5786/2025
Parashat Noach opens with a well known description of Noach. The Pasuk states that נֹ֗חַ אִ֥ישׁ צַדִּ֛יק תָּמִ֥ים הָיָ֖ה בְּדֹֽרֹתָ֑יו אֶת־הָֽאֱלֹקם הִֽתְהַלֶּךְ־נֹֽחַ׃, Noach was a righteous and complete man in his generation. Noach walked with Hashem. The Gemara Sanhedrin (108a) famously debates what the the word בְּדֹֽרֹתָ֑יו, in his genration adds in our understanding of the pasuk?
אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: ״בְּדוֹרוֹתָיו״, וְלֹא בְּדוֹרוֹת אֲחֵרִים. וְרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמַר: ״בְּדוֹרוֹתָיו״, כָּל שֶׁכֵּן בְּדוֹרוֹת אֲחֵרִים.
Rabbi Yochanan says, in his generation, but not other generations, Reish Lakish says even more so in another generation.
And yet, the whole discussion is very strange. Why are we asking how good Noach would have been in different circumstances? Why do I care if he would have been better or worse in a different generation? He only had the circumstances that the generation he lived in afforded him. He had the challenges of his time and all we should care about is if he passed those.
The question should be: How good of a person was Noach? The answer seems to be he was pretty good, considering that Noach was a Tzaddik and the one Hashem selected to be the new father of humanity.
Rashi, however, is willing to quote this Gemara as the solution to the question.
יֵשׁ מֵרַבּוֹתֵינוּ דּוֹרְשִׁים אוֹתוֹ לְשֶׁבַח, כָּל שֶׁכֵּן אִלּוּ הָיָה בְדוֹר צַדִּיקִים הָיָה צַדִּיק יוֹתֵר; וְיֵשׁ שֶׁדּוֹרְשִׁים אוֹתוֹ לִגְנַאי, לְפִי דוֹרוֹ הָיָה צַדִּיק וְאִלּוּ הָיָה בְדוֹרוֹ שֶׁל אַבְרָהָם לֹא הָיָה נֶחְשָׁב לִכְלוּם
Some of our Rabbis interpret this to his praise, had he been in a generation of righteous people, he would have been even more righteous. And some interpret it to his denigration, in his generation he was righteous but had he been in the generation of Avraham he would have not been considered anything.
The Mefarshei Rashi have many questions on Rashi and the Gemara. They point out the opinion that wants to degenerate Noach is difficult if you just read the Pesukim. The Pasuk calls Noach a Tzaddik not once, but twice, meaning that Hashem thought he was Tzaddik. Not a single other person in all of Chumash does Hashem describe as a Tzaddik. There are people that refer to themselves as Tzaddikim, but that’s not really reliable. So if only Noach is referred to as a Tzaddik by Hashem, then why do Chazal feel that they can say he wasn’t such a great person? Secondly, why should we compare Noach to Avraham, shouldn’t we just judge each Tzaddik by his own actions and his own merits?
The Mefarshei Rashi are also bothered that Rashi does not quote the Gemara 100% correctly. The positive opinion states that had Noach lived in a generation of other Tzaddikim, he would have been more righteous. However, the negative opinion says that if Noach was in the generation of Avraham, then he would not have amounted to anything. This switch from Tzaddikim to Avraham is a little confusing for a few reasons. Firstly, it's not an apples to apples comparison. Comparing generic Tzaddikim to Avraham is not at all fair. Saying that Noach would not have been thought of as great in the generation of Avraham is not fair to Noach. Avraham was one of the greatest men to ever live. He is referred to by the Navi as אַבְרָהָ֥ם אֹהֲבִֽי, Avraham, My beloved (Isaiah 41:8). Saying that Noach was not as great as Avraham doesn’t really mean much. It’s like saying that someone isn’t as good a baseball player as Willie Mays was, almost no one is. All that means is he wasn’t one of the 5 greatest people of all time. But that’s not much of an insult; he could still be in the top 10. So what exactly is the negative that Rashi refers to? Secondly, why is Avraham’s generation different than Noach’s? There were no righteous people to influence Avraham or help him grow in his connection to Hashem. Thirdly, it's not true to say that ‘if Noach lived in the generation of Avraham’. Noach and Avraham did live at the same time. By looking at all the ages of births and death you’ll realize Noach died in the year 2006 since creation, and Avraham was born in the year 1948 (coincidence? Definitely not.) since creation. Which means that Avraham was 58 when Noach died. So technically, they did live in the same generation!
