Shaul's Sin in the Battle with Amalek/2

Shaul Loses the Kingship

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Kept Agag Alive

Shaul sinned in leaving Agag, the king of Amalek, alive.

Sources:Bavli YomaYoma 22bAbout the Bavli, Bavli MegillahMegillah 12b-13aAbout the Bavli, Yalkut ShimoniShemuel I 121About Yalkut Shimoni

Severity of Shaul's sin – R"Y Bin-Nun¹ questions why Shaul should deserve such a harsh punishment if this misdeed was correctable, especially considering that Shemuel subsequently killed Agag.  These sources offer several possibilities:

• Shaul thought he was more just than Hashem – Bavli Yoma and Yalkut Shimoni suggest that Shaul thought he could decide who needs to be punished or saved on his own, as if he were more merciful than Hashem. They contrast his mercy on his enemies here, with his extreme cruelty to the priests of Nov, proving that Shaul's personal morals were not up to par.
• Consequences of deed – Bavli Megillah says that had Agag been killed immediately Haman would have never been born,² suggesting that this was the problem.  This, though, is difficult since there is no evidence in the text that anyone was born before Agag was killed by Shemuel.
• Not heeding Hashem's command – Alternatively, Shaul's sin was simply the fact that he did not listen to Hashem's commandment. Hashem said to destroy all of Amalek so leaving over even just one person violated the directive.  Kings, especially, must realize that they are subservient to a greater King and cannot simply do as they desire.

"וַתַּעַט אֶל הַשָּׁלָל" – The sin of not killing Agag is missing from the text, as Shemuel repeatedly rebukes only about the spoils that were left (see vs. 14, 19, and 22-23) and does not mention a word about keeping Agag alive.³

"הַגִּישׁוּ אֵלַי אֶת אֲגַג" – Though Shemuel's words do not emphasize that the sin was not killing Agag, the fact that Shemuel only corrects that action and kills Agag supports this read.

"כִּי חַטַּאת קֶסֶם מֶרִי וְאָוֶן וּתְרָפִים הַפְצַר" – This approach can posit, like Targum YonatanShemuel I 15:23About Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, that Shemuel is comparing Shaul's disobedience to Hashem's words to a sin of magic, since both promote lack of faith in Hashem.

"אֲשֶׁר שָׁמַעְתִּי בְּקוֹל י"י" – Shaul mentions that he brought Agag alive as a proof that he fulfilled Hashem's words, which would suggest that this was not really a problem.⁴

Shaul vs. David

Did Not Consecrate the Spoils

Sources:RadakShemuel I 15:3Shemuel I 15:12Shemuel I 15:15Shemuel I 15:17Shemuel I 15:23About R. David Kimchi, RalbagShemuel I 15:6-23About R. Levi b. Gershom, AbarbanelShemuel I 14, Questions 2-4Shemuel I 15:1Shemuel I 15:14-15Shemuel I 15:23Shemuel I 15:26About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel, BiurShemuel I 15:23About the Biur (Netivot HaShalom), MalbimShemuel I 15:4-5About R. Meir Leibush Weiser

Purpose of the command:

• Ralbag and Abarbanel suggest this battle with Amalek was to take revenge for what they did on the way out of Egypt, so they were commanded not to take spoils. For by taking spoils the war is viewed as personally beneficial and not as a revenge.
• Radak notes that the war was to fulfill "תִּמְחֶה אֶת זֵכֶר עֲמָלֵק" (Devarim 25:19), and if they leave over even just a horse then people will say "this horse is from Amalek's spoils" and Amalek's name will be continued to be mentioned.

Severity of Shaul's sin:

• Shaul did not accomplish the goal of the war – Ralbag and Abarbanel. Shaul proved by letting the nation take from the spoils that their purpose was to benefit and not to sanctify Hashem's name.
• Shaul thought כוחי ועוצם ידי.  By setting aside the spoils for Hashem one shows that they were only able to win the battle with His help.
• Shaul gave in to the nation.  Shaul proved that he does not know how to stand against the nation's request and do Hashem's will.

"וַתַּעַט אֶל הַשָּׁלָל" – Shemuel's rebuke to Shaul focuses on the animals that he hears were left over.  Already in verse 9 it says "וְלֹא אָבוּ הַחֲרִימָם" as opposed to the language of the command "וְהַחֲרַמְתֶּם אֶת כׇּל אֲשֶׁר לוֹ".

"הַגִּישׁוּ אֵלַי אֶת אֲגַג" – This can be understood as a demonstration that Hashem won the battle and not Shaul.

"כִּי חַטַּאת קֶסֶם מֶרִי וְאָוֶן וּתְרָפִים הַפְצַר"

"וְהִנֵּה מַצִּיב לוֹ יָד" – Radak posits Shaul was splitting up the spoils from the war at Carmel where Shemuel came to meet him.  Alternatively, Ralbag views Shaul more positively that he set a place to thank Hashem, and he moved to Gilgal because there the Children of Israel always gathered.

