Noach’s commitment to farming was, in itself, admirable. Charged with the responsibility of rebuilding the earth after the flood, Noach invested himself in this endeavor and set out to renew the land’s productivity and fertility. From the Ramban’s description, however, it appears that Noach was too emotionally invested, to the point where farming became an end unto itself.
We read in Parashat Noach of Noach’s intoxication and subsequent humiliation after the flood, a story that unfolded after his exit from the ark. The brief narrative begins by relating that Noach became an “ish ha-adama” (“man of the land” – 9:20), which Rashi interprets to mean “adonei ha-adama,” the master and overseer of the land.
The Ramban, however, disagrees. He claims the “ish ha-adama” refers to Noach’s dedication to agriculture. The terminology of “ish ha-,” according to the Ramban, is used to describe somebody who is “nivdal la-davar,” completely dedicated to that cause. In Noach’s case, he committed himself intensely to farming, and is thus described as “ish ha-adama.” The Ramban cites a number of passages from Bereishit Rabba that make mention of Noach’s emotional investment in farming, one of which describes him as “lahut achar ha-adama” (“passionately drawn after the land”).
Chazal are generally critical of Noach for his conduct in this section, and it indeed appears that this incident marked Noach’s downfall, as he is never spoken of again afterward. The Ramban’s comments perhaps provide some insight into the root of Noach’s mistake (as discussed by Rav Moshe Taragin in his shiur on the topic). Noach’s commitment to farming was, in itself, admirable. Charged with the responsibility of rebuilding the earth after the flood, Noach invested himself in this endeavor and set out to renew the land’s productivity and fertility. From the Ramban’s description, however, it appears that Noach was too emotionally invested, to the point where farming became an end unto itself, rather than a worthy and holy endeavor undertaken within a broader idealistic framework.
The Ramban cites the Midrash’s description of Noach as a “burgar le-sheim burganut,” a farmer who worked for the sake of farming. Sometimes we get so invested in a worthy cause that we become blinded to other important values and lose sight of the overall purpose we ought to be pursuing. Noach’s decision to devote himself to farming was a correct and admirable one, but this devotion soon became an end unto itself, rather than part of a broader, general commitment to God, and this triggered his downfall which resulted in indulgence and intoxication.
The lesson to be learned from this unfortunate sequence of events is the importance of moderation and balance even with regard to the noble, idealistic causes that we pursue. We must remember to approach these causes within the broader perspective of ouravodat Hashem, and not make the mistake of singling out one cause as an exclusive, self-contained ideal.