Chapter 3.

"CAIN'S SEAL"

In the book of Genesis we read that Cain, after killing his brother Abel, was forbidden to communicate with people. This doomed him to the life of an exile and wanderer. Fearing that anyone he met might henceforth kill him, Cain began to complain to God about his bitter fate; and, taking pity on him, “the Lord made a sign for Cain so that no one who met him would kill him.” What kind of sign or mark was this with which God marked the first murderer?

It is very probable that we are dealing here with some relic of an ancient custom observed by murderers; although we are not able to establish positively what exactly this sign or mark consisted of, a comparison with the customs observed by murderers in other places on the globe will help us understand at least general meaning this sign. Robertson-Smith suggested that this sign was nothing more than a tribal distinctive sign or sign that each member of the tribe had on his body; this sign served as a means of protection for him, testifying to his belonging to one or another community, which could, if necessary, avenge his murder. William Robertson-Smith (1846-1894) - English Orientalist who studied issues of Semitic religion, Frazer's closest friend and teacher. It is reliably known that such distinctive signs are practiced among peoples who have preserved their tribal organization. For example, among the Bedouins, one of the main tribal characteristics is a special hairstyle. In many places around the world, especially in Africa, the sign of a tribe is a design on a person's body, made by tattooing. It is likely that such signs really serve as a means of protection for a person of a particular tribe, as Robertson-Smith thinks, although, on the other hand, it should be borne in mind that they can also be dangerous for a person living in a hostile country, since they facilitate the ability to recognize him as an enemy. But even if we agree with Robertson-Smith on the issue of the protective significance of the tribal mark, it is unlikely that such an explanation applies to this case, that is, to the “Seal of Cain.” The explanation for this is too general character, because it refers to every person of a particular tribe who needs protection, and not just to the murderer. The whole meaning of the biblical story makes us think that the sign in question was not assigned to every member of the community, but was an exclusive feature of the murderer. Therefore, we are forced to look for explanations in a different direction.

From the story itself we see that Cain faced not only the danger of being killed by anyone he met. God says to Cain: “What have you done? The voice of your brother's blood cries to me from the earth; and now art thou cursed from the earth, which hath opened its mouth to receive the blood of thy brother at thy hand; when you cultivate the land, it will no longer give its strength to you; you will be an exile and a wanderer on earth." Obviously, here the blood of a murdered brother is seen as something that poses a real danger to the killer; it defiles the earth and prevents her from giving birth. It turns out that the killer poisoned the source of life and thereby created the danger of depriving himself of food , and perhaps others. Hence it is clear that the murderer must be expelled from his country, for which his presence is a constant threat. The murderer is a man plagued by the plague, surrounded by a poisonous atmosphere, infected with the breath of death; his mere touch destroys the earth. Such a view of murderer gives the key to understanding the famous law of ancient Attica: A murderer, subjected to exile, against whom a new charge was brought in his absence, had the right to return to Attica for protection, but could not set foot on land, but had to speak from the ship, even to the ship it was impossible to drop an anchor or lower a ladder ashore.The judges avoided all contact with the accused and tried the case while remaining on the shore. It is clear that the law had in mind to completely isolate the murderer, who could cause damage to it by simply touching the soil of Attica, even indirectly, through an anchor or a ladder. For the same reason, there was a rule that if such a person, after a shipwreck, was thrown by the sea on the shore of the country where he committed the crime, he was allowed to remain on the shore until another ship came to the rescue. But he was required to keep his feet up all the time. sea ​​water, - obviously, to exclude or weaken the penetration of poison into the ground, which was believed to come from the murderer.

A phenomenon quite analogous to the quarantine established for murderers by the law of ancient Attica is the currently practiced isolation of murderers among the savages of the island of Dobu, located off the southeastern tip of New Guinea. Here is what a missionary who lived on this island for seventeen years writes about this: “War with in-laws is permitted, but it is forbidden to eat the bodies of the dead. A man who kills his wife's relative can never again eat any food or fruit from his wife's village. Only his wife can cook his food. If her fire goes out, she is not allowed to take a firebrand from any house in her village. For violating this taboo, the husband will die from poisoning. The murder of a blood relative imposes an even stricter taboo on the killer. When Chief Gaganumoro killed his cousin, he was forbidden to return to his village and was forced to build a new one. He had to get himself a separate pumpkin bottle and spatula, as well as a special water bottle, cup and pots for cooking food; he had to get his own coconuts and fruits; He had to maintain his own fire as long as possible; when the fire went out, he could not light it from someone else’s fire, but had to rekindle it by friction. If the leader had violated this taboo, his brother’s blood would have poisoned his own blood, his body would have swelled, and he would have died a painful death.”

