Noah: Good or Bad?

One interesting distinction between ‘The Queen of Sheba and her only Son Menyelek’ and the ‘Zohar’ is the approach taken in regard to Noah. The ‘Zohar’ reproached Noah because he did not ‘shield his generation and did not pray for them like Abraham…he did not care and did not ask for mercy, he just built the ark and the whole world was destroyed’ (pg 58-59, Zohar). The Kebra Negast, however, says ‘…as for Noah, he humbled himself, and offered up sacrifice, and he cried out, and groaned, and wept. And God held converse with Noah, who said, “If Thou wilt destroy the earth a second time with a Flood, blot Thou me out with those who are to perish” And God said unto him, “I will make a covenant with thee that…I, on My part, that I will not destroy the earth a second time with a Flood, and that I will give unto thy children Winter and Summer, Seedtime and Harvest, Autumn and Spring.’ (6-7, Kebra).

These two interpretations portray Noah in drastically different lights. In ‘Zohar’, Noah is made accountable for the flood because he did not stand up for his people and plead to God on their behalf. Noah is chastised for not being as caring or protective as Abraham or Moses, both of whom pledged their pledged their lives in the attempt to save their people. In ‘Kebra’, Noah is presented precisely as Abraham and Moses are in ‘Zohar’. He pleads to God, and he asks that he be killed with his people if God decides to flood the world again. When God then promises that he will never again destroy the world by flood, Noah may be credited for this security.

These two differences demonstrate how different perspectives and authors influence the writings of historical texts. The portrayal of one book or work may create a person worthy to be praised, or it may make that same person into an example of what not to do. The ‘Zohar’ and ‘Kebra’ both offer different portrayals of Noah and his actions regarding the flooding of the world.