Genesis · Chapter 8

And Hashem remembered Noah, and all the wild animals, and all the cattle that were with him in the ark; and Hashem caused a wind to pass over the earth, and the waters subsided.

ויזכור אלהים AND GOD REMEMBERED— This Divine Name really signifies the God of Strict Justice but it is transformed into Divine Mercy through the prayers of the righteous, whilst the evil practised by wicked people transforms Divine Mercy into Strict Justice, as it is said (Genesis 6:5) “And the Lord ('ה) saw that the wickedness of man was great” and (Genesis 5:7) “And the Lord ('ה) said, “I will blot out etc.”— yet in these passages the Name ('ה) is מדת רחמים, that signifying Divine Mercy (Genesis Rabbah 33:3). ‘ויזכור אלהים את נח וגו AND GOD REMEMBERED NOAH etc. — What did He remember regarding the cattle? The merit that no perversion of their way had been seen amongst them previously to the Flood, and that they lived apart in the Ark. ויעבר אלהים רוח AND GOD MADE A WIND (or SPIRIT) TO PASS — A spirit of consolation and relief passed before Him. על הארץ OVER THE EARTH — Because of what was happening on earth. וישכו AND THE WATERS ASSUAGED — The word occurs again (Esther 2:1), “when the wrath of the king was assuaged (כשוך)”, and it means there abatement of anger.

AND G-D REMEMBERED NOAH, AND EVERY LIVING THING, AND ALL THE CATTLE. The remembrance of Noah was because he was a perfectly righteous man, and He had made a covenant with him to save him. The word “Noah” here includes his children that were there with him. Scripture did not mention them specifically, though, for they were saved by his merit. However, the remembrance stated concerning beast and cattle was not on account of merit, for among living creatures there is no merit or guilt save in man alone. But the remembrance concerning them was Because He remembered His holy word which He had spoken, causing the world to come into existence, and the Will which was before Him at the creation of the world arose before Him and He desired the existence of the world with all the species that He created therein. Thus He now saw fit to bring them forth so that they should not perish in the ark. Scripture does not mention the fowl and the creeping things for the remembrance of the living thing is similar to their remembrance, and the companion thereof telleth concerning it. That is, since the remembrance of the fowl and creeping things would be the same type of remembrance as that of all animals—i.e., the remembrance of His holy word—one implies the other.

"And God remembered Noah" — his sons and the wives are included within Noah, since he is the principal one. "And all the living" is a collective term encompassing the beasts of the field, the birds of the heavens, and all that creeps upon the earth. The meaning of "remembered" is the oath He had sworn to Noah. "And God caused a wind to pass" — He caused it to pass continually. "And the waters subsided" — they came to rest and did not prevail any further; similarly: "and the king's wrath subsided" (Esther 7:10). The dagesh in the kaf [of וַיִּשְׁכּוּ] is due to the absence of the ayin [as a root letter], and both forms [וַיִּשְׁכּוּ and שָׁכְכָה] belong to the qal conjugation.

ויזכר אלוקים את נח. G'd remembered Noach. The reason the Torah was not content to mention that G'd remembered Noach but added that He remembered all the beasts that were in the ark with him may have been that the animals by themselves already warranted that G'd should remember them. Another reason is that the Torah includes in that statement that G'd considered all the hard and menial work Noach was subjected to in looking after all the animals under his care. G'd had pity on Noach. The Torah wanted to emphasise that G'd's major concern was Noach and not the animals. ויעבד אלוקים רוח על הארץ וישבו המים. G'd made a wind pass over the earth and the waters subsided. The Torah here wishes to tell us that G'd had commanded the waters to become tumultuous just as He had commanded the waters during the six days of creation to swarm with fish, etc. Here G'd commanded the waters to conduct themselves with their full power; as a result of that the remains of the creatures which had died disintegrated completely. Had it not been for this fact there would have been no point in verse 24 telling us that the waters swelled on earth for 150 days. After all, the remains of all creatures had already disintegrated previously. Until G'd remembered Noach (our verse) the waters had no reason to act differently than the instructions they had received from G'd.

ויזכור אלקים את נח, “G-d remembered Noach;” G-d remembered that for a full year Noach had fed the entire animal kingdom that was with him in the ark, playing “waiter” for them. וישכו המים, “the waters subsided.” The wording proves that the waters were almost boiling hot. [Subsiding, meaning that they had bubbled previously. Ed.] The expression שככ is used also for King Ahasverus’ angers subsiding in Esther 7,10. Compare Sanhedrin 108 on that verse.

ויזכר אלוקים את נח, “G-d remembered Noach, etc.” It would have been more appropriate for the Torah to write that “G-d remembered Noach and his sons, etc.” After all, we know that they too were beneficiaries of His presence since the Torah wrote in 9,8 “G-d spoke to Noach and to his sons, etc.” Why then did the Torah here mention only Noach as the one to whom G-d spoke? It is possible to understand the word את in front of the word נח as a reference to his sons. This would certainly not be the first time that the word את is used as a רבוי, a word which alludes to something additional which the Torah had not spelled out in detail. Seeing that Noach’s sons were extensions of his own self, the Torah did not see fit to mention them separately at this stage. We find a similar occurrence in Exodus 1,1 where the Torah mentions את יעקב, and Shemot Rabbah interprets the word את as a reference to all the people who descended to Egypt because they were “extensions” of Yaakov. This meant that sons and wives were automatically included in the people whose fate G-d had “remembered.” As to the fact that the Torah specifically refers to the animals and all other creatures in the Ark with Noach, something which at first glance makes it appear as if their fates were of greater concern to G-d than that of Noach’s wife, his sons and their wives, this is not so. We distinguish between השגחה כללית, and השגחה פרטית, G-d’s general overall concern and supervision of their fate, and G-d’s specific individual supervision of someone’s fate. Whereas the animals, etc., qualified for G-d’s general concern, Noach and his family qualified for G-d’s specific concern. Hence the word את is an indication that G-d’s specific concern extended also to the members of Noach’s family. Alternatively, the reason Torah chose to mention G-d’s concern for the domestic beasts and the free-roaming animals was to draw our attention to the fact that He displayed no such concern for the birds; hence the birds are not mentioned in this verse. The reason may have been that seeing that the mammals were all created on the sixth day of creation, i.e. the same day as man, they shared special consideration by G-d with man; the birds which had been created already on the fifth day did not enjoy this distinction. This may also be reflected in the wording אשר אתו בתיבה “who were with him in the Ark.” The Torah wanted to stress that there was something that man and the other mammals shared to the exclusion of other phenomena on earth, namely G-d’s especial concern for their fates. It is noteworthy that the same word את occurs in the narrative of the Torah when it describes both man’s and the mammal’s creation on the sixth day. Please compare Genesis 1,24-25. The words אשר אתו in our verse here may be an allusion to that verse in 1,24.

ויזכור אלהים את נח "And God remembered Noah". According to Rashi: He (God) remembered them for sticking to their kind, etc. And the Ramban wrote: "to Noah" (את נח) that he remembered his righteousness and made a covenant with him to save him, and Noah would include his seed with him, but the remembrance of animals and beasts is not their right, that they have neither right nor punishment, except that he reminded them of his holy word that he said, and the world and his will were In the creation of the world. He (Noach) came before him (God) and (God) desired their existence and remembered to take them out so that they could not be anymore in the ark. ויסוכו המים, “the waters subsided.” The expression is parallel to the one in Esther 7,10 which describes the king’s anger as subsiding with the words וחמת המלך שככה, the letters ס and ש being interchangeable letters on frequent occasions. Alternatively, the word is parallel to the root סתר as in הסתר, meaning “hiding, a form of receding.” According to סדר עולם, the waters that had come forth from the bowels of the earth during the deluge, now receded back to their habitat within the bowels of the globe.

And the springs of the deep were sealed, and the windows of the heavens, and the rain from the heavens was restrained.

ויסכרו מעינות AND THE FOUNTAINS … WERE STOPPED –– When they were opened, it was stated that all fountains were opened (7:11), whilst here the word all is omitted: the reason is that such of them as were essential to the world were left unstopped, such as the hot springs of Tiberias and their like (Sanhedrin 108a). ויכלא means was restrained. withheld, as (Psalms 40:12) “Thou wilt not withhold (תכלא) thy mercies” and (Genesis 23:6) “None of us will withhold (יכלה) from thee.’’

"And they were stopped up" [וַיִּסָּכְרוּ] — like וַיִּסָּגְרוּ, "and they were closed." The kaf and gimel do not interchange as such, but rather these are two distinct words that share the same meaning; for letters do not interchange except for the letters alef-heh-vav-yod, and samekh with shin. "And the rain was restrained" — it was held back within its storehouse.

ויסכדו מעינות תהום. The wells of the deep closed up. The Torah here hints that the waters beneath the earth had risen in proportion to the rain descending from the heavens. These two phenomena go hand in hand. Our verse alludes to this fact by mentioning the withdrawal of the waters beneath the earth as occurring simultaneously with the cessation of the rain from the heavens. We have pointed out previously that these two types of waters complement each other, enabling growth to occur (Taanit 28).

ויסכרו מעינות תהום רבה, “The subterranean sluices of the earth were shut down;” Rashi points out that the absence here of the word: כל, “all,” i.e. all these sluices, is proof that some of these springs were left open for healing purposes so that man could enjoy them in the future. [Spas such as Marienbad, Karlsbad, Leukerbad, etc. Ed.] The hot springs of Tiberias are quoted by Rashi as an example. If you were to ask that according to the opinion quoted in the Midrash that the deluge did not affect the land of Israel, whence did the hot springs in Tiberias originate? 1) There are similar hot mineral springs all over the world, Tiberias just happens to be the only such in the Holy Land. 2) When the Torah first wrote about these springs having been opened at the time of the deluge, (7,11) when the Torah there spoke about “all the springs,” it clearly included the hot springs of Tiberias, although rain may not have fallen in the Holy Land during that period. When the springs closed, the ones in Tiberias were one of the several that remained open. ויסכרו מעיינות תהום, this is not really the logical place where we would have expected to find this verse. Rather, we would have expected it after 7,17, before continuing with that the waters continued to rise further. The reason it was inserted here is that the Torah wished to mention together all the causes that contributed to the termination of the deluge.

ויכלא הגשם, “the rain ceased.” Here the Torah cannot refer to the rain that descended as part of the deluge, seeing that this rain had stopped already on the 27th of Kislev, after 40 days. The Torah reports here that during this period of over 200 days after the first of Sivan and the family of Noach and the animals leaving the ark, no normal rainfall occurred. The strong prevailing winds at this time prevented any rain clouds from forming and descending. The purpose of the wind was to gradually restore the atmosphere to its traditional dryness.

And the waters receded from upon the earth, going and returning, and the waters diminished at the end of one hundred and fifty days.

מקצה חמשים ומאת יום AFTER THE END OF ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY DAYS they began to decrease: that was on the first day of Sivan. How so? The rains ceased to fall on the twenty-seventh day of Kislev — you have three days left in Kislev, and the 29 days of Tebeth make 32, and Shebat, Adar, Nisan and Eyar have together 118, making altogether 150.

"And the waters returned" — downward beneath the earth, to their proper place, at the end of one hundred and fifty days. This calculation, too, they knew by way of prophecy. Those who say: behold, we find one hundred and fifty days equal to five months, and this is evidence to us that these are solar months — they have not spoken rightly regarding their own argument, for two days are lacking. Similarly, the one who says that the reckoning was done according to the intercalated calendar, and who places the second month as Marcheshvan so that the year would be complete — why all this? Even if it were written that Noah reckoned by the sun, or that the year began from Tishrei, the appointed times were not given through Noah. Furthermore, one could speak at length about the resting of the ark, and therefore none of these explanations profit or save, for they are vanity (cf. 1 Samuel 12:21).

וישובו המים מעל הארץ. The waters retreated from the earth's surface. The waters which had flooded the earth kept retreating towards the oceans. They decreased naturally, starting 150 days after the onset of the deluge.

ויחסרו המים, “the waters diminished;” according to Rashi, this process began 150 days after the outbreak of the deluge, on the first day of the month of Sivan. Rashi arrives at this calculation from the Torah’s report that the deluge (rains) began on the 17th day of the second month (Cheshvan) the rains which lasted for 40 days having stopped falling on the 27th day of Kislev. It is reasonable to assume that according to Rashi’s calculation no rain fell on the 28th of Kislev, so that day was already one of the 150 days during which the water level on the earth kept rising without additional rainfall. On the other hand, when the Torah had written in verse 12 of chapter 7 that the rainfall persisted for 40 days, the impression given is that the twenty eighth day of Kislev was still a rainy day, as Rashi specifically states that the first day mentioned in the Torah did not count, as the rain had started during the daylight hours, i.e. long after the day had already commenced. The Torah describes the sky as breaking open during the daylight hours. According to this calculation the rains would only have stopped during the 28th of Kislev. We are forced therefore to understand Rashi’s words as follows: “the first day of rainfall mentioned is the Torah is not to be considered as a “day” in the same sense as all the other days, seeing that all the other “days” mentioned included the preceding night; this day did not include the preceding night.”When you follow this approach you can understand Rashi’s saying that the 17th of Cheshvan was the first day on which rain fell and continued falling for 40 days. There were 12 days left in that month, followed by 27 days in the month of Kislev, all of which included the preceding nights until daybreak on the 28th day of Kislev. This tallies with what the Torah wrote: “The rain (came down) onto the earth for 40 days and forty nights.” (7,12) When the Torah referred to 150 days, these days do not need to include the preceding nights, as the Torah itself states: “it was at the end of 150 days.”(8,3). In other words: from daybreak on the 28th of Kislev until nightfall on the first day of Sivan. If you wish to count the 150 days as whole days including the preceding nights, you would have to count from the morning of the 28th of Kislev until the morning until the morning of the first day of Sivan, giving you a total of 150 days and 150 nights. Even if you were to deduct the night of the 28th of Kislev according to Rashi ג something irrelevant to the descent of rain for 40 days, the first of Sivan as the seventh month the first of Sivan, as stated in the Torah, would still be the beginning of the seventh month after the beginning of the deluge. [The significance of the number “seven” as a number signaling beneficial developments is most important in Judaism, Ed.] The reason why the manner in which the Torah reported these details is significant is because if we were to start the count of the deluge (40 days of rainfall) from Cheshvan, the ark would not have come to rest on Mount Arrarat on the seventeenth of the seventh month (Sivan) from the daylight period of the seventeenth, but on the eighteenth. Our author demonstrates how this would have contradicted other dates mentioned later in the account of the gradual abating of the waters. The most important date mentioned is that on which the ark came to rest on solid ground, the first day of the first month of the 601st year of Noach’s life, i.e. on New Year’s day according to the Jewish calendar. It signaled a new and more propitious beginning in the history of mankind. On that day the waters had dried from the surface of the earth. [as distinct from “dry” as opposed to “muddy.” Ed.]

