Cursing Canaan/2/en

Cursing Canaan

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Overview

Commentators struggle to understand both why Canaan should be cursed for his father's actions and what was so terrible about his deed that it provoked such a severe punishment.  R"Y Bekhor Shor and Ralbag assert that while Cham merely looked at Noach, Canaan committed a much more offensive act, either castrating his grandfather, or at least actively revealing his nakedness.

Others disagree, claiming that Cham was the sole offender.  Thus, Rashi asserts that although Cham sinned, for technical reasons the curse fell upon his son rather than himself.  The Hoil Moshe, in contrast, assumes that the choice to curse Canaan was much more fundamental.  Looking at the meaning of "גילוי עריות" elsewhere in Tanakh, he arrives at the possibility that Cham's sin lay in sleeping with Noach's wife.  Canaan, being the son born of this union, was naturally considered a cursed offspring, and told that he would never be on equal footing with his half-brothers, but always serve them.  Finally, R. Saadia solves the conundrum by maintaining that not only was Cham the only sinner, he was also the one cursed.  When Noach said "אָרוּר כְּנָעַן", this was short for "אֲבִי כְנָעַן", the epithet of Cham.

Canaan Sinned

Canaan was punished because it was he who committed the offense.

Sources:R. Nehemiah in Bereshit Rabbah,36:7About Bereshit Rabbah R. Yosef KaraBereshit 9:24About R. Yosef Kara, RashbamReconstructed Bereshit 9:18About R. Shemuel b. Meir, Ibn EzraBereshit 9:18-27Additional Commentary Bereshit 9:18-27About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, R. Yosef Bekhor ShorBereshit 9:18-27About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, RalbagBereshit Beur HaParashah 9About R. Levi b. Gershom, SefornoBereshit 9:18-27About R. Ovadyah Seforno

"אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן" – All of these sources assume that the verse cannot be speaking of the action done by Cham, since he was not the youngest of Noach's sons.¹  They disagree, though, regarding the subject of the phrase:

• Canaan – Most of these commentators maintain that the term refers to Canaan, the youngest son of Cham,² and that the verse proves that he sinned.³  R"Y Kara and Seforno explain that Canaan is called Noach's son, despite being only his grandson, because 'בְּנֵי בָּנִים הֲרֵי הֵם כְּבָנִים', (a person's grandsons are like his sons).  Ibn Ezra and Ralbag⁴ assert, instead, that the possessive letter vav in "בְּנוֹ" refers back to Cham.⁵
• Shem – R"Y Bekhor Shor, in contrast, suggests that the verse refers to Shem who (RYBS claims) was Noach's youngest son.⁶  According to him, the verse speaks not of the evil which was done to Noach, but rather the good.⁷  Its purpose is to emphasize that, of the three sons, Shem acted most appropriately and was thus the most blessed.

What did Canaan do?

• Castrated/sodomized Noach – Most of these sources maintain that Canaan did a heinous act, with Rashbam, Ralbag and Seforno positing that he castrated his grandfather and the Bavli suggesting that he sodomized him.  All of these sources are likely noting the language of "‎ אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ",‎⁸ and thus attempting to identify an active crime that Canaan might have committed.⁹  Moreover, in order to justify Canaan being cursed, they need to attribute to him a deed worthy of such a punishment.
• Revealed Noach's nakedness – In contrast, R"Y Bekhor Shor finds the hint to Canaan's sin in the phrase "וַיִּתְגַּל בְּתוֹךְ אׇהֳלֹה".‎¹⁰  He maintains that the word "וַיִּתְגַּל" is not a reflexive form, but rather means that Noach was revealed by others.  As such, he suggests that it was Canaan who did so, while Cham simply saw the nakedness.¹¹

"וְחָם הוּא אֲבִי כְנָעַן"

• Introduction – Rashbam and R"Y Bekhor Shor suggest that Cham is introduced as Canaan's father so that the reader will know who Canaan is when he is later cursed.¹²
• "Like father, like son" – In contrast, according to Ibn Ezra, Ralbag, and Seforno, the text comes to show the similar conduct of father and son.¹³

