Search
Close this search box.
October 31, 2024
Search
Close this search box.

Linking Northern and Central NJ, Bronx, Manhattan, Westchester and CT

Zera Shimshon on Parshas Noach

וַתִּשָּׁחֵת הָאָרֶץ לִפְנֵי הָאֱלֹקים וַתִּמָּלֵא הָאָרֶץ חָמָס: וַיַּרְא אֱלקים אֶת הָאָרֶץ וְהִנֵּה נִשְׁחָתָה כִּי הִשְׁחִית כָּל בָּשָׂר אֶת דַּרְכּוֹ עַל הָאָרֶץ: וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹקים לְנֹחַ קֵץ כָּל בָּשָׂר בָּא לְפָנַי כִּי מָלְאָה הָאָרֶץ חָמָס מִפְּנֵיהֶם וְהִנְנִי מַשְׁחִיתָם אֶת הָאָרֶץ
(בראשית ו:יא-יב)

And the earth acted immorally before Hashem, and the earth became full of robbery. And Hashem saw the earth, and behold it had become corrupted, for all flesh had corrupted its way on the earth. And Hashem said to Noach, “The end of all flesh has come before Me, for the earth has become full of robbery because of them, and behold I am destroying them from the earth. (Braishis 6:11-13)

The Zera Shimshon points out a seeming contradiction in the pesukim. Initially, the generation is described as having two shortcomings: they were “immoral and full of robbery.” However, when Hashem decides to destroy the world, only robbery is mentioned. In the next pasuk where the punishment is mentioned, only the fact that thievery was prevalent was mentioned. Why the inconsistency? Were they destroyed for immorality, for robbery or for both?

Zera Shimshon explains in light of the Gemara in Berachos (32a) that interprets the term “ve’Di-Zahav,” found at the beginning of Sefer Devarim, as a reference to the sin of the Golden Calf. Moshe argued before HaKodesh Baruch Hu, “Rebono Shel Olam! The abundant silver and gold You bestowed upon Yisroel led them to create the Golden Calf!” (The word “Di” is spelled with the letters “daled” and “yud,” which are the same letters in the word “dai,” meaning “enough.”) “Zahav” translates to gold.

The Gemara further elaborates on its explanation by offering two analogies. In the yeshiva of Reb Yannai, they likened the situation to a saying: “A lion does not roar (when he eats) a basket of straw but rather (when he eats) a basket of meat.” Rabbi Chiyya bar Abba quoted Rabbi Yocḥanan, who compared it to a man who took good care of his son—bathing him, anointing him, feeding him, giving him drink and even hanging a purse of money around his neck—only to then place him at the entrance of a brothel. In such circumstances, how could the son avoid sinning? Rabbi Shmuell bar Nachmani, citing Reb Yonason, pointed out that Hashem essentially agreed with Moshe’s argument. This is evidenced by the phrase, “and silver, I (Hashem) gave to them in abundance, and they made a calf from gold.”

In other words, after the incident of the Golden Calf and Hashem wanting to destroy the whole Jewish nation because of it, Moshe put forth an argument that Hashem found persuasive. The crux of his argument was that Bnei Yisroel could not bear full responsibility for the sin of the Golden Calf. Why? Because they were not responsible for the initial conditions that led to what they eventually did with the Golden Calf. In essence, they were placed in a situation where resisting sin became exceedingly difficult, and for this reason, their blame was not absolute.

Expanding on this concept, it’s crucial to understand that actions are not isolated occurrences; they are part of a complex web of circumstances, decisions and consequences. When Hashem punishes, this complexity is taken into full account. Every contributing factor, every mitigating circumstance and every precursor to a given action is weighed carefully.

In cases where the root cause of the sin was not instigated by the individual, such as the case of the Golden Calf, the severity of Hashem’s punishment is adjusted accordingly. That’s not to say that the person is wholly absolved; rather, that the punishment reflects a nuanced understanding of human behavior and the factors that influence it.

According to this, Zera Shimshon explains the primary sin of the Dor HaMabul (generation of the Flood) was extreme immorality, but this is not where it all started. Chazal (Sanhedrin 108a) teach us that Hashem provided them with immense prosperity.

Therefore, the argument could be made that their immoral behavior was a byproduct of the prosperity and abundance they enjoyed which Hashem gave them. This is what led them to decadence and a loss of ethical moorings. This idea recalls the defense Moshe Rabbeinu made on behalf of Bnei Yisroel for what they did in the incident of the Golden Calf. Moshe argued that the challenges Bnei Yisroel faced were often the result of their circumstances, and therefore they should be judged with this context in mind.

However, the Zera Shimshon points out that this potential line of defense for the Dor HaMabul falls apart when considering their engagement in robbery and theft. The act of stealing shows that they were not content with the prosperity that Hashem had provided them and didn’t see themselves as wealthy but as people who needed money. This undermines any defense that their immorality was solely a byproduct of their prosperity because their actions demonstrated a lack of contentment with what they already had.

In essence, their engagement in robbery served as a “nail in the coffin,” nullifying any possible defense based on the circumstances of their prosperity. As a result, Hashem deemed them fully responsible for their actions, leading to their ultimate destruction in the Mabul (the Flood).

According to Zera Shimshon, there is absolutely no contradiction between the pesukim; rather, they offer a layered understanding of the Dor HaMabul’s transgressions. It was their extreme immorality, compounded by their robbery, that rendered them deserving of the severe judgment they faced. The first pasuk clearly lists both their immorality and thievery, highlighting that these dual sins were both present. The second pasuk emphasizes their immorality as the principal reason for Hashem’s initial consideration of destruction, indicating that this was the primary cause warranting such grave punishment. The third pasuk, by focusing solely on their thievery, underscores that it was this added layer of sin that stripped them of any possible defense. Each pasuk contributes a different facet to the complete picture, and together they fully justify Hashem’s judgment.

While Zera Shimshon’s commentary specifically addresses Dor HaMabul, his core insight—that Hashem meticulously considers all factors leading up to a person’s actions before meting out punishment—has contemporary relevance for us. Before judging teenagers who may not conform to their upbringing in speech, dress or behavior, we should strive to emulate Hashem’s compassion and wisdom. These teenagers have likely endured a great deal of pain and struggle that shaped their choices. We must be careful not to blame others for these young people’s behavior, just as Moshe didn’t blame Hashem for the gold and silver that He bestowed on Bnei Yisroel before the incident of the Golden Calf. On the other hand, we should avoid dismissing them, judging them harshly, or holding them in contempt, and instead strive to see the entire context while extending the compassion toward them that they so need and deserve.

HaRav Shimshon Nachmani, author of Zera Shimshon, lived in Italy about 300 years ago in the time of the Or HaChaim HaKodesh. He had one child who died in his lifetime and he prefaced his sefer with the promise that those who learn his sefarim “will see children and grandchildren like the offshoots of an olive tree around your tables.”

Leave a Comment

Most Popular Articles