And the ark came to rest in the seventh month, on the seventeenth day of the month, upon the mountains of Kardu.

בחדש השביעי IN THE SEVENTH MONTH — viz., Sivan, which is the seventh from Kislev in which the rains stopped falling. בשבעה עשר יום ON THE SEVENTEENTH DAY — From here you may infer that the Ark was submerged in the water to a depth of eleven cubits. For it is written (next verse) “In the tenth month on the first day of the month the tops of the mountains were seen” and this was Ab which is the tenth month after Cheshvan — after the rain began to fall. Now the waters were 15 cubits high above the mountains so that they subsided from the first of Sivan to the first of Ab 15 cubits for those 60 intervening days, which is one cubit each four days. Consequently by the sixteenth of Sivan they had subsided only 4 cubits, and since the Ark rested on Ararat on the next day, you may learn that it was submerged eleven cubits in the waters which were then still above the mountain tops (Genesis Rabbah 33:7).

AND THE ARK RESTED IN THE SEVENTH MONTH, ON THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF THE MONTH. Rashi wrote: “From here you may infer that the ark was submerged in the water to a depth of eleven cubits.” This he wrote on the basis of the calculation written in his commentaries, and it is so found in Bereshith Rabbah 3:10. But since in certain places Rashi minutely examines Midrashic traditions and for the same verses also takes the trouble to explain the simple meanings of Scripture, he has thus given us permission to do likewise for there are seventy ways of interpreting the Torah, and there are many differing Midrashim among the words of the Sages. And so I say that this calculation which they have mentioned does not fit into the language of Scripture unless we bear with that which explains And the ark rested in the seventh month as referring to that day mentioned above [in Verses 2-3] when the rain was withheld and the waters receded from the earth and decreased continually. [This interpretation of the seventh month is] unlike the counting of the second month mentioned in the beginning of the section, [which Rashi explains there as being “the second month” of the creation calendar], and unlike the counting stated at the end of the section [in Verse 13: in the first month, which Rashi similarly explains as being “the first month” of the creation calendar]! And how is it possible that in the second verse Scripture should immediately retract [from using the withholding of the rain as a reference point for counting] and state, until the tenth month, and proceed to another reference point, counting it, as Rashi explains, as the tenth month with reference to the coming of the rains! The evidence Rashi brings from the submergence of the ark in the waters is no proof for he attributes an equal decrease of water to each of the days — namely, a cubit every four days — and it is known in nature concerning the decrease of water that a great river which decreases at first a cubit every four days will at the end decrease four cubits in a day. Thus according to this calculation of Rashi, on the first day of the month of Ab the tops of the mountains were seen, and on the first day of Tishri the earth dried. Thus in sixty days the waters decreased the entire height of the high mountains consisting of many thousands of cubits, [surely a greater rate than four cubits a day, as Rashi would have it]! Besides, when Noah sent forth the dove on the seventeenth day of the month of Ellul, (See Verses 5-6). This brings us to the tenth of Ellul. Seven days later, on the seventeenth day of Ellul, he sent forth the dove. the waters were yet on the face of the entire earth, and the trees were covered, and in a matter of twelve days the whole earth dried! And by way of reason, if the ark was submerged in the waters eleven cubits, that being more than a third of its height [which was thirty cubits], it would have sunk because it was wide at the bottom and finished to a cubit at the top, contrary to the structure of ships, and there was also in it great weight! From the simple interpretation of Scripture it appears that the hundred and fifty days mentioned in connection with the prevailing of the waters include the forty days of the coming down of the rains since the main increase and prevailing of the waters took place during these days. Thus the waters began decreasing on the seventeenth day of Nisan, This is contrary to Rashi, who said that the decrease of the waters began forty days later on the first of Sivan. and thirty days later — the seventeenth day of the month Iyar, which was the seventh month from the time the rain began to fall — the ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat. Seventy-three days later, on the first of Ab, which was the tenth month from the time the rain began to fall, the tops of the mountains were seen. We have thus made a small correction in the interpretation of the language of Scripture, [namely, that all counting begins from the time the rain began to fall]. But the correct interpretation appears to me to be that the hundred and fifty days were from the seventeenth day of the second month, namely, the month of Marcheshvan, to the seventeenth day of the seventh month, namely, the month of Nisan, and that was the day when the ark rested on the mountains of Ararat. For then G-d caused a strong east wind to pass all the night and made the waters dry land, Also see Verse 1 here in Chapter 8. meaning that they decreased very much, and the ark rested. The proof for this is that Scripture does not say here, “and the waters decreased on such a month and on such a day and the waters decreased continually until the seventh month, and the ark rested, etc.,” as it said concerning the other decrease when the tops of the mountains were seen, for on the very day the waters began decreasing, the ark rested. The order of events in this matter was thus: on the day the rain began to fall all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of the heavens were opened and the rain came down for forty days. During that time the waters prevailed fifteen cubits above [the summits of all the mountains]. The rain stopped at the end of forty days, but “the fountains of the deep” and “the windows of the heavens” remained open. The atmosphere was very damp, and the whole earth was full of water, not like waters poured down a precipice, nor ever to become dried. And they stood thus in their power until one hundred and fifty days from the day the rain began were completed. Then G-d caused a very powerful wind to pass through the heavens and over the earth, and the fountains of the deep were stopped for the water that flowed from them returned to its place until the deep filled up as it was before the flood, and the openings of its fountains were locked, as were “the windows of the heavens.” And the air was dried very much by a drying wind, and the water on the earth was licked up. Thus the waters decreased exceedingly on that day, and the ark, which was submerged in the waters about two to three cubits, rested. Seventy-three days after that — on the first day of the tenth month, namely, the month of Tammuz — the tops of the mountains were seen. At the end of forty additional days — on the tenth day of the eleventh month, Ab — Noah opened the window of the ark, and three weeks later the dove left him; thirty days later, he removed the covering of the ark. AND G-D MADE A WIND TO PASS OVER THE EARTH. This means that there was a great and powerful wind coming out from the bowels of the earth over the face of the deep and hovering over the waters, and the fountains of the deep were stopped thereby. This is so since Scripture does not say, “and G-d made a wind to pass over the waters.” AND THE WATERS ASSUAGED (‘VAYASHOKU’). This means that the waters which were flowing from the deep subsided. It is the same expression as, Then the king’s wrath ‘shachachah’ (assuaged), meaning that his anger subsided. Or it may be that this is an expression of a thing being concealed and swallowed up. Thus the verse teaches that the waters of the deep were swallowed up in their place. And so did the Rabbis say in Seder Olam: The Seder Olam (Order of the World) is a historical record of events from the time of creation to the destruction of the Second Temple. It was authored by Rabbi Yosei, a disciple of Rabbi Akiba. “The waters that went up were dried by the wind, and those that went down were swallowed in their place.” AND THE RAINS FROM THE HEAVENS WERE WITHHELD. This means that no more rain came down until they [Noah and his family and all living creatures] went out of the ark for by this wind [which G-d made to pass over the earth] the heavens became as iron. Neither dew nor rain came down, the air lost its moisture, and the waters dried up for the rain of the flood completely stopped after the fortieth day. AND THE WATERS RETURNED FROM OFF THE EARTH CONTINUALLY. The verse states that the waters decreased gradually until the face of the ground was dried up. And after the end of a hundred and fifty days the waters decreased. This is connected with the following verse, And the ark rested, thus stating that on that day there was a great decrease in the waters which enabled the ark to rest [on the mountains of Ararat], as I have explained.

.בחודש השביעי, “in the seventh month.” The “seventh” month mentioned here is the month of Sivan starting with Kislev, the month during which the rains had ceased. On the tenth of the first month (verse 5) the first mountain tops became visible to Noach. This was the month of Av in our calendar, which is the tenth month of the year starting with Cheshvan the month during which the rain started falling. This is how Rashi understands the text of the Torah. If you were to argue that the year of the deluge could have been a year which had 13 months, something easily computed, the whole calculation is erroneous. From the data in the Torah, 1656 years had elapsed since the creation of Adam. We observe a cycle of 19 years during which 7 years are leap years, i.e. years of 13 months. A calculation would reveal that the year of the deluge would have been the third leap year during such a cycle. The result would be that the month of Sivan would not be the seventh but the eighth month of that particular year. According to this calculation the deluge would have commenced instead of in the 1656th year, in the year following. A different interpretation of the data provided by the Torah: The calculation of the year of the deluge is based on the year of tohu, the period preceding the creation of Adam. If so the year of the deluge was not a leap year. A third possible approach to the data provided by the Torah on the timing of the deluge: the year of the deluge was not included in calendar calculations of world history, according to Rabbi Yochanan in Bereshit Rabbah 33,3, as the planets in heaven did not describe their regular orbits during that period. Rabbi Yonathan responded to that statement by Rabbi Yochanan, that while the planets did not perform their function during that year, this does not mean that the year is to be considered as not having occurred. ותנח התבה בחדש השביעי בשבעה עשר יום, “the ark came to rest on the seventeenth day of the seventh month.” According to Rashi, we learn from this verse that the ark was deep in the water to a depth of 11 cubits. If you were to counter that the Torah reported that the tops of the mountains had become visible on the first day of Av, and that by the first day of Tishrey nature had resumed to function as usual, as we know from verse 13, this would suggest that during the preceding 60 days the water level had dropped precipitously, and there are certainly many mountains that are higher than 15 cubits, so that the water level must have receded by a whole cubit every four days, how could the ark still have been in eleven cubits of water? We would have to answer that the (air surrounding mountains is measured by different yardsticks than the earth upon which they rise, so that all of the mountains and the waters surrounding them receded totally during those 60 days. The waters in the airspace above the level of the mountains receded at a different rate of speed. Once the waters had dropped below the mountainous regions, they retreated at the rate of one cubit per day. The proof that this interpretation is true is the fact that we do not encounter the expression חסרון, diminution, reduction, when the Torah speaks of the mountain tops having become visible again. This teaches that a minor abatement of the waters was not deemed worthy of comment. Rashi also comments: “if you were to interpret the word שביעי, “seventh month,” as referring to the month of Sivan, as referring to the period during which the waters abated, how could you understand the line: “the ark came to rest in the seventh month of the cumulative abatement of the waters as occurring on the seventeenth of the month?” At that time the waters had not yet even stopped increasing in their inundation of the surface of the earth? We had already proved that the waters inundated progressively more parts of the earth commencing with the cessation of the rain for 150 days! This day only concluded on the first day of Sivan! This was the day when the deluge reached its crest! Every day thereafter was part of the recovery from the deluge. According to Rashi, the relevant dates of the story of the deluge are as follows: “in the second month of the year. i.e. the month of Cheshvan, which according to the Talmud in Rosh Hashanah 12 is the second month of the year, the deluge commenced. According to the compilation of a well known historical text relied upon by our sages, known as seder olam, the sages accepted the view of Rabbi Eliezer concerning the Torah report of the deluge, whereas they accepted the view expressed by Rabbi Joshua, concerning the calculations of the seasons of the year. According to this view both the rains and the opening of subterranean wells commenced on the 17th day of the month of Cheshvan, on the morning of that day. Both events continued until the morning of the 28th day of Kislev. At that point both rain and waters from subterranean parts of the globe ceased, but the inundation was felt as increasing until the ark‘s bottom was 15 cubits above the top of the highest mountain. As a result the ark kept on moving. The process of waters rising continued from the morning of the 28th of Kislev until sundown on the first day of Sivan. This was followed immediately by the verse: ויזכור אלוקים את נח, that G-d remembered Noach, etc. (8,1) revealing that as from that day on the waters receded at the end of 150 days. (verse 3) The ark running aground occurred 7 days later on the 17th day of the seventh month, i.e. the 17th of Sivan.(verse 3). It was the seventh month after the rains had commenced to fall. The waters kept receding after the rains had ceased (verse 5) from the first of Sivan until the month of Av, the tenth month after the rains had commenced descending on the earth. On the first day of the tenth month the tops of the highest mountains became visible. 40 days later on the tenth day of Ellul, Noach opened the window of the ark and sent out the raven. The raven not having returned, Noach sent out the pigeon after having waited for seven days. (according to Rashi). The pigeon returned to the ark not having found a foothold outside of it. Noach waited another seven days before sending out the pigeon again. This time the pigeon returned on the evening of the same day carrying part of an olive leaf in its beak. Some commentators believe that this leaf came from Mount Olives in the land of Israel. (Rabbi Levi in Bereshit Rabbah 33,6 according to the view that the rains did not flood the soil of the Land of Israel) The Scriptural basis for this view is found in Ezekiel 22,24: לא גושמה ביום זעם, “which was not rained upon on the day of anger.” Noach then waited for another seven days before dispatching a pigeon a third time. That time the pigeon did not return to the ark. Immediately after this, the Torah reports, (8,13) that the waters on earth had dried as of the first day of the month of Tishrey in the 601st year of Noach’s life. Finally, on the 27th day of Cheshvan, (57 days later) the soil was dry enough for man and beast to walk on without sinking into mud. Some commentators wonder what forced Rashi to state that the words: “it was at the end of forty days,” in 8,6 refer to 40 days after the tops of the mountains had become visible. If correct, why would the pigeon not have found a foothold on earth then? After all, 47 days had elapsed since that time before Noach sent out the pigeon. Some commentators dismiss this argument saying that since no actual land surfaces were visible, the pigeon did not find a suitable place to rest. We may assume that Rashi accepted the report of the Torah as following events chronologically so that the date on which the pigeon finally decided to remain outside the ark was on the first of Tishrey when the surface of the earth appeared dry, [capable of supporting the weight of a little bird. Ed.] Some commentators begin the count of 150 days from the first day the rains had commenced, i.e. from the 17th day of Cheshvan. Those days accordingly would include the 40 days of incessant rainfall. They consider the seventh month, Iyar as already a month during which the waters receded, just as we consider the tenth month as the month during which the waters receded. Their interpretation of the Torah’s report, commencing with 8,18: “the waters grew more powerful,” is thus: starting with the 17th of Cheshvan the water level on earth kept rising for a continuous 150 days culminating on the 20th day of Nissan. On that day the tide was turned and the waters began to recede. The ark came to rest on Mount Arrarat in the month of Iyar, i.e. the seventh month during which the waters were receding, on the 17th of that month. The waters continued to recede until the tenth month continuously, and during the tenth month of their retreat on the on the first of that month the tops of the tallest mountains became visible. The 15 cubits of water which had covered the tallest mountains for 95 days, between the 20th of Nissan until the 1st day of Av, had retreated at the rate of 1 cubit every 6 and a half days between the 20th of Nissan and the 16th day of Iyar, whereas the 11 cubits of the ark which were beneath the water level, retreated during the 7 days between the 17th of Iyar and the 1st day of Av, at the rate of one cubit every 6 and a half days. Some commentators explain the conclusion of this section in accordance with what we have learned in Seder Olam, which addresses the meaning of the paragraph commencing with: “it was at the end of 40 days (8,6)” as referring to 40 days which commenced with the first day in Sivan and concluded on the 10th day of Tammuz. According to that calculation, Noach immediately opened the window of the ark on that day and dispatched the raven. He then waited for seven days before dispatching the pigeon. He waited another seven days before dispatching the pigeon again. The reason why the pigeon on that occasion did not return was that it had found room on a top of a mountain that had been revealed in the meantime. The day under discussion was the first day of the month of Av, as already mentioned, seeing that the Torah had written that the tops of the mountains became visible on the first of the tenth month (8,5). Av is the tenth month of the year if the month during which the deluge started is considered as the “first month.” According to this method of counting, any part of a month is considered as if it were a full month. On the other hand, the month of Elul is never considered as the tenth month following Kislev during which the rains ceased, for if so, why when Noach dispatched a bird a third time would the pigeon not have returned to the ark seeing that according the calculation the tops of the mountains had not yet reappeared until the first of the month of Elul? Do not query the verse commencing with the words: והמים הלוך וחסור, “and the waters continued to diminish,” (8,5) by asking by what yardstick Noach decided on when to dispatch another bird, this is no problem for once the process of waters receding had commenced until the ark had come to rest on Mount Arrarat, Noach could confidently expect that with the passage of another week the chances of land appearing had increased. Between the first day of Av and the until the first day of Tishrey all the waters remaining from the deluge had been absorbed by the earth, and by the 27th of the month of Cheshvan the earth had become dry enough to walk on and to build on.

