החיים והלכה

There are many halachos pertaining to brachos, for example:

מי שאכל בחוץ, כל זמן שהוא רואה את המקום שבו בירך בתחילה, עדיין נחשב שלא שינה את מקומו. ואם היה מהלך בדרך ובירך על אכילה או שתייה, אין שינוי מקום נחשב הפסק לגביו, שכל הדרך היא מקומו (שו"ע קעח, ד, מ"ב מב).

If a person is eating an ice cream cone outdoors and is moving around it can get very complicated. I once heard a rabbi telling his students not to eat while moving around because it creates many shailos. What always bothered me was; instead of telling people not to do something why dont you teach the halachos pertaining to that situation as opposed to preaching about NOT living normally. We live our lives and halacha guides us on when and how to make a bracha, for example. Hilkchos Brachos does t tell us not to eat ice cream. That kind of advocacy is not what halacha is about. We should be teaching people that they must know שו"ע או"ח סימן קע"ח.

The Gemara in Eiruvin 32:A,B, discusses a case where a "Chaver" tells an עם הארץ that he can pick fruit from the Chaver's tree. The question then arises whether the Chaver has to worry if the עם הארץ is going to be מפריש the required תרו"מ. Should the חבר go and be מפריש so that the עם הארץ won't eat תבל or should the חבר not go and be עובר an איסור of being מפריש שלא מין המוקף just so that the עם הארץ won't be עובר an איסור of תבל?. The גמרא calls that an איסור קלילא, a light איסור. Should one allow himself to be עובר a light איסור so that someone else shouldn't be עובר an איסור חמור.

Why dont we say that a חבר shouldn't allow an עם הארץ to pick fruit from his tree if ממה נפשך an איסור will be being performed? The answer is that he is not being עובר the איסור of לפני עור because he can be מפריש. Even though that is an "issur Klilah". Therefore chazal cannot tell a person in a situation where there is no איסור not to do something. The only thing the חכמים can do in that situation is to tell him HOW to act, whether he should be עובר and be torem sheloh min hamukaf or not.

Halacha tells us what we can and can't do as it pertains to our daily lives. Halacha tells us sometimes what we must or must not do. However, Halacha will not invade a space where it doesnt belong simply because we are then, by our actions, put in a situation that complicates the halachic implications.

We don't refrain from flying on chanukah because we might then not be able to light נרות. We rather travel and follow the halachic guidelines as to what a traveler is obligated to do. If he doesnt have to light because he is flying over night then so be it.

Kohanim Zerizim

Once one goes through a lot of the places in the Gemara where it mentions כהנים זריזים
It becomes pretty obvious that it doesn't only mean Zariz as in nimble, swift, or prompt. It really means that they are functional as in not dysfuntional. They run a well organized operation. For example in the Gemara in Tamid Nishchat in Pesachim 59b It says that with Kohanim the Chachamim did not have to worry that the Kohanim will mistakenly be Maktir a karban that was on the mizbeach over night which couldn't be burnt till the morning because כהנים זריזים
the indication is that they don't make organizational mistakes. It is somewhat like the chapter of Zrizus in the sefer מסילת ישרים where the מסילת ישרים defines the concept of zerizus in avodas hashem as being productive. Obviously a lot of it is focused on not being lazy but ultimately not being lazy is not enough as they say in business "Work Smarter not Harder". When there are processes in place in an organization that don't allow for mistakes to happen the organization runs much more smoothly. The same can be said for an individual, if that individual puts processes in place that don't allow him to be lazy or make mistakes he will become much more productive. However, setting up the processes and following the protocols takes work but can make the job ultimately much easier. The Kohanim, it seems from the Gemara, were experts at that.

Pardes of Naran

The psukim in Parshas Lech Lecha state as follows:

וישא-לוֹט אֶת-עֵינָיו וַיַּרְא אֶת-כָּל-כִּכַּר הַיַּרְדֵּן כִּי כֻלָּהּ מַשְׁקֶה לִפְנֵי שַׁחֵת יְהֹוָה אֶת-סְדֹם וְאֶת-עֲמֹרָה כְּגַן-יְהוָֹה כְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם בֹּאֲכָה צֹעַר:
יא וַיִּבְחַר-לוֹ לוֹט אֵת כָּל-כִּכַּר הַיַּרְדֵּן וַיִּסַּע לוֹט מִקֶּדֶם וַיִּפָּרְדוּ אִישׁ מֵעַל אָחִיו:
יב אַבְרָם יָשַׁב בְּאֶרֶץ-כְּנָעַן וְלוֹט יָשַׁב בְּעָרֵי הַכִּכָּר וַיֶּאֱהַל עַד-סְדֹם

Rashi brings a medrash which is a gemara in  Horiyus 10:b that states as follows regarding Lot's intention:

דורשה לגנאי, על שהיו שטופי זימה בחר לו לוט בשכונתם 

Lot really liked the Sodomites behavior and that is why he chose Sdom. The question is why not take the pasuk literally? It seems to have been well known that Sdom was a nation with great wealth (chazal say that they had great natural resources). Why do Chaza'l assume an ulterior motive?

