Seeing and not seeing - Reflections on my trip to family in New York - Noach

I'm sitting on a flight back home from New York with my young son. Last night both of us danced the night away at the wedding of my niece. I am still savouring the joy of being with family, and observing the delight of my young child. Yet, my tradition, turns our attention to sadness amid joy. A glass is broken during the Jewish marriage ceremony to remind us of loss 1).  Oddly, this sombre gesture is not honoured by a reflective silence, on the contrary, immediately after the crashing noise everyone erupts into joyous exclamations of Mazal Tov! Shifting our awareness away from and almost subverting the touch of sadness. This blog is a reflection on choices relating to seeing and “embracing all that is” 2).

My time in New York has been both happy and sad. I've spent time with my parents and siblings and my oldest three sons who are studying away from home. I feel unsatisfied with the short time we had. Our ten days together were cluttered with tasks and competing priorities. In the story of Noah’s ark, a family is in close proximity but they are so busy feeding the animals, including the nocturnal animals that the husbands and wives don't manage to organise to leave the ark together 3). Yet, it is in the mundane physical domain that love is often expressed, in a meal baked or bought, dishes cooked or cleared.

I was confronted by the importance of the physical dimension of love at a memorial service I attended in New York for Mendel Brickman, a friend and a father who died one year ago in his mid-forties. His spirit was felt strongly in the room in the words of his children and widow, and in a talk by a hospital roommate who was touched by his energetic kindness, and care. His spirit fought courageously against his loss of breath and health. He was always focused on the positive. In a sense, Mendel beat mortality by sheer force of will and his living on in the lives of his family. Still, they miss his physical presence, and so do I and so many others.

In acknowledging our physical humanity, we are confronted by the human imperfections we all have. In the first instance it's about averting our eyes from the embarrassing aspects of the other person. Two of Noah's sons covered their father's nakedness when he was drunk as they chose not to see his disgrace 4). A selective view of others is often appropriate.

However, sometimes we must choose to see and acknowledge disgrace and act. While in the US I learned of the revelations about the abuses of power by a movie mogul that were allowed to go on for too long. Powerful men feeling entitled to women's bodies is referenced in the Bible as a reason for Noah’s flood. “The sons of the Gods saw the daughters of men, that they were good [looking], so they took any women they chose” 5) even without consent 6). The Torah could not be more emphatic in its condemnation of this behaviour.

In summation. There is merit in an approach that generally emphasises the positive and overlooks some faults and sad parts of life. On the other hand, there are challenges relating to human frailties that need to be noticed and talked about in workplaces, communities or families. Ideally, talk would resolve matters in accordance with the teaching that ‘to be reconciled over a glass of wine is to have an aspect of the mind of God’ 7). In other cases people can show support in a range of ways from taking action to simply being there for each other with care.

Back in my seat on this plane I can see daybreak over the Pacific and I can see my content little son sitting beside me. I feel grateful.

Notes

1. The breaking of the glass is symbolic, particularly of the destroyed temple in Jerusalem, but it represents broader loss.
2. Bennett, P. In the Cranky Guru
3. Talmud Sanhedrin 108b Comment on Genesis 8:19 and as explained by Torah Temimah on this verse.
4. Genesis 9:23, see Rashi commentary
5. Genesis 6:2
6. Ramban, Ibn Ezra on Genesis 6:2
7. Talmud Eruvin 65b

Can't say that!! “black armband vs “whitewash”, & “Curse of Ham”- Racism II

Thought control is not popular. Is it racist to say that “white men can't jump”?! What about saying, that “the children of Ham are more sensual, less determined to be free” as Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch (1808-88, Germany)¹ does in his commentary? It brings to mind this black South African maid who was told by a visiting American Rabbi that she should eat with the family at the Passover Seder when Jews celebrate freedom. She felt so uncomfortable with the silverware and the whole thing, that the following year she asked “is that mad American priest coming again this year?

