INSIGHT 5767 - #05 THE ETHICS OF ROBBERY In
Bereishit 6:11-13, two words are used to explain the evil1
found in humanity that led to its destruction, and to
some extent the destruction of the world, through the
Flood. One is the word shachat2 which
is generally translated as “destroy” or
“corrupt”; the second is the word chamas
which is generally translated as “violence” or
“crime.” The gemara, though, is much
more specific in defining the exact wrongdoing expressed
by each of these words. T.B. Sanhedrin 57a explains that
the root shachat indicates sexual immorality and
idolatry. T.B. Sanhedrin 108a explains that the word chamas
indicates gezel, robbery.3 It would
thus seem that the Flood occurred because of the sins of
sexual impropriety, idolatry and robbery. This unique
grouping demands some investigation.
A review of the Biblical text indicates that there was,
in fact, a progression in the behaviour of humanity that
eventually led to its destruction. First, there was a
corruption (shachat) of the land and then the land
was filled with chamas. This would also seem to be
the understanding of the gemara. In defining chamas
as robbery, the gemara actually states that, even
though the generation of the Flood was involved in all
types of transgressions, it was only when they became
involved in robbery that their fate was sealed.4
Viewed as such, we can postulate that, in regard to the
generation of the Flood, sexual impropriety and idolatry
led to robbery which, specifically, brought forth the
punishment of destruction. Interestingly, though, the
text continues that God saw the land and its corruption (shachat),
specifically that all beings5 corrupted their
ways. This would seem to imply that it was the idolatry
and, specifically, the sexual impropriety6
that God saw that led Him to render the decision to bring
the Flood. Corruption of the world, marked by sexual
impropriety and idolatry, led to robbery which sealed the
fate of this generation and brought forth this judgment
– but even then it was the corruption of the world
that was the basis of this judgment. It would seem that
it was not specific crimes – be they sexual
immorality, idolatry or robbery – that led to the
Flood. It was a corrupt method by which humanity related
to the world that led to humanity’s destruction. It
would seem that this corruption was marked by sexual
immorality and idolatry. Yet, it was robbery – not
necessarily a sign of corruption but rather a sign of chamas
-- that truly indicated the nature of this corruption and
decreed this corruption necessitating destruction.
In Bereishit 6:13, God relays his findings to Noach by
again returning to the theme of chamas and stating
that the end of beings is approaching because the world
is filled with robbery. Again we find movement from shachat
to chamas in that the previous verse indicates
that God saw shachat but in His statement to
Noach, He mentions chamas. But then God does
return to the theme of shachat by stating that He
will destroy (shachat) the land. In English we
would say that: because humanity corrupted the world, God
destroyed it, yet that would not fully represent the
depth of this statement. The Hebrew root of both words is
the same. In essence, what is really being presented is
that because humanity acted one way towards the world,
God, in response, chose to act similarly – the
result being the Flood. Simply, God told humanity,
through the Flood, that if you choose not to follow the
rules, so will I.
Following and not following the rules – the laws of
nature, both physical and moral – is clearly a major
theme of the Flood narrative. It may, in fact, be the
major theme of this event. T.B. Sanhedrin 108b states
that already seven days before the onslaught of the
waters God changed the order of Creation so that, for
example, the sun rose in the west and went down in the
east. Numerous midrashic and aggadic
sources point further to the suspension of normal life,
including the rules of nature,7 during the
time of the Flood. This indeed would seem to be obvious.
How does the dove find vegetation8 when the
entire world has just been submerged in water? Most
significantly, God does not only promise not to punish
humanity in the same manner again but, in Bereishit 8:22,
he declares that never again will the normal cycle of
existence stop. There are rules of existence. Humanity is
called upon to exist within these rules. It was this
reality that the generation of the Flood challenged;
humanity felt it could go beyond these rules. God’s
response was to also ignore the rules, demonstrating that
the result can only be destruction.
With this perspective, the sins of sexual impropriety and
idolatry practiced by the generation of the Flood take on
a very specific meaning. There are many motivations for
sin. Regardless of the motivation for sexual impropriety
or idolatry, though, the result is inherently chaos. It
is for this reason that sexual immorality and idolatry
are the signs of shachat. Nevertheless, in regard
to the generation of the Flood, this was also the
motivation. They desired to abandon all rules, to remove
barriers and declare reality as solely a function of the
self. One’s wishes were to be the sole determinant
of one’s behaviour; consideration for an external
order that may be providing direction was deemed to be
unnecessary. The animal and the human are clearly
different; there is no realm of connection in mating.
This was a truth that Adam9 discovered and
recognized. It was such truths that this generation
challenged; there can be connection if one simply forms a
connection. One can create a world in any manner that one
wishes. One is not bound by rules that wish to impose
limits upon the person in the name of some order.
God’s response was to show the consequences of
ignoring rules. Even the One Who can override all rules
accepts limits in order to achieve the desired objective.
While robbery may not
inherently reflect chaos, when it emerges from the chaos
of shachat, it can actually reflect the greatest
concern for lost parameters. In the case of theft, we not
only find individuals, rejecting rules, acting against
rules, but we find individuals continuously redefining
rules. Was Robin Hood a thief or a hero? The answer
ultimately depends on the rules of property. Theft, as
such, is inherently defined by rules. It is in the case
of theft, as such, that we are most easily able to turn
good into evil and evil into good. And the power of this
chaos is most powerfully stated in the case of robbery,
where the thief declares this change in reality and,
effectively, his/her right to this property even as the
owner is present.
Sexual immorality and idolatry are the clear signs of the
breakdown of order within reality. The flood was a
response to the evil of chaos; reality demands rules.
Yet, robbery sealed the generation’s fate. It is not
only an action that we can rationalize, it is one we can
often transform into right. Robbery can, as such, reflect
the greatest chaos – the chaos that declares itself
order, chamas. Rabbi Benjamin Hecht e-mail Notes
(1) In Bereishit
6:5, the word ra, evil, is used to describe
the behaviour of humanity but without further
explanation. The later verses, as such, would seem to be
explaining this evil and, to some extent, the general
nature of evil. (2) This is the
Hebrew root of specific words in these verses. (3)The Torah
distinguishes between two distinct acts of theft, geneiva
and gezel. The latter refers to a theft done
outside the presence or direct knowledge of the victim,
such as a cat- burglary. The former refers to a theft
done in the presence of the victim and is generally
translated as robbery. (4)The projection
of a time line may not necessarily be found in the
literal reading of the gemara but use of a
perception of a time line may be the best way of
expressing the gemara’s basic thought. (5)The Hebrew
word used is basar, which is usually translated as
meat and is found translated as flesh in many
translations of this verse. My use of the word
“beings” is, indeed, too broad as fish were not
destroyed in the Flood. (6) See Rashi,
Bereishit 6:12. (7) See, for
example, Rashi, Bereishit 8:22. (8) Bereishit
8:11 (9) See Rashi,
Bereishit 2:2 Return to top |
© 2006 NISHMA