NOTES for Gen 4:1-26

What is the parable of Cain and Abel about? And is it a parable at all? After all, this is about murder, the first after the fall, and with it the history of fallen humanity begins. In itself this is no surprise: how else would such a history begin? And there have been so many murders in human history that the story of Cain and Abel can be considered typical, characteristic of every age, including the age of prehistory that the sacred writer has in mind. True, this is not simply murder; it is murder out of envy. But that too is no rarity. People have killed out of envy so many times and, without doubt, will kill so many times again that in terms of motive as well, the event described by the author of the Pentateuch can be considered typical. Only the envy here is not quite ordinary: Cain envied not just anything, but Abel's faith, more precisely, his trusting relationship with God, which Cain himself, judging by the sacred writer's account, did not have.

A natural question arises: why? What hindered Cain? Evil intentions toward his brother? They would have served as a reason, but they appeared only after Cain became convinced that God did not need his sacrifice. The fact that Cain was a farmer and Abel a shepherd? From the point of view of representatives of certain specific movements within Yahwism, such an answer would have been fully adequate, but the author of the Pentateuch hardly belonged to them, although he undoubtedly knew about such movements and about how their participants regarded settled and nomadic ways of life.

Then what was it? When reading the parable attentively, one interesting nuance stands out: Cain knows perfectly well that God did not accept his sacrifice. From where? We know this from the sacred writer's account, but how and from where did Cain learn that God had rejected his sacrifice? Cain clearly had some ways to find out whether God had accepted his sacrifice or not. Historians of religion know many methods that were used in antiquity to determine whether a sacrifice was pleasing to God or the gods, or not pleasing. Cain had opportunities to learn what interested him and what was so important to him. And what about Abel? Not a word is said about him. So he was not interested in finding out whether God had accepted his sacrifice? If we follow the author of the parable, the answer is no. Abel simply brings his sacrifice to God and lives peacefully.

God confirms that this very position is the right one. He says to Cain: if you do good deeds, lift up your head; and if not, then look, sin is at the door, it reaches out for you, but you must rule over it. Everything is simple, but Cain is not satisfied precisely with this simplicity. He needs guarantees; he wants to understand whether God has accepted his sacrifice or not, so that afterward he will know what he can count on in return. You give to me, I give to you: for the fallen world these are normal relations, but not with God. Cain wants them to be the same with God as well. He is angry at God when he understands that his sacrifice has not been accepted (in the Hebrew text this is exactly so: Cain is angry rather than saddened), lowers his head, and turns away from God. A relationship with Him in freedom and love, but without guarantees, does not satisfy Cain.

That is why he kills Abel: after all, everything works out for Abel, but not in the way Cain would like. It appears to him that if Abel disappears, then everything will work out for him, Cain. But when he kills him, it turns out that nothing has changed, that it was all in vain; yet even after the murder Cain does not want to acknowledge the obvious, the spiritual failure that is perfectly clear to God.

It is no accident that Cain's descendants build a city and create civilization: this is precisely how fallen humanity seeks to guarantee its well-being and its security. It did not work out with God; well then, in the end one can get by without Him. Yet this is a dead end, and it is no accident that the genealogy of Cain's descendants ends without leading anywhere. But the line begun by Seth, who came in Abel's place, leads to Abraham, to the people of God.

Cain has long become a symbol of fratricide, and people usually do not even think about why everything turned out this way and what, exactly, Cain killed Abel for. Both brought sacrifices, and the Lord "looked with favor on Abel and his offering, but on Cain and his offering He did not look with favor." In other words, He accepted Abel's sacrifice and did not accept Cain's sacrifice. Two questions arise. First: what was it about Cain's sacrifice that did not please the Lord? Second: if He did not accept it, then He did not accept it; where is the tragedy? Let us begin with the tragedy. The Lord preferred one of the two brothers. He liked Abel's sacrifice more; He loves him more. Cain's reaction is jealousy. And now it is easier to answer the first question: what was it about Cain's sacrifice that displeased God? Most of all, he was probably already bringing this sacrifice with precisely such an inner feeling: with a desire to buy God's favor. What followed, the murder, proves that Cain's heart had not been open to God from the beginning. And therefore, however much the Lord might have wanted to, He could not accept such a sacrifice, a sacrifice brought not from the heart but for some purpose of Cain's own.

