Genesis 9:1-9:29

Surf The Site
Genesis: 1a 1b 1c 1d 2a 2b 2c 2d 3 4a 4b 4c/5 6a 6b 7 8 9 10 11a 11b 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25a 25b 26a   26b 27 28a 28b 29 30a 30b 31a 31b/32a 32b 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44a 44b 45 46 47a 47b 48 49 50



9:1 VA YEVARECH ELOHIM ET NO'ACH VE ET VANAV VA YOMER LAHEM PERU U REVU U MILU ET HA ARETS

וַיְבָרֶךְ אֱלֹהִים אֶת נֹחַ וְאֶת בָּנָיו וַיֹּאמֶר לָהֶם פְּרוּ וּרְבוּ וּמִלְאוּ אֶת הָאָרֶץ

KJ (King James translation): And God blessed Noah and his sons, and said unto them, Be fruitful, and multiply, and replenish the earth.

BN (BibleNet translation): And Elohim blessed No'ach and his sons, and said to them: "Be fruitful and multiply and replenish the Earth.


The previous chapter ended with YHVH, but now we are with Elohim again.

PERU U REVU: The Creation commandment reiterated yet again. But this is specifically the male deity telling the men to go out and make babies, and not the fertility goddess bestowing the ability to conceive on what would otherwise be barren women, which will be one of the predominant themes of the remainder of the Book of Genesis.


9:2 U MORA'ACHEM VE CHIT'CHEM YIHEYEH AL KOL CHAYAT HA ARETS VE AL KOL OPH HA SHAMAYIM, BE CHOL ASHER TIRMOS HA ADAMAH U VE CHOL DEGEY HA YAM BE YED'CHEM NITANU

וּמוֹרַאֲכֶם וְחִתְּכֶם יִהְיֶה עַל כָּל חַיַּת הָאָרֶץ וְעַל כָּל עוֹף הַשָּׁמָיִם בְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר תִּרְמֹשׂ הָאֲדָמָה וּבְכָל דְּגֵי הַיָּם בְּיֶדְכֶם נִתָּנוּ

KJ: And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the earth, and upon every fowl of the air, upon all that moveth upon the earth, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hand are they delivered.

BN: "And the fear of you and the dread of you shall be upon every beast of the Earth, and upon every fowl of the air, and upon every creature with which the ground teems, and upon all the fishes of the sea; into your hands are they delivered...


This is the lesson read in churches, mosques and synagogues every week among the white rhinoceros of Africa, the whales of the northern Arctic, the coral of the Moruroa Atoll, and the lifeforms on several planets currently being explored and therefore already in danger of becoming endangered. The second key Creation commandment now stated for no less than the third time: HUMAN BEINGS ARE TO BE HELD RESPONSIBLE FOR THE PLANET. But with a warning now, based presumably on that cynical statement by the deity at the end of the previous chapter (8:21): "for the imagination of the human heart is evil from youth onwards".

MORA'ACHEM: From the root YAR'E = "fear"; YIR'AT YHVH, the "fear of the deity", will recur frequently in the tales that follow, ancient humans not regarding the deity as an intellectual construct that one "believes", but as a daily physical reality of droughts and famines, deaths and diseases, earthquakes and hurricanes, cancer cells and newly-mutated viruses, that one rightly fears.

CHIT'CHEM: From the root CHET, and yes, it is almost certainly a word neologised out of the "might" and "strength" and "power" of the Beney Chet, the Hittites who established the first known empire, and ruled the lands of "the common source" for several centuries.

"Fear and dread" is thus a variation on Genesis 1:28, where the verb used was CHIVSHUHAH (וְכִבְשֻׁהָ): "subdue her". There is a fascinating debate waiting to be had over these interconnected references: clearly the gods intended human stewardship, but they also recognised that Nature would have to be conquered first, and that Humankind is driven by the same instincts as the rest of Nature, so it is going to be a battle for domination by conquest, which will require the same sorts of ruthlessness and destruction repeatedly modeled by the gods themselves. And then, where do peace, mercy, truth, justice and compassion come into the equation?

DEGEY HA YAM: There has been no mention of the fishes until this point in the story, and not surprisingly, since they were the one species totally unaffected by the flood. Nonetheless, now that the Flood is over and Human responsiblity has been re-asserted, the fishes have to be included or it might be assumed by humans in their "inclination towards wickedness" that the pollution of the seas was not their problem.

Why the switch from Remes (רמש) which is in the Po'al form, to Terames (תרמש) which is in the Pi'el form? Pi'el is always an intensification (e.g. LICHTOV = "to write", but LEKATEV = "to scribble")? See the next verse where this becomes even more bewildering.

Now that the world has been created, and Humankind put in charge, there needs to be a set of rules for Humankind to live by (a very pessimistic conclusion by the deity, who might like to think more positively and optimistically that humans could establish their own rules and live morally and ethically by them). The evidence of the first attempt, in Eden, is that Humankind finds obedience to rules difficult, but simply punishing them by leaving them to their own devices in a post-Edenic world has failed, whence this Flood; so the deity recognises that there have to be rules and regulations (responsible capitalists may be exempt, but the text is not absolutely clear on this point), but that these need to be far more explicit than the vagueness of "do not eat from certain trees". What follows are those rules, and they are provided for all of Humankind, not just for that people (because they do not yet exist as such) who will be called the Beney Yisra-El, and later on the Jews.


9:3: KOL REMES ASHER HU CHAI LACHEM YIHEYEH LE ACHLAH KE YEREK ESEV NATATI LACHEM ET KOL

כָּל רֶמֶשׂ אֲשֶׁר הוּא חַי לָכֶם יִהְיֶה לְאָכְלָה כְּיֶרֶק עֵשֶׂב נָתַתִּי לָכֶם אֶת כֹּל

KJ: Every moving thing that liveth shall be meat for you; even as the green herb have I given you all things.

BN: "Every moving thing that lives shall be for food for you; as the green herb have I given you all.


For the third time carnivorism appears to be given formal approval, despite the vegetarian inferences of earlier chapters, and the appearance that Humankind like all creatures was originally made as a herbivore. However "every moving thing" does not include a separation of those clean and unclean animals which the Redactor added to the tale in the previous chapters in order to make a Beney Yisra-Eli tale out of a Babylonish one, complete with Kashrut; an editorial "oversight" driven by political necessity, we have to assume. Nor is any distinction made between poisonous and safe foodstuffs (lizards, for example, carry salmonella...take a look here). Yet other kinds of exceptions will be made in the next verse.

KOL REMES: But does it really give formal approval to "every moving thing"? REMES has been used throughout to mean, quite specifically, insects and reptiles; so "every" may well be hyperbolous, if not actually a mis-translation (click here for the many references).

Presumably this written formal approval (if such it is) is the result of mingling different tribal creation myths, though it may also be a post-diluvian modification by the deity.

This verse in particular seems to endorse the view that No'ach was originally a Creation, and not a Re-Creation myth - the terms of the settlement being given very explicitly.


