The Sacrifices of the Righteous

“Calamity befalls the world only when wicked people are in the world, but the calamity begins only with the righteous first…”

This powerful and thought-provoking line comes from the Talmud, from Masechet Bava Kamma. It continues: “as it is stated in the verse: “If a fire breaks out, and catches in thorns, so that a stack of grain, or standing grain, or the field, is consumed.”

The Sages of the Talmud here quote a verse from our Torah portion Mishpatim. The verse lays down a law according to which, if one started a fire, and the fire got out of control and consumed standing piles of grain (even without the fault of the fire starter,) the fire starter is responsible to pay for the damage. 

Our sages took this verse to be more allegorical. They compared the fire to a calamity which one does not have control over, calamity which may start at no fault of one's own, and becomes fueled and spread by thorns (the wicked) but unfortunately consumes the righteous first (the standing piles of grain.)

In September 1975, Jewish philosopher Emmanuel Levinas stood in front of the colloquium of Jewish intellectuals in France and chose this Talmudic reading for his talk. The topic of the conference was war. Specifically, the Yom Kippur War which just ended:

When our sages spoke of “calamity” (Por’anut) they were referring to a plague, referencing the plague of the slaying of the first born, but also mentioning disease and famine.  

“Once permission is granted to the destroyer to kill, it does not distinguish between the righteous and the wicked. And not only that, but it begins with the righteous first, as it is stated in the verse: “And will cut off from you the righteous and the wicked”

Levinas suggested that just so happens in war. In his words:

“These are also the effects of war. Is it possible to deduce the essence of war from this starting point? Or to deduce what is more war than war? Perhaps this is where our reading will, in fact, take us.”

Why would the righteous die first, by a war which was fueled by the wicked?

One possible reading offered by Levinas is this:

“Injustice within society would give rise to external armies…the righteous are responsible for evil before anyone else is. They are responsible because they have not been righteous enough to make their justice spread and abolish injustice: it is the fiasco of the best which leaves the coast clear for the worst…”

This very depressing reading of Levinas puts the responsibility for violence in the hands of the best of us, who perhaps did not do enough to cast the darkness away and left room for it to grow.

Levinas was not entirely satisfied with this reading and so he offered another:

“Another reading: it is the righteous who pay for the wickedness of evil. Here again we have a violence which is not chaotic: the righteous are yet distinct from the wicked. Our text would not be completely pessimistic. The priority of the righteous would be upheld: the priority of the righteous would be due to his laying himself open to sacrifice. Good is the nonresistance to evil and the gift of atonement.”

Here in this second and almost opposite reading, Levinas does not put the responsibility of evil on the righteous, but rather portrays them as sacrifices on the altar of evil’s existence. Perhaps there is consolation in that.

A third reading by Levinas, of another Talmudic dialogue on the subject suggests: “...the saints and the righteous, being first to disappear, will not see the evils coming upon the world. A relative consolation, last echo of rationality in the half open abyss.”

In this third reading the poor consolation is that by dying first, the righteous will be spared witnessing the growing evil in the world.

Some consolation… But don’t we all need some? Can’t we all use some Nechama?

What we have been experiencing in the past days, weeks and months is hard to rationalize. There is no consolation for the senseless death of the righteous. Perhaps what Levinas wanted to convey was that you cannot rationalize something which is not rational to begin with.

As he wrote himself: “...Perhaps in the end the reason of war consists in the very turning upside down of reason.”

Rest in peace Kfir and Ariel, and may your souls be bound in the bond of life forever.