Not only had they not mended their ways, but they had become ever more corrupt.

כי מלאה הארץ חמס , “for the earth has become saturated with violence.” The Torah states here that the decree to destroy mankind was not finalized until the anarchy, i.e. indiscriminate violence, had made the establishment of a civilized society a utopian dream. Robbery is a basic commandment of the seven universally applicable prohibitions given to mankind, a commandment which any group of people would have invented for themselves had such laws not been formulated by the Creator Himself and been conveyed by one of His prophets. Non-observance of such basic laws leads to the destruction of mankind.

Upheaval comes upon the world. Not that upheaval will definitely come; but if death is decreed upon them, it is of this type.

קץ von קצץ (verwandt mit גזז): abschneiden, daher das Ende, wo etwas aufhört. "Das Ende alles Fleisches ist vor mich gekommen", kann heißen: die Verhältnisse alles Fleisches sind in ein solches Stadium getreten, dass sie mich auffordern, dem ein Ende zu machen. Oder wahrscheinlicher: wenn ich nicht einschreite, geht alles Fleisch von selbst völlig zu Grunde, "sein Ende ist bereits vor mich gekommen." Wie schon oben durch למינהו gesagt, ist das Gedeihen des Geschlechtes an die geschlechtliche Gattungsreinheit also geknüpft, dass, wenn Gott spricht, die Erde soll blühen, implizit damit die geschlechtliche Reinheit bedingt ist. Wenn daher השחית כל בשר את דרכו על הארץ, so ist ihr קץ von selbst da, und wenn Gott nicht eingeschritten wäre, so wäre auch selbst der noch mit Noa zu rettende reine Funke unrettbar verloren gewesen. Dann dürfte auch das מפניהם zu verstehen sein. מפני heißt nämlich immer: ein sich Zurückziehen vor etwas aus einem Gefühle der Unterordnung, der Angst, der Rücksicht u. dgl. Wir haben schon erwähnt, dass חמס auch von leblosen Dingen vorkommt, ויחמס כגפן בסרו usw. Vielleicht hier ebenso: "Das Ende alles Fleisches ist vor mich gekommen." Wenn dies so weiter geht, gibt es keine Zukunft für den Menschen mehr; denn "aus Furcht vor ihnen" ist bereits die Erde voller חמס geworden, sie entzieht ihnen schon ihre Kräfte aus Scheu vor der Unsittlichkeit, dem Raube und dem Morde, die sie mit ihnen unterstützen würde. והיה מקול זנותה ותחנף הארץ (Jirm. 3. 9), הדם יחניף את 33.53( ץראה.M.B .4(, היבשוי תחת הפנח ץראהו )mriJ. 5.42םתיחשמ יננהו, הנה — .) Partikel des Darreichens, Gewährens. Mit הנה entspricht man den Anforderungen, die aus den Verhältnissen sich ergeben. Also: diesem gegenüber schreite ich Verderben bringend ein; allein dies Verderben ist keine Vernichtung, ist die von den Verhältnissen dringend geforderte Rettung.

כי מלאה הארץ חמס FOR THE EARTH IS FILLED WITH VIOLENCE — Their fate was sealed only on account of their sin of robbery (Sanhedrin 108a).

AND BEHOLD, I WILL DESTROY THEM ‘ETH’ THE EARTH. This is similar to saying “from the earth.” So also: When I go forth ‘eth’ the city,³³Exodus 9:29. [meaning “from the city”]; he suffered ‘eth’ his feet,³⁴I Kings 15:23. [meaning “from his feet”]. Another interpretation is that eth ha’aretz means “with the earth” for even the land was blotted out to the depth of a furrow of three handbreadths. Thus the language of Rashi quoting Bereshith Rabbah.³⁵31:7.
And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that the word mashchitham (destroy them) draws along with it a similar word, [meaning it is as if the verb “destroy” appears twice in the verse], thus stating, “And behold, I will destroy them and destroy the earth.”
By way of the truth [the mystic teaching of the Cabala],³⁶See Bereshith, Note 63. this is like the verse, eth hashamayim ve’eth ha’aretz (the heaven and the earth),³⁷Above, 1:1. thus intimating that “the earth”³⁸Here referring to “the earth of immortal life.” will be destroyed, and with the destruction of the earth they too will be destroyed and thus they will be blotted out from the World to Come, just as is intimated in the verse: and it grieved Him at His heart.³⁹Above, 6:6. See Ramban there. It is to this that the Rabbis alluded in Bereshith Rabbah:⁴⁰31:7. “This is like a master’s son who had a wet-nurse; whenever he would commit an offense the wet-nurse would be punished.”⁴¹“So, said the Holy One, blessed be He: ‘I will destroy them and destroy the earth with them.’” (Bereshith Rabbah.)

בא לפני, this period has now expired.

בא לפני, we have explained the word בא already elsewhere as meaning “that the time had arrived before Me.” The same expression is used in Jonah 1,2 when G’d describes the impending fate of the people of Nineveh in the words כי עלתה רעתם לפני, meaning that the effect of the wickedness had reached Him. The קץ described in our verse is the natural reaction to the effect the wickedness of the people had on G’d when it confronted Him.

והנני משחיתם את הארץ, “and I am about to destroy them together with the earth.” According to Rashi the word את is to be understood as מן from, i.e. “I will destroy them from the face of the earth.” According to Ibn Ezra the word משחיתם drags the next word with it, i.e. G’d will destroy the earth together with man [as an earth without man has no purpose. Ed.]

The good and the bad. I.e., normally it kills bad and good alike. But here, it did not kill the good along with the bad. (Maharshal)

Although one might answer that everybody indulged in robbery, each one according to what he thought he could get away with, our sages (Vayikra Rabbah 23,9) have explained the matter differently when they said that in any society in which sexual licentiousness abounds retribution will strike both the wicked and the good people. Therefore we must understand our verse as saying that though the decree to destroy mankind was sealed because of the prevalence of robbery with violence, the fact that amongst all the sins there were many instances of sexual licentiousness and promiscuity resulted in the retribution including also those who were innocent of robbery. You may ask that all these people could have saved themselves from Divine retribution by each one forgiving the other? As a result of this G'd would not have sealed the evil decree! Perhaps G'd did not want to reveal the effectiveness of mutual forgiveness to anyone but Noach. Noach in turn was not able to reveal this secret to his contemporaries seeing that unless G'd tells a person to communicate revelations made to him to others, such revelations are confidential communications from G'd. One of the reasons G'd did not want this secret revealed to Noach's contemporaries may have been that they all remained guilty of having committed robbery. The sin of robbery cannot be atoned for by simply offering the sinner your forgiveness without making restitution. Although the Midrash mentioned types of robbery which are not subject to prosecution, these types of robbery were not the only ones perpetrated by the people of Noach's time. The people of that generation indulged in every form of robbery. Whenever they confronted someone stronger than themselves they resorted to the kind of trickery described by the Midrash. Otherwise they had no qualms about simply grabbing what they fancied.

את הארץ, the word את, at the end of the verse, includes all the previously not spelled out creatures on earth. An example of such indirect references is: Exodus 19,5: כי לי כל הארץ, “for the entire earth is Mine,” where the word כל substitutes for: “all the creatures on.”

את הארץ [I WILL DESTROY THEM] WITH THE EARTH — It is similar to מן הארץ "from the earth”; other examples of this use of את are: (Exodus 9:29) בצאתי ‘‘when I go forth” את העיר which means מן העיר “from the city” and (1 Kings 15:23) חלה ‘‘he suffered” את רגליו which means מן רגליו ‘‘from his feet”. Another explanation of את הארץ is: “together with the earth” — for the earth was blotted out and washed away to the depth of a furrow of three handbreadths (Genesis Rabbah 31:7).

The earth is filled with violent crime. A landlord would steal openly from his tenant farmer while the tenant farmer stole surreptitiously from the landlord in return. Thus all the earth’s bounty went to thieves.

כי מלאה הארץ חמס, the word מפניהם belongs next to the words בא לפני, i.e. on account of the violence they have perpetrated. Our sages (Sanhedrin 108) say behold how powerful is the sin of violence seeing that the generation of the deluge was not wiped out in spite of all their other sins until they had become guilty of indiscriminate violence. Iit was only then that the decree of their destruction was sealed.