"וַיַּרְא חָם אֲבִי כְנַעַן אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו" – Seforno posits that the word "עֶרְוַת" here means shame, pointing to such usage in Ezra 4:14.  Thus, the verse is saying that, unlike his brothers who covered their father, Cham gawked at his father's castration and disgrace.¹⁴

Contrast to Shem and Yefet – According to most of these commentators,¹⁵ there is a vast divide between Canaan and Shem/Yefet.  While the former committed an egregious sexual crime, the latter were so modest as to not even look at their father.  Canaan therefore merited punishment, while Shem and Yefet received blessings.

Measure for measure punishment – Ralbag posits that Canaan purposefully prevented Noach from having other children so as to maximize the inheritance and land that he would get.  Noach thus punished him that he would be enslaved to his brothers and receive less.

Canaan Born from Cham's Sin

Canaan was the cursed offspring, born from the illicit relations between Cham and Noach's wife.

Sources:Hoil MosheBereshit 9:28About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi, R. Itai Elitzur¹⁶

"וַיַּרְא חָם אֲבִי כְנַעַן אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו" – This position compares this phrase to the similar one in Vayikra 20:11, "וְאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁכַּב אֶת אֵשֶׁת אָבִיו עֶרְוַת אָבִיו גִּלָּה".‎¹⁷  There, "revealing a father's nakedness" is equivalent to "sleeping with the wife of your father".¹⁸  As such, in our verse, too, Cham is not simply viewing his father nakedness, but rather having intercourse with his father's wife. His son, Canaan, was the product of that encounter.

"אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן" – This approach understands this verse as referring to Cham and would likely suggest that the word "הַקָּטָן" refers to lowly stature, rather than young age.¹⁹  When Noach awoke he realized what his deprecated son had done to him by sleeping with his wife.

"וַיִּתְגַּל בְּתוֹךְ אׇהֳלֹה" – Hoil Moshe explains that in his drunkenness, Noach had relations with his wife openly, without any thought to modesty.  Cham, thus, saw, and was filled with desire.  R"I Elitzur suggests that the exceptional spelling of "‎אׇהֳלֹה"‎²⁰ is Tanakh's euphemistic way of hinting to the fact that this took place in the bedroom tent of Noach's wife ("her" tent).²¹

"וְחָם הוּא אֲבִי כְנָעַן" – Since outsiders might mistake Canaan for Noach's son, the verse goes out of its way to emphasize that Cham, not Noach, was the father of Canaan.  Similarly, the following verse repeats the already known fact, "שְׁלֹשָׁה אֵלֶּה בְּנֵי נֹחַ", to highlight that these three alone (and not four) were the sons of Noach.

Shem and Yefet – R"I Elitzur suggests that Shem and Yefet covered not their father, but their mother, and that the phrase "עֶרְוַת אֲבִיהֶם" consistently refers to Noach's wife.  It was she they turned their faces from and made sure not to view or touch.

Punishment - "עֶבֶד עֲבָדִים יִהְיֶה לְאֶחָיו" – Canaan, who was the disgrace of Noach, was doomed to be a scorned slave.  This position might further suggest that when Noach says that Canaan will be enslaved to "his brothers" (verse 25), he is referring not to the other sons of Cham, but to Shem and Yefet themselves (Canaan's half-brothers).²²  Noach is declaring that despite his being their half brother, Canaan is not to be on equal footing with them, but rather to serve them.

Canaan Cursed for Cham's Sin

Despite the fact that it was Cham who sinned, due to technical reasons, it was Canaan who received the punishment.