Observations made on Dobu Island show that the blood of a murdered person, according to the natives, acted like a real poison on the killer if he decided to enter the village of his victim or at least indirectly communicate with him. His isolation had, therefore, the significance of a protective measure rather in relation to himself than in relation to the community he was avoiding; it is possible that the same idea underlay the above law of Attica. However, it seems more likely that there was a mutual danger involved, that is, in other words, both the murderer and the people with whom he had intercourse were exposed to the danger of becoming infected with poisoned blood. The idea that a killer can infect other people with a disease-causing virus certainly exists among the Akikuyu tribe of East Africa. The people of this tribe believe that if a murderer comes to spend the night in a village and eats with someone else's family in their hut, then the people with whom he ate together are polluted by a dangerous infection (thahu), which can be fatal for them if it will not be deleted in time. Even the skin on which the killer slept is tainted and can infect anyone who sleeps on it. Therefore, in such cases, a healer is called to cleanse the hut and its inhabitants.

Among the Moors in Morocco, a murderer is likewise considered to be in some way an unclean being for the rest of his life. Poison oozes from under his nails, and therefore anyone who drinks the water in which he washed his hands will fall ill with a dangerous disease. You cannot eat the meat of an animal he has killed, or eat anything at all in his company. When he appears at a place where people are digging a well, the water immediately goes away. In Giaina, they say, he is forbidden to enter an orchard or vegetable garden, as well as to appear at a current or bins, or to pass among a flock of sheep. According to a widespread, although not universally accepted, custom, during the “great holiday” he cannot make a sacrifice with his own hand; and among some tribes, mainly speaking Barbary dialects, the same prohibition exists in relation to a person who has killed a dog, which is considered unclean animals. Any blood flowing from the body is considered unclean and attracts evil spirits.

But in the biblical story of the murder of Abel, the blood of the murdered man is not the only inanimate object that behaves like a living being. If blood is represented here as flagrant, then the earth is said to have opened its mouth to receive the blood of the sacrifice. We find a parallel to this image of the earth in Aeschylus, in one of whose tragedies the earth drinks the blood of the murdered Agamemnon. But in the book of Genesis a further step is taken in the personification of the earth, for here it is said that Cain was “cursed from the earth” and that when he began to cultivate the earth, it “will no longer give its strength,” and he himself will be an exile and a wanderer on earth. Here it is evidently implied that the soil, defiled by blood and insulted by crime, does not allow the seeds sown by the hand of the murderer to germinate and bear fruit;

Moreover, the murderer himself will be expelled from the cultivated land on which he has hitherto lived happily, and will be forced to wander in the barren desert as a hungry and homeless vagabond. The image of the earth acting like a living being, outraged by the sins of its inhabitants and pushing them away from its breast, is not alien to the Old Testament. In the book of Leviticus we read that, disgraced by human unrighteousness, “the land has cast off its inhabitants,” the Jews are solemnly warned about the need to observe divine laws and decrees, “so that the land does not cast you out from itself when you begin to defile it, as she overthrew the nations that were before you."

The ancient Greeks also apparently believed that the shedding of human blood - or at least the blood of relatives - defiles the earth. So, according to legend, Alcmaeon, who killed his mother Eriphile and was pursued by the spirit of the murdered woman, wandered around the world for a long time, not finding peace for himself anywhere; when he finally turned to the Delphic oracle, the priestess told him that “the only country where the rebellious spirit of Eriphyle will not haunt him is the new land, exposed by the sea after the desecration caused by the shed blood of his mother”; or, as Thucydides put it, “he He will not find peace from his suffering anywhere until he comes to a country over which the sun had not yet shone at the time when he killed his mother, and which was not yet dry land, for the rest of the earth was desecrated by him.” Following the instructions of the oracle, Alcmaeon discovered the small and barren Echinada Islands at the mouth of the Achelous; according to the Greeks, they were formed from the coastal land, carried away by the flow of the river, after Alcmaeon committed his crime; on these islands he found refuge for himself. According to another version, the killer found temporary shelter in the gloomy valley of Psofis, among the harsh mountains of Arcadia; but here, too, the earth refused to bear fruit for the murderer of his mother, and he, like Cain, was forced to return to his former hard life as a wanderer.