Only because of robbery. You might ask: Did Rashi not say before that upheaval comes upon the world because of lewdness, implying that they died because of lewdness? The answer is: Both sins played a part. For just robbery, only the wicked people’s fate would be sealed. And for just lewdness, no one’s fate would be sealed. But now since both sins were present, fate was sealed for the wicked and the good alike. We are forced to make this distinction because otherwise the verses are in contradiction. For first it says, “For all flesh had corrupted its way on the earth,” and then it is written, “Elohim said to Noach: ‘The end of all flesh has come before Me.’” This implies that the Flood was due to lewdness. But then it is written, “For the earth is filled with violent crime” — implying that the Flood was due to robbery. Perforce, it means as explained. This answers another question: If “The earth was corrupt” means lewdness and idolatry, as Rashi said before, why does Scripture go on to mention only lewdness but not idolatry? For it is written, “For all flesh had corrupted its way,” which means lewdness, as Rashi himself explained. [The answer is:] There was no death penalty for idolatry [alone. Furthermore, it alone] would not kill the good and the wicked alike. [Thus idolatry was not mentioned, since it did not change the decree]. Furthermore, each stole his fellow’s wife, an act that involves both robbery and lewdness. So their fate was in fact sealed for both. The Maharshal asks: Why did Rashi (v. 11) not mention robbery together with lewdness and idolatry? The answer is: It is written right before, “Elohim saw,” implying sins between man and God. But robbery is a sin between man and his fellow.

The reason G'd explained to Noach exactly what sins prompted Him to decree destruction of the species was to motivate him to build the ark so that all living creatures could be preserved until after the deluge.

והנני משחיתם את הארץ, so that now I will destroy them together with the earth. I will destroy the climate which could support life on earth by interfering with the sun’s orbit and rearranging it from the beginning of the deluge for the entire future. We find that G’d explained this to Job In Job 38, 4-15. This accounts for the lifespan of man having been drastically reduced after the deluge. The climate of the earth changed, there were greater extremes of heat and cold, the produce of the earth was considerably less capable of supporting a long lifespan. As a by-product of this deterioration in the quality of the vegetable products, man was allowed to eat meat as a compensation.

משחיתם, seeing that the people had deliberately corrupted their way of life, G’d matches the punishment to the crime by depriving them of the control they used to exert over nature inasmuch as it effected their habitat, earth.

Together with the earth. The first explanation raises the question: Why is it not written מארץ? Thus Rashi brings the alternate explanation, “together with the earth.” But this raises the question: Since את is not an adjective, why is it not written עם? Thus Rashi needs the first explanation as well. (Maharshal)

Next we must explain what prompted Noach not to ask G'd to have mercy on the people of his time (as did Abraham when G'd told him He would destroy Sodom). It appears that Abraham learned from Noach not to bother to ask that G'd spare a city when there were fewer than ten good people in it. Unless he had learned this from Noach, who told Abraham that it would be futile to pray for the survival of a city which contained fewer than ten righteous people?

את, in this instance it means the same as מן, “from.” A parallel verse in which the word את is used in this sense is Exodus 9,29 כצאתי את העיר, “as soon as I leave the city.” Another such example is found in Genesis 44,4 הם יצאו את העיר “they had just departed from the city.”

That also three handbreadths. For up to a depth of three handbreadths it is called ארץ, but further down it is called אדמה. And here it is written את הארץ.

Noach became convinced from what G'd told him that any prayer of his would be futile, that the fate of these people had been sealed beyond reprieve. All of this is contained in the words: "the end of all flesh has come before Me, here I am about to destroy them." When G'd told Abraham (Genesis 18,20-21) about the sinful nature of the people of Sodom He did not use such kind of language at all. On the contrary, He told Abraham that He was going to examine if what had come to His attention was indeed so, etc. While it is true that in the case of Sodom G'd carried out His decree as soon as He had confirmed the true state of affairs, G'd wanted to demonstrate to Abraham that He does not exercise His power arbitrarily. We have explained in that connection that G'd spoke to Abraham in a manner that invited him to pray on behalf of the doomed cities. Something similar occurred during the episode of the golden calf when G'd proclaimed His intent to wipe out the Jewish people in such a way that Moses saw an opening for his prayer. None of these openings were provided for Noach.

One cannot argue that if G'd did not want Noach to pray for his contemporaries, He did not have to tell Noach what He was going to do and why. G'd needed to tell Noach in order that the latter build the ark. This commandment alone convinced Noach that it would be useless to pray on behalf of the people. Abraham concluded from the fact that Noach and his family were not enough to save the earth from the deluge that fewer than ten good people could not save a town from destruction.

עשה לך תבת MAKE THEE AN ARK — There are numerous ways by which God could have saved Noah; why, then, did he burden him with this construction of the Ark? So that the men of the generation of the Flood might see him employed on it for 120 years and might ask him, “What do you need this for”? and so that he might answer them, “The Holy One, blessed be He, is about to bring a flood upon the world” — perhaps they might repent (Sanhedrin 108b).

עשה לך תבת וגו, during the period allocated to them, in order to remind them to do teshuvah.

עשה לך תבת עצי גפר. Make for yourself an ark of gopher wood. In order to understand this verse fully we must refer to Ezekiel 14,14 where the prophet speaks of three men, i.e. Noach, Daniel, and Job who managed to save their own lives due to their personal piety. The prophet there claims that G'd had told him that even if all these three pious men were alive in Jerusalem at that time they could not save the city from disaster though they personally would be saved. The reason all three of these pious men are mentioned is to teach us that even two of them together would not suffice to save themselves at that time in Jerusalem. Some of the earlier commentators wondered that in view of the many pious people who perished during the destruction of the Temple (compare Psalms 79,2 "they have left Your servants' corpses etc."), how was it that if three pious people could have saved themselves that the far more numerous number of pious people who died during the destruction of the city did not manage to save themselves? One of the answers given is that each pious person may have been scattered amongst many sinners, whereas if three pious persons had stuck together they would certainly have been saved by their merits. This may have been the reason that Noach could only be saved after building the ark, i.e. providing a separate environment for himself. As long as he had been surrounded by his compatriots without a מחיצה, dividing wall, he would have been swept away together with them. If Noach had had a few more pious people with him, he and they would have been saved without the need to construct their own environment. Under such circumstances the verse in Psalms 94,15 עד צדק ישוב משפט, that under certain circumstances righteousness could have reversed judgment, would have been applicable. From the fact that Noach was required to build an ark we learn that his sons did not match him in piety. Had they done so, Noach would not have needed to construct the ark but would have been saved in his own habitat. We need to reconcile this with the words of our sages which I have quoted earlier, and according to which Abraham learned from Noach that it was futile to pray for a city with fewer than ten righteous people to be saved. If Noach was the only righteous man in his generation what could Abraham have learned from this? We must therefore assume that though Noach's sons were righteous they were not perfectly righteous people such as their father. When Abraham prayed about righteous people being able to save a town he meant perfectly righteous people, not those whose good deeds barely outweighed their sins. This is the reason that Ezekiel listed the names of outstandingly righteous men such as Noach, Daniel, and Job. He did not refer to three average type צדיקים. We learn from Ezekiel that once the destructive agents have been given permission by G'd to carry out their function, who and under what circumstances someone can restrain them.

עשה לך, for your needs so that you will be saved from the impending deluge, as well as the other living creatures in the ark with you.,

Make for yourself. He was to carry out the work himself with Heaven’s help.

עצי גופר, “gopher wood.” A word reminiscent of גפרית, sulphur, a means of destroying by fire, the fate which mankind was guilty of experiencing. Compare the fate of Sodom and Gomorrha which were destroyed by sulphur and fire.

Perhaps they will repent. Question: Would not the building of the ark have an opposite effect, for it may cause them not repent? For they could answer Noach: “If the ark’s purpose is really to save you [from the Flood, this makes no sense. For] Hashem has many ways to save you even without an ark!” The answer is: They knew the Flood would come, as Rashi explained in connection with the story of Lemech’s wives (4:24). But they thought it would come in the distant future. His building the ark showed that it was imminent, thus they might repent. (Nachalas Yaakov)

תֵבָה, ein Behältnis, das nur in dieser Erzählung und in derjenigen der Rettung Moses׳ vorkommt, wo es auch zur rettenden Erhaltung eines Menschen im Wasser dient. Die Ableitung ist dunkel. Ob, wie לֵדָה von יָלד, so תֵבָה von dem chald. יתב, sitzen, abzuleiten wäre, ist zweifelhaft. Jedenfalls ist es der Form nach ein Kasten und nicht ein Schiff. Die Form ist ja unten breit und oben spitz zulaufend, somit der Schiffsform entgegengesetzt. Es sollte ja gar nicht zum Durchschneiden der Wellen bestimmt sein, sondern von ihnen getragen werden. — קנים von קנן, das verstärkte גנן, schützen, umfriedigen, woher denn גן der Garten, קֵן: eine noch engere Umfriedung zur Bergung lebender Wesen: Nest, hier im großen: Tierbehälter. Es heißt nicht לתבה sondern את התבה, der ganze Kasten soll קנים sein, nicht zunächst eine Wohnung für Noa und seine Familie und dabei auch Räume für Tiere, etwa zum Nutzen, sondern der ganze Kasten ein Rettungshaus für lebende Wesen.

