וידע נח כי קלו המים

by

וישלח את היונה מאתו, לראות הקלו המים מעל פני האדמה

And he send the dove from beside him, to see if the waters had “lightened” from on the face of the earth

Sending the First Tweet

Aftermath of the Flood

After the flood had destroyed the evil people, and cleansed the world, the Torah tells us[i] ויעבר אלקים רוח על הארץ וישכו המים – and G‑d passed a wind / spirit over the earth and the waters subsided. Then ויסכרו מעינת תהום וארבת השמים – the Springs of the Deep were stopped and the vaults of heaven and rain ceased falling. The water then subsided gradually until the ark came to rest on the mountains of Ararat on the seventeenth (17th) day of the seventh (7th) month (Sivan).[1] On the first (1st) day of the tenth (10th) month (Menaĉem Av) the tops of the mountains became visible[2]. Forty (40) days later [Rashi: on the tenth of Elul][ii], ויפתח נח את חלון התבה אשר עשה – and Noaĉ opened the window of the ark which he had made.

The implication of the verse, the Noaĉ made a window, when we already know[iii] that Noaĉ did everything G‑d had commanded him in constructing the ark is that he made the window of his own volition since the צהר he had been commanded to make / install provided any light he might have needed[3]. Other opinions disagree and state that the צהר was a window, and this is a clarification verse of the initial command to provide lighting for the ark.

After opening the window, Noaĉ sends a Crow. The Crow circles the ark and does not perform its mission [Rashi] since it suspected Noaĉ of attempting to separate it from its mate. Reish Lakish clarifies[iv] this stating ‘the Crow provided a convincing argument to Noaĉ: “your Master [G‑d] hates me, and you hate me – your Master hates me as you were commanded to take seven (7) individuals from the טהור species, while two (2) individuals were taken from the טמא species [proving that G‑d considers the Crow a טמא species, as only two individuals were taken]. And you hate me because you ignore the species of which there are seven (7) individuals and send from the species in which there are only two (2) individuals. If I am harmed by the angel of heat, or the angel of the shade, will not the world be missing one of its creations? Or perhaps you need my wife [for relations – and that is why you are sending me away]?’

While Noaĉ rebuked the bird for such impure thoughts, seven (7) days later [Rashi] when it came time to send a replacement, Noaĉ indeed chose from a טהור species, the dove. Noaĉ sends away [Rashi] the dove לראות הקלו המים – to see if the waters had become ‘light’. The word הקלו means light or swift – in context, Noaĉ was seeking to know if the water was no longer covering the earth like a weight but was rather flowing over the earth like a stream. The dove was unable to find a resting place, so it returned to the ark. Noaĉ waits again another seven (7) days and sends the dove. This time it returns with an olive branch – thus Noaĉ knew כי קלו המים – the waters had become ‘light’. Finally, Noaĉ waits a third seven (7) days and this time [Rashi: Rosh Hashana] the dove does not return.[v] Noaĉ opens the top of the ark and sees the destruction on earth.[vi] On the seventeenth (17th) of the second (2nd) month [of the year – MarĈeshvon] the earth was [fully] dry.[vii] Noaĉ is told to leave the ark ten (10) days later – on the twenty seventh (27th) of MarĈeshvon.

Thus, from the opening of the window until Noaĉ is commanded to leave the Ark appx. Eighty-eight (88) days elapse. Accordingly, an obvious question can be asked.

  • Why did Noaĉ send out the birds to reconnoiter the land? Why then? Why these birds? Why is this detailed information told to us at all?

Tales of a Feather

A critical examination of the classical commentators shows obvious logical, factual, and theological holes. Their presence indicates that the only proper method of understanding the text is by turning to the secrets of the Torah. Let’s examine the questions that force us to look beyond the literal commentary.

The central paradox governing this entire episode is one of legal agency: Noaĉ was sealed into the Ark by Divine command and an actual physical seal ויסגר ה’ בעדו. He could not[4] leave without an explicit Divine mandate צא מן התבה. If his exit was entirely dependent on prophecy, any physical reconnaissance was practically useless. And indeed, when the dove failed to return, Noaĉ still had to wait nearly two (2) months before G‑d told him to leave the Ark.

Below is an exhaustive breakdown of the classical approaches to Noaĉ’s avian reconnaissance, and the critical flaws within each framework.

