Fear No Fear

(All scripture from the World English Bible, ebible.org, all rights reserved)

“Noah began to be a farmer, and planted a vineyard. He drank of the wine and got drunk. He was uncovered within his tent. Ham, the father of Canaan, saw the nakedness of his father, and told his two brothers outside. Shem and Japheth took a garment, and laid it on both their shoulders, went in backwards, and covered the nakedness of their father. Their faces were backwards, and they didn’t see their father’s nakedness.”
(Genesis 9:20-23)

It takes time to grow a vineyard and for it to produce grapes. And then more time to create the wine from the grapes. This is not immediately after the Flood and COULD have been many years afterward. The bible does not give us an exact timeline – since it in no way affects the story.

This is the first time that drunkenness is mentioned in scripture. There are scholars who believe that this is the first time that wine was made. As one man of God said, that might have made Noah innocent of this in some ways because he would have had no idea that drunkenness would result from the wine. It’s really hard to say and not really our place. God knows his heart and God dealt with it.

The plain reading of this is that Ham entered his parent’s tent and saw (the Hebrew word has connotations of lingering, enjoyment, or marking it as significant; so this wasn’t a quick glimpse but a revelling in it in some way) Noah was passed out naked, and then took joy in telling his brothers about it – probably in a lewd or mocking way. That is bad enough as we aren’t to take joy at the misfortune of others (Proverbs 24:17-18) and we are to honour our parents (Ephesians 6:2). But there are clues that this was much more significant of an act.

Leviticus 18:7-17 delineates forbidden sexual relationships. The wording is very clear throughout, but we’ll look at two of them: “‘You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father, nor the nakedness of your mother: she is your mother. You shall not uncover her nakedness. “‘You shall not uncover the nakedness of your father’s wife. It is your father’s nakedness.” (Leviticus 18:7-8). Having sex with your father is uncovering his nakedness. Having sex with your mother OR your father’s wife (step-mother) is uncovering your father’s nakedness. Deuteronomy 22:30 corroborates this. Also, when Reuben sleeps with his father’s concubine (Genesis 35:22), it results in his being cursed for the despicable act – losing his birthright (Genesis 49:3-4). This is a sexual sin. This is serious. So in context, Ham went in and found either Noah or his mother drunk and took sexual advantage of them. This is the kind of depravity that was common before the Flood. Violence (sexual, mental, physical, emotional, etc) was prevalent in the world. It was the reason the world got judged. No one said Ham was godly. Noah’s family was saved out of mercy because of Noah’s godliness. Also, the devil doesn’t stop tempting us or whispering to us just because we get saved by God. He wants to kill EVERYONE and corrupt EVERYTHING (John 10:10). He doesn’t leave anyone alone. Obviously, he got a hook into Ham and didn’t let go. Ham didn’t keep the door closed and did not use a relationship with God to keep sin subdued (Genesis 4:7). Ham indulged in sexual sin with one or the other of his parents, and then he bragged on it.

There is another clue. Ham is mentioned as the father of Canaan – before any genealogy is given. No mother is mentioned, but that isn’t unusual since the ancient world followed the male line (the seed, not the egg). When Noah wakes up (starting in tomorrow’s verse) and hears about this violation, he includes Canaan in the curses. Why? I think in context it is clear that Ham slept with his mother and she got pregnant and Canaan was the result. The child of incest was included in the curse. Fair? Not to a modern mind and maybe not at all. But if Noah was going to curse kids (his own grandkids), why single out this one? Why not all of Ham’s sons (he had four of them)? Also, the phrase ‘he saw’ was also used in Genesis 34:2 to describe a lustful longing that also led to rape. Same words used. So I believe Ham entered the tent where his parents lived. He saw them passed out, possibly both physically naked, lustfully lingered on his mother’s form, and raped her. She ended up becoming pregnant with Canaan and when Noah learned of it all, cursed Ham and the child of the rape.

Ham bragged about it with his brothers, but they didn’t share his lustful longings. They did not indulge. They entered the tent backwards with a garment between them and laid it on the naked form – I assume they walked until they saw the feet and then covered the body. They did not look. They did not ‘see’. They did not linger. They respected and honoured the person (whether Noah or their mother) and did not in ANY way expose them to their sight. This was godly. This was protective. This was honourable.

The sage Radak writes: ‘וירא, by feasting his eyes on his father’s nudity, Cham showed that he was the father of Canaan, i.e. that his son already had inherited a genetic flaw. The additional impropriety he committed was that he told his brothers about it, instead of first covering his father’s nudity.’

Torah: The Women’s Commentary writes: ‘nakedness. Heb. ervah, which differs from the word for naked in Genesis 2:25 (arumim). Ervah always has sexual connotations; uncovering relatives’ ervah incurs severe punishment under the Sinai covenant (see, for example Leviticus 18:6–19 and 20:10–21).’

The sage Sforno takes a completely different view: ‘וירא חם אבי כנען את ערות אביו, he saw the shameful deed his son כנען had done to his father Noach when he had castrated him. (according to some of our sages in Sanhedrin 70) According to the historian Berussi Hacaldaii, (compare Genesis 6,9) Canaan castrated his grandfather not surgically, but by some means of sorcery. His father Cham watched his son invoke the witchcraft without protesting or trying to stop him. Disgrace, shame, is also called ערוה, “nakedness.” Compare Ezra 4,14 וערות מלכא לא אריך לנא למחזא “it is not right that we should see the king being disgraced.” Also, in Deuteronomy 21,4 the expression ערות דבר does not refer to either literal nakedness, or to sexual licentiousness, or incest, but refers to “a disgraceful thing.” ויגד לשני אחיו בחוץ, he revealed that he had enjoyed what his son had done.’

The sage Siftei Chakhamim writes: ‘Some of our Sages say, he castrated him. Others say, he sodomized him.’