עשה לך תיבת, “make an ark for yourself etc;” Rashi comments on this by asking the rhetorical question that “seeing that G-d has unlimited space at His disposal, why did He choose such a compact little ark in which to coop up all the creatures He meant to save?” His answer is that if mankind would constantly see that Noach was totally preoccupied with the construction of this ark as a means to ride out the deluge, perhaps they would take this to heart and become penitents. (Based on Tanchuma) Our author finds this difficult, seeing that G-d had known His hopes would be disappointed, and that was hardly a reason to make life in the ark so uncomfortable for all the creatures in it. He therefore prefers to answer the question in a different manner. He claims that G-d wanted to show the attribute of Mercy that He had done all in His power to encourage people to stave off disaster when they saw how seriously Noach took G-d’s warning. In 7,12 Rashi himself mentions this attempt by G-d to stave off disaster by G-d initially allowing rain which was not accompanied by storms and subterranean sluices opening, to serve as an a additional warning. G-d did all this to convince the attribute of Mercy that further delay was quite useless.

(literally, return to God). עצי גופר GOPHER WOOD — Thus is its name. Why of this species (גפר)? Because of the (גפרית) “sulphur” by which it was decreed that they were to be blotted out.

גפר, a type of light wood, like balsam wood, which floats easily on the water. According to Onkelos it is a kind of cedar wood.

מבית ומחוץ בכופר, “overlay it with tar both from the inside and the outside.” According to Rashi כופר is identical with זפת, pitch. The purpose of the pitch was to protect the wooden structure against the waters which would have penetrated and made it disintegrate in a few days. Some commentators understand the word זפת as a generic term for any insulating material which adheres firmly to the surface to which it is applied.

Of cedar wood. That is its name. [Rashi is answering the question:] Why is עצי written in the plural form, when גפר is singular? (R. Yaakov Taryosh)

כפר (verwandt mit קבר ,גבר) Grundbedeutung: eine schützende oder hemmende Bedeckung; schützend, dass auf den bedeckten Gegenstand nichts von außen einwirke, wie hier, so auch כפרת, Deckel; hemmend, dass das Bedeckte nicht nach außen wirke, so כפר פנים. Zorn hemmen, כפר ברית (Jesaias 28. 18) die Wirkung eines Bundes hemmen. In Beziehung auf Sünde kommt es in beiden Bedeutungen vor: כפר על הנפש וגוי מן החטא, die Person, das Volk, das Heiligtum usw. schützen vor den Folgen begangener Sünden, und ebenso כפר על עון ,כפר פשע וכוי, die Folgen der Sünde hemmen, dass sie nicht auf die Person usw. wirke. כְפַר Häuser, die nur die Bedeutung des Schutzes für den Arbeiter haben: Dorf, im Gegensatz zu עיר, wo die Häuser eine selbständige Bestimmung haben, Träger der ganzen städtischen Kultur zu sein; das Haus des Landmanns ist nicht sein עיר. (Siehe oben 4, 17). כְפִיר ein junger Löwe, der schon anfängt, schützender Anführer eines Löwenrudels zu sein. Hier tritt die Verwandtschaft mit גבר hervor. — Der Name des Holzes גפר steht in Lautverwandtschaft mit כפר, und dürfte vielleicht auch schon dem Holze an sich eine gegen den Einfluß des Wassers schützende Eigenschaft inne gewesen sein.

עצי גופר, “gopher wood;” this is the wood the resin of which yields sulfur. It is not soluble in water, and G-d chose it to remind those who watched it. [Noach included according to this interpretation, as it had taken an act of mercy by G-d to save him and his family Ed.] being used that they deserved to be judged by sulfur. (The material used to destroy Sodom some 400 years later. Compare Genesis 19,24)

קנים ROOMS — Separate cabins for each kind of cattle and beast.

קנים, divided into cabins, small rooms, such as the enclosures allocated to individual birds in a dove-cot. G’d commanded Noach to see to it that each species of animal would have separate accommodation in the ark.

Its name relating to sulphur. I.e., boiling water comes from the earth’s sulfur; see Sanhedrin 108b and Rosh Hashanah 12a. You might ask: How did Rashi know that the water [of the Flood] was hot? The answer is: Here (8:1) it is written וישוכו המים, and about Achashveirosh (Esther 7:10) it is written וחמת המלך שככה. There it means subsiding from a previous heat, as it said before, “His anger burnt within him” (ibid. 1:12). And here also it is written וישוכו, meaning that the water subsided from its boiling and cooled off.

וכפרת אותו מבית ומחוץ בכופר, “you are to seal it from the inside as well as from the outside with pitch;” our sages (Sanhedrin 108) comment on this that seeing mankind had sinned with “boiling water,” they were punished by means of boiling water. [The expression is used in the Talmud to describe ejaculation of heated semen in sexually forbidden intercourse. Ed.] If you were to query that in our experience pitch does not withstand boiling water but dissolves in it, this was another miracle [to show that G-d can use even such material to help save the innocent. Ed.] A different exegesis: The water surrounding the immediate proximity remained cool, whereas the waters further away were bubbling hot. If this were not the correct interpretation, how could we explain that Gog, Sichon and his brothers had survived the deluge? (Compare Talmud Niddah 61, according to the opinion in the Talmud that the deluge had also inundated the land of Israel)

בכפר WITH כפר — This is an Aramaic term for the Hebrew זפת “pitch’’, and in the Talmud (Shabbat 67a) we find the noun כופרא “pitch”. In the case of the ark (cradle) in which Moses was placed, since the waters were not rapid it sufficed that it should be daubed with slime inside and with pitch outside; and a further reason for this was that this righteous person (Moses) should not smell the bad odour of the pitch (Sotah 12a). Here, however, because of the rough waters he had to cover it with pitch inside as well as outside.

וכפרת, verbalised from the word כופר, or זפת, waterproof caulking, pitch or tar. Our sages also describe it as such in Shabbat 67.

Because the waters were calm. You might ask: Why does Rashi bring this here? The answer is: Without Rashi’s above explanation [that כופר means tar] we would not have asked why Noach’s teivah had tar inside and outside, whereas Moshe’s teivah had tar only outside. For they seem to be different — here it says כופר and there it says tar. But now that Rashi explained that כופר means tar, we see that Noach’s teivah had tar just like Moshe’s teivah. If so, why did Moshe’s teivah not have tar on the inside and outside, like Noach’s did? Furthermore, without Rashi’s explanation [that כופר means tar] we could say that כופר is something that is stronger than clay but weaker than tar. Therefore, clay on the inside and tar on the outside [Moshe’s teivah] is the same strength as כופר on inside and outside [Noach’s teivah]. But now that Rashi explained that כופר means tar, the question arises: Why were both not [built] the same manner?

מבית ומחוץ, the reason why the caulking had to be applied both from the outside and from the inside, was so that in case the outside would spring a leak or crack due to the violent impact of the waves, the inside caulking would provide insurance against the people inside the ark getting wet.

Another reason... It seems that when Rashi explained that the waters were calm for Moshe’s teivah, therefore clay inside and tar outside was sufficient, it means as follows: Surely the waters were calm, so clay inside and tar outside was sufficient. But with Noach’s teivah it needed tar inside and out. This raises a question: What is wrong with making it that way also for Moshe? Rashi answers with the second reason: so that Moshe would be spared the odor of tar. This raises the question: Noach was also righteous; [why should he not be spared the odor?] Rashi answers: “But, here at the Flood, because of the force of the water, he tarred it on the inside and the outside.” (Maharshal)

THE LENGTH OF THE ARK SHALL BE THREE HUNDRED CUBITS. The verse specifies for us measure of its length, width and height...to let us know the greatness of the miracle, that a small space was able to hold much, because there were large creatures there such as elephants and wild oxen.

וזה אשר תעשה אותה, the measurements and shape are introduced by the word זה. The reason why the Torah uses the masculine mode זה instead of the feminine mode זאת, seeing that the word תבה, ark, is feminine, is because the word זה, “this,” masculine, describes the שעור, measurement, a noun which is masculine. G’d commanded Noach to make the width of the ark one sixth of its length, and the height one tenth of its length.] According to Bereshit Rabbah 31,10 the reason that the Torah gave these dimensions is precisely that shipbuilders are advised to stick to the relative measurements of width, length and height recorded here.

And you shall do this... this Occurs three times like here another time "and you shall do this on the altar" (Exodus 29:38) and to say that just as the altar atones, so you should build an altar to atone for when you come out.

צהר A LIGHT — Some say this was a window; others say that it was a precious stone that gave light to them (Genesis Rabbah 31:11).

בצדה תשים, on the side which is wide, for that is the side called צד. The long side is referred to as צלע.

