The twelfth chapter of the Book of Exodus contains the climax of
the Plagues against Egypt. In the
previous chapter, the Pharaoh repeatedly refuses Moses’ demand that the
Israelites be freed. This, despite the
increasing cost from his refusal. Now, Hashem
instructs Moses regarding the preparations for the Final Plague, Makat
Bechorot, the Slaying of the Firstborn.
The Israelites are to prepare a sacrifice, the Paschal Lamb, and
daub its blood on the lintels of their doorways. That way, when the Angel of Death moves
through Egypt taking the lives of the firstborn of every family, he will spare
the firstborn of the Israelites.
We know the
story. We read it every year. And yet, as the narrative turns to this
passage, it is difficult not to get caught up in the excitement of the drama. To experience it as if for the first time.
If you heard or read
my sermon from last week, you know that I consider the recitation of the
Plagues to be an essential part of the Seder.
Without it, we are robbed of the high drama and the full Glory of G-d’s
power. Maybe that’s why some liberals
want to expunge the Plagues. They want
the narrative to be stripped of its most compelling quality. They won’t admit this. They’ll say that we shouldn’t take delight at
others’ misfortune. No argument from me
on that point. But those who want to ban
our enjoying the Plagues, are often the most gleeful in their reactions to the
misfortune upon those, whom they oppose.
So if we are to
sympathise, at least on some level, with the Egyptians for the plagues that
they endured to the point of the Death of their Firsborn, how are we to
understand them? How are we to
understand Hashem, who exacted this terrible price from the Egyptians,
apparently for their leader’s obstinence?
Isn’t it shown to us earlier in the Torah that G-d wishes to relent from
punishing large numbers of people, even if a small number of righteous
individuals can be found among them?
Aren’t we taught, that the merit of the few can absolve the many? If so, how can one man’s continued refusal – even
when that one man is the Pharaoh – cause G-d to rain down such severe
judgement upon an entire people?
It’s a reasonable
question, but in asking it we reveal our ignorance concerning Ancient Egypt and
its laws and society. There’s far more
to the story of Egypt, than the fact that they were ruled over by a tyrannical
Pharaoh who singled out and enslaved the Israelite people.
Repeatedly in
history, subject people have suffered from the excesses of capricious rulers. Let’s use Nazi Germany as an example. There is no doubt that each and every German
citizen ultimately suffered for Hitler’s maniacal plans to conquer the world,
and in particular his using the Jewish people as a scapegoat for explaining all
of Germany’s problems. But as historian Daniel
Hagen showed us in his blockbuster Hitler’s Willing Executioners, Hitler
didn’t not feed his people anything they were unwilling to swallow. Sure there were individuals who resisted the
worst of the Nazi persecutions. But
Hitler did not invent the Germans’ antipathy toward the Jews, he only channeled
it. And not only that of the Germans,
but also of the Eastern Europeans. Even
in lands of the East which were brutally occupied and raped by the Nazis,
finding accomplices for the destruction of the Jews was not difficult. And for the Jews, finding assistance from
locals was – not only difficult, but mostly impossible.
Human nature is such
that most people, if their own status is secure, will not oppose a tyrannical
regime to defend someone who is less fortunate. And this is so even when the citizen does not
imperil himself by opposing the regime. How much more so, when it does! Even those who secretly think the regime evil,
will often acquiesce if it keeps them safe. Of course, this is a fallacy; any regime evil
enough to single some group or groups in society for persecution and annihilation,
will not hesitate to target other groups or individuals at its pleasure. People in their cowardice, often fail to see this
clearly. It should be
self-evident. But people want to
be convinced that their well-being is assured. So they will ignore – or even be coopted into –
evil as long as they’re not its target.
I think we can make
this assumption regarding the Ancient Egyptians. The Pharaoh enslaved the Israelites to a life
of heavy servitude on the counsel of his advisors, who expressed fear that this
‘Certain People’ among all the groups of resident aliens in Egypt, would form a
Fifth Column to rise up against his rule.
Given this behavior, I think it requires an extreme stretch of the
imagination to think that everybody else would get off scot-free! More likely, the Pharaoh used various means
and degrees to control everybody, native Egyptians being no exception. Remember how, later in our Torah narrative,
the Israelites in the desert rebel against Moses’ leadership? Sick of the sameness of their diet, they
proclaim to him: At least in Egypt,
we had meat to eat! While it is frequently
said that an army marches on its stomach, it is frequently ignored that civilian
populations can be controlled by rewarding them with food.
So we should not
mourn excessively for the Egyptians who suffered under the plagues. Surely some of them transcended the
persecution of the Israelites and tried to be kind to them. But given what we know of human history, we
should assume that most of the Egyptians were Pharaoh’s willing taskmasters.
One more thought on
the Slaying of the Firstborn. We know
that most ancient Near Eastern cultures, had a death-cult whose god required human
sacrifices. In particular, the Sacrifice
of the Firstborn. This is a repeating trope.
In Ancient Canaanite societies, the
sacrifice was to the Fire-god Moloch. Many
of the ancient societies of the Fertile Crescent, North Africa and Arabia had a
similar cult. The god who required this
sacrifice was considered the most awesome of a people’s gods, because this is
to many the Ultimate Sacrifice. Although
there is little evidence that this practice existed in Egypt, that does not
prove that it didn’t. It isn’t a stretch
to think that the Pharaoh, who was held as the chiefest of the gods, required
human sacrifice. Just because some
contemporary Egyptologists want to whitewash Ancient Egypt’s practices, doesn’t
mean that we should eagerly embrace this whitewashing.
The god requiring
the sacrifice of the firstborn was considered the most awesome, most powerful
of the gods. And we understand that
Pharaoh – and his people – were not going to budge on the issue of freedom for
the Israelites until they could see their G-d, Hashem, as being the most
awesome and powerful G-d: more than any
of the gods of Egypt, Pharaoh included. Given
all this, it is easier to understand why there was no serious movement to free
the Israelites until after the Slaying of the Egyptian Firstborn – which spared
the Israelite Firstborn. It is
self-evident in the narrative that this final act was not Hashem’s preference. The plagues began with acts that could have
been passed off as magicians’ tricks or natural acts, and escalated to the
point where Hashem had no other choice but to smite the Egyptian
firstborn. This ultimate plague must be
seen as being the consequence for the Pharaoh’s obstinance and his people’s complicity. And not because Hashem, the G-d
of the Israelites, desired it should happen.
So we remember the
Ten Plagues. And we understand that they
are an essential element of the story of our freedom. We don’t celebrate that it was necessary, for
our ancient forebears to fulfil their destiny.
But we do celebrate that the G-d we serve, was so steadfast in
His determination to overcome evil, that He reluctantly made it happen. Shabbat shalom.
No comments:
Post a Comment