David's battle with Amalek – The story of David's battle with Amalek is bothersome for this approach.  There, in chapter 30:20-31 it is elaborated on all the spoils David took from Amalek and how he split it up between the people.  It seems puzzling why Shaul deserved to lose the kingship for the same action David did later on and there was no problem with.⁵

Shaul vs. David

Did Not Fight All of Amalek

Shaul's battle was actually limited in scope and he only killed one group of Amalekites, leaving behind many whom he did not attack at all.

Sources:Hoil MosheShemuel I 15:3Shemuel I 15:5About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi, R"Y Bin-Nun⁶

Severity of Shaul's sin: – According to this approach, Hashem is angry because a substantial portion of Amalekites were not killed, not nearly fulfilling Hashem's command.

"מֵחֲוִילָה בּוֹאֲךָ שׁוּר" – This approach rereads verse 7, from which it sounds as if Shaul fought Amalek in a comprehensive manner:

• According to Hoil Moshe, Shaul killed Amalek within the borders "מֵחֲוִילָה בּוֹאֲךָ שׁוּר", but he only attacked the permanent dwellers who lived under the rule of Agag, leaving alive the nomadic majority.⁷ 
• R"Y Bin-Nun, in contrast, assumes that "מֵחֲוִילָה בּוֹאֲךָ שׁוּר" describes the borders in which Amalek lived but not to the area which Shaul attacked.⁸  Shaul fought in a much more limited area.

"בָּא שָׁאוּל הַכַּרְמֶלָה" – According to Hoil Moshe, after the initial battle against Agag, Shaul took a break, returning to Israel and the Carmel⁹ to set up a victory monument.  This is what allowed the rest of the Amalekites to flee.

"וַתַּעַט אֶל הַשָּׁלָל" – Hoil Moshe explains that Shaul followed the commandment "וְהַחֲרַמְתֶּם אֶת כׇּל אֲשֶׁר לוֹ" and he left over the animals to sacrifice them to Hashem,¹⁰ as he says "הֲקִימֹתִי אֶת דְּבַר יְהוָה".  However, this is not the sense one gets from the verses, where Shemuel notes many times about the spoils.¹¹

"הַגִּישׁוּ אֵלַי אֶת אֲגַג" – Hoil Moshe understands that Shaul was planning on killing Agag.  He just brought him alive to brag about him in front of the nation.

"כִּי חַטַּאת קֶסֶם מֶרִי וְאָוֶן וּתְרָפִים הַפְצַר"

David's battle with Amalek – Had Shaul defeated Amalek, David would not have needed to go to war against them.

Shaul vs. David

¹ See his article, "משא אגג – חטא שאול בעמלק", Megadim 7 (1989): 49-63.

² The Bavli is based off the description of Haman in Meggilat Esther as "הָמָן בֶּן הַמְּדָתָא הָאֲגָגִי" ‎(3:1).  The assumption is that Agag had relations in between his capture and being killed.

³ One can suggest like Abarbanel that Shemuel was only told by Hashem that Shaul did something wrong but he did not know further, and was mistaken as to what it was.

⁴ If not killing Agag was really the main sin, it would be the ultimate insolence to point to it as fulfilling Hashem's words.  On the other hand, one can explain that Shaul was simply ignorant of Hashem's intent.

⁵ One could answer that David was not yet the king officially, and did not get an explicit command to consecrate the spoils.

⁶ See article cited above.

⁷ He assumes that the Amalekites were composed of many individual groups, some under the leadership of Agag, but many under the rule of others.  Shaul attacked the city-state of Agag, but left the others in peace.

⁸ Accoridng to him, the verse should read, "וַיַּךְ שָׁאוּל אֶת עֲמָלֵק [אשר גר] מֵחֲוִילָה בּוֹאֲךָ שׁוּר".  He quotes the parallel verse (in 27:8) by David's battle with Amalek, to prove that is where they lived, "כִּי הֵנָּה יֹשְׁבוֹת הָאָרֶץ אֲשֶׁר מֵעוֹלָם בּוֹאֲךָ שׁוּרָה וְעַד אֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם", and notes that David, too, did not fight in that whole area, but he at least defeated them.

⁹ Hoil Moshe asserts that this refers to a city in Yehuda and not the Carmel which is up North.

¹⁰ In Vayikra 27:28 it says "כׇּל חֵרֶם קֹדֶשׁ קׇדָשִׁים הוּא לַי"י", and that it exactly what Shaul did.

¹¹ R"y Bin-Nun follows Abarbanel's approach that Shemuel was not told by Hashem what the sin was, and did not recognize it until after he saw Agag alive and then realized many more Amalekites were left.