Difference between revisions of "Cursing Canaan/1/en"
m |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
<h1>Cursing Canaan</h1> | <h1>Cursing Canaan</h1> | ||
<div><b><center><span class="highlighted-notice">This topic has not yet undergone editorial review</span></center></b></div> | <div><b><center><span class="highlighted-notice">This topic has not yet undergone editorial review</span></center></b></div> | ||
| − | <h2>A Misdirected Curse</h2> | + | <h2>A Misdirected Curse?</h2> |
| − | + | <p>Following the account of the Flood and its aftermath, <a href="Bereshit9-18-27" data-aht="source">Bereshit 9</a> presents an epilogue in which Noach gets drunk and exposes himself in his tent ("וַיִּתְגַּל בְּתוֹךְ אָהֳלֹה"). The Torah proceeds to describe the contrasting reactions of Noach's children:</p> | |
| + | <q class="" dir="rtl" lang="he"> | ||
| + | <p> (כב) וַיַּרְא חָם אֲבִי כְנַעַן אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו וַיַּגֵּד לִשְׁנֵי אֶחָיו בַּחוּץ.  (כג) וַיִּקַּח שֵׁם וָיֶפֶת אֶת הַשִּׂמְלָה וַיָּשִׂימוּ עַל שְׁכֶם שְׁנֵיהֶם וַיֵּלְכוּ אֲחֹרַנִּית וַיְכַסּוּ אֵת עֶרְוַת אֲבִיהֶם וּפְנֵיהֶם אֲחֹרַנִּית וְעֶרְוַת אֲבִיהֶם לֹא רָאוּ.</p> | ||
| + | </q> | ||
| + | <p>While Cham sees his father's nakedness, Shem and Yefet cover their father.  As a result, when Noach awakens from his drunken stupor and becomes aware of what transpired, he blesses Shem and Yefet.  Surprisingly, though, he conveys his displeasure with Cham, not by cursing Cham himself, but by singling out Canaan, the youngest of Cham's sons:</p> | ||
| + | <multilang style="overflow: auto"> | ||
| + | <q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl">(כד) וַיִּיקֶץ נֹחַ מִיֵּינוֹ וַיֵּדַע אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן. (כה) וַיֹּאמֶר <b>אָרוּר כְּנָעַן</b> עֶבֶד עֲבָדִים יִהְיֶה לְאֶחָיו.</q> | ||
| + | <q xml:lang="en">(24) And Noach awakened form his wine and he knew what his youngest son had done to him. (25) And he said: '<b>Cursed is Canaan</b>; a slave of slaves he will be to his brethren.'</q> | ||
| + | </multilang> | ||
| + | <p>Bereshit Rabbah asks the obvious question, "חָם חָטָא וּכְנַעַן נִתְקַלֵּל, אֶתְמָהָא"?  If Cham sinned, why is it Canaan who is punished?!  Indeed, this curse was no trifling matter, as it would have reverberations for all of world history.</p> | ||
<h2>Who is the "Youngest Son"?</h2> | <h2>Who is the "Youngest Son"?</h2> | ||
| − | <p>Two other phrases in the story raise further questions about the connection between Cham and Canaan's role in the deed.  The story opens by stating that Cham | + | <p>Two other phrases in the story raise further questions about the connection between Cham and Canaan's role in the deed.  The story opens by stating that Cham was the father of Canaan ("וְחָם הוּא אֲבִי כְנָעַן"), and when Cham acts against his father, he is again identified as Canaan's father.  Why does the narrator find it necessary to share this fact here, let alone repeat it?  Does the pairing of father and son suggest that the two acted in concert, or that Canaan played some role in the episode?</p> |
| − | <p> | + | <p>Additionally, after Noach awakens from his stupor, the Torah states that he became aware of what "his youngest son" ("בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן") had done to him.</p> |
<multilang style="overflow: auto;"> | <multilang style="overflow: auto;"> | ||
<q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl"> (כד) וַיִּיקֶץ נֹחַ מִיֵּינוֹ וַיֵּדַע אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן. </q> | <q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl"> (כד) וַיִּיקֶץ נֹחַ מִיֵּינוֹ וַיֵּדַע אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן. </q> | ||
<q xml:lang="en">(24) And Noach awakened form his wine and he knew what his youngest son had done to him.</q> | <q xml:lang="en">(24) And Noach awakened form his wine and he knew what his youngest son had done to him.</q> | ||