The explanation is that  there is פרדס in Torah (pshat remez, drush, sod). This is instrinctly built into the basic structure of the Torah. The klal we were mekabel from Chaza'l is 
הסתכל באורייתא וברא עלמא

The Torah is the blueprint for the world. If the blueprint has פרדס built into it then the actual structure has to reflect that.   In Seforim it is mentioned that PARDES is "Keneged NARNN" There is PARDES in every man. Man is know as "OLAM KATAN". There is פרדס in every man whether he realizes it or not. . Just as we can only see Pshat if we look at the surface of the Torah we can also only see Pshat when it comes to seeing man.  Chazal were able to tap into the פרדס of man. Man's NARNN, nefesh ruach neshama. There is a Shoresh, a root, beyond what is recognized to the person himself whcih is much deeper than what meets the eye. The unconscious might be one of  the layers. Maybe those layers start after the unconscious and the unconscious is still part of Pshat. Who knows. This is Pshat in many Chazal's such as in Bamidbar it says that the Bnei Yisrael were  ‘bochim limishpichosav”. Chaza'l say that that Bnei Yisrael  were not complaining about onions but rather “iskei mishpachos” – arayos. They were complaining about the Issur of Arayos. How do Chazal know that? They were able to tap into a much higher level of man's consciousness into the פרדס  realm. Another example is when  Yehuda told Pharoah – Ki Chamocha kiParoah. Chazal attribute a whole different meaning than it seems on the surface even though on the surface the simple meaning makes sense that Pharoah is a strong king.  Chazal say that Yehuda meant much more than that. This deeper meaning is  possible even if the speaker is not aware of it. And this might only be in the remez, or drush realm, there might be other deeper meanings in the Sod realm which is parallel to the Neshama which is totally above and beyond a person's ability to relate and obviously isn't even aware that it exists. Even a shrink that can delve into a persons darkest place cannot find this realm. It si buried in the person's spiritual existence.  That might be why we find in the Gemara a lot of times when people say things that they don't even mean the Gemra says his "mazal" saw it and sometimes it comes true. This is because there is a much deeper part of that person that is speaking. He might be speaking directly from his Neshama. 

That would be pshat in “barasi yetzer harah barasi torah tavlin” and other “segulas” that chazal tell us like saying krias shema. These fixes  work on the “sod” of the persons neshama which drives him without him able to know why.

As an aside, I find it very interesting that we, today, are so enthralled with our "Gedolim" and "Rebbes" and feel that when they see a person they know right away everything about him/her. That they can see into the deepest depths of their soul. I just want to quote a few psukim from Shmuel I 15 6:

וַיְהִי בְּבוֹאָם וַיַּרְא אֶת-אֱלִיאָב וַיֹּאמֶר אַךְ נֶגֶד יְהֹוָה מְשִׁיחוֹ:
ז וַיֹּאמֶר יְהֹוָה אֶל-שְׁמוּאֵל אַל-תַּבֵּט אֶל-מַרְאֵהוּ וְאֶל-גְּבֹהַּ קוֹמָתוֹ כִּי מְאַסְתִּיהוּ כִּי לֹא אֲשֶׁר יִרְאֶה הָאָדָם כִּי הָאָדָם יִרְאֶה לַעֵינַיִם וַיהֹוָה יִרְאֶה לַלֵּבָב

This is talking about Shmuel Hanavi. Possibly the greatest Prophet Bnei Yisrael ever knew since Moshe Rabenu. He comes to Yishai with a command from God to anoint one of Yishai's son's as the next King. When he sees Eliav he immediately "Knows" that Eliav is the "ONE" and is ready to anoint him, but wait, God says to Shmuel הָאָדָם יִרְאֶה לַעֵינַיִם וַיהֹוָה יִרְאֶה לַלֵּבָב. You can only see what is on the surface because only God knows what is in man's heart. I guess it was too bad that Shmuel couldn't take a contemporary Rebbe with him who could show him how to do it.  

Reason for the Mabul being a flood of Water

An explanation as to why God brought a Mabul upon the world and drowned all civilization in water is possibly as mida keneged mida for their sins. Water as we know represents "Chesed". Chesed brings things together as opposed to Fire which represents "Din". Fire breaks things down and  separates them into their basic elements while water is typically a bonding agent. The aveira of the Dor hamabul was "Nizkakim Lishe'aynum minum-Mishkav Zachar. There was an abundance of  zima in the world. Civilization's attitude was to  love indiscriminately, they even loved animals. The medrash says that the Dor Hamabul were the first generation that sanctioned mishkav Zachar by instituting a "Ksuva Lizachar". They affected animals to the point where animals were cohabitating with other species other than their own. Znus in the Torah is called "Chesed" which is really misplaced Love. Love has to be channeled correctly. Indiscriminate love is destructive.

