Moral Equivalence

Noach

Gen. 6:9-11:32

Précis: The story of Noah (Hebrew: Noach) and the Flood appear in this parasha. Noah, called by God, builds the Ark and collects the animals. It rains for forty days and nights. Noah and his family are saved, and afterwards leave the Ark, build an altar, and make sacrifices to God. God sets a rainbow as a promise not to destroy mankind again. Noah plants a vineyard, makes wine, and becomes drunk. An odd incident with sexual overtones takes place with his sons. The story of the Tower of Babel is included in this parasha, and it ends with a genealogy of the ancient peoples of the Bible, concluding with Abram.

Gen. 6:9 “...Noah was a righteous man; he was blameless in his age.”

            The Sages debate about the relative “righteousness” of Noah. Was he truly righteous or merely better than those around him? Noah is identified in these verses as both “tzaddik” (righteous) and “tamim” (blameless). According to rabbinic thought, a “tzaddik” is one who has been proclaimed righteous following an accusation of wrong doing, while the term “tamim” describes a person who required no defense because no wrongs by him have been alleged. Most commentators agree that Noah merits praise, since nothing is more difficult than to be moral when one is surrounded by deceit and sinfulness.

            The text informs us that Noah lived in a time filled with corruption and violence. Despite societal pressure, he “walked with God." So whether he was truly righteous on some immutable scale or merely better than those around him seems to fall on the side of the former.

            I take from this an important lesson: there is, indeed, a difference between right and wrong, regardless of the circumstances. We all too often fall into a false reliance of “moral equivalence” when acts of barbarity are brushed off because “the other side” also acts improperly. Israel is repeatedly treated by much of the world in this manner, falsely being equated with apartheid South Africa by the BDS movement, or by claims that its continued “occupation” of Palestinian territory justify violence by Hamas or other terror groups – as if these two were morally equivalent.

            In the current election season in America, there is the real danger that all too many see a similar moral equivalence between the major candidates. If Noah is to be our guide, it is our responsibility to vote for the candidate who best represents our historic American ideals of equality, justice, and the recognition that those with whom we disagree politically are all part of the American fabric. 

Is what is left out important?

I began doing a weekly d’var torah in 5761, corresponding to the year 2000-2001 of the secular calendar, which means I am starting another year! I hope you all have a wonderful Shabbat and a year of peace and health. 

Bereshit

Gen. 1:1 - 6:8

Précis: The first Book of the Torah, Bereshit (Genesis, literally “in the beginning” or “When God began to create”) begins with the familiar story of creation. The world is created in six days and God rests on the seventh. The stories of Adam and Eve and the Garden of Eden are included, as is the story of Cain and Abel.

            We begin the annual reading of the Five Books of Moses immediately upon its conclusion. Why? Perhaps it is because with each passing year, our experiences allow us to understand more of what life has to offer, and what the text has to offer. Yochanan Ben Bag Bag said (Pirke Avot 5:25), "Turn it, and turn it, for everything is in it. Reflect on it and grow old and gray with it. Don't turn from it, for you have no better standard of conduct."

Gen. 4:9 "...Cain said to his brother Abel.... and then, when they were in the field, he rose up and killed him..."

            Let's review the action of this story for just a moment. God accepts Abel's sacrifice, but He rejects Cain's offering. The text does not explain why this happens. As became customary for the Sages, midrash was introduced to “fill in” the missing details. Here, they suggest that Cain’s offering was of inferior quality to that of his brother Abel, resulting in God’s displeasure.

             Cain becomes upset and angry. We then come to the oddly constructed verse, cited here. The Sages point out that the verb "said" has no object. What  did Cain say, and why is the rest of his statement omitted from the text? Tradition tells us that what Cain said is irrelevant; he was starting an argument and looking for a fight with his brother. He was looking for an excuse to blame Abel for his own failures.

            I suggest that this is precisely the source of much difficulty in our own lives, whether individually or as groups. When we are unhappy or dissatisfied, a natural reaction is the look to someone else to blame for the situation, when in reality we should be looking within ourselves for an explanation. This suggests a need for self-awareness and honesty.

            In this year’s political contest, we can see the Cain/Abel dichotomy as a metaphor for our political dividedness. Vague and omitted objects are leading us to heat and anger. We ourselves are “filling in” the targets of our anger and hatred. Some say that Cain had never seen death, and therefore never really intended to slay his bother. We, however, have no such excuse. We all know the perils of politically-inspired electoral violence, the kind of which United States has by and large managed to avoid.  We must pray that in our own case – contrary to that of Cain and Abel – that we avoid the violence we find in their story as our election approaches.