The Olive Branch
The Olive Branch

There are few episodes in the history of mankind as cataclysmic as the flood. The story is familiar to just about everyone – through mankind’s descent into moral chaos and complete severing from God, God responds by wiping out the species as a whole, save for Noach (Noah) and his immediate family. Noach rides out the storm on the ark, and when the waters recede, exits with the survivors to start anew.

Prior to his disembarking, the famous sign that all is well comes from the dove’s return with the olive branch. One would be forgiven for thinking that the olive branch served a purely functional role, as Noach had to have some way to know that he had the “all clear”. What we will see, though, is that Chazal, the Talmudic Sages, saw something deeper in the origins of this olive branch, an insight into the mind of Noach during this traumatic event.

Noach dispatches the dove to ascertain if the Flood had ended (Genesis 8:8-11):

And he sent forth the dove from with him, to see whether the waters had abated from upon the surface of the earth. 9. But the dove found no resting place for the sole of its foot; so it returned to him to the ark because there was water upon the entire surface of the earth; so he stretched forth his hand and took it, and he brought it to him to the ark. 10. And he waited again another seven days, and he again sent forth the dove from the ark. 11. And the dove returned to him at eventide, and behold it had plucked an olive leaf in its mouth; so Noah knew that the water had abated from upon the earth.

Once Noach receives the olive branch, he concludes definitively that the time of the flood had come to an end. His deduction was certainly a valid and rational one – after all, if the dove was able to access trees, one could assume the waters had receded substantially enough to allow for an exit from the ark.

At first glance, one would not think twice about the choice of an olive branch, and assume it came from the nearest visible tree. When looking at a well-known Midrash, we see the source of this olive branch seems to be very important:

From where did the olive bring the branch? Rabbi Levi said, ‘She brought it from the Mount of Olives since the Land of Israel was not inundated by the waters of the flood…’ Rabbi Biryei said, ‘The gates of the Garden of Eden were opened for the dove and from there she brought the leaf’.”

The obvious question here is why it matters where the olive branch came from? If it was merely an indicator, it should be completely unimportant whether it came from the Garden Eden or from the South Pole. Why have such a debate? Furthermore, of the two possibilities, the first seems to be much more intuitive. The Ramban notes (based on another Midrash) that the rains of the flood never fell directly on the Land of Israel. This does not mean that there were no floodwaters in Israel; indeed, the Ramban writes that floodwaters made their way as well. However, the Land of Israel stood apart from other areas due to the lack of direct rainfall.

Whatever the specific explanation of the Mount of Olives (assuming the obvious fact that olive trees were in abundance on a mountain with that name) being the source of the olive branch, one can sense a positive message if it came from the Land of Israel. The Garden of Eden is a whole other story. How does one understand the dove obtaining the olive branch from the Garden of Eden? Assuming Noach knew that the olive branch came from the Garden of Eden, how did this effect his overall decision making process regarding disembarking from the ark?

The above questions indicate that there must be a deeper idea Noach realized through the presentation of the olive branch, something beyond knowing the flood had receded. In the beginning of the flood story, Noach is promised by God that he will be saved; therefore, Noach knew at some point he would be leaving the ark. What then did Noach see in the olive branch? It is difficult for mankind today to relate to the mindset of Noach and his generation. Mankind was to be wiped out, save for Noach and his family. This was a catastrophic event in the order of the world, a re-start for mankind through Noach.

The flood, though, could have been foreshadowing far more than the annihilation of the species of man. Man’s destruction indicated that he had failed, that his role as the highest of all species was in fact a mirage. Man was imbued with a soul, essentially being separated from the rest of the created world. He was to use the soul to follow God, to shy away from the world of the instinctual. Man failed in this endeavor, as society was defined by moral chaos and degradation. Man did not function in line with his created purpose, and he was destroyed for this failing.

Would mankind be able to rise up again? Would mankind continue to share that unique relationship with God, or was the damage caused so severe that a complete makeover was in order? It was possible that mankind post-flood would occupy a different spot on the species totem pole, never to relate to God in a meaningful way again.

And how would God relate to mankind? Would the entire system of Divine Providence, or hashgacha, be relegated to the dustbin? Noach was confounded with these concerns. He understood he would be saved; but he did not know what would the “new” mankind be like.

The Midrash is indicating, through the return of the olive branch, a message of reassurance to Noach. The debate within the Midrash concerns the two potential changes that could have emerged from the remains of the generation of the flood. Let’s take the more difficult position that the olive branch came from the Garden of Eden. As we know, the Garden of Eden was the utopian ideal for man at the time of Creation. Prior to the sin, Adam and Eve lived the ideal existence as set up by God, and were able to relate to God in the purest manner. They personified man existing at the highest plane, differentiated from all of the other created beings on Earth. The idea of the olive branch coming from the Garden of Eden sends an important message to Noach. God would not be lowering man’s status in relation to the rest of the created world. He would still be able to relate to God in a unique manner, echoing his existence in the Garden of Eden.

Emphasizing man’s continued position in the hierarchy of created beings was important for Noach to understand. However, there is another concern that was present. The event of the flood clearly indicated God’s investment in man’s fate. The question was whether God would continue to be “interested” in mankind’s development and progress. It was quite possible that the damage done a as a result of the generation of the flood would result in the species of mankind being abandoned to his own fate, a God who now severs His relationship with humans. As we know, the Land of Israel always occupies a lofty perch as compared to anywhere else in the world. When mankind lives in line with his created purpose, God responds through hashgacha. We see this reality in the Beit Hamikdash, God’s presence being manifest there constantly. The very notion of prophecy, where God communicates with the highest level people, is one exclusive to the Land of Israel.

In essence, the Land of Israel brings forth the reality of God’s hashgacha. According to this line of thinking, the return of the dove with the olive branch signified to Noach that God would continue His relationship with mankind. Noach could take comfort from knowing that God indeed would be engaged in man’s destiny.

Indeed, the event of the flood was an event or paramount importance, as God rebooted mankind’s existence. Yet, in His mercy, He did not fundamentally change mankind’s unique position in the world. As well, He continued to engage in mankind’s destiny.

These two ideas were of paramount importance to Noach, as he proceeded to begin charting the new history of mankind.