צהר, this word is derived from the word צהרים, “noon,” an instruction that Noach make a window in the ark that would let in the light after the rain would stop falling, during the long period when the water level would gradually subside. This is what is meant in 8,7 when the Torah wrote ויפתח נח את החלון, “Noach opened the window.” Some of our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 31,11 ) believe that Noach suspended a brilliant gemstone which provided light inside the ark. The words תעשה לתבה, “you shall construct for or inside the ark,” contradict such an explanation. There is no question that Noach had prepared oil for the lamps he took along into the ark. The window mentioned here in our verse is a natural source of light, affixed by Noach in the highest part of the ark.

צוהר, “a light,” according to some commentators this source of light was a gem stone which refracted whatever light was available in all directions. Others believe that the reference is to some kind of window (transparent material) Our sages question that seeing that the sun and moon did not operate during the duration of the flood, what good would a window have done? The answer provided is that it would enable the people inside the ark to calculate when 12 months would have passed. This is not a satisfactory answer either; however we know that a window had functions other than the admitting of light from the outside, namely it served as a means to dispatch the raven and the dove, as we will learn later on. [disposal of garbage could also be achieved by that means. Ed.]

What is the meaning of a door in the side: for he says, "Thou shalt make a door in the side?" (Genesis 6:16).

Others say it was a precious stone. The word צהר is similar to צהרים, denoting illumination. And some say it was a window, for it is written (8:6), “Noach opened the window of the ark.” If so, [why do the others say it was a precious stone? Because] the window was only for air. (Nachalas Yaakov)

צהר. Die צ-Form von זהר scheint fast auf eine künstliche Beleuchtung hinzuweisen. (Heißt vielleicht Öl zunächst als wichtigstes Beleuchtungsmittel יצהר, sowie als Nahrungsmittel שמן?) Sicherlich nicht ohne Grund wird die Einrichtung so ganz speziell mitgeteilt und später wiederholt hervorgehoben, dass Noa alles כֵן, ganz so gemacht habe. Gott hätte in tausendfacher Weise retten können — ob die Größe der Arche hinreichend war usw. sind Überlegungen, die wir ziemlich bei Seite lassen können. Gott erwählt einen Menschen, der soll sich, seine Familie und die Tierwelt für die Zukunft retten; er rettet sie und sich nur dann, wenn er alles so und nur so vollbringt, wie ihm befohlen. גדול המצווה ועושה ממי שאין מצווה ועושה, die gebotene Vollbringung ist bei weitem größer, als die willkürliche, ist erster jüdischer Grundsatz. Im Gegensatz zur herrschenden Ansicht hat wahren Wert nur das, was zur Erfüllung des göttlichen Willens geschieht. Was jemand nach eigener Eingebung usw. übt, hat nur zweifelhafte, untergeordnete Bedeutung. Was hätte Noa in den 120 Jahren nicht noch alles zur Rettung tun können! Hundert Archen bauen usw. usw. Es dürfte hier daher vielmehr nur gesagt sein, dass sich Noa darauf beschränkte, das, das aber ganz zu tun, was Gott befohlen hatte, und Gott das Weitere überließ.

1. צהר, tzohar, window, opening in Gematria: In the light of the stone.

ואל אמה תכלנה מלמעלה, “and finish it to within a cubit from the top;” this was meant to prevent the rains from getting into the ark and causing its planks to rot. If you were to argue that the rains then could cause the width of the ark to start rotting, we refer you to the commentary of Rabbi Joseph Kara, who understands the subject in the verse to be the window. This window should be affixed in the upper cubit near the roof, the cover of the ark.

צהר תעשה לתיבה “you are to provide means of illumination for the ark.” According to most opinions this is a reference to the window that Noach used later on to dispatch the raven and the turtle dove. During the period that this “window” was kept closed he suspended in that area a jewel which sparkled and provided interior lighting. When we understand this in this manner, our sages, some of whom spoke only of the jewel and others only of the “window,” are both correct, except that neither of them gave us the full explanation. When the Torah told Noach to provide interior lighting it was because during most of days of the deluge illumination from the sky was totally absent, neither sun, nor moon or stars being visible. Noach had to use his ingenuity to provide for interior lighting.

ואל אמה תכלנה מלמעלה AND TO A CUBIT SHALT THOU FINISH IT UPWARD — Its covering (roof) slanted upwards so that it narrowed at the top to a cubit, in order that the water should run off on both sides.

תחתיים, the lower deck in ships; as in any other ship, the customary lower deck.

ואל אמה, to the uppermost cubit of the slanting roof of the ark. It is called thus seeing that at the top there was no more than one cubit of width between the roof sloping down on one side and that sloping down on the other side. The purpose of the slanting roof was to let the rain run off the ark.

So that the water would flow. I.e., rather than seep inside. You might ask: Why not make it flat, but very strong and thick so the rainwater could not penetrate? The answer is: Rashi means it had an open space of one amoh, since a house without air is uninhabitable. But if it would be completely open the rain would fall in. Thus Noach made the open space only one amoh in length, with a tiny width of a sixth of an amoh, i.e., a tefach. [The roof sloped down in four directions from the open space,] and below, the teivah’s length was three hundred amos, while on top, only one amoh in length. This is one three-hundredth. Below, the width was fifty amos. Thus the width above was one sixth of an amoh, i.e., one tefach. For fifty amos is three hundred tefachim, and the width [above] was one three-hundredth [of the width below].

ואל אמה תכלנה מלמעלה, this phrase describes more detail about the expression צהר. It instructs Noach to affix the lighting near the top end of the ark. The “lamp” was supposed to be fuelled by oil, as hinted at by the letters in the word צהר which are the same as יצהר, “pure oil.” Both the words חלון and צהר are used in Scripture in the masculine and feminine mode. Compare Kings I 6,4. Interestingly enough, the word חלון, window is used both in the masculine and feminine mode, presumably as a reminder that windows can be used both in order to look out or in order to look in, or to allow light to come in.

בצדה תשים THOU SHALT SET [THE DOOR] IN THE SIDE THEREOF — in order that the rain might not penetrate.

ופתח התבה, the entrance/exit which was closed after everybody who was entitled to enter the ark had entered it.

שניים ושלשים, they are similar, parallel to the lower deck.

So that the rain may not seep through. Rashi is answering the question: Are not ship openings normally on the top?

ופתח התיבה בצדה תשים “and you are to position the entrance to the ark sideways.” Contrary to what we might think the entrance was not to be in the middle of the broadside of the ark, but at the corner where it would be least exposed to the elements. An alternate interpretation of the word: בצדה; on the third level (from the bottom) of the ark.

תחתים שנים ושלישים WITH LOWER, SECOND AND THIRD STORIES — Three stories one above the other: the top rooms for the human beings, the middle ones as cabins for the cattle, and the bottom was for the refuse (Sanhedrin 108b).

תחתים, a lower deck; the letter י in this word serves a dual purpose, a) to represent the plural mode of the word, as well as 2) a letter describing a relative and not an absolute position. When speaking of the third deck, שלשים, the letter י which would reflect the relative position is unnecessary (seeing it was the top, i.e. highest deck) so that we do not find the dagesh in the י in that word. The י describing the plural mode does appear, just as it does in words such as נכרים, gentiles, or in מצרים, Egyptians. In Bereshit Rabbah 31,11 we are told that the lower deck served as the container of refuse, the middle deck as the accommodation for the family of Noach and the pure animals, [the ones fit as sacrifices], whereas the upper deck served as accommodation for the impure species of animals. Some scholars believe that the lowest deck accommodated the ritually impure species of animals, the middle deck was reserved for Noach and his family as well as for the ritually pure animals, whereas the top deck was for the refuse. Noach constructed sort of a trap door through which he shoveled the refuse.

תחתיים שניים, ושלישים, the third floor (deck) was intended for the human beings inhabiting the ark, as well as for the storage of the entire food supply.

ואני הנני מביא AND I, BEHOLD, I DO BRING — God says, “Now I am prepared to agree with those angels who cautioned Me and long ago said to Me (when I was about to create man), (Psalms 8:5) “What is man that thou art mindful of him” (Genesis Rabbah 31:12).

AND, BEHOLD, I DO BRING THE FLOOD. “Now I agree with those angels who long ago said to Me [when I was about to create man], What is man that Thou art mindful of him.”⁴²Psalms 8:5. Thus the words of Rashi quoting Bereshith Rabbah.⁴³31:15.
But I wonder: in what way did He “agree” with them since He left man a remnant for a great deliverance through Noah and his sons and all living things to increase their seed as the sand! Perhaps this agreement with their opinion signified [His intent which was to come to fruition] when He would show them no mercy. [However, when the Divine quality of mercy was introduced, it resulted in the deliverance of mankind through Noah.]
By way of the truth [the mystic lore of the Cabala], va’ani (And I) is similar to: And I also will chastise you;⁴⁴Leviticus 26:28. The word va’ani (And I) thus intimates the attribute of judgment. so also, I am He! behold, My covenant is with thee;⁴⁵Genesis 17:4. And as for Me, this is My covenant.⁴⁶Isaiah 59:21. The verse here thus states: “I also will have My hand on them for having destroyed the earth.” This is why He said [after the flood]: This is the token of the covenant which I make.⁴⁷Genesis 9:12. — He maketh sore, and He bindeth up.⁴⁸Job 5:18. The learned student [in the mystic lore of the Cabala] will understand.

