ציטירנדיקער פּירוש אויף ישעיהו 8:21

Alternatively, when Cain saw that G'd did not accept his own offering he felt angry at the Creator's disdain for His creatures, His not taking any interest in them. This is a very negative character trait. We find an example of such emotions in Isaiah 8,21 where anger is described as leading to blasphemy when someone feels that G'd does not look after him. After Cain found that he had been wrong, that G'd did accept his brother's offering, his anger against G'd turned to anger against G'd's favourite, against his brother Abel.

V. 8. וכחרב. Schon in Choreb, sofort bei der ersten Grundlegung eurer nationalen Bestimmung. ויתאנף וגו׳, während קצף das unmittelbar durch ein mißliebiges Verhalten, eines andern hervorgerufene Gefühl der Entrüstung ist, ist התאנף: das mit Bewusstsein und Überlegung "Sich in Zorn versetzen" gegen einen andern. Daher steht es vor Strafverhängnissen und sagt, daß sie nicht in leidenschaftlichem Aufwallen, sondern mit sich selbst beherrschender Überlegung gefasst werden. So hier und 1, 37; 4, 21; 9, 20. Auch das התקצף (Jesaias 8, 22) ist ein solches aus Nachdenken hervorgehendes Böswerden mit seinem Gott und König, es ist ein sich in Zorn Hineinreden.

AND HE THAT SMITETH HIS FATHER, OR HIS MOTHER, SHALL SURELY BE PUT TO DEATH. Our Sages have already taught¹¹⁰Sanhedrin 84b. that his death is by strangulation. This is why He placed next to it, And he that stealeth a man, and selleth him,¹¹¹Verse 16. for he too is punished by the same death. He separated it from the later verse, And he that curseth his father or his mother,¹¹²Verse 17. because his death is by stoning, as it is said concerning him, he hath cursed his father or his mother; his blood shall be upon him,¹¹³Leviticus 20:9. and whenever such an expression [his blood be upon him] is used about someone, his death is by stoning, this being derived from that which is written, They shall stone them with stones; their blood shall be upon them.¹¹⁴Ibid., Verse 27. The reason why He was more severe as to the manner of death of the one who curses his mother or father than as to the manner of death of one who smites them,¹¹⁵In the order of severity stoning is considered the most stringent of the four deaths that the court had power to inflict, and strangulation the least severe. Ramban’s question is thus pertinent: why the most severe punishment for the curser, and the least severe one for one who smites? is because the sin of cursing is more common, for when the fool gets angry he frets himself and curses by his king¹¹⁶Isaiah 8:21. and father and mother the whole day, and a crime that is frequently committed needs a greater punishment [than one rarely committed]. Or it may be that cursing involves a greater sin, because he uses the Name of G-d,¹¹⁷Shebuoth 36a. Also in the Mechilta here: “One who curses his father or his mother is not liable to the death penalty unless he curses them by using the Divine Name.” Needless to say cursing is strongly forbidden by itself, even without using the Divine Name. and therefore he has to be punished for his sin against his father and mother, and also for taking G-d’s Name in transgression and sin. Now the Gaon Rav Saadia¹¹⁸Mentioned here in Ibn Ezra, Verse 16. — On Rav Saadia, see in Seder Va’eira, Note 229. said, that the reason why He placed the matter of stealing a human being between that of smiting one’s parents and cursing them, is because most people are kidnapped when they are young, and they grow up in a strange place unaware of who their parents are, and thus they may come to smite them or to curse them [not knowing that they are their parents]; therefore it is fitting that the thief too be punished by death as they are, since he is responsible for the punishment that is visited upon the child [who smites or curses either of his parents, and for that reason the verse dealing with the thief’s punishment is mentioned between those dealing with smiting one’s parents and cursing them].