{"id":90142,"date":"2025-10-24T18:09:29","date_gmt":"2025-10-24T23:09:29","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.crescentcityjewishnews.com\/?p=90142"},"modified":"2025-10-24T18:09:29","modified_gmt":"2025-10-24T23:09:29","slug":"person-in-the-parsha-noach-14","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.crescentcityjewishnews.com\/blog\/person-in-the-parsha-noach-14\/","title":{"rendered":"Person in the Parsha: Noach"},"content":{"rendered":"

By RABBI TZVI HERSH WEINREB<\/p>\n

“NIMROD AND THE PSYCHOLOGY OF EVIL<\/strong>“<\/p>\n

Why did I choose the title \u201cPerson in the Parsha<\/em>\u201d when I began to compose these weekly columns many years ago? I hesitate to tell you the truth; namely, that I had several reasons for doing so. But one reason was the fact that almost every parsha<\/em> has in it a central human figure, Abraham or Moses for example, and often several such figures. Surely, a weekly column must include some comment about that person\u2019s heroic achievements or occasional frustrations.<\/p>\n

\"\"

In writing this week\u2019s column, I decided to focus on one such individual, Nimrod. Here is what the Torah tells us about him:<\/p>\n

Kush (the son of Cham) begot Nimrod, who was the first to be a man of might on earth. He was a mighty hunter before the Lord; hence the saying, \u201cLike Nimrod a mighty hunter before the Lord.\u201d The mainstays of his kingdom were Babylon, Erach, Accad, and Calneh in the land of Shinar. From that land he (Nimrod, according to Ramban and others) went forth to Ashur and built Nineveh\u2026 (Genesis 10:8-11<\/a><\/span>)<\/p>\n

Was Nimrod a \u201cbad guy\u201d or a \u201cgood guy\u201d? The simple reading of the text gives us nary a clue about whether he was \u201cgood\u201d or \u201cevil\u201d. Yet even a cursory study of the rabbinic sources yields the picture of an ambitious and self-aggrandizing tyrant. Even the two phrases \u201cbefore the Lord\u201d are understood by our sages as testifying to either his arrogance or to his hypocritical and blasphemous relationship with the divine.<\/p>\n

As Rashi puts it: \u201cHe recognized his Master (i.e. the Lord) but intentionally rebelled against Him.\u201d Thus, Don Isaac Abarbanel, who knew a thing or two about palace politics, portrays Nimrod as the first human being to challenge the equality of all mankind and to relegate for himself the role of an egomaniacal autocrat driven by violent ambitions of military conquest.<\/p>\n

And yet, his outer behavior, his persona, was \u201cbefore the Lord\u201d. He played the role of a devout believer in the One Above and successfully convinced others that this fa\u00e7ade was the \u201creal\u201d Nimrod. We may conjecture that, in his mind, even the Lord himself was deceived by his prayers and religious rituals as he \u201cknew his Master but intended to rebel against Him\u201d.<\/p>\n

We may conclude that Nimrod was evil, but in a complex and self-contradictory way. For most of us, he remains difficult, perhaps even impossible, to comprehend!<\/p>\n

This brings us to the tantalizing question, \u201cWhat is the nature of Evil?\u201d Are all villains as psychologically complex as Nimrod? Does one size fit all the Hamans and Hitlers of our tragic history? Or do they somehow differ from each other in an inscrutable but equally diabolical manner?<\/p>\n

These are questions to which I intend to return as we proceed together through the ensuing chapters of the Chumash <\/em>this year. I\u2019ve begun with Nimrod, but for a broader<\/em> view let\u2019s return to the Torah portions we read last week, Parashat Bereshit<\/em>, and the preceding Shabbat<\/em> during Sukkot <\/em>when we read the Book of Kohelet<\/em> (Ecclesiastes) in the synagogue.<\/p>\n

First, the following reflection of King Solomon, whom our Sages identified as the author of the tantalizing and fascinating Book of Kohelet<\/em>. Let\u2019s see what he had to say about evil and, more importantly, about the relationship between good and evil:<\/p>\n

Behold the Lord\u2019s doing! Who can straighten what He has twisted? In an instance of \u201cgood\u201d, join it; and in an instance of \u201cevil\u201d, reflect: the Lord arranged them as parallel to each other\u2026\u201d (<\/span>Kohelet<\/a><\/em> 7:13-14<\/a>, my translation).<\/p>\n

Zeh le\u2019umat zeh<\/em>! \u201cGood\u201d and \u201cEvil\u201d are, in some manner, \u201cparallel to each other\u201d. I take that to mean that just as \u201cevil\u201d people are composed of mixed motivations and mixed behaviors in keeping with their individual psyches, so are \u201cgood\u201d people complex to the extent that no two of them are exactly like each other.<\/p>\n

For another emphatic \u201ccoupling\u201d of \u201cgood\u201d and \u201cevil\u201d let\u2019s flip back a few pages in our Chumash<\/em> to last week\u2019s Torah portion, Bereshit<\/em>. There we find the following powerful words:<\/p>\n

The Lord took Adam and placed him in the garden of Eden\u2026 And the Lord commanded Adam, saying, \u201cOf every tree in the garden you may eat; but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, you must not eat. For as soon as you eat of it, you shall die.\u201d (Genesis 2:15-17<\/a><\/span>).<\/p>\n

Note! One tree with both \u201cgood\u201d and \u201cevil\u201d components. There are many conclusions to draw from the curious juxtaposition of two opposites in one tree. One plausible interpretation is that there is often, if not always, no evil without some good in it, and no good without a dose of evil within.<\/p>\n

But I prefer to interpret the presence of both good and evil in the tree as support for my contention that the psychological composition of good and evil people is complex as both are products of mixed motives and contrary dispositions.<\/p>\n

Our task is to better understand the differing components of both the \u201cgood\u201d and the \u201cevil\u201d within each of us. One approach to this task is offered by Rabbi Yakov Loberbaum, the nineteenth century Torah scholar known for his many Talmudic works such as Netivot HaMishpat<\/em>, who writes in his commentary on Chumash<\/em>, Nachalat Yakov<\/em>:<\/p>\n

There are two types of sinners: a) the one who sins because of his uncontrollable personal passions, and (b) the other who sins to defy his Maker even with no personal material benefit.<\/p>\n

How eloquently Rabbi Avraham Isaac Kook expresses his view of the source of evil in his Orot HaTeshuvah<\/em> (8:4):<\/p>\n

What is the reason for the rage evinced by evil doers? What is the meaning of their anger with the whole world, what is the basis for the bitter melancholy that consumes spirit and flesh, that poisons life, that is found among them?… With clear inner certainty we reply to this: All this stems from the source of evil, \u201cfrom the wicked emanates wickedness.\u201d (Samuel I 24:13<\/a><\/span>)<\/p>\n

For Rav Kook, there is evil deep within all of us, but our free will can suppress it. \u201cWhen the will refuses to leave evil reposing in the depths of the soul, it\u2026 disturbs the equitable relationship of the soul with all existence.\u201d<\/p>\n

This week, I have focused upon the complexities of evil. I deliberately ignored Noah, the force for good in this week\u2019s Torah portion, Noach<\/em>. Next week\u2019s Torah portion will give me the opportunity to shift gears to explore the stark contrast between two Biblical representatives of good\u2014Noah and Abraham. Please join me again for Parshat Lech Lecha<\/em> as we strive together to suppress evil and attain only that which is \u201cgood\u201d in the eyes of others and in the judgement of our Creator.<\/p>\n

\"Share