Cain and Abel

 Manslaughter has several degrees of seriousness depending on the victim, as exemplified through the story of Adam's 2 sons, whom the Quran does not name as it eloquently and concisely draws its audience's attention to the story's core precepts without distracting it with names of persons and places

5:27"And relate to them the story of the two sons of Adam with truth". 

It is interesting to note the repetitve stress on re-establishment of the truth, most often when the Quran recounts an incident already known for long by its addressees but transmitted in a convoluted and/or purposefully obscured manner.

As will be shown below, the Quran sheds light on at least 2 crucial events within the whole narrative that are strikingly absent from the HB. These details have important implications and ramifications not only for the protagonists but for all mankind; the reason for the rejection of one brother's offering, derogatorily referred to with al akhar. It means "remaining", he remains after first introducing the virtuous brother. The word also creates a kind of disdain and distancing between the sinful character and the audience/reader. The second issue the Quranic narrative tacles is the killing of the other brother, how it was unjustifiable from every possible angle.

For brevity's sake, the 2 brothers will be given their Biblical names.

Abel first sought reforming his brother. He pointed that the offering was rejected due to his sinfulness or lack of piety (the divine approval/disapproval might have manifested itself through inspiration, either to Abel or his father the prophet Adam). He should thus focus on his inner self, reassessing his spirituality and mend his ways instead of being envious 5:27. The nature of the offering in itself is not important, so long as it is done with sincerity and God-consciousness, hence the Quran's silence on the things both brothers offered

 22:37"There does not reach Allah their flesh nor their blood, but to Him is acceptable the guarding (against evil) on your part; thus has He made them subservient to you, that you may magnify Allah because He has guided you aright; and give good news to those who do good (to others)".

 

This is a major point driven through by the Quran. In the HB, God disdainfully rejects Cain's offering for no other reason that

Gen4:3"Cain brought the fruit of the soil" 

while Abel 

"brought the firstborn of his flocks and the fattest, and the Lord turned to Abel and to his offering"

This sacrificial rite is no more than a symbol of a conscious, selfless offering in God's name of something one cherishes as necessary and valuable. It is not an attempt to "appease" Him who is far above anything that resembles human emotion, nothing of His creation can disturb Him 35:44. Ultimately anything offered to Allah in God consciousness counts as of equal value and merit than a blood offering as stated in 22:37 above. The primary issue is to remain aware of Allah during this universal rite

 22:34"To every people did We appoint rites, that they might celebrate the name of God over the sustenance He gave them" 

The Quran recognizes the universality of this rite, and then restores it to the right, original course; glorifying God alone, first and foremost.

It is when one loses Allah's pleasure from sight in the process, such as by having one's intentions polluted with sinfulness as occurred to Cain, or by having other deities or motives in mind, that the offering is invalidated. The merit does not lie in the intrinsic value or nature of the offering. Even fasting for Allah's sake by the one who cannot afford an offering is a valid substitute 2:196. 

Although the HB echoes that reality when it says 

Ps50:8-14"..Will I eat the flesh of bulls or do I drink the blood of he-goats? Slaughter for God a confession and pay the Most High your vows". 

 Yet in other places, YHWH is depicted as physically delecting with the offering

Lev1:9"Then, the kohen shall cause to [go up in] smoke all [of the animal] on the altar, as a burnt offering, a fire offering, [with] a pleasing fragrance to the Lord". 

This is reminiscent of ancient mythologies, more particularily Babylonian, where the gods would partake in the offering together with the offerer. In the HB numbers18 the priests making the offering are the only ones allowed to eat from the dead animal. Gods do not sit on the same table as the laymen. The Quran in sharp contrast allows to

22:28-36"eat of them and feed the poor man who is contented and the beggar; thus have We made them subservient to you, that you may be grateful".

Finally, regardless of Cain's decision, Abel said he will not attempt murdering his brother in return, on account of his deep God-consciousness. Cain is now left with no reason to carry on with his death threats. Abel this way left the entire burden of manslaughter on his brother, not sharing any responsibility for having caused this action, for example by threatening Cain back with death, or fighting back so fiercely that he puts Cain's life in danger

5:28"If you will stretch forth your hand towards me to slay me, I am not one to stretch forth my hand towards you to slay you surely I fear Allah, the Lord of the worlds". 