ותנח התבה בחדש השביעי בשבעה עשר יום לחודש על הרי אררט, “The Ark came to rest on the mountain range of Arrarat on the seventeenth day of the seventh month.” The day on which the Ark “landed” on that mountain range was the seventeenth day of the month of Nissan. [This is based on the view of Nachmanides that whenever the Torah here speaks of the seventh or the tenth month, this is calculated from the day the universe was created and not from the date the deluge began.] When the Torah wrote that the waters kept increasing for one hundred and fifty days (7,24), this describes a process which had commenced on the seventeenth day of Marcheshvan, i.e. the day on which the deluge began. It refers back to where the Torah reported (7,11) that in the sixth hundredth year of Noach’s life on the seventeenth of the second month, the fountains of the deep broke open, etc.” You will note that there are 150 days between the seventeenth of Marcheshvan and the seventeenth of Nissan. According to Nachmanides the timetable of the deluge ran as follows: Rain descended on earth for forty days continuously from the date the fountains of the deep broke open. During those forty days the waters on earth rose to a level of fifteen cubits above the highest peaks. At the end of the forty days the rain stopped but the fountains of the deep remained open and the “windows” of the heavens also remained open so that the atmosphere was extremely moist. The entire globe was full of water none of which dried off during that period. This condition continued until the end of 150 days after the rain had started falling. At that point G-d made a strong wind blow in the atmosphere and on earth and the fountains of the deep closed. The waters which had flooded earth from below returned to the interior of the earth where they had been before the deluge started. At that point the “windows” of the heavens were closed also and the air of the atmosphere began to dry up. As a result, the level of water on earth became drastically reduced so that the Ark which had previously been about two or three cubits deep in water managed to “land” on the mountain range of Ararat. Some 73 days later the tops of the mountains became visible on the first day of the tenth month, i.e. on the first of the month of Tamuz. Another forty days later, on the tenth of the month of Av, the dove left the Ark for good. Another thirty days later Noach removed the cover of the ark.

ותנח התבה בחודש השביעי, “the ark came to rest in the seventh month.” According to Rashi this was the month of Sivan, and we would learn from this information that the keel of the ark was submerged in the water by 11 cubits (approx 6.6 meters) Nachmanides confirms that Rashi’s explanation follows Bereshit Rabbah He adds that seeing that Rashi himself frequently takes issue with such Midrashim in light of the dictum that on the one hand there are 70 facets to the written Torah, whereas at the same time we must establish the plain meaning of the text, (a major concern of Rashi), we too may also be permitted to emphasise another aspect of our verse. The difficulty with Rashi’s explanation is that he counts the words “in the seventh month,” as referring to a date, as the seventh month after the original rains had stopped at which time the waters had already begun to recede; how can the Torah immediately afterwards refer to the first of the month of the 601st year of Noach’s life (8,13) where clearly the reference must be to the first month of the calendar year, i.e. the first of Tishrey? How could the Torah switch its terms of reference and confuse its readers? Besides, whence do we have proof that the keel of the ark was submerged by 11 cubits? This calculation appears based on Rashi’s assumption that the waters receded at a constant speed of 1 cubit every four days, seeing that the keel of the ark had been reported as above the highest mountain by 15 cubits (7,20). From the 1st of Sivan till the first of Av there are 60 days. If the ark, as reported, ran aground on the17th of the seventh month, and the summits of the highest mountains became visible once more, how could the surface of the earth become dry by the first of Tishrey according to Rashi’s calculation, seeing that many mountains were thousands of cubits high? According to the calculation of Rashi all this took place within 13 days (from the 17th of the seventh month counting from Kislev, as interpreted verse 4) Furthermore, from a mariner’s point of view, a vessel which is more than one third submerged in water (the ark’s total height being 30 cubits), is not really capable of navigating waters, too much of its weight being under the water’s surface. In view of the problems of Rashi’s interpretation, Nachmanides understands that the 150 days which the Torah describes the waters as being turbulent and rising, commence by including the 40 days of rain, so that these days concluded on the 17th of Iyar, seeing that the major flooding took place during the 40 days of incessant rainfall. 73 days after the 17th of Iyar on the first of the tenth month, i.e. the first of Av. This was the tenth month after the beginning of the rainfall, the tops of the mountains becoming visible. Another approach to the report of the dates in the Torah, and this is the correct approach according to Nachmanides, is that the 150 days certainly commenced with the 17th of the second month (Marcheshvan) the day the deluge began, and ended on the 17th day in Nissan (which is the seventh month after Tishrey, which is the first month of the year.) On this day the ark came to rest on Mount Arrarat, for then G’d made a strong easterly wind blow (verse 1). This wind dried out the surface of the earth.(The wind accelerated the lowering of the water level dramatically.) Until the Exodus from Egypt all of mankind considered the first of Tishrey as New Year. Only immediately prior the Exodus from Egypt did G’d command the Jewish people to henceforth count “their” years from the first of the month of Nissan. [concerning matters which they did not have in common with mankind as a whole, Ed.] Proof that this approach is correct is the fact that the Torah does not mention that the waters decreased by a certain amount on a certain day during a specific month. Such details were reserved for the second stage of the recovery after the waters had peaked, such as when the Torah mentions the date on which the highest mountain peaks once again became visible. The sequence in which the various stages occurred was as follows: on the day the rain started falling on earth, the fountains of the earth below also opened and added huge amounts of water which flooded the surface of the earth. The atmosphere became extremely saturated with moisture. The flooding of the earth continued at this level for 150 days. At that point G’d made a strong wind sweep over the earth that accounted for a sudden and substantial drop of the water level on earth as well as a drying of the atmosphere. The water level dropped so much on that day as a result of that wind that the ark landed on top of Mount Arrarat on that same day. Prior to that the ark’s keel had been submerged by 2-3 cubits. 73 days later, on the first of the month of Tamuz, the tenth month of the year, the tops of various mountains became visible. 40 days later, on the tenth of Av, Noach opened the window of the ark for the first time and three weeks later on the first day of Ellul he dispatched the dove for the first time. 40 days later he decided to remove the roof of the ark. The meaning of the words (verse 1) “G’d made a wind sweep the earth so that the waters calmed,” is something that occurred simultaneously with the retreat of the subterranean waters into the bowels of the earth. You will note that the Torah speaks of a wind sweeping over the earth, not over the water.

And the waters continued going and diminishing until the tenth month; in the tenth, on the first of the month, the tops of the mountains appeared.

בעשירי וגו' נראו ראשי ההרים IN THE TENTH MONTH … WERE THE TOPS OF THE MOUNTAINS SEEN —This was Ab which is the tenth from Marcheshvan when the rain began. If, however, you say that it means Elul, the tenth month from Kislev in which the rain stopped, just as you said (see Rashi on verse 4) that “in the seventh month” means Sivan which was the seventh month after the rain stopped, then I reply that it is impossible to argue so. For you must needs admit that the “seventh” month when the Ark rested can only be counted from the time when the rain stopped, since the 40 days during which the rain fell and the 150 days during which the waters prevailed did not terminate until the first day of Sivan, and if you say that it means the seventh after the rain began to fall, this would not be Sivan. The “tenth month”, however, when the tops of the mountains became visible cannot possibly be counted except from the time the rain began to fall, for if you say that it must be calculated from the time when it stopped, which would be Elul, you would not then find that “in the first month, on the first day of the month the waters dried up from off the earth” (Genesis 8:13). For it was only at the end of 40 days after the tops of the mountains were visible that he sent forth the raven (Genesis 8:6), and he waited periods amounting altogether to 21 days during which he was sending forth the dove, making altogether 60 days from when the tops of the mountains became visible until when the face of the earth became dry; if, therefore, you say that it was in Elul that they were seen, it would follow that the earth became dry in Marcheshvan (60 days after Elul). But it (Scripture) calls it (the month when the waters were dried up; Genesis 8:13) the first month, and that can only be Tishri which is the first month reckoning according to the creation of the world — or according to R. Joshua, it would be Nisan (Genesis Rabbah 30:6).