ואני הנני מביא את המבול, G’d is saying, that Noach’s task is to build the ark, whereas He, when the time expires, will bring on the deluge He had threatened as soon as the ark would be completed. The word מבול is a variant of מפלה, referring to something lost as in Deut. 14,21 כל נבלה, a carcass being a life lost. The definitive article ה in המבול refers to the destruction, the nature of which had not previously been spelled out. [my paraphrasing. Ed.]

ואני הנני מביא את המבול. As far as I am concerned, here I shall bring on a deluge. It is difficult to justify the extra word ואני. Rashi explains it to mean: "I am prepared to concur with those angels who have considered man as not worth preserving." According to my own approach it simply means that the stage had been reached for G'd to give permission to the destructive agents which had readied themselves to carry out their design. Although the verse specifies only rain, the Zohar has elaborated on the meaning of the word מבול which would not have been needed had the Torah referred only to rain. This word alludes to the deadly power of the angel of death.

ואני...המבול מים, the word מבול after the word המבול is missing, a word which should have been written since we had not heard about a concept called מבול previously. There are some other parallels to this missing construct form when we would have expected it, as in Joshua 3,15 הארון הברית. The basic root of the word מבול is נבל, in the same sense as in Job 38,37 ונבלי מים מי ישכיב? “who can tilt the water bottles from the sky?” This is a reference to rain emanating from the celestial regions. At the same time the word also contains an allusion to “falling”, מפלה, as in Isaiah 1,30 נובלת עליה, things which fall from the sky and are poured on to earth The word מבול is an adjective describing a certain type of rain. The word גשם on the other hand, is a noun. This is why it is possible to use the word מבול concerning any matter that drops out of the sky, such as snow, fire, hail, etc. Also, this is the reason why the Torah did not need to write גשם מים מתחת השמים, if the Torah had not added the words כל אשר בארץ, I would have thought that the fish had also been meant to die. The word בארץ in our verse therefore means “on the dry land.” The decree of destruction did not include the fish because since they do not share man’s habitat they did not adopt man’s corrupt ways. (compare Zevachim 113)

ואני הנני מביא את המבול, as for Me, I am ready to bring on the deluge, etc.” According to Rashi the word הנני signals that at this time G’d found Himself in agreement with the angels who had opposed the creation of man to begin with, saying מה אנוש כי תזכרנו, “what is man (the species) that You should concern Yourself with him?” (Psalms 8,5). Nachmanides queries such an interpretation, seeing that G’d went to some lengths to ensure that the species was not wiped out, but that Noach and family would survive the deluge. Perhaps Rashi meant to say that G’d agreed with the angels who argued that man was not entitled to forgiveness anymore.

Behold I am bringing. It was necessary for Hashem to state this to refute the claim that the flood was a natural phenomenon brought on by conditions of the young earth.

“I am now prepared to agree.” Rashi is answering the question: ואני implies that another being wants it, and I, too, concur. How can it be said about Hashem that another being assists Him, Heaven forbid? Thus Rashi answers that ואני refers to the angels, who agreed long ago — “And I am now prepared to agree.” Alternatively, Rashi is answering the question: Why is it written ואני הנני, a double expression?

Das hast du zu tun, und ich, — siehe ich usw.; in dem הנני liegt, dass das Schauerlich-Ernste, welches Gott zu tun im Begriffe war, durch die Umstände selbst erheischt ward. — מַבול, offenbar von der Wurzel נבל, welche das Schwinden der Lebenskräfte in der organischen, animalischen oder sittlichen Welt bedeutet. Daher נָבל: das Welken der Blätter, נָבל: das Entschwinden der Kräfte, ermüden, נְבָלָה ,נָבָל: die sittliche Nichtswürdigkeit, und endlich נְבֵלה: den entseelten Körper, den Leichnam bedeutet. Es ist nur eine schwächere Form von נפל, also das allmäliche Abwelken und Absterben, sei es der vegetabilischen, animalischen, oder geistigen und sittlichen Kräfte. מבול also: die Entseelung, und indem das herbeizuführende Verhängnis mit diesem Worte bezeichnet wird, ist damit der Katastrophe der mildeste Charakter aufgedrückt. Alles, was irdisch ist, ist ohnehin zuletzt dem "נבול" bestimmt; alle die dem Untergange verfallenden Wesen würden so nicht ewig gelebt haben; es tritt für sie nur ein verfrühtes Abwelken und Sterben ein. Es wird überhaupt mit großer unterscheidender Sorgfalt gesagt, was getötet werden soll: לשחת כל בשר אשר בו רוח חיים, nur die Hüllen, in welchen Lebensgeist ist, die ohnehin dereinst נְבֵלות werden, nicht aber das Leben, auch nicht der Geist des Lebens, (רוח ist das unsichtbar Bewegende), am allerwenigsten נפש, die im Menschen unsterbliche Persönlichkeit. "Die Entseelung kommt, um den Hüllen, in welchen Lebensgeist ist, den Weg zu hemmen, ihnen frühzeitig das Grab zu bereiten." —

ואני הנני, Rashi interprets these two words as: “and I have agreed,” i.e. “against the pleas of the attribute of Mercy which acted as advocate for sinful mankind.”

מבול A FLOOD — so called because it ruined (בלה) everything; because it cast everything into confusion (בלל), and because it brought (הוביל from root יבל) everything down from the heights to a lower level. And this last explanation underlies the translation of Onkelos who translates it by טופנא (Ar. טוף = Heb. צוף) because the Flood caused everything to float about and brought it (the Ark) to Babel which is a low-lying district. That is the reason why it (Babylon) is called, also, Shinar (שנער): because all those who died through the Flood were shaken out (ננערו) into it (Shabbat 113b).

With those... Meaning: I consulted the angels whether to create man, and they answered, “What is man that You should consider him.” Now, I agree with them.

יגוע rad. גוע. Schon von den Weisen bemerkt, dass dieser Ausdruck vorzugsweise das Sterben der Gerechten begleitet, so bei Abraham, Jizchak, Jakob: ויגוע וימת ויאסף אל עמיו, und hier steht derselbe zur Bezeichnung des Unterganges dieses Geschlechtes! Nichts ist so bezeichnend, wie die Wahl dieses Ausdruckes! Es ist ja nicht ein Mensch, dessen Phantasie sich hier das Schreckliche des Untergangs des ganzen Menschengeschlechtes mit allem möglichen Graus ausmalt, desgleichen die verschiedenen Sündflutgemälde in Wort und Pinsel sich ergangen; es ist der milde, barmherzige Schöpfer und Herr der Welt, der uns über seine Taten Aufschluss gibt. Wie מבול, so ist auch dies גוע in dieser Richtung höchst bedeutsam. גוע verwandt mit גוה, der Wurzel von גֵוָה, die Körper- lichkeit, גֵו Leib, Rücken, גְוִיָה, der hingeschiedene Leib, גוי, der Volkskörper als Ganzes nach außen im Unterschied von עם, der Gesellschaft nach innen. Ferner mit גֵבֶא: An- sammlung von Flüssigkeiten, Grube, davon später גבאי, der Sammler; mit גבה Ansammlung fester Stoffe, daher: hoch; dann גבעה ,גבע Hügel, גֵבֶה, Höcker. Aus allem diesen ergibt sich die Grundbedeutung: Massensammlung, Stoffsammlung, und גוע wird den Moment bezeichnen, in welchem der bis dahin bewusste, fühlende, empfindende Leib, bloß "Stoff" wird, d. h. bewusstlos, empfindungslos wird, ein Zustand, der, wenn er dem Tode vorangeht, ihn für den Sterbenden schmerzlos macht. So wird auch in יגוע ב"ר einfach: יצמוק, erstarren, starr werden erläutert. Wie kann — menschlich gesprochen — der barmherzige Gott milder handeln, wie kann er dem Manne, der dies alles mit durchleben soll, und der das Phantasiebild des Röchelns, der Angst und Verzweiflung so vieler Millionen Wesen kaum hätte überleben können, wie kann er ihm das kommende Verhängnis mild-beruhigender ankündigen als: alles בשר, alles Empfindende wird in einem Moment erstarren, wird "Materie" werden, יגוע! Materie fühlt nicht; das übrige, was dann mit ihnen vorgeht, ist nichts als elementare Auflösung. Bewußtlos werden, sterben und aufgelöst werden, — וימח ,מתו ,ויגוע, — diese drei Stadien werden auch nachher bei der historischen Erzählung des Vorganges, VII. 21, 22, 23 deutlich auseinander gehalten.