9:4 ACH BASAR BE NAPHSHO DAMO LO TOCHELU

אַךְ בָּשָׂר בְּנַפְשׁוֹ דָמוֹ לֹא תֹאכֵלוּ

KJ: But flesh with the life thereof, which is the blood thereof, shall ye not eat.

BN: "Only meat that is still alive, with blood still in it, you may not eat."


The first two dietary laws (or the second and third, if one includes the forbidden fruit of Eden): "kill the meat first", "drain all the blood". Deuteronomy 12:23 makes clear that "the blood is life" and therefore to consume the blood is to eat the beast while, or as if, it is still alive, which is why Jewish meat is always so dry, and why those amazing Kosher restaurants that have recently opened on New York's Upper West Side have introduced the arts of teriyaki, Hoi-Sin, barbecue sauce and English gravy; kashrut requires every last drop of blood to be removed after slaughter and you have to counter this with something tasteful. Rashi links the prohibition with that of cutting off the limb of a live animal, which is the first of what are called the Seven No'achide Laws, all of them deduced from or given in this particular story. The seven in full are given in the notes to verse 7 below.


9:5: VE ACH ET DIMCHEM LE NAPHSHOTEYCHEM EDROSH MI YAD KOL CHAYAH EDRESHENU U MI YAD HA ADAM MI YAD ISH ACHIV EDROSH ET NEPHESH HA ADAM

וְאַךְ אֶת דִּמְכֶם לְנַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם אֶדְרֹשׁ מִיַּד כָּל חַיָּה אֶדְרְשֶׁנּוּ וּמִיַּד הָאָדָם מִיַּד אִישׁ אָחִיו אֶדְרֹשׁ אֶת נֶפֶשׁ הָאָדָם

KJ: And surely your blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it, and at the hand of man; at the hand of every man's brother will I require the life of man.

BN: "And surely the blood of your lives will I require; at the hand of every beast will I require it; and at the hand of every man, even at the hand of every man's brother, will I require the life of every man."


Which seems to give legal and moral justification to the blood-feud and the blood-vengeance, the GO'EL. Surely this doesn't tally with general Beney Yisra-Eli law? Well, actually it does, as we shall see when we get to Numbers 35:9-30. But what it is actually saying here is: there is no immortality; eventually I, your god, will take back every life that I have given. This statement undermines the argument, used for example by anti-abortionists, that in the eyes of the divine all human life is sacred. It evidently is not. The most that we can say is that every human life is a temporary privilege, with no possibility of knowing when the privilege will be withdrawn, a position seemingly recognised by insurance companies, who regard most incidents of the arbitrary and haphazard loss of life as "acts of god".

The vehemence of the phrasing comes as a surprise. But the Beney Yisra-El would likely have known the Utnapishtim story, and Utnapishtim was granted eternal life/immortality as his reward - if indeed it can be regarded as a reward! cf also Lamech and Kayin. The emphasis is there to make absolutely clear that there is no immortality for ordinary human beings.

If an animal kills a man, according to the law in Exodus 21:28-32, it must be put to death. What might be called the Rottweiler Code.

Alternately, we may read this entirely differently. Blood is sacred because it belongs to me, Elohim, it being the liquid of Life. Your souls likewise belong to me, as being the spirit of Life. And I demand – i.e. have the right to claim back my property… these are the terms of the covenant then, in which Elohim gets not just obedience to his law during life, but the yielding of the blood and soul afterwards.

Alternate to the alternate, is this a statement of Elohim's intent if the specific law in the verse above is broken, that if an animal is eaten while it is still alive, the punishment will be the deaths of the eaters? Various references to "the accursed thing" later in the Tanach and in the Christian Bible, and similar deaths for touching the Ark or breaking other sacred taboos related to the divinity, bear out this possibility? It may well be, because in fact the whole purpose of Temple sacrifice – from the Latin = "to make sacred" – is that we are taking the life of one of the deity's creatures, in order to eat it, but it is made acceptable to do so because, first, we have slaughtered it in the approved manner, and, second, Elohim gets a share of the banquet through the vapours.

MI YAD KOL CHAYAH: Generally CHAYAH means "animals" or "beasts", where KOL CHAI usually means "all living things"; I wonder if the intention here really is the beasts, rather than merely being an early form of the sixth commandment, "You shall not kill" (Exodus 20:12).

But there is also one more inference to be drawn from this, that Elohim sent the flood to destroy the Earth because of the wickedness of Humankind; but Elohim clearly anticipates that Humankind is not going to be in the slightest bit improved by the experience, that murder and rape and others forms of bestiality and criminality will resume... and that punishment will again be needed. How depressing!


9:6: SHOPHECH DAM HA ADAM BA ADAM DAMO YISHAPHECH KI BE TSELEM ELOHIM ASAH ET HA ADAM

שֹׁפֵךְ דַּם הָאָדָם בָּאָדָם דָּמוֹ יִשָּׁפֵךְ כִּי בְּצֶלֶם אֱלֹהִים עָשָׂה אֶת הָאָדָם

KJ: Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed: for in the image of God made he man.

BN: "Whoever sheds Man's blood, by Man shall his blood be shed; for in the image of Elohim did Elohim make Man.


Wonderful alliteration! Wonderful symmetry! Again this depends very much on the Yehudit, and doesn't work so well in translation. Dam (דם) for blood and Adam (אדם) for Man as we have seen so often.

But it is also a translation that belongs to its (very patriarchal) epoch; in today's world, or at least in the more liberal-progressive corners of today's (still very patriarchal) world, it might read more politically correctly as:

"Whoever sheds another human's blood, by another human shall his blood be shed; for in the image of Elohim did Elohim make human beings."

Does this reassert the statement in the first note to verse 5 - that this is the law of the Go'el, the death penalty as well as a dietary law?

Again this is Elohim, not YHVH. Humankind in the image and likeness of the god is always Elohim, because the Elohim are forces and powers (blood and soul), and Titans and demi-gods, whereas YHVH is always the abstract spirit, the metaphor, the universal pulse; the former a mythological, the latter a metaphysical construct (and YHVH Tseva'ot, who we will also encounter much later on, was the transition stage between Elohimistic polytheism and the Omnideity YHVH of the post-Biblical epoch).


9:7 VE ATEM PERU U REVU SHIRTSU VA ARETS U REVU VA

וְאַתֶּם פְּרוּ וּרְבוּ שִׁרְצוּ בָאָרֶץ וּרְבוּ בָהּ

KJ: And you, be ye fruitful, and multiply; bring forth abundantly in the earth, and multiply therein.

"And you, be fruitful, and multiply; spread out over the Earth, and populate it."


Absolutely no sense of ergonomics!

Was this not already commanded in verse 1?

The Seven No'achide Laws are thus deduced from this story, though there is absolutely no textual evidence to corroborate several of them:

a) the establishment of courts of justice;
b) prohibition of blasphemy;
c) prohibition of idolatry;
d) prohibition of incest;
e) prohibition of bloodshed;
f) prohibition of robbery;
g) prohibition of eating flesh cut from a living animal.