Sources:JosephusAntiquities of the Jews 1:6:1About Josephus, Bavli SanhedrinSanhedrin 70aAbout the Bavli, opinions in Bereshit Rabbah36:7About Bereshit Rabbah, Targum Pseudo-JonathanBereshit 9:20-27About Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, RashiBereshit 9:18-27About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, RambanBereshit 6:10Bereshit 9:18, 20, 26About R. Moshe b. Nachman

"אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן" – These sources maintain that the verse is speaking of an action done by Cham, but they differ regarding why he is called "הַקָּטָן":

• Youngest – Ramban asserts that despite the fact that Cham is named in the middle of the progeny lists, he was in fact Noach's youngest child.  He points to Bereshit 10:21 as evidence that Yefet was the oldest, and to our verse that Cham was the youngest.²³  Shem, the middle child, is consistently listed first due to his loftier stature.²⁴
• Lowly stature – Bereshit Rabbah, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, and Rashi, in contrast, suggest that Cham is not the smallest in age, but in stature.  He is referred to as the "smallest" because of his behavior.

"וַיַּרְא... אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו" – What did Cham do? These sources disagree regarding what it was that Cham did:

• Saw Noach's nakedness – Ramban reads the verse literally, and assert that Cham was disrespectful in looking at his father's nakedness.
• Castrated or sodomized Noach  – The Bavli, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, and Rashi, in contrast, understand the term "גילוי ערוה" to have a sexual connotation and assume that Cham must have done an actual act, either castration²⁵ or sodomizing.  This works with the language of "אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ" in verse 24 which suggests that Cham did more than look.

"וַיַּגֵּד לִשְׁנֵי אֶחָיו בַּחוּץ" – Ramban posits that what made Cham's action so disrespectful was not just that he shared what he saw with his brothers, but that he did so "בַּחוּץ", in front of others.  It was this public shaming that is referred to when the verse says that Noach knew "what his son had done to him".

"וְחָם הוּא אֲבִי כְנָעַן"

• Introduction – Rashi asserts that the verse is simply an introduction so the reader can understand who Canaan is when he is cursed.
• Canaan the eldest - According to Ramban the verse teaches that at the time of the story, Canaan was the only son of Cham.²⁶  As such, Cham was known as "the father of Canaan".

If Cham sinned, why curse Canaan? These sources offer a variety of possibilities:

• Curses don't fall on the blessed – R. Yehuda in Bereshit Rabbah asserts that since Hashem had already blessed Noach's sons, cursing Cham would have been ineffective and so Noach cursed his son instead.  It is not clear, though, why Canaan, and not Cham's other children, was cursed.
• Measure for measure – The Bavli suggests that this was a "measure for measure" punishment of Cham.²⁷  Since Cham had prevented Noach from having a fourth child, Noach decided to curse Cham's fourth son.
• Cham too close to Noach – According to Josephus, Noach did not want to curse Cham as he was too close to him in blood, and thus he moved the curse onto Cham's progeny.
• Not enough to punish Cham – In contrast to Josephus, Ramban asserts that Noach felt that cursing Cham would not be enough; his progeny needed to suffer as well.²⁸  Since Canaan was the only son who was alive at the time, he was the one cursed.²⁹

Canaan Not Cursed

It was really Cham who was cursed, not Canaan.

Sources:R. Saadia GaonTafsir Bereshit 9About R. Saadia Gaon

"חָם הוּא אֲבִי כְנָעַן" – R. Saadia asserts that "אֲבִי כְנָעַן" is Cham's moniker; he was known to all as "אֲבִי כְנָעַן", after his oldest child, Canaan.³⁰  R. Saadia compares this to the custom in his own time of referring to a person as the father of a specific child, using names such as "Abu Yitzchak" or "Abu Alhasan".

"Cursed be Canaan" – R. Saadia asserts that Noach was actually cursing "אֲבִי כְנָעַן", using Cham's epithet.³¹  The verse is missing the word "אֲבִי " as is the case in many verses which skip the titles "son", "father", or "brother".³²

"בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן" – R. Saadia translates this as "his younger son" rather than "his youngest son".  Cham is referred to in relationship to Shem, being younger than him, though older then Yefet.

