Home
Log in / Sign Up
    Private Messages   Advanced Search   Rules   New User Guide   FAQ   Advertise   Contact Us  
Forum -> Interesting Discussions
Timcheh es zecher amalek



Post new topic   Reply to topic View latest: 24h 48h 72h

amother


 

Post Mon, Mar 09 2009, 4:46 am
I am posting this anonymously because, quite frankly after 12 years of BY education, I am embarrassed to be asking such a question. But going to shul and hearing again this year abt. destroying amalek, and w/ purim rite around the corner, it got me thinking more.
I really want an answer that will strengthen my emunah. I am scared even to ask DH because I dont want him to even know I have such questions, I think he would be disappointed and scared. And there is not a single Rov in the world, who I wouldnt be embarassed to ask. Shaul Hamelech was surely greater than me and he had the such questions, so maybe I am in good company? Im looking for help ladies. This is a basic tenet of emunah, and the more I think about it, the more bothersome it is. I try to ignore it, but I cant anymore.
How can we come and criticize other nations, for killing us over the years (or killing other people), when we also, have a commandment in our own Torah that we have to kill EVERYONE of this particular nation - man, woman, child, animal, everyone. It bothers me so much, we say "deracheha darchei noam" but then we are commanded OTOH to wipe out an entire nation? that is just what they wanted to do to us! So what is this? Torah-sanctioned nekamah? Why are wecommanded to do the dirty work? Why cant Hashem just kill out the nation of Amalek, just let the ground swallow them up or something?
Back to top

amother


 

Post Mon, Mar 09 2009, 5:23 am
ne1???
Back to top

catonmylap




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Mar 09 2009, 5:51 am
It is a very valid question. You should not be embarrassed to ask this question.

I don't have an answer for you on the top of my head. It's something that they bring up on anti-bible (anti both Christianity & Judaism) to invalidate the bible & Torah
Back to top

louche




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Mar 09 2009, 6:00 am
Why do you question that and not the commandment to wipe out the Shiv'at Ha'amim who lived in C'naan? Amalek at least was guilty of crimes against Bnei Yisrael from the get-go.

Many people take issue with G-d's command to kill, claiming that genocide is immoral. How outrageous! G-d's command cannot be immoral. Self-directed genocide would of course be immoral, but G-d's command is by definition moral--how can it be otherwise? G-d has His reasons even when He does not choose to share them with us.

Maybe the whole episode was a test of the people's faith: would they follow G-d's command even if it was incomprehensible? They had already displeased G-d by asking to have a flesh-and-blood king. Would they follow the king or the King? Avraham passed his test at Akedat Yitzchak with flying colors; Shaul and his people flunked.

The Kadosh baruch Hu doesn't have to give us everything on a silver platter. Sometimes He wants us to do some things ourselves. There is no comparison between having something done for you and doing it yourself. What you see done may change you, but you may eventually forget it. What you do yourself you will never forget. Exactly what lesson was to have been learned from destroying Amalek I can't even guess, but I'm positive it was there. Otherwise, as you say, Hashem could have destroyed Amalek Himself.

There's a certain satisfaction and closure one gets from doing something oneself that doesn't come from having it done for him. You ever hear a person say "No, this is something I want to do myself?" What difference does it make who does it, as long as it's done? Because when you had a hand in the process, it's your accomplishment. maybe that was the lesson--if BY would destroy Amalek, it would be a lesson to them for all time, that with G-d's backing they can overcome all their enemies, utterly and forever.

Amalek had to be destroyed because the entire nation was the embodiment of evil. So much so, that even their property had to be destroyed. Not simply left in place to flourish or rot, as might have been done had the sole message been "we're not taking the loot because this was a holy war, not a war of acquisition", but actively and utterly destroyed. That included the women and children, because they also had this evil within them. Proof positive of that is that the child that Agag fathered during that brief interlude before Shmuel executed him, went on to establish a new nation of Amalek that was as evil as the original. He was evil in his genes, if you will, since there were presumably no adult Amalekites around to train him in the ways of evil when he was growing up.

And maybe there was in fact an element of revenge in the command to destroy Amalek. Humans are human, after all, and Amalek had been making Jewish lives a misery from Day 1. The commandment "lo tikom" (thou shalt not take revenge), is expressed as applying to Jews--lo tikom velo titor et benei amecha. Secondly, there are places where the Torah bows to human nature. When a person accidentally kills someone, the "goel hadam" (literally "redeemer of the blood", a close relative who seeks to kill the perpetrator in revenge) is allowed to kill him unless he makes it to an ir miklat (city of refuge). Human beings have a certain need for revenge. That need can't be allowed to run free and unrestricted, but clearly there is an acknowledgement of and an outlet for this very need.
Back to top

ora_43




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Mar 09 2009, 6:11 am
I remember this came up a little while ago (regarding a different topic) and it was mentioned that we are not commanded to kill everyone who is born Amalek, but rather those who choose to be Amalek. If someone born Amaleki decides to convert or to keep 7 mitzvot b'nei Noach then they are not killed.