The other aveira of Dor Hamabul  of "Gezel" is always described as "Chamas" as in "Vatimaleh Ha'aretz Chamas" and 'ki malah Ha'aretz Chamas. "Chamas" is translated as  "Chatofin" in the Targum. The Torah is not referring to private Gezel where people are stealing from each other but rather institutionalized stealing where the strong take from the weak. Grabbing by force of the law such as in Sdom where legal stealing was their way of life. When the strong government steals from the producers to redistribute their private property to others that they feel is politically expedient is called "Chamas". When those in power take from the weak to redistribute the wealth it is  usually done in the name of social justice. Again this is a misplaced act of Chesed. Sdom would steal from visitors and distribute to citizens. They had a rationalization. They were doing Chesed to those that needed it most.

וַיִּרְא֤וּ בְנֵי־הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙ אֶת־בְּנ֣וֹת הָֽאָדָ֔ם כִּ֥י טֹבֹ֖ת הֵ֑נָּה וַיִּקְח֤וּ לָהֶם֙ נָשִׁ֔ים מִכֹּ֖ל אֲשֶׁ֥ר בָּחָֽרוּ:

This was another example of the powerful taking advantage of the week. The powerful decided who should be married to whom and who should love whom. Private citizens were not allowed to make those decisions. For sure there was a rationale to that too. This was the sin of the Dor Hamabul

The punishment was "Mida Keneged Mida". Water which symbolizes chesed when it is doled out in measure became a flood. The Gemara says that one of the Chasadim of God is that when it rains no raindrop touches the other. If the raindrops combined they would flood the world. A flood happens when water which usually creates growth combines unnaturally and instead of acting as a constructive force becomes the ultimate destructive force. A flood is water becoming a destructive force which symbolizes the ultimate perversion of "Chesed". 

Nesayon of Avraham according to the Ramban עשרה נסיונות נתנסה אברהם אבינו

The Ramban in Parshas Lech Lecha perek 12 pasuk 10 say a fascinating thing.

דע כי אברהם אבינו חטא חטא גדול בשגגה שהביא אשתו הצדקת במכשול עוון מפני פחדו פן יהרגוהו, והיה לו לבטוח בשם שיציל אותו ואת אשתו ואת כל אשר לו, כי יש באלוהים כוח לעזור ולהציל. גם יציאתו מן הארץ, שנצטווה עליה בתחילה, מפני הרעב, עוון אשר חטא, כי האלוהים ברעב יפדנו ממות. ועל המעשה הזה נגזר על זרעו הגלות בארץ מצרים ביד פרעה. במקום המשפט שמה הרשע והחטא

This Ramban is very hard to understand. (So difficult that I've hear that Rabbi Moshe Feinstein said that that it was written by a תלמיד טועה.

The Mishna in Avos perek 5 mishna 3 states:
עשרה נסיונות נתנסה אברהם אבינו

There are a few versions of what the nesyonos were; (Rashi/Pirkei Dirabi Eliezer, Rambam, Bartenura, Rabenu Yona) One of the constants is that they all consider the famine in the land of Canaan and Sara being taken by Phaaroh as two of the nesyonos.

How can it be considered that Avraham passed this test if, according to the Ramban, Avraham sinned by leaving the land of Canaan because of the famine? Furthermore, it seems from the Ramban that Avraham didn't do too good of a job regarding the nesoyon of Sarah Bevais Pharoh? What was the nesoyon and how did Avraham pass according to the Ramban?

The tests were as follows (Rambam):

1. Lech Lecha
2. The famine in the Land of Canaan
3. Sara being taken away  to Pharoh's palace
4. The war of the 5 kings vs the 4 kings
5.  Hagar being taken as a wife
6. Bris Milah
7. Sarah taken away by Avimelech
8. Having to chase Hagar away
9. Having to chase away Yishmael
10. Akedas Yitzchak

Others consider:
- Being thrown into the Kivshan Ha'esh by Nimrod
-Bris Bein Habsarim
-Being chased away by Nimrod


It seems that there is no constant theme in all these nisyonos. Some of them were commandments, some were simply things that happened to him, some were miracles. What is a nisayon?

