ForgotPassword?
Sign Up
Search this Topic:
Forum Jump
Posts: 732
Tue, 10-Mar-09 09:22:59
Arikm7 wrote: As for Amalek, Saul was to take him out.. but he didn't. Although Samuel would kill King Agag, the Amalekite king had sired children adn they continue the line. In fact, Haman was a direct descendant of the Amalekites. And every enemy of the Jewish people has been "Amalek" either via lineage or via character.
==================================== "Erasing the Memory of 'Amaleq" ==================================== A fundamental dimension of Yisrael is its National Memory. It is on this basis that political judgments are achievable. When National Memory is discarded or fails to elicit a response, Yisrael ceases to function as an autonomous political entity, and national disasters follow. The role of Jewish National Memory is evidence in the case of 'Amaleq, Yisrael's arch-enemy. They were the earliest terrorists on record. What made their attack particularly heinous was that (a) it was unprovoked, since Yisrael was passing through the desert, and not through their territory; (b) it was sudden, against unsuspecting travelers; and (c) it was carried out against the "weak and infirm," who could not defend themselves, rather than against the army (Devarim 25:17-18). As we shall see in what follows, these facts - rather than mere ethnicity - are the defining elements of 'Amaleq. The Tora did not specify the atrocities perpetuated by 'Amaleq; rather, they were entrusted to the National Memory of Yisrael. Jews are required to "remember" what 'Amaleq did (Devarim 25:17) and to "erase the remembrance (zekher) of 'Amaleq" (Devarim 25:19, see also Shemoth 17:14). The conflict must be carried on from generation to generation (Shemoth 17:16). Usually, this is understood in ethnic terms. This understanding is unacceptable. Clearly and unambiguously the Tora mentions "the remembrance (zekher) of 'Amaleq"! According to the rabbis, after King Sennaheriv invaded the Near East, the original natives of the region were deported and replaced with others. Therefore, the present inhabitants of these areas could no longer be identified with the national entities mentioned in Scripture. Therefore, it is impossible to identify the ethnicity of any of the ancient inhabitants of the region (Rambam applied this principle to all people of the region). Thus, on technical grounds alone it would be impossible to identify any one person or people with the original inhabitants of the region. If so, how could Jews be expected to keep on fighting the Amalekite enemy "from generation to generation"? The question is particularly poignant in light of the fact that after having lost contact with 'Amaleq for over 500 years, Jews in Persia were able to identify Haman - the proverbial 'Jew-hater' - with 'Amaleq. What was the basis for this identification? The correct meaning of the "remembrance" was given by R. Isaac Abul'afya in "Pene Yitshaq," (Shabbath Zakhor). He called attention to the fact that the Scripture charged Yisrael to erase the "remembrance" (zekher) - never the "seed" (zer'a) - of 'Amaleq! What was intolerable about 'Amaleq was their inhumanity against unsuspecting travelers; particularly, marking the weak and infirm as the preferred target. The remembrance of 'Amaleq has little to do with ethnicity but with a level of inhuman behavior that cannot be tolerated, no matter what. This type of threat faces Yisrael "from generation to generation." Because Yisrael had registered in her National Memory the atrocities committed by 'Amaleq, she is charged with the double responsibility of identifying and erasing the remembrance of 'Amaleq. The Jews in Persia were able to identify Haman with their proverbial enemy because in their National Memory his activities and ideology reminded them of 'Amaleq: it was a matter of behavior, not merely genealogy or nationality. The preceding could help us resolve a halakhic puzzle. An absolute stipulation to classify a Scriptural assignment as a precept (mitswa) is that, at least in theory, it could be fulfilled in perpetuity. To wit, although sacramental sacrifices are not offered today, nonetheless they qualify as precepts (mitswoth) since they could be offered when the Temple is rebuilt. Now, if to erase "the remembrance (zekher) of 'Amaleq" meant some sort of 'ethnic cleansing," then once executed, it could never be fulfilled again. Rambam attempts to cope with the problem, in my view unsuccessfully, in Sefer ha-Mitswoth #187 (Positive Precepts). The same problem applies to the precept to destroy the seven Canaanite nations - once it is properly fulfilled, it could not be fulfilled again. On the other hand, identification of 'Amaleq in terms of behavior and the memories it evokes, rather than ethnicity, permits the fulfillment of this mitswa in perpetuity. A final note: there may be several valid interpretations on how to identify and proceed to erase the "memory of 'Amaleq." 'Ethnic cleansing," however, is not one of them. (Adapted from "Erasing the Memory of 'Amaleq," appended to "The Horizontal Society: Understanding the Covenant and Alphabetic Judaism" by Rabbi Jose Faur, an extraordinary two-volume explanation of the rabbinic tradition in modern terminology)
Share This