Torah - Lemekh: His Wives, His Children, His Speech - Sheet 14

The name Lemekh bears no easily discernable meaning, but a clue may be found in transposing the letters that comprise it. An anagram of Lemekh is melekh, meaning king. As we will see in the coming verses, Lemekh, the only character in his line to speak, will express himself in authoritative, arguably “royal” tones, and will give expression to the ethos of his entire generation. Strikingly, in the next chapter, which introduces the line of Seth, we will encounter a second Lemekh. Like his predecessor, this second Lemekh will be the only figure in his line to speak, and thus will serve as a defining voice of his generation. As we will see in our examination of Genesis 5, the messages of the second Lemekh will differ dramatically from those of his problematic namesake in chapter 4. (Anagram, Symbolism, Intertextuality)

Rashi, in line with the midrash, takes a negative view of Lemekh’s act of polygamy, viewing it as an illustration of the evil practiced by the generation of the flood. Read with modern eyes, Rashi’s comments may be seen as prescient social commentary. Repeatedly, throughout human history, society’s treatment of its women has been a good indicator of its overall moral health. (Character Analysis, Archetype)

Between them, Lemekh’s two wives give birth to three sons. We would be remiss not to notice the remarkable similarity in the names Yaval, Yuval, and Tuval Kayin. Beyond their likeness to one another, these names bear great phonetic resonance within their broader context. Looking backward in the story, the names Yaval, Yuval, and Tuval Kayin recall the tragic figure of Hevel. And going forward, we arrive at the cataclysmic mabbul, the flood that awaits virtually the entire line of Cain.

How might this continuum, from Hevel to Yaval, Yuval, and Tuval Kayin, and finally to the mabbul, inform our overall understanding of the genealogical line of Cain?

Viewing this sequence in its most positive possible light, we might argue that the three sons of Lemekh symbolically carry on the legacy of their slain ancestor. As “father of those who dwell in tents and among herds,” Jabal reenacts and institutionalizes Abel’s profession of shepherding. Our discussion of Abel’s choice of profession took note of its relative ease when compared with the challenge of working a cursed earth (see my comments to Gen. 4:2). But it can also be viewed as a choice that models humanity’s harmonious coexistence with animal life. It is possible that Jabal’s brothers Jubal and Tubal-Cain pay further tribute to the slain Abel by memorializing the meditative dimension of his vocation. Their chosen pursuits relate to the life of the spirit: one will bring music, the other artistry in the form of forging copper and iron.

In considering the positive resonances in the names of Lemekh’s sons, even the calamitous specter of the mabbul is somewhat mitigated. Their establishing of the arts and other forms of wisdom assures us that something of Cain’s line will survive the great flood and will thrive ever after.

It is worth noting that two of Lemekh’s three sons recall Kayin in addition to Hevel. Yaval dwells among cattle, mikneh in Hebrew, which plays phonetically on the name Kayin. More explicitly, the name Tuval Kayin includes the full name of Cain. Perhaps the appendage of Cain’s name to those of Abel’s namesakes symbolizes the potential for siblings, even those as combative as Cain and Abel, to find moments of constructive harmony. In this instance, by virtue of their creative efforts, the brothers are figuratively reunited in a common goal: enriching the lives of humankind.

In a more negative reading of the names of Lemekh’s sons, we may argue that Abel’s name is repeatedly invoked not only to recall his contributions, but to remind readers of his tragic murder. Possibly, by combining the names of Cain and Abel in the name Tuval Kayin, the text wishes to conjure up the fraught, clashing relationship between the brothers, which led to the known catastrophic results. (Symbolism, Sound, Intertextuality, Wordplay, Character Analysis, Archetype)

Some classical commentators find further negative messaging in the chosen profession of Tubal-Cain:

Tubal-Cain is the forger of metal instruments, such as copper and iron. While in one sense, as we have seen, his vocational choice is a sign of his great creativity, it may also be seen, as Rashi and others suggest, as the Bible’s origin story for the large-scale manufacture of weapons. Read this way, Tubal-Cain seeks to emulate, and make accessible to all, the most consequential craft of his ancestor Cain: the craft of murder. It is not difficult to draw a line from this wholesale production and proliferation of weapons to the violence that will seal the fate of the mabbul’s generation. (Character Analysis, Wordplay, Symbolism)

Viewed as a whole, the generation of Jabal, Jubal and Tubal-Cain appears to reflect an incremental trend among Cain’s descendants to pay tribute to, and in various ways, to emulate, their murderous ancestor. This list hints that the frightful scream of Abel’s blood, so powerfully invoked by God after the murder, grows louder and more anguished in each ensuing generation. As a result, God will soon decree that it will take nothing less than a devastating mabbul to cleanse humanity of its violent ways.

Yet with this, Cain’s lineage offers a glimmer of positive human potential and the hope of a more optimistic outcome. As hinted by the names and occupations of Jabal, Jubal, and Tubal-Cain, siblings are capable of not only tension and strife but creative, fruitful collaboration. When unencumbered by conflict, siblings could produce the sublime results of wisdom, art, and culture. Ultimately, while most of humanity will succumb to the waters of the flood, these gifts will survive and thrive throughout human history.