The idea of ​​the earth as a powerful deity, to whom the shedding of human blood is an insult and who must be propitiated by sacrifice, is common among some tribes of Upper Senegal. The earth demands atonement not only for murder, but also for causing bloody wounds. Thus, in the area of ​​Laro, in the country of the Bobo tribe, “the killer gave two goats, one dog and one rooster to the village elder, who sacrificed them to the earth. All the villagers, including the elder, then ate the meat of the sacrificed animal, but the families of the killer and the killed did not take part in the feast. If it was just about a fight without shedding blood, then this was not given any importance. But the sight of spilled blood angered the earth, and it was therefore necessary to appease it with a sacrifice. The culprit gave one goat and a thousand shells to the elder, who sacrificed the goat to the earth and distributed the shells among the most respected persons. The goat sacrificed to the earth was also divided among them. But no one thought about the injured party during the entire procedure, and she received nothing. This is understandable: the task was not to compensate the victims for their damage at the expense of the offender, but to calm the earth, this great and formidable deity, who was angry at the sight of shed blood. In this case, the victim was entitled to nothing. It is enough for the earth to calm down by eating the soul of a goat sacrificed to it, for among the Bobo tribe, like other blacks, the earth is revered as the great goddess of justice."

Similar customs and beliefs existed among the Nunuma, another tribe of Upper Senegal. The murderer was banished for three years and had to pay a large fine in shells and cattle, not as a reward for the family of the murdered man, but to appease the earth and other local deities offended by the sight of the blood spilled. One of the oxen was sacrificed to the angry earth by a priest who bore the title “leader of the earth”; the meat, like the shells, was divided among the most honorable persons, but the family of the killed did not take part in the division or received the same share of meat and money as others. In the event of a quarrel involving bloodshed, but without killing, the attacker gave one ox, a sheep, a goat and four chickens, which were all sacrificed to appease the local gods, outraged by the shedding of blood. The ox was sacrificed to the land by its “chief” in the presence of the elders villages; the sheep was dedicated to the river, and the chickens to the rocks and forest; the goat was sacrificed by the village leader as a sacrifice to his personal fetish. If these cleansing sacrifices were not made, then, according to Nunum, the culprit and his family would face death at the hands of an angry god.

The facts presented suggest that the sign placed on the murderer initially served as a means of protecting not the murderer himself, but other people who could become defiled by contact with him and incur the wrath of the deity he offended or the spirit pursuing him; in other words, the sign served as a signal warning people about the need to step aside, similar to the special clothing for lepers in Israel.

However, there are other facts that allow, as follows from the legend of Cain, to think that the mark was intended specifically for the murderer himself and that the danger against which it served him as protection was revenge not from the relatives of the murdered man, but from his angry spirit . This superstition was very widespread in ancient Attica. Thus, Plato says that, according to an ancient Greek belief, the spirit of a recently murdered person haunts the murderer, for he is outraged by the sight of a criminal walking freely around his native land. Therefore, the murderer must retire from his native country for one year, until in the meantime the anger of the indignant spirit cools down, and, before returning to his homeland, purify himself by sacrifices and established rites. If the victim of the murderer was a foreigner, then the murderer must avoid the homeland of the murdered man, as well as his own homeland, and, going into exile, follow the path prescribed by custom; for nothing good will come of it if he wanders about his country pursued by an angry spirit.

We saw above that among the Akikuyu tribe, a murderer is considered a carrier of some dangerous filth, which he can infect other people through contact with them. The fact that there is a certain connection between such contamination and the spirit of the murdered person is indicated by one of the ceremonies practiced to atone for the crime committed. The village elders sacrifice a pig near one of the sacred fig trees, which play an important role in the religious rites of the tribe. Here they make a feast and eat the tastiest parts of the animal, leaving the fat, intestines and a few bones for the spirit, who, they are sure, will appear that same night in the form of a wild cat and eat it all. After this, having satisfied his hunger, he will calm down and will no longer come to the village and disturb its inhabitants. It should be noted that among this tribe only the murder of a person of his own clan entails desecration and corresponding rites; killing a person from another clan or tribe does not have such consequences.

According to the customs of the Bagishu tribe of Elgon in East Africa, a person guilty of killing a resident of the same village who belonged to the same clan must leave his village and move to another place, even if he is reconciled with the relatives of the murdered person. Then he must slaughter a goat, smear his chest with the contents of its stomach, and throw the rest onto the roof of the house of the slain, “to appease the spirit” (of the slain). A similar purification rite is established among this tribe for a warrior who has killed a person in battle, and it is safe to say , that the meaning of the ritual is to calm the spirit of the killed. The warrior returns to his village, but does not have the right to spend the first night in his house, but must stay in the house of one of his friends. In the evening, he kills a goat or sheep, puts the contents of its stomach in a pot and lubricates lubricate his head, chest and arms with fat. If he has children, then they are also lubricated in a similar way. Having protected himself and the children in this way, the warrior boldly goes to his house, lubricates all the doorposts, and throws the remaining contents of the goat's stomach onto the roof, apparently to be devoured by the spirit lurking there. For a whole day the murderer does not dare touch the food with his hands and must eat with the help of two chopsticks made for this purpose. The next day he is free to return to his house and to his usual life. All these restrictions do not apply to his wife; she can even go to mourn the murdered person and take part in his funeral. Such a manifestation of sadness even helps to soften the spirit's unkind feelings and may incline him to forgive her husband.