AND THE WATERS DECREASED CONTINUALLY UNTIL THE TENTH MONTH. This verse is to be interpreted by transposition: the waters decreased continually until the tops of the mountains were seen in the tenth month, which is the month of Tammuz. Scripture thus informs us that during seventy-three days the waters decreased fifteen cubits. But we do not know the amount of the original decrease which enabled the ark to rest since Scripture did not find it necessary to inform us either of the number of cubits that the ark was submerged in the waters or of the amount of the decrease. In the matter of the floating of the ark, it appears to me that because the waters flowed from the deeps and were hot, as our Rabbis have said, the ark therefore floated upon the face of the waters. Were it not for that, it would have sunk on account of its weight for there were many living things in it, as well as a great deal of food and drink. But as soon as the waters subsided from their flowing or from their heat and they decreased on account of the wind, the ark at once entered into the midst of the waters due to the weight of its load, and it rested on the mountain. In the opinion of the commentators, See my Hebrew commentary, p. 59. the Scriptural accounts concerning the total of one hundred and fifty days during which the waters prevailed, the resting of the ark, the visibility of the tops of the mountains and the succeeding forty days — all these events we know by way of prophecy for Scripture so informs us, but Noah knew only that he felt that the ark had rested, and he waited a period of time which, in his opinion, was sufficient for the waters to abate. Now according to our words, as well as those of our Rabbis and all commentators, the mountains of Ararat, which are among the highest mountains under the heavens, had fifteen cubits of water above their summit. Therefore this difficulty is to be posed: it is known that the Greek mountain Olympus is very much higher than they, and the land of Ararat, which is near Babylon, lies in the lower part of the globe! Perhaps we should then say that the decrease of waters which took place on the seventeenth day of the seventh month was very much more than fifteen cubits, and at first the tops of the high mountains were seen, not the mountains of Ararat, and it just happened that the ark was in the land of Ararat during the seventh month and it rested on the tops of those mountains. Now Noah, from the time the rains ceased, would open and close the window at his will. Seventy-three days after the resting of the ark he looked forth from the window and the tops of the mountains of Ararat were visible to him, and he again closed the window. Scripture then relates that forty days later he sent forth the raven. Scripture does not say, “and it was in such-a-month and on such-a-day that Noah opened the window,” but instead it says, And it came to pass at the end of forty days, in order to declare that from the time the tops of the mountains were seen by Noah, he waited forty days for he thought that by then the towers would be seen and the trees would become visible and the fowls would thus find in them a place to nest, and so he opened the window in order to send forth the raven. In the first month, which is the month of Tishri, the waters were dried up, and in the second month, which is the month of Marcheshvan, on the twenty-seventh day thereof, was the earth dry, and on that day they went out of the ark. Thus all calculations of the section are in accordance with the simple explanation of Scripture and its usual sense. Know that after the Sages agreed that it was in the month of Tishri that the world was created Rabbi Eliezer maintained that the world was created in Tishri while Rabbi Yehoshua taught that the world was created in the month of Nisan. The consensus of the Sages conformed with Rabbi Eliezer’s view (ibid., 27 a). This is the intent of Ramban’s saying here: “Know that after the sages agreed, etc.” See also Ramban further, 17:26. — as [is evidenced by the text of the prayer for the New Year which] they formulated, i.e., “This day, on which was the beginning of Thy work, is a memorial of the first day,” and by the fact that the Scriptural order of the seasons is seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat Thus the winter precedes the summer. — that the beginning of the year is reckoned from Tishri. And so also were the months reckoned from Tishri until we reached the exodus from Egypt. Then the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded us to reckon the months according to another count, [namely, from the going forth from Egypt, which occurred in the month of Nisan], as it is said, This month shall be unto you the beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year to you. Thenceforth in all of Scripture, Tishri is reckoned as the seventh month. But as far as the years are concerned, the reckoning from Tishri was still retained, as it is written, And the feast of ingathering at the turn of the year. And so did Jonathan the son of Uziel He wrote a Targum or Aramaic version of the books of the Prophets. It is similar in scope to that of Onkelos on the Five Books of Moses. translate the verse, In the month of Eithanim which is the seventh month, saying, “in the month which the ancients called the first month and which is now the seventh month.” And in the Mechilta we also find: “This month [Nisan] shall be unto you. But the first man did not reckon by it; [he reckoned Tishri as the first month].”

"In the tenth month, on the first of the month, the tops of the mountains appeared" — Noah fixed the first of the month, yet he did not see the moon, since he had not yet opened the window of the ark. On the tenth of Shevat he sent out the raven, which continually went back and forth until Noah departed, as it says: "until the waters dried up" (Genesis 8:7), and on the day the earth dried out, Noah and all who were with him departed. Seven days after he sent the raven, he sent the dove; this was on the seventeenth of Shevat, which was the tenth month from the day of the Flood. This is the square aspect [מַבָּט הַמְּרֻבָּע], and the proof is that it says: "and he waited yet another seven days" (Genesis 8:12).

והמים הלוך וחסור. The waters kept ebbing away. Part of the water retreated whereas part still flooded the earth until the tenth month.

והמים היו הלוך וחסור עד החודש העשירי בעשירי וגו', “and the waters had been in a steady retreat until the tenth month; on the tenth day of that month, etc.” This verse sounds like the kind of verse our sages describe as מסורס, “truncated,” and its meaning is that the waters had kept receding until the time when the tops of the mountains had become visible in the tenth month; the Torah informs us that during these 73 days the level of the water fell by 15 cubits. This contrasts with the first period during which the water level fell, as a result of which there occurred the landing of the ark on top of Mount Arrarat. We do not know how many cubits the water level had fallen then, nor do we know how deeply the ark had sat beneath the surface of the waters. It was of no concern to us. Personally, I believe that the fact that the ark was floating was due to the current created by the subterranean wells which had opened up. Had it not been for this, the extreme weight of the ark, caused by both the great number of passengers and the tremendous amount of food stored within it, would have resulted in the ark sitting pretty much in the same spot during all this time. As soon as the current of the subterranean wells subsided, and these waters had returned to their former habitat, and the wind which G’d had sent ceased, the ark, in accordance with the laws of physics, settled more deeply in the water and struck solid rock (foundered) on Mount Arrarat. Note that both according to our understanding and according to the understanding of our sages in the Midrash, as well as in accordance with the various commentators who have laboured over our chapter, Arrarat is one of the tallest mountains in the region, and the waters of the deluge covered its peak to a depth of at least 15 cubits. This “axiom” is difficult to comprehend, as according to general agreement Mount Olympus is considerably higher than Mount Arrarat. The Arrarat mountain range is located close to the valley within which Bagdad is situated. [modern cartographers give the height of Mount Olympus as 2917 meters, and that of Arrarat as 5122 meters. Ed.] Perhaps the Torah meant to tell us that prior to the 17th of the seventh month the ark was far more than 15 cubits above the tallest mountain, and that other higher mountain tops had been visible already before then but that by that time the waters had receded so much that even Mount Arrarat, though far lower, was already capable of arresting the movement of the ark. Noach had opened the window of the ark ever since the rains had stopped (after the first 40 days) closing it at will from time to time. After the 73 days when the ark had become stationary, Noach used the window to look out and observe what was happening around him. When he perceived the tops of high mountains all around him, he closed the window and waited for another 40 days before checking on his surroundings again. 40 days later he dispatched the raven. You will note that the Torah did not write “Noach opened the window, etc.,” but merely that this event occurred at the end of a period of 40 days. This is to tell us that the raven was dispatched 40 days after the tops of other mountains had become visible. Noach had hoped that enough time had elapsed to reveal the tops of the trees, (on mountains below the tree line) If correct, he thought to release the birds, as there would be a habitat available for them once more. The raven was released on the first of Tishrey when for the first time חרבה הארץ, the surface of the earth was earth instead of water, although the earth dried out sufficiently only in the second month. At that time (17th of Marcheshvan) Noach and his passengers left the ark at G’d’s command. There is a minor difficulty with Nachmanides’ description, in that he perceives the tops of the mountains having become visible before the first of the tenth month, seeing that the Torah writes specifically that these mountain tops became visible on the first of the month. Nachmanides’ saying that these words refer once more to Mount Arrarat is difficult to accept.

And it came to pass at the end of forty days that Noah opened the window of the ark that he had made.

מקץ ארבעים יום AT THE END OF FORTY DAYS from when the tops of the mountains were seen. את חלון התבה אשר עשה THE WINDOW OF THE ARK WHICH HE HAD MADE — for the light; it does not mean the door of the Ark intended for entry and exit.

ויהי מקץ ארבעים יום. It was at the end of a period of forty days. How did Noach know when the time had come to safely open the window? Was he not scared the surrounding waters would flood the ark? Perhaps G'd had told him that the deluge would not last longer than twelve months and he had prepared a food supply to last for that period of time.

ויהי מקץ ארבעים יום ויפתח נח את חלון התבה, “it was at the end of 40 days that Noach opened the window of the ark.” According to Rashi the meaning of the line is that this was 40 days after the tops of the mountains had become visible. If that were correct, we are hard pressed to understand why the dove did not find a resting place. Nachmanides writes concerning this that it is not the nature of the birds to seek out resting places in lofty mountains.

And he sent out the raven, and it went out, going out and returning, until the waters had dried from upon the earth.

יצא ושוב WENT FORTH TO AND FRO — It (the raven) flew in circles round and round the Ark and did not go on its errand for it suspected that he (Noah) intended to injure its mate, just as we learn in the Agada of Chelek (Sanhedrin 108b). עד יבשת המים UNTIL THE WATERS WERE DRIED UP—The real sense of the verse is what it plainly implies (until the waters of the Flood were dried up); but the Midrashic explanation (Genesis Rabbah 33:5) is: The raven went to and fro in the world being kept in readiness for another errand during the time when the rain was withheld and the waters dried up in the days of Elijah, as it is said, (1 Kings 17:6) “And the ravens brought him bread and flesh”.

וישלח את העורב, to find out if the atmosphere had dried out after the tops of the mountains had become visible. Noach wanted to know if the atmosphere in the meanwhile was such that the raven could tolerate it. ויצא יצוא ושוב, this proved that the atmosphere was not yet dry enough for the raven to tolerate it for any extended period of time.

וישלח את העורב. He sent away the raven. Why did Noach sent away the raven? If it was to examine if the waters had receded sufficiently, why does the Torah not mention this? If the Torah assumed that we could figure this out for ourseleves, why did the Torah mention the reason for Noach sending out the dove? What exactly is the meaning of: "it went to and fro until the water on the earth dried out?" If the meaning is that the raven could not find a place to rest outside the ark and that therefore it kept re-entering the ark and leaving anew, why was there a need to send out a dove altogether? Did not the raven's behaviour indicate that the waters had not yet eased sufficiently? What exactly does the Torah mean by the words עד יבשת המים? Furthermore, did Noach not have sufficient information once he sent out the dove? Why does the Torah not mention that Noach extended his hand to bring the raven back, just as it does in connection with the dove in verse 9? The entire verse must be understood in light of the aggadah (Sanhedrin 108) that the raven mated while in the ark and that Noach knew about it. This is why he expelled the raven from the ark as soon as he opened its window. This is why the Torah does not mention that the raven was despatched in order to examine the extent to which the waters had receded. The raven was forced to remain outside the ark though it tried to return to it. This situation continued until the waters on the earth had dried out. When Noach wanted to know how far the waters had receded he sent out the dove. He had not been able to find this out from the raven which he had expelled. The dove was willing to undertake the mission of relaying information to Noach. Initially, the dove reported that it had not been able to find a place to rest. As soon as Noach heard this he took the dove back into the ark with him. The detailed wording of verse 9 suggests that Noach made a special place in the ark for the dove. Later on Noach sent out the same dove a second time. Our sages derived another lesson from the wording of this verse when they stated (Sanhedrin 108) that the raven used an ironclad argument when it accused both G'd and Noach of hating it. It said: "G'd hates me because only a single pair of my species has been allowed into the ark whereas the "pure" birds are represented by seven pairs. You hate me because you endangered me instead of one of the birds of which there are seven pairs." The raven went on to suspect Noach of personal motives in sending it on a mission so that Noach could have relations with its mate. Noach was very angry, telling the raven that since he refrained from having inter-course with is own wife in the ark he most certainly would not dream of mating with a species that was forbidden to him. According to this aggadah the raven refused to undertake the mission Noach wanted to assign to it for fear of its species becoming extinct should anything happen to it outside the ark. As a result, Noach had to send the dove on the mission originally planned for the raven. The raven's very fear and constant circling of the ark told Noach that the waters were still covering most of the earth. What Noach did not know was whether the water level on earth was already substantially lower. He sent out the dove to find out this information. The deeper meaning of the aggadah depicting the raven's confrontation with Noach can be understood in terms of Psalms 69,27: "For they persecute those whom You have struck." Normally, those who have been persecuted can expect to encounter mercy and pity. The people who persecute Jews in exile heap more suffering on those already in unfortunate circumstances. This was basically the raven's argument against Noach when it said: "is it not enough that Your Master hates me, must you hate me also?" The raven continued: "if you are not motivated by hatred of me, do you have designs on my mate and wish me out of the way?" The raven implied that precisely because Noach was not allowed to have sexual relations with his wife in the ark, he might have reasoned that he could have relations with other species. There is no reason to question why the raven's mate should be different from any other female animal. The raven's argument applied to all female animals, but seeing the others remained under their mates' supervision Noach would not be able to carry out such a design unseen. Only the female raven would be unprotected during its mate's absence from the ark. The raven may also have extrapolated from the very fact that it had been guilty of mating in the ark. It reasoned that the fact that Noach had seen this take place had aroused his instincts. Our sages have always claimed that watching something arouses one's greed and lust to possess the object one has watched. This is why the sages have been so careful to forbid looking at parts of the body. Noach was angry at the raven for having referred to G'd only as Noach's "Master," not it's own. This is why he called the raven "wicked." Concerning the suspicion that Noach had designs on the raven's mate, Noach retorted that seeing he had been able to restrain himself from sleeping with his own wife, something which was only a simple prohibition, he could certainly restrain himself from sleeping with the raven's mate, something that involved violating two prohibitions. Another reason that prompted Noach to call the raven "wicked" in that aggadah is that Noach applied the principle כל הפוסל במומו פוסל, that "when someone accuses others of moral shortcomings, he usually accuses the outsider of a moral defect that he himself is guilty of" (Kidushin 70). Noach told the raven it could never have suspected him of what it did unless it was guilty of such misdemeanours itself. The reason the Talmud describes the raven's argument as ניצחת, ironclad, is that Noach could not answer why he had picked for this mission a bird of which there was only a single pair. Another reason why Noach called the raven wicked could be that seeing it had impregnated its mate already, the species would not die out even if some accident were to befall the male raven on its mission. Its very wickedness therefore had made the raven the only expendable bird.

