Pninim U'Peliyos on the Weekly Parsha — Answers
(For the questions see second to back page)
1) R' Label Lam derives a profound lesson from here:
The inhabitants of the teivah were destined to become the builders of a new world. Had they spent an entire year casually tossing their rubbish out of the window, that behaviour could easily have become second nature. What would happen once the mabul ended and they returned to dry land? They might well have continued discarding waste wherever and whenever they pleased.
Therefore, they were required to live for an entire year with a floor dedicated to rubbish, enduring the inconvenience in order to ensure that they would not develop habits destructive to the world they were about to rebuild.
Sometimes discomfort is a small price to pay for preserving proper character.
2) The Shu”t Pesach Devir (Vol. II, siman 204) discusses whether its feathers may be used for sechach. Technically speaking, since the bird grows from a tree, it would appear to qualify as gidulei karka, something that originates from the ground. Nevertheless, he rules that such feathers should not be used, lest people confuse them with ordinary bird feathers, which are invalid for sechach.
The same Teshuvah discusses the appropriate berachah to recite when eating the bird. Since it ultimately detaches from the tree and only begins its independent existence after falling into the water, its primary stage of life commences there. Accordingly, its berachah would be shehakol, no different to a fruit which is unripe on a tree and only ripens after being stored in dust or straw. Just like such fruit is shehakol, the same thing would be with this bird.
As for whether these birds entered the teivah, there is disagreement among the authorities.
One of the Geonim from the previous generation (a talmid of R’ Mordcha Benet zt”l, cited in Otzer Chemda pg. 257) suggests that Noach never brought them aboard. Since they effectively emerge from trees rather than reproducing like ordinary birds, there was no need to preserve them. The trees upon which they grew could simply regenerate after the Flood.
However, Tosfos HaShalem cites one of the Ba'alei HaTosfos who maintains that Noach brought every species of bird in existence into the teivah, including this remarkable one.
3) According to Chazal, Og, King of Bashan, survived the mabul while remaining outside the teivah. The Gemara in Zevachim (113b) states that a miracle occurred whereby the waters around the teivah did not harm him. Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer relates that Og sat upon a ladder attached to the exterior of the teivah, swore allegiance to Noach, and received food daily through an opening in its side.
If Og spent the entire year outside, surely, he knew exactly what conditions were like. Why not simply ask him whether the waters had receded?
Several answers have been suggested:
i) The Radal explains that Og’s survival proved very little. Tosfos teaches that exceptionally powerful beings, such as Og and the re'em, were capable of withstanding conditions that would have been fatal to ordinary creatures.
Even if Og survived, the world might still have been uninhabitable. The dove, by contrast, could demonstrate that normal living conditions had returned by successfully locating a place to rest.
ii) Rav Yisrael Yaakov Fisher, in Even Yisrael, suggests that Noach simply did not regard Og as a fully reliable source of information. Consequently, he preferred to verify conditions through the signs provided by the raven and the dove.
iii) Perhaps Og departed immediately when conditions improved. By the time Noach sought confirmation, Og was no longer present. Yet his absence could not serve as proof that the earth was habitable, since other explanations were possible.
iv) The Daf Al Daf (Zevachim 113b) cites a beautiful explanation:
Noach intentionally chose not to rely upon Og because he wanted to impress upon him that his survival had not made him indispensable to the future of mankind.
Had Noach depended upon Og's information, Og might have concluded that he occupied a central role in rebuilding the world. By sending the dove instead, Noach demonstrated that the future depended solely upon the will of Hashem, not upon any contribution from Og.
4) The Medrash Rabbah comments on the pasuk:
“Vayisha'er ach Noach — Only Noach remained.”
The word "ach" ("only") implies limitation. The Medrash explains that Noach was not entirely spared. Throughout the year in the teivah, he suffered greatly and even coughed up blood because of the harsh conditions and penetrating cold.
The Yefeh To'ar explains that although the waters of the Flood were initially boiling hot, this was primarily during the forty days of rain. Afterwards, Hashem cooled the waters, and it was then that Noach suffered from the intense cold.
5) Pirkei D'Rabbi Eliezer (Perek 24) relates that the builders completed only a portion of the structure they originally intended to build, and yet it reached an astonishing height of seventy mil.
According to the calculations of the Chazon Ish, this amounts to approximately eighty kilometres.
The tower was so tall that bricks and mortar passed from workers at the bottom to workers at the top required an entire year to complete the journey.
The Gemara in Sanhedrin (109a) teaches that ultimately one-third of the tower was swallowed into the earth, one-third burned, and one-third remains.
Even if only a third remained, the resulting structure would still stand at a staggering height of roughly twenty-seven kilometres.
To put things into perspective, the tallest building in the world today, the Burj Khalifa in Dubai, stands at less than one kilometre high. The remnant of the Tower of Bavel, according to these calculations, would dwarf anything humanity has ever built.
6) The answer emerges from the very first Mishnah in Bava Basra.
The Mishnah teaches that if partners want to build a partition between their two courtyards each one must give according to the custom of the town etc. if they are building a wall with gevil (rough stone) each one should provide three tefochim of space to build the wall on, if they are building with levenim (large complete bricks) each one should provide a tefach and a half. It comes out that a wall made of stones (gevil) is twice the thickness of one built from bricks (levenim).
Yet concerning the Tower of Bavel, the Torah states: “Vatehi lahem halevenah la’even” – “The bricks served them as stone.” The difficulty is obvious. Bricks and stone walls differ significantly in thickness. Which was it, brick or stone?
The Chanukas HaTorah answers beautifully.
The builders used bricks. However, every brick was miraculously blessed and expanded, occupying the same space as stone. In effect, each brick became the equivalent of two.
This, he explains, is the Medrash's source. The pasuk “Vatehi lahem halevenah la'even” is not merely describing the material they used. It is revealing that their bricks possessed the effective dimensions and strength of stone.
(Perhaps we can add that this is some perfect chizuk for those beginning Bava Basra. Some people get put off from the fact that the Masechta is very large and is 176 Daf, in fact I remember when we learnt it in yeshivah that only one person managed to finish the Masechta. However, it is important not to let the size deter you. Put the effort in, lay down the bricks one by one, slowly and consistently, and Hashem will double, triple and quadruple your efforts and before you know it you will be at the top of the tower and have reached the end. Hatzlocha Rabbah.)