Among the Nilotes of Kavirondo, the murderer is isolated from other villagers and lives in a separate hut with an old woman who serves him, cooks his food, and also feeds him, because he is forbidden to touch food with his hands. This isolation lasts three days. On the fourth day, another man, who himself once committed a murder or killed a person in battle, takes the murderer to the river, where he washes him from head to toe; then he cuts the goat, boils its meat and places a piece of meat on four sticks; the killer eats all four pieces from his hands one by one, after which the same person places four lumps of thick porridge on sticks, which the killer must also swallow. Finally, the goatskin is cut into three strips, one of which is placed around the killer's neck, and the other two are wrapped around the hands. The entire ritual is performed by only two persons on the river bank. At the end of the ritual, the killer is free to return home. It is believed that until such a ritual is performed, the spirit of the deceased cannot go to the land of the dead and hovers over the murderer.

Among the Baloko tribe living in the Upper Congo, whoever kills a person from some neighboring village does not have to fear the spirit of the murdered person, because the spirits wander here only in a very limited area; but on the other hand, one cannot fearlessly kill a person from one’s own village, where a small distance separates the killer from the spirit, which makes him constantly fear the spirit’s revenge. Here, unfortunately for the killer, there is no ritual that relieves him of fear, and the killer is forced to mourn his victim as if it were his own brother, he stops caring about his appearance, shaves his head, fasts and sheds streams of crocodile tears. All these outward manifestations of grief, which a simple-minded European may take as signs of sincere repentance and remorse, are in fact designed only to deceive the spirit.

Similarly, among the Omaha Indians of North America, a murderer whose life is spared by the relatives of the murdered man is forced to observe certain strict rules for a certain period of time, usually from two to four years. He must walk barefoot, not eat hot food, not raise his voice, and not look around. His clothes should always be wrapped, even in warm weather, and the collar should be tightly closed. He is forbidden to swing his arms, he must keep them pressed to his body; he should not comb his hair or let it fly in the wind. No one is to eat with him, and only one of his relatives is allowed to live with him in his tent. When the whole tribe goes hunting, he is obliged to place his dwelling at a distance of a quarter of a mile from the rest, “so that the spirit of the murdered man does not raise a strong wind that could cause harm.” The reason given here for the isolation of the murderer from the general camp seems to give the key to the explanation all the general restrictions to which among primitive peoples people who have committed murder, intentional or unintentional, are subjected.The isolation of such people is dictated not by a moral feeling of disgust at their crime, but solely by practical motives of caution or simply by fear of a dangerous spirit that is chasing on the heels of the murderer.

On the north-eastern coast of New Guinea, among the Yabim tribe, the relatives of the murdered man, who agreed to receive a monetary reward instead of blood feud, force the murderer's relatives to smear their foreheads with chalk, “so that the spirit would not disturb them, would not take the pigs away from their herd and would not loosen their teeth for that they did not avenge the murder." Here we see that it is not the murderer himself, but the relatives of the crime victim who mark themselves with a sign, but the principle remains the same. The spirit of the murdered man is naturally indignant at the behavior of the heartless relatives who did not demand the murderer's blood for blood killed. And so, when the spirit is ready to rush at them and loosen their teeth, or drag a pig from their herd, or cause them some other misfortune, it suddenly stops at the sight of a white mark on their black or dark brown forehead. This sign seems to serves as a receipt for receiving the full amount of money due from the killer, proof that the relatives have achieved, if not blood, then monetary reward for the murder... And the spirit should be satisfied with this weak consolation and save the family of the murdered man from any persecution in the future. The same sign and for the same purpose can, of course, be placed on the forehead of the murderer as proof that he paid for his crime in full in cash or the usual cash equivalent among the tribe and that, therefore, the spirit cannot have any connection with him. claims. Wasn’t the “Seal of Cain” a similar sign? Didn’t it also serve as proof of the compensation he paid for the shed blood, a kind of receipt for receiving a sum of money from him?

It is likely that this was the case, but there is another possibility that also cannot be ignored. Obviously, according to the theory I have just outlined, the “Mark of Cain” could be imposed on a person who killed his fellow tribesman or fellow villager, because compensation for murder was paid only to people belonging to the same tribe or community as the murderer But the spirits of slain enemies are probably no less dangerous than the spirits of slain friends, and if it seems impossible to appease them by paying relatives a sum of money, then what else can be done with them? There were several ways to protect warriors from the spirits of the people they sent to the next world ahead of time. One of the means was, obviously, that the killer dressed himself up so that the spirit could not recognize him; another was to give himself such a warlike and terrible appearance that the spirit would not dare to compete with him. One of these two motives lies at the basis of the following customs, which I choose from among many similar ones.