The Nearsighted Visionary

The Classical Approach:

To explain why Noaĉ needed to send a bird instead of simply looking outside, commentators like the Ibn Ezra and others differentiate between the צהר – the primary skylight or jewel and the חלון – the window Noaĉ opened. They argue that because the Ark drafted deep in the water and rested on the peaks of the Ararat mountains, opening a side hatch or a roof hatch provided a severely limited field of vision due to the slope of the walls of the Ark. Noaĉ could see the adjacent mountain peaks, but he could not see the valleys or the plains (פני האדמה) to ascertain if the earth was completely dry. Therefore, he needed a bird to act as his proxy.

The Logical Flaw:

This argument is ultimately a distraction. The logistical debate over how much of the ground Noaĉ could see sidesteps the fundamental problem: Why did he need to know the state of the ground at all?

G‑d explicitly told Noaĉ the rain would last forty days and nights. Noaĉ knew the flood was a temporary decree. Furthermore, the waters of the deep had been opened to flood the earth; logic dictates they would recede back into the earth, not rely on the agonizingly slow process of natural evaporation[5]. Most importantly, since Noaĉ was legally bound to wait for G‑d’s command to exit, information about the valleys was useless. Arguing over his line of sight is irrelevant when the data gathered could not be acted upon.

Black as a Crow

The Classical Approach:

The Torah states that Noaĉ sent the Crow[6]; ויצא יצוא ושוב עד יבשת המים מעל הארץ – and it went out exiting and returning until the water dried from the earth. Rashi, the Malbim and others explain that the Crow was a catastrophic failure as a scout[7]. Instead of surveying the land, the scavenger simply circled the Ark[8] and fed on the floating carrion[9] of the destroyed world. Realizing the Crow’s nature yielded no useful data, Noaĉ was forced to escalate his methods and send the dove, a righteous bird (מאתו) requiring clean vegetation.

The Logical Flaw:

This explanation contradicts the mathematical and legal reality of the Ark’s inhabitants. Noaĉ was commanded to preserve the species. He brought seven clean animals from each type, but only one pair each of the unclean animals. The Crow is an unclean scavenger; there were only two such birds in existence.

If sending a bird out a window was an act of human initiative[10] (השתדלות), how could Noaĉ justify risking the entirety of the Crow species[11] on a reconnaissance mission? If the Crow had flown away and not returned, the species would have gone extinct. If the Crow had been hurt or damaged and been rendered sterile the species would have gone extinct. Claiming Noaĉ used the Crow as a “test” defies his primary mandate of preservation. If he needed a scout, logic dictates he would have immediately used one of the abundant clean birds—which he did next.

Indeed, as we noted above in quoting the Gemara, this argument was a “successful”[12] argument used by the Crow.

White Hatted Dove

Deeping the question: in the command issued by G-d to exit the ark, the Torah uses a קרי / כתיב combination. The statement reads היצא אתך – that go out with you but is written as הוצא אתך – remove with you. The explanation is that the animals did not want to leave the ark. They were experiencing an elevated state of existence, similar to that of the era of Moshiaĉ, and did not want to reenter the world. Noaĉ had to force them to exit.

And yet, the dove was different. It did not wish to return, and when it found a roosting place, it in fact did not return.

  • Why did the dove want to leave the ark while the other animals wanted to remain in the ark?
  • Why didn’t the dove obey the command issued by G-d to remain in the Ark?

Dove in the Coal Mine

The Classical Approach:

Addressing why Noaĉ took physical action rather than waiting passively, the Ramban and others posit that Noaĉ was attempting to transition the world from a state of overt miracles back to the laws of nature. By using an animal’s instinct, he was “re-engaging” the natural order.

Similarly, the Sforno and the Kli Yakar suggest a physical necessity: the Midrash states the floodwaters were toxic and boiling[13]. Noaĉ sent the highly sensitive dove as a “canary in a coal mine” to test if the atmospheric toxicity had dissipated enough to support life.

The Logical Flaw:

Nature does not require human permission to “re-engage.” The olive tree that produced the leaf grew entirely on its own, independent of Noaĉ’s actions. Sending a bird out of a window does not restart the ecosystem.

Furthermore, the atmospheric-toxicity-argument falls apart structurally. If the outside air was deadly, opening the large window to release any bird immediately exposed the entire Ark—and its vast variety of animals—to the environment. He did not need to send a dove to test the air; he had already opened the window.

