Torah - God’s Response to the Offerings; Cain’s Reaction to Rejection - Sheet 6

The Lord accepts one offering and rejects the other, apparently due to the superior quality of Abel’s gift. But, perplexingly, the text attributes to God an acceptance and rejection not only of the offerings, but of the two brothers who offered them: “the Lord paid heed to Abel and his offering, but to Cain and his offering [the Lord] did not pay heed.” God’s behavior, as recorded in the verse, is theologically challenging. Why would a compassionate, just, and all-knowing God act in a manner that was personally hurtful rather than educational, one that was likely to aggravate an already volatile situation?

Some commentators view the personal nature of God’s rejection as a sign that Cain’s offering was brought with improper motives. Surely, they argue in a somewhat circular manner, if God rejected Cain along with his gift, Cain’s intentions must have been insincere. With this interpretation, God’s personal rejection of Cain could be considered justified.

For an alternative reading, we consider a possible – subtle, almost imperceptible – shift in the verse’s perspective. At times, without signaling its intent, the text steps away from its objective narration and into the viewpoint of one of its characters. For example, in reporting on the love triangle of Jacob, Rahel, and Leah, the narrative voice informs us that “Jacob loved Rahel more than he loved Leah,” clearly implying that Leah was loved, albeit less so than her sister. Yet, the next verse reports that “the Lord saw that Leah was hated.” This change suggests a pivot, from objective reporting to Leah’s subjective feeling. Once we are granted access to Leah’s point of view, we appreciate more fully how, in the heart of the inferior spouse, being less loved is experienced as nothing less than outright hatred.

Perhaps, in a similar vein, in its record of God’s rejection of Cain’s offering, the narrative voice takes leave of its objective stance, and adopts Cain’s subjective impression of the event. Although objectively God has rejected only Cain’s offering, Cain, through his prism of pain and humiliation, perceives God’s dismissal of his gift as a shunning of him personally. (Theology, Perspective)

The term va-yihar is ambiguous: it can depict feelings of inner distress because of one’s own actions, as in Genesis 45:5, or anger at others, as in Genesis 34:7. Perhaps the ambiguity invites us to embrace the dual, and paradoxical, nature of Cain’s raging emotions. On the one hand, he is furious at others: at his brother for upstaging him, and at God for preferring Abel’s offering – and, in Cain’s wounded perspective, for preferring Abel personally. Yet on the other hand, Cain’s misery has an internal focus, with his “fallen face” expressing his humiliation and disappointment at his own failure to do his best. We recall that from the moment of birth, expectations of Cain were prodigious. It was he who was recognized as his mother’s primary offspring, and it was he who was invested with the weight of both great promise and great responsibility (see my comments to Gen. 4:1). This combustible combination, of outward and inward turmoil, sets Cain on an accelerated march toward fratricide. (Ambiguity, Double Entendre)

But before Cain acts, God pays him a visit.