Among the Bayakka, one of the Bantu tribes in the Congo Free State, “there is a belief that a man killed in battle sends his soul to the man who killed him to avenge his murder; but the latter can avoid death if he sticks a red feather from a parrot's tail into his hair and paints his forehead red." Tonga (in South-East Africa) believe that a person who kills an enemy in battle is in great danger from the spirit of the killed , which haunts him and can drive him to madness. To protect himself from the revenge of the spirit, the killer must stay in the main village of the tribe for several days, during which he cannot go home to his wife, must wear old clothes and eat from special dishes with the help of special spoon. In the past, incisions were made between such a person’s eyebrows and a special ointment was rubbed into them, which caused acne to appear, giving the person the appearance of an enraged buffalo. Among the Basotho tribe, “warriors who kill an enemy undergo purification. The leader of the tribe must wash them and bring them to sacrifice of an ox in the presence of the entire army. They also rub the body with the bile of the animal, which prevents persecution of them by the spirit."

Among the Bantu tribes in Kavirondo there is a custom according to which a person who has killed an enemy in battle, upon returning home, shaves his head, and his friends rub his body with an ointment, usually prepared from cow dung, so that the spirit of the killed person does not take revenge on him. Among the Balukhya from Kavirondo, “a warrior who kills a man in battle is isolated from his village and lives for about four days in a separate hut, where an old woman cooks food for him and feeds him like a child, because he is not supposed to touch food. On the fifth day, he goes to the river, accompanied by another man, who first washes him, and then kills a white goat and, having boiled its meat, feeds it to the warrior. The goat's skin is cut into pieces, which are wrapped around the warrior's hands and head, after which he returns to his temporary hut for the night. The next day he is again taken to the river and washed, then he is given a white chicken, which he kills himself, and the accompanying person again feeds him chicken meat. Then at last he is declared clean and can return to his home. Sometimes it happens that a warrior pierces another person with a spear in battle, the latter dies from his wounds some time later. Then the relatives of the killed come to the warrior and inform him of the death of the wounded, and the warrior is immediately isolated from the community for the entire time until all the above-described rituals are performed. The natives say that these rites are necessary in order to free the spirit of the deceased, which remains attached to the warrior until the entire ritual is completed. If the warrior decides to refuse to perform the ritual, the spirit will ask him: “Why don’t you perform the ritual and release me?” If even after this the warrior persists in his refusal, the spirit will grab him by the throat and strangle him.”

We saw above that the Nilotes from Kavirondo have preserved a completely similar custom regarding murderers, pursuing the goal of freeing themselves from revenge on the part of the spirit of the murdered person. This perfect similarity of the ritual in both cases, together with its clearly expressed motives, sheds a bright light on the basic meaning of the purification rites observed by the murderer, be it a warrior or a criminal: in both cases the goal is the same - to rid a person of the vengeful spirit of the victim. Wrapping the head and hands of both hands with pieces of goat skin seems to be intended to make the person unrecognizable to the spirit. Even in cases where our sources do not say anything about the spirit of the killed, we can still say with confidence that the cleansing actions performed by warriors or other persons who shed human blood in the interests of warriors are aimed at calming the angry spirit, driving away or deceiving his. Thus, among the Ichopi tribe (in Central Africa), when a victorious army, returning from a campaign, approaches its village, it makes a halt on the river bank, all the warriors who killed enemies in battle smear their hands and bodies with white clay, and those from They, who themselves did not pierce the enemy with a spear, but only helped to finish him off, cover only their right hand with clay. On this night, murderers sleep in a cattle pen and are afraid to come close to their houses. The next morning they wash off the clay in the river. The shaman serves them a miraculous drink and smears their bodies with a fresh layer of clay. This procedure is repeated for six days in a row, and the cleansing is considered complete. All that remains is to shave their heads, after which the warriors are declared clean and can return to their homes. Among the Borana, one of the group of Galla tribes, when a military detachment returns to the village, women wash the victors who killed people from the enemy camp in battle with a mixture of lard and oil, and their faces are painted red and white. Among the Maasai tribe, warriors who kill foreigners during a battle paint the right half of their body red and the left half white. In the same way, the natives of the Nandi tribe, who have killed a person from another tribe, paint their body red on one side and white on the other. For four days after the murder, the murderer is considered unclean and cannot return to his home; he builds himself a small tent on the river bank, where he lives. All these days he should not have relations with his wife or mistress, and can only eat oatmeal, beef and goat meat. At the end of the fourth day he must purify himself with a strong laxative prepared from the sap of the segetet tree and goat's milk mixed with the blood of a calf. Among the Wagogo tribe, a person who has killed an enemy in battle encircles his right eye with red paint, and his left eye with black paint.