Ramban  Parshas Yisro Shemos 20 pasuk 17 on the pasuk
וַיֹּ֨אמֶר משֶׁ֣ה אֶל־הָעָם֘ אַל־תִּירָ֒אוּ֒ כִּ֗י לְבַֽעֲבוּר֙ נַסּ֣וֹת אֶתְכֶ֔ם בָּ֖א הָֽאֱלֹהִ֑ים וּבַֽעֲב֗וּר תִּֽהְיֶ֧ה יִרְאָת֛וֹ עַל־פְּנֵיכֶ֖ם לְבִלְתִּ֥י תֶֽחֱטָֽאוּ:

The Ramban brings three different definitions for the word  Nisayon (the root is נסה) in this context.

1. Rashi says its rooted in the word נַסּ֣ the word would imply to raise up. This would mean to show the world how great you are by putting a Tzadik through a Nesayon and showing the world how he succeeds and doesn't succumb he is making a Kiddush Hashem and raising the awarenss of God in the world.

2. He brings another pshat, this would be the Rambam in Moreh Nevuchaim's pshat also that it is rooted in the word נסיונ as in "try" or to get used to. I have given you the Torah so that you should get used to serving me says God. The Ramban says it means הרגל

3. The Ramban's final pshat is that it is as one would assume to mean "Test". The Ramban alludes to the pasuk in parshas Vayera where it says וְהָ֣אֱלֹהִ֔ים נִסָּ֖ה אֶת־אַבְרָהָ֑ם. The Ramban on that pasuk states as follows:

ענין הנסיון הוא לדעתי, בעבור היות מעשה האדם רשות מוחלטת בידו, אם ירצה יעשה ואם לא ירצה לא יעשה, יקרא "נסיון" מצד המנוסה, אבל המנסה יתברך יצווה בו להוציא הדבר מן הכח אל הפועל, להיות לו שכר מעשה טוב לא שכר לב טוב בלבד.
ודע כי השם צדיק יבחן (תהלים יא ה), כשהוא יודע בצדיק שיעשה רצונו וחפץ להצדיקו יצווה אותו בנסיון, ולא יבחן את הרשעים אשר לא ישמעו. והנה כל הנסיונות שבתורה לטובת המנוסה

It almost sounds like a scientist testing out his theory. Even thought the scientist knows that theoretically his logic is sound and his experiment will work he still wants to act in out in practice. The Ramban takes it a step further and says that it is to give the Tzadik Schar so that he should get a reward for his action which would be a greater reward than a reward for his intent. If it wasn't borne out in practice then the reward would be just for intent to do the right thing therefore God allows the Tzadik to actually do the right thing and gets greater reward. 

According to the Ramban Hashem was testing Avraham. Avraham was the first person in his generation, the only person in his generation, to recognize God. He logically came to the conclusion that God exists. Avraham then acted upon his belief and would not let anything shake his belief in God until God finally came to Avraham and revealed himself. Even after God revealed himself Avraham had to continue working on his full belief in God and in following God's commandments and allowing himself to be fully immersed in God's existence. Was he the only God? If God promised would he keep his promise? Was God all powerful? Were there other forces? These are all questions that Avraham answered logically and held his belief based on the logic that Avraham originally reached. 

The summation of Avraham's behaviour towards God is in the perek 17 pasuk 1 

הִתְהַלֵּ֥ךְ לְפָנַ֖י וֶֽהְיֵ֥ה תָמִֽים

God then tested Avraham if anything would sway him from this belief. First by telling him to uproot himself from his homeland and move to a faraway land. Avraham followed without asking questions. As soon as Avraham got there a famine occured. Now Avraham had to move away. Would Avraham ask himself if he should be listening to God if he can't seem to protect him from a famine after he sends him to that land. Avraham also had a decision to make should he stay there in the land of Canaan or leave because of the famine. That decision would have no bearing on the fact that Avraham's belief in God was not swayed. Avraham left to go to another land so as not to die of starvation. One might say that it shows a stronger belief and he actually passed the test with even better marks in that he had to leave and wasn't swayed in his belief. Yes, the Ramban says that he sinned because he should have stayed in the Land of Canaan and had more faith that God would provide for him but that wasn't in any way an indication that he had less of a belief in his thesis that God existed and he must listen to God's command. 

With his wife Sara it was the same thing. He was moved around by God. He did everything that God told him to do. The results did not look good. That did not sway him in any way shape for form from continuing with an unwavering belief. Maybe he sinned in his actions and should have not allowed Pharoh to take his wife. That was a technical mistake according to the Ramban but wasn't a fundamental flaw in his approach to believing in God. Actually, it strengthens the argument that he withstood the test. In spite of things seemingly not working out Avraham stood firm in his belief. 

