Fur or Fire
The Insufficiency of Righteousness
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks in his book, Lessons In Leadership, discusses the failings of Noah. I had never thought Noah had many failings. Perhaps drunkenness toward the end of his life. However, he is described in scripture as a righteous man. In Genesis 6:9 the statement is made that “Noah was a righteous man, blameless in his generation; Noah walked with God.” (NRSV) The picture painted there seems to be of someone who is beyond reproach.
However, Sacks indicates that there is a debate among the great Jewish sages about a particular possible stain on Noah’s life. The Hebrew indicates that Noah “alone” was found righteous among his contemporaries. And the question of the great Jewish thinkers is “why?” Why were there no others? Why didn’t Noah influence others to join him. Sacks contends that while Noah was an extraordinary person of great character and devotion, he still lacked something. He was not a leader.
Collective Responsibility
While true leadership, as depicted in the Bible, requires righteousness. It is insufficient to simply be a person of impeccable character if one wishes to lead. Taking responsibility beyond the personal is required. Leaders seek the betterment of those around them.
In the book, Sacks indicates there are three examples of abdicated responsibility in the first few chapters of Genesis. First there is the rejection of personal responsibility for actions in Adam and Eve. Both famously claim sin was “not their fault.” (cf. Genesis 3:11-13). Second, there is the rejection of moral responsibility in Cain. “Am I my brother’s keeper?” (Genesis 4:9). And finally there is the apathy with respect to collective responsibility in Noah. Noah made sure he himself walked with God. However, he did little to try to bring those in his community along.
Sacks speculates that Noah’s escape into alcohol might have been to relieve the guilt he felt over the lives lost in the flood. Could he not have done something to help them change so they too might have been saved?
A Man In A Fur Coat
According to the Hasidim, Noah was a tzaddik im peltz, a “righteous man in a fur coat.” Sacks explains the phrase this way.
Wear a fur coat and you warm only yourself. Light a fire and you warm others. We are supposed to light a fire.
Sacks, Jonathan. Lessons in Leadership: A Weekly Reading of the Jewish Bible . The Toby Press. Kindle Edition.
The challenge of leadership is that of accepting collective responsibility. It is the embracing of the fact embedded in the universe that we are part of a larger community and bear some responsibility for it. It is not enough to just keep ourselves in right relationship with God and others. We are called upon to work toward the common good. To bring others into positive relationships with others. To work toward justice. To be peacemakers. So the question posed to us is Fur or Fire?
A Fire Builder
Rabbi Sacks contrasts Noah with the leader back to whom Jews, Christians, and Muslims all trace their origins, Abraham. Like Noah, Abraham was alerted by God to impending destruction. God stopped and spoke with Abraham just prior to the fiery end of Sodom (Genesis 18). However, Abraham was not content to just listen and save his immediate family as Noah did. The father of the Jews grasped that he had responsibility for the well being of the people who were under God’s judgment, even though they were strangers.
Where Noah simply obeyed God’s instructions, Abraham challenged God (Genesis 18:22-33) in a way that demonstrated he was not content that his distant neighbors be wiped out. He sought to find a way to save them. His courage in addressing the Creator and Judge of the universe is remarkable. It is the courage of one who takes collective responsibility.
While it may be that Noah was simply content with a fur coat, Abraham sought to bring others to his fire. Because of this willingness to take collective responsibility, he was able to pass on the same leadership disposition to countless descendents who have had the attitude to seek beyond their own personal benefit to the common good. He inspires a multitude of fire-builders.
No greater compliment could be paid to a leader than that said of the 17th century Quakers who came to America:
They “were not idle, but went forth and gathered sticks and kindled a fire and left it burning.”
The Voyage of the Woodhouse – 1657