Noah, Hamas and Evil
Why did we celebrate Simchat Torah?
Jeremy Rosen
One of the reasons given by the Tur, (Jacob Ben Asher 1270-1340) and other Medieval giants is that we must confound the Satan who criticizes the Jews to God because they study Torah but never complete it, and even when they finish the Torah, they do not revise it. We need to show how devoted we are just to spite him (or her or it). The same sources say that we don’t blow the shofar the day before Rosh Hashana (after blowing it every day for the month of Ellul) to confuse Satan so that he should not try to interfere with our prayers and think he’s missed the opportunity.
The word SATAN in the Torah is used simply as a verb to prevent or block someone as in Numbers (22:22). Only in the late books of Job and Zechariah is Satan personified. Which indicates it’s a late arrival into Jewish thought. Christianity adopted the Devil enthusiastically and fear of the Devil came to dominate the Medieval mind. As we Jews often absorb a great deal from surrounding cultures, we too have become infected with such superstitions. Rabbis may have used such ideas to communicate and some still do. The common man did believe in Satan. Throughout Medieval, and early modern history, Jews were always being referred to either as the Devil or the Devil’s spawn.
Such ideas have entered Islam too. Jews are often associated with the devil. In Mecca, the tradition of stoning the Devil during the Haj plays a very important part in their folklore and theology. Satan is sometimes used to excite the more barbaric and unenlightened lower levels of Islam.
But in the light of the past horrifically evil weeks of evil incarnate, I am inclined to think that Satan does walk on earth and his real name is Hamas. The story of Noah tells of God destroying the humans on earth, not because they worshipped idols or ate milk and meat together or even went mixed dancing Heaven forbid. No. It was because of violence, Hamas. Hamas is the Hebrew word the Torah uses (Genesis 6:11). Can it be coincidental? No, I don’t think the Torah had this modern incarnation of evil in mind specifically. But it is fanciful and appropriate.
The early chapters of Genesis are concerned with the battle between good and evil, between humans and God, and between human beings. It started by distinguishing animals from humans. The snake. And then suggests that only humans obeying God can discover the right way to live. Regression led to fratricidal Cain. On to his offspring Lemech who misused his wives. Adam’s other grandson Enosh ‘invented’ idolatry.
As other humanoids spread out, the Benei Elohim, started to abuse and grab women whenever they felt like it (Genesis 6:2). Benei Elohim could mean Sons of God, (with apologies to Christianity). The phrase is used in the Book of Job to imply heavenly beings, including Satan, who acted as divine agents. And yet Elohim was also used throughout the Torah to mean Judges as well. In which case they might have been the equivalent of privileged, spoiled Trust Fund sons of aristocrats. Then came the Nephilim ( Genesis 6:4) who intermarried with Adam’s progeny. Were they Neanderthals, giants, or just mythical creatures? Perhaps they were forerunners of Isis. All these were people whom the Bible regarded as pure evil. No redeeming features at all. Destroyed Because above all God hated violence. In the words of the Torah, the earth was full of Hamas. Even so, the strain continued in the new era. It was never eradicated. Some, like Amalek,( Exodus 17:8), emerged later and these are the people Israel has to battle against to survive.
After the flood, the understanding of evil changed or evolved. The Yetzer, the will of humans had developed as something purely evil (Genesis 6:5) now became modified and bifurcated into two inclinations. A positive will or drive and a competing evil drive, the Yetzer HaTov and the Yetzer HaRa. Life would be a permanent struggle between the two. And most human beings get caught up in the challenge of giving the good tendency priority over the bad. So that we’re neither all good nor all bad but capable of both. Some go one way, some the other.
The succeeding story of the Tower of Babel was not grounds for destroying mankind. The arguments then were political and ideological. Something that could be dealt with by scattering them and as a result by having alternative narratives, values, or communities. Variety was a safety net.
Controversial Professor Hans Eysenck (1916-1997) thought there was such a thing as an evil gene. Some still do. And the Jihadi mentality is one manifestation. But horrible, evil people can be found everywhere on earth. The (albeit controversial) idea of free will, means that some of us can do good and others do evil. But humans are easily led and whipped up to frenzies. It happened under the Nazis and much of the Muslim world today.
What we are seeing now, is this capacity for evil beyond imagination. We thought that ISIS was barbaric until we saw the sadism beyond the imagination of Hamas. Just as with the Nazis, the Western world is infected with the disease of appeasement. That is what supporters of Hamas around the world do. They find excuses, they blame the Jews. When they support Hamas, they are not only bereft of morality but also hastening the demise of their societies and cultures. Because one day it will be too late.
Some ask why God did not intervene. And I reply that we should rather be asking where humanity was. The Talmud says that the word functions according to its own rules (Avodah Zara 54b). And that includes humans. There is no point in blaming God, we should blame ourselves. Our failures of security and leadership.
We have been reminded of how low some humans can sink because of the poison they are reared on. The culture that has influenced us is an ethical one that abhors violence. Jews do not rejoice or celebrate the death, torture, or rape of others. We must “turn from evil and only do good.” And do all we can to avoid being dragged down into the pit that will forever be called Hamas.
Rabbi Jeremy Rosen lives in New York. He was born in Manchester. His writings are concerned with religion, culture, history and current affairs – anything he finds interesting or relevant. They are designed to entertain and to stimulate. Disagreement is always welcome.
