Living With Difference
Is the story of the Tower of Babel about human unity, or about human diversity?At the critical point when the Torah transitions from the story of Noah and its universal themes to the particular family of Abraham, the Tower of Babel conveys ambivalence about both unity and diversity.In doing so, it provides us with a model for how we can navigate our own complex social dynamics, especially in times of crisis and trauma.
Parashat Noah provides a genealogy of the descendants of Noah鈥檚 sons鈥擲hem, Ham, and Japheth鈥攚ho were born after the Flood (Gen 10:1). In addition to the family lines, the text includes detailed information about their 鈥渃lans (mishpehotam), languages (leshonotam), lands (artzotam), and nations (goyeihem)鈥 (10:5, 10:20, and 10:31. Verse 10:5, describing the offspring of Japheth, omits a reference to 鈥渓ands,鈥 perhaps because so many of his descendants are described as being maritime peoples.) Chapter 10 concludes that 鈥渇rom these the nations branched out over the earth after the Flood鈥 (10:32). But the very next sentence, the first of the next chapter, states: 鈥淓veryone on earth had the same language and the same words鈥 / 讜址讬职讛执芝讬 讻讎诇志讛指讗指謻专侄抓 砖指讉驻指郑讛 讗侄讞指謶转 讜旨讚职讘指专执謻讬诐 讗植讞指讚执纸讬诐變 (Gen. 11:1). How could it be that everyone had the same language, when we have just concluded a chapter that lists numerous different nations and their various languages?!
The next eight verses tell us how this came to be and how God responded. The conventional reading is that the people wanted to come together to build a tower higher than any of them could have built as individuals, and that God prevented the power of human unity by confusing their speech. However, the idea that God would improve the world by preventing people from understanding one another seems nonsensical. It would eliminate the problem of extreme collaboration and prompt God鈥檚 desired outcome of dispersing the people throughout the world, but it would surely create other, even more severe problems. A close reading of the text, however, provides a more sophisticated understanding about how people can navigate the reality of difference and diversity of languages (literal and figurative) and in doing so experience healing and foster peace.
Commentators have debated whether or not the builders of the Tower committed a sin and, if a sin was committed, what it was. Four aspects of the story could be considered mistakes or sins on behalf of the Tower鈥檚 builders: (1) they spoke one language instead of many according to their clan and location, (2) they wanted to 鈥渕ake a name鈥 for themselves, (3) they wanted to make 鈥渁 tower that reaches to the heavens,鈥 and (4) they desired to not be 鈥渟cattered over the face of the whole earth鈥 despite God鈥檚 command to Adam and later to Noah to 鈥淏e fruitful and multiply and fill the earth鈥 (Gen. 1:28; Gen. 9:1).
The Netziv (Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin, 19th c. Lithuania) believed that having one language was not a sin in and of itself but it 鈥渃aused the first sin鈥: because they could all communicate, 鈥渢hey agreed to stop in one single place. And this is against the will of God that said to 鈥榝ill the land and replenish it鈥欌攖hat is, to walk to all its places, since the land was created to be settled.鈥 He further explains that the reference in 11:1 to devarim ahadim, 鈥渢he same words鈥 spoken by all of humanity, does not spell out what these words were 鈥渢o teach us that it wasn’t because of the content of the words themselves that the Holy One of Blessing was distressed.鈥 God was alarmed not by what they were saying, but by the fact that they 鈥渁ll thought the same thing, and this came to be the problem of the settlement.鈥
Rabbi Jonathan Sacks sees in the Netziv鈥檚 interpretation of the building of the Tower of Babel as 鈥the first totalitarianism:鈥 鈥淚t is a supreme act of hubris, committed time and again in history . . . . It is the attempt to impose an artificial unity onto divinely created diversity鈥 (The Dignity of Difference: How to Avoid the Clash of Civilizations, 52).
The problem was not all of humanity speaking the same language, rather what it would lead to. God鈥檚 response to the construction of the Tower did not suggest that having multiple languages was inherently better; this was simply the mechanism that God chose to get the builders to halt their work on the Tower. However, the result of this mechanism was the emergence of a world riddled with miscommunications and limits in understanding. Surely, this would bring about conflict.