Flood waters. It ruined... It confused... You might ask: How does Rashi know that it means these three things? The answer is: The ב of מבּול has a dagesh, and such a dagesh implies that the first letter of the root is a י or a נ, or, the dagesh represents a double letter. According to the first meaning, “it ruined everything,” it is as if it had written נבול, as in נבול תבול (Shemos 18:18), meaning “wear out.” According to the second meaning, “it confused everything,” it is as if it had written מבול twice, i.e., בלבל, meaning “confusion.” According to the third meaning, “it brought everything,” it is as if it had written יובל, as in (Tehillim 76:12) יובילו שי למורא, meaning “will bring.”

והקמתי את בריתי BUT I WILL ESTABLISH MY COVENANT — A covenant was necessary for the sake of the fruits that they should not rot or decay; and also that the wicked people of that generation should not kill him (Genesis Rabbah 31:12)

AND I WILL ESTABLISH MY COVENANT. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that this is a sign that G-d had sworn to Noah that during the flood, neither he nor his children would die even though it is not clearly written at first. This is similar to what we find in Deuteronomy: And ye came near unto me every one of you, and said: Let us send men before us, that they may search the land for us.⁴⁹Deuteronomy 1:22. This account, narrated by Moses, is not explicitly stated in Numbers, Chapter 13, which begins with G-d saying: Send thou men… Ramban cites this as another case where the first account lacks some of the details of the later account.
The meaning of V’hakimothi (And I will establish) is “I will fulfill My oath.” It appears likely to me that this covenant mentioned here refers to the rainbow, [Thus G-d hinted to Noah that after the flood He will make a covenant with him if he will fulfill the commandment concerning the making of the ark.] The meaning of the word b’rith (covenant) is an agreement and accord which two have chosen, stemming from the root, ‘b’ru’ (choose) you.⁵⁰I Samuel 17:8. And the word b’rith takes the same form in construct and in separateness. A similar case is [the word sh’vith, captivity]: ‘sh’vith’ (the captivity of) Jacob;⁵¹Psalms 85:2. Here the word sh’vith is in construct. And his daughters ‘bash’vith’ (in captivity).⁵²Numbers 21:29. Here the word bash’vith is separate. And some say that the word b’rith means the establishment of a boundary [to which each party to the covenant should adhere]. All these are Abraham ibn Ezra’s words.
A more correct explanation in line with the simple meaning of Scripture is that the purport of the expression, And I will establish My covenant, is, “At the time of the coming of the flood, My covenant will be established with you so that you and your family and two of all flesh will come into the ark to remain alive, that is to say, so that you will live there and maintain yourself in order to go forth from there alive.” And b’rith (covenant) means G-d’s word when He decrees something without any condition and residuary and fulfills it. Now He mentions the b’rith and mentions that it will be fulfilled, [which, according to the present interpretation is an apparent redundancy], just as we find the verse, The Jews ordained and took upon them, and upon their seed,⁵³Esther 9:27. meaning they accepted upon themselves a matter which was to exist. [Thus our verse is to be explained in a similar way, i.e., He established an unconditional covenant.]
By way of the truth, [the mystic lore of the Cabala], the b’rith is everlasting, the word being derived from. In the beginning G-d ‘bara’ (created).³⁷Above, 1:1. Thus brithi (My covenant) is similar to b’riyothi (My creation), and the word is alike in construct form because it is adjoined to the times there were before us. He thus commanded that the b’rith exist and be with the righteous one [Noah]. In a similar sense are the verses: As for Me, behold, I establish My covenant with you;⁵⁴Genesis 9:9. My covenant was with him.⁵⁵Malachi 2:5. The learned student [in the mystic lore of the Cabala] will understand.

והקימותי את בריתי, a reference to the covenant G’d made with Noach after the deluge.

והקימותי את בריתי. I shall fulfil My covenant. Why did G'd not first tell Noach to enter the ark seeing that his survival depended on that? Our sages (Bereshit Rabbah 31,12) say that the covenant in question was merely that Noach's peers would not kill him when he would enter the ark. In that event it is quite appropriate that the Torah first mentioned G'd as maintaining His covenant with Noach.

והקימותי את בריתי אתך, the covenant that I am going to make with you as part of the deal that you and your family will be saved. I will keep this promise for you and your descendants.

I will establish My covenant. This refers to the blessing that Hashem gave Adam and Chavah. Its consequence here was that Noach and his family would remain alive.

והקימותי את בריתי אתך, “but I will maintain My covenant with you.” According to Rashi the covenant was needed to prevent the produce in the ark that was to serve its inhabitants as food from rotting, during the year it would remain inside. Ibn Ezra suggests that this was an oath by G’d to Noach that neither he nor members of his family would die while in the ark during the deluge, even though the Torah does not spell it out as a specific promise. We explained this (Tur)) in connection with Deut. 1,22 on the line נשלחה אנשים לפנינו, “let us send some men ahead.” [in that verse too the Torah refrains from spelling out that the request was for spies and not simply scouts. Ed.] The word והקימותי refers to “keeping a promise, an oath.” It is most likely that this is a veiled hint of the rainbow, which will become the symbol of G’d’s oath later on in our portion. The word ברית, meaning “a solemn and mutual undertaking,” is derived from the expression ברו לכם, (Samuel I 17,8) where it means “choose for yourselves.” Nachmanides writes, more in line with the plain meaning of the text, that G’d promised Noach that when the moment came for the deluge to commence, he and his family would enter the ark safely, unharmed and the requisite pairs of animals would all show up ready to enter the ark to spend the time within safely. The special significance of the word (concept) ברית is that it is a binding promise not subject to additional clauses which could invalidate it.

A covenant was necessary. It is as if it said, “I have established My covenant with you, and then you shall go into the ark.” But otherwise you could not go in.

ברית, Wurzel ברת, verwandt mit פרת ,פרד ,ארד, die alle ein Trennen ausdrücken. (Daher auch wohl ברת: ein Stück, ברת ארץ, eine Strecke). ברית ist eine solche Bestimmung, die unabhängig von allen äußeren Umständen, ja selbst im Gegensatz zu denselben, in Erfüllung gebracht werden soll. Es entspricht buchstäblich dem Begriff des "Absoluten", dem von allem Kausalnexus Abgelösten, dem Unbedingten. Daher auch das Errichten eines כרת :ברית, trennen, sondern, heißt, sowie die Erfüllung eines, Bündnisses: קום .הקים ist verschieden von עמד: Gegensatz der Bewegung; von התיצב: Gegensatz des Sichhingebens, die Selbständigkeit. קום ist Gegensatz des Fallens. Nun ist ברית eben etwas, das in dem Zusammenhang der Dinge keine Stütze hat, sich selbst überlassen, fallen würde, und nur von dem כורת ברית aufrecht erhalten wird. Der Begriff "Bund" entspricht dem ברית keineswegs. Schon darum nicht, weil Bund immer ein Gegenseitiges voraussetzt, ברית kommt aber auch völlig einseitig vor. So Gottes ברית der Erhaltung Noa׳s und der noachidischen Welt. So הנני נותן לו את בריתי שלום an Pineas. Nichts hatte wohl mehr eine n^-Be- stimmung nötig als die Erhaltung Noa׳s. Die paar Balken machten gewiss nicht die Rettung aus, sonst hätten sich ebenso noch andere retten können. Wohl nur im Sinne des אין סומכין על הנס, nach welchem der Mensch jederzeit das ihm Mögliche tun soll,. hatte Noa seinen Kasten zu bauen, aber die Erhaltung und Rettung selbst bedurfte gewiss des ganz besonderen Schutzes des göttlichen Willens; daher: אתך — .ברית, die übrigen alle um Noa׳s und seines Verdienstes willen. Zu ihm gehörte die Familie und die zu rettende lebendige Welt.

והקימותי את בריתי אתך, “I will maintain My covenant with you.” The reference is to the covenant that Noach’s descendants will not be wiped out during the deluge.

אתה ובניך ואשתך THOU, AND THY SONS AND THY WIFE — Males separately and females separately. From this one may infer that they were not permitted to live together in the Ark as man and wife (Sanhedrin 108b).

ובאת אל התבה, the ark in which I told you that I would save you from the waters of the deluge.