וישלח את העורב, “he dispatched the raven;” the reason Noach chose one of the impure birds for this mission, [although he could have chosen a pigeon of which he had seven pairs, Ed.] was that since that bird feeds on carcasses, the chances that it would find something to eat were far greater than if he had sent a pigeon which is more circumspect in what it chooses as its food. Do not question how Noach could have dispatched any creature from the ark seeing that at that time it was totally dark outside? While it is true that there was no sunshine or moonlight, and the light of the stars is insufficient to know thereby whether it is day or night, there was some light, as we know from when the Torah wrote in verse 5 that the mountain tops had become visible at the beginning of the tenth month. Furthermore, there is an opinion cited in Bereshit Rabbah 33,5, according to which light of sun and moon was usable, but was not usable by Noach for astronomical calculations. Unless this was so, how would Noach have been able to tell day from night? ויצא יצוא ושוב, “it kept going back and forth;” Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish in Sanhedrin 108 claims that the raven accused Noach with an ironclad argument of hating it, else he would have used a bird of which there were seven species rather than endanger the species of the raven of which he had only a single pair. As a result, the raven did not fly far away from the ark to ensure it would find its way back, and could protect its mate if need be.

וישלח את העורב, “he sent out the raven, etc.” Our sages in Sanhedrin 108 claim that the raven had an incontrovertible argument against Noach, claiming that both G-d and Noach hated it. G-d hated the impure creatures, seeing that He had commanded Noach to save only a single pair of each. Noach hated the raven seeing that he was prepared to endanger its survival as a species by sending it on a dangerous mission when he could have sent out a dove or another pure bird of which there were seven pairs. It therefore taunted Noach by accusing him of having sexual designs on its mate. Noach retorted by telling the raven that it was being deliberately vicious seeing it was well aware that he had refrained from indulging in sexual relations in the Ark even with his own wife, someone with whom he was permitted to have relations. Why then would the raven suspect him of having designs on a species which was forbidden to him, i.e the raven’s mate? The raven was not willing to accept Noach’s argument. As a result, Noach told the raven that it would neither be fit to eat nor to be offered as a sacrifice to G-d. At that point G-d intervened and told Noach to take the raven back into the Ark at least until the waters on the earth had dried off. G-d explained that in the future a certain righteous individual (the prophet Elijah) would dry out the world (decree drought) and at that time G-d would need the raven who would carry food to Elijah who would be in hiding at that time. (compare Kings I 17,8). The word יבשת, “dry land,” is closely related to the word תשבי, a favourite description of the prophet Elijah whose home town appears to have been Tishbi or something similar.

ויצא יצא ושוב, “it kept coming back;” Noach concluded at that point not to endanger the species of which only one pair was in the ark, and to dispatch birds of the “pure” species of which he had seven pairs each at his disposal.

And he sent out the dove from with him, to see whether the waters had abated from the face of the earth.

וישלח את היונה AND HE SENT FORTH A DOVE at the end of seven days, for it is written, (Genesis 8:10) “And he stayed yet other seven days” — from this statement you may infer that after the first occasion, also, he waited seven days. וישלח And HE SENT FORTH — This does not mean merely “sending on an errand”, but “sending away”, “letting go” — he freed her to go where she liked, and thus he could see whether the waters abated, because if she could find a resting place she would not return to him.

וישלח את היונה, all of the seven pairs of pigeons [based on the latter ה in front of the word יונה. Ed.] לראות הקלו, if the atmosphere had improved they would build their nests in the mountains and high structures as is their custom.

וישלח, “he sent it off on a one way trip;” the dot in the letter ל is the proof that this is the correct interpretation. When someone is dispatched in order to report back, that letter never appears with such a dot.

וישלח היונה מאתו, “he sent out the dove away from him.” When the Torah describes Noach as sending out the raven the word מאתו, “away from being with him,” was missing. This teaches that the habitat of the pure birds is close to the righteous people.

But the dove found no resting place for the sole of her foot, and she returned to him, to the ark, for there were waters upon the face of all the earth; and he stretched out his hand and took her, and brought her in to him, into the ark.

AND THE DOVE FOUND NO REST. It is not customary for fowl to rest on the tops of the high mountains on the earth which are bare of trees and surely not when the waters were on the face of the whole earth. Therefore, the dove found no rest suitable for her. But as soon as she saw the trees she went her own way for in their branches she would build her nest.

כי מים על פני כל הארץ, even on the tops of the mountains which had become visible, everything was still thoroughly wet so that even there לא מצא מנוח לכף רגלו, it could not find a resting place for its foot.

וישלח ידו ויקחה ויבא אותה אל התבה. He extended his hand, took her (the dove) and brought her to him into the ark. The verse tells us that the dove was exhausted from its mission, not having found a place to land. Noach was worried that the dove did not have strength enough to enter the ark on her own and would fall into the water and drown.

ולא מצאה היונה מנוח, “but the dove did not find a place to rest the ball of its foot on.” Even though one of our sages holds that the deluge left the Land of Israel unaffected, the dove did not descend there on account of the heat. The giant Og took refuge in the vicinity of the ark as the immediate area around the ark was cooler than the atmosphere at large. The truth is that –as Nachmanides writes- that even though the deluge did not flood the Holy Land directly and the rains did not fall there, water from the surrounding countries flooded the Holy Land also, seeing that the Holy Land was not enclosed by a water-proof fence which could keep out the waters. The Biblical verse supporting the view that the waters of the deluge did not descend on the Holy Land, only speaks of ארץ מטוהרה לא גושמה ביום זעם, “a land which remained pure and did not experience destructive rain on the day of (G’d’s) anger.” (Ezekiel 22,24) The verse did not mention that no water penetrated the Holy Land during the deluge, only that it did not endure the rain, and that the subterranean wells did not gush forth from underneath it.

And he waited yet another seven days, and again sent out the dove from the ark.

ויחל AND HE STAYED — The word means waiting, as (Job 29:21) “Unto me they gave ear and waited (ויחלו)”, and it occurs frequently in the Scriptures.

The word וַיָּחֶל ["and he waited"] — in my opinion, it derives from the root meaning 'beginning,' for if it came from the root תּוֹחֶלֶת, 'hope' or 'expectation,' it would be וַיִּיחֶל, like וַיִּיקַץ (Genesis 9:24), or וַיָּחֶל like וַיֵּשֶׁב יַעֲקֹב (Genesis 37:1). It may be that this word is irregular in grammar. "And he again sent the dove from the ark" — this was on the twenty-fourth of Shevat.

And the dove came to him at eventide, and behold, a torn olive leaf was in her mouth; and Noah knew that the waters had abated from upon the earth.

טרף בפיה PLUCKED IN HER MOUTH — I am of opinion that it (the dove) was a male and that therefore it (the text) speaks of it sometimes as masculine and sometimes as feminine, because really wherever יונה “dove” occurs in the Scriptures it is spoken of as feminine, as (Song 5:12) “[His eyes] are like those of doves beside the water brooks. that are washing themselves (רוחצות fem.) in milk”; (Ezekiel 7:16) “Like the doves of the valleys, all of them moaning" and as (Hosea 7:11) “Like a silly (פותה fem.) dove” טרף means IT HAD PLUCKED OFF — The Midrashic explanation takes it as meaning “food”, and interprets בפיה as “speaking” — viz., she said. “Rather that my food be bitter as an olive but from the hand of God, than as sweet as honey and from the hand of mortal men” (Eruvin 18b; Genesis Rabbah 33).

AND LO AN OLIVE LEAF. From the plain meaning of this verse it would appear that the trees were not uprooted or blotted out in the flood because there was there no flooding stream since the whole world became full of water. But in Bereshith Rabbah the Rabbis have said,15633:9. “From where did the dove bring the olive leaf? Rabbi Levi said, ‘She brought it from the Mount of Olives since the land of Israel was not inundated by the waters of the flood. This is as the Holy One, blessed be He, said to the prophet Ezekiel: Son of man, say unto her: Thou art a land that is not cleansed, nor rained upon in the day of indignation.’ Rabbi Biryei said, ‘The gates of the garden of Eden were opened for the dove and from there she brought the leaf.’” Thus the intent of the Rabbis is that the trees were uprooted and blotted out in those places where the flood was, and surely the leaf faded. Similarly the Rabbis said, “Even the [solid substance of the] lower stationery millstone was blotted out in the flood,” and [to substantiate this statement] they expounded the verse, The waters wore the stones, [as referring to the waters of the flood which wore down stones]. And their saying that “the Land of Israel was not inundated by the flood” is to be understood as meaning that the rain of the flood was not there, as it is written, nor rained upon; the fountains of the great deep were not therein. But the waters did spread over the whole world, and all the high mountains that were under the whole heaven were covered, as it is clearly written, and there is no partition around the Land of Israel to prevent the waters from entering. And so did the Sages say in Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer: “The waters of the flood did not come down from heaven upon the land of Israel, but they rolled in from other lands and came there, as it is said, Son of man, say unto her, etc.” Now according to the opinion of Rabbi Levi, [mentioned above, that the dove brought the olive leaf from the Mount of Olives], it was because the torrential rain did not come down upon the land of Israel and the windows of heaven were not opened there that the trees remained there while in the rest of the world they were broken and uprooted by the flood and His mighty rain. But I wonder about their saying that [the olive leaf was brought by the dove] from the garden of Eden. If it were so, then Noah did not know that the waters abated from off the earth for there [in Eden] the waters of the flood did not enter. But perhaps its gates were closed so that the waters did not enter there, but when the waters abated they were opened. [Thus the olive leaf indicated the opening of the gates which in turn indicated that the waters had abated.]It is on the basis of this opinion of theirs [—that the trees were broken and uprooted in the entire world during the flood — that the Rabbis] have said there in Bereshith Rabbah,16536:4. “And he [Noah] planted a vineyard. And from where did he have a branch? Said Rabbi Abba bar Kahana, ‘When he went into the ark he had taken with him branches of the vine, shoots of fig trees, and stumps of olive trees.’” ‘TARAPH’ (PLUCKED) IN HER MOUTH. Rashi wrote: “I am of the opinion that the dove was a male and that therefore Scripture sometimes speaks of it as masculine and sometimes as feminine because where the word yonah (dove) occurs in Scripture it is spoken of as feminine. Taraph however means ‘he plucked.’ But a Midrashic explanation takes it [taraph] as meaning ‘food,’ and the word b’phiha (in her mouth) it explains as meaning ‘speaking.’ Thus she said: ‘Rather that my food be bitter as an olive and come by the hand of the Holy One, blessed be He, than as sweet as honey and from the hand of mortal man.’”All this does not appear to me to be correct for there is no reason why Scripture should change its reference to doves from feminine to masculine in one place in the same section. And if it is proper language to always speak of yonah in Scripture as feminine, why did it change here? Similarly, their Midrashic explanation does not at all make the word b’phiha to mean “speaking.” Instead, their Midrash is based on the fact that she brought this kind of leaf for if we should say that it just happened [that she brought an olive leaf], it cannot be in vain that Scripture mentioned it since it should have said, “And, lo, in her mouth a leaf freshly plucked.” Besides, the olive does not come from the very high trees that the fowl should nest there on account of its long branches. It was for this reason that the Sages said that there was in this a hint that it is more pleasing to the fowl to have their food bitter as wormwood from the hand of the Holy One, blessed be He, and not have it be good and sweet as honey from the hand of mortal man, and surely, all the more, people do not wish to be dependent for their livehood upon one another. In the words of Bereshith Rabbah:9. “Rabbi Abahu said, ‘If the dove brought the olive leaf from the garden of Eden, could she not have brought something exceptional such as either cinnamon or balsam? But it was a hint which she gave to Noah: rather something even more bitter than this from the hand of the Holy One, blessed be He, than something sweet from your hand.’” But in the Gemara See my Hebrew commentary, p. 61, Note 28. they [the Sages] added: “What evidence is there that the word taraph means food? It is written, ‘Hatripheni’ (Feed me) with mine allotted bread.” It is due to the reason we have stated, [namely, that Scripture mentioned the name of the tree in order to indicate this hint] for which the Rabbis found support in the word hatripheni, implying that it is as if Scripture said, “And, lo, an olive-leaf of tereph (food) in her mouth.”As for the plain meaning of Scripture, the commentators have explained that the word taraph modifies the word “leaf,” thus stating, “And, lo, a plucked olive leaf was in her mouth.” Proof for this [i.e., that taraph modifies “leaf” rather than acting as a verb] is that taraph is wholly vocalized with the kamatz, as is the rule. It is, however, found in irregular forms: For ‘taraph’ (He hath torn), and He will heal us; Here the word is vocalized wholly with the kamatz, and yet it is a verb rather than an adjective. And he shall restore that which ‘gazal’ (he took by robbery); Similar to the above. The error which ‘shagag’ (he committed); This too is similar to the above. and many other additional verses.

"Torn [טָרָף] in its mouth" — some say this is a word doubled in meaning, like אַדְמַת עָפָר (Daniel 12:2), and they interpret טָרָף as meaning 'an olive leaf,' as in כָּל טַרְפֵי צִמְחָהּ (Ezekiel 17:9). The proof they cite is that there is a qamatz gadol under the resh, like זָהָב and עָשָׁן. But what seems correct to me is that the bet is a prefix letter, like the bet in בְּרוּחוֹ שָׁמַיִם שִׁפְרָה (Job 26:13) and וְהוּא בְאֶחָד (Job 23:12), and it comes with a qamatz, as in כִּי הוּא טָרָף (Hosea 6:1) and אַרְיֵה שָׁאָג (Amos 3:8) and similar forms. Alternatively, טָרָף has a qamatz because it is an attributive adjective [תּוֹאַר שֵׁם], like חָכָם, with the meaning of 'one who tears,' since some adjectives resemble active verbs [פּוֹעֵל] and some resemble passive verbs [פָּעוּל].

