Torah - Cain’s Appeal, God’s Response - Sheet 11

In the previous section, God left numerous openings for Cain’s repentance, which Cain repeatedly rebuffed. In the section ahead, we will examine the ongoing interactions between God and Cain, hunting for signs of the introspection and remorse that God seeks.

In considering Cain’s response to God in verses 13 and 14, we are faced with an apparent non-sequitur. Taken at face value, Cain’s words “my sin is too great to bear” convey both the contrition and the inner turmoil that God desires. Yet abruptly, in verse 14, Cain complains about the severity of his punishment. How could Cain’s tone shift so suddenly, and so inexplicably, from remorse to discontent?

Numerous creative resolutions have been suggested, but arguably the most straightforward reading is that of Ibn Ezra. In his view, although the word avon literally means “sin,” here it is meant to be understood metonymically, as interchangeable with its most frequent consequence, which is punishment. Thus, Cain’s response in verse 13 must be read: “my punishment is too great to bear,” a sentiment that is entirely consistent with his complaint in the following verse (for a similar reading, see the NJPS translation). In fact, with this reading, Cain’s words conform to the attitude he has assumed since God first visited him in verse 7 (see my comments on Gen. 4:7). Although God repeatedly calls upon Cain to examine his own problematic actions and reactions, Cain’s steadfast focus has remained outside of himself, on the perceived injustices perpetrated upon him by others. (Sequence, Logic, Metonymy, Semantics)

God deems one part of Cain’s complaint to be justified: his wandering might make him a target for murder, a fate that God has not decreed. As a result, God promises to protect him. But the precise nature of God’s promise is unclear, as it is expressed in the ambiguous language of shivatayim yukam.

Commentators are divided on the meaning of this term, but all agree that shivatayim plays on the number seven in a manner that is meant to denote exaggerated increase. As we move ahead in the narrative, we will note how the text adopts multiple sevens as an effective literary device, especially in comparing the genealogies of Cain and of his soon-to-be-born brother Seth. (Syntax, Ambiguity, Wordplay, Intertextuality)

In yet another parallel to the Garden of Eden, Cain, the wayfaring protagonist, goes eastward. In fact, as we read on in Genesis, we find that other marginalized figures embark on this same route: the tower builders in Babel (Gen. 11:2); Lot, upon parting from Abraham (Gen. 13:11); and the children of Abraham’s concubines who are not to be part of his covenantal legacy (Gen. 25:6).

Although Cain follows his parents’ geographical trajectory, it appears that he does not emulate their submissive demeanor. When Adam is cast out of the Garden to “work the land from which he was taken” the plain sense of the verse is that he complies. In contrast, Cain, who is meant to be a ceaseless wanderer, na va-nad, immediately settles down in one place. And in what appears to be a particularly audacious repudiation of God’s pronouncement, Cain chosen place of residence is Nod, a land whose very name means wandering. (Intertextuality, Symbolism, Convention, Irony)