`

There is an interesting Medrash Raba on Parshas Noach Chapter 34 2 which states the following:

[ה' מנסה את הצדיק]

(שם יא): ה' צדיק יבחן ורשע ואוהב חמס שנאה נפשו
אמר רבי יונתן: היוצר הזה אינו בודק קנקנים מרועעים, שאינו מקיש עליהם אחת עד שהיא פוקעת.
ומה הוא בודק?
קנקנים יפים, שאפי' הוא מקיש עליו כמה פעמים, אינו נשבר.
כך, אין הקב"ה מנסה אלא את הצדיקים.

אמר ר' יוסי: הפשתני הזה בשעה שהוא יודע שהפשתן שלו יפה, כל שהוא כותשה היא משתבחת, וכל שהוא מקיש עליה היא משתמנת, ובשעה שהוא יודע שפשתנו רעה, אינו מספיק להקיש עליה, עד שהיא פוקעת.
כך, אין הקדוש ברוך הוא מנסה אלא את הצדיקים, שנאמר: ה' צדיק יבחן.

רבי אליעזר אמר: לבעל הבית שהיו לו ב' פרות, אחת כחה יפה ואחת כחה רע.
על מי הוא נותן העול לא על אותה שכחה יפה?!
כך, אין הקב"ה מנסה אלא הצדיק, שנאמר: ה' צדיק יבחן.

The Medrash brings three different parables for the Nesayon of a Tzadik. They each have a different twist. The first is the glassmaker that only pounds on the strong glass bottles so too does God only test the Tzadik. This would align with Rashi's pshat in Nisayon that God is proud to show the world how strong the Tzadik is that he is so strong that nothing shakes his belief. 

The second example is the flax maker who pounds on his flax to make it stronger. The better flax gets stronger with pounding while the weaker flax can't be pounded because it couldn't withstand a pounding. This would possibly align with the Rambam's pshat of getting used to.. To make the Tzadik stronger so he can grow God gives him a Nisayon which strengthens him this helps the Tzadik become better and better as he passes harder and harder tests and grows closer to God.  

The third example is the two oxen, one strong and one weak, the owner only uses the stronger oxen to plough the field because the weaker one would not be able to pull the plowshare. This would seemingly align with the final Ramban's pshat that Nisayon is to take the Tzadiks belief from the theoretical to the practical and allows him to have a greater reward. The farmer knows that the stronger ox can pull the plowshare and not the weaker one but when he wants to actually do it he takes the stronger one because the weaker one would not be able to do it. God will not put a person in a situation where he knows he will fail. 

Maybe the ten Nisyonos are a mix of the three different types of Nisyonos being discussed here. Some were to show Avraham's resolve, some were to strengthen Avraham, and some were to allow him to take his theoretical belief and live it in real life to allow him to garner greater reward. That is why the Nisyonos are not consistent. Some were simply life hardships that happened to Avraham while trying to keep God's commands, some were showing Avraham following God's commandments and some were miracles that happened to Avraham while keeping God's commandments.

Another interesting point regarding Nesayon we see in the Torah that ultimately when God promises something to someone he will put that person in a situation where that person might have a nisayon in which the choice seems counterproductive. Sometimes it might seem that staying the course and following Gods will will not allow that person to fulfill his dream. For example Yehuda was promised to be the King of Yisrael forever. Yehuda knew he was in line for his descendants to  be the Kings of Yisrael. However, when the story of Tamar took place Yehuda stood at a crossroads. He could admit that the staff and ring were his and probably lose his kingdom forever or he could deny it and retain the mantle of progenitor of the kings of Israel. Yehuda ultimately decided to do the right thing and admit. The Torah tells us that not only did he not lose his Kingdomship by admitting to Tamar but that is exactly what earned him the kingdom forever.

Yosef is another example. He was all geared up to be the next king of Egypt. He was waiting for his dreams to become reality. The last thing he needed was to be thrown into a dark prison pit. Not allowing his boss's wife to have her way with him would blow up his whole future. He was going to be the savior of Bnei Yaakov. He was going to be a historical figure. Shouldn't he consider those issues when making a decision not to do a small sin? The truth of the matter is that that was his Nisayon. Because he was willing to give up on his whole future so as not to sin with Potephar's wife Yosef was rewarded with all his dreams and aspirations. We don't see the whole picture. Our job is to do what we have to do and let God figure out how to make what is supposed to happen happen. In these cases things were exactly the opposite of what they seemed. What one thinks is jeopardizing his future is in fact solidifying his future.

Avraham Aveinu at the Akeida had the exact same dilemma. Avraham's future was Yitzchak. "Ki biYitzchak Yikarei Lecha Zera" Inheriting Eretz Yisrael, creating Kneset Yisrael, and ultimately receiving the Torah, all the promises that God made to hime were dependent on Yitzchak. Now God is asking Avraham to sacrifice his son Yitzchak. Poof, his whole future disappears. Avraham doesnt ask questions and does it anyway. The end result is that all the promises were fulfilled because Avraham went and performed the Akeida without taking all that into consideration.