Samech break; end of fragment four.


9:8 VA YOMER ELOHIM EL NO'ACH VE EL BANAV ITO LEMOR

וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים אֶל נֹחַ וְאֶל בָּנָיו אִתּוֹ לֵאמֹר

KJ: And God spake unto Noah, and to his sons with him, saying,

BN: And Elohim spoke to No'ach, and to his sons who were with him, saying:


9:9 VA ANI HINENI MEKIM ET BERITI IT'CHEM VE ET ZAR'ACHEM ACHAREYCHEM

וַאֲנִי הִנְנִי מֵקִים אֶת בְּרִיתִי אִתְּכֶם וְאֶת זַרְעֲכֶם אַחֲרֵיכֶם

KJ: And I, behold, I establish my covenant with you, and with your seed after you;

BN: "As for me, behold, I hereby establish my covenant with you, and with the generations who come after you.


ET BERITI: As pointed out earlier, he has already established his covenant; only now the terms are slightly different (see 6:18).

HINENI: Worth following through the usages of this important term through the Tanach; I will add an essay on the subject later. In the meanwhile, there is a decent D'var Torah on the subject here.


9:10 VE ET KOL NEPHESH HA CHAYAH ASHER IT'CHEM BA OPH BA BEHEMAH U VE CHOL CHAYAT HA ARETS IT'CHEM MI KOL YOTS'EY HA TEVAH LE CHOL CHAYAT HA ARETS

וְאֵת כָּל נֶפֶשׁ הַחַיָּה אֲשֶׁר אִתְּכֶם בָּעוֹף בַּבְּהֵמָה וּבְכָל חַיַּת הָאָרֶץ אִתְּכֶם מִכֹּל יֹצְאֵי הַתֵּבָה לְכֹל חַיַּת הָאָרֶץ

KJ: And with every living creature that is with you, of the fowl, of the cattle, and of every beast of the earth with you; from all that go out of the ark, to every beast of the earth.

BN: And with every living creature that is with you, the birds, the cattle, and every living creature of the Earth that is with you; everything that goes out of the ark; every living creature of the Earth.


Making it clear by endorsement-through-repetition that this covenant is with all of Elohim's creatures, and not just with Humankind. Folks of faith should take comfort from it; as we will see in the next verse, global warming may do damage, the melting of the ice as a consequence of global warming may take out Florida and Bangladesh, New York and Venice, the fjordic coastline of western Europe and many a coral atoll in the Pacific, but not a total flooding of the world, as in the time of No'ach. It is a promise, a covenant, a commitment. We are safe. (Can't you just hear the sigh of relief among politicians!)


9:11 VA HAKIMOTI ET BERITI IT'CHEM VE LO YIKARET KOL BASAR OD MI MEY HA MABUL VE LO YIHEYEH OD MABUL LESHACHET HA ARETS

וַהֲקִמֹתִי אֶת בְּרִיתִי אִתְּכֶם וְלֹא יִכָּרֵת כָּל בָּשָׂר עוֹד מִמֵּי הַמַּבּוּל וְלֹא יִהְיֶה עוֹד מַבּוּל לְשַׁחֵת הָאָרֶץ

KJ: And I will establish my covenant with you; neither shall all flesh be cut off any more by the waters of a flood; neither shall there any more be a flood to destroy the earth.

BN: "I hereby establish my covenant with you: never again will animal life be cut off by flood-waters; never again will there be a flood to destroy the Earth.


Hurricanes and volcanoes and earthquakes, even atom bombs, these there will be, not to mention plagues, famines, even the fire and brimstone of Sedom and Amorah; but never again a flood. Do not tell that to the folks who believe that the predicted outcome of global warming - world-wide flooding when the ice-caps melt - is a second Flood, consequent upon our continuing to sin, because Elohim has ruled out that possibility, right here.

Oh, and by the way, for those of you who have not noticed, as most of the world has failed to notice, Elohim makes this promise, in, on, where - yes, look at the top - Genesis - 9/11!


9:12 VA YOMER ELOHIM ZOT OT HA BERIT ASHER ANI NOTEN BEYNI U VEYNEYCHEM U VEYN KOL NEPHESH CHAYAH ASHER IT'CHEM LE DOROT OLAM

וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים זֹאת אוֹת הַבְּרִית אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי נֹתֵן בֵּינִי וּבֵינֵיכֶם וּבֵין כָּל נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה אֲשֶׁר אִתְּכֶם לְדֹרֹת עוֹלָם

KJ: And God said, This is the token of the covenant which I make between me and you and every living creature that is with you, for perpetual generations:

BN: And Elohim said, "This is the seal of the covenant which I hereby establish between myself and you, and with every living creature that is with you, and with every future generation.


OT (אות): See Genesis 1 for the significance of this word.

BEYNI U VEYNEYCHEM: Is it just me, or is it really arrogant and narcissistic and egomaniacal and self-centred that this gives the "me" first and the "you" afterwards?

The formal signature of the deity, written on the dotted line of the sky; unwitnessed, if you are a believer in monotheism; with seven witnesses, if you are a pantheist who attributes each of the colours of the rainbow to an individual god or goddess, and the light of the sun-god which enables the rainbow to serve as the King John of this particular Magna Carta.


9:13 ET KASHTI NATATI BE ANAN VE HAYETAH LE OT BERIT BEYNI U VEYN HA ARETS

אֶת קַשְׁתִּי נָתַתִּי בֶּעָנָן וְהָיְתָה לְאוֹת בְּרִית בֵּינִי וּבֵין הָאָרֶץ

KJ: I do set my bow in the cloud, and it shall be for a token of a covenant between me and the earth.

BN: "I have set my rainbow in the cloud, and it shall serve as a symbol of the covenant between myself and the Earth.


KASHTI (קשתי): = "my rainbow"; an aetiological explanation that goes rather a long way from the normal conventions of covenant-making; i.e. where is the cut? And what is the agreement on the part of the other parties? The No'achide Laws?

The Yud (י) in Berit (ברית) seems to be part of the word, not an aide to pronunciation. Is this correct?


9:14 VE HAYAH BE ANENI ANAN AL HA ARETS VE NIR'ATAH HA KESHET BE ANAN

וְהָיָה בְּעַנְנִי עָנָן עַל הָאָרֶץ וְנִרְאֲתָה הַקֶּשֶׁת בֶּעָנָן

KJ: And it shall come to pass, when I bring a cloud over the earth, that the bow shall be seen in the cloud:

BN: And it shall come to pass, when I bring clouds over the Earth, and the rainbow is seen in the cloud...


Identifying Elohim with Ba'al-Chadad the Kena'anite storm god.


9:15 VE ZACHARTI ET BERITI ASHER BEYNI U VEYNEYCHEM U VEYN KOL NEPHESH CHAYAH BE CHOL BASAR VE LO YIHEYEH OD HA MAYIM LE MABUL LESHACHET KOL BASAR

וְזָכַרְתִּי אֶת בְּרִיתִי אֲשֶׁר בֵּינִי וּבֵינֵיכֶם וּבֵין כָּל נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה בְּכָל בָּשָׂר וְלֹא יִהְיֶה עוֹד הַמַּיִם לְמַבּוּל לְשַׁחֵת כָּל בָּשָׂר

KJ: And I will remember my covenant, which is between me and you and every living creature of all flesh; and the waters shall no more become a flood to destroy all flesh.

