Compassion Or Violence?: The Heroism of Daniel Penny

Parshas Vayishlach 5785

Daniel Penny is a free man. It’s a shame it took so long.

Penny was acquitted of manslaughter this past week in relation to the death of Jordan Neely, a homeless man who boarded the same New York City subway car as Neely and screamed, according to one bystander, “I don’t have food, I don’t have a drink, I’m fed up. I don’t mind going to jail and getting life in prison. I’m ready to die.”

Penny, a former Marine, placed Neely in a chokehold, restraining him until police arrived. Neely was later pronounced dead. 

Upon the acquittal, Congresswoman Summer Lee of Pennsylvania commented on X, “The acquittal of Daniel Penny in the murder of Jordan Neely is a painful reminder of a long-standing reality: vigilante violence against Black people often goes unchecked. Jordan deserved compassion, not violence.”

Actually, he deserved both. 

As he journeyed from Charan, having fled the home of Lavan without so much as a goodbye, Yaakov is ultimately overtaken by his uncle. Lavan scolds him for absconding with Lavan’s daughters and grandchildren without a proper farewell. Yaakov will have none of it. He rails against Lavan, lambasting him for his mistreatment and trickery, and noting his own honesty and integrity throughout the years he worked for Lavan.

Yaakov will not back down from a fight. 

An entirely different scene plays out when Yaakov receives word that Esav’s camp is approaching his own. Yaakov becomes conciliatory, sending Esav a hefty tribute, being sure to refer to Esav as his “master” multiple times, and ultimately engaging Esav in a warm embrace when his heretofore raging brother shows that his anger has subsided.

Yaakov backs down from the fight. 

Perhaps Yaakov is simply a pragmatist. Sure, he’d have given Esav the same earful he gave Lavan, but the four hundred soldiers Esav marched with made that impractical. Yaakov could chastise Lavan for his behavior, stand toe-to-toe with his uncle and decry his animosity because he posed no mortal threat. Esav, on the other hand, marched with an army, ready to kill. A different approach would have to be adopted.

Rav Shimshon Raphael Hirsch, though, sees an altogether different distinction to be made between the two encounters. Lavan receives a tongue-lashing because he had no legitimate argument to make. Yaakov had done only right by Lavan, and was subjected to Lavan’s scheming and manipulation as a result. Lavan would be put squarely in his place.

Esav was simply a different story. Yes, Yaakov had purchased the birthright from Esav fair and square. But Yaakov had to resort to some measure of subterfuge in order to receive the blessings from his father in Esav’s place. Esav had indeed been tricked, and Yaakov, as a result, understood his brother’s anger and resentment. It was only right to act differently towards him than he did towards Lavan.

Is this to say that Yaakov regretted his actions? That if he could do it all over again, he’d defy the instructions of his mother and let Esav receive their father’s bracha? Or, at the very least, tip his hand and inform Esav of his intention to speak with Yitzchak and convince him to change his mind about which son ought to be blessed?

Certainly not. It is to say only that even while being convinced of one’s position, he can still hear and appreciate the case of his rival. Yaakov did what needed to be done, but he had a heart for Esav and understood where he was coming from. Even as Yaakov felt undeniably justified in his own actions, he could appreciate why Esav felt wronged.

The reverse is likewise true. The recognition of the pain of another person or people is not sufficient to justify the cause for which they may be fighting. Being marginalized or wronged in some way is reason to have others identify your suffering, but not enough to act out with impunity in any way you deem fair. Compassion cannot completely overwhelm our sense of right and wrong, of meting out appropriate consequences. 

Homelessness is a terribly sad predicament and when a homeless person says “I don’t have food, I don’t have a drink, I’m fed up,” our hearts should go out to him. But when he says “I don’t mind going to jail and getting life in prison,” he should be restrained from behind until the police arrive.

Which makes Daniel Penny a hero, not a criminal. But ours is a society that too often permits justification of any and all actions on the heels of the compassion we feel for the aggrieved. Yaakov Avinu understands Esav, he even has a heart for Esav, but he doesn’t agree with him, doesn’t condone his behavior, and doesn’t agree to rewrite history so that Esav can get his way. 

We should have compassion for Jordan Neely because he suffered. But that shouldn’t blind us to right and wrong, to the injustice of threatening innocent people on a subway car, and to the heroism—rather than criminality—of Daniel Penny. Summer Lee insisted that Jordan Neely deserved compassion, not violence. No, he deserved both.