According to the custom of the Indians living along the Thomson River in British Columbia, people who have killed their enemies paint their faces black. Without such precautions, they believe, the spirit of the murdered person will blind the killer. A Pima Indian who killed one of his traditional enemies, the Apaches, was subjected to strict isolation and purification for six days. All this time he had no right to touch meat or salt, look at the fire or speak to anyone. He lived alone in the forest, where he was served by an old woman who brought meager food. Almost all this time his head was covered with a layer of clay, which he had no right to touch. A group of Tinne Indians, who destroyed a detachment of “copper” Eskimos at the Coppermine River, considered themselves defiled after this and for a long time, in order to purify themselves, observed a number of curious restrictions. Those of them who killed the enemy were strictly forbidden to cook food for themselves and for others. it was forbidden to drink from someone else's dishes and smoke someone else's pipe, to eat boiled meat, but only raw, roasted or dried in the sun. And every time before eating, before putting the first piece in their mouth, they had to paint their faces with red ocher from the nose to the chin and across the cheeks from one ear to the other.

Among the Chinook Indian tribe (in the states of Oregon and Washington), the killer painted his face with charcoal and rendered lard and put cedar bark rings on his head, ankles and hands. After five days, the black paint was washed off and replaced with red. For all five days he was not supposed to sleep or even lie down, and also to look at babies and other people's meals. Towards the end of the purification period, he hung his head ring made of cedar bark on a tree, and this tree, according to popular belief, was supposed to dry up. Among the Eskimos who lived near Langton Bay, killing an Indian and killing a whale were considered equally glorious deeds. The man who killed the Indian was tattooed from nose to ears, and the man who killed the whale was tattooed from mouth to ears. Both had to abstain from all work for five days and from certain types of food for a whole year; in particular, it was forbidden to eat the head and intestines of animals. When a band of savages from the Arunta tribe (in Central Australia) returns home after a bloody raid, taking revenge on the enemy for an insult, they fear the spirit of the slain, being fully confident that he is pursuing them in the form of a small bird emitting a plaintive cry. For several days after their return, they say nothing about the raid, paint their bodies with coal powder and decorate their foreheads and nostrils with green branches. Finally, they paint their whole body and face with bright colors and after that they begin to talk about what happened; however, at night they still cannot fall asleep, listening to the plaintive cry of the bird, in which they imagine the voice of their victim.

In the Fiji Islands, any native who killed a man with his club in war was sanctified or subjected to a taboo. The local chief painted his body red from head to toe with turmeric. A special hut was built where he had to spend the first three nights, and he was forbidden to lie down, and he could only sleep while sitting. For the first three days, he could not change his clothes, remove paint from his body, or enter the house where the woman was. The fact that these instructions were meant to protect the warrior from the spirit of the person he killed is fully confirmed by another custom of the same islanders. When, as often happened among these savages, they buried a person alive in the ground, then at nightfall they made a terrible noise with the blows of bamboo sticks, the trumpet sounds of a special kind of shell, and similar means, in order to drive away the spirit of the dead man and prevent him from returning to his home. your old house. And in order to make this house unattractive to the spirit, they removed all sorts of decorations from the walls of the house and hung them with various objects that, in their opinion, were most repulsive. A similar custom existed among the North American Indians: in order to drive away the spirit of an enemy they had just tortured to death, they ran around the village with terrifying screams and beat with sticks on various household utensils, on the walls and roofs of huts. The same kind of customs are still observed today in different parts of New Guinea and the Bismarck Archipelago.

So, it is possible that the “Seal of Cain” was used to make the murderer unrecognizable to the spirit of the murdered person, or to give his appearance such a repulsive or frightening appearance that the spirit at least would no longer have any desire to approach him. In various works I suggested that mourning attire generally served to protect surviving relatives from the spirit of a dead person that frightened them.