"וַיַּרְא חָם... אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו" – What did Cham do? R. Saadia reads the verse literally and asserts that Cham viewed his father's nakedness.  The real sin, though, lay in his sharing the fact with his brothers.

"וַיֵּדַע אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ" – R. Saadia responds to those that argue that seeing and telling do not constitute actions (אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ), by asserting that defaming another is considered an action in Tanakh.  As support, he points to Shelomo saying to Shimi, "אַתָּה יָדַעְתָּ אֵת כׇּל הָרָעָה אֲשֶׁר... עָשִׂיתָ לְדָוִד אָבִי" referring to his cursing of David.

Contrast to Shem and Yefet – R. Saadia further supports his claim that Cham's action was limited to revealing his father's nakedness by the contrast drawn between him and his brothers.  They are praised for covering their father, suggesting that he was condemned for the opposite.

¹ When the three sons are mentioned together (Bereshit 5:32, 6:10, 9:18 and 10:1), they are ordered, Shem, Cham, and Yefet, suggesting that Shem is the eldest and Yefet the youngest, while Cham is in the middle.

² As evidence that he is Cham's youngest, they point to the order of sons mentioned in the genealogy list in 10:6, "וּבְנֵי חָם כּוּשׁ וּמִצְרַיִם וּפוּט וּכְנָעַן."

³ R"Y Bekhor Shor, who reads this verse differently, finds the hint to Canaan's sin in verse 21 instead. [See below.]

⁴ R"Y Kara also brings this as a second possibility.

⁵ In other words, the verse reads "And Noach realized what the youngest son [of Cham] had done to him.

⁶ As evidence, he points to the genealogy list of Chapter 11 which first lists the descendants of Yefet, then of Cham, and finally of Shem, and asserts that this order represents the true birth order.  Shem is listed first in other cases due to his importance, not his age.  As further support of this order, R"Y Bekhor Shor points to Bereshit 10:21, which speaks of Yefet as the "older brother" ("וּלְשֵׁם יֻלַּד גַּם הוּא אֲבִי כׇּל בְּנֵי עֵבֶר אֲחִי יֶפֶת הַגָּדוֹל").  [However, it should be noted that this verse, too, is ambiguous and can be understood to say instead that Shem was the older brother of Yefet.]
Cf. Ralbag who agrees with R"Y Bekhor Shor regarding the son's ages, though he disagrees regarding how to read this specific verse.

⁷ It is, thus, connected to the immediately preceding verse rather than the following one.

⁸ See J. Al-Kirkisani the KaraiteJacob Al-Kirkisani the Karaite, who makes this point.

⁹ See also R"Y Kara and Ibn Ezra who similarly see in this verse evidence of Canaan's depraved action, but do not state what it was explicitly.

¹⁰ Since R"Y Bekhor Shor read the verse, "וַיֵּדַע אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ" to refer to Shem, he is forced to find the hint to Canaan's sin elsewhere.

¹¹ See R. Nehemiah in Bereshit Rabbah who similarly says that Canaan's sin was that he was the first to see Noach's nakedness.

¹² Rashbam points out that this is "דרך המקראות" (the way of the text), and explains that often the text introduces a fact to the reader early on so that something later in the narrative will be understood.  He uses the principle in more radical ways than others, suggesting that Bereshit 35:2 is an introduction to Reuven's curse and that the entire Creation story is mentioned merely as an introduction to the commandment regarding Shabbat.

¹³ While Ibn Ezra claims that Canaan followed in his father's ways, Seforno suggests that the verse is saying that Cham was like the infamous Canaan.

¹⁴ Ibn Ezra, R"Y Bekhor Shor, and Ralbag also all emphasize that Cham's sin was one of looking, and not more than that.

¹⁵ R"y Bekhor Shor is the exception.

¹⁶ I. Elitzur, "חידת כנען", Makor Rishon Shabbat section, 5 Marcheshvan, 5767, p.2.

¹⁷ See also Vayikra 20:17.