The answer to these questions stems from the reason that we learn about Noach and Avraham in the first place. Rashi, in his first comments in the Torah, asks why the Chumash doesn’t start from the first mitzvah. It’s clear from Rashi’s question that he understood that the Torah is the guidebook to life, and as such should have the rules of life, i.e. the mitzvos and doesn’t really need anything else. From his answer it is clear that he believes the stories also have what to teach us about how to live our lives. Each story section fulfills the same purpose as the mitzvos sections albeit in a different way. Hashem included each story, not as world history, as Hashem’s goal was not to tell us about the major events of the past. Rather each story is included because Hashem wanted us to learn something from each one. The Netziv writes in his introduction to Sefer BeReishit, that one of the goals of Sefer BeReishit is for us to have role models; To have great men and women that we can look up to and emulate. It is obvious that the Avot: Avraham, Yitzchak and Yaakov are great men for us to look to as guides. Each had a different way of serving Hashem: Avraham with Chesed, Yitzchak with Gevurah and Yaakov with Emet. On the other hand, there are also people we are supposed to learn from what not to do. Like Kayin, don’t be like him, a jealous murderer. The question the Gemara and Rashi are really asking is what about Noach. Is Noach included in our list of role models, someone to look up to and emulate, or not?
The first opinion believes that Noach’s model of Avodat Hashem is something that we should learn from and would be good to emulate. Noach lived in an awful generation, everyone around him was a terrible person. And yet, Noach was a Tzaddik meaning that Noach had strong convictions and he was able to not be influenced by those around him. That is something that we should emulate. We too should also learn to cling to our beliefs despite what the world around us believes. We too should not be influenced by the moral depravity that surrounds us and permeates the modern society around us. Rather, we should cleave to Hashem and follow his Torah.
The second opinion in the Gemara might agree that Noach was a good person. He is someone that Hashem testifies about his righteousness. However, that does not mean that he is someone we should emulate. His righteousness was circumstantial and we don’t live in his circumstances. If he was only righteous as compared to the people he lived with, that isn’t something we should strive for. We shouldn’t just want to be better than those around us. We want to be objectively great. That’s how the Gemara understands the Pasuk. The denigration is not to Noach himself as a person, but to Noach the hero, as the man I strive to be like, the role model.
Rashi, however, adds something more. Rashi recognizes that there is 1 other person in Chumash for whom the word תמים appears: Avraham. When Hashem tell command Avraham to have a Brit Milah, he starts by telling Avraham: הִתְהַלֵּ֥ךְ לְפָנַ֖י וֶהְיֵ֥ה תָמִֽים (Breishis 17:1). The word תָמִֽים is only used in reference to these to great men, meaning that the Torah is telling us to compare the two. But the word הִתְהַלֵּ֥ךְ appears by both, also a very unique word in the Torah, describing how each walked with Hashem. However, there is a difference between the way Noach and Avraham are described. Noach is described as walking אֶת־הָֽאֱלֹקם, with Hashem, while Avraham is לְפָנַי, before Hashem. Rashi, in our Parashah notes the similarity and difference and comments that Noach was only able to walk with Hashem, meaning he needed Hashem’s support to reach his level of righteousness, while Avraham was able to become a Tzaddik on his own. Therefore, Rashi changes the text of the Gemara just a bit, comparing Noach and Avraham just as the Torah is telling us to. The way Rashi presents the opinion isn’t that Noach isn’t worthy, rather just that Avraham is better. Why strive to be Noach when you could strive to be Avraham? As compared to Avraham, says Rashi, Noach wasn’t really that great. Noach’s great achievement was blocking out the influence of the society around him. Avraham did not just achieve greatness in a harsh environment, he actively fought against it. Avraham had the same challenges that Noach did. There was moral depravity and Avodah Zara in his generation, and there was no role model for Avraham to look for. Noach, just as he did when he was building the Teivah had no influence on the world around him. So Avraham, for all intents and purposes lived in a different generation. He also had to cleave to Hashem, despite the outside world pushing against what he knew was right. This second opinion is telling us that personal growth is not enough. The first opinion says that it's a good thing to be like Noach and ignore the world around us to connect to Hashem. However, the second opinion says that that isn’t good enough; We need to do more than that. We need to be Avraham. We need to have a positive influence on the world around us. We should not just care about cleaving to Hashem but we should help others to as well.