BN: "...that I will remember my covenant, which is between myself and you and every living creature of every species; and never again will the waters become a flood to destroy all flesh.


Again, this covenant is with all creatures, not just with No'ach, not even just with humans. But what is odd is that the rainbow appears to be there for Elohim's needs, not Humankind's; like an aide for a dyslectic, seeing the rainbow will remind Elohim of his promise to protect Humanity. So we should pray for rainbows, because if there are none, maybe Elohim with his poor memory will forget us. And maybe this is a better explanation for evil in the world than Histir Panav (also known as Hester Panim: see Deuteronomy 31:18 and Psalm 22:25), or the inevitable infallibility of humankind stated earlier in this tale, or original sin – divine dyslecksia!


9:16 VE HAYETAH HA KESHET BE ANAN U RE'IYTIYHA LIZKOR BERIT OLAM BEYN ELOHIM U VEYN KOL NEPHESH CHAYAH BE CHOL BASAR ASHER AL HA ARETS

וְהָיְתָה הַקֶּשֶׁת בֶּעָנָן וּרְאִיתִיהָ לִזְכֹּר בְּרִית עוֹלָם בֵּין אֱלֹהִים וּבֵין כָּל נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה בְּכָל בָּשָׂר אֲשֶׁר עַל הָאָרֶץ

KJ: And the bow shall be in the cloud; and I will look upon it, that I may remember the everlasting covenant between God and every living creature of all flesh that is upon the earth.

BN: "And when the bow is in the cloud, then seeing it there will remind me of the eternal covenant between Elohim and every living creature made of flesh that is on the Earth."


All of which sounds like a classic legal document, written up in lawyer jargon and signed and witnessed by all present; one assumes that such documents were common enough, even in these days of chisel and stone, and the style merely borrowed for the purposes.


9:17: VA YOMER ELOHIM EL NO'ACH ZOT OT HA BERIT ASHER HAKIMOTI BEYNI U VEYN KOL BASAR ASHER AL HA ARETS

וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים אֶל נֹחַ זֹאת אוֹת הַבְּרִית אֲשֶׁר הֲקִמֹתִי בֵּינִי וּבֵין כָּל בָּשָׂר אֲשֶׁר עַל הָאָרֶץ

KJ: And God said unto Noah, This is the token of the covenant, which I have established between me and all flesh that is upon the earth.

BN: Then Elohim said to No'ach, "This is the symbol of the covenant which I hereby establish between myself and all flesh that is on the Earth."


It is not made clear how the other creatures are going to know that this covenant has been signed and sealed in their name; but it has been given to No'ach as representative of Humankind, so of course it is again a statement of the human stewardship of the planet, and the animals must simply trust the care and integrity of Humankind.

Pey break; end of fragment 5.


9:18 VA YIHEYU VENEY NO'ACH HA YOTS'IM MIN HA TEVAH SHEM VE CHAM VA YAPHET VE CHAM HU AVI KENA'AN

וַיִּהְיוּ בְנֵי נֹחַ הַיֹּצְאִים מִן הַתֵּבָה שֵׁם וְחָם וָיָפֶת וְחָם הוּא אֲבִי כְנָעַן

KJ: And the sons of Noah, that went forth of the ark, were Shem, and Ham, and Japheth: and Ham is the father of Canaan.

BN: And these were the sons of No'ach who disembarked from the ark: Shem, Cham and Yaphet; and Cham is the father of Kena'an.


Why this statement, and why now, given that we had the information already? As a prelude to the genealogy about to follow? What seems to me most significant about it is that declares the residents of Kena'an to be Beney Cham (Hamites), and not Beney Shem (Semites), where the Jews have always maintained that they were Semites; so is this making a distinction between the Semitic, perhaps Amoritic Beney Yisral-El, and the indigenous Beney Kena'an?

In most mythological cultures, as we have seen, there is a triad or trinity or trimurti, a triplet of patriarchs or deities through whom the evolution of the species is explained: Brahma, Vishnu and Shiva in Hinduism, Ouranos, Chronos and Zeus in the Greek world, Av-Raham, Yitschak and Ya'akov in that of the Beney Yisra-El. If No'ach is the sun, are his three sons also an equivalent of this trinity?


9:19 SHELOSHAH ELEH BENEY NO'ACH U MEY ELEH NAPHTSAH CHOL HA ARETS

שְׁלֹשָׁה אֵלֶּה בְּנֵי נֹחַ וּמֵאֵלֶּה נָפְצָה כָל הָאָרֶץ

KJ: These are the three sons of Noah: and of them was the whole earth overspread.

BN: These three were the sons of No'ach, and through them the entire Earth was populated.


This does not tie up with the KAYIN list or "facts" elsewhere, but the point is the one emphasised by the literal way I have translated the verse.


9:20 VA YACHEL NO'ACH ISH HA ADAMAH VA YIT'A KAREM

וַיָּחֶל נֹחַ אִישׁ הָאֲדָמָה וַיִּטַּע כָּרֶם

KJ: And Noah began to be an husbandman, and he planted a vineyard:

BN: And No'ach took up farming, and he planted a vineyard.


ISH HA ADAMAH (איש האדמה): usually rendered as "husbandman" - is this right? Wasn't Kayin "a tiller of the ground" already before him (Genesis 4:2). Why this attribution? Note the play on words yet again, ADAMAH relating back to Adam, both from the root DAM = "blood", whose significance as the source of life has just been restated in the latter verses.

VA YIT'A KAREM (ויטע כרם): he planted a vineyard - but the Prophets, and later Jesus, regularly use the vineyard as an allegory for Yisra-El, so this could mean, he established the nation etc. Alternatively, given that Creation in the previous versions led to the establishment of the "garden" of Eden, which turned out not to be a garden at all, in the sense that we think of the patch of lawn and roses behind our house, but as a place of fruit-bearing trees... the Persian Paradise, which gives Yehudit the word PARDES, was a citrus orchard; the Greek Garden of the Hesperides was an apple orchard; and now No'ach, who we have seen is a humanised form of the sun-god, is planting a vineyard, linking him perhaps with Bacchus in the Roman tradition, himself a variant of Dionysus in the various Greek traditions. Does this commentary help us unravel the enigma of what comes next? If this is the No'achic version of Eden, can we expect some act of wickedness, some sin, some evil, some rebelliousness, to lead to the loss of the vineyard?

The following may simply be another myth or version appended at the end; it needs separate analysis. Note that this is now YHVH, not Elohim, which explains a great deal about the peculiarity of the tale.

