Noach: Mutual Reciprocity
When we think about the covenants of Tanach, G-d’s covenant with Noach is not one that easily comes to mind. His covenant with Abraham, and the Sinaitic covenant between G-d and the Jewish people made at Mount Sinai, are the most prominent in Jewish thinking and theology. They are embroidered into how orthodox Jewry live since halakha is the fulfilment of our end of the agreements made at these two biblical junctures. In the words of Jon D. Levenson, the Jewish people ‘live in awareness principally of [these] two covenants’, with Sinai in particular ‘speak[ing] to us of our obligations, of the society we must become, of the world we must build’.[1] The covenant with Noach, on the other hand, is made prior to the creation of the Jewish people; it is the first covenant in the world’s history, made with the first righteous man of humanity. Why, then, does it seem secondary to the apocalyptic destruction of the Flood?
It has been argued in both Jewish and scholarly circles that the Noahide covenant is in fact the second covenant, with the creation of the world being the first. In Essays on Ethics, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks Z’L writes that ‘Genesis 8-9 is […] a kind of second version of Genesis 1-3’, citing two differences which mark them apart: the replacement of טוב (‘good’) with ברית (‘covenant’) as the key word, and the references to man being made in G-d’s image as having different implications in each chapter.[2] In Judaism’s Life-Changing Ideas he expands on this, linking the two stories together into one narrative chain instead of seeing them as separate parallels. He writes that Noach, when following Bereshit, is simply a story of ‘creation, followed by de-creation, followed by re-creation’[3], a view which is echoed in biblical critic Joseph Blenkinsopp’s conception of ‘a cycle of creation, un-creation and re-creation in Gen 1-9’[4]. That this idea crosses between Jewish and academic thought is curious; such a strong, continual link between the two narratives beyond the lineage detailed in the text is powerful. Reading Tanach in such a way, the covenant which begins in G-d’s divine creation of the world for those that inhabit it is made more explicit in the text of Noach as G-d destroys His world and recreates it for one righteous man and his family, promising that Noach’s descendants – good and bad – will not experience such destruction again. To understand this covenant more deeply, to investigate if it is a one-sided promise or a covenant of mutual reciprocation, one must return to the text itself before exploring its symbolic ramifications.
Though the construct form of ברית, בריתי (‘my covenant’), is used in Genesis 6:18, the word’s usage is most prominent in the latter pesukim of the sefer’s ninth perek, in which it appears seven times, a parallel of the use of טוב in Genesis 1-3. The covenant in these verses is framed very specifically and carefully; the repetition of this key linguistic marker explicitly outlines its contents, its promise, whilst G-d’s language states that He is creating this covenant ‘with’ these human beings. It is sealed with an אות הברית, ‘a covenantal sign’: a קשת, a ‘rainbow’ (though the root itself does not connote rain, but a bow of might or hunting). G-d assures Noach that He will remember this covenant He has made and then reaffirms its existence with the same sign. The parameters of the covenant are clear: its recipient, its contents and the symbol of its existence are clearly set out within a neat framework. And yet, at first glance, it appears that Noach alone is the benefactor. There is no reciprocation, no action on his part in these passages. It appears to be the exact opposite of mutual.
To counter this idea, it is important to look earlier in the parasha, to the sixth perek of Bereshit, in which בריתיappears. At this point in the narrative, G-d has told Noach in detail how to build the ark and the reasoning for it. He tells Noach that He will destroy all living things on the earth except for those within the ark. Like in the later perek, G-d declares that He will make His covenant with Noach and his descendants, but the difference here is that we have more visibility of Noach’s contribution to this arrangement. He is the instrument through which G-d saves humanity and parts of the animal kingdom. Yes, the covenant we see in the later perakim is a promise, but, as James Barr writes, ‘it is a promise that has an antecedent basis, namely Noah’s exceptional goodness and fellowship with G-d’.[5] Noach’s actions as a righteous man in a world deemed so evil that it must be destroyed, and his effort and work to help preserve even a fraction of G-d’s divine creations, is a contribution to the covenant before the fact. His very being and behaviour is considered by G-d to be worthy of such a covenant, making this initial covenant so much more than the promise which Genesis 9:8-17 suggests. The Noahide Covenant, like the other biblical covenants, ‘establishes a relationship of peace and mutual ties between quite separate entities’, tying them together.[6] In this case, it is the divine and the human, tied in a bond which is imbued with reciprocity and mutuality.
It is true that this covenant made with Noach does not appear to form a foundational part of Jewish theology by virtue of the fact that Judaism, and the Abrahamic covenant, did not yet exist in this part of Tanach. Yet, this covenant is foundational to humanity. Borne from this narrative are the Noahide laws, the moral basis by which societies – both ancient and modern – are founded. This covenant introduced morality into the world in a way which Adam and Eve’s narrative could not; though they disobeyed G-d, morality did not truly come into the picture, a hint of it appearing with Cain and Hevel. With Noach, the world was destroyed purely because of immorality, and a fraction of humanity was saved purely because of his inherent righteousness – his morality. The powerful centrality of this theme to this week’s parasha serves to teach us that it is a universal concept, something which R’ Sacks cements by pointing out that ‘the Torah places G-d’s covenant with Noah and through him all humanity prior to His particular covenant with Abraham and his later covenant with his descendants at Mount Sinai’ to prove that ‘our universal humanity precedes our religious differences’.[7] Noah was not a Jew, and yet he exemplified many Jewish ideals in his behaviour. Interestingly, in many ways this narrative of Tanach allows us to understand better the rabbinic phrase תורה עם דרך ארץ, ‘Torah in the way of the land’, a phrase which implores us to remain upstanding as a Jew, follow our traditions, our culture, our beliefs and our values, whilst interacting with the wider world, the good that it offers and the people within it who make those offerings. The parasha ends by tracing the generations between Noach and Abram, setting the scene for the creation of the Jewish people. But without Noach’s righteousness, there would not have been a world in which Abraham could exist, symbolically proving that there is value to the ‘outside world’ if we interact with it correctly, respecting our religion and culture whilst respecting theirs. Parashat Noach therefore offers us a beautiful lens through which to view our mutual existences, and helps us explore how to deepen such reciprocal relationships, with each other and with G-d.
[1] Jon Levenson, ‘Covenant and Commandment’ in Tradition: A Journal of Orthodox Jewish Thought, Vol.21 No.1 (1983), pp.42-51, pg.50
[2] Jonathan Sacks, Essays on Ethics: A Weekly Reading of the Jewish Bible (2016), pg.11
[3] Jonathan Sacks, Judaism’s Life Changing Ideas: A Weekly Reading of the Jewish Bible (2020), pg.9
[4] Peter Benjamin Boeckel, ‘Exploring Narrative Forms and Trajectories Form Criticism and the Noahic Covenant’ in Partners with G-d: Theological and Critical Readings of the Bible in Honor of Marvin A. Sweeney (2017), pp.27-39, pg.37-38
[5] James Barr, ‘Reflections on the Covenant with Noah’ in Covenant as Context: Essays in Honour of E.W. Nicholson (2003), pp.10-22, pg.14
[6] Daniel J. Elazar, ‘The Political Theory of Covenant: Biblical Origins and Modern Developments’ in Publius Vol.10 No. 4 (1980), pp.3-30, pg.8
[7] Sacks, Essays on Ethics, pg.13
