What did Lemech mean when he added, "Because Kayin was avenged at seven [generations], and Lemech, seventy-seven"?
Rashi #1 1 : 'If Kayin, who killed on purpose, was granted a reprieve of seven generations. I, who killed inadvertently, should certainly be granted a reprieve 2 of many times seven.' 3
Ramban: Lemech's wives were worried that Lemech, like Kayin, would die for the sin of Kayin (since Hashem did not say that he had pardoned him, only that he would not be killed, but that his children would; only He did not say when. Consequently, in an effort to console them, he retorted that, seeing as, unlike Kayin, he was innocent of bloodshed, Hashem would certainly have mercy on him just as He had had mercy on Kayin, when like Kayin, he would Daven to Him.
Seforno: Lamenting the fact that he had killed Kayin and Tuval Kayin, Lemech was stating that, if Kayin suffered (seven) when he became a Na va'Nad, then he (Lemech) would suffer much more (seventy-seven) - mentally - for having killed his (grand)father and his son.
Da'as Zekenim (in Pasuk 15): 'Even if I will have seventy-seven children, they will all die', due to Hashem's promise to avenge whoever will kill Kayin.
What was Lemech coming to achieve, when he made this statement?
Rashi: He was trying to console his wives, who were afraid to have relations with him because they were destined to be wiped out shortly afterwards.
Seforno: Nothing; he was lamenting in grief.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "Lemech's wives began to abstain from [intimacy with] him, once they had fulfilled the [minimum] command to have children, 'Peru u'Revu' (1:28)." But women are not commanded regarding Peru u'Revu in the first place (see Rashi to 1:28)!
Gur Aryeh: Although a woman is not obligated to bear children, she receives reward for doing so, to the same degree as one who voluntarily performs a Mitzvah. Once Lemech's wives had done so, they wished to abstain.
Rashi writes: "They abstained once they had fulfilled 'Peru u'Revu,' because it had been decreed that Kayin's offspring be wiped out...." Mizrachi asks - If none of their offspring was destined to survive, Peru u'Revu should not have been a factor even regarding their initial four children?
Gur Aryeh: The verse, "He created it to be inhabited (la'Sheves Yetzarah)" (Yeshayah 45:18) teaches to fulfill Peru u'Revu, even in a case when the results will be temporary (Chayei Sha'ah); just as we violate Shabbos even to prolong life even for a short time (Yoma 85a). Certainly so in this case, for there was no indication that Hashem would carry out His decree imminently. 1
In the end, their initial Peru u'Revu turned out not to be temporary, but everlasting! Rashi (to 4:22) cites the Midrash that Tzilah's daughter Na'amah married Noach, and became the ancestress of all of mankind. Refer to 4:22:1:1** . (CS)
Rashi writes: "They abstained, once they had fulfilled [the minimum for] 'Peru u'Revu.'" Isn't it a Mitzvah to continue procreating even afterwards?
Gur Aryeh: The Mitzvah to continue procreating is expressed by the verse, "...Do not desist, for you do not know which [offspring] will turn out well..." (Koheles 11:6). In this case, they knew that neither their initial nor their future offspring would last.
Rashi writes: "They abstained, once they had fulfilled [the minimum for] 'Peru u'Revu.'" This seems difficult, because Peru u'Revu is not one of the 7 Mitzvos commanded to [Adam and] Noach?
Mizrachi: Although after Bnei Yisrael received the Torah, the Mitzvah of Peru u'Revu would apply only to them, prior to Matan Torah it applied to all of mankind. 1
Gur Aryeh: Bnei Noach receive reward to the same degree as one who voluntarily performs a Mitzvah. 2
See Gur Aryeh's discussion of Mizrachi's answer. Perhaps Peru u'Revu only became obligatory after the command was repeated in the times of Noach? (See Rashi to 9:7, and Gur Aryeh loc. cit.)
As Gur Aryeh answered above; refer to 4:24:2.1:1 .
Rashi writes: "Because it had been decreed that Kayin's offspring would be wiped out... They said, 'Why should we give birth for naught? Soon the flood will come and wipe away everything!'" Did the flood wipe out only the families of Kayin?
Gur Aryeh: Lemech's wives did not mean the great Flood in the times of Noach, which would destroy (almost) all of mankind. Rather, even prior to that, in the days of Enosh, the ocean rose up and flooded a third of the world (see Rashi to 6:4) -- the offspring of Kayin in particular.
Rashi writes: "This Kal va'Chomer is nonsense." But wasn't Lemech correct? Hashem suspends punishment against the righteous, to exact it upon later generations if they prove to be unworthy - and if He did so for Kayin, how much more so for Lemech?
Gur Aryeh: Hashem suspended Kayin's punishment because he did (or at least verbalized) Teshuvah. How does Lemech presume to know how his Teshuvah compares to that of Kayin? It must be that Lemech took into account only Kayin's deed, not his Teshuvah; and if so he has no basis to make a Kal va'Chomer.
