Shabbos Parshas Noach 5786 "Noach Ish Tzaddik Tamim" - Speaking Well About a Jew

00:00 The Rebbe once related that he entered the room of his father-in-law, the Frierdiker Rebbe, and saw him writing a letter to a Jew. This Jew was very distant from Judaism, from Torah and mitzvos, and his conduct was not as it should be in a number of respects. Yet in the letter, the Frierdiker Rebbe addressed him with several titles. He called him “my dear and steadfast friend” and “a tzaddik and a chossid,” and the like. He used a number of titles that did not seem to fit this person or his conduct at all. The Rebbe asked his father-in-law, the Frierdiker Rebbe: What is the meaning of this? None of the titles you are writing seem to fit this person. What is the idea behind it? The Frierdiker Rebbe told him that the answer is written in the Rambam. He directed him to what the Rambam explicitly writes, as is well known, in the laws of divorce. There is a case in which “we compel him,” yet a get must be given willingly. In other words, the person giving the get—the husband—must want to give it, even though there are cases in which he does not want to. But if he must give her the get

01:41 for certain reasons, when the circumstances require a divorce, the law is that “we compel him until he says, ‘I want to.’” He is compelled in various ways until he is brought to say, “I want to.” The Rambam asks: How can this be considered “compelling him”? He clearly does not want to. They force him and press him, using all sorts of means to get him to say, “I want to.” But while they are compelling him, they know that he does not really want to. He says “I want to” only because he is being forced. The Rambam answers, as is well known, that a Jew, at his core, wants to do the will of Hakadosh Boruch Hu; it is only that the yetzer hara pulls him away. The Rambam writes that a Jew’s nature is to want to do the Divine will, to do the will of Hakadosh Boruch Hu and observe the Torah and mitzvos. And what is being required of him is entirely in accordance with Torah. It is only that his yetzer hara has overpowered him: it has taken hold of him, pulled him away and compelled him to do wrong. When “we compel him,” we weaken the yetzer hara and reveal what he truly wants. The Frierdiker Rebbe said that when looking at a Jew, we must look at what the Rambam describes: his inner self, what he truly wants. And these titles

03:03 are meant to awaken that desire, so that it emerges from concealment into revelation, from potential into actuality. This does not mean writing flattering titles without meaning them. When a tzaddik writes these titles, it is a way of awakening that person’s hidden strengths and bringing them out into the open. We find this point in the weekly parsha. In Parshas Noach we find several ideas related to this: the power a Jew has when he looks at another Jew favorably. And when we say good things about another Jew, that has the power to reveal the good and the strengths within him. This is a central idea that we find in the weekly parsha, right at its beginning. The parsha opens: “These are the offspring of Noach: Noach was a righteous man, perfect in his generations.” Rashi addresses this immediately at the start of the parsha. Rashi does not pose a question; he says straightaway: What does “These are the offspring of Noach: Noach was a righteous man” mean? Rashi says: “Since he mentioned him, he spoke in his praise, as it says, ‘The memory of a tzaddik is for a blessing.’” When mentioning a tzaddik, we speak in his praise: “The memory of a tzaddik is for a blessing.” Rashi then says that “offspring” refers to deeds, to good deeds: “The primary offspring of tzaddikim are good deeds.” What is Rashi telling us here? And we know what it means when Rashi gives two interpretations. We

04:40 always learn in Rashi that he does not give two interpretations for no reason. When he gives two, it is because each contributes to the plain meaning of the verse. In other words, one interpretation alone is not enough; the two together form one explanation. We need both to understand the verse. What exactly is troubling Rashi? What question is he asking? What is he trying to tell us here? The explanation is that the opening of the verse is puzzling. It says, “These are the offspring of Noach,” but does not tell us who Noach’s sons were. His sons are named only later in the verse. Instead, it immediately tells us: “Noach was a righteous man, perfect in his generations; Noach walked with G-d.” What does this have to do with “the offspring of Noach”? Rashi first answers that since the Torah mentioned Noach, it spoke in his praise, as the verse in Mishlei says: “The memory of a tzaddik is for a blessing.” As soon as he is mentioned, his praise is stated; the verse will name his sons afterward. But the first interpretation is not enough. Why? Because it still leaves a question: Why couldn’t the verse first say that “the offspring of Noach” were Shem, Cham and Yafes, and then say that Noach was righteous and perfect? So Rashi gives a second interpretation: “offspring” here does not refer to sons at all. Here, “offspring” means the good deeds