</multilang> | </multilang> | ||
| + | <p> </p> | ||
<p>On first read, it is natural to assume that the text refers to Cham, the antagonist previously mentioned.  However, based on the order given in the lists of Noach's sons,<fn>See <a href="Bereshit5-32" data-aht="source">Bereshit 5:32</a>, <a href="Bereshit6-9-10" data-aht="source">6:10</a>, <a href="Bereshit9-18-27" data-aht="source">9:18</a> and <a href="Bereshit10-1-26-721-22" data-aht="source">10:1</a>.</fn> Cham would appear not to be the youngest son, but rather the middle child.  If so, who is referred to by the phrase "בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן"?  Interestingly, Canaan is listed last among Cham's sons,<fn>See <a href="Bereshit10-1-26-721-22" data-aht="source">Bereshit 10:6</a>.</fn> suggesting that he was the youngest of them.  It is possible that the text refers to him?  Why, though, would he be referred to as Noach's son?</p> | <p>On first read, it is natural to assume that the text refers to Cham, the antagonist previously mentioned.  However, based on the order given in the lists of Noach's sons,<fn>See <a href="Bereshit5-32" data-aht="source">Bereshit 5:32</a>, <a href="Bereshit6-9-10" data-aht="source">6:10</a>, <a href="Bereshit9-18-27" data-aht="source">9:18</a> and <a href="Bereshit10-1-26-721-22" data-aht="source">10:1</a>.</fn> Cham would appear not to be the youngest son, but rather the middle child.  If so, who is referred to by the phrase "בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן"?  Interestingly, Canaan is listed last among Cham's sons,<fn>See <a href="Bereshit10-1-26-721-22" data-aht="source">Bereshit 10:6</a>.</fn> suggesting that he was the youngest of them.  It is possible that the text refers to him?  Why, though, would he be referred to as Noach's son?</p> | ||
| − | <h2> | + | <h2>Identifying the Sin</h2> |
<p>Verse 22 speaks of the deed that was done to Noach, but it is not clear why the action deserved such a harsh curse:</p> | <p>Verse 22 speaks of the deed that was done to Noach, but it is not clear why the action deserved such a harsh curse:</p> | ||
<multilang style="overflow: auto;"> | <multilang style="overflow: auto;"> | ||
<q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl" style="margin-bottom:.3em;">(כב) וַיַּרְא חָם אֲבִי כְנַעַן אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו וַיַּגֵּד לִשְׁנֵי אֶחָיו בַּחוּץ. </q><q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl"> </q> | <q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl" style="margin-bottom:.3em;">(כב) וַיַּרְא חָם אֲבִי כְנַעַן אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו וַיַּגֵּד לִשְׁנֵי אֶחָיו בַּחוּץ. </q><q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl"> </q> | ||
| − | <q xml:lang="en"></q> | + | <q xml:lang="en"> </q> |
</multilang> | </multilang> | ||
<p>The literal translation of "וַיַּרְא...  אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו" is "and he saw... his father's nakedness", an improper act, surely, but perhaps not so heinous as to be deserving of eternal damnation.  However, throughout Tanakh, the similar phrase "גילוי ערוה" has sexual connotations.  Did Cham merely look at his father, or were his deeds much more sinister?</p> | <p>The literal translation of "וַיַּרְא...  אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו" is "and he saw... his father's nakedness", an improper act, surely, but perhaps not so heinous as to be deserving of eternal damnation.  However, throughout Tanakh, the similar phrase "גילוי ערוה" has sexual connotations.  Did Cham merely look at his father, or were his deeds much more sinister?</p> | ||
Version as of 01:35, 16 October 2015
Cursing Canaan
Introduction
A Misdirected Curse?
