שמות, פרק י״ד, פסוק י״א

In moments of severe crisis, the psychology of a crowd is fully exposed. The Israelites, who only shortly before had joyously obeyed their leaders and marched toward freedom, quickly rebel when confronted with mortal danger [קאסוטו]. While this reaction might appear ungrateful, it stems from a logical foundation. The people possessed common sense and refused to follow blindly. Their doubts during an unprecedented situation demonstrate a level of sobriety, as they demanded realistic proof of God's leadership [רש״ר הירש].

A striking contradiction arises regarding how the very people who had just cried out to God in prayer could immediately turn to hurl harsh accusations. The primary approach among commentators is that the camp was not a single, unified entity, but was instead divided into different factions [רמב״ן, רבנו בחיי, הטור הארוך, שפתי כהן]. The righteous and prominent members of the nation offered sincere prayers to God. In contrast, the general masses or the mixed multitude, terrified of Pharaoh's wrath, complained and rejected their salvation [הטור הארוך, שפתי כהן]. According to Midrashic tradition, the people standing at the edge of the sea actually fractured into four distinct groups. Some wanted to pray, others wished to surrender and return to Egypt, a third group wanted to fight, and a fourth group, consumed by despair, wanted to throw themselves into the sea [רבנו בחיי, שפתי כהן].

Those who fell into despair directed their anger squarely at Moses. They questioned the authenticity of his prophecy, suspecting that the Exodus was not God's will at all, but rather a personal initiative orchestrated by Moses and Aaron [שד״ל, העמק דבר, ביאור יש״ר]. The worldview of the time allowed people to believe that spiritual figures could independently perform miracles without any divine command. Consequently, they assumed Moses had acted on his own and was now powerless to save them [שד״ל]. To emphasize their frustration, the people employed an elegant but biting rhetorical question, asking if they had been taken away simply because there was a shortage of graves in Egypt [אבן עזרא, רשב״ם, רש״י, בכור שור, דברי דוד]. This sarcastic inquiry reveals a sharp sense of irony and dark humor. Even in the grip of dread, they cynically wondered if all the trouble of leaving was merely to secure a new burial plot, pointing out that they could have easily died at home under the yoke of slavery without the effort of the journey [רש״ר הירש, ביאור שטיינזלץ, מלבי״ם].

Their fear of dying in the desolate wilderness was grounded in a grim reality. They understood that even if the pursuing Egyptians chose not to engage in active combat, they could simply blockade the camp. Trapped in the wasteland, the Israelites would inevitably perish from starvation, thirst, and total destitution [ספורנו, רשב״ם, הטור הארוך]. Furthermore, dying in the wilderness was perceived as a particularly horrific fate, as it meant they would be denied a proper burial, unlike in a settled region like Egypt [הטור הארוך].

As they demanded to know why they had been brought out to such a fate, they created a fascinating and ironic parallel to their oppressors. In this fateful hour, they expressed regret over their departure using the exact same phrasing that Pharaoh used when he regretted letting them go. This shared language reveals that neither side had yet internalized that the entire sequence of events was being orchestrated by God [קאסוטו]. Ultimately, this crisis marks the first of ten instances where the Israelites tested God in the wilderness. However, because their complaints arose from genuine anxiety and a deep concern for their survival rather than a calculated attempt to challenge divine power, some commentators explain that testing in this context actually means provoking anger. Through their profound fear and momentary lack of faith, they angered God [ביאור יש״ר, תורה תמימה, ברכת אשר].