Armchair Psychology and the Tired Defense

The Classical Approach:

The Abarbanel and the Radak offer a purely human defense: Noaĉ was exhausted[viii], traumatized, and desperate. Operating a floating menagerie for a year took an absolute physical and mental toll. According to this view, Noaĉ sent the birds not to trigger his exit, but out of a desperate psychological need for hope. He needed to know if G‑d’s anger had subsided.[14]

The Logical Flaw:

While psychologically compelling, this reduces a profound Torah narrative to an anecdote about fatigue.

First, if Noaĉ sought spiritual reassurance or an end to the decree, the Torah’s standard response is prayer. When Yona was trapped in the fish, he prayed. Noaĉ could have simply prayed for a sign.

Second, and most critically, if the entire exercise of sending the birds was merely to soothe Noaĉ’s anxiety, it strips the narrative of its eternal weight. The Torah is not a diary. If Noaĉ’s actions resulted in no practical preparations—because one cannot “prepare” to step out of a boat onto dry land, especially when the mandate to do so had not been issued—and no legal change in his status, then a literal reading leaves us with a narrative dead-end.

The Inevitability of סוד

When we compile the text strictly on the level of פשט and דרוש, we are left with a righteous man who risks the extinction of a species (the Crow) to gather data he cannot use (the state of the valleys), testing an atmosphere he has already breached (the window), to prepare for an exit he is forbidden to initiate.

The classical commentaries, while concealing the secrets of the Torah, attempt to solve a spiritual equation using only physical variables. The Torah writes the narrative, and the commentators frame the discussion, in a way that completely breaks down under literal scrutiny to force the reader to elevate their perspective. The text demands we abandon the physical logistics of the Ark and enter the realm of סוד (the Kabbalistic and Ĉassidic framework), where the Ark, the waters, the Crow, and the dove are not merely history, but the blueprint for the wellspring of Divine knowledge and the ultimate redemption.

Checking for Moshiaĉ

To resolve the logistical and legal paradoxes of Noaĉ’s reconnaissance, we must look at the Ark not as a wooden boat, but as the spiritual architecture of a cosmic paradigm shift.

The Pardes Rimonim extensively proves that נח equates with the Sefira of יסוד – Foundation. יסוד is the funnel, the point of transmission that gathers all Divine life-force from the upper realms and channels it into the receiving physical world. During the flood, Noaĉ is sealed inside the תיבה, which in Ĉassidic thought[ix] translates literally as the “Word” (the concentrated light of Torah and prayer). The world outside is submerged in a chaotic, uncontainable flow of Divine energy, where destruction and death are the norm. However, the flood is not merely an eradication of evil; it is also a Mikvah preparing the earth for the era of Moshiaĉ, mirroring the Rambam’s description: כי מלאה הארץ דעה את ה’ כמים לים מחסים – when the earth will be filled with the knowledge of G‑d, as water covers the ocean.[x]

Why, then, does Noaĉ initiate his own investigation instead of waiting for G‑d to inform him about the state of the earth? Because יסוד cannot be passive. The existential drive of יסוד is to act as the Mashpia – the bestower. As the conduit of creation, it constantly feels the pressure of the pent-up Divine flow waiting to be released. יסוד actively seeks out, probes, and tests the capacity of its receiver (מלכות), as stated in the verse[xi] קול דודי דופק – the voice of our beloved [G-d] knocks[xii] on the ‘door’ asking us to open up. To sit passively and wait for a command is against the very nature of יסוד, which is driven to proactively bridge the upper and lower worlds.

To initiate this test, יסוד projects its own internal aspects outward. יסוד contains both the pure drive to connect and the residual, severe energies (דינים) that interface with the lower realms.

First, Noaĉ projects this severe extremity by sending the Crow (עורב). Etymologically rooted in darkness and תערובות chaotic mixture, the Crow represents the unrefined, cynical, or scavenger aspect within the system. Death by consumption and destruction. Before pure connection can occur, יסוד must purge this chaotic mixture. The Crow goes “back and forth,” surviving on the floating carrion of the old, shattered paradigms.

Having expelled the chaotic mixture of darkness, יסוד projects its inner, pure essence: the Dove. Here, the phrase לראות הקלו המים reveals יסוד’s true objective. Noaĉ is not looking to see if the physical water has evaporated. Rooted in the concept of being “swift” or “free-flowing,” Noaĉ is investigating whether the heavy, crushing waters of judgment have refined into swift, clear-flowing currents of integrated knowledge. Have the מים הזדונים become ‘light‘ enough for מלכות to safely absorb the knowledge gained from the Ark?