וידע נח כי קלו המים, “then Noach knew that the waters had subsided substantially. The fact that the pigeon stayed out all day long convinced Noach that there was what to look at other than mere water. According to the view that the deluge did not affect the land of Israel (Zevachim 113) how could Noach have known from the torn olive leaf that the waters had indeed subsided so much? He could have deduced that this leaf had originated in the Holy Land, or it had been picked up floating on the surface of the waters? The word חטף used by the Torah here, always is used in connection with something that has been plucked from a tree. If it had been picked up floating, it would have been a whole leaf, and would not have shown signs of having been picked from its branch. The translation by Yonathan ben Uzziel is further proof of this. He translates: נחית, i.e. plucked by mouth or beak. [The Hebrew equivalent of when Yaakov mourned his son Joseph as having been torn to shreds by a wild beast, טרף טרף יוסף, Genesis 37,33.]

והנה עלה זית טרף בפיה, “and here it had torn off an olive leaf with its beak.” Seeing that destruction had been decreed on man and beast there was no need for the Torah to have reported that the trees too had been doomed by the deluge. In fact, the destruction of vegetation on earth had been so thorough that our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 28,3 claim that even the lower millstones had been thoroughly destroyed. This may be based on Job 14,19 אבנים שחקו מים, “the waters wear away even stones.” There was no need for the Torah to add that the leaf which the dove carried in its beak must have been one that had withered already a long time previously. The question is: where did the dove find even such a leaf? The Midrash offers several explanations. Rabbi Levi claims that the leaf came from Mount Olives (Jerusalem), seeing the deluge had not touched the Holy Land. He claims that G-d had said to Ezekiel (Ezekiel 22, 24) בן אדם אמר לה את ארץ לא מטהרה היא לא גשמה ביום זעם, “Ben Adam, say to her: “You are a land that has not been cleansed; she had not been rained upon on the day of fury.” The words לא מטהרה refer to the fountains of the deep beneath the Holy Land not having opened at the time of the deluge, whereas the words ולא גושמה mean that no destructive rain fell on the Holy Land during the period of the deluge. Nonetheless, it is fair to assume that the waters of the deluge which had flooded neighbouring countries also spilled over into the Holy Land. After all, the Torah testifies that the waters of the deluge “covered all the high mountains beneath the whole sky (7,19).” Seeing that no rain had fallen on the Holy Land which would have uprooted and broken the trees in that land, the waters which spilled over into that land did not have such a destructive effect. It is quite plausible therefore that the dove took the leaf from Mount Olives. This explains what is meant when the Torah wrote ((8,11) וידע נח כי קלו המים מעל הארץ, “Noach realised that the waters had subsided from upon the earth.” Another view expressed in Bereshit Rabbah 33,6 is that the dove brought this olive leaf from Gan Eden. This appears very puzzling. If that were true whence did Noach know that the waters on the surface of the earth had subsided? After all, the waters of the deluge had most certainly not penetrated into Gan Eden! Nachmanides addressed this problem and wrote that possibly the gates of Gan Eden were locked so that the waters could not enter there, and as soon as the waters on earth subsided the gates to Gan Eden reopened. The word טרף, “it had torn (it)” in our verse is puzzling. We would have expected the Torah to describe what happened to the leaf, i.e. the feminine form טרפה seeing that the bird יונה always appears in the feminine form. The answer is that it is not a form of a verb but an adjective and the word טרף has to be understood as if the Torah had written טרוף, “torn off.” This is the reason for the vowel kametz under the letter ר in the word טרף, when actually we would have expected to find the vowel patach. The Torah could have merely written והנה עלה טרף בפיה, “and here a torn leaf was in its beak.” This alone would have provided Noach with the information that the waters on earth had subsided. The addition of the word זית, i.e. that this leaf had been torn from an olive tree, caused our sages to derive the lesson that it is better to subsist on one’s own efforts (relying directly on G-d’s bounty), even if one has to eat something bitter such as olive leaves, than to be fed delicious morsels by one’s (human) host in the Ark, i.e. by Noach (compare Rashi on our verse). Our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 33,6 comment further in the name of Rabbi Avuhu: “if the dove entered Gan Eden and brought a leaf from there why did it not at least bring a leaf from a cinnamon tree or something sweet?” It wanted to hint to Noach “better something bitter which originates in Gan Eden than something sweet which originates from you.” According to these homiletical comments by the Midrash, the word טרף, must have a connotation of “food.” We do indeed find this meaning for the word טרף in Proverbs 30,8 where Solomon, having spurned riches turns to G-d and exclaims: הטריפני לחם חקי, “feed me with the bread allotted to me.” All creatures may draw some logical conclusions from this paragraph. If even birds prefer freedom and a relatively difficult mode of subsistence, how much more so must we human beings who have been equipped with a brain and the power to reason adopt such an attitude in life! Would that intelligent people were aware of the demeaning aspect of relying on fellow human beings for their subsistence.

“And the dove came to him at evening time, etc.” Why should we care whether it came in the evening and returned in the morning or vice versa? It appears that she brought him an olive leaf specifically to produce light which was particularly needed in the evening time. This is because according to the opinion that tzohar means window, it’s difficult [to understand] what would provide light at night. Therefore, the Chizkuni explains that tzohar is related to the word “yitzhar” [oil], meaning that he would light oil in the ark at night, while during the day light would enter through the ark’s window, as it is written And Noah opened the window of the ark which he had made. Support for these words comes from what is concluded in the Midrash Tanchuma and the Yalkut on Parshat Tetzaveh regarding the verse Your eyes are like doves (Song of Songs 4:1): Just as the dove brought light to the world, so too you shall bring olive oil and light candles before Him, etc. This is difficult: How did the author of this Midrash know that the dove brought light to the world, and how did he derive this from the verse and behold, a torn olive leaf was in its mouth? Rather, he must have certainly learned this from the fact that it specifically states at evening time, as mentioned above. And regarding what Rashi explained: The dove said, “Let my sustenance be bitter like an olive…” — the explanation is not that she actually said this with her mouth, for the dove was not capable of speech from times past. Rather, we understand from the fact that she brought an olive leaf for her food — which is very bitter food — and did the dove not know that she had regular meals provided at Noah’s table daily? Rather, certainly she chose this bitter food because it was [provided] by the hands of Heaven and not by the hands of flesh and blood.

והנה עלה זית בפיה, “and here she had torn off an olive leaf with its beak.” According to Nachmanides, the plain meaning of the words indicate that the trees in that region had not been uprooted, the reason being that the deluge was not like a raging river which sweeps everything ahead of it. However, according to Bereshit Rabbah, the wording supports the view that the trees themselves had disintegrated, There is a discussion in the Midrash according to which the dove brought this leaf from the Holy Land, proving to Noach that in that region there had not been a deluge. True, that the waters had flooded the earth also in that region, as we pointed out already, however, seeing that no torrential rain had descended on that region and no hot geysers had gushed forth in that region from below, the trunks of the trees had survived, whereas elsewhere all the trees had been completely destroyed. There is another opinion in the Midrash according to which the dove found the leaf in Gan Eden. Nachmanides questions how, according to the view that the olive leaf came from Gan Eden, did Noach know that the waters outside the ark had subsided? Surely, the waters had never penetrated into Gan Eden in the first place? He answers that possibly the gates of Gan Eden had been shut to prevent the waters from getting inside, and as soon as the waters subsided these gates were reopened. והנה עלה זית טרף בפיה. Our sages explain that the word טרף here means “booty,” as it does many times in the Bible, and that the dove had prayed to find such booty, i.e. it succeeded בפיה, thanks to the pleading with her mouth. Still other commentators understand the word טרף as meaning “torn off,” as in Exodus 22,30 ובשר בשדה טרפה, “flesh of an animal in the field which has been torn apart, etc.” This corresponds to Onkelos who renders the word there as תליש, meaning שבור, broken, damaged, ripped off. [a reference to tissue ripped from a live beast. Ed.] If that were not so, perhaps the dove had simply scooped up a torn leaf that was floating on top of the water.

And he waited yet another seven days, and sent out the dove; and she did not return to him again.

וייחל AND HE STAYED — This has the same meaning as ויחל (Genesis 8:10), only that the latter is the Kal, whereas the word here is the Hithpael: ויחל means “he waited” וייחל “he had patience”.

"And he waited" [וַיִּיחֶל] — this is from the nifal conjugation. It comes with the accent on the first syllable [מִלְעֵיל], like וַיִּלָּחֶם (Exodus 17:8) and וַיִּצָּמֶד (Numbers 25:3). There are forms of this conjugation that carry the accent on the last syllable [מִלְרַע], such as וַיִּפָּקֵד מְקוֹם דָּוִד (1 Samuel 20:25). The yod of וַיִּיחֶל belongs to its full root, like the yod of אוֹ יָרֹה יִיָּרֶה (Exodus 19:13). On the first of Adar he sent the dove, and it did not return to him again according to its custom — ever — as in עוֹד טֻמְאָתוֹ בוֹ (Numbers 19:13) and עֹד כָּל יְמֵי הָאָרֶץ (Genesis 8:22).

And it came to pass in the six hundred and first year, in the first month, on the first of the month, the waters had dried from upon the earth; and Noah removed the covering of the ark and looked, and behold, the face of the earth had dried.

בראשׂון IN THE FIRST MONTH — According to R. Eliezer this would be Tishri, and according to R. Joshua Nisan (Rosh Hashanah 11b). חרבו [THE WATERS] DRIED UP — It (the earth) had become like clay, for now its surface had become somewhat hardened.

"The waters had dried" — therefore the foot could not tread upon the earth, for it was soft; only the surface had dried, and afterward the earth dried fully. Those who rely on a lunar year [in their reckoning], on account of the ten days by which the solar year exceeds the lunar, would require their year to be complete [with intercalation]. Furthermore, who told them that Noah spent a full year in the ark? He spent only a solar year plus ten additional days.

ויסר נח את מכסה התבה, he had thought that the earth had already dried out completely only to find והנה חרבה פני האדמה, that whereas there was a thin layer of earth above the water, the earth had not yet dried out thoroughly.

ויהי באחת ושש מאות שנה בראשון באחד לחודש. It was inthe 601st year (of Noach’s life) on the first day of the first month; even a single day of a new year is referred to as the year just commencing.” (Compare Talmud Rosh Hashanah 10) A different explanation of the significance of this statement: in the 600th year of Noach’s life in the month of Iyar on the 17th of the month the deluge had commenced, and the rain lasted for 40 days and 40 nights, so that the rains ceased by the 28th day of Sivan. According to this interpretation the first month of the year is the month of Nissan. All the other months follow the same patterns according to the solar calendar. Each month is considered as having thirty days.

And in the second month, on the twenty-seventh day of the month, the earth was dry.

בשבעה ועשרים ON THE TWENTY-SEVENTH [OF THE MONTH] —The rain had begun to fall in the second month on the seventeenth day (Genesis 7:11): the ten days are those by which the solar year exceeds the lunar year; for the punishment of the generation of the Flood lasted a full (i.e. a solar) year (Genesis Rabbah 33:17). יבשה WAS [THE EARTH] DRIED — It became hard as is its normal condition.

בשבעה ועשרים יום לחודש “on the twenty-seventh day of that month.” This was the month of Marcheshvan. Earlier the Torah had spoken of “on the seventeenth of the month the fountains of the “deep” broke open (7,11),” whereas now the Torah says that on the twenty-seventh day of that month the earth had dried out completely. This teaches that the deluge lasted exactly one full solar year (365 days). We know that ordinarily the solar year is 11 days longer than the lunar year, i.e. 12 months. This is why our sages in Ediyot 2,10 stated that the period during which the people of that generation were judged lasted for 12 months. (According to Rabbi Shlomoh ben Aderet we have to add the eleven days of the difference between the solar and the lunar year so as to avoid the Mishnah in Ediyot being in conflict with the Torah). We are also told in that same Mishnah that the judgment of the Egyptians in Egypt (the ten plagues) lasted 12 months and that Job’s afflictions lasted for 12 months. Also the judgment of the wicked in Gehinom lasts for 12 months. Finally, the Mishnah states that the judgment experienced by the nations taking part in the final assault on the Jewish people under the kingdoms of Gog and Magog will last for 12 months. יבשה הארץ, “the earth had dried up.” Although the earth had completely dried up Noach did not leave the Ark until G-d had given him express permission to do so and had commanded him: “leave the Ark, etc.” (8,16). Seeing that he had only entered the Ark at the direct command of G-d he did not want to leave it until G-d commanded him to do so. Basing themselves on Noach’s example the sages in Tanchuma Noach 7 concluded that Chananyah, Mishael, and Azaryah did not want to leave the furnace of Nevuchadnezzar (Daniel 3,26) until bidden to do so [the wording is that Nevuchadnezzar said to them; “step out and come here!” They had not wanted to come out until bidden to do so although the bottom of the furnace had risen miraculously to be level with the ground around them and this would have been a clear indication that their ordeal was over.]

And Hashem spoke with Noah, saying:

וידבר אלוקים אל נח לאמור, “G-d spoke to Noach for him to tell the members of his family;” this apparently repetitive statement is customary in the Torah; compare Exodus 6,10, or even more definitively, Leviticus 11,1;

"Go out from the ark — you, and your wife, and your sons, and your sons' wives with you."

’אתה ואשתך וגו THOU AND THY WIFE etc. — Husband and wife are mentioned together— now He allowed them to resume family life (Genesis Rabbah 34:8).

צא מן התבה אתה ואשתך. Leave the ark, you and your wife, etc. The wording was intended to permit Noach what had been forbidden to him while he was in the ark, namely normal relations with his wife. G'd also commanded all the other species to resume multiplying. G'd made this resumption of sexual relations dependent on Noach and the other species having left the ark. Even though the deluge was over, normalcy returned only after they all left the ark. All of this is indicated again by the report in the next verse that the males and the females exited from the ark separately. There was no point in telling us this except to teach us that the ark was not a home, but only a refuge.

