Aggressor and Aggrieved
The Israelites find themselves in a new position in Parashat Beshallah. After generations of suffering as slaves to the pharaohs, and after decades of uncertainty about how and when their suffering might end, the Israelites are now staring backwards as their oppressors die violently.
讜址讬值旨讟蜘 诪止砖侄讈吱讛 讗侄转志讬指讚譁讜止 注址诇志讛址讬指旨謼诐 讜址讬指旨吱砖讎讈讘 讛址讬指旨譁诐 诇执驻职谞芝讜止转 讘止旨謾拽侄专謾 诇职讗值郑讬转指谞謹讜止 讜旨诪执爪职专址謻讬执诐 谞指住执郑讬诐 诇执拽职专指讗转謶讜止 讜址讬职谞址注值支专 讬职讛止讜指譀讛 讗侄转志诪执爪职专址謻讬执诐 讘职旨转芝讜止讱职 讛址讬指旨纸诐
讜址讬指旨砖只讈郑讘讜旨 讛址诪址旨謼讬执诐 讜址讬职讻址住旨证讜旨 讗侄转志讛指专侄謾讻侄讘謾 讜职讗侄转志讛址驻指旨郑专指砖执讈謹讬诐 诇职讻止诇謾 讞值郑讬诇 驻址旨专职注止謹讛 讛址讘指旨讗执芝讬诐 讗址讞植专值讬讛侄謻诐 讘址旨讬指旨謶诐 诇止纸讗志谞执砖职讈讗址芝专 讘指旨讛侄謻诐 注址讚志讗侄讞指纸讚
讜旨讘职谞值支讬 讬执砖职讉专指讗值譀诇 讛指诇职讻芝讜旨 讘址讬址旨讘指旨砖指讈謻讛 讘职旨转郑讜止讱职 讛址讬指旨謶诐 讜职讛址诪址旨证讬执诐 诇指讛侄诐謾 讞止诪指謹讛 诪执纸讬诪执讬谞指謻诐 讜旨诪执砖职旨讉诪止讗诇指纸诐
Moshe held his arm out over the sea, and at the break of day the sea returned to its normal flow, and the Egyptians fled from it, but God propelled the Egyptians into the sea.The waters turned back and covered the chariots and the riders of all the troops of Pharaoh who had come with them to the sea. Not a single one of them remained. But the Israelites had gone through the sea on dry land, for them the waters were like walls to their right and to their left. (Exod. 14: 27-28)[1]
What follows in the text of the Torah itself is unbridled jubilation. We read 鈥淎z Yashir,鈥� a triumphant song of military might in which we are told 鈥� That song, found in chapter 15 of Shemot, is part of the daily liturgy established by the rabbinic authorities.
Lest we miss the point, takes the death of the Egyptians by water as a chance to make a larger point: Israel鈥檚 enemies die in ways fitting to their wickedness. 鈥淓gypt was lashed in water because they glorified themselves through water [by killing Jewish babies in the Nile].鈥�[2] The Midrash then spends 12 pericopes detailing the deaths of the wicked men of the Bible from the generation of the flood to Nebuchadnezzar, Babylonian conqueror of Jerusalem. In classic midrashic fashion, this text utilizes other biblical verses to flesh out the imagery of the stories. The result is a series of violent vignettes, with the midrash dwelling on the 鈥渞ightness鈥� of the punishments of wicked people.
Tanhuma鈥檚 delight in the violent deaths of the wicked speaks to a satisfaction that can be derived from violence. Freud, in one of his earliest works, argued that violence, even abstracted violence through language, was a mechanism for working through trauma. 鈥淭he reaction of an injured person to a trauma has really only then a perfect 鈥榗athartic鈥� effect if it is expressed in an adequate reaction like revenge.鈥�[3] Freud lends his imprimatur here to the joy that humans can take in watching their foes suffer. In the absence of real violence, he believes humans can have similar catharsis from verbal or artistic depictions of suffering. The delight in this rabbinic text may be understandable, but it can trouble those of us committed to the universality of God鈥檚 creations.