The Dove’s three missions map the active attempts of יסוד to reconnect with the earth:

  1. The First Mission: The dove finds no resting place. Malĉus is still overwhelmed; it cannot yet provide a vessel for the pure light.
  2. The Second Mission: The dove returns with a bitter olive leaf. Malĉus is beginning to actively process the חכמה – represented by olive oil. By enduring the bitter friction of physical existence and our exiles, the earth is pressing out its own pure oil. The receiver is finally becoming active – וידע נח כי קלו המים מעל פני האדמה – and Noaĉ knew when the waters became ‘light’ above the face of the earth. Noaĉ wasn’t looking to see that the land had become dry, but rather that the flow of water had become swift above the earth.
  3. The Third Mission: The dove does not return. The integration is complete. The earth can now sustain the pure light of the Era of Moshiaĉ.

Yet, the Zohar[xiii] reveals a profound secret about this final flight: the Dove did not simply vanish into the ecosystem. Having confirmed that Malĉus was fully refined, this specific Dove – the pure emissary of יסוד – retreats to its place to await the ultimate unification. When the time arrives for Moshiaĉ to come out from his stronghold[15], this very Dove will bring the crown in its beak to Moshiaĉ, fulfilling the verse[xiv]: תשית לראשו עטרת פז – You shall place on his head a crown of pure gold.

Noaĉ’s avian reconnaissance was never about gathering meteorological data to plan an exit from a floating zoo. It was the Sefira of יסוד actively mapping, purging, and preparing the spiritual architecture of the earth, setting the foundation for the ultimate redemption.[16]

[1] The commentaries discuss the exact timeline and the corresponding dates on the calendar.

[2] presumably to Noaĉ as the flood had killed the other people.

[3] This is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yoĉanan who taught that the צהר was a glowing stone, which shone like the twilight.

[4] It is unclear if he could have climbed out through the window and jumped.

[5] There are some holy opinions which point out that the receding water could be the result of evaporation, rather than the recall of the flood waters by G-d. This though is impossible since, even if evaporation on the scale envisioned could have occurred within the time frame mentioned, the result would be The Big Wet – unending rainfall as the atmosphere became saturated and then reevaporated at astonishing rates.

[6] The common translation here of the עורב is “raven”. However, the Gemara notes this bird was punished for maintaining its intimate relationship with its spouse while on the Ark. The term used for the punishment in the Gemara is עורב רק – the עורב spits. The Ben Yehoyada comments that the bird was punished concerning the manner of its reproduction – in that it spits into the mouth of its mate. This type of courtship ritual is found with crows not ravens. The crows first perform a “cloacal kiss”. Therefore, the עורב listed here was a crow and not a raven.

[7] The careful reader will note: there is no indication in the Torah as to the purpose of sending the Crow out. The reason לראות הקלו המים is only given (twice for emphasis) regarding the dove.

[8] Some say, the phrase עד יבשת המים מעל הארץ means the Crow never reentered the ark. Instead, it returned to perch on the covering for the entire remaining time while Noaĉ was in the ark.

[9] In discussing the fertility of Babylon, the Gemara notes that the bodies of the flood drifted there due to its low altitude and decomposed there – eventually changing the soil to become exceedingly productive. However, the Ark landed on the Mountain of Ararat. No opinion places that mountain anywhere near Babylon. If the Crow continued to feed on the floating bodies “עד יבשת המים” then it would have had to travel enormous distances to do so. Furthermore, the Midrash notes that while in the Ark, the animals stopped being carnivorous and lived in harmony with each other. This would call into question why the Crow would suddenly revert to eating carrion – although, that in itself could provide an answer: the minute it exited the window, the miraculous state of the Ark ended for the Crow, and it reverted to being a scavenger.

[10] Some would argue that, based on the Gemara [Gem. Nida 61a] one is forbidden from depending on miracles. Therefore, Noaĉ was required / right to do whatever little he could, even if it was obviously useless and only symbolic. This however requires one to ascribe to the concept that exiting the ark was a natural phenomenon that Noaĉ was meant to undertake, which would seem to counter the קרי / כתיב teaching of the verse הוצא אתך – the animals had to be forced out. If nature was meant to immediately reassert itself, there should have been no need to expel ALL the animals. Most of them, like the dove, would have chosen their bitter life [see Gem. Eiruvin 18b] foraging rather than the pampered life in the Ark. Therefore, if the exiting of the Ark was another miraculous phenomenon, the concept of being required to perform השתדלות falls apart.