Regardless of the correctness of my statement, it is safe to say that people sometimes try to transform themselves enough to remain unrecognized by the dead. Thus, in the western districts of Timor, a large island of the Malay Archipelago, before the deceased is laid in the coffin, his wives stand around and mourn him; their girlfriends are right there, all with their hair down, so that the “nitu” (spirit) of the deceased cannot recognize them. Among the Herero (in South-West Africa) it happens that a dying person turns to a person he does not love with the words: “Where from?” have you taken it? I don’t want to see you here" - and at the same time shows him a fig with his left hand. Having heard such words, a person already knows that the dying person has decided to drive him away from the world after his death and that, therefore, death awaits him soon. However, in many cases he can avoid the threatening danger. To do this, he quickly leaves the dying person and looks for an “ongang,” that is, a healer or sorcerer who undresses him, washes him, rubs him with oil and changes him into different clothes. Then he completely calms down, saying: “Well, now our father doesn’t recognize me.” . And he has nothing more to fear from the deceased.

It is also possible that after God marked Cain with a special seal, the latter completely calmed down, confident that the spirit of his murdered brother would not recognize him and would not bother him. We cannot say exactly what sign God marked the first murderer with; at best, we can only make one or another assumption on this matter. Judging by similar customs of modern savages, God could have painted Cain red, black or white, or perhaps his artistic taste told him one or another combination of all these colors. For example, he could paint it a uniform red color, as is customary among the savages of the Fiji Islands, or white, like the Ichopi savages, or black, like the Arunta tribe; but he could also cover one half of the body with red and the other with white paint, as is the custom among the Maasai and Nandi tribes. It is also possible that the god limited the field of his artistic efforts to the face of Cain alone and outlined his right eye with red paint and his left eye with black, in the style of Vago, or painted his face with gentle tones of cinnabar from nose to chin and from mouth to ears, on manners of the Tinne Indian tribe. He could also cover Cain's head with a layer of clay, as the Pima do, or smear his entire body with cow dung, according to Bantu custom. Finally, he could tattoo it, like the Eskimos, from the nose to the ears or between the eyebrows, like the Tonga, which caused blisters to appear, giving the person the appearance of an angry buffalo. Thus decorated beyond recognition, the first Mr. Smith (for Cain means Smith in English) could freely walk across the wide face of the earth, without the least fear of meeting the spirit of his murdered brother. Tubalcain, a descendant of Cain, was, according to the Bible, the first blacksmith (Gen. 4:22). In Arabic and Syriac, “kain” means “blacksmith.” The author has a play on words: smith means “blacksmith” in English, and is also a common surname.

This interpretation of the “Seal of Cain” has the advantage that it eliminates obvious absurdity from the biblical story. For, according to the usual interpretation, God put a sign on Cain in order to protect him from a possible attack from people, but at the same time completely forgot, obviously, that, in essence, there was no one to attack Cain, for the entire population of the earth then consisted of the murderer himself and his parents.And therefore, assuming that the enemy of whom the first murderer felt fear was not a living person, but a spirit, we thereby we avoid a disrespectful attitude towards God and do not attribute to him such gross forgetfulness, which is completely inconsistent with divine omniscience. Here again it turns out that the comparative method acts as a powerful advocatus dei. Advocatus dei (advocate of God) - in Catholicism, the person who was entrusted with canonization defend the holiness of the canonized person against the arguments of the devil's advocate (advocatus diaboli), who challenged his holiness.

The key to this question is the answer, no less interesting -
nary question: “Why was Abel’s sacrifice accepted by God, but Cain’s sacrifice was accepted by God?
didn’t look after? Who is right: Eve or the Apostle John? Eve about Cain: " Acquired
I am a man from the Lord."

Ap. John: "Not like Cain, who was of the evil one"(1 John 3:12).
If Eve is right, then why is her son’s life so broken? Black envy
brother, indifference to God's warning, fratricide, impudent
conversation with God (“Why am I my brother’s keeper?”), and demonstrative departure
from the presence of the Lord to the land of Nod, where he was killed by one of the descendants of Adam
in the fourth generation - Lamech. (Gen. 4:23-24), when Cain had already composed
rushed in and was accompanied by a boy. Adam and Eve's sin is worse than it seems
at first glance: disobedience, forbidden fruit... they sold, gene-
virtually all of humanity to sin, which still torments 6 billion today,
Human.

Why was Abel’s sacrifice accepted by God, but Cain’s sacrifice was accepted by God?
didn't look after?

And after everything, after the terrible deal, not a word of repentance?! Dumped
everyone blames someone: Eve blames the serpent, Adam blames God (“this is the wife,
which You gave to me." And, offended, having stepped beyond the boundaries of paradise, they drowned in Buddhism.
yah, never repented. A son is born, the mother is delighted: “I got it.”
I am a man from the Lord." But the devil has already put a seal on the sold one
his son Adam and Eve.

Ap. John, who sees incomparably deeper than the unrepentant mother,
writes: “Not like Cain, who was of the evil one.”

