5–7 Although these verses are cast in the literary form typical of
these chapters (vision|question|angelic interpretation), they differ from all
other instances of the form in two respects. The vision here is of an
individual rather than a cosmological phenomenon. The angel here described is
the object of the verb “to ask” rather than the subject of the verb “to answer”
at the beginning of a new sentence.
In this exegetical elaboration of
Gen 4:10, Abel’s blood—in Genesis, inanimate but personified—is understood as
the seat of נפשׁ (“life” or “soul”; cf. Gen 9:4), which in
this author’s anthropology is identified with רוח
(“spirit”). This spirit is in turn an active being, portrayed in terms familiar
to the Hellenistic world. It is like the restless spirit of the murdered
Clytemnestra (Aeschylus Eumenides
98), who cries out for revenge on the murderer.
The terminology in vv 5–6 is
especially close to 1 Enoch 9:2, 10, where the narrative of Genesis 6–9 has
been interpolated with the extraneous motif of the dead pleading for vengeance.
Both here and in 1 Enoch 6–11, the cry of the dead (and of the earth that has
soaked up the blood of the dead, 7:6; 9:2, 9; cf. Gen 4:11) continues to bring
accusation until divine judgment is executed against the murderer(s). Although
1 Enoch 22 was composed after chaps. 6–11, both may contain primitive elements
of a common, earlier exegetical tradition on Gen 4:10. Here “the spirit” of
Abel brings suit against his murderer and his seed. In chaps. 6–11, where the
souls (pl.) of men make accusation (9:2, 9), the anthropological term ψυχή (= נפשׁ)
more closely approximates the Genesis idea that נפשׁ
resides in the blood. The principal difference between 1 Enoch 9:2, 10 and
22:5–7 is in the plurality of souls and the single figure of Abel. As the
translators of G and E recognized, however, the author of the present passage
understood Abel as a type of those
violently put to death. This is suggested in v 7, with its reference to the
descendants of Cain, and is evident in v 12.
It is widely assumed that vv 5–7
depict Abel as the prototype of the martyred righteous. Later tradition clearly
regarded him as such, and the contrast between Cain’s and Abel’s sacrifices in
Gen 4:4–5 suggests such an interpretation.31 Nonetheless,
pre-Christian texts, including 1 Enoch, do not specifically attest such an
interpretation. The present passage, as well as 22:12 and chaps. 6–11,
emphasize not the righteousness of those who have been murdered, but the
violence of their murderers and the certain judgment that will befall them (see
comm. on chaps. 6–11 and 22:8–13).
The place of vv 5–7 in the
literary history of this chapter is less than certain. Wacker believes that v
12 is hardly understandable apart from vv 5–7 and suggests, therefore, that
they were probably added at the same time as vv 8–14. That vv 5–7 were added to
provide a context for v 12 is certain; however, the allusions to Gen 4:10 in 1
Enoch 9 already provide such a context, and 22:5–7 could have been added after
vv 8–14 to clarify further the meaning of v 12. (George W. E. Nickelsburg, 1 Enoch: A Commentary on the Book of 1 Enoch,
Chapters 1-36, 81-108 [Hermeneia—a Critical and Historical Commentary on
the Bible; Minneapolis, MN: Fortress, 2001), 305-6)
