Annihilating Amalek/2

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Annihilating Amalek

Exegetical Approaches

Overview

Immoral Warfare

In contrast to other enemies of Israel, Amalek attacked without just cause and in an unscrupulous fashion. They are punished more harshly than others since they represent a militant, terrorist mindset, and lack any sense of morality.

"וְלֹא יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים" – All of these commentators maintain that the phrase describes Amalek rather than the Israelites. They differ, though, in their understanding of the phrase "יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים".
  • According to both Abarbanel and R. Hirsch, the verse is saying that Amalek had no fear of Hashem.2
  • Shadal3 and R. David Zvi Hoffmann, in contrast, claim that the phrase means that Amalek had no fear of any god.4 "יראת א-להים" is not limited to one's belief in Hashem, but instead refers to one's moral and ethical conduct as a whole.5
Why did Amalek attack? – According to these commentators, Amalek had no good reason for attacking, as it was neither a war of defense or conquest, nor was their any provocation on the part of Israel. R. Hirsch adds that Amalek's only motivation was the glory of victory and their scorn of peace-loving nations.
"וַיְזַנֵּב בְּךָ כׇּל הַנֶּחֱשָׁלִים" – According to this approach, it is the attack specifically on the weak stragglers which highlights the immorality of Amalek.
Context – R. Yosef Bekhor Shor and Shadal point out that the context of the command in Devarim is one of unjust business dealings, supporting the idea that Amalek's crime, too, related to his crooked actions and military tactics. R. Hirsch adds that many of the commandments listed in the parashah deal with one's relations with fellow men, guiding Israel to be an ethical nation. The Torah then contrasts the Israelite lifestyle, a paradigm of morality, with Amalek, its antithesis.
A continuous pattern – Later in history, Amalek show a similar disdain for moral principles. In the time of Gidon they plunder the land,6 an attack which harms civilians rather than armed forces. Similarly, later they attack David's camp in Ziklag,7 once again targeting the helpless women and children.
Biblical parallels – The language of "מחייה" and the concept of wiping out a nation for its crimes appears also in the stories of the flood8 and the Sin of the Golden Calf.9 In the former, like here, the stated reason is the world's violence.
Obligation on Hashem or Israel? – Abarbanel maintains that there is a dual obligation, as the attack was aimed at both Israel and God.
Yehoshua's role – Shadal asserts that Hashem did not mean that Yehoshua was to play any special role in the ultimate conquest of Amalek. Rather, being the leader in this first battle, he was given the honor of recording the event.10
When to destroy? – According to Abarbanel, Hashem commanded the nation to destroy Amalek only when they were settled in the land of Israel, since He did not want them to be overwhelmed both by the wars of conquest and this additional command. R. D"Z Hoffmann, in contrast, asserts that Hashem wanted it recognized that this was not just another war of conquest, but rather a holy war against immorality.11
Shaul's obligation and failure
"מִדֹּר דֹּר" – According to R. Hirsch, the ongoing war is against the legacy of Amalek,12 i.e. against glorifying power and the idea that might makes right. Hashem is telling the Children of Israel never to forget that they represent the antithesis of Amalek. The others might suggest that Hashem, knowing that Amalek was not destroyed totally in the time of Shaul, is commanding that we continuously fight throughout the generations, until the task is accomplished.
Relationship to command regarding seven nations

Disrespect for the Divine

Amalek's attack on the Children of Israel stemmed from a lack of fear of God and a desire to profane His name. Whereas all other nations trembled before God in the aftermath of the miracles of the Exodus, Amalek had no such fear. In wiping out Amalek, Hashem was not only punishing them but also setting them up as an example for others to learn from.

