Ramban (Nachmanides) on the Torah

AND G-D REMEMBERED NOAH, AND EVERY LIVING THING, AND ALL THE CATTLE. The remembrance of Noah was because he was a perfectly righteous man, and He had made a covenant with him to save him. The word “Noah” here includes his children that were there with him. Scripture did not mention them specifically, though, for they were saved by his merit. However, the remembrance stated concerning beast and cattle was not on account of merit, for among living creatures there is no merit or guilt save in man alone. But the remembrance concerning them was Because He remembered His holy word which He had spoken, causing the world to come into existence, and the Will which was before Him at the creation of the world arose before Him and He desired the existence of the world with all the species that He created therein. Thus He now saw fit to bring them forth so that they should not perish in the ark. Scripture does not mention the fowl and the creeping things for the remembrance of the living thing is similar to their remembrance, and the companion thereof telleth concerning it.

AND THE ARK RESTED IN THE SEVENTH MONTH, ON THE SEVENTEENTH DAY OF THE MONTH. Rashi wrote: “From here you may infer that the ark was submerged in the water to a depth of eleven cubits.” This he wrote on the basis of the calculation written in his commentaries, and it is so found in Bereshith Rabbah. But since in certain places Rashi minutely examines Midrashic traditions and for the same verses also takes the trouble to explain the simple meanings of Scripture, he has thus given us permission to do likewise for there are seventy ways of interpreting the Torah, and there are many differing Midrashim among the words of the Sages. And so I say that this calculation which they have mentioned does not fit into the language of Scripture unless we bear with that which explains And the ark rested in the seventh month as referring to that day mentioned above [in Verses 2-3] when the rain was withheld and the waters receded from the earth and decreased continually. [This interpretation of the seventh month is] unlike the counting of the second month mentioned in the beginning of the section, [which Rashi explains there as being “the second month” of the creation calendar], and unlike the counting stated at the end of the section [in Verse 13: in the first month, which Rashi similarly explains as being “the first month” of the creation calendar]! And how is it possible that in the second verse Scripture should immediately retract [from using the withholding of the rain as a reference point for counting] and state, until the tenth month, and proceed to another reference point, counting it, as Rashi explains, as the tenth month with reference to the coming of the rains! The evidence Rashi brings from the submergence of the ark in the waters is no proof for he attributes an equal decrease of water to each of the days — namely, a cubit every four days — and it is known in nature concerning the decrease of water that a great river which decreases at first a cubit every four days will at the end decrease four cubits in a day. Thus according to this calculation of Rashi, on the first day of the month of Ab the tops of the mountains were seen, and on the first day of Tishri the earth dried. Thus in sixty days the waters decreased the entire height of the high mountains consisting of many thousands of cubits, [surely a greater rate than four cubits a day, as Rashi would have it]! Besides, when Noah sent forth the dove on the seventeenth day of the month of Ellul, the waters were yet on the face of the entire earth, and the trees were covered, and in a matter of twelve days the whole earth dried! And by way of reason, if the ark was submerged in the waters eleven cubits, that being more than a third of its height [which was thirty cubits], it would have sunk because it was wide at the bottom and finished to a cubit at the top,, Verse 16. contrary to the structure of ships, and there was also in it great weight! From the simple interpretation of Scripture it appears that the hundred and fifty days mentioned in connection with the prevailing of the waters include the forty days of the coming down of the rains, Verse 12. since the main increase and prevailing of the waters took place during these days. Thus the waters began decreasing on the seventeenth day of Nisan, and thirty days later — the seventeenth day of the month Iyar, which was the seventh month from the time the rain began to fall — the ark rested upon the mountains of Ararat. Seventy-three days later, on the first of Ab, which was the tenth month from the time the rain began to fall, the tops of the mountains were seen. We have thus made a small correction in the interpretation of the language of Scripture, [namely, that all counting begins from the time the rain began to fall]. But the correct interpretation appears to me to be that the hundred and fifty days were from the seventeenth day of the second month, namely, the month of Marcheshvan, to the seventeenth day of the seventh month, namely, the month of Nisan, and that was the day when the ark rested on the mountains of Ararat. For then G-d caused a strong east wind to pass all the night and made the waters dry land, meaning that they decreased very much, and the ark rested. The proof for this is that Scripture does not say here, “and the waters decreased on such a month and on such a day and the waters decreased continually until the seventh month, and the ark rested, etc.,” as it said concerning the other decrease when the tops of the mountains were seen, for on the very day the waters began decreasing, the ark