Rabbi Akiva was willing to sacrifice his lifetime goal of dying Al kiddush Hashem so he could use water to wash. That was his Nisayon. He overcame the nisayon and was zocheh to die al kiddush hashem.

Our job, if we learn one thing from Avraham Aveinu is:

הִתְהַלֵּ֥ךְ לְפָנַ֖י וֶֽהְיֵ֥ה תָמִֽים

Let God figure out the consequences

Feeling Kedusha

We ask ourselves, when we learn and daven a lot why don't we feel any kedusha. We don't feel any different? Shouldn't the presence of the shechina within us have an effect on us emotionally? Although we do feel different intellectually we don't feel any different emotionally or spiritually. Why?

The answer must be that because "Zeh Le'umas Zeh Asa Elokim" everything must be balanced. When we do Avairos we don't feel any different either. We can't feel any different because then we would lose our Bechira. If man felt spiritually unclean when he did an avaira that would stop him from doing avairos. Therefore the only bad feeling is intellectual. However, as a man becomes more intellectual meaning his Sechel controls him more he starts noticing a difference in how he feels intellectually and it has a real effect on him. That is why Tzadikim (I assume) are affected by avairos and conversely by Mitzvos that they do because they are more wholesome people that are controlled by what should control them which is the Yetzer Tov. An emotional person won't feel dirty by an aveira or good about a mitzva that he does because real spirituality in this world is intellectual control meaning the ability to be controlled by an objective mind.   

The Reason for the Mabul

The parsha of the Mabul starts at the end of parshas Bereishis. The pasuk says

וַיִּרְא֤וּ בְנֵי־הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙ אֶת־בְּנ֣וֹת הָֽאָדָ֔ם כִּ֥י טֹבֹ֖ת הֵ֑נָּה וַיִּקְח֤וּ לָהֶם֙ נָשִׁ֔ים מִכֹּ֖ל אֲשֶׁ֥ר בָּחָֽרוּ:

גוַיֹּ֣אמֶר יְהֹוָ֗ה לֹֽא־יָד֨וֹן רוּחִ֤י בָֽאָדָם֙ לְעֹלָ֔ם בְּשַׁגָּ֖ם ה֣וּא בָשָׂ֑ר וְהָי֣וּ יָמָ֔יו מֵאָ֥ה וְעֶשְׂרִ֖ים שָׁנָֽה:

דהַנְּפִלִ֞ים הָי֣וּ בָאָ֘רֶץ֘ בַּיָּמִ֣ים הָהֵם֒ וְגַ֣ם אַֽחֲרֵי־כֵ֗ן אֲשֶׁ֨ר יָבֹ֜אוּ בְּנֵ֤י הָֽאֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־בְּנ֣וֹת הָֽאָדָ֔ם וְיָֽלְד֖וּ לָהֶ֑ם הֵ֧מָּה הַגִּבֹּרִ֛ים אֲשֶׁ֥ר מֵֽעוֹלָ֖ם אַנְשֵׁ֥י הַשֵּֽׁם:

הוַיַּ֣רְא יְהֹוָ֔ה כִּ֥י רַבָּ֛ה רָעַ֥ת הָֽאָדָ֖ם בָּאָ֑רֶץ וְכָל־יֵ֨צֶר֙ מַחְשְׁבֹ֣ת לִבּ֔וֹ רַ֥ק רַ֖ע כָּל־הַיּֽוֹם:

ווַיִּנָּ֣חֶם יְהֹוָ֔ה כִּֽי־עָשָׂ֥ה אֶת־הָֽאָדָ֖ם בָּאָ֑רֶץ וַיִּתְעַצֵּ֖ב אֶל־לִבּֽוֹ:

זוַיֹּ֣אמֶר יְהֹוָ֗ה אֶמְחֶ֨ה אֶת־הָֽאָדָ֤ם אֲשֶׁר־בָּרָ֨אתִי֙ מֵעַל֨ פְּנֵ֣י הָֽאֲדָמָ֔ה מֵֽאָדָם֙ עַד־בְּהֵמָ֔ה עַד־רֶ֖מֶשׂ וְעַד־ע֣וֹף הַשָּׁמָ֑יִם כִּ֥י נִחַ֖מְתִּי כִּ֥י עֲשִׂיתִֽם:

In Pasuk ה it says  וַיַּ֣רְא יְהֹוָ֔ה כִּ֥י רַבָּ֛ה רָעַ֥ת הָֽאָדָ֖ם בָּאָ֑רֶץ וְכָל־יֵ֨צֶר֙ מַחְשְׁבֹ֣ת לִבּ֔וֹ רַ֥ק רַ֖ע כָּל־הַיּֽוֹם. It is interesting in that later on when Noach comes out of the Teivah

and brings a Korbon at that point the pasuk says:

וַיִּ֥בֶן נֹ֛חַ מִזְבֵּ֖חַ לַֽיהֹוָ֑ה וַיִּקַּ֞ח מִכֹּ֣ל | הַבְּהֵמָ֣ה הַטְּהֹרָ֗ה וּמִכֹּל֙ הָע֣וֹף הַטָּה֔וֹר וַיַּ֥עַל עֹלֹ֖ת בַּמִּזְבֵּֽחַ:

כאוַיָּ֣רַח יְהֹוָה֘ אֶת־רֵ֣יחַ הַנִּיחֹ֒חַ֒ וַיֹּ֨אמֶר יְהֹוָ֜ה אֶל־לִבּ֗וֹ לֹ֣א אֹ֠סִ֠ף לְקַלֵּ֨ל ע֤וֹד אֶת־הָֽאֲדָמָה֙ בַּֽעֲב֣וּר הָֽאָדָ֔ם כִּ֠י יֵ֣צֶר לֵ֧ב הָֽאָדָ֛ם רַ֖ע מִנְּעֻרָ֑יו וְלֹֽא־אֹסִ֥ף ע֛וֹד לְהַכּ֥וֹת אֶת־כָּל־חַ֖י כַּֽאֲשֶׁ֥ר עָשִֽׂיתִי:

The reason that Hashem won't bring another Mabul upon the world is because כִּ֠י יֵ֣צֶר לֵ֧ב הָֽאָדָ֛ם רַ֖ע מִנְּעֻרָ֑יו. The pasuk uses almost the same words for not ever bringing another Mabul upon the world as the words for the reason that there was a Mabul in the first place. Is the fact that man has an inherent evil inclination a reason for destroying the world or a reason for never destroying the world?

Upon looking closer into the two psukim one will notice two major differences. The first pasuk says כָל־יֵ֨צֶר֙ מַחְשְׁבֹ֣ת לִבּ֔וֹ רַ֥ק רַ֖ע כָּל־הַיּֽוֹם

The second pasuk says: כִּ֠י יֵ֣צֶר לֵ֧ב הָֽאָדָ֛ם רַ֖ע מִנְּעֻרָ֑יו

One is that the first pasuk says רַ֥ק רַ֖ע the second one doesn't say רַ֥ק-only. The second difference is that the second pasuk says מִנְּעֻרָ֑יו. The first pasuk doesn't mention that. The question is what are the ramifications of those two differences?

The Ramba"n in Parshas Netzavim on the pasuk:

פֶּן־יֵ֣שׁ בָּ֠כֶ֠ם אִ֣ישׁ אֽוֹ־אִשָּׁ֞ה א֧וֹ מִשְׁפָּחָ֣ה אוֹ־שֵׁ֗בֶט אֲשֶׁר֩ לְבָב֨וֹ פֹנֶ֤ה הַיּוֹם֙ מֵעִם֙ יְהֹוָ֣ה אֱלֹהֵ֔ינוּ לָלֶ֣כֶת לַֽעֲבֹ֔ד אֶת־אֱלֹהֵ֖י הַגּוֹיִ֣ם הָהֵ֑ם פֶּן־יֵ֣שׁ בָּכֶ֗ם שֹׁ֛רֶשׁ פֹּרֶ֥ה רֹ֖אשׁ וְלַֽעֲנָֽה:

יחוְהָיָ֡ה בְּשָׁמְעוֹ֩ אֶת־דִּבְרֵ֨י הָֽאָלָ֜ה הַזֹּ֗את וְהִתְבָּרֵ֨ךְ בִּלְבָב֤וֹ לֵאמֹר֙ שָׁל֣וֹם יִֽהְיֶה־לִּ֔י כִּ֛י בִּשְׁרִר֥וּת לִבִּ֖י אֵלֵ֑ךְ לְמַ֛עַן סְפ֥וֹת הָֽרָוָ֖ה אֶת־הַצְּמֵאָֽה:

explains that לְמַ֛עַן סְפ֥וֹת הָֽרָוָ֖ה אֶת־הַצְּמֵאָֽה refers to a people who  never practiced putting a brake on their evil inclination. Allowing oneself to do whatever animalistic behaviours a person wants creates a downward spiral leading to worse behaviours. This is similar to addictions. It gets worse and worse. The Ramban says that once a person allows themself to follow their sexual desires without any pause they start straying towards deviant sexual behaviours. Chazal tell us " משביעו רעב, מרעיבו שבע". Fulfilling a sexual desire causes one to have a larger appetite while not fulfilling said desire causes the appetite to cease. This is true

regarding many destructive behaviours.