When Adam was expelled from Eden, he became a farmer; No'ach tending the vine is, in a sense, back inside the orchard, the word for which in modern Ivrit is once again Pardes, the same as Paradise. Is there a play-on-words going on here, to suggest that some measure of redemption, or at least rehabilitation, has taken place? Or is this simply a literary technique to enable a segue into what is actually an entirely unconnected tale, the one that now follows?


9:21 VA YESHT MIN HA YAYIN VA YISHKAR VA YIT'GAL BETOCH AHALOH

וַיֵּשְׁתְּ מִן הַיַּיִן וַיִּשְׁכָּר וַיִּתְגַּל בְּתוֹךְ אָהֳלֹה

KJ: And he drank of the wine, and was drunken; and he was uncovered within his tent.

BN: And he consumed wine until he was drunk, and he lay down naked in his tent.


Which suggests that verse 20 was needed as a way into this particular legend; nothing to do with No'ach in the original most likely, it was attached to him for want of anywhere else to put it. All the more oddly because: wasn't No'ach the most upright and perfect man, the only good one saved from the flood that destroyed the wicked? And yet here he is, drunk as any good citizen of Amorah, and with his private parts uncovered in his tent. Unlikely! Very unlikely! Or perhaps, go back to my final note to verse 5... isn't this exactly what Elohim was anticipating?

This myth needs deeper explanation. The similar Creation myth of the castration of Ouranos by Zeus and Chronos gives some idea of its meaning. But we also need to read it in parallel with the tale of Lot and his daughters, in the aftermath of their personal apocalypse - see especially Genesis 19:30-37.


9:22 VA YAR CHAM AVI CHENA'AN ET ERVAT AVIV VA YAGED LI SHENEY ECHAV BACHUTS

וַיַּרְא חָם אֲבִי כְנַעַן אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו וַיַּגֵּד לִשְׁנֵי אֶחָיו בַּחוּץ

KJ: And Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brethren without.

BN: And Cham, the father of Kena'an, saw his father naked, and told his two brothers who were outside.


KENA'AN: TheBibleNet text retains the correct Yehudit wherever possible; there are occasions when the text looks like it may contain an error, but is in fact correct: this is one of them. Kena'an (Canaan) is given here, and in verse 18 above, as the man, elsewhere as the land. We must regard him as the eponymous ancestor.

The tale here is puzzling to the point of bewilderment. The previous description had him partially uncovered in his tent (VA YIT'GAL), whereas now he is fully naked (ERVAT). Which is correct? Why is it significant that his sons saw him naked? Had it been his daughters, or daughters-in-law, as in the Lot story, it might have raised concern; but surely not his sons. And why Cham, and why the Kena'an link reiterated? In all likelihood this is one of innumerable occasions in the Torah where one tale has been interpolated or appended to another, despite their being unconnected; but done as part of the dual editorial objective of creating a coherent and linear historical narrative that will give the Beney Yisra-El a unified past, and therefore the means to build a unified present and future; and the need to find a place for all the major myths and legends of all the participating members of the confederacy.

In this case we have the latter part of the original Creation myth from which the Beney Yisra-El took their story, appended to No'ach for reasons that will become apparent in the notes to the ensuing verses. In most comparable mythologies, there are three phases of Creation, Brahma:Vishnu:Shiva in the Hindu, Av-Raham:Yitschak:Ya'akov in the source-myths of the Beney Yisra-El, Ouranos:Chronos:Zeus in the Greek. When Ouranos' capacity for procreation started getting out of hand, and just too many stars and planets and galaxies were coming into being, his sons - Chronos with his brothers Coeus and Crius as well as Hyperion and, guess who! Iapetus, our Yaphet - took the drastic but necessary measure of castrating him – which is ironic in the context of this tale, because going-forth-and-multiplying is precisely what Elohim has told No'ach to do, and precisely what eunuchisation precludes.

That reference to Iapetus is worth pursuing. Greek Iapetus is Beney Yisra-Eli Yaphet, one of the three sons of No'ach; in the Biblical version it is Cham, the father of Kena'an who is the guilty party. Is it feasible that the earliest versions of the Yehudit did indeed make Yaphet the culprit, but the Redactor changed it to Cham? Iapetus's sons included Prometheus, the Greek Adam, the one who stole fire from the gods and gave it to Humankind, itself regarded in the Greek world as a form of "original sin", because it too was a "first-fruit" from the Tree of Knowledge.

A rather less prurient reading might simply focus on the parallel here with the naked Adam and Chavah of Eden; the first-fruits of their eating of the Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil was the realisation that they were naked, and that this was somehow shameful; a parallel of Cham's discovery of his father's nakedness here. But if so, why do we alone of all creatures wear clothes, when we are born into the world naked? And why are we ashamed of being seen without clothing, and prurient in longing so to see? These are ancient questions, and this, perhaps, the second of Genesis' ways of trying to answer it.


9:23 VA YIKACH SHEM VA YEPHET ET HA SIMLAH VA YASIYMU AL SHECHEM SHENEYHEM VE YELCHU ACHORANIT VA YECHASU ET ERVAT AVIHEM U PHENEYHEM ACHORANIT VE ERVAT AVIHEM LO RA'U

וַיִּקַּח שֵׁם וָיֶפֶת אֶת הַשִּׂמְלָה וַיָּשִׂימוּ עַל שְׁכֶם שְׁנֵיהֶם וַיֵּלְכוּ אֲחֹרַנִּית וַיְכַסּוּ אֵת עֶרְוַת אֲבִיהֶם וּפְנֵיהֶם אֲחֹרַנִּית וְעֶרְוַת אֲבִיהֶם לֹא רָאוּ

KJ: And Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went backward, and covered the nakedness of their father; and their faces were backward, and they saw not their father's nakedness.

BN: And Shem and Yaphet took a garment, and laid it upon both their shoulders, and went in backwards, and covered their father's nakedness; and their faces were turned around, so they did not see their father's nakedness.


The tale now appears to suggest that actually it was Shem and Yaphet who did something terribly wrong, and not Cham; the latter merely saw his father's body exposed, but they threw a blanket over him and covered him up. In what way is this a terrible thing to have done? If we go back to the Ouranos tale, where his sons castrated him, we can assume that the Redactor has taken an equivalent of that tale, and castrated it, so to speak, to this. In the light of the repeated commandment to go forth and multiply, especially now, in the aftermath of the Flood, the castration of their father is a rebellion against the god, and fits into Frazer's description in "The Golden Bough" of the guardian of the shrine being supplanted by his successor. Av-Shalom (Absalom) will attempt the same against David when he declares civil war and claims the throne; in his case not by physically castrating David, but by seizing the harem (2 Samuel 16:21), which in effect amounts to the same thing. This matter of supplanting will become one of the central themes throughout the remainder of Genesis.

If this second interpretation is truly borne out by this verse, then what manner of strange custom is this laying of the garment on both their shoulders, and going in backwards, faces as well as bodies facing backwards, to lay it over their father? Is there is a sense of a chupah of some kind being raised - the bridal canopy which is also lifted over the head of the Beney Mitzvah? Is it that one only enters and exits backwards with a king? An early version of the Emperor's New Clothes perhaps? Or simply a variation of the embarrassment of nakedness that Adam and Chavah experienced? No'ach as king, or god? Whatever may have been the original text has been so heavily expurgated that we simply cannot know.