rested. The order of events in this matter was thus: on the day the rain began to fall all the fountains of the great deep were broken up, and the windows of the heavens were opened and the rain came down for forty days. During that time the waters prevailed fifteen cubits above [the summits of all the mountains]. The rain stopped at the end of forty days, but “the fountains of the deep” and “the windows of the heavens” remained open. The atmosphere was very damp, and the whole earth was full of water, not like waters poured down a precipice, nor ever to become dried. And they stood thus in their power until one hundred and fifty days from the day the rain began were completed. Then G-d caused a very powerful wind to pass through the heavens and over the earth, and the fountains of the deep were stopped for the water that flowed from them returned to its place until the deep filled up as it was before the flood, and the openings of its fountains were locked, as were “the windows of the heavens.” And the air was dried very much by a drying wind, and the water on the earth was licked up. Thus the waters decreased exceedingly on that day, and the ark, which was submerged in the waters about two to three cubits, rested. Seventy-three days after that — on the first day of the tenth month, namely, the month of Tammuz — the tops of the mountains were seen. At the end of forty additional days — on the tenth day of the eleventh month, Ab — Noah opened the window of the ark, and three weeks later the dove left him; thirty days later, he removed the covering of the ark. AND G-D MADE A WIND TO PASS OVER THE EARTH. This means that there was a great and powerful wind coming out from the bowels of the earth over the face of the deep and hovering over the waters, and the fountains of the deep were stopped thereby. This is so since Scripture does not say, “and G-d made a wind to pass over the waters.” AND THE WATERS ASSUAGED (‘VAYASHOKU’). This means that the waters which were flowing from the deep subsided. It is the same expression as, Then the king’s wrath ‘shachachah’ (assuaged), meaning that his anger subsided. Or it may be that this is an expression of a thing being concealed and swallowed up. Thus the verse teaches that the waters of the deep were swallowed up in their place. And so did the Rabbis say in Seder Olam: “The waters that went up were dried by the wind, and those that went down were swallowed in their place.” AND THE RAINS FROM THE HEAVENS WERE WITHHELD. This means that no more rain came down until they [Noah and his family and all living creatures] went out of the ark for by this wind [which G-d made to pass over the earth] the heavens became as iron. Neither dew nor rain came down, the air lost its moisture, and the waters dried up for the rain of the flood completely stopped after the fortieth day. AND THE WATERS RETURNED FROM OFF THE EARTH CONTINUALLY. The verse states that the waters decreased gradually until the face of the ground was dried up. And after the end of a hundred and fifty days the waters decreased. This is connected with the following verse, And the ark rested, thus stating that on that day there was a great decrease in the waters which enabled the ark to rest [on the mountains of Ararat], as I have explained.

AND THE WATERS DECREASED CONTINUALLY UNTIL THE TENTH MONTH. This verse is to be interpreted by transposition: the waters decreased continually until the tops of the mountains were seen in the tenth month, which is the month of Tammuz. Scripture thus informs us that during seventy-three days the waters decreased fifteen cubits. But we do not know the amount of the original decrease which enabled the ark to rest since Scripture did not find it necessary to inform us either of the number of cubits that the ark was submerged in the waters or of the amount of the decrease. In the matter of the floating of the ark, it appears to me that because the waters flowed from the deeps and were hot, as our Rabbis have said, the ark therefore floated upon the face of the waters. Were it not for that, it would have sunk on account of its weight for there were many living things in it, as well as a great deal of food and drink. But as soon as the waters subsided from their flowing or from their heat and they decreased on account of the wind, the ark at once entered into the midst of the waters due to the weight of its load, and it rested on the mountain. In the opinion of the commentators, the Scriptural accounts concerning the total of one hundred and fifty days during which the waters prevailed, the resting of the ark, the visibility of the tops of the mountains and the succeeding forty days — all these events we know by way of prophecy for Scripture so informs us, but Noah knew only that he felt that the ark had rested, and he waited a period of time which, in his opinion, was sufficient for the waters to abate. Now according to our words, as well as those of our Rabbis and all commentators, the mountains of Ararat, which are among the highest mountains under the heavens, had fifteen cubits of water above their summit. Therefore this difficulty is to be posed: it is known that the Greek mountain Olympus is very much higher than they, and the land of Ararat, which is near Babylon, lies in the lower part of the globe! Perhaps we should then say that the decrease of waters which took place on the seventeenth day of the seventh month was very much more than fifteen cubits, and at first the tops of the high mountains were seen, not the mountains of Ararat, and it just happened that the ark was in the land of Ararat during the seventh month and it rested on the tops of those mountains. Now Noah, from