I have a question about Hashem's admonition to Cain, when He saw Cain crestfallen in Bereishith 4:5. From the grammar standpoint, the text is very difficult to translate. Of course there is a standard English translation, but it seems to be too simple for a text so complex. Russian translation appears just as simplified.

The text goes, "lamah kharah lakh lamah naflu paneikha: halo im-theitiv s'et ve'im lo theitiv petakh khata'th ve'aleikha..." (etc.)

Why is it that in "halo", 'lo' is spelled with a 'vav': 'Heh - Lamed - Vav - Alef', whereas in "lo", it is spelled 'Lamed - Alef'?

Why is "lakh" (feminine) used, but "paneikha" (masculine)?

Why does it say "khata'th" ('Khet-tet-alef-tav') and not "khet'"('Khet-tet-alef')?

The reason I am asking all this is I am wondering if anything is there that got hidden in the translations?

What did the sages say about it?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Alex,

I saw in th Tallai Oros this morning that the Bais Halavi brings a Medrish the reason that it changes from feminine when talking about the Yetzer HArah to Masculine (RoVETz instead of Rovetzes) is at first the Yetzer HOrah is week like woman (which is physically weaker than a man) and he gets stronger as he goes on like a male (So hashem was telling CAin to nip the problem in the bud before the Yetzer Horah gets stronger).
Maybe with this you can say that HAshem refers to CAin "LAch" in the feminine to hint to the weakness of Cain not to be able to overcome the Yetzer Hora. The MAlbim says that when Hashem said "why are you angry, is referring with being upset with Hashem for not accepting his Korbon and "Why is your face down" is referring to the disappointment in himself that he didn't achieve bringing a worthy Korbon, since that is not as bad as the first it changed back to masculine.

The "Halo" I'm still working on . Stay tune.

Thank you, Rav Chaim.

I don't think I agree about the woman's weakness, but I still think I understand your point. Maybe it is related to the woman's role as the mother and nurturer; then it would perhaps mean that Hashem is in a sense telling Cain to stop nurturing his anger?

Another thought on the same passage: is it "paneikha" - face -or "p'neikha" - interior - that "naflu" - fell? If the latter, then it would imply that Hashem saw that Cain's internal soul (Neshamah?), is what fell, and that is what causes Him to interfere, and that's why He is talking about sin at the (open) door ...

Am I making any sense?

This message has been edited. Last edited by: Alex,

I couldn't find anyone who deals with the extra VoV in "HAloh" so I thought of an answer myself.

In other places where it is written "Lo" with an Aleph and Vov, Chazal learn to interpet the verse to read both types of "Lo"s with the Aleph to mean no and with a Vov to mean him. So you can have the meaning of the verse to read also,"Is it him, If you do good etc."

The meaning would be, that what bothered Cain more, was not that his offering wasn't accepted Per Se, but that his brother's was. So if it was that his brother hadn't have brought an offering, he would of been happy, so his source of his anger was that his brother was better than him in comparision.

Thus HAshem told him, that it doesn't make a differnce what someone else does, what you must be concerned with what you do. If your brother didn't bring anything, you shouldn't be happy, since tht end results was that your offering wasn't accepted, and it doesn't change anything wether someone else was accepted.

Thus "Is it him" refering to Abel, which is the only 3rd person in the story, should it make a difference to you what he does. "If you do good etc." everything is dependent on if you have done good or not, not someone elses.

Thank you, Rav Chaim. Sorry. I haven't been able to get to this forum for a while.

Don't worry Alex, we all have other lives besides to be on the internet. Please don't feel any pressure to come on, use the forum at your own convienience .

quote:

I am wondering if anything got hidden in the translations

Of course, something is hidden in anomalies. The question now is - what is it?

Here's one small idea on "halo":

In Bereshit 4:7 - halo - hey lamed vav alef - introduces a psychologically "balanced" situation - if you improve yourself ...

In Bereshit 4:7 - lo - lamed alef - introduces a psychologically imbalanced situation - if you do not improve yourself ...

The hebrew letter vav kabbalistically represents the "middle vertical pillar" of the sefirotic tree. This pillar mediates and balances emotional extremes. Consequently, the letter vav represents a "moderation" of emotional lability.

The hebrew letter alef, on the other hand, is one of the "mother letters", according to sefer yetzirah, and is the letter "in charge" of the path between the two extremes (of gevurah, severity, and chesed, lovingkindness). Without the moderating influence of the vav, the path of alef is wide open - and one may be flung from one emotional extreme to the other.

So, in the word halo, the vav acts to moderate emotional extremes and leads to expression of the middot in a balanced fashion. In contrast, in the word lo, there is no vav present to prevent one from being flung emotionally from one extreme to the other. In this latter case, expressions may be chaotic and lead to bad choices based upon emotional reactions as opposed to thoughtful contemplation.

Just my 2 cents.