Suddenly, in a genealogy that includes only male offspring, we are confronted with the birth of a girl, Na’amah. How has this young woman managed to burst through the androcentric biblical list of Cain’s descendants? Ramban, in line with the midrash, accounts for this anomaly by identifying Na’amah as Noah’s wife.

In support of this theory, Ramban offers two arguments. First, he indulges in name interpretation, noting that Na’amah means “pleasant” and is likely to signify her pleasing, virtuous character. It would follow that such a woman would have been the worthiest choice to marry the righteous Noah and to survive the flood.

Second, with the dearth of female figures in the Bible’s genealogical lists – lamentable, to be sure – the very act of her inclusion attests to her unusual level of righteousness. Again, we may reasonably surmise that a woman of such high moral character would have been the likeliest candidate to partner with Noah.

In support of Ramban, it is worth noting that throughout Noah’s narrative, although his wife is referenced several times, she is never named. In the minds of numerous commentators, it is then reasonable to go in search of her name elsewhere in the text. And what better match for Noah’s wife, the positive character with no name, than Na’amah, the woman with the pleasing name who has no accompanying narrative?

After identifying Na’amah as Noah’s wife, Ramban adds the following intriguing comment: “If it is so [that Na’amah is Noah’s wife], a small remnant of Cain remains in the world”. With these words, Ramban allows for the possibility that Na’amah was exceptional in her generation, much as Noah was outstanding in his. Both may be seen as lone righteous individuals who resisted the pressures of both family lineage and the corrupt societies that encircled them. Just as Noah, the “blameless man” who was “righteous in his age”, was worthy of being saved from the waters of the flood, so Na’amah, the steadfast moral outlier in her time, merited surviving the flood. When we follow Ramban’s lead and identify Na’amah as Noah’s wife, we find that Noah and Na’amah are indeed a most suitable match.

With Ramban’s reading as background, we may draw a line from Na’amah back to God’s empowering charge to Cain in verse 7 (see my comments to verse 7). Na’amah may be seen as living proof of God’s message that regardless of the magnetic negative pull of one’s dark inner urges – whether inborn or ingrained by society – the choice is always open. As God said to Cain, ata timshol bo, you may, at any stage, take charge and rule over it.

With the possibility that Na’amah is a morally unwavering heroic figure, we must understand God’s words more expansively. Surely, they are meant to include her remarkable capacity, and, by extension, the capacity of all women, to transcend genetics and circumstance. From Ramban’s presentation of Na’amah, we understand the words ata timshol bo, phrased in the masculine, to encompass the feminine construction as well: at timsheli bo. (Character Analysis, Logic, Derash, Convention, Wordplay, Symbolism)

In this verse, the text steps out of its expository style, and moves, almost imperceptibly, into poetry. Even if we do not immediately recognize the shift in literary form, the text’s distinctive rhythms prime us for words of great import. As we will soon see, Lemekh’s short poem will serve as a kind of generational anthem, whose lyrical style illustrates, more potently than the prose that precedes it, the depravity that has been embraced by Cain’s descendants.

Lemekh begins by calling his wives to attention, using parallel structure for dramatic, and, as we will see, ominous effect. (Poetry)

Lemekh proceeds to deliver a speech whose style is poetic, but whose content is menacing. Despite his use of parallel structure and poetic imagery, Lemekh’s frightful words evoke the braggadocio of a hardened gangster. “I have killed a man…and a child,” he exults, meaning he has, without obstruction, killed all types of human beings, young and old. Then, in grandiose – and still parallel – language, he celebrates the indiscriminate, and disproportionate, nature of his acts of murder. I have killed in response to mere wounds and bruises – le-fitz’i, la-haburati – which were inflicted upon me by others. (Poetry)

With an even more bombastic flourish, Lemekh claims invulnerability to punishment, including, he implies, from the hands of God. To make his point, he shamelessly appropriates God’s promise to Cain of seven-fold protection from anyone who would try to kill him. Lemekh the unapologetic murderer now claims an exponentially higher level of protection for himself, even in the wake of his acts of random violence. Brazenly, and hyperbolically, Lemekh multiplies Cain’s sevenfold protection into his own seventy-seven-fold safety net.

Lemekh’s narrative provides an appalling, yet worthy, finale to the Bible’s list of Cain’s descendants. The line began with a single murder; then – in the view of numerous commentators – it moved on to the mass production of the tools of homicide. Cain’s line concludes with Lemekh’s unabashed celebration of his license to kill, at will and with impunity. With this final piece in place, the march toward the flood appears to be irrevocably underway.

But instead of continuing humanity’s uniform decline, the text suddenly introduces a new genealogical line. On the one hand, the names in this new line will contain compelling phonetic echoes of those listed in Genesis 4, thus suggesting continuity. Yet on the other hand, the new list of names will offer surprising hints of a possible alternative course. Although for the most part, the new lineage, like that of Cain, will meet its end in the great flood, it will also introduce several outstanding individuals, who show signs of meriting a different fate. (Hyperbole, Wordplay, Symbolism)