Christian spouses, know that if you fall into sin and do not repent,
having become silent in the church, then the first one born into your family after this,
may be marked with the “Seal of Cain.” Whether this is a broken life, bo-
Down's illness or bad character, or something like that, right down to
to the point of obsession. Numerous facts confirm the possibility of this
in most cases, although there are exceptions.

With such a mark, with such a daring character, the religious Cain
makes a sacrifice to God. But God did not look upon her. And not at all because
they interpret that Abel made a blood sacrifice as a prototype of the sacrifice of Christ.

And Cain is bloodless.

Everyone brought something from what they did. And today we serve the Lord
to those in which we are rich, we give to Him from our abilities and capabilities. At-
Whether the Lord will accept or reject our gift depends only on whose seal
appears in our lives - the stamp of belonging to the Lord or the devil
lu, to whom we not only give a place, but, at times, provide space
at the level of language, thoughts and actions, although we remain religious, as
Cain, and we even try to do something for God.

The meaning of the phraseological unit is the seal of Cain or the seal of Cain.

This term, previously often used, means betrayal, the person who betrayed and who, as
Cain, sentenced to punishment for treason. After all, Cain betrayed his brother by killing him, thus earning himself a seal.

Cain's seal Book. Express External signs of criminality on someone. - [ Now] people are afraid of me, they call me a “murderer”, but then I was still like a baby, this seal of Cain was not yet on me(Korolenko. Killer). - From the biblical myth about the murder by Cain, the son of Adam and Eve, of his brother Abel (this was the first murder on earth), as punishment for which God marked his face with a special sign. The name "Cain" became a common name for a serious criminal.

Phraseological dictionary of the Russian literary language. - M.: Astrel, AST. A. I. Fedorov. 2008.

See what the “Seal of Cain” is in other dictionaries:

CAIN'S SEAL- “CAIN’S PRINT”, Russia, FICTION BROADCASTING LAD, 1996, color, 41 min. Teletheatre. Based on the book by A. Rodin. The plot is based on the memoirs of Nikolai Martynov, who killed M. Lermontov in a duel. Cast: Igor Yasulovich (see YASULOVICH Igor Nikolaevich).... ... Encyclopedia of Cinema

Cain's seal- noun, number of synonyms: 1 sin of crime (1) ASIS Dictionary of Synonyms. V.N. Trishin. 2013… Synonym dictionary

CAIN'S SEAL- that the mark of an outcast or criminal. This implies committing actions, possessing characteristics that are rejected by society. This means that a person or group of persons (X), less often an organization (Z) are marked by obvious signs of the actions they have carried out... Phraseological Dictionary of the Russian Language

Cain's seal- this is a special sign with which, according to the Old Testament, God marked the eldest son of Adam and Eve. Cain is the first fruit of childbearing in sin. From birth he was gloomy, angry, and envious. These qualities pushed him to the terrible sin of fratricide... ... Fundamentals of spiritual culture (teacher's encyclopedic dictionary)

Cain's seal- wing. sl. In biblical myth, Cain is one of the sons of Adam and Eve; after he killed his brother Abel (this was the first murder on earth), God “made him a “sign” (Genesis, 4). The name Cain, which became a common noun for a serious criminal, monster,... ... Universal additional practical explanatory dictionary by I. Mostitsky

Cain's seal- Book Imprint, trace, external signs crime. /i> Goes back to the Bible. FSRY, 319; BMS 1998, 444 ...

"CAIN'S SEAL"- a special sign, the Crimea was marked by God, according to the Bible. legend, the eldest son of Adam and Eve Cain because he killed his brother Abel out of envy... Atheist Dictionary

Cain. Cain's seal- In the biblical myth, Cain is one of the sons of Adam and Eve; after he killed his brother Abel (this was the first murder on earth), God showed him a sign (Genesis, 4). The name Cain, which has become a household name for a serious criminal, monster, murderer,... ... Dictionary of popular words and expressions

SEAL- Cain's seal. Book Imprint, trace, external signs of crime. /i> Goes back to the Bible. FSRY, 319; BMS 1998, 444. Put/put a seal on someone, on what. Book Outdated Leave on whom l., on what l. trace of what l. impact, influence. F... ... Large dictionary of Russian sayings

DEMONIC SIGNS- in demonology it was believed that when concluding an agreement with Satan, the neophyte was given the mark of the devil, or the “seal of Satan.” It was a symbol of service to the forces of darkness. The devil's mark resembled a scar, birthmark or tattoo. It could have... Symbols, signs, emblems. Encyclopedia

Books

• Cain's seal. Biased study of the irreparable, V. G. Gitin. An unconventional study of the causes, motives and psychology of murder. Methods for identifying criminal tendencies using palmistry, physiognomy and astrology. Forensic workshop for…