And so that they not kill him. You might ask: Why not say this was the only reason [for the covenant]? The answer is: Then it should say, “I will establish My covenant.” Since it says והקמותי, “I established,” it means: When I created the fruits, I already established My covenant with them to fulfill My word. [And if the covenant was for the fruits alone, why does it say אתך?] (Maharshal)

An additional meaning maybe that G'd was afraid that Noach would not consider his salvation as a permanent one. He might feel that what was about to occur now might occur again some generations later if mankind did not improve. G'd therefore already hinted to him what He would spell out in more detail after Noach's thanks-giving offering in 8,21. In the meantime Noach had to enter the ark to escape the destruction that would kill all flesh.

אתה ובניך, the absence of a reference to the females, shows that copulation was forbidden in the ark, seeing that the women were to have separate quarters. (Chulin 70) G’d separated them by writing: אתה ובניך, אשתך ונשי בניך, The moral lesson in all this is that a time when the entire human species is being wiped out, it is not appropriate for the survivors to indulge in physical pleasures. All they were allowed to do was to eat enough in order to keep themselves alive and well.

That marital relations were prohibited to them. Rashi knows this because of the textual changes between Scripture’s description of their coming into the ark and their leaving the ark. When they left the ark it is written (8:16): “Depart from the ark, yourself and your wife.” I will later explain b’ezras Hashem why it is written (ibid. v. 18), “Noach departed from the ark together with his sons, his wife and son’s wives,” [implying they were separate]. Question: Why, on the verse of “Noach went in...” (7:7), did Rashi repeat his comment, “Because they were forbidden marital relations”? Furthermore, Rashi explained there, “Since the world was in a state of grief.” Why did he not mention this here? It seems the answer is: The command [to enter, which appears here,] mentions entering the ark first, and afterwards the separation. But when it comes to actually entering, the separation is mentioned first and only afterwards does it says “into the ark.” This is because Noach decided on his own to separate even before entering the ark, because he saw the world was already in a state of grief. For Noach did not enter the ark until forced by the water, as Rashi explains (7:7). Thus the grief had already begun [before he entered], and marital relations became prohibited. This is why Rashi mentioned grief then. But the command [as mentioned here] was to enter the ark before the rainfall, when there was not yet grief. (Divrei Dovid)

G'd may also have wanted to reassure Noach prior to his entering the ark that He would not abandon him during the time it took to sit out the deluge in the ark. Noach should not worry that the ark itself would prove a death trap. This assurance helped Noach as we know from 8,1 where the Torah mentions that G'd remembered Noach during all that time. After this G'd commanded Noach to enter the ark under the protection of this covenant. Although the covenant is not mentioned again in connection with 7,1, G'd relied on His previous assurance to Noach in this regard. The covenant is alluded to again in 8,1 where G'd is reported as "remembering" all those in the ark. Even though Rashi understands G'd as "remembering" Noach's good deeds and the animals refraining from mating while in the ark, this is homiletics and not the plain meaning of the verse.

ומכל החי AND OF EVERY LIVING THING — Even of demons (Genesis Rabbah 31:13).

OF ALL FLESH. It is known that there are a great many beasts, and some of them — such as elephants, rams and others — are very large; likewise, the creeping things upon the earth are very many. Of the fowl of the heaven there are also innumerably many kinds, just as our Rabbis have said:⁵⁶Chullin 63b. However, instead of 120 kinds, the figure mentioned there is 100. “There are one hundred and twenty kinds of unclean birds in the east, and all of them belong to the species of ayah (kite).”⁵⁷See Leviticus 11:14. Clean fowl are innumerable. Noah was thus obligated to bring all of them into the ark in order that they may beget their like. If you would gather a full year’s supply of food for all of them, [you would find] that this ark and ten others like it could not hold it! But this was a miracle of a small space containing a great quantity. And in case you suppose that he should have made it [the ark] very small and rely on this miracle, the answer is that the Holy One, blessed be He, saw fit to make it large so that the people of his generation should see it, wonder at it, converse about it, and speak of the subject of the flood and the gathering of the cattle, beast, and fowl into it so that perhaps they would repent. Furthermore, he made it large in order to reduce the miracle for such is the way with all miracles in the Torah or in the Prophets: whatever is humanly possible is done, with the balance left to Heaven. Now be not persuaded to say as Ibn Ezra that the three hundred cubits [of the length of the ark were measured] in cubits of a man like Noah, who was unusually tall. If so, the other people were also tall, and the beasts and fowl of those generations were also tall until the world was struck by the flood! Moreover, the cubits here are the standard cubits of the Torah.⁵⁸See Erubin 3b.

ומכל החי מכל בשר, a reference to the living creatures on the dry land only.

ומכל החי מכל בשר, “and from all living creatures, all flesh, etc.” Nachmanides writes that it is a well known fact that the beasts are many and that there are innumerable sub-species to be found among them, not only huge creatures such as elephants, but millions of varieties of creepers, insects, etc. The need to bring specimens of each into the ark and to feed them all once they were inside, was a seemingly superhuman task. Clearly, the ark was not large enough to contain them all, except if G’d invoked some miracle. Although G’d could have reduced the size of these creatures for the duration of their stay in the ark, He wanted them to continue to live normally, so as to impress this and subsequent generations with the miracles G’d performed as part of Noach’s survival, so as to inspire later generations to choose the path of repentance once they had become guilty of sins. Furthermore, it is a principle of G’d’s intervention in laws of nature, that miracles are restricted to what could not be accomplished without them. Man is thus encouraged to do whatever he can to survive without relying on G’d’s intervention. by means of miracles.

Even the demons. [Rashi knows this] because it says afterwards, “From all flesh,” i.e., all that have flesh. Thus, “From all living things” comes to include even demons, which do not have flesh.

מכל החי, nach den Weisen: von allem Lebenskräftigen, solche, die nicht durch die auch in die Kreise der Tiere hinübergetragene Entartung in ihrer Lebenskraft geschwächt waren. Ebenso זכר ונקבה יהיו, nicht זכר ונקבה תביא sondern: ihr Charakter soll noch das reine, ungetrübte, unverderbte Männliche und Weibliche sein. Dasselbe wird wohl auch durch das im Raw Hirsch on Genesis 6: 20 wiederholte למינהו hervorgehoben. Solche Exemplare, in denen der Gattungscharakter noch unvermischt und unverfälscht geblieben, die ihrer Gattung noch rein angehörten. Es wird diese geschlechtliche Ungetrübtheit der zu rettenden Tierpaare unten VII. 2 noch geradezu durch איש ואשתו bezeichnet. Die Geschlechter, welche gerettet wurden, waren in so außerordentlichem Maße von Entartung frei geblieben, dass sie in diesem gehobenen Augenblicke, durch Gott gehoben, fast wie in einem Menschen ähnlichen Verhältnis zu einander zu betrachten waren. Der Grundquell der ganzen Entartung war ja: השחתת דרך, sowie die Wurzel der Rettung Noa׳s eben sein cran-Charakter gewesen.

ומכל החי....תביא, “and bring from all living species, etc.” According to Rashi the wording includes species of demons. In B’reshit Rabbah 31,13 Rabbi Aushiyah claims that the oblique wording of the Torah was exploited by disembodied spirits to demand entrance to the ARK. Noach refused them entry until they could appear with their partners. He used the fact that the Torah added the words מכל בשר, “from all that is flesh,” to deny entrance. Another version is that “Lie” begged for entry into the ark. When Noach heard this he demanded that “Lie” come with its partner. “Lie” chose the spiritual representative of all thieves as his partner. When this arch thief asked “Lie” what it would give him for appearing before Noach as its mate, “Lie” answered that it would give him everything it acquired through falsehood. They therefore entered the ark side by side. This is the origin of the well known proverb: “whatever is sown by falsehood is reaped by thievery.” A different version quotes Noach as tying that pair to the outside of the ark without permitting it to enter it. [Rashi, i.e. the author of the Midrash, was probably forced to give such an interpretation as we might have thought that if all living creatures died except for Noach and his family, how come there was still falsehood and thievery on earth even after the deluge. Ed.]

ומכל החי, “and of all living creatures, etc.” according to Rabbi Yehudah, the fully grown animal known as reem did not enter the ark as it was too tall, whereas not fully developed specimens, did enter. (Compare Matnot kehunah on B’reshit Rabbah 31,13. According to Rabbi Nechemyah, the mature pair of reems was tied by Noach to the outside of the ark. He bases himself on a verse in Job 39,10, which hints at the length of the legs of this kind of animal.

שנים מכל TWO OF EVERY SORT — Even of the least numerous amongst them there were not less than two—one male, the other female.

שנים מכל, Noach was told that these animals were to be admitted in pairs. G’d specified further, זכר ונקבה יהיו.. תביא אל התבה, after the animals which came of their own accord had been accommodated in the ark. What prompted some of these animals to come to Noach’s ark on their own? They were inspired by the same kind of imagination which unerringly enables them to find grazing land etc. G’d, no doubt, aided their imagination in this instance.

