The portrait of human responsibility in the Book of Eikha is complicated. While the notion of human sin and accountability abides in Eikha, the book resists resorting to a one-dimensional depiction of the disaster, in which responsibility is thrust solely upon human sin. Eikha is not a book of confessions and acknowledgement of culpability. Often, anger and confusion overshadows any admission of guilt. The agonized portrait of human suffering implicitly asserts that the book cannot account for it tidily or easily. Its intense, graphic description stuns the reader, leaving an indelible impression of raw, irredeemable suffering. Most poignantly, the suffering of the children (see, for example Eikha 2:11-12) implies the death and torment of innocents (tzaddik ve’ra lo). Moreover, the lack of specificity in reference to the sins leaves the reader mostly unruffled by the nation’s debauchery, allowing us to focus instead on the enormity of the human suffering. In this schema, Israel can hurl accusations at a hostile God (Eikha 2:4: “He set up His bow like an enemy, He poised His right hand like a foe”), whose excessive punishments seem disproportionate to the sins.
This complex portrait may be the best that we can do to attempt to make sense of the human experience. Without a simple solution for the problem of human suffering, the book resists the urge to deny that, at least from a human perspective, injustice abounds. However, at the same time, Eikha declines to surrender the idea that God reigns justly over the world (Eikha 3:22-23: “The kindnesses of God do not end, His mercies do not cease; They renew themselves every morning: ‘Great is Your faithfulness!’”), and that human beings must take responsibility for the way in which their deeds impact their lives (Eikha 3:39: “Of what can living people complain? Each one only of his sins!”) This complex portrayal accurately reflects the theological paradox of humans who tenaciously believe in a God of morality, despite their experience of a divinely controlled world, seemingly saturated with evil and injustice.
How is it possible to maintain a relationship with God within such a disquieting paradox? This ability to navigate an inscrutable world depends upon one’s willingness to live with complexity, and one’s faith in God’s goodness. Eikha’s ability to present this complexity produces a candid portrait of humans who struggle honestly to balance fidelity to God with a world that can often seem cruel and unfair.