the time the rains ceased, would open and close the window at his will. Seventy-three days after the resting of the ark he looked forth from the window and the tops of the mountains of Ararat were visible to him, and he again closed the window. Scripture then relates that forty days later he sent forth the raven. Scripture does not say, “and it was in such-a-month and on such-a-day that Noah opened the window,” but instead it says, And it came to pass at the end of forty days, in order to declare that from the time the tops of the mountains were seen by Noah, he waited forty days for he thought that by then the towers would be seen and the trees would become visible and the fowls would thus find in them a place to nest, and so he opened the window in order to send forth the raven. In the first month, which is the month of Tishri, the waters were dried up, and in the second month, which is the month of Marcheshvan, on the twenty-seventh day thereof, was the earth dry, and on that day they went out of the ark. Thus all calculations of the section are in accordance with the simple explanation of Scripture and its usual sense. Know that after the Sages agreed that it was in the month of Tishri that the world was created, 27 a). This is the intent of Ramban’s saying here: “Know that after the sages agreed, etc.” See also Ramban further, 17:26. — as [is evidenced by the text of the prayer for the New Year which] they formulated, i.e., “This day, on which was the beginning of Thy work, is a memorial of the first day,” and by the fact that the Scriptural order of the seasons is seedtime and harvest, and cold and heat — that the beginning of the year is reckoned from Tishri. And so also were the months reckoned from Tishri until we reached the exodus from Egypt. Then the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded us to reckon the months according to another count, [namely, from the going forth from Egypt, which occurred in the month of Nisan], as it is said, This month shall be unto you the beginning of months; it shall be the first month of the year to you. Thenceforth in all of Scripture, Tishri is reckoned as the seventh month. But as far as the years are concerned, the reckoning from Tishri was still retained, as it is written, And the feast of ingathering at the turn of the year., 34:22. And so did Jonathan the son of Uziel or Aramaic version of the books of the Prophets. It is similar in scope to that of Onkelos on the Five Books of Moses. translate the verse, In the month of Eithanim which is the seventh month, saying, “in the month which the ancients called the first month and which is now the seventh month.” And in the Mechilta we also find: “This month [Nisan] shall be unto you. But the first man did not reckon by it; [he reckoned Tishri as the first month].”

AND THE DOVE FOUND NO REST. It is not customary for fowl to rest on the tops of the high mountains on the earth which are bare of trees and surely not when the waters were on the face of the whole earth. Therefore, the dove found no rest suitable for her. But as soon as she saw the trees she went her own way for in their branches she would build her nest.

AND LO AN OLIVE LEAF. From the plain meaning of this verse it would appear that the trees were not uprooted or blotted out in the flood because there was there no flooding stream since the whole world became full of water. But in Bereshith Rabbah the Rabbis have said, “From where did the dove bring the olive leaf? Rabbi Levi said, ‘She brought it from the Mount of Olives since the land of Israel was not inundated by the waters of the flood. This is as the Holy One, blessed be He, said to the prophet Ezekiel: Son of man, say unto her: Thou art a land that is not cleansed, nor rained upon in the day of indignation.’ Rabbi Biryei said, ‘The gates of the garden of Eden were opened for the dove and from there she brought the leaf.’” Thus the intent of the Rabbis is that the trees were uprooted and blotted out in those places where the flood was, and surely the leaf faded. Similarly the Rabbis said, “Even the [solid substance of the] lower stationery millstone was blotted out in the flood,” and [to substantiate this statement] they expounded the verse, The waters wore the stones, [as referring to the waters of the flood which wore down stones]. And their saying that “the Land of Israel was not inundated by the flood” is to be understood as meaning that the rain of the flood was not there, as it is written, nor rained upon; the fountains of the great deep were not therein. But the waters did spread over the whole world, and all the high mountains that were under the whole heaven were covered,, 19. as it is clearly written, and there is no partition around the Land of Israel to prevent the waters from entering. And so did the Sages say in Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer: “The waters of the flood did not come down from heaven upon the land of Israel, but they rolled in from other lands and came there, as it is said, Son of man, say unto her, etc.” Now according to the opinion of Rabbi Levi, [mentioned above, that the dove brought the olive leaf from the Mount of Olives], it was because the torrential rain did not come down upon the land of Israel and the windows of heaven were not opened there that the trees remained there while in the rest of the world they were broken and uprooted by the flood and His mighty rain. But I wonder about their saying that [the olive leaf was brought by the dove] from the garden of Eden. If it were so, then Noah did not know that the waters abated from off the earth for there [in Eden] the waters of the flood did not enter. But perhaps its