21st Century Bible Hebrew -- hufal binyan

Genesis 4:13-16

יג וַיֹּ֥אמֶר קַ֖יִן אֶל־יְהוָֹ֑ה גָּד֥וֹל עֲוֹנִ֖י מִנְּשֽׂוֹא:  

יד הֵן֩ גֵּרַ֨שְׁתָּ אֹתִ֜י הַיּ֗וֹם מֵעַל֙ פְּנֵ֣י הָֽאֲדָמָ֔ה וּמִפָּנֶ֖יךָ אֶסָּתֵ֑ר וְהָיִ֜יתִי נָ֤ע וָנָד֙ בָּאָ֔רֶץ וְהָיָ֥ה כָל־מֹֽצְאִ֖י יַֽהַרְגֵֽנִי:

טו וַיֹּ֧אמֶר ל֣וֹ יְהֹוָ֗ה לָכֵן֙ כָּל־הֹרֵ֣ג קַ֔יִן שִׁבְעָתַ֖יִם יֻקָּ֑ם וַיָּ֨שֶׂם יְהוָֹ֤ה לְקַ֨יִן֙ א֔וֹת לְבִלְתִּ֥י הַכּוֹת־אֹת֖וֹ כָּל־מֹֽצְאֽוֹ:

טז וַיֵּ֥צֵא קַ֖יִן מִלִּפְנֵ֣י יְהוָֹ֑ה וַיֵּ֥שֶׁב בְּאֶֽרֶץ־נ֖וֹד קִדְמַת־עֵֽדֶן:

Translation: Qain said to the Lord: is my sin great beyond bearing?

Behold you have expelled me today from the surface of the earth, from Your Presence, I shall be in hiding; a wanderer and trembler on earth, from now on anybody who finds me will kill me.
The Lord said to him, therefore anybody killing Qain, he is avenged shivataim; the Lord set for Qain a sign for anybody finding him not killing him.
Qain went out from before the Lord; he lived in the land of Nod eastward of Eden.
 

Now. Why do we have yuqam?

 

This is hufal binyan which I mentioned before.  It looks a lot like hifil except for the “oo” in the first syllable.  Like pual, it is used differently in narratives compared to legal material.

 

In legal material, hufal is the binyan of a legal definition.   When an ox kills more than one person, it is defined in law as huad, noticeably dangerous.  The same term is used of a murderer. 

 

Equally importantly, hurtsah is used of a sacrifice which has been performed according to all the details of the ritual that applies, meaning that it’s acceptable.  In BH, rotseh does not mean “want”; that’s what it means in Mishnaic Hebrew and Modern Hebrew as the auxiliary verb for the volitive.  BH does the volitive in morphology; MH and MH use periphrasis.

 

In narratives hufal seems to indicate following a norm of behavior or a local custom.  Hugad tends to mean receiving information only through official sources.

 

Which do we have here?  The audience would have understood yuqam to mean court-ordered sanctions for a killing.  In Qain’s case, it’s exile because he’s guilty of manslaughter, not murder.  In the case of anybody who kills Qain, it will be whatever fits the case – the death penalty or exile.  And since nobody has killed Qain yet, we don’t know what that will be.

 

Why not use nifal?  Nifal is used for court rulings, not legal definitions.  Pual is not appropriate because it says that what happened may not meet the legal definition expressed in hufal.  Qual is not appropriate because in laws, it points to consequences that are unexpected or counterintuitive.

 

Each of the binyanim has a specific role.  While piel and hifil can both be used transitively when the qal is intransitive, or as action verbs when qal is descriptive, I have yet to notice a case when piel and hifil both exist for a verb and both are transitive and have identical meaning.  In such cases, one of them has a special meaning.  I’ll do a special lesson on this much later.  Let’s get through the basics first.

 

You will see yuqam again soon and that will identify an important issue about the Qain saga.