From the least of them. Rashi is answering the question: Does it not say a little later (7:2), “Take to yourself seven pairs”?

THOU SHALT BRING INTO THE ARK, TO KEEP THEM ALIVE WITH THEE. G-d thus commanded Noah that he concern himself with and help them in their entering the ark and that he strive on behalf of their existence even as he would for his own life.

להחיות אתך, to keep them alive with you by feeding them on a daily basis.

מהעוף למינהו OF THE FOWLS AFTER THEIR KIND— those that had kept to their own species and had not corrupted their way (taking the words to mean, “of the fowls that had kept to their own kind”). All these came of their own accord, but only those which the Ark was allowing to pass in did Noah permit to enter (Sanhedrin 108b).

TWO OF EVERY SORT SHALL COME UNTO THEE, TO KEEP THEM ALIVE. G-d thus informed Noah that two of every sort would come of their own accord, and he would not find it necessary to hunt for them in the mountains and distant lands, and he would bring them into the ark after that. At the actual narration [of their coming, Scripture] explains⁵⁹Genesis 7:16. that they came male and female; this is implied here. After that, He commanded him to take seven and seven of every clean beast.⁶⁰Ibid., 7:2. Concerning these, G-d did not say that they would come of their own accord but that Noah should take them.⁶¹The verse states: Of every clean beast thou shalt ‘take’ to thee seven and seven. Noah brought sacrifices after the flood from the clean beasts and fowl. (See Chapter 8, Verse 20.) The reason for this is that those who came to be saved and to keep their seed alive⁶²Chapter 7, Verse 3. did come of their own accord, but for those who were to be sacrificed as whole offerings, G-d did not decree that they come of their own accord to be slaughtered. Rather, Noah took them since the purpose of the command to take seven and seven was that Noah bring a sacrifice from them after the flood.
The meaning of the word “clean” is that the Holy One, blessed be He, explained to Noah the signs of ritual cleanliness for beast and fowl. Scripture, however, refers to it briefly by saying, “clean,” in accordance with the Torah.⁶³See Leviticus, Chapter 11. But Rashi wrote: “Clean, meaning that which in the future will be permitted to Israel as clean; we thus learn that Noah studied the Torah.”
From here we derive that the sacrifices of the sons of Noah⁶⁴See Seder Bereshith, Note 222. must also be only of the clean beast and the clean fowl. So also it is said of the sacrifice of Abel: of the first-born of his flock and of the fat thereof.⁶⁵Above, 4:4. However, all clean species are permissible for them to bring as sacrifices as it is written: And he took of every clean beast, and of every clean fowl, and offered burnt-offerings on the altar.⁶⁶Genesis 8:20. [Later, when the Torah was given, G-d] added a commandment to Israel that all their sacrifices be only of the beasts and of the herd,⁶⁷Leviticus 1:2. of the turtledoves and of the young pigeons.⁶⁸Ibid., Verse 14.
Of the fowl also of the heaven, seven and seven⁶⁹Genesis 7:3. — this means the clean fowl for the verse is a continuation of the verse above: [Of every ‘clean’ beast shalt thou take to thee seven and seven].⁷⁰Ibid., Verse 2.

מהעוף למינהו. From the birds according to their kind. It is peculiar that the birds are mentioned before the mammals in this list. If the list is in order of their respective importance, the mammals should have been mentioned first; if the list is in an ascending order the crawling creatures should have been mentioned first. Why does the Torah use this peculiar order? Perhaps the birds enjoy a certain distinction over the mammals because they multiply so profusely. It is interesting that only the "pure" birds multiply so profusely; the 24 categories of "impure" birds which are not fit for consumption by Jews do not multiply as profusely. We have a tradition (Chulin 63?) according to which 120 varieties of birds were found on the Temple Mount, all of which are sub-categories of the איה, the falcon. At any rate these birds are greatly outnumbered by the "pure" birds. The Torah lists only ten categories of mammals which may be consumed by Jews. Presumably this is the reason the Torah commanded Noach to have the birds enter the ark ahead of the mammals. The difference in the description of the birds as למינהו, and the mammals as למינה, indicates that there were more categories and sub-categories of birds (compare Rashi). The Torah lists the respective categories of creatures, i.e. birds, mammals, and crawling creatures according to their relative mobility.

מהעוף למחנהו, some from each species;

שנים מכל יבואו אליך,”two of each species will come to you, etc.” According to Nachmanides G’d tells Noach that these creatures will present themselves before Noach of their own volition, so that he did not have to go chasing after them in order to save their lives. When the Torah later on reports about the arrival of these beasts, it adds that they all came as a pair, male and female. (7,9) We need to resolve why, in the previous verse, G’d instructed Noach “to bring the beasts to him,” seeing they were going to come of their own volition. The instruction in verse 19 became operative only after the animals had presented themselves before Noach. Now he was to bring them into the ark and to assign to them their respective quarters. Moreover, the animals that were to have their lives saved came of their own volition. But the seven pairs of the pure animals that were to serve as sacrifices after the deluge did not come by themselves, but Noach was instructed to take them and bring them into the ark. (compare 7,2)

Came of their own accord. Rashi is saying that they all came, even the ones that corrupted their way. But Noach permitted only “those that the ark took in.” What forced Rashi to explain that they came of their own accord? The answer is: Noach would otherwise have to trap them during the 120 years he had. Perforce, Hashem would give him a sign to know which ones consorted with their own species, as one opinion in the Midrash indeed says. [But Scripture mentions no such sign, so this cannot be the simple meaning.] For if Noach had no sign other than the ark taking them in, [a problem would arise:] there are numerous rare species, found only in the deserts, mountains and forests, which are very difficult to trap. And each comes out in its own special season. After extended effort to trap a specimen, Noach would have to bring it to the ark to see if it is taken in — perhaps it did not consort with its own species, as “all flesh corrupted its way”! Thus all of Noach’s trouble would be for naught, and his whole life would not be long enough to trap each species many times. Therefore, Rashi explains that they “came of their own accord and all those that the ark took in.” (R. Yaakov Taryosh)

מהעוף למינהו ומן הבהמה למינה “including the feathered birds according to their various species and according to the fourlegged beasts according to each specific species.” Seeing that the birds had been created on the fifth day of creation and the mammals on the sixth day, they are listed here in that order.

ומן הבהמה למינה, this includes the free-roaming beasts.

יבאו, they will come on their own to the proximity of the ark, from where you will bring in the ones which qualify.

להחיות, we already explained the meaning of this word.

Take for yourself (or “from your own”). He was forbidden to take from others, even though everything was about to be destroyed. This would also increase the miracle since Noach surely did not possess enough to feed them all without a special blessing.

ואתה קח לך מכל מאכל, different menus for different species of creatures.

ואתה קח לך, seeing that they will come to you in order to survive, you will have to prepare food for them, each species according to the type of diet it is used to. Even the predators will not be allowed to eat flesh while in the ark but would have to subsist on a vegetarian diet. They had, after all, been used to such a diet immediately after they had been created, as we have already explained on Genesis 1,25.

מכל מאכל, “from every category of food;” seeing that the ark contained all the living creatures that consumed food, Noach had to store the kind of food that was eaten by all these various creatures. The reason was that some creatures refused to touch food that other creatures enjoyed eating.

ויעש נח THUS DID NOAH — This refers to the building of the Ark (Genesis Rabbah 31:14).

AND NOAH DID THUS; ACCORDING TO ALL THAT G-D HAD COMMANDED HIM, meaning that he constructed the ark and gathered the food. Scripture’s intent in saying, And Noah did… so did he, is to explain that he did not omit a thing from all that G-d had commanded him.

ויעש נח, Noach built the ark in accordance with all the instructions given to him by G’d. He built its dimensions of length, width and height exactly as he had been commanded. He built the many cabins, and collected the various types of plants and fruit to serve as food for the journey.

ויעש נח ככל אשר צוה אותו אלוקים, “Noach carried out all the instructions G’d had given him.” He constructed the ark, collected the food supplies, etc. The reason why the Torah appears to repeat itself in 7,5 where it again mentions that Noach had carried out his instructions, is to make us aware that he did not skip performing any part of G’d’s instructions to him.

ויעש נח, “Noach did, etc.” These words refer to Noach constructing the Ark. The next words i.e. כן עשה, “so he did,” refer to Noach bringing in the various species in pairs as well as stocking the Ark with the necessary food supply, the appropriate food for each species.

This refers to his constructing the ark. Rashi is answering the question: Doesn’t “Noach did so” imply that he entered the ark, as commanded? But afterwards it says (7:1), “Adonoy said to Noach, Come into the ark...” Clearly, Noach did not yet enter the ark! Perforce, “This refers to his constructing the ark.”

כן עשה, “so he did.” This is a reference to bringing all these various kinds of food inside the ark.