Following the account of the Flood and its aftermath, Bereshit 9 presents an epilogue in which Noach gets drunk and exposes himself in his tent ("וַיִּתְגַּל בְּתוֹךְ אָהֳלֹה"). The Torah proceeds to describe the contrasting reactions of Noach's children:
(כב) וַיַּרְא חָם אֲבִי כְנַעַן אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו וַיַּגֵּד לִשְׁנֵי אֶחָיו בַּחוּץ. (כג) וַיִּקַּח שֵׁם וָיֶפֶת אֶת הַשִּׂמְלָה וַיָּשִׂימוּ עַל שְׁכֶם שְׁנֵיהֶם וַיֵּלְכוּ אֲחֹרַנִּית וַיְכַסּוּ אֵת עֶרְוַת אֲבִיהֶם וּפְנֵיהֶם אֲחֹרַנִּית וְעֶרְוַת אֲבִיהֶם לֹא רָאוּ.
While Cham sees his father's nakedness, Shem and Yefet cover their father. As a result, when Noach awakens from his drunken stupor and becomes aware of what transpired, he blesses Shem and Yefet. Surprisingly, though, he conveys his displeasure with Cham, not by cursing Cham himself, but by singling out Canaan, the youngest of Cham's sons:
(כד) וַיִּיקֶץ נֹחַ מִיֵּינוֹ וַיֵּדַע אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן. (כה) וַיֹּאמֶר אָרוּר כְּנָעַן עֶבֶד עֲבָדִים יִהְיֶה לְאֶחָיו.
(24) And Noach awakened form his wine and he knew what his youngest son had done to him. (25) And he said: 'Cursed is Canaan; a slave of slaves he will be to his brethren.'
Bereshit Rabbah asks the obvious question, "חָם חָטָא וּכְנַעַן נִתְקַלֵּל, אֶתְמָהָא"? If Cham sinned, why is it Canaan who is punished?! Indeed, this curse was no trifling matter, as it would have reverberations for all of world history.
Who is the "Youngest Son"?
Two other phrases in the story raise further questions about the connection between Cham and Canaan's role in the deed. The story opens by stating that Cham was the father of Canaan ("וְחָם הוּא אֲבִי כְנָעַן"), and when Cham acts against his father, he is again identified as Canaan's father. Why does the narrator find it necessary to share this fact here, let alone repeat it? Does the pairing of father and son suggest that the two acted in concert, or that Canaan played some role in the episode?
Additionally, after Noach awakens from his stupor, the Torah states that he became aware of what "his youngest son" ("בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן") had done to him.
(כד) וַיִּיקֶץ נֹחַ מִיֵּינוֹ וַיֵּדַע אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן.
(24) And Noach awakened form his wine and he knew what his youngest son had done to him.
On first read, it is natural to assume that the text refers to Cham, the antagonist previously mentioned. However, based on the order given in the lists of Noach's sons,1 Cham would appear not to be the youngest son, but rather the middle child. If so, who is referred to by the phrase "בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן"? Interestingly, Canaan is listed last among Cham's sons,2 suggesting that he was the youngest of them. It is possible that the text refers to him? Why, though, would he be referred to as Noach's son?
Identifying the Sin
Verse 22 speaks of the deed that was done to Noach, but it is not clear why the action deserved such a harsh curse:
(כב) וַיַּרְא חָם אֲבִי כְנַעַן אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו וַיַּגֵּד לִשְׁנֵי אֶחָיו בַּחוּץ.
The literal translation of "וַיַּרְא... אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו" is "and he saw... his father's nakedness", an improper act, surely, but perhaps not so heinous as to be deserving of eternal damnation. However, throughout Tanakh, the similar phrase "גילוי ערוה" has sexual connotations. Did Cham merely look at his father, or were his deeds much more sinister?
