Noach Teaches Us Why Being Good Isn’t Always Good Enough

People do not make decisions in isolation. Our environments influence what we notice, what motivates us, which actions become habitual, and how we understand ourselves. Imagine trying to eat more nutritiously, but at every Shabbat kiddush all you see are cookies, chips, and candy. You don’t want to avoid the sociality of synagogue, but when you see these foods, you’re tempted to eat them. Willpower can only take us so far, especially when our surroundings constantly tempt us to act against our greater intentions.

That is, unless you are the type of person whose willpower is strengthened by publicly going against the grain. For some, being contrarian becomes part of their public identity. They take pride in being the healthy ones who stand beside the cookies, defiantly ignoring them while chewing on a carrot stick. Yet maintaining that identity in public does not necessarily mean that resisting temptation will be just as easy when nobody is watching.

A third type of person recognizes the influence that their environment has on them, but instead of fighting the current, they work to change their environment – both for their own sakes and for others. These people lobby to change the kiddush culture, explaining to lay leadership the harm caused by eating cookies before lunch, reminding them that they would never feed their own children dessert before they ate their vegetables. They recognize that their private surroundings, just like public environments, influence their decisions, so they intentionally design their personal spaces to encourage the choices they want to make. These individuals make it easier for both themselves and the people around them to live their values without necessarily needing to strengthen their willpower. Through their influence, both they and other kiddush goers can begin to make healthier choices simply because their environment has changed.

The Talmud records a dispute between Rabbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish on what it means for Noach to be “wholehearted (tamim) in his generations.” In essence, Rabbi Yochanan and Reish Lakish disagree about how to appreciate Noach’s righteousness in light of his environment.

Rabbi Yochanan understands the phrase to mean that compared to the people around him, he was wholehearted, but he wouldn’t be considered so when compared to people in more righteous generations. Noach’s actions stand out because of the way everyone around him acts, not necessarily because they are so outstanding.

Reish Lakish, on the other hand, sees Noach differently. He states that if Noach is wholehearted in his generation, just imagine how he would live when he wasn’t the only righteous one around! If Noach’s actions stand out despite the way everyone around him acts, it must mean that they are pretty outstanding.

Both interpretations attempt to evaluate Noach’s righteousness, given his environment. Yet, there is another question worth asking. What does Noach’s effect on his environment say about his righteousness?

The Bible says that “Noach walked with God.” So did Enoch. Yet, Enoch didn’t leave a mark on this world; rather, God took him at a young age. Rashi explains that even though Enoch was righteous, he could easily be swayed by his surroundings. Therefore, to prevent his moral downfall, God took him before his time. In our earlier kiddush example, Enoch would be the one who must leave early to save himself from temptation. Noach isn’t like Enoch. His righteousness lasts, and he becomes the father of humankind in a post-diluvian world.

After repeatedly emphasizing how Noach did everything that God commanded him, the Bible relates God telling Noach that he is “righteous before Me in this generation.” This statement is reminiscent of what God says to Abraham: “Walk before Me and be wholehearted (tamim).” Like Noach, Abraham was also unique in his generation. Rabbi Yehuda says that Abraham was called HaIvri because the entire world was on one side (m’ever echad) and he was on the other side (m’ever echad). Yet, there is a big difference between Noach’s and Abraham’s iconoclasm.

Noach enters the ark with only his family and pairs of all the animals with him. He successfully resisted the corruption of his generation to enter a brave new world, but in that new world he ends up getting drunk alone in his tent. It doesn’t take very long for the people who come after him to revert to actions and values that Noach opposes.

Abraham, on the other hand, not only stands firm against the actions of the rest of the world; he brings people into his big tent – both literally and figuratively. Known for his hospitality, according to the Talmudic sages, Abraham used these encounters to share his beliefs with others, inspiring guests to embrace those beliefs themselves. Abraham does not simply represent greater willpower than Noach. He represents a different approach to righteousness. In our kiddush example, he was the person who not only ate healthy foods, but he also changed the kiddush environment to make it easier for both him and others to eat healthily. While Noach teaches us that we can be better than our environment, Abraham teaches us that we can make our environment better.

In the end, it is hard to say how Noach would fare in another generation. Yet maybe that shouldn’t be the focus of his story. Perhaps the lesson we should learn from Noach is that it is not enough to be the change we want to see in the world. We must also make that change by creating environments that make it easier for ourselves and others to become – and remain – the people we aspire to be.