When reading the parable of Cain and Abel, a question arises: why, after all, did Cain kill his brother? The first and most natural answer to this question is envy. Of course, such an answer is in many ways correct, because Cain truly could have envied Abel, who managed to do what Cain himself did not: offer a sacrifice pleasing to God. It is hardly necessary to prove that envy has led to fratricide more than once in human history, and there is nothing surprising in the fact that the history of fallen humanity begins in just this way. And yet this is not the whole answer. Envy arose here not on ordinary everyday grounds, but on religious grounds; the question was whose sacrifice was more pleasing to God, or, to use modern language, whose faith was more correct. Then the next question arises: why did Cain's sacrifice turn out to be unnecessary to God? Of course, Cain is a farmer, and unlike the shepherd Abel, he brings God not calves or lambs but the fruits of the earth. But it is hard to believe that God would not have accepted his gifts for that reason alone, because, after all, each person offers what he has, and the Bible does not forbid offering God the fruits of agricultural labor. The matter is, evidently, something else, and here the text of the parable itself can help us. It says almost nothing about Abel, but it tells a great deal, and in detail, about Cain. The main theme of the story becomes precisely the account of how Cain learns that his sacrifice has not been accepted, and how he reacts to that fact. How does Cain learn that his sacrifice has been rejected? The text of the parable says nothing about this. A historian of religion would say that ancient people had many ways to determine whether their sacrifice had been accepted. But that is not the important thing. What matters is the very fact that Cain had ways to determine it, and therefore that some religion already existed, because such knowledge presupposes the presence of a religious system. If so, then Cain was clearly religious, which cannot be said of Abel, who simply brings his sacrifice and does not torment himself with questions about whether it has been accepted by God. It would seem that there is nothing wrong with wanting to know whether God accepts your sacrifice. But much here depends on a person's goals and intentions. Cain, for example, on learning that his sacrifice has not been accepted, angrily turns away from God, unwilling even to look toward heaven (v. 5; the corresponding Hebrew word means not so much "became upset" as "took offense and became angry"). He was clearly counting on a certain answer that his religion led him to expect, but the expected answer did not come. Of course, God does not abandon Cain. He explains to him what he must do in order to have normal, full relations with Him (vv. 6-7). But there is no place for religiosity in these relations. They are utterly simple, and at their foundation lies only the right choice between good and evil and consistency in carrying out the decision made. Religion is good because it offers guarantees; but in the relations of which God speaks to Cain, there is no question of any guarantees. There are only relations with God, and nothing else. And it is very hard for fallen man to part with the life preserver that religion, as it seems to him, can become for him: relations with God are unpredictable, while fallen man is seeking precisely predictability, which becomes for him a symbol of reliability. Then one has to choose between God and religion. Cain chooses religion, and then Abel becomes the most terrible threat to his religious well-being, because Abel truly has normal relations with God, and he manages without any religion. For religious consciousness this is a catastrophe, because if such a thing is possible for even one person on earth, it means the end of religiosity, which ceases to be the highest and absolute value. Then only one thing remains: to get rid of Abel, to remove the threat. Thus a spiritual choice determines a moral choice, justifying one of the most terrible sins: fratricide.

Before Christ came into the world, no one had ever spoken of original sin. But this does not mean that nothing was known about it. It is another matter that the fundamental damage, the corruption of human nature that became the source of concrete sins, was not perceived in itself as sin. Indeed, how can one accuse a person for having been born the way he was born? No one is guilty of his hereditary diseases, even if those diseases became the consequence of his parents' sin.

But what a person was considered responsible for at all times was his concrete actions. Of course, in the times described by the sacred writer, there was no Torah and no commandments yet. They still lay ahead, for according to the logic of the author of Genesis, the matter takes place at the very dawn of history, though already the history of fallen humanity. And yet God turns to man with a call to do good deeds and calmly look God in the eye. Evidently, even after the fall, there remained in the human heart that "natural Torah," that law of which Paul says that it is written in the hearts of the Gentiles. And here, after all, this is not paganism proper; here people still remember the One, He is not yet completely forgotten.

And God calls Cain to that simplicity which frees one from all inner fears and perplexities, from all questions about the accepted and the unaccepted sacrifice. If you do good deeds, lift up your head and look boldly toward heaven. Otherwise sin itself will be drawn to you, for the one who does nothing good will sooner or later slide into the swamp of sin, which for fallen man is always a direct and immediate threat. Thus God points Cain to the only spiritual path possible for him, as for anyone else. The path that could have freed him from fratricide.

Before the coming into the world of the Christ, nobody had ever spoken of the original sin. But it does not mean that people knew nothing of it. Another thing is that this fundamental damage, the perversity of the human nature, which became the source of the concrete sins, was not perceived in itself as sin. Indeed, how can someone be accused because he was born such as he was born? Nobody is guilty of his hereditary illnesses, even if these diseases were the consequence of the sin of their parents.

But here is why man is considered responsible in all the times, so it is for his concrete acts. Certainly, in those periods, that the author describes, one couldn’t speak yet neither about the Torah, nor about any commandments, they were still ahead, because the case according to the logic of the author of the Book of Genesis, takes place at the dawn of the history, moreover, the already fallen humanity. But God addresses all the same man with the call to do good works and look calmly into the eyes of God.