Cain apparently did not show any sign of reform, prompting Abel, despite his initial pleas, to openly declare his enmity towards his brother, making it clear to him what would be the eternal consequences of what he was about to commit

5:29"Surely I want that you should bear my sin and your sin, and so you would be of the inmates of the fire, and this is the recompense of the unjust". 

Abel wanted his brother to carry the burden of "my sin and your sin". It is speaking of 2 specific sins, in the singular. The context shows what these 2 specific sins are; Abel's unjust murder ie "my sin", and Cain's sinfulness, his refusal to reform himself despite the repeated pleas of his brother, leading to him being bent on murdering his brother ie "your sin". Certain commentators have erroneously assumed the word was in the plural, concluding that the murder transfered the victim's past sins to the criminal.

Again, Abel at no point denies he will defend himself and fight back if he sees Cain coming with the purpose of realizing his death threats. He didnt say "I wont defend myself and will let you do whatever you want with me" he only said "I do not intend, under any circumstances, to kill you".

 

Despite his brother's increased admonitions, from gentle pleas and pointing the wrong ways, to threatening him with hellfire should he commit the crime, Cain slew Abel. The victim was not only innocent of any wrongdoing, but did not even raise his hand with the intention of killing him while he defended himself. What made matters worse, Cain knew beforehand that Abel would never under any circumstance pose a threat to his life. With his crime, Cain had established an evil precedent among the sons of Adam. This precedent has found its way all throughout the history of mankind, down to our present days

"The Prophet said, "None is killed unjustly, but the first son of Adam will have a part of its burden." Sufyan said, "...a part of its blood because he was the first to establish the tradition of murdering". 

The hadith speaks of the concept of misleading others into sin. We will never establish the chain of events linking our current experiences and actions all the way to the first sons of Adam. But this hadith tells us the connection exists, so much so that whenever an unjust murder is comitted, Cain is burdened with SOME of that sin, not all of it. This is simple common sense as one cannot be held fully responsible for a crime he was enticed into comitting. It does not take away one's responsibility in the sin, rather determines the level of involvement of every individual.

God knows very well those who conceal or misconstrue the Truth 41:40 and such sin causes the rejection from God's grace, rejection by men and angels alltogether 2:161. This type of human and spiritual injustice is "fitna", not based on any reasonable evidence and knowledge but instead on inner desires, wordly interests, blind attachement to inherited ways, and the Quran logically explains that the misleaders shall bear their own burden of sins as well as the responsibility of misleading others -intentionally or not- into sin 4:85,16:25,29:12-13 without diminishing from the moral responsibility and consequent requital of those they mislead 14:21,43:36-9. Once more, misleaders do not take away the share of responsibility of a person in his sin, because none bears the burden of other people's sins 17:13-15,53:38-42. Misleaders share their own burdens in those specific sins which they enticed others into committing. Thus each one shares his full burden of responsibility within one and the same sin. This why the Quran keeps warning to guard

36:45"against that which is before you and that which is behind you"

  the "before" referring to the action one is about to perform and "behind" is the consequence of this action, referred to as the footsteps one leaves behind

36:12,37:69-70,43:22"they say: We found our fathers on a course, and surely we are guided by their footsteps". 

There is a reason why, in sura fatiha, we seek example from people of the past confirmed to have succeeded spiritually, hence the use of the past alladhina anaamta alayhim.

This story of Adam's 2 sons establishes that in the next life, punishment is a matter of degrees, where a murderer can get a more severe punishment depending upon the person he killed. The one slain was innocent of any wrongdoing, even warned his brother that was about to kill him, tried reforming him, and finally pointed the grave consequences of his sins. But this familial tragedy was about to repeat itself, as the murderous Israelites were trying by all means to put an end to their Ishmaelite brother's life, despite his calls to reforms, there being no reasons for them to threaten and attack him, and his warnings of hellfire should they carry on with their deadly intentions. The Jews of the prophet's time were not only trying to kill a man innocent of any wrongdoing against them and in general, but were trying to kill a prophet of God as their forefathers tried doing and sometimes succeeded against the prophets raised from among themselves and who called them to adhere to their own Books which they had thrown behind their backs and forgotten. The story of the 2 sons of Adam ends with a reminder of a lesson they knew very well

5:32"For this reason did We write upon the children of Israel that whoever slays a soul, unless it be for manslaughter or for mischief in the land, it is as though he slew all men; and whoever keeps it alive, it is as though he kept alive all men".