Why we have to do it ourselves I don't know. I think that could be asked about many mitzvot though, or about the entire concept of a physical world.

Also, I think we generally criticize others for killing us or others for no good reason. It's the difference between "killing" and "murder." It's not immoral to kill someone in self-defense, and this situation is basically that on a national level -- one nation killing another in self-defense, because Amalek is a nation dedicated to destroying us (but again, those who choose not to be Amalek may do so (I'm not sure if or how that applies to children)). When other nations killed us, it was not a matter of self defense at all, therefore it was murder and morally wrong.
Back to top

amother


 

Post Mon, Mar 09 2009, 6:38 am
louche wrote:
Why do you question that and not the commandment to wipe out the Shiv'at Ha'amim who lived in C'naan? Amalek at least was guilty of crimes against Bnei Yisrael from the get-go.

Louche, thanks for answering. I guess I do take issue with the other 7 nations, but Amalek came up because of Shabbos Zachor, got me thinking (unfortunately) again. I try to just suppress these thoughts but its very hard for me.
You say: "Many people take issue with G-d's command to kill, claiming that genocide is immoral. How outrageous! G-d's command cannot be immoral. Self-directed genocide would of course be immoral, but G-d's command is by definition moral--how can it be otherwise? G-d has His reasons even when He does not choose to share them with us."
So how does that make us better than Moslems on holy war? they dont think what they are doing is genocide, they think its Alahs command. Or different than Crusaders who also thought they were doing it in G-ds name. Is the only difference that OUR G-d is right and their "gods" are wrong? Because they are saying the same thing probably.
I know that Shaul failed, and by Akeidas Yitzchak, avraham passed. But I am not Avraham Avinu. Thank G-d, he didnt test me with those ten things, because I would fail terribly probably.

Your response to my amalek problem is fine - nekama is only in reference to jews. but what about Lo Sirtzach? Since when does that one of the aseres hadibros only apply to killing Jews?
Back to top

amother


 

Post Mon, Mar 09 2009, 6:44 am
ora_43 wrote:
I remember this came up a little while ago (regarding a different topic) and it was mentioned that we are not commanded to kill everyone who is born Amalek, but rather those who choose to be Amalek. If someone born Amaleki decides to convert or to keep 7 mitzvot b'nei Noach then they are not killed.

Why we have to do it ourselves I don't know. I think that could be asked about many mitzvot though, or about the entire concept of a physical world.

Also, I think we generally criticize others for killing us or others for no good reason. It's the difference between "killing" and "murder." It's not immoral to kill someone in self-defense, and this situation is basically that on a national level -- one nation killing another in self-defense, because Amalek is a nation dedicated to destroying us (but again, those who choose not to be Amalek may do so (I'm not sure if or how that applies to children)). When other nations killed us, it was not a matter of self defense at all, therefore it was murder and morally wrong.

Right, well not that I am G-d forbid trying to bring legitimacy to their religion, but dont you think that other religions over the years have said this is for "good reason?" To the christians, "good reason"=we killed their god (supposedly. even though didnt the Romans really kill him?). To the muslems, good reason is, I dont know, that we dont believe Mohammed was a prophet? Im not saying their reasons are meaningful, but do you see what I am saying?
Back to top

Imaonwheels




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Mar 09 2009, 7:57 am
Amalek and the 7 nations are also spiritual concepts. The nations were the embodiment of those negative spiritual traits. I realize that does not help one with modern sensibilities. The death was brought on physical individuals.

Therefore, the most difficult thing to accept is that all killing is not the same and all life is not the same. Shimon and Levi killed all of the residents of Shechem because their violation of Noahide law made them guilty of a capital crime.

The difference is as if the state executes a murderer and the murders victims. There are those who by their actions bring become worthy of death. There are those who pass this evil to their children.

The reason why this bothers us is the pervasive non Jewish attitude that all people are basically good. This is not true of all peoples.
Back to top

amother


 

Post Mon, Mar 09 2009, 8:19 am
Imaonwheels wrote:
Amalek and the 7 nations are also spiritual concepts. The nations were the embodiment of those negative spiritual traits. I realize that does not help one with modern sensibilities. The death was brought on physical individuals.

Therefore, the most difficult thing to accept is that all killing is not the same and all life is not the same. Shimon and Levi killed all of the residents of Shechem because their violation of Noahide law made them guilty of a capital crime.

this I understand though. The people of Shechem violated a basic principle so they have to be killed as punishment. But what does it say about the jewish middah of rachmanus to just kill out people whose parents did something wrong? I know sure we cant judge it was hashems decision and we cant really question, but it bothers me and I dont know how to reconcile it with my emunah. does that make sense? I am a frum girl (Kollel, BY, seminary) from a frum family, but I feel like there is this crack in my belief that I keep trying to just ignore, but every year, it comes back to haunt me.
I understand your mashal of a murderer and the murderer's victims. One "deserves" to die because of the sins he committed. But if the murderer lives because say, the US president pardoned him, and we execute his grandkids to exact justice, how is that justice? It seems so misplaced to me, I am sorry to even say that but I dont understand! How can we claim its a peaceful religion, any more peaceful than any of the other religions, if we are doing the same thing. Yes we claim that our killing is leshem mitzvah, but they all claim the same thing!
If it were just a spiritual commandment like you say, I wouldn't have a problem with it. Get rid of the "zecher" of this nation, rid ourselves of their sins and their terrible ways, etc. But to be commanded to kill people I dont understand, I dont know!
Back to top

NotInNJMommy




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Mar 09 2009, 9:01 am
I don't have time to write as much as I wish a I could, but I learned re:parshas zachor, amalek, purim, etc. that the cause of Shaul's major aveirah, was that he was using very good rational thought to deal with amalek, the property, etc. He kept the animals bc he thought the highest thing to do, the biggest achievement would be to take the animals and make them holy korbanos.