"וְלֹא יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים" – According to this approach, the subject of this phrase is Amalek. When Hashem tells the nation to remember what Amalek did to them, He also points to the problematic aspect of their actions, that Amalek had no fear of God.
Why did Amalek attack?Abarbanel emphasizes that Amalek had nothing to gain by attacking,15 and only fought so as to denigrate God's name by showing that they were more powerful than He.16
"וַיְזַנֵּב בְּךָ כׇּל הַנֶּחֱשָׁלִים"
Context
Biblical parallels – The language of "מחייה" and the concept of wiping out a nation for its crimes appears also in the stories of the flood17 and the Sin of the Golden Calf.18 In the latter, like here, Hashem proposes to kill those who did not fear Hashem.
Obligation on Hashem or Israel? – According to Abarbanel, Amalek targeted both Hashem and the nation, so both are obligated in their extermination.19
When to destroy? - Ibn Ezra and Ramban assert that Hashem wanted the nation to first wipe out the seven nations, and thus did not instruct them to kill off Amalek until that mission was accomplished.
Yehoshua's role – According to Ibn Ezra, Hashem's directive to Yehoshua regarding the annihilation of Amalek was first told to Him in the fortieth year. At this point, it was already known that he was to be the next leader, and as such, he was the appropriate audience.20 Ramban adds that had the conquest actually been finished during his era, Yehoshua would have been the one to complete the task. Only because enemies abounded until the monarchic period, was Shaul chosen instead.
Shaul's obligation and failure
"מִדֹּר דֹּר"
Relationship to command regarding seven nations

Existential Threat

Amalek desired to completely exterminate Israel and, unless wiped out, it would continuously present a threat to the nation's survival.

Why did Amalek attack?
  • Ralbag associates Amalek's attack with the blessing given to Esav, his ancestor. Yitzchak had promised that Yaakov would rule over Esav, but that when Yaakov was down, Esav would be able to throw off his yoke. As such, seeing that Israel was unlearned in war, weak, and thirsty, Amalek took the opportunity to kill off Yaakov=Israel and be rid of his servitude once and for all.
  • Cassuto, instead, suggests that this was a preemptive strike. Amalek dwelled in the Negev and recognized that the Israelites were soon to invade their territory. They, therefore, decided to conquer the nation before they themselves were attacked.
"וְלֹא יָרֵא אֱלֹהִים" – According to Ralbag, the phrase refers back to the Israelites, who, at the time of the initial attack, were not yet infused with a fear of God.21 This is one of the reasons Amalek chose to fight when it did, believing that if the nation was not God-fearing, they might not merit God's providence and protection from attack.
"וַיְזַנֵּב בְּךָ כׇּל הַנֶּחֱשָׁלִים" – For Ralbag, the Israel's weakness is one of Amalek's main motivations for attack.22 Cassuto sees this as simply a tactic of war.23
Context
Obligation on Hashem or Israel?
Yehoshua's role – Yehoshua, being the general of Israel during this initial battle, and eventually the one to lead the conquest, is the logical choice to heed the command to obliterate Amalek, even if it in the end it is only during the monarchy that the nations actually fight.
When to destroy? – According to Cassuto's understanding of the command, one would have thought that the killing off of Amalek would be most relevant prior to the conquest, not after the nation had already settled the land.
Shaul's obligation and failure
"מִדֹּר דֹּר" – This approach would understand that the obligation extends to every generation, so long as the Amalekites are not yet obliterated. Since the Amalekites are not being killed as a punishment for past actions, but because they themselves are a threat, there is no issue of children being punished for parents' sins.
Relationship to command regarding seven nations – For Cassuto, the command to obliterate Amalek might not be all that different from the similar directive regarding the seven nations of Canaan. The geographic location of both make them a threat to Israel's survival leading to the commands to destroy them.
"לֹא תְתַעֵב אֲדֹמִי" – According to Ralbag, one might have thought that all descendants of Esav should be considered a threat and thus there should be a command to wipe all of them out which makes the explicit command not to despise Edom puzzling. Ralbag might answer that it was only one branch of the family that actually desired to kill off Israel and so only they are targeted by Hashem's command.

No Different Than Others

Amalek's actions were not significantly different than other nations who similarly attacked Israel, and their punishment, too, is not exceptional. God often punishes those who try to kill the Children of Israel with annihilation.

JosephusAntiquities 3:2:5About Josephus, R. Yosef ibn KaspiShemot 17:16About R. Yosef ibn Kaspi, MalbimShemot 17:14About R. Meir Leibush Weiser, Tzeror HaMorShemot 17:8About R. Avraham Saba,