The choice of the word SHECHEM is also not without significance: the SHECHEM/shoulder being the Kohen's portion of the sacrifice; also SHECHEM was a major shrine of the Ezraic period: today's Nablus. Is the garment on their joint shoulders and over their head then a primitive prayer-shawl? The backward-walking might be a form of duchening - the ascent onto the dais in the synagogue by the Kohanim to deliver the Priestly Blessing. Is this then a description of some ancient cultic rite - perhaps the dressing of the god-idol in much the way that gelilah is performed today, undressing and redressing the Torah scroll before and after reading from it in synagogue? If so, it again affirms No'ach's deitic status. But then, what is the status of the wine and No'ach's drunkenness in all this - a form of kiddush; a reflection of the tradition of approved drunkenness at Purim and Simchat Torah? Compare this with the aftermath of the destruction of the Cities of the Plain, where it is Lot's daughters who go into him, drunk like No'ach, and father children with him incestuously. Which of the three (castration, incest, mere covering up) is the original, which the revision, which the final version? Again, we cannot know.

There is a very thorough essay on the subject by David Goldenberg which you can read here.


9:24: VA YIYKETS NO'ACH MI YEYNO VA YEDA ET ASHER ASAH LO BENO HA KATAN

וַיִּיקֶץ נֹחַ מִיֵּינוֹ וַיֵּדַע אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן

KJ: And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him.

BN: And No'ach awoke from his wine, and knew what his youngest son had done to him.


BENO HA KATAN: But wait a minute, his youngest son is Yaphet, and it was Cham, the middle son, who found him and told his brothers, who did the deed. The youngest son was Yaphet. And in verse 25 it will be Kena'an, the son of Cham, who will receive the curse, because No'ach now thinks it was him. Do we have yet another example of the supplanting of the elder by the younger? Or simply yet another instance of multiple versions getting badly merged?

But the reference to the youngest also bears curious resemblance (and the Midrashim - see below - bear this out), if somewhat expurgated, to the Greek tale; or tales, in fact, because after the Ouranos version there is also a Chronos version, much the same really, but one generation along, in which his three sons (and again there are three sons) Zeus, Poseidon and Hades, conspired together to castrate him. In the end only the youngest, Zeus, undertook the act, and it was he who then supplanted his father to become king of Olympus.

In the Hittite myth, the supreme god Anu's testicles are bitten off by his rebel son and cup-bearer Kumarbi, who then laughed, as Cham is said to have done, until Anu cursed him. According to Philo, El castrated his father Uranus likewise.

Deuteronomy 23:1 prohibits a man from "uncovering his father's skirt", as several Christian translations coyly put it - though the original may actually be a euphemism for the nakedness of the stepmother rather than the father - but of course Cham doesn't do that, so the amount of schlarship dedicated to this is actually futile: Cham finds his father naked, which is not the same thing. More significantly the verse in Deuteronomy that follows explicitly forbids membership of god's congregation to eunuchs; there is evidence that the early Beney Yisra-El castrated all their uncircumcised enemies, as the Egyptians did in their wars with the People of the Sea (13th & 14th centuries BCE). 1 Samuel 18:25-7 has David paying Sha'ul a hundred Philistine foreskins as a bride-price for Michal, though the Bible is unclear whether David took the foreskins live, or removed them after taking the entire meat and veg.

The Beney Kena'an, in Leviticus 18, are accredited with a detailed list of sexual offences, and in 1 Kings 14:24 Rechav-Am's (Rehoboam's) subjects are reproached for doing much the same.

The Midrashim, as noted above, are manifold on this subject. Genesis Rabba 36:5 deals with the planting of the vineyard and No'ach's consequent drunkenness; that latter is also discussed in Tan Noah:20. Sanhedrin 70a accuses No'ach of intemperance, but also blames Adam for not warning him, which is problematic, since Adam was dead long before No'ach was born; it also accuses Adam of being a drunkard, which endorses the value of my questioning earlier if Eden was a vineyard, and the links to Bacchus and Dionysus (see note to v20).

The Pirkei de Rabbi Eliezer (1:c) take this further, suggesting that No'ach actually took with him onto the Ark a vine-branch which had been cast out with Adam from Eden; having previously eaten its grapes, he now planted it, but the taste was dreadful. Clearly Eliezer knew nothing about vine-husbandry; planting a branch will achieve nothing; the trick is to graft it, and then you have to wait for several years - at least five, even by the Mosaic Code, let alone the evidence of horticulture.

The even more bizarre fantasies of Midrash Aggadah on Genesis 9:21, such as Midrash Abkir and Genesis Rabba 36:7, you will have to search through for yourself (the link to GR here is to the full text; No'ach is around page 200; there's a copy of MA in the British Library, 3rd floor, Asian manuscripts, if you happen to be in London); but in brief they tell how Ha Satan offered to help No'ach plant the vineyard, and did so by sacrificing various animals so he could use their blood as compost. Ibn Yahya (Shalshelet ha-Kabbalah) adds that No'ach saw one of his goats eating the very sour grapes and becoming so intoxicated that it did what male goats do when female goats are about; No'ach liked the connection of wine with copulation, took the root of the vine-branch and washed it with the blood of those Satanic sacrifices (a lion, a hog, a sheep, and an ape), planted it, grew sweet grapes (the vineyard miraculously bore fruit on the same day that it was planted), gathered them, pressed them, drank their juice, became intoxicated - but instead of finding lovely females to enjoy, along came wicked Cham (Cham in this Midrashic version, saw his grandfather naked, and abused him). Strangely, this piece of exegesis would make much more sense if it were applied to Lot and his daughters, rather than No'ach and his sons.


9:25: VA YOMER ARUR KENA'AN EVED AVADIM YIHEYEH LE ECHAV

וַיֹּאמֶר אָרוּר כְּנָעַן עֶבֶד עֲבָדִים יִהְיֶה לְאֶחָיו

KJ: And he said, Cursed be Canaan; a servant of servants shall he be unto his brethren.

BN: And he said: "Cursed be Kena'an; a servant of servants shall he be to his brethren."


Why Ken'aan? Or why Kena'an, but not Cham himself? At what point in the tale has Kena'an been involved, other than being named as Cham's son? Answer: he hasn't. So, again, why is he the one who gets cursed? Perhaps because it provided a justification for the enslavement of the Kena'anites by the Beney Yisra-El and the abomination of their practices? An early version of "manifest destiny"?