Luckily for us, the rabbinic tradition never speaks with only one voice. This moment of violent catharsis comes with ambivalence for the Rabbis. In one of the most famous midrashim, we get insight into God-the-universalist鈥檚 reaction to the death of Israel鈥檚 foes:
讗指诪址专 专址讘执旨讬 砖职讈诪讜旨讗值诇 讘址旨专 谞址讞职诪指谉 讗指诪址专 专址讘执旨讬 讬讜止谞指转指谉: 诪址讗讬 讚执旨讻职转执讬讘 状讜职诇止讗 拽指专址讘 讝侄讛 讗侄诇 讝侄讛 讻讎旨诇 讛址诇指旨讬职诇指讛状? 讘职旨讗讜止转指讛旨 砖指讈注指讛 讘执旨拽职旨砖讈讜旨 诪址诇职讗植讻值讬 讛址砖指旨讈专值转 诇讜止诪址专 砖执讈讬专指讛 诇执驻职谞值讬 讛址拽指旨讚讜止砖讈 讘指旨专讜旨讱职 讛讜旨讗. 讗指诪址专 诇指讛侄谉 讛址拽指旨讚讜止砖讈 讘指旨专讜旨讱职 讛讜旨讗: 诪址注植砖值讉讛 讬指讚址讬 讟讜止讘职注执讬谉 讘址旨讬指旨诐 讜职讗址转侄旨诐 讗讜止诪职专执讬诐 砖执讈讬专指讛 诇职驻指谞址讬
Rabbi Shmuel son of Nachman says in the name of Rabbi Yohanan, 鈥淲hy does the Torah say [in Exodus 14:20] 鈥榌the Israelites and Egyptians] did not come near one to the other all night?鈥� In that moment, the ministering angels requested to sing a song before the Holy one, blessed be he. The Holy one, blessed be he said to them, 鈥楾he works of my hands are drowning in the sea, and you would sing a song before me?!鈥欌�� (Sanhedrin 39b)
By having God himself refer to the Egyptians as 鈥渢he works of my hands,鈥� the midrash reminds us of the overriding commonality in the human condition. From the perspective of God, there is no joy in violent death and suffering.
This midrash is today beloved for its humanistic bent. It is often employed as a demonstration of the pathos of rabbinic Judaism. It is not, however, more or less authoritative than the pornographic violence of Tanhuma. Rabbinic Jews鈥攍ike the Israelites in the Torah鈥攈ad both the capacity to see the divine spark in all of God鈥檚 creatures, and also had the drive towards aggression as a way to face their own trauma.
We are the same. There are moments in our lives as Jews when we face the trauma of the world around us鈥攊n America and in Israel, with our families and in public鈥攁nd feel an inclination towards cathartic violence, whether rhetorical or real. That is human, and it is Jewish. But equally human and equally Jewish is to meet the drive with what to look at our erstwhile targets and see the humanity within. We are the Israelites, but we are also the Egyptians.
This redemptive power of knowing that we are both aggressor and aggrieved underpins the yirah (awe/fear) at the core of our relationship with God. when God warns the Israelites of what will happen to them if they fail to keep the covenant, medieval commentator The Israelites leaving Egypt saw their foes suffering, and they did rejoice, but Rashi tells us that they also were able to see that this suffering was not something they would necessarily be spared. Even the chosen people are vulnerable to suffering, and though we may have base passions, we also have the capacity to rise above them when we see the humanity in the other.
Even at moments when we see our foes wracked with pain, perhaps pain that we feel they deserve, we have the opportunity, and the obligation, to see ourselves in them. Only this can stop the cycle of violent trauma that persisted in our parsha, where the victims glorified retributive violence and the sea became littered with the corpses of the work of God鈥檚 hands.
[1] Translations by Dr. Phil Keisman
[2] Note that in his translation on Sefaria.org, Samuel Berman explains 鈥済lorified themselves by water鈥� as referencing Pharaoh鈥檚 claiming that he created the Nile in Ezekiel 29:3. This requires ignoring the use of the verb 鈥溩┳犠捵愖曗�� in its plural form in order to make Pharaoh the subject of the sentence.
[3] Joseph Breuer and Sigmand Freud, Studies in Hysteria. Translation A. A. Brill. (Nervous and Mental Health Disease Publishing, 1936).
