Difference between revisions of "Cursing Canaan/2/en"

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
Line 35: Line 35:
 
<point><b>"וַיִּתְגַּל בְּתוֹךְ אׇהֳלֹה"</b> – Hoil Moshe explains that in his drunkenness, Noach had relations with his wife openly, without any thought to modesty.&#160; Cham, thus, saw, and was filled with desire.&#160; I. Elizur suggests that the exceptional spelling of "&#8206;אׇהֳלֹה"&#8206;<fn>It ends with a&#160; "ה" rather than a "ו".</fn> is Tanakh's euphemistic way of hinting to the fact that this took place in the bedroom tent of Naoch's wife ("her" tent).<fn>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.</fn></point>
 
<point><b>"וַיִּתְגַּל בְּתוֹךְ אׇהֳלֹה"</b> – Hoil Moshe explains that in his drunkenness, Noach had relations with his wife openly, without any thought to modesty.&#160; Cham, thus, saw, and was filled with desire.&#160; I. Elizur suggests that the exceptional spelling of "&#8206;אׇהֳלֹה"&#8206;<fn>It ends with a&#160; "ה" rather than a "ו".</fn> is Tanakh's euphemistic way of hinting to the fact that this took place in the bedroom tent of Naoch's wife ("her" tent).<fn>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.</fn></point>
 
<point><b>"וְחָם הוּא אֲבִי כְנָעַן"</b> – 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.</point>
 
<point><b>"וְחָם הוּא אֲבִי כְנָעַן"</b> – 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.</point>
<point><b>Contrast to Shem and Yefet</b> – I. Elizur suggests that Shem and Yefet covered not their father, but their mother ("עֶרְוַת אֲבִיהֶם" consistently referring to Noach's wife).&#160; It was she they turned their faces from and made sure not to look at/touch.</point>
+
<point><b>Contrast to Shem and Yefet</b> – I. Elizur suggests that Shem and Yefet covered not their father, but their mother. ["עֶרְוַת אֲבִיהֶם" consistently refers to Noach's wife.]&#160; It was she they turned their faces from and made sure not to look at/touch.</point>
<point><b>Punishment</b> – Canaan, who was the disgrace of Noach, was punished to be a</point>
+
<point><b>Punishment</b> – Canaan, who was the disgrace of Noach, was punished to be a scorned servant.&#160; According to this position, it is possible that in verse 25 when Noach says that Canaan will be enslaved to his brothers, he is referring not to the other sons of Cham, but to Shem and Yefet themselves (his half-brothers).<fn>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.)</fn>&#160; He is declaring that Canaan is not to be on equal footing with them, but rather to serve them.</point>
 
</category>
 
</category>
 
<category>Canaan Cursed for Cham's Sin
 
<category>Canaan Cursed for Cham's Sin

Version as of 22:45, 12 October 2015

Noach's Vineyard

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Canaan Sinned

Noach punished Canaan because it was Canaan who had wronged him.

"אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן" – All 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 who is the subject of the phrase:
  • Canaan – Most of these commentators maintain that the term refers to Canaan, the youngest son of Cham.2  Seforno explains that Canaan is called Noach's son, despite his being his grandson, because 'בְּנֵי בָּנִים הֲרֵי הֵם כְּבָנִים', (a person's grandsons are like his sons). R. Yosef Kara, Ibn Ezra, and Ralbag assert, instead, that the "וי"ו" of "בְּנוֹ" refers back to Cham.3
  • Shem – R"Y Bekhor Shor, in contrast, suggests that the verse refers to Shem whom, he claims, was Noach's youngest son.4  According to him, the verse speaks not of the evil which was done to Noach, but rather the good.5  Its purpose is to emphasize that, of the three sons, Shem acted most appropriately and was thus the most blessed.
What did Canaan do?
  • Revealed Noach's nakedness – According to R"Y Bekhor Shor,  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.6
  • Castrated/sodomized Noach – The other sources maintain that Canaan did a much more severe act, with Rashbam, Ralbag and Seforno positing that he castrated his grandfather and the Bavli suggesting that he sodomized him.  All these sources are probably picking up on the language of "‎וַיֵּדַע אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ",‎7 and thus look for an active crime that Canaan might have committed.8  Moreover, they all assume that his deed was worse than that of his father to justify his being cursed.
"וְחָם הוּא אֲבִי כְנָעַן"
  • Introduction – Rashbam and R"Y Bekhor Shor suggest that Cham is introduced as Canaan's father because this is relevant for later in the story.  This way the reader understands who Canaan is when he is cursed.
  • "Like father, like son" – According to Ibn Ezra, Ralbag and Seforno, on the other hand, the text comes to identify father and son in their evil ways.9
"וַיַּרְא חָם אֲבִי כְנַעַן אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו" – Seforno understands this phrase to mean that Cham saw the castration that had been done to his father.10 Unlike his brothers who covered their father, he looked at his disgrace.
Contrast to Shem and Yefet – According to this approach there is a vast gap between Canaan and Shem/Yefet.  While the former committed an egregious sexual crime, the latter did not even look at their father.  Canaan therefore merited punishment while the others received a blessing.
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.  Since he desired a larger dominion, Noach punished him that he would get the opposite, and be enslaved to his brothers.
Purpose of Story

Canaan Born from Cham's Sin

Canaan was cursed as an illegitimate child born of the illicit union between Cham and Noach's wife.

"וַיַּרְא חָם אֲבִי כְנַעַן אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו" – This position compares the phrase to the similar one in Vayikra 20:11 "וְאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִשְׁכַּב אֶת אֵשֶׁת אָבִיו עֶרְוַת אָבִיו גִּלָּה".  There "revealing your father's nakedness" is equivalent to "sleeping with the wife of your father". 11 As such, in our verse too, Cham is not simply viewing his father nakedness, but having intercourse with his mother.
"אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לוֹ בְּנוֹ הַקָּטָן" – This approach would likely read this verse as referring to Cham and suggest that the word "הַקָּטָן" refers to lowly stature, rather than young age.12  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.  I. Elizur suggests that the exceptional spelling of "‎אׇהֳלֹה"‎13 is Tanakh's euphemistic way of hinting to the fact that this took place in the bedroom tent of Naoch's wife ("her" tent).14
"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.
Contrast to Shem and Yefet – I. Elizur suggests that Shem and Yefet covered not their father, but their mother. ["עֶרְוַת אֲבִיהֶם" consistently refers to Noach's wife.]  It was she they turned their faces from and made sure not to look at/touch.
Punishment – Canaan, who was the disgrace of Noach, was punished to be a scorned servant.  According to this position, it is possible that in verse 25 when Noach says that Canaan will be enslaved to his brothers, he is referring not to the other sons of Cham, but to Shem and Yefet themselves (his half-brothers).15  He is declaring that Canaan is not to be on equal footing with them, but rather to serve them.

Canaan Cursed for Cham's Sin

JosephusAntiquities of the Jews 1:6:1About Josephus, opinion in Bavli SanhedrinSanhedrin 70aAbout the Bavli, opinions in Bereshit Rabbah36:7About Bereshit Rabbah, Targum Pseudo-JonathanBereshit 9:20-27About Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, RambanBereshit 9:18, 20, 26About R. Moshe b. NachmanShadalBereshit 9:18-27About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto

Sources:Despite the fact that it was Cham who acted wrongly, for technical reasons Canaan was cursed instead.
"וַיַּרְא חָם אֲבִי כְנַעַן אֵת עֶרְוַת אָבִיו"

Canaan not Cursed

Canaan was never cursed; only Cham was.