Despite experiencing makkah after makkah, Pharaoh did not fully give in. Why didn’t Pharaoh want to save himself and his country and agree to let the Jews out? Why did he instead choose to be vulnerable and to suffer the consequences of the disastrous makkot?

From the comments of Rabbeinu Bechayei ont our parsha, Rav Henach Leibowitz seems to derive that it was Pharoah’s middah of cruelty which influenced him to refrain from listening to Hashem and allowing Bnei Yisrael to leave, thus subjecting himself to the first five makkot; it was this middah that caused Pharaoh to be cruel not only to others but even to himself! Thus, because he was cruel to himself, he essentially chose to be subjected to the catastrophic makkot instead of allowing Bnei Yisrael to leave Mitzrayim.

Rav Leibowitz points to another place in the Torah where we find how the middah of cruelty caused one to be cruel to himself, and that is when Esav disparaged the bechora. The Ramban explains that “Esav’s disparagement of the bechorah was due to the cruelty of his heart,” meaning, as Rav Leibowitz explains, that Esav was cruel to himself.

From all this we see, as Rav Leibowitz seems to point out, that the middah of cruelty doesn’t discriminate between one person and another—if one possesses this middah he might not only end up being cruel to others, but also to himself and his loved ones. However, the same works in the opposite realm as well: If one is merciful, kind and giving, he will end up being kind and doing chesed not only to others, but also to himself (see Chidushei HaLev, Bo, 10:11).

This can perhaps teach us how beneficial it is to work on overcoming cruelty and callousness and instead to grow in mercy and kindness; by doing so we also gain personally and in a practical sense, for we may end up being kind to others as well as to ourselves, instead of the opposite.

Perhaps we can elaborate on Rav Leibowitz’s insight. The implication from the Ramban and Rabbeinu Bechayei perhaps is that had Pharoah and Esav not harbored the middah of cruelty, then they would have chosen properly—Pharaoh would have listened to Hashem and let the Jews out, and Esav would not have disrespected the glorious bechorah. Ironically, however, we can suggest that both Pharaoh and Esav might have thought that they were actually benefiting from doing the evil they did when in reality they were in fact being cruel to themselves, and they might not have even been aware that they were motivated by the middah of cruelty and were essentially harming themselves! They might have thought they were doing themselves a favor, while objectively speaking they were, ultimately, causing themselves pain and grief.

This can perhaps teach us that our middot—and in this particular context —the middot of cruelty and compassion may largely impact the decisions we make in life, and that by improving in compassion and chesed, our ability to refrain from choosing that which is not beneficial and instead choosing that which is truly good for ourselves and others is enhanced.

Binyamin is a graduate of Yeshivas Rabbeinu Yitzchak Elchanan, and Wurzweiler School of Social Work.