What is the significance of the olive-leaf that the dove brought back to the Ark, as hinted in the word "b'Fiha"?
Rashi: It was making a statement that sustenance that comes directly from HaSh-m, even if it is bitter like an olive, is preferable to sustenance that comes from man, even if it is as sweet as honey.
If all vegetation was destroyed in the Flood (even the mill-stones melted - Bereishis Rabah 28), from where did the dove bring the olive-leaf?
Targum Yonasan and Ramban #1 (citing a Midrash): It brought it from Har ha'Zeisim 1
Ramban #2 (citing a Midrash): It brought it from Gan Eden. 2
Moshav Zekenim: Water entered only the top three Tefachim of the ground, so trees with deep roots were not destroyed. Noach knew that vines would be destroyed, so he took vine sprigs into the Ark.
Seforno (to 7:23): [Miraculously,] only living beings were destroyed by the Flood, but plants remained.
Ramban: The flood water did not fall in Eretz Yisrael, so the trees did not break, but it flowed from bordering lands through Eretz Yisrael, so Noach could infer that the water had subsided.
Ramban: The gates of Gan Eden were closed until the water subsided, so Noach could infer that it had subsided.
How did the leaf show that the land was dry? Perhaps it was detached, and floating on the water!
Riva #1, Hadar Zekenim (to 8:9): "Taraf" connotes that it was torn [from where it grew]. 1
Riva #2, Moshav Zekenim #1, Da'as Zekenim: It looked fresh (blossoming).
Moshav Zekenim #2: The dove was away from morning until evening, so Noach knew that it found a place to rest. It could not fly the entire day.
The Rosh says similarly to this.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "It was a male dove (Yonah), therefore the verse refers to it sometimes in the masculine (e.g. 'Taraf'), and sometimes in the feminine ('b'Fiha')." Ramban asks - Why would the Torah mix masculine and feminine expressions in the same phrase? If a dove is usually referred to in the feminine, why does it use the masculine specifically here?
Gur Aryeh: Noach purposely sent the male dove, because the nature of the male is to bring back food (Teref) for the female to eat (Baba Kama 16b). Had Noach sent the female, it would have eaten the food itself, and Noach would not have learned about the condition of the earth.
Rashi writes: "In its mouth (b'Fi'ha) - Homiletically, this is what [the dove] said: 'May my food be as bitter as an olive, but from HaSh-m....'" Is this literal? Ramban asks - The Midrash derives the dove's message from the fact that it was an olive leaf, not from the word "b'Fi'ha"?
Mizrachi: Rashi is based on the Gemara (Sanhedrin 108b). Noach would not have known what the dove was hinting to, without it being said.
Gur Aryeh: Ramban is correct. The word b'Fi'ha should be taken in the simple sense - the leaf was in the dove's mouth. An animal's natural instinct 1 can be referred to as its "speech." It "spoke" its message towards HaSh-m (Eruvin 18b), and hinted it to Noach through its actions (Midrash).
Although an animal has no intelligence, HaSh-m gave each being the instincts to know what is beneficial for it (Maharal, Chidushei Agados Vol. 3, p. 259, to Sanhedrin 108b).
Rashi writes: "May my food be as bitter as an olive, but from HaSh-m, and not sweet as honey from the hands of mortals." Why is this true?
Maharal (Chidushei Agados Vol. 3, p. 259, to Sanhedrin 108b): Bitter food at least amounts to something. Sustenance from mortals, however, means reliance upon them, and no [independent] existence at all.