The poetic form of presentation here suggests an ancient proverb or possibly song, which it seemed a pity not to place in the text somewhere. From a purely psychological point of view it is a massive over-reaction, and therefore we need to find an explanation. One simple way to do that it to try to screenplay the scene. No'ach wakes from his drunken stupor to find that someone has come in and thrown a blanket over him; and he probably has no idea who it was, and unless the blanket has fleas, or unless it's made him too hot, he has no reason to complain about the thoughtful kindness of whoever-it-was. But apparently he was furious. Let us imagine him storming out of the tent, demanding to know who did it, and being told (deceitfully) that it was Kena'an. In which case ARUR KENA'AN might be an error for ARUR ATAH KENA'AN, translatable as "Damn you Kena'an!" But there is no ATAH. This phrase speaks about him, not to him.


v26: VA YOMER BARUCH YHVH ELOHEY SHEM VIY'HI KENA'AN EVED LAMO

וַיֹּאמֶר בָּרוּךְ יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵי שֵׁם וִיהִי כְנַעַן עֶבֶד לָמוֹ

KJ: And he said, Blessed be the LORD God of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

BN: And he said: "Blessed be YHVH, the god of Shem; and let Kena'an be their servant.


My statement about "manifest destiny" in the commentary to the previous verse no doubt surprised you. But then there is this verse: Exodus 6:3, as we have quoted repeatedly, makes clear that the name YHVH was unknown until the time of Mosheh, so this verse is either a late addition or an alteration. Why make it? As noted in the commentary to verse 18, Cham not Shem was the father of Kena'an, which makes the Beney Kena'an, the residents of Canaan, Hamites and not Semites, and through this verse their subordination to the Semites. A justification of the Joshuaic conquest? Perhaps.

Do not forget however that EVED also means "worshipper", so the intent may be purely religious rather than political subjugation.


9:27: YAPHT ELOHIM LE YEPHET VE YISHKON BE AHALEY SHEM VIY'HI KENA'AN EVED LAMO

יַפְתְּ אֱלֹהִים לְיֶפֶת וְיִשְׁכֹּן בְּאָהֳלֵי שֵׁם וִיהִי כְנַעַן עֶבֶד לָמוֹ

KJ: God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant.

BN: "May Elohim enlarge Yaphet, and may he dwell in the tents of Shem; and let Kena'an be their servant."


ELOHIM: Where YHVH is stated as the god of Shem in verse 26, Elohim is the god of Yaphet here; and just as Kena'an will serve Shem, so apparently will Shem serve Yaphet - which also helps explain how Kena'an got to be "a servant of servants" in verse 25. So should the Jews refer to themselves as Japhethites, and not Semites? Once again, racial, tribal, national myths and legends appear to be struggling to resolve themselves into a unity.

There is something very similar to Ya'akov's HIKAVTSU "blessings" (Genesis 49), and the farewell blessings of Mosheh in Deuteronomy 33, in this latter.

YAPHT ELOHIM LE YAPHET (יפת אלהים ליפת): an interesting piece of word-play, and once again it endorses the work that is being undertaken throughout the text, of seeking interpretation through the meanings of the names; for it is perfectly plain that this is precisely what the Tanach authors are doing here. Alas the translation is unable to equivalate this in English.

Presumably there is some kind of tribal power-struggle being discussed here, with a good deal of text missing. Kena'an/Cham worship one god, unmentioned here but obviously overthrown or subjugated; Yaphet worships Elohim; Shem has his own gods (Elohey Shem) who are probably the various Semitic gods, perhaps known collectively as YHVH, though more likely this is the HA ELOHIM whom we occasionally encounter. While Kena'an ends up as everybody's servant, and Cham seems to disappear, as though Kena'an has replaced him (which in a sense he did, as the children of Cham are properly the southern Kena'anites), Yaphet is the one who really comes out best, for he, and therefore Elohim, is given dominance over Shem, and therefore YHVH; which does not accord with Beney Yisra-El history, and would not accord with the Ezraic aspiration in constructing the Tanach as part of the process of establishing national identity through that history; so this needs more investigation.

Kena'an's children are given in Genesis 10 as Yevusim (Jebusites) etc, the predominant tribes of the land of Kena'an; confirming that we must read this as the conquest of Kena'an by the Beney Yisra-El. The key line of descent established here is ADAM - KAYIN - NO'ACH - YAPHET, which is not how the story is usually told!

Yaphet is held to be the progenitor of the Indo-European or Aryan races; he is best known through Phoenician and Greek legends, as Iapetus, but this pushes his dates a long way forward.

The Yehudit word for "beauty" - יָפִיוּת - may be connected to his name.

What though has the punishment to do with the crime?


9:28: VE YECHI NO'ACH ACHAR HA MABUL SHELOSH ME'OT SHANAH VE CHAMISHIM SHANAH

וַיְחִי נֹחַ אַחַר הַמַּבּוּל שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים שָׁנָה

KJ: And Noah lived after the flood three hundred and fifty years.

BN: And No'ach lived for 350 years after the flood.


Again a perfect round number - and not just any round number, but the precise sum of the two key sun-numbers that we identified repeatedly through the Flood story, 7 x 50.

From the next verse we can make the easy calculation that he was 600 at the time of the Flood (actually we already knew it; see Genesis 7:6), another perfect round number. Symbolic? And if so, of what. The calendar of the later Beney Yisra-El, based on the Babylonian, regarded the lunar year as 360 days (12 months of 30 days per month), but then added 5 extra days to intercalate with the solar calendar - so it is not this. But the Babylonian calendar - and the No'ach story, was originally Babylonian - was sexigesimal, not decimal, so the 600 is most definitely calendric; which leaves me wondering if he didn't live 360 years after the Flood, which would represent symbolically a year of years.

As ever, at this stage of the book, no tale can end without saying how long he lived. But notice the one stylistic difference – there is no reference to No'ach producing further sons and daughters! Because, finally, his journey across the heavens in the divine ark was a figure of the old sun-god, but we have entered a new epoch, and so the privilege of Creation has been taken from him; the trinity of Shem, Cham and Yaphet is now the sun-god, and procreation rests with them; a male trinity, as in most of the European cults, and not a female trinity (the three Graces, the daughters of al-Lah et cetera) as in most of the Middle Eastern cults.


9:29 VA YIHEYU KOL YEMEY NO'ACH TESHA ME'OT SHANAH VA CHAMISHIM SHANAH VA YAMOT

וַיִּהְיוּ כָּל יְמֵי נֹחַ תְּשַׁע מֵאוֹת שָׁנָה וַחֲמִשִּׁים שָׁנָה וַיָּמֹת

KJ: And all the days of Noah were nine hundred and fifty years: and he died.

BN: And all the days of No'ach were 950 years; and he died.


Pey break; end of chapter 9 but not yet the end of fragment 6... see Genesis 10:1-10:32 for its continuation.



