Balaam, Yithro, and Job

The Book of Job, part 3: Balaam, Yithro, and Job

n the Talmud there is an Aggadic reference to the great three non-Jewish prophets at the time of the Exodus: Job, Jethro (Yithro) and Balaam. When Pharaoh was deciding whether to kill the baby Hebrew boys he consults the three. Balaam tells him to kill the Jews, Jethro to spare them and Job, who does not agree with the plan, says nothing.

This changes the script. Job goes from being the righteous, but tested, individual who, whilst not perfect, is not guilty of any specific sin to one who has committed a grievous act. He has stood by in a situation where he could have saved lives.

The Talmud and Torah clearly see Jethro, Moses' father-in-law, in a heroic light. In the Jewish tradition he is seen as a someone who helps the Jewish people, organises them and according to this Aggadah he tries to save them. Balaam is portrayed as the evil prophet of his day. In the Torah he tries to curse the Israelites. So, in the language of Raoul Hilberg, the post-Holocaust philosopher, whilst Jethro is a "rescuer" and Balaam is a "perpetrator", Job is has the role of "the bystander". And we are told it is for this reason he is punished.

In a word full of human rights violations can we ever stand by, or do we acquire guilt by not acting?

In philosophical responses to the Holocaust (Shoah), Karl Jaspers, a German intellectual who was victimised by the Nazis on account of his Jewish wife, wrote a book in 1945 on The Question of German Guilt. The book tries to move away from concept of collective guilt and with reason . For Jaspers, collective guilt removes the burden of individual responsibility. The individuals are able to blame genocide on the state or even the times they live in. Instead, Jaspers focuses on four types of individual guilt in relation to the Shoah: legal, political, moral and metaphysical.

Legal is simple enough: an individual has guilt for a specific breach of the law. Political guilt for Jaspers comes as a result of engaging in the political system within Nazi Germany. Moral guilt is were you wrestle with your own conscience of whether you did do something or could have done something more and justify that to G-d. Metaphysical guilt is where you are torn by the fact that you survived when others in your midst were taken away and murdered.

Applying this concept to this Aggadic story: Job's individual guilt may not be legal unless you suppose he was in some way guilty of a crime through omission. However, we can assume by this story a form of moral guilt. He could of done more and he should have done more. He's a prophet after all.

A prophet not fulfilling their duty is certainly not unique to Job. Jonah, for example, tried to run away and is challenged by G-d. However, for us non-prophets, do we have any responsibility in a world where billions of people are under the poverty line and millions die of starvation, curable diseases and in conflict?

The answer is surely yes. The moral guilt that Jaspers assigned to many living in Germany can be at some level apply to us today in terms of our attitudes to the suffering in the world at large. We have the power to act and therefore have responsibility. Our obligation is writ large when there is suffering in our own city or our own streets, and the Jewish philosopherMaimonides taught that charity must start first with those in need on our street because it is precisely there we can make the biggest impact. The only way we can break free of this guilt is to act in order to alleviate the suffering of others.

The Aggadic version of the story of Job is a challenge to us all. It is a reminder of the main theme of the Torah. When Cain kills Abel and is questioned by G-d, Cain asks "Am I my brother's keeper?". G-d's answer is contained within the rest of the Torah and it's a resounding 'yes'.

If Job did stay silent when a genocidal plan was revealed to him then his guilt is clear. And if we do nothing in a world full of suffering then we are responsible too.