Martin Neimoller famously said after World War II, “First they came for the socialists, and I didn’t speak out because I was not a socialist. Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out because I was not a trade unionist. Then they came for the Jews, and I didn’t speak out because I was not a Jew.
Then they came for me, and there was no one left to speak for me.”
I’m reminded of this quote by a fascinating midrash pliyah, a cryptic teaching on this week’s parshah. When Iyov learned that Nadav and Avihu had passed away, he became frightened and none of his friends were able to comfort him. The chida, presents a magnificent explanation on what bothered Iyov so much.
The Gemara in Baba Basra provides a little known backstory to Paroh’s decree against the Jewish people. Paroh was increasingly intimidated by their growing population. In trying to find a solution, Paroh sought the advice of his three advisors, Bilam, Yisro and Iyov. Bilam, being the anti Semite that he was, suggested that all the Jewish baby boys be thrown into the Nile.
Yisro protested, saying that it would be unwise and evil to harm the Jewish people. Paroh did not take kindly to Yisro’s words. In fact, Yisro was forced to flee to Midyan because of the danger to his life. Observing this, Iyov decided to remain silent. What good would it be to protest the decree, he thought.
Clearly, Paroh was set on killing the Jewish babies. It would only place his own life in danger. So, although Iyov felt it was wrong, he remained silent. Iyov was always perturbed by his inaction. Perhaps he should have protested, despite the danger. When Iyov heard the news that Nadav and Aviyu had passed, the magnitude of his mistake hit him.
The Gemara in Sanhedrin explains that the reason Nadav and Aviyu passed away was because one time they were walking behind Moshe and Aaron, Nadav turned to Aviyu and said, “when will these two old men pass away so that we can take over their leadership?” Now, this explains why Nadav was punished, because he was the one who brazenly challenged and wished ill upon Moshe and Aaron.
But what did Avihu do wrong? He heard it and remained silent. He didn’t protest, and his silence was held against him. Now we could understand what triggered Iyov’s fear, says the Chida. He realized that his silence was complicity. In other words, inaction is a form of action. Not voting is a form of voting.
His lack of courage and protest was a part of the problem. Silence can be deafening, and what you don’t say can speak louder than any words. And it was this recognition that made Iyov fully regret his past inactivity. Our voice holds tremendous power, as does its absence. Put differently, being kind to the cruel, we are taught, is in effect being cruel to the kind.
Let us always remember that. Wishing you a wonderful Shabbos.