The story as it is generally translated:



These are the generations of No'ach. No'ach was a righteous man, perfect in his generations, and he walked with Ha Elohim. And No'ach fathered three sons, Shem, Cham and Yaphet. But the Earth had becone corrupt in the eyes of Ha Elohim, and the Earth was filled with violence. And Elohim saw the Earth and behold it was corrupt, for all flesh had corrupted its way on the Earth. And Elohim said to No'ach, the end of all flesh is come for the Earth is full of violence, and behold, I will destroy the Earth. Make an Ark of gopher wood; make rooms inside it, and cover it inside and out with pitch. And this is how you shall build it: 300 cubits in length, 50 cubits in width and 50 cubits high. Put a window one cubit square in the Ark, and a door in the side of the Ark, and make three levels within. And I shall bring a flood against the Earth to destroy all flesh that lives and breathes and everything that lives beneath the sky and on the Earth shall perish. But I will make a covenant with you and you shall go into the Ark, you and your sons and your wife and your sons' wives. And from every creature, from all flesh, you will place two in the Ark to live with you; one male and one female. Birds of every species, cattle likewise, reptiles - two of every kind take with you to keep them alive. And take some of every kind of food with you, so that you will have something to eat. And No'ach did exactly as Elohim had instructed him.


And YHVH said to No'ach, "Come, you and your house, into the Ark; for I have seen that you are the one righteous man of your entire generation. Take seven male and seven female of every clean beast, and two male and two female of every unclean beast. Likewise of birds seven male and seven female, so there should be seed of all the Earth. Because in another seven days I shall cause rain to fall on the earth for forty days and night and I will erase every living thing that I have made from the face of the Earth." And No'ach did everything that YHVH commanded. And No'ach was 600 years old when the flood came upon the earth. And No'ach went into the Ark with his sons and his wife and his sons' wives to escape from the flood...

Of clean cattle and unclean cattle, of bird and reptile, two by two they came to No'ach and the Ark, both male and female, as Elohim had commanded...

And seven days went by, and the waters of the flood burst over the Earth. On the seventeenth day of the second month of the six hundredth year of No'ach's life, on that day all the wells of the deep burst and the windows of heaven broke open. And rain fell on the Earth full forty days and forty nights. On that same day No'ach, Shem, Cham, Yaphet, No'ach's wife, and the wives of his three sons entered the Ark. They, and every species of animal, every reptile, every bird, every fowl. And they came into No'ach on the Ark two by two of every living thing. And those that went in were male and female, as Elohim had commanded...

And YHVH closed up the Ark...

And the flood was forty days on the Earth, and the waters increased, and bore up the Ark and it was held above the Earth. And the waters prevailed, and they increased greatly on the Earth, and the Ark sailed on the face of the water. And the waters were supreme on the Earth and they covered even the highest mountains of the Earth. Fifteen cubits high did the waters reach, covering every mountain. And every creature perished that roamed on the Earth, every bird, beast and creeping thing and every man. Every creature in whom was the breath of life did perish...

And every living thing was destroyed that inhabited the Earth, man and beast, reptile and bird, and only No'ach and that which was with him in the Ark survived. And the water ruled the Earth fully one hundred and fifty days...

And Elohim remembered No'ach and all the creatures that were with him in the Ark, and Elohim made a wind pass across the Earth, so that the waters subsided. The fountains of the deep and the windows of Heaven were closed up, and the rain ceased to fall from the skies. And the waters continued to subside from the Earth, and after 150 days and nights the waters abated. And on the seventeenth day of the seventh month the Ark came to rest on Mount Ararat. And the waters continued to abate until the tenth month, and on the first day of the tenth month the peaks of the hills were visible. And after forty days No'ach opened the window he had made in the Ark. And he sent out a raven, which flew to and fro until the water had dissipated on the Earth. Then he sent out a dove to see if the water had completely dissipated. But the dove found nowhere to rest her feet and she came back to him in the Ark for the waters had not abated and he put out his arm and he took her back inside the Ark. And he waited a further seven days and again sent out the dove from the Ark. And the dove came back to him in the evening and behold there was an olive branch in her mouth, thus No'ach knew that the waters had now abated from the Earth. And he waited still another seven days and again he sent out the dove, and she did not return again. So it was that on the first day of the first month of the six hundred and first year that the waters dried up and No'ach removed the covering of the Ark, and behold, the Earth was visible. And on the 27th day of the second month, the Earth was fully dry.

And Elohim spoke to No'ach saying "Go out from the Ark, you and your wife and your sons and your sons' wives, and every living thing that is with you, cattle and reptile, and let them be fruitful and multiply on the Earth."

So No'ach and his sons and his wife and his sons' wives and every living creature, cattle, reptile, and bird, every family of creature went out from the Ark. And No'ach built a sacrificial altar to YHVH and he took from every clean cattle and from every clean bird and offered up offerings on the altar. And YHVH smelled the sweet smell and he said to himself: "I shall never again curse the Earth for Man's sake because the deepest instincts of Man are evil from his youth, and I will never again smite every living creature as I have done. For the rest of time seed, time, harvest, heat, summer, winter, day and night shall not cease..."

And Elohim blessed No'ach and his sons and said to them, "Be fruitful and multiply and fill the Earth. And every living creature of the Earth, every bird of the air every thing that creeps on the Earth, every fish in the sea shall hold you in fear and awe; and into your hand they are given. Every living creature that creeps on the Earth shall be food for you, just as I have given you the green herb. But meat in which the blood still flows you will not eat. And if you do, I shall demand your blood, from the hand of every living creature I shall demand it, and from the hand of man, and from the hand of your brother will I demand it. He who sheds blood, his blood shall likewise be spilled. For he is made in the image of Elohim. And you, be fruitful and multiply."

And Elohim spoke further to No'ach and his sons saying, "Behold I shall make a covenant with you and with your descendants and with every living creature that is with you, bird, beast and animal, from all that go out of the Ark to the last beast of the Earth. And I will establish my covenant with you that never again will I cut off all flesh with the waters of the flood, nor will I send a flood to destroy the Earth." And Elohim said, "This is the token of the covenant that I have made with you and all living creatures for ever more. I shall place a rainbow in the cloud and it shall symbolise the covenant drawn up between us. And when a cloud passes across the sky you will see the bow in the cloud. And I will remember my covenant with you..." And Elohim said to No'ach...

And these were the sons of No'ach who went out from the Ark, Shem, Cham and Yaphet (Cham being the father of Kena'an). Three sons of No'ach, from whom all the peoples of the world are descended. And No'ach began to farm the land, and he planted a vineyard. And he drank the wine and became drunk; and he lay naked in his tent. And Cham, the father of Kena'an, saw his father naked and told his two brothers. And Shem and Yaphet took a garment, and laid it on their shoulders, and walking backwards approached their father, and covered him with the garment, in such a way that they did not see him naked. And No'ach woke from his stupor and realised what his youngest son had done. And he said, "Cursed be Canaan, a slave of slaves he shall be to his brothers." And he went on, "Blessed be YHVH, the god of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant. Elohim shall reward Yaphet and he shall dwell in the tents of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant." And after the flood No'ach lived 350 years. And all the days of No'ach's life were 950 years, when he died.




Surf The Site
Genesis: 1a 1b 1c 1d 2a 2b 2c 2d 3 4a 4b 4c/5 6a 6b 7 8 9 10 11a 11b 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25a 25b 26a   26b 27 28a 28b 29 30a 30b 31a 31b/32a 32b 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44a 44b 45 46 47a 47b 48 49 50



Copyright © 2020 David Prashker
All rights reserved
The Argaman Press


No comments:

Post a Comment