¹⁸ Throughout Vayikra 18 and 20, the variations of the phrase "גילוי ערוה" are a euphemism for having sexual intercourse.

¹⁹ See Bereshit Rabbah and Rashi below.  Alternatively, they might assume, like Ramban, that Cham was in fact Noach's youngest son and maintain that neither the lists of Noach's progeny, nor the genealogy of Chapter 11, preserve the true birth order.  This approach could also take a third possibility and follow R"Y Bekhor Shor above who reads the verse as referring to Shem.

²⁰ It ends with a "ה" rather than a "ו".

²¹ As another example, he points to the same spelling of the word in the context of Reuven's relations with Bilhah in Bereshit 35:21-22.

²² If so, the content of Canaan's curse is equivalent to the blessing of Shem and Yefet.
Alternatively, Noach might be cursing Cham two-fold, that he is to serve all his half brothers, those from his father (as mentioned in his own curse) and also those from his mother (as mentioned in the blessings of Shem and Yefet.)

²³ One might further support Ramban's assumption by looking at the ages when Noach and his sons bore children. Bereshit 5:32 suggests that Noach was 500 upon bearing his children, while Bereshit 7:11 teaches that he was 600 at the start of the flood. Bereshit 11:10 states that Shem was 100 when he bore his son, and this was 2 years after the flood (when Noach was 602).  If so, Shem must have been born when Noach was 502 (602-100= 502).  This would mean that he was not the oldest son, as Noach had born a child at 500. Shem, thus, was either the second or third to be born.

²⁴ He suggests that the verses list Shem and then Cham, rather than Yefet, since Cham chronologically followed Shem, and Yefet was not so meritorious so as to change the entire order.  The one exception to Shem's being listed first is the genealogy list in Chapter 10, where his descendants are listed last. This might be explained on thematic grounds, for that list leads into the story of Terach and Avraham (descendants of Shem) in Chapter 11.

²⁵ One opinion in the Bavli, Targum Pseudo-Jonathan and Rashi all suggest this.

²⁶ Although Canaan is listed as the fourth son of Cham in Bereshit 10:6, this is only because of his denigrated status.  In reality, he was the oldest of the four.

²⁷ See also R. Berechiah in Bereshit Rabbah, Targum Pseudo Jonathan, and Rashi who follow the Bavli.  R. Berechiah adds that as Noach had wanted a fourth son to serve him in his old age, and Cham prevented this, he had Canaan become a slave to others. 

²⁸ Ramban might see a certain poetic justice in punishing Cham's son; Noach had suffered via his son, so it was right that Cham should suffer through his child.

²⁹ Cf.  R"Y Aryeh OsimoBereshit 9:18-27About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (a student of Shadal cited in his commentary) that maybe Canaan, being the youngest of Cham's sons, was his most beloved and as such Noach chose to curse him.

³⁰ He presumably assumes that the list in 10:6 does not preserve birth order.  He does not explain, though why he would be listed last if he was the first born, especially since according to this position, Canaan was not cursed and, thus, not in any lower position than the other sons.

³¹ Canaan is the shortened version of "אֲבִי כְנָעַן". See also R. Yonah ibn Janach, Sefer HaRikmah, Gate 25 who follows R. Saadia's understanding.  The Karaite commentator, Kirkisani, also brings an opinion that Cham is referred to by the word "כְּנָעַן". However, he suggests that "כְּנָעַן" here is not a proper name, but rather means merchant (cf. Yeshayahu 23:8, Hoshea 12:8 or Mishlei 31:24).

³² R. Saadia brings several examples including Shemuel II 21:19 which should read "the brother" of Golyat (as found in the parallel in Divrei HaYamim I 20:5), Yirmeyahu 32:7-8,12 where Chanamel should be called the "son" of my uncle, as he was a few verses earlier (cf. discussion regarding "דֹּדָתוֹ" in  Duration of the Egyptian Exile), and Divrei HaYamim I 4:11-12 which is missing the epithet "the father" when referring to אבי אשתן.