In his book To Heal a Fractured World, Sacks explores two Jewish conceptions of peace as ways to navigate difference. First, he identifies universalist prophetic visions of peace including Isaiah鈥檚 鈥淭hey shall beat their swords into plough-shares, Their spears into pursuing hooks. Nation shall not lift up sword against nation, neither shall they learn war anymore鈥 (Isa. 2:4) or Micah鈥檚 鈥淭hey shall sit, every man under his vine and under his fig tree, And none shall make them afraid, For the mouth of the Lord of the Hosts has spoken鈥 (Mic. 4:4).
Sacks suggests, however, that rabbinic tradition presented a contrasting model for how to navigate differences peacefully; it can be found in the rabbinic concept and instructions regarding darkhei shalom, the ways of peace, often understood as practices for maintaining peaceful community relations. One statement of these principles is found in Tosefta Gittin:
注讬专 砖讬砖 讘讛 讬砖专讗诇 讜讙讜讬诐, 讛驻专谞住讬谉 讙讜讘讬谉 诪讬砖专讗诇 讜诪讙讜讬诐, 诪驻谞讬 讚专讻讬 砖诇讜诐. 诪驻专谞住讬谉 注谞讬讬 讙讜讬诐 注诐 注谞讬讬 讬砖专讗诇, 诪驻谞讬 讚专讻讬 砖诇讜诐.
诪住驻讬讚讬谉 讜拽讜讘专讬谉 诪讬转讬 讙讜讬诐, 诪驻谞讬 讚专讻讬 砖诇讜诐. 诪谞讞诪讬谉 讗讘讬诇讬 讙讜讬诐, 诪驻谞讬 讚专讻讬 砖诇讜诐.
A city that has Jews and non-Jews鈥攖he charity collectors collect from the Jews and the non-Jews, in the interests of peace, and they provide for the needs of Jewish and non-Jewish poor, in the interests of peace. One eulogizes and buries non-Jewish dead, in the interests of peace. One comforts non-Jewish mourners, in the interests of peace. (Tosefta, Gittin [Lieberman edition] 3:13-14)
Sacks characterizes darkhei shalom as 鈥渁 programme for peace in an unredeemed world.鈥 The rabbis who articulated this program know that 鈥渋n this not-yet-fully-redeemed world, peace means living with difference鈥攚ith those who have another faith and other texts. That is the fundamental distinction between the prophetic peace of religious unity and the rabbinic peace of religious diversity, with all the compromise, restraint, and mutual respect that coexistence requires.鈥
Significantly, the Tosefta鈥檚 instructions include practices of caregiving.
Another debate among commentators is who was living at the time of the building of the Tower of Babel (as well as who was involved in its building). Seder Olam Rabbah, a second-century CE Hebrew text that provides a chronology of biblical events from Adam to Alexander the Great鈥檚 conquests, states that due to long lifespans Noah was both present at the time of the building of the Tower and the dispersion. David Kimchi writes that 鈥淣oah, Shem, Eber, and Japheth were also there.鈥
Genesis Rabbah imagines Shem and Eber establishing a yeshiva to which numerous subsequent ancestors studied. My teacher, Rabbi Morton Leifman, of blessed memory, used to emphasize the special power of the classic midrash that suggests that after the akedah, Isaac went to this yeshiva to study with his ancestors (Genesis Rabbah 56:11). Rabbi Leifman suggested that Isaac went there following his experience of trauma, to grapple with existential questions and to seek healing. If we imagine that Noah and his children were present at the building of the Tower of Babel, and that their children were born to parents who survived the flood, we can understand that they were all grappling with intergenerational trauma. In this created, broken, and unredeemed world in which people are different and struggle to understand one another, practices of caring for one another seem exactly what is needed to establish a sense of shared humanity while doing justice to the variety of human experience. Sitting with people during crisis, listening to them with compassion and empathy, and bearing witness to their subjective and affective experience pave the way toward healing and peace.
The publication and distribution of the 91快播 Commentary are made possible by a generous grant from Rita Dee (z鈥漧) and Harold Hassenfeld (z鈥漧).