06:06 of the tzaddik. That is why “These are the offspring of Noach” is followed by “Noach was a righteous man, perfect in his generations; Noach walked with G-d.” Only afterward does the Torah mention his offspring in the literal sense. But the second interpretation is not enough on its own either, because in the plain meaning of the verse, “offspring” means children. Rashi therefore gives two interpretations, each of which completes the other. That is how we understand the plain meaning of the verse. But what is interesting is this: Why did the Torah wait until Parshas Noach to do this? Noach had already been mentioned in the previous parsha. There, too, it says that Noach lived, and that “Noach fathered three sons: Shem, Cham and Yafes.” Yet there the Torah does not first tell us that he was righteous and perfect “in his generations,” or any of these things. The Torah waited until Parshas Noach to state his praises. Surely, if mentioning a tzaddik calls for mentioning his praise, this should have been said in the previous parsha. And the question is even stronger: Why is this said only about Noach? There are other tzaddikim in the previous parsha, and we do not find their praises mentioned. Mesushelach was a tzaddik; Chanoch was a tzaddik. This is stated in the Midrashim and elsewhere, but in the verses we do not find

07:34 very much about it. It is only in Parshas Noach—and even regarding Noach himself, the Torah gives no details in Parshas Bereishis. The only thing it says is, “And Noach found favor in the eyes of Hashem,” but it does not state Noach’s praise there. Only in Parshas Noach does the Torah open with “The memory of a tzaddik is for a blessing.” How do we explain this? Well, once we understand the deeper meaning of the idea—why “the memory of a tzaddik is for a blessing” matters—we will understand it all. Why must mentioning a tzaddik be for a blessing? What is the meaning of “the memory of a tzaddik is for a blessing”? The explanation, as brought in the name of the Baal Shem Tov, is that mentioning something brings it from concealment into revelation. As is well known in the name of the Baal Shem Tov, one must see the virtues of other souls, and when we speak about their virtues, we bring them out from concealment into revelation. This works both positively and negatively. On the negative side, it is based on what our Sages say: the Gemara says that lashon hara kills three people. When someone speaks ill of another person, it harms three people: the one who speaks lashon hara, the one who hears it, and the one about whom it is spoken—even though that person did not speak lashon hara himself. And this, as is well known, is straightforward. Regarding the one who speaks lashon hara, it is understandable. Such speech is not good; lashon hara is very dangerous. The one who hears lashon hara is also in danger.

09:18 It is forbidden to speak lashon hara. But even if they did not speak and only thought something bad about that person, what is the difference? What is the danger? What does speech do? It is specifically when the thought is put into words, when someone speaks badly about another person, that something changes. The answer is that when I speak about a person, speech has the power to bring something from concealment into revelation. This is connected to the well-known story about the Baal Shem Tov that appears in Hayom Yom. In the Hayom Yom entry for Parshas Noach, there is a story that took place in the Baal Shem Tov’s shul in Mezhibuzh. Two Jews quarreled there. Later they made peace, but one had said to the other, “I’ll tear you apart like a fish.” Rachmana litzlan. That is what he said. The holy Baal Shem Tov was there. He immediately called his disciples, instructed them to stand around him and place their hands on one another, and placed his holy hands on the disciples standing beside him. They saw that the man who had said he would tear the other apart, rachmana litzlan, actually did so. They were words, but they had substance. It was as though it had happened in reality. The Baal Shem Tov showed them this, and then the chassidim could understand what it meant. The power of speech that Hakadosh Boruch Hu gave human beings is immense, because speech brings things from concealment into revelation. Speech reveals hidden powers. When we speak, we bring what is within the soul from concealment into revelation; speech reveals things and causes them to have an effect. As it is written, “By the word of Hashem the heavens were made”—something is created through speech. And when we speak, rachmana litzlan, about something undesirable, speech can also bring that undesirable thing into actual manifestation.

11:11 And the measure of goodness is greater than the measure of misfortune. If this is so, rachmana litzlan, on the side of evil, how much more so on the side of good. When I say something good about a person, that itself brings what is within him from concealment into revelation and draws out his goodness. When I say something positive, words of blessing, that itself reveals hidden powers, bringing them from concealment into revelation, so that the person can actually become better. This is the meaning of “Since he mentioned him, he spoke in his praise.” The very act of mentioning him and speaking in his praise gives strength and draws the good from concealment into revelation, so that what was hidden finds expression in actual practice. This is why, in Parshas Bereishis, the Torah says only that Noach found favor. It speaks in his praise specifically in Parshas Noach. The difference between Parshas Bereishis and Parshas Noach is that Bereishis is more about “This is the book of the generations of Adam.” In Parshas Bereishis, the Torah does not yet need to speak about Noach’s praise. The verse says, “This is the book of the generations of Adam.” When the aim is to recount the sequence of events—how the generations proceeded from Adam, the ten generations until Noach, and how they reached the generation of the Flood—the point is not to praise each generation. But in Parshas Noach, the Torah wants to speak about a person’s avodah and its effect on the world. What does a person’s avodah accomplish? When it is not as it should be, rachmana litzlan, “all flesh had corrupted its way,” and something undesirable came about that brought the Flood. Conversely, when Noach, who “was a righteous man, perfect in his generations,” did good, he built a new world. Noach went out with his sons and all his