gates were closed so that the waters did not enter there, but when the waters abated they were opened. [Thus the olive leaf indicated the opening of the gates which in turn indicated that the waters had abated.] It is on the basis of this opinion of theirs [—that the trees were broken and uprooted in the entire world during the flood — that the Rabbis] have said there in Bereshith Rabbah, “And he [Noah] planted a vineyard. And from where did he have a branch? Said Rabbi Abba bar Kahana, ‘When he went into the ark he had taken with him branches of the vine, shoots of fig trees, and stumps of olive trees.’” ‘TARAPH’ (PLUCKED) IN HER MOUTH. Rashi wrote: “I am of the opinion that the dove was a male and that therefore Scripture sometimes speaks of it as masculine (he plucked) rather than tarpha (she plucked). and sometimes as feminine (in her mouth). because where the word yonah (dove) occurs in Scripture it is spoken of as feminine. Taraph however means ‘he plucked.’ But a Midrashic explanation takes it [taraph] as meaning ‘food,’ and the word b’phiha (in her mouth) it explains as meaning ‘speaking.’ Thus she said: ‘Rather that my food be bitter as an olive and come by the hand of the Holy One, blessed be He, than as sweet as honey and from the hand of mortal man.’” All this does not appear to me to be correct for there is no reason why Scripture should change its reference to doves from feminine to masculine in one place in the same section. And if it is proper language to always speak of yonah in Scripture as feminine, why did it change here? Similarly, their Midrashic explanation does not at all make the word b’phiha to mean “speaking.” Instead, their Midrash is based on the fact that she brought this kind of leaf for if we should say that it just happened [that she brought an olive leaf], it cannot be in vain that Scripture mentioned it since it should have said, “And, lo, in her mouth a leaf freshly plucked.” Besides, the olive does not come from the very high trees that the fowl should nest there on account of its long branches. It was for this reason that the Sages said that there was in this a hint that it is more pleasing to the fowl to have their food bitter as wormwood from the hand of the Holy One, blessed be He, and not have it be good and sweet as honey from the hand of mortal man, and surely, all the more, people do not wish to be dependent for their livehood upon one another. In the words of Bereshith Rabbah: “Rabbi Abahu said, ‘If the dove brought the olive leaf from the garden of Eden, could she not have brought something exceptional such as either cinnamon or balsam? But it was a hint which she gave to Noah: rather something even more bitter than this from the hand of the Holy One, blessed be He, than something sweet from your hand.’” But in the Gemara they [the Sages] added: “What evidence is there that the word taraph means food? It is written, ‘Hatripheni’ (Feed me) with mine allotted bread.” It is due to the reason we have stated, [namely, that Scripture mentioned the name of the tree in order to indicate this hint] for which the Rabbis found support in the word hatripheni, implying that it is as if Scripture said, “And, lo, an olive-leaf of tereph (food) (he plucked), as it is actually vocalized. in her mouth.” As for the plain meaning of Scripture, the commentators have explained that the word taraph modifies the word “leaf,” thus stating, “And, lo, a plucked olive leaf was in her mouth.” Proof for this [i.e., that taraph modifies “leaf” rather than acting as a verb] is that taraph is wholly vocalized with the kamatz, as is the rule. followed by a patach. It is, however, found in irregular forms: For ‘taraph’ (He hath torn), and He will heal us;, and yet it is a verb rather than an adjective. And he shall restore that which ‘gazal’ (he took by robbery); The error which ‘shagag’ (he committed);, Verse 18. This too is similar to the above. and many other additional verses.

AND THE ETERNAL SAID IN HIS HEART. He did not reveal the matter to a prophet at that time, but on the day He commanded Moses concerning the writing of the Torah He revealed to him that as Noah brought his sacrifice it mounted pleasingly, and He decreed that He will no more smite every living thing. In this regard, I have already written of a secret hinted at by our Rabbis. The sense of the expression, I will not again curse the ground any more for man’s sake is that they were punished because of him for if man had not sinned, they have been spared even though they had also corrupted their ways. FOR THE IMAGINATION OF MAN’s HEART IS EVIL FROM HIS YOUTH. He ascribes merit to men because by their very creation they have an evil nature in their youthful days but not in their mature years. If so, for these two reasons, it is not proper to smite every living thing. The reason for the prefix mem [which signifies “from” in the word] min’urav (from his youth) is to indicate that the evil imagination is with men from the very beginning of their youth, just as the Rabbis have said: “From the moment he awakes to go forth from his mother’s womb the evil impulse is placed in him.” It is possible that the verse is saying that it is from youth — meaning, on account of youth — that the evil inclination is in man, for youth causes him to sin. And some say that it is as if it said “in his youth,” [min’urav being interpreted as if it were bin’urav]. Similarly we find ‘Miterem’ (Before) a stone was laid upon a stone in the temple of the Eternal, [where the word miterem is interpreted as beterem]; so too, This is the land which ye shall divide ‘minachlah’ (by lot) unto the tribes of Israel, [where minachlah is interpreted as benachlah].