צא מן התיבה אתה ואשתך, “leave the ark, you and your wife, etc;” when you check the text you will find that Noach did not follow G-d’s instructions precisely, as in verse 18 the Torah reports that Noach did not leave the ark at the same time as his wife, but he left in the company of his sons. According to an argument between Rabbi Nechemyah and Rabbi Yehudah, according to one Noach was punished for not taking advantage of living with his wife again immediately and siring more children by being debased and castrated in his wife’s tent. (Bereshit Rabbah 35,1) The other Rabbi disagrees, claiming that he was rewarded, seeing that he proved more chaste than even commanded, by not immediately indulging in sex with his wife so that G-d spoke to both him and his children in 9,1.

צא מן התבה, אתה ואשתך ובניך, “Leave the Ark, you and your wife, your sons and the wives of your sons.” This was a sign that permission had been granted to once again conduct regular married life with one’s spouse, something which had been forbidden while they were inside the Ark. We know this as at the time Noach and his family entered the Ark the Torah prescribed the sequence “you and your sons, your wife and the wives of your sons” (6,18). At this point the sequence mentioned by the Torah is: “you and your wife, your sons and the wives of your sons.” Clearly, the difference points to separation of the sexes while they were inside the Ark. Talmud Sanhedrin 108 states that only three creatures engaged in sex inside the Ark; they were the raven, the dog, and Cham. All three of them were punished. The raven was condemned to ejaculate its semen via its beak, the dog is kept on a leash; Cham was punished by becoming black-skinned.

“Go out from the ark, you and your wife.” And regarding their entrance [into the ark], He mentioned the males separately and the females separately, namely in order that they should not be fruitful and multiply in the ark. For if not for this [separation], there would be concern that all the other living creatures would observe them [being intimate] and would [likewise] be fruitful and multiply in the ark. Then the ark would not be able to contain them, as it was only built to accommodate the [original] number of those who entered it. And even if you were to say that those who entered there were sustained by a miracle, nevertheless, why would the Holy One, Blessed be He, perform an unnecessary miracle, particularly for those who were not suffering at a time when the entire world was in distress? And regarding what was said about the exit [from the ark], And Noah went out, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons’ wives — even though the Holy One, Blessed be He, permitted Noah to have marital relations, nevertheless, he did not accept this upon himself because he said “Perhaps they will continue to sin and the flood waters will come and sweep them away — so why should I give birth [to children] in vain and for chaos?” Until God swore that He would not bring the flood waters again, only then was it said Be fruitful and multiply, etc. And Noah wanted to first offer a sacrifice before engaging in procreation. According to the simple interpretation, we can say that when Noah entered the ark, he was forbidden even from seclusion with his wife, which is why it says And you shall come into the ark, you and your sons, etc. And upon leaving, intimate relations were not yet permitted to him, only seclusion alone was permitted, as this is what is understood from the statement Go out from the ark, you and your wife. And since only seclusion was permitted to him but not intimate relations, Noah added his own restriction and forbade himself even from seclusion, and thus Noah and his sons went out [separately from the women] until he was explicitly told Be fruitful and multiply — only then was everything permitted to him.

צא מן התבה, “leave the ark!” Noach was not willing to leave the ark without specific instructions from G’d.

"Every living creature that is with you, of all flesh — among the birds, and among the cattle, and among every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth — bring out with you; and let them breed in the land, and spread and multiply upon the earth."

הוצא BRING FORTH — The Ketib is הוצא and the Keri היצא —;היצא means, “tell them to go forth”, הוצא means, ‘‘if they do not wish (if they refuse) to go forth, you make them go out”. ושרצו בארץ THAT THEY MAY BRING FORTH ABUNDANTLY IN THE EARTH but not in the Ark: this teaches that cattle and fowls also were separated, male and female, in the Ark (Genesis Rabbah 34:8).

"Go forth" [הַיְצֵא] — like the imperative form הַשְׁלֵם, 'complete'; similarly: הַיְשַׁר לְפָנַי דַּרְכֶּךָ (Psalm 5:9). "And they shall swarm" — they shall give birth / beget offspring.

הוצא אתך, this word is to be read as if it had been spelled: “היצא!” “Take out!”

And Noah went out, and his sons, and his wife, and his sons' wives with him.

ויצא נח ובניו, “Noach and his sons left the ark, etc.” Some commentators claim that although marital relations between the sexes had been permitted again, the manner in which the Torah writes the males exiting from the ark as if in a group is revealing. On the other hand, the Talmud in Sanhedrin 108 states that there were three creatures which violated the prohibition of sexual relations during their stay in the ark: the dog, the raven and Noach’s son Cham. All of them were punished for their misconduct. The dog is tied by a chain or leash to its owner. The raven is forced to spit after indulging in mating, and Cham’s skin, or that of his offspring, turned black.

Every living creature, every creeping thing, and every bird — everything that creeps upon the earth — went out from the ark according to their families.

למשפחתיהם AFTER THEIR FAMILIES — They took upon themselves to keep to their specie.

"According to their families" — meaning, according to their kinds. Some say they bred within the ark, and that each family went out without mixing with another — and this is not far-fetched.

למשפחותיהם יצאו מן התבה, “they left the ark according to their respective families.” In Sanhedin 108 this is understood as למשפחותיהם ולא הם. This statement is not elaborated on there. [The simplest interpretation is that only those animals capable of reproducing left the ark; any animal which was sterile did not live on after the deluge for any length of time. Some commentators believe that whereas the animals left the ark without awaiting instructions from either Noach or G’d, Noach and family awaited such instructions. Noach demanded a promise from G’d that He would not again bring a flood upon the earth. Still other commentators view the word למשפחותיהם here as a hint that the animals undertook henceforth to mate only with their own species.

למשפחותיהם יצאו מן התבה, “they left the ark as families.” On the face of it this sounds incredible; the Torah wishes to tell us that the animals which prior to the deluge had mated only with members of their own species were rewarded by being able to continue to do so. This was also why these pairs had seen fit to enter the ark together in the first place.

And Noah built an altar before Hashem, and he took of every clean animal and of every clean bird, and offered burnt offerings upon the altar.

מכל הבהמה הטהרה OF ALL CLEAN CATTLE — He said: “The Holy One, blessed be He, ordered me to take in seven pairs of these only in order that I might offer a sacrifice of them” (Genesis Rabbah 34:9).

"The clean animals" — ten. We do not know the number of clean birds, for they were more numerous than the unclean. Noah built the altar on one of the mountains of Ararat.

ויעל עולות, “he offered burnt offerings.” He acted similar to the sailors in the story of Jonah, who after having been saved from a great storm and returned to dry land, immediately offered offerings to G-d for their deliverance. (Jonah 2,16). We learn from here that anyone who has been miraculously saved from dangers beyond his control is expected to offer tangible thanksgiving offerings. במזבח, “on the altar.” This is a reference to the altar on which Kayin and Hevel had presented their respective offerings.

ויבן נח מזבח לה’, “Noach built an altar for the Lord, etc.” Noach’s thinking when offering sacrifices was in an ascending manner. First, he built an altar on earth, addressing himself to G-d as the attribute of Mercy, hence the word לה’. From this attribute of Mercy, he proceeded to ויעל עלת, “he raised total-offerings on top of that altar.” Although the word עולות for total-offerings is read as a plural, it is spelled without the letters ו, i.e. as if it were a singular. This indicated his intent to elevate himself spiritually by means of the sacrifices. The animal was to take his place symbolically when the smoke of its flesh rose heavenwards. Isaiah 60,7 where the prophet, quoting G-d, exclaims יעלו על רצון מזבחי ובית תפארתי אפאר, “they will ascend on high achieving goodwill associated with My altar and I will glorify even further My glorious House,” is similar. [We would have expected the prophet to write יעלו לרצון על מזבחי, “they will ascend on My altar to achieve goodwill, etc.” The change in the wording indicates that the person offering the sacrifice wanted to achieve a spiritual union with Him [Who is “above,” Ed.]. We find such a concept even with Manoach in Judges. He had not even bothered to build an altar [it was forbidden at that time to build private altars, Ed.], but the prophet described the ascent of his sacrifice from a spiritual point located as higher than the altar i.e. מעל המזבח, “from above the altar” (Judges 13,20). Subsequently, that same sacrifice is described as reaching heaven. At that point the angel is depicted as “taking a ride in the flame and ascending” (to heaven? also). The word להב in Judges may be understood as connected to לב, heart. In other words, the heart was the medium which enabled the sacrifice and what it stood for to reach heaven. This explains G-d’s reaction which is described here in the words וירח את ריח הניחח, “G-d’s bounty which originates in the celestial regions was drawn “downwards”. At that point G-d said אל לבו, to the attribute of Justice, “I will not continue ever to allow My attribute of Justice to curse the earth because of man, i.e. “because I have discovered something positive in man.”

And Hashem accepted his offering with favor, and Hashem said in His Memra: I will not again curse the earth on account of the sins of mankind, for the inclination of the heart of man is evil from his youth; and I will not again smite every living thing as I have done.

. מנעריו FROM HIS YOUTH — This word is written without a Vav after the ע so that it may be read as מנעריו which would imply that from the moment the embryo bestirs itself to have an independent existence the evil inclination is given to it (Genesis Rabbah 34:10). לא אסף… ולא אסף I WILL NEVER AGAIN … NEITHER WILL I EVER AGAIN — He repeated the expression that it might serve as a solemn oath, and it is to this that the text (Isaiah 54:9) refers: “For as I have sworn that the waters of Noah [will never again pass over the earth]”. We, however, do not find any explicit oath regarding this, but this passage in which He repeated these words, which may be regarded as an oath. Thus do our Sages explain in Treatise Shevuot 36a.

AND THE ETERNAL SAID IN HIS HEART. He did not reveal the matter to a prophet at that time, but on the day He commanded Moses concerning the writing of the Torah He revealed to him that as Noah brought his sacrifice it mounted pleasingly, and He decreed that He will no more smite every living thing. In this regard, I have already written of a secret hinted at by our Rabbis. The sense of the expression, I will not again curse the ground any more for man’s sake is that they were punished because of him for if man had not sinned, they have been spared even though they had also corrupted their ways. FOR THE IMAGINATION OF MAN’s HEART IS EVIL FROM HIS YOUTH. He ascribes merit to men because by their very creation they have an evil nature in their youthful days but not in their mature years. If so, for these two reasons, Therefore, for these two reasons it is not proper that every living thing be smitten on account of man. it is not proper to smite every living thing. The reason for the prefix mem [which signifies “from” in the word] min’urav (from his youth) is to indicate that the evil imagination is with men from the very beginning of their youth, just as the Rabbis have said: “From the moment he awakes to go forth from his mother’s womb the evil impulse is placed in him.” It is possible that the verse is saying that it is from youth — meaning, on account of youth — that the evil inclination is in man, for youth causes him to sin. And some say that it is as if it said “in his youth,” [min’urav being interpreted as if it were bin’urav]. Similarly we find ‘Miterem’ (Before) a stone was laid upon a stone in the temple of the Eternal, [where the word miterem is interpreted as beterem]; so too, This is the land which ye shall divide ‘minachlah’ (by lot) unto the tribes of Israel, [where minachlah is interpreted as benachlah].

"And He smelled" [וַיָּרַח] — on the pattern of וַיָּנַח בְּכָל גְּבוּל מִצְרַיִם (Exodus 10:14). The resh is voweled with a patah on account of the het, which is a guttural, as is the rule in the holy tongue. Heaven forbid — heaven forbid — that Hashem should smell without eating, for it is written: אֲשֶׁר חֵלֶב זִבְחֵימוֹ יֹאכֵלוּ (Deuteronomy 32:38). Rather, the meaning is that He accepted the burnt offering and it was pleasing before Him, like a person who inhales a good fragrance and finds it pleasant. "The pleasing aroma" [הַנִּיחוֹחַ] — from the root of מְנוּחָה, 'rest'; the het is doubled, as the pe of נַּאֲפוּפֶיהָ (Hosea 2:4) is doubled. The meaning is that the fragrance caused [His] wrath to rest, or that it causes a supernal power to rest. "To His heart" — meaning, 'with His heart.' Afterward He revealed His secret to Noah, for he was a prophet. "The meaning of 'I will not again curse'" — as He had cursed through Adam's act, for so it is written: אֲרוּרָה הָאֲדָמָה (Genesis 3:17). יֵצֶר ["the inclination"] — this is the nature that was formed within him. "And I will not again" — referring to the Flood. The word עוֹד means 'forever,' or 'a second time'; similarly: וַיֵּבְךְּ עַל צַוָּארָיו עוֹד (Genesis 46:29).

את ריח הניחוח, proving that at that time all these species of ritually pure animals were fit as sacrifices. In His heart. He did not reveal this resolution to Noach and his sons until after they had accepted His commandments and He established His covenant with them. For the inclination of man’s heart. Human makeup was now inferior to what it was before the flood and the intellect no longer held sway during the years of youth. This enabled the appetites to achieve domination.