[11] For if one animal dies, the mate cannot perpetuate the species. Although this argument might also be factually incorrect. The Gemara notes that along with the dog and חם, the Crow engaged with its partner while in the Ark. Thus, it is possible there were already fertilized Crow eggs available for perpetuating the species when Noaĉ sent the Crow to scout.

[12] Some would argue that since the Crow’s argument was classified by Reish Lakish as “successful” and yet, Noaĉ still went ahead and sent out the dove, this implies that the command given to Noaĉ to bring the animals into the ark was to preserve the species, and not to preserve each animal. Therefore, since there was a ‘surplus’ of doves, Noaĉ could send out the dove without violating G-d’s mandate. However, this argument presupposes that the sending of the Crow did violate G-d’s command and wasn’t simply a logical argument to which Noaĉ had no response. This seems incompatible with the description of his righteousness in the Torah.

[13] heated by the earth’s core

[14] My sister posits along this line that perhaps the righteous Noaĉ was not the one who needed to know. His children were suffering from a lack of intimacy and perhaps they were pestering Noaĉ to “do something, anything” rather than passively waiting for G-d’s permission to exit the ark. The idea has merit considering חם did not actually wait to reengage with his wife.

[15] This is the phrasing used by the Zohar…

[16] To Recap:

This structure answers all our questions:

  • Why couldn’t Noaĉ look out the window? He wasn’t looking for dirt. He was looking for the spiritual capacity of the world’s receptiveness
  • Why send anything if he couldn’t leave? Noaĉ didn’t send the birds to prepare for the physical exit. He sent them because that is part of the nature of יסוד; to seek to connect to מלכות.
  • Why send the Crow and why the Dove and why not other birds? The birds are not the physical scouts, they are a spiritual projection.
  • What does לראות הקלו המים really mean? יסוד seeks to determine if the knowledge on the earth has been refined (הקלו) and elevated (מעל פני האדמה).
  • Why didn’t the dove return? It will return with a crown in its mouth, when Moshiaĉ comes.

[i] Beraishis 8:1…

[ii] Beraishis 8:6

[iii] Beraishis 7:5

[iv] Gem. Sanhedrin 108b

[v] Beraishis 8:8-12

[vi] Beraishis 8:13

[vii] Beraishis 8:14

[viii] See Midrash Tanĉuma – Noaĉ was struck (and was lamed) by the hungry lion for being later with the fodder.

[ix] Baal Shem Tov (Tzava’as HaRivash, Sec. 73; Kesser Shem Tov, Sec. 16)

[x] Alter Rebbe, Torah Ohr, Parshas Noaĉ (8c / 15c)

[xi] Shir HaShirim 5:2

[xii] Midrash Raba states that each of the terms אחתי רעיתי יונתי תמתי is a “knock” by G-d, asking us to open up even a tiny bit. In his famous essay in 1956, Rabbi Yosef B. Soloveitchik ע”ה identified six (6) knocks in the past century (paraphrased):

  • The political knock – when the USSR was the pivotal vote in the UN (which presumably was only created for this purpose) to establish the State of Israel in 1948
  • The battlefield knock – in each and every war we have had to fight, the same miracles are performed
  • The theological knock – in which centuries of christian dogma, which had previously taught replacement theology, was converted to being staunchly pro-Israel
  • The youth knock – the sudden fierce desire of secular Jewish youth to reconnect to Judaism and return to Torah learning. Rather than go through the “normal teenage rebellion” years, these youth entered Yeshivas in record numbers, sacrificing their lives both physically in defense of other Jews and spiritually in giving up their comfortable secular lives
  • The demographic knock – the unprecedented (perhaps in even greater percentages than during Ezra’s time) ingathering of exiles to our land when previous expulsions had only produced further disbursement
  • The Jewish identity knock – where Jews no longer hid their identity but began to emerge and declare their Jewishness to the world and defending themselves against those who cannot deal with a proud Jew.

Soloveitchik, Joseph B. Kol Dodi Dofek: Listen – My Beloved Knocks. Translated by David Z. Gordon, Yeshiva University, 2006. https://www.sefaria.org/Kol_Dodi_Dofek

[xiii] Zohar Ĉadash Noaĉ 58:12. For a further connection to this Zohar, Pardes Rimonim 5:2 explains that the Divine Presence is called both an Eagle and a Dove – which he explains further in שער אבי”ע.

[xiv] Tehillim 21:4

Leave a Comment