12:57 family, with good deeds. That is why the Torah does not yet bring Noach’s praise in Parshas Bereishis. There, the point is only to recount the sequence of generations up to Noach and his family. It does say there, “And Noach found favor”—but finding favor comes from Above. As is known, finding favor is not connected to avodah; it is a gift. That is why it says only “found favor.” From this, we still cannot say what he accomplished through his avodah; it is something given as a gift from Above. But when we reach Parshas Noach, where the Torah wants to introduce the subject of avodah, it speaks in his praise. When we want a person to be good, to be righteous, to do good and grow in good deeds, we do so by speaking in his praise. This brings his good deeds to expression and gives him strength to become stronger, to become more righteous, to grow further and rise higher. And this shows the true order of things: when we praise another person and say good things about him, the speech itself brings his hidden powers to expression. In this way they become stronger, grow and improve, and he does even more good, grows stronger still, grows further and becomes better. This is the lesson of Parshas Noach. With this in mind, let us continue to Rashi. What comes next? Rashi says, “Since he mentioned him, he spoke in his praise,” and then, “Some of our Sages interpret it in his praise, and others interpret it to his discredit.” Rashi says there are two interpretations of “in his generations.” According to those who “interpret it in his praise,” had he lived in Avraham’s generation, he would have been even more righteous; all the more so, it is to his credit that he remained righteous among wicked people in his own generations. But those who “interpret it to his discredit” say that had he lived in Avraham’s generation, “he would not have been considered anything.” And that raises the question: how could the Torah intend to speak here to his discredit? After all, I am saying that the Torah is speaking in his praise.

14:43 But the Rebbe says something remarkable here: the interpretation that seems to be to Noach’s discredit is actually his praise. Noach was in a situation, in his generations, where it was not possible to be more righteous. Given the state of that generation, Rashi is saying something in Noach’s praise, not, G-d forbid, to his discredit. In reality, Noach was a person living in that generation and that period, and he could not have been more than he was. Had he lived in Avraham’s generation, in that period, there would have been more [unclear]; his avodah would not have counted for so much. But in Noach’s generation, it was not possible for Noach to reach a higher level. Noach was therefore the best he could possibly have been. Noach’s praise is that even the one who interprets the verse to his discredit must make clear to the whole world: this was Noach in his generations; there was no room there for anything more. But had he lived in Avraham’s generation, it would not have counted for so much, because there it was possible to reach higher. In other words, the Rebbe explains this [unclear] in his explanation of the Zohar. The Zohar says that Moshe Rabbeinu argued in defense of his generation, while Noach did not. That appears to reflect badly on Noach, that he did not argue in their defense. But the Rebbe explains: What does it mean? G-d forbid that we should say Noach did not act as he should have. Noach lived at a time when he had no grounds on which to argue in their defense. In Moshe’s time, there was a situation in which it was possible to argue in their defense; the same was true of Avraham Avinu. Noach could not be compared with them in this respect, because the situation was such that arguing in their defense was not possible. Noach says: I

16:24 could not argue in their defense. But I interpret it to my discredit so that you will know this is not a good thing. Otherwise, a person might reason: If Noach was righteous and perfect and nevertheless did not argue in their defense, then one can be righteous and perfect without arguing in defense of others. So one of Noach’s praises is that he himself asks that this be interpreted to his discredit, so that people will not learn from him in this regard, but will learn from Avraham Avinu and Moshe Rabbeinu, who argued in defense of their generations, and so on. And the Rebbe says: Here we see the lesson of our parsha—the great value of speaking in another person’s praise and saying good things about him. When you say a good word about someone else, you give him strength and awaken what is hidden within him, bringing it into the open. You give him the strength to be righteous and perfect, to conduct himself as he should, and to bring his strengths from concealment into revelation. And as the Alter Rebbe famously said, when a father sees his children treating one another well—when one notices another’s weaknesses, helps him, cares for him and prays for him—when a father sees his children behaving

17:31 with love, brotherhood, peace and friendship, it awakens in him the desire to give them all the blessings he wishes to give them, materially in the literal sense, and abundantly. So too, when we say a good word about another Jew: besides awakening that person’s strengths and abilities, we also bring about an abundant flow of goodness and blessing from the Rebbe, so that it will be a good and blessed year, with abundance in material matters in the literal sense. May every Jew have all blessings in every area, in visible and revealed goodness. And may this year indeed be a good and blessed year, a chassidishe year and a healthy year, a year of abundance in visible and revealed goodness.