ויאמר השם אל לבו לא אוסיף עוד לקלל G'd said to His heart: "I will not continue to curse, etc." Why does G'd use the words לא אוסיף twice in the same verse? Rashi claims that the repetition makes the statement equivalent to an oath. He bases himself on Shavuot 36. This poses a problem, seeing that the sages do not really say this. This is the text of the Talmud: Rabbi Eliezer said the word לא is a term used as an oath; the word הן is also a term used as an oath; Rabbi Eliezer quotes some verse as proof. Rava corrects his statement by saying that only when these words are used twice do they constitute an oath. Rava quotes Genesis 9,11 ולא יכרת כל בשר עוד ממי המבול ולא יהיה עוד מבול, all flesh will not again be annihilated by the waters of the deluge, nor will there ever be another flood, as proof for his rule. The fact that Rava quotes this verse and not 8,21 shows that he means two separate verses or statements are needed. The single verse in 8,21 does not constitute an oath according to the Talmud. The Talmud is quite correct in not using the repeated words לא אוסיף as an oath where G'd is reported as saying this "to His heart." In that verse the words לא אוסיף were applied to two different undertakings by G'd. He promised not to curse the earth, and He promised not to curse all the living creatures. It would not be proper to speak of a repetition then. What G'd undertook in this verse was not to punish the earth again on account of man's deeds as He had done when Adam sinned and when Cain sinned. Not even a part of the earth would henceforth be cursed on account of man's actions or inactions. In addition G'd expressed His satisfaction with Noach's sacrifice and promised not to smite whole categories of creatures even when this did not involve destroying their habitat. It is clear then that there is no oath here since G'd did not repeat anything. That is why Rava in the Talmud uses the verse in 9,11 as an example of an oath. We will explain that verse in detail in its proper place. Perhaps Rashi had a different version of the Talmud as suggested by the commentary of the רא׳ש on that folio. We still need to supply a reason why the verse once mentions the curse before the word עוד, i.e. לא אוסיף לקלל עוד, whereas in the second half of the verse the sequence is ולא אוסיף עוד להכות, the word עוד already appearing before the predicate of the sentence. The reason is that a curse directed at the earth already has a past history, i.e. earth has been cursed before and the effects of that curse still existed. When G'd curses living creatures there is no noticeable effect of any previous curse as any living creatures that had been cursed or smitten prior to the present curse were already dead and as if they had never existed. Our verse incorporates this nuance. It reminds us that the earth was still suffering from the effect of previous curses. כי יצר לב האדם רע מנעוריו, for the inclination of man's heart is evil from its youth. This statement is best understood as similar to the Talmud Baba Kama 39. The Talmud discusses an incidence in which a bull trained to perform in an arena has gored someone. Such an animal is not subject to the death penalty as it only did what it was expected to do. The reason cited in that Mishnah is that the Torah uses the future tense יגח in Exodus 21,28 when providing the death penalty for oxen which gore a human being. Animals which have been trained to do just that are not culpable for doing what comes naturally. Similarly, man, equipped as he is with an evil instinct from birth, is not culpable until he has learned to distinguish right from wrong. This rule applies to minors not being subject to the judiciary process. They are, however, punishable by G'd for not having heeded His call. In that respect man is not like the bull we mentioned. Man's advantage over the beasts is his knowledge of good and evil. He is charged with despising evil and choosing what is good. The fact that man was born with the יצר הרע only, acts like an extenuating circumstance protecting him against G'd's anger.

ויאמר ה' אל לבו, “the Lord said to Himself, etc.,” Prior to the deluge (Genesis 6,6) the Lord had seen fit to feel saddened in His heart; now He felt greatly encouraged about the human species He had created.[Noach could have drawn comparisons between the chaos he faced in spite of having lived a blameless life for 600 years, with the Gan Eden into which Adam had been placed without his having done anything to merit this. Instead, he was grateful. Ed.] לא אוסיף, “I will not continue, etc;” according to the plain meaning of the text, i.e. the additional, apparently superfluous word: עוד, again, further, the first word refers to the earth, whereas the second word refers to the living creatures on it. If we needed proof of this, it can be found in Genesis 9,12). כי יצר לב האדם רע מנעוריו, “because the tendencies of man’s heart are evil from his youth already.” Man’s immaturity in his younger years is the reason for these evil inclinations. G-d therefore had decided not to visit punishments on man promptly as a result this consideration as He used to do.

מנעוריו, “from the time he is youthful.” Our sages in Bereshit Rabbah 34,10 say that the meaning of this expression is that the word מנעוריו, refers to “the moment the baby is born.” It accompanies man from the time he is born and that this is why he does not have to observe the Torah’s commandments until he attains the age of puberty (13) as only then does the יצר הטוב, the urge to be good, become part of him. (based on Kohelet Rabbah 9,22 and on Kohelet 4,14 כי מבית הסורים יצא למלך, “for from the time he is a prisoner he (the evil urge) rules.”) The evil urge had considered itself imprisoned in the fetus which is inside the mother’s womb and it wants to “celebrate its freedom” as soon as the baby is born. Seeing that the word הסורים is spelled defective with the letter א missing, this is an allusion to the evil urge which ignores the א, the One and Only G-d and His wishes. Alternatively, the defective spelling makes the word the equivalent of the aramaic סרי, meaning ויבאש, “it became foul.”

“I will not continue to curse the ground anymore because of man.” Similarly, it was said to Adam (Genesis 3:17), Cursed is the ground because of you. From here we have proof that the earth was a cause of man’s sin, for it gave him coarse and thick matter that tends greatly toward materiality, as it is written (Leviticus 18:25), And the land became defiled and I visited its iniquity upon it. This was said specifically about the seven nations who previously dwelt in the Holy Land, because although the Holy One, Blessed be He, gathered his dust from all four corners of the world, and thus all lands have a share in man’s sin since they all contributed thick and coarse matter to him, nevertheless, all other lands received their judgment and were purified by the waters of the flood, as three handbreadths of plowed soil were damaged, and through this the earth’s matter was softened and its hardness was removed. From then on, the earth’s matter was not as bad as it was initially, both from the perspective of punishment — as it was purified by the flood waters like any immersion that purifies and removes contamination and impurity — and from the natural perspective, as all the earth was softened by the flood waters, and since then the earth’s matter is not as hard as it was before. However, regarding the Land of Israel, it is said in Ezekiel (22:24), You are a land that is not cleansed, nor rained upon in the day of wrath. Since it was not purified by the flood waters, its impurity remains within it, and when the inhabitants of that land sin, the sin can be attributed to the land. Therefore, it was specifically said regarding the lands of the seven nations, And the land became defiled and I visited its iniquity upon it. This resolves what could be questioned: The verse says Like the practice of the land of Egypt… and like the practice of the land of Canaan, equating them to each other, so why doesn’t the land of Egypt vomit out its inhabitants as the land of Canaan vomited out its nations? The answer is that since Egypt was rained upon in the day of wrath, their transgressions can no longer be attributed to the land, so why should it vomit them out? It is sufficient that the sinning nation receives their punishment on their land. But the Land of Israel, which was not rained upon, can still have sin attributed to it. Therefore it is said (Deuteronomy 29:21), And they will see the plagues of that land. As will be explained in its place, God willing, this is why it was said after this flood, I will not continue to curse the ground anymore because of man. For from here onward, man’s transgression cannot be attributed to the land, but rather to his evil inclination which draws its power from the serpent and from Samael who rides it. This is why He gave the reason: for the inclination of man’s heart is evil from his youth — that the main source of his sin would be attributed to his inclination and not to the physicality of the earth. And the proof of this: In the generation of the flood it is written and every inclination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil all day, meaning it would continually worsen from day to day. This sin was certainly dependent on the physicality of the earth, not from the intellectual capacity within man, for wisdom is with aged men, and with length of days comes understanding (Job 12:12). How could it be that man would not regret his evil as he advances in years? However, if physicality alone is the cause, it makes sense, because physicality, due to its bestial nature, even as it ages, its foolishness does not depart from it. But after the flood, when the physicality of the earth was purified, from then on one cannot attribute sin except to the evil inclination which becomes stronger particularly in youth, but when one ages, one’s intellectual eye opens and one does not return to foolishness. Therefore it does not say “all day” but rather only from his youth. Indeed, when one reaches 13 years, “his friend” also comes and examines — this is the good inclination, and this is the cause of their survival.

ויאמר ה' אל לבו, “The Lord said to Himself, etc.” According to Nachmanides this strange formulation simply means that G’d did not reveal His thoughts to anyone at that time. Only when Moses received the Torah, did G’d reveal what His thoughts had been at the time. He had not revealed to Noach what precisely His reaction had been to Noach’s sacrifice, i.e. that on account of it He would not again use the deluge as a means to punish mankind. בעבור האדם, “because of man.” The earth had only been cursed on account of original man. Had Adam not sinned, his descendants, despite their corruption, would not have had to endure a deluge. ולא אוסיף עוד להכות את כל חי, “and I will not again smite all living creatures simultaneously. However, I reserve the right to decree collective punishment on a city or a country.

All the days of the earth — sowing and harvest, cold and heat, summer and winter, and day and night — shall not cease.

עוד כל ימי הארץ וגו' לא ישבתו WHILE THE EARTH REMAINETH … SHALL NOT CEASE — Of these six seasons each consists of two months, as we have learned (Bava Metzia 106b): Half of Tishri, Marcheshvan and half of Kislev is seedtime; half of Kislev, Tebeth and half of Shebat is the cold-season. קור COLD-SEASON is more severe than חורף winter. חורף WINTER is the time of sowing barley and pulse which are quick (חריף) to ripen. It is half of Shebat, Adar and half of Nisan. קציר HARVEST — Half of Nisan, Eyar, and half of Sivan. קיץ SUMMER — Half of Sivan, Tammuz and half of Ab. This is the time of fig-gathering, the time when they lay them out to dry in the fields. and its name is קיץ “summer-fruittime”, as (2 Samuel 16:2) “And the bread and the summer-fruit (קיץ) for the young men to eat”. חום HEAT — This is the end of the hot season, half of Ab, Elul and half of Tishri, when the world is excessively hot, as we have learned in Treatise Yoma 29a: “The end of the summer is worse than the summer itself”. ויום ולילה לא ישבתו DAY AND NIGHT SHALL NOT CEASE — From this we may infer that they (day and night) ceased during the period of the Flood, for the planetary system did not function, so that there was no distinction between day and night (Genesis Rabbah 34:11). לא ישבתו SHALL NOT CEASE — None of these shall cease to take their natural course.

"All the days of the earth, etc." — a sign that it has a fixed end. How noble is the homily about the eighteen thousand surrounding [worlds] — yet we do not know even one in a thousand. "Seedtime and harvest" — He divided the year into two, and then into four: "cold" corresponds to "heat," and "summer" corresponds to "winter" — corresponding to the four seasons of the year. And all of them are divided by "day and night," for what one lacks the other adds; and then the surplus returns and diminishes, adding to what was lacking, until they are equal.

עוד כל ימי הארץ זרע וקציר, וקור וחום, וקיץ וחורף, ויום ולילה, לא ישבתו; nature will not cease to function dependably as it had prior to the deluge. The sun will orbit predictably, its orbit will be subject to calculation in advance, so will be its position relative to other phenomena in the sky. All the time periods mentioned in this verse will somehow be related to the position of the sun at different times during the year. It would be different from before the deluge. Whereas prior to the deluge the sun had remained at a fixed distance relative to the earth all year round, its orbit being circular, resulting in eternal spring in the populated parts of the earth, now there would be all these changes, though at predetermined intervals, resulting in alternating seasons of relative warmth and cold due to the elliptical nature of the sun’s orbit [Although the author lived approximately at the time of Copernicus having determined that the earth moves around the sun instead of being the center of our galaxy, the basic concept even according to the ancient world view does not invalidate the author’s description of antediluvian and postdiluvian climatic conditions. Ed. כל ימי הארץ, until such time as G’d would correct this deterioration in living conditions on earth due to the effect of the deluge. This “correction” is what the prophet Isaiah 66,22 had in mind when he spoke of the הארץ החדשה אשר אני עושה, “the new earth which I am going to make.” In that future foreseen by the prophet, the sun will once more orbit like a circle instead of like an ellipsis, a configuration responsible for the uneven temperatures on earth during different parts of the year. At that time, the whole vegetation on earth will undergo an upgrading, the curse earth experienced both after Adam’s sin and after Kayin’s murder of his brother Hevel being lifted. Conditions of length of human life will revert to what they had been before the deluge, as the prophet said that a נער, a youth, if he dies at a hundred years old will be considered as having died in his adolescence and more verses there describing this future. This is also what David referred to in Psalms 65,9 מוצאי בוקר וערב תרנין, “You make the lands of sunrise and sunset shout for joy.”

עוד כל ימי הארץ, “as long as earth exists, etc;” our author understands these words as parallel to Isaiah 51,6: כי שמים כעשן נמלחו והארץ כבגד תבלה, “for the heavens should melt way like smoke and the earth wear out like a garment.” In other words, the covenant now concluded with mankind is not eternal, but subject to the same conditions as the duration of the material universe as we know it. Rashi understands the whole verse as describing the seasons of the year which will repeat regularly, [limited, of course to our northern hemisphere. Ed.] two months for each season, but they do not coincide with the beginning of the lunar months but run from the middle of the month approximately. This subject is dwelt on in Baba Metzia, 106. If you were to counter that in the Talmud Baba Metzia the Talmud does not appear to match what is written here, as the year is described as the seasons being described as contrasting each other, i.e. cold season versus hot season, etc; it is possible that the version of Rashi that we have is faulty.

עוד כל ימי הארץ, “Furthermore, as long as the earth will continue to exist, etc.” The wording of this verse [Rabbi Chavell sees in the word כל an allusion to כלה, “something finite”] indicates that there will come a time when the earth will no longer exist. Even though the word עוד is spelled defective without the letter ו, and this would allude to the very reverse, i.e. the infinite existence of earth based on the word עד being similar to ועד, “forever,” we must give precedence to the reading of the word over its spelling. זרע וקציר, “seedtime and harvest;” the ones (being seeded) are going to be born, whereas the others are going to die (harvested). The verse goes on to explain the cause of such birth and death respectively, i.e. קר וחם, “cold and heat.” Basically, this verse intends to acquaint us with six regular phenomena which will recur at regular intervals as do day and night.