The Ramban continues saying that this is what causes a person to have homosexual desires. Once a person allows themself all sexual pleasures they will seek out the next level of deviancey which is  homosexuality. This is a case of a person actually creating an evil inclination. This inclination wasn't one that he was born with but rather one that man created. There might be a real and somewhat natural  desire for homosexuality, it is real, but it was created by man himself. This Yetzer Hara was not born into him this Yetzer Hara is an outgrowth of a person allowing the Yetzer Harah to have full control over him. These deviant behaviours are now ingrained in that person and as strong as the original Yetzer Harah but have been literally brought upon by the perpetrator himself. 

This is what the Dor Hamabul had created. Chazal tell us that they were into all kind of deviant sexual behaviours. They became like that because they had not tried to control their Yetzer Harah up to that point. 

Rashi brings a gemara on the pasuk כִּ֠י יֵ֣צֶר לֵ֧ב הָֽאָדָ֛ם רַ֖ע מִנְּעֻרָ֑יו

"מנעריו כתיב משננער לצאת ממעי אמו ניתן בו יצר הרע"

After the Mabul many things in nature were changed. One of the things that were changed was that man now got the Yetzer Harah as soon as he was born. (The Gemara in Sanhedrin discusses a debate between Rebi and Antininus whether the yetzer Hara resides in a fetus too). (I would suggest that Hashem changed the Teva so that the Yetzer Hara comes early so that man can have this excuse).

On a simple level (see external vs internal Yetzer Harah) the Yetzer Harah is simply man's base desires or animalistic instincts. The Yetzer Tov on the other hand is the Sechel. The intelligence to differentiate between right and wrong and the ability to overcome base instincts to follow logic is what we call the Yetzer Tov. The Yetzer Harah is ingrained in man from birth. The Yetzer Tov, Chazal tell us enters man at his Bar Mitzva. That is to say that when man reaches maturity he has the ability to understand the difference between good and bad and also has the ability to control himself. As a child man cannot fully distinguish between the two and even when he could he does not have the maturity to fully control his behaviour. 

There was a fundamental difference between man before the Mabul and after the Mabul. Before the Mabul The Yetzer Hara only entered into man's conscience when the Yetzer Tov entered. Therefore the Yetzer Harah did not have an headstart. Man was able to distinguish between right and wrong, good and evil as he was still developing his animalistic instincts. By the time the Yetzer Hara fully controlled a person, by then, that person fully knew the difference between right and wrong. When the people of the Dor Hamabul sinned, they sinned knowing full well what they should have been doing and how to behave but still allowed the evil inclination to take hold of them to the point where they also created a new Yetzer Harah within themselves.  There was no excuse for their evil behaviour. Hashem in his mercy, so as not to put man in a position where he would have to bring another Mabul on the world then actually recreated man as the pasuk says:

וַיֹּ֣אמֶר יְהֹוָ֗ה אֶמְחֶ֨ה אֶת־הָֽאָדָ֤ם אֲשֶׁר־בָּרָ֨אתִי֙ מֵעַל֨ פְּנֵ֣י הָֽאֲדָמָ֔ה

God destroyed man that he had created. Meaning "Man" that he had created that had the Yetzer Tov from inception would no longer exist. Now the new "Man" would not be created as "Man" but be created with only the Yetzer Hara. This would allow man to have the Yetzer so fully embedded in him by the time that the Yetzer Tov developed that he might not be able to overcome the Yetzer Hara that was already in total control.

We've quoted the prime minister of England Benjamin Disraeli who said "It is easy to do the right thing but knowing what the right thing to do is what is Hard". Once a man follows his Yetzer Harah for so long that it is ingrained and he is totally controlled by it, he can no longer see good and evil for what they are because his subjective desires don't allow him to think straight. There is a cloud over the world, right and wrong are no longer as clear as they were before. This would seem to be a terrible thing but in reality it is saving humanity from itself. Now man has a built in excuse his Yetzer Harah didn't allow him to think straight. Man's job is now harder. We have to control the Yetzer Harah before the Yetzer Tov starts working so that the Yetzer Tov can do its job and tell a man what is right and what is wrong. 

When Noach brought the Korbon Hashem said now I will no longer destroy the world anymore. How can Hashem put the world in a position not to be destroyed if the world becomes overcome by evil like it did during the Dor Hamabul? By putting man in a position where he has a harder time distinguishing between good and evil. Now the Dor Hamabul is not a generation of bad people but a generation of idiots. Our work is harder and the Yetzer Harah is stronger but we are not as evil as a generation of people that know the difference between right and wrong but still allow wrong to control us. 

The Yetzer Hara is controlling us earlier and earlier in our life and the Yetzer Tov is coming later and later, no wonder that in the later generations people actually think that good is bad and that bad is good. Maybe this has brought us to a point of  dor shakulo chayiv and force Mashiach times bimhiera biyamenu.