There is a structural resemblance between the Chiastic editing structure of the Cain and Able parable and the Garden of Eden story and this is an invitation to consider the two parables to be equivalent in a certain sense when it comes to interpreting the meaning of both short myths. The parable of Cain and Able, which borrows the structure of the Eden story, can be seen as the same story told again in a different way, and thus the Cain and Able story is best understood, following the clues embedded in the editing structure, as a commentary on the meaning of the parable of Eden.
While the chiastic editing structure introduces a thematic similarity between the two parables, substitutions are made in the symbolism within the structure. This editing technique is deliberate and indicates that it was the author's intent that the symbols themselves be understood by the final reader to be interpreted as commentary on a similar theme. In the Cain sequence, the apple of Eden is replaced by another symbol of consumption, sacrifice of food products. The snake is replaced by sin, personified as a lurking predator. Dualism is present in both parables (two trees, one acceptable, one unacceptable in the Garden story, and two sacrifices, only one of which was acceptable, in the Cain story). Both stories include a prohibition, and in the Cain parable the snake character, in the form of sin, is also involved in encouraging Cain to violate the prohibition. In both cases Yahweh goes looking for the truth, confronts the offender, a curse is pronounced followed by a hard exile. The story of the Mark of Cain, the curse against escalating blood feuds, concludes both stories, with the story of Lamech and the ever increasing curse concluding the Cain story, and completing the chiastic editing structure in mimicry of the Eden parable.
Chiasm is an identifiable editing technique, and when manuscripts are composed that employ this technique it is obvious that an attentive reader is being invited to consider these structural similarities when interpreting the intended meaning of the parables. The thematic similarities between the two parables are emphasized by the chiastic editing structure, with the repetition of the genealogy and the story of the Mark of the Cain an obvious structural pointer to the Eden parable, indicating that it was the intent of the original author that these two parables should be read as commentary upon one other. The new meanings attached to familiar symbols in the Cain and Able parable emphasized the religious interpretation of the symbolism in the Garden Parable (the intended meaning was that everything that happened in Garden should be understood as a religious conflict).
The author of the two parables was from the Yahweh school of prophecy, and the prophets were treated like Able, according to the testimony of the Bible. The dualism of both parables is a feature of Jewish prophecy in general, in that it was the strongly held belief of the Yahweh prophets that you had good religion and you had bad religion. The reaction their criticism provoked is symbolized by Cain, enraged that, for reasons not spelled out in the parable, his religion was rejected by Yahweh. This would put the Cain character on the wrong side of a prophet's mouth, no doubt, and as the Bible testifies, this would put Able either in the grave or out in the wilderness, which is where prophets were exiled in those days (if they wanted to live). The theme of Cain plotting against Able permeates the books of Jewish prophecy and when it is found reflected in a sequence of parables composed by Yahweh mythogists the connection is to clear to ignore. The controversies over divine knowledge and the validity of the Torah regulations found in the prophets and the ideology of the Levites is also alluded to in the polar opposite religious imagery of the Cain story. This is typical of the strongly dualistic portrayal of religion as being either good or evil, so characteristic of the Yahweh school of prophecy. The same conflict can be found reflected in the symbol of the two trees, and the forbidden apple which promised to make a person 'wise, like Yahweh'.
When the author(s) of the parable sequence made the deliberate choice to link the two parables by having the structure of the Cain sequence echo the Garden sequence, such a transparent structural device is an obvious invitation to the reader to consider that some sort of relationship can be assumed to exist between these two parables, and the logical assumption is that the second parable in the sequence, the story of Cain, was intended as a commentary expanding on the intended meaning of the symbolism of the Garden of Eden myth. We can then assume that the stark dualism between symbols of good and evil, present in both parbles, can be considered to be represent the same thing in both cases.
The Cain parable provides the reader with a commentary on the meaning of the dualistic symbols in the Garden parable (the trees) by alluding to the 'Cain and Able' tradition woven into the story of the Jewish prophets and their conflicts with the Priests and Kings. By using structure to allude to the Eden story and then altering the symbols the author was helping to tie the interpretation of the Eden parable to the meaning of the Cain parable, which was less enigmatic and used the symbols in such a way that the meaning would be familiar to those who had read the prophets of Yahweh (the Cain and Able conflict over religion is one of the principle themes of Jewish prophecy, and thus familiar to the reader). That the author assumed that the reader was familiar with the Yahweh school is demonstrated in the way symbols are introduced and never explained (it is not explained why Able's sacrifice is accepted while Cain's religious practice was rejected). The theme of religious conflict and persecution, as well as the dualistic religious symbolism are all familiar themes in the writings of the Yahweh school, and when looked at in this way, the allusion to the traditions of Yahweh prophecy is clear. The author provides no explanation, for none is needed. The Cain parable provides commmentary on the Garden parable by giving a religious meaning to the dualistic symbolism (defined, without further explanation, as good and bad religion, a major theme of the Yahweh school of prophets).
There are many ways to interpret myth and story. However, it seems to me that to respect any author or any school of thought, we need to consider what the original intent of the author was, or something is lost (namely, their voice, and that is unfortunate). In this search for the voices of those composed the stories in the Bible, the editorial structure provides important clues. Since this structural device was deliberately chosen it must be accepted and understood if we are to respect the voice of the author, since this technique was chosen by the author. Because the technique employed is obvious (and chiasm is a frequent editorial technique employed in Biblical manuscripts) it was the original intent of the author that the two parables be appreciated not simply by interpreting the surface by also by considering the implications of the structural devices employed to link the symbolism employed in the two parables. When an author or a later editor chooses a chiastic structure this choice of literary device then becomes an important factor in interpreting the intended meaning of the symbolism employed by the myth makers, and appreciating the structure of myth itself is to show respect for the voice of the original story tellers, since this is how they chose to tell their stories.
A Unified Field Theory
The Unified Field Theory
is also available as a zip file -> unified.zip
Introduction :The Pioneer Effect and the New Physics. A brief description of the new physics required to explain the 'Pioneer Effect', which is the constant deceleration of space craft as they fly through space.