Noah in the Zohar

I would like to expand upon my previous post regarding the different perspectives of the biblical character Noah, focusing on the interpretation found in the ‘Zohar’. I would like to try and account for why Noah is presented in such different ways, and how the background and current events surrounding the author may have influenced the stratified outcomes.
First, I must examine the bible, to explore what the text familiar to one religious tradition says about Noah.

And God said unto Noah, The end of all flesh is come before me; for the earth is filled with violence through them; and, behold, I will destroy them with the earth….And, behold, I, even I, do bring a flood of waters upon the earth, to destroy all flesh, wherein [is] the breath of life, from under heaven; [and] every thing that [is] in the earth shall die. But with thee will I establish my covenant; and thou shalt come into the ark, thou, and thy sons, and thy wife, and thy sons' wives with thee….Thus did Noah; according to all that God commanded him, so did he. And the Lord said unto Noah, Come thou and all thy house into the ark; for thee have I seen righteous before me in this generation….And Noah did according unto all that the Lord commanded him. (Gen. 6:13 -7:5)

According to the bible, Noah simply did as God told him to do. The reader knows that Noah is a Godly man, but this is evident because God spared him and his family- this isn’t information based on the author’s first-person opinion.

In the ‘Zohar’ reading, the passage of Noah is based on a certain Rabbi Yohanan’s interpretation of the text. The Rabbi doesn’t see the obedience of Noah, he sees its negation- the fact that Noah was in the presence of God and did not take advantage of the opportunity to plea on the behalf of the human race. Because of this action- or lack of one- by Noah, the Rabbi Yohanan argues that Noah was simply satisfied with knowing he and his family was safe. He makes the case that because Noah was not in any danger, he was content with getting on the ark and allowing the rest of the world to perish. Why does this Rabbi take this opinion? Why didn’t he applaud Noah for his steadfast obedience and ability to follow God’s directions?
So make yourself an ark of cypress wood; make rooms in it and coat it with pitch inside and out. This is how you are to build it: The ark is to be 450 feet long, 75 feet wide and 45 feet high. Make a roof for it and finish the ark to within 18 inches of the top. Put a door in the side of the ark and make lower, middle and upper decks….You are to bring into the ark two of all living creatures, male and female, to keep them alive with you. Two of every kind of bird, of every kind of animal and of every kind of creature that moves along the ground will come to you to be kept alive. You are to take every kind of food that is to be eaten and store it away as food for you and for them. Gen 14-21
This passage is so precise and detailed that most of us couldn’t imagine following them correctly.

However, it appears that the foundation of the Rabbi’s anger towards Noah is based upon the text as found in the ‘Zohar’:
Our Rabbis have taught: How did the Blessed Holy One respond when Noah came out of the ark and saw the whole world destroyed and began to cry over the Holocaust? Noah said: “Master of the world, You and called Compassionate! You should have shown compassion for Your Creatures!” The Blessed Holy One answered him: “Foolish shepherd! Now you say this, but not when I spoke to you tenderly…I lingered with you and spoke to you at length so that you would ask for mercy for the world! (pg 58)
This teaching, as passed down from different Rabbis, explains the interpretation. This information is different then as found in the standard Bible, and this difference accounts for the resulting confliction of attitude toward this biblical figure. Clearly, it only takes a few additional passages in a different religious tradition to completely alter a group’s perspective on a historical character, and this must be accounted for in comparing different opinions.