There are generally differences between cultures, but the differences within cultures and especially taking into account individual choices must be respected. Research found that even complimentary compliments are hurtful, can increase mistrust and can be experienced as being expected to conform to a stereotype rather than being seen as an individual (Czopp 2008)². When I was a student at Yeshiva (a bochur) the secretary was annoyed with the attitudes of “the bochrim” and was hostile to me because I was a just another “bochir”. While Hirsch rejects disrespect toward blacks and acknowledges differences within “races”, he argues that certain elements “predominate”, which seems to me to “essentialize” the problem in the race, a key component of what is called the New Racism (Paradies et al, 2009)³. .

Shem & Yafet Look Away – black armband vs “whitewash”

I love Hirsch, this is not convenient!It would be wrong to hold Hirsch accountable to the latest research, surely “there is nothing for the judge but what his eyes see”, he was explaining this based on available knowledge in 19^th century Europe.

In Australia's “history wars”, left-wingers were accused by former Prime Minister Howard of wanting a black armband version of history because of the insistence on recognising the atrocities perpetrated against Indigenous people by early white settlers. Last night I heard a talk by MP Scott Morrison who argued that while the apology for the past was part of the great Australian story we cannot judge the people of the past by present standards, and we should embrace the virtues of the early settlers.

I think Hirsh would agree with that, he comments on two of Noah's sons looking away when he was drunk (Genesis 9:23). "Only where the younger generation stands with respect on the grave of the gone by, draws a cloak over its lapses but takes to itself all that it had of nobility as an inheritance on which to build...blossoms..but as soon as the younger generation gloats over the "nakedness" of their fathers...(Hirsch 1818-1888)

I think in cross-cultural and inter-faith relations there is also a place for looking away from the negatives and focusing on the positive. Not to deny the dangers or challenges but also not to give these more attention than is useful. As the Lubavitcher Rebbe's approach to the idea that Lashon Harah (gossip) “kills 3”, the speaker the listener and the one spoken about because it awakens or strengthens the evil within him. Seeing the good or the bad can be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

To return to the big question of the curse of Canaan & racism. Thanks to my FaceBook friends Rene L. & Mansheed A.) for a few more sources

• The Nimrod Proof for a limited curse. Abraham Ibn Ezra: "And the meaning of '[the Curse of Canaan to be salve to his brothers] is to Cush, Egypt, and Put [only- the other families of Ham]. There are those who say that the Cushim [black skinned people] are slaves because Noah cursed Ham, but they forget that the first king after the flood [Nimrod] was a descendant of Cush... this proves that the Cushites, i.e. black skinned people, cannot be under Canaan's curse of slavery.
• Blackness is not a curse. Ibn Ezra & Abarbanel:⁴ even though genealogically Zipporah might not have been a Cushite, the Torah still considered her as such because in appearance the Midianites resemble Cushites. They explain that since Cushites live in sunny areas, the power and heat of the sun cause their skin to darken. According to the Vilna Gaon⁵, skin color was not related to the curse of Noah's son, rather it was relative to one's geographical location and the power of the sun there.

A more important point (thanks FBF Mansheed-), is the idea that the words of Torah are “poor in one place but rich in another”, eg. That we seek guidance from all of the text not one section in isolation. Again in our Parsha in relation to murder, he spills a person’s blood, his blood will be spilt, because in the image of God, man was made⁶. Not white or black man, Not Jewish man, Gay or straight, all humans.

The Talmud states “therefore man was created alone (with a common ancestor, Adam) so that families will not fight to say my father is greater than your father”⁷.

The bottom line as above is we should do that which is right and proper (Haemet Vahayasha), and that it includes looking away from others shame, and appointing ourselves to be our own thought police.

1 Hirsch is regarded as the Father of Modern Orthodoxy, this is based on his commentary on parshat Noach.

2Czopp A.M. (2008) When is a compliment not a compliment? Evaluating expressions of positive stereotypes. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology 44 (2008) 413-420.
3Paradies Y, Chadrakumar L, Klocker N, Frere M, Webster K, Burrel M, McLean P (2009) Building on our strengths; a framework to reduce race based discrimination and support diversity in Victoria. Victorian Health Promotion, Melbourne, p.26.

4 Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra (1092-1167) and Rabbi Don Yitzchok Abarbanel (1437-1508) In their respective commentaries to Numbers 12:1)

5 Rabbi Eliyahu of Vilna (1720-1797) (Eliyahu Rabbah to Negaim 2:1)

6 Genesis 9:6

7 Talmud Sanhedrin

Anti-Black Racism & the Curse of Canaan by Noah

The Biblical story of Noah’s curse of his grandson Canaan to be a slave after Noah’s drunken disgrace (Gensis 9:25) “has been the single greatest justification for Black slavery for more than a thousand years….as one pro-slavery author wrote in 1838 “the blacks were originally designed to vassalage by the patriarch Noah” writes Goldenberg (2003)[1] who wrote a book on the topic.

Four key points, two for each side of the argument;

1. The Torah text does not say anything about Canaan being black. “He said cursed is Canaan, a slave of slaves he will be to his brothers- ויאמר ארור כנען עבר עברים יהי לאחיו.

2. The Talmud somewhat cryptically mentions that Ham was afflicted in his skin (for a separate offence)[2], which is interpreted as relating to “that Kush came from him (Rashi)”, or “this is the Kushiim as kush was the oldest of his sons” (Maharsha). In modern Hebrew Kushi refers to some with black skin, Rashi also connected Kushi with Black[3].

3. The curse is said by Noah, not God so this could be seen as one mans angry curse rather than God’s command to mankind (Yuter)[4]. Judaism sees Noah as a righteous man but his curse does not amount to license (in contrast to Islam that sees Noah/Nookh as a prophet).

4. The curse is seen as being legitimate in the argument of Gviha Ben Pesusa against the Canaanites about the ownership of the land of Israel “it states in the Torah, and he said cursed be Canaan, a slave of slaves he will be to his brothers (and) A slave who acquires property, the slave belongs to who?, the property to who? (the Master of course).[5]

This goes on with arguments and counter arguments,

Canaan, one of Ham 4 sons, is cursed not Ham!

But, there is a source that states “how do we know that all the families of Ham are called slaves? As it says “from the land of Egypt, the house of slaves (Exodus 2:2)[6]

In my view this important discussion is academic. The Torah declares “Justice, Justice you shall pursue!”, the Torah and the prophets thunder against the exploitation of the weak by the strong and so much of racism is exactly that. “You know the soul of the stranger”[7], surely the Jew dare not conceive of justice that does not include blacks, especially considering that those who hate one usually hate the other as expressed in the 1930’s American graffiti that “A nigger is a Jew turned inside out” as Voltaire put it succinctly: “One regards the Jews the same way as one regards

the Negroes, as a species of inferior humanity[8]”  Yet, there is a lot more here in Parshat Noach, worth investigating. Let us continue.

---

[1] Goldenberg D,M, (2003), The Curse of Ham: Race and Slavery in Early Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, Princeton University Press.

[2] Sanhedrin (108b)

[3] Rashi on Exodus 12:1, The Kushite Woman, “this teaches us that all admit to her beauty, just all would agree about the blackness of the Kushi.

[4] http://text.rcarabbis.org/misreading-the-torah-the-curse-of-ham-and-racism/

[5] Megilat Taanis chapter 3, brought in Kasher M (1992), Torat Shelaima, Noach 9, #146, page 489.

[6] Peikta Rabati Chapter 21, Torat Shelaima ibid page 490.

[7] See interpretation of Ibn Ezra on this verse.

[8] Goldenberg DM (1997) http://www.sas.upenn.edu/~dmg2/comsalz3%20as%20publ.%20with%20additions.pdf