Still remained, apparently, even after the fall in the heart of man, the "natural Torah", this law, of which Paul says that it is written to the heathen in their heart. And indeed, it is not paganism strictly speaking here, they still remember the Unique here, He is not yet completely forgotten. And God calls Cain to this simplicity, which frees from all the internal fears and misunderstandings, from all the questions about the accepted and not accepted sacrifice.

If you commit good works, lift your head up and look bravely to the heaven. Otherwise sin will come itself to you, because the one who does nothing good, sooner or later will obligatory slide into the swamp of sin, which for the fallen man is always a direct and immediate threat. So God shows to Cain the only possible spiritual way for him, quite as for any other person. The way that could have freed him from fratricide.

Cain's reaction to the determination that can be considered his judgment is quite curious. Even after God exposes him in the terrible sin of fratricide, he regrets nothing and repents of nothing. The only thing that troubles Cain is the fear that now, when he becomes an exile, anyone who wants to will be able to kill him; after all, an exile and wanderer was often defenseless before the first person he met.

Apparently we have here the typical behavior of a sinner who does not consider his sin to be sin. He does not ask God for forgiveness, probably because he considers God's sentence unjust by definition. In the same way, apparently, he considers himself guilty of nothing. That is why what troubles him is not the sin itself, which for him is not sin, but the consequences of sin, which fall on him regardless of his attitude toward the sin itself.

And this is the whole history of fallen humanity: it is permeated not by awareness of sin and not by repentance, but by the struggle against the consequences of sin, both one's own and someone else's. Is this not why humanity proves unable to find that harmony with the world and with itself that so many have sought, and still seek, for so long and without success?

Meanwhile, the solution to the problem is much closer than it may appear. But in order to find it, one must resolve to repent. That means changing the spiritual and mental paradigm of human history as a whole. And judging by the way things are going, for many of us this is no easier than it was for Cain to acknowledge his responsibility for the sin he had committed.

It is given to us today in these words an evident and simple truth: you should not kill. The entire universe collapses because we trench on the life of the other people, life that God offered them. Indeed, by killing Abel, Cain opposes God who wanted that Abel to live. All the rest: the wickedness of Cain and his denial of responsibility, - moves back to the second plan. The reasons which incited Cain to kill his brother are almost not generally examined in the Holy Scriptures. No matter, how much these reasons are serious. It is important that you should not kill. But up to now people are not able to understand this.

Today these words give us one simple and obvious truth: we must not kill. The whole universe collapses because we encroach upon the lives of other people, lives given to them by God. By killing Abel, Cain resists God, who wanted Abel to live. Everything else—Cain’s deceit and his refusal to accept responsibility—recedes into the background. The reasons that prompted Cain to kill his brother are scarcely discussed in Scripture at all. It does not matter how serious those reasons may be. What matters is that we must not kill. Yet people are still unable to hear this.

The fact that an entire civilization is built on the line of Cain says that the human race is poisoned from the beginning. The sacred writer shows how the terrible machine of evil gathers speed. The words, "if Cain is avenged sevenfold, then Lamech seventy times seven," mean precisely this. And Lamech's words, "I killed a man for wounding me," mean that the murder was committed in revenge for some evil done to him, Lamech. But in fact, is this not what we see throughout all of human history? As soon as a person gets some new technical achievement into his hands, the forces of evil soon take hold of it. This process is best described by the expression "arms race," which sounded out in the terrible twentieth century: that is the kind of arms race that has run throughout all human history.

But Seth was given in place of Abel: for wicked Cain, revenge, evil, and new deaths; for good Abel, a new birth, a new human being. This fact serves as an answer to superficial judgments that the Old Testament allegedly permits or even glorifies revenge: if that were so, revenge for Abel would have been glorified. But no, the birth of Seth is glorified for Abel.

The main occupation of Cain's descendants becomes the creation of civilization: they build cities and develop crafts, trade, and art. So is it really necessary to commit fratricide first in order to create civilization? Can civilization be built only on blood, and does it itself require blood?

It is not quite that after all. Perhaps the question is why civilization is created. The answer would seem clear: to make life more comfortable and safer. At first glance, cities, the development of crafts, and the appearance of art all serve precisely these goals. If not for one small episode with Lamech, who boasts that he avenged the injury done to him in such a way that no one would ever again even think of daring anything like it. And here the reverse side of civilization shows through, the side soaked in blood.

It would seem Lamech was not the first to begin. He only struck back. But he struck with all his might, wildly, not in order to defend himself, but in order to kill, to destroy the enemy, to destroy him as an example to anyone who would dare attack. This is no longer self-defense, but vengeance: vengeance not only for himself, but also for Cain, who had had to humble himself and ask God for protection (for someone who, like Cain, considers God an enemy and a merciless judge, such a request cannot but be humiliating).

Self-assertion grounded in force and vengeance - this is the spiritual foundation of fallen civilization. It is no surprise that its history begins with fratricide. It is not hard to guess what its end can be.