Let's return to our topic – indeed, it can also be said in another way, closer to the simple understanding of things, that the great difficulty in arousing the power of faith and trust below at the time before the splitting of the sea was due to the fact that, as per the situation in which the Israelites found themselves at that moment, to the naked eye, there was no possible way of escape. This is how the Midrash (Yalkut Shimoni, Song of Songs, hint 945) describes it: "My dove in the clefts of the rock – to what were the Israelites similar at that moment? To a dove fleeing from a hawk, and it entered a cleft in a rock and there was a snake hissing at it; when it entered inside, and when it came out, the hawk was there to catch it. So were the Israelites at that moment similar – the sea was closed, and the enemy was pursuing, etc." And what kind of escape route could open before the dove trapped between the snake and the hawk? And since this was the case, the trust required from the Israelites at that time, to believe and trust that salvation was near, was as if it were a trust of madness, a trust of someone not connected to reality...

Let's illustrate this with two life scenarios: The first scenario – a person experiencing some test regarding livelihood, due to layoffs, a large and unexpected expense, and the like, requiring them to strengthen and exert themselves in trust in God. The second scenario – someone is informed, not upon us, by doctors, that they are suffering from an incurable disease, in such a way that according to medical methods, all hope is lost, and they too, like the person in the first scenario, are required to strengthen and exert themselves in trust in God. But is it possible to compare the two cases? Is there any place for comparison between them? Indeed, what is the real difference? – The first person, although strengthening their measure of trust involves a certain difficulty, still has some relief at their disposal, some support that helps them subconsciously, and that is, it is easier for them to imagine in their mind's eye how and from where their salvation might sprout. Perhaps, for example, a highly lucrative job offer might suddenly come to their door, they might receive financial assistance from some benefactor, and so on, thereby reducing the trial and making it easier to trust. However, the person standing in the second trial does not enjoy this support; they do not have this relief at their disposal. They cannot imagine how and from where their salvation might sprout, since according to natural ways, the gates of medicine are closed before them. Consequently, it is easy for a wise person to understand that the trial of trust that awaits them is much harder and heavier.

This was the trial that God put the Israelites through at the shore of the sea, where they could not imagine in any way how their salvation might come, for who in all flesh had seen such a thing, that the sea would split in two, and its bed turn to dry land – who would be crazy enough to think of such a thing? Therefore, the trust required from the Israelites at that time was as if it were a trust of madness, a trust with no rational support, and hence it was a very, very difficult trial.

According to this, we can nicely interpret the verses (Psalms 22:5–6): "Our ancestors trusted in You, they trusted, and You delivered them. To You they cried out and were saved; in You they trusted and were not put to shame" – seemingly, why should they be ashamed of their trust in God? Indeed, according to our approach, it is well understood, that since the trust required from them was as if it were a trust of madness, and madness is inherently associated with shame... therefore, the poet praised the merit of his ancestors and said, "Our ancestors trusted in You... they trusted in You and were not put to shame," that although they might have been ashamed of it, they were not.