The lesson taught us that while we have to use seichel to understand Torah and mitzvos, we can't lose sight of the actual mitzvah directive. There are lots of reasons why killing a whole nation of people including women and children and destroying everything seems morally wrong and antithetical to so many of the values we learn from the Torah and the structure of the mitzvos etc.

The tachlis is that we only know what is good and what is right because Hashem tells us so. He defines morality, holiness, etc. At the end of the day we may see tons of reasons for not "killing amalek" (I'm not sure of the pratical application of this particular mitzvah today, but using it as an example) and only 1 to do it--and that's bc Hashem said so.

This was Shaul's error. That he couldn't let go of his rational thought---as well founded as it was--and just do what Hashem told him to. According to some commentaries, this is why there is a mitzvah to be "ado lo yado" on Purim. If we can temporarily give up using our rational thought and just trust Hashem and follow what he says even when we can't see the sense of it, we can be freed of our limitations of trying to understand everything, all the time. This is the basis of our avodah. At the end of the day, Hashem expects to do what he says, and he'd love it if we "get" the reason why, and expects us to try to understand Him and His motivations, but even if we don't, we must do it.

The main point is that Hashem defines morality. We don't use our understanding of morality to define Hashem. If Hashem says, destroy ALL of this particular people, their possessions, etc., we know it's right bc Hashem said so. If Hashem says this group is my chosen people, and to destroy them is wrong and evil (as in destroying most people and things), then it is evil, bc HE says so.
Back to top

louche




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Mar 09 2009, 10:18 am
amother wrote:


So how does that make us better than Moslems on holy war? they dont think what they are doing is genocide, they think its Alahs command. Or different than Crusaders who also thought they were doing it in G-ds name. Is the only difference that OUR G-d is right and their "gods" are wrong? Because they are saying the same thing probably.


Naturally as a jew I beleive that we worship the One True G-d and anyone else's "prophecy" is false, though that argument wouldn't go far in the world at large. (The fact that two opponents face each other, each claiming to be in the right, doesn't mean that one of them isn't right and one of them isn't wrong.) However--the difference between us and them is that we do not take it upon ourselves to interpret G-d's word as meaning we should kill people. We have a horror of killing and do so only when forced to by circumstances or when commanded to, directly and in words that leave no room for any other interpretation.

I don't see Jews today going out and attempting to wipe out nations. Shaul HaMelech had a direct command from G-d through a contemporary living Navi, in simple exact and detailed words. what part of לֵךְ וְהִכִּיתָה אֶת-עֲמָלֵק, וְהַחֲרַמְתֶּם אֶת-כָּל-אֲשֶׁר-לוֹ, וְלֹא תַחְמֹל, עָלָיו; וְהֵמַתָּה מֵאִישׁ עַד-אִשָּׁה, מֵעֹלֵל וְעַד-יוֹנֵק, מִשּׁוֹר וְעַד-שֶׂה, מִגָּמָל וְעַד-חֲמוֹר could possibly be misunderstood? He didn't take it upon himself to take scripture from a hundred or a thousands years ago and claim "this means we should kill them". He had a clear assignment straight from G-d. (BTW, even Christians and Moslems agree that Shmuel was a true prophet, not that their agreement matters.)

Christians and Moslems, on the other hand, interpret their scriptures as an excuse to kill. They don't say "this was true a hundred years ago when the prophet was alive but we have no permission to do this now."

amother wrote:
but what about Lo Sirtzach? Since when does that one of the aseres hadibros only apply to killing Jews?


We Jews have been subject to so much grief by people who mistranslate OUR scriptures, and Jews who haven't been given a good grounding in Hebrew language are so easily misled. "Almah" doesn't mean "virgin" and "Retzach" doesn't mean "killing", it means murder. killing by G-d's explicit command, is not murder. self-defense is not murder, and executing a person convicted of a capital offense is not murder. I believe that killing Amalek qualifies as all three: self-defense because if we don't kill them, they will surely kill us. As Rashi says, "Haba lehorgecha, hashkem lehorgo" If someone comes to kill you, kill him first. Execution because the nation of Amalek was guilty of murdering Jews. G-d obviously convicted them and appointed Shaul and his people to do the execution.

Now if we, today, decided that Moslems were zera Amalek and went on a campaign to annihilate them, that would be immoral because we don't in fact know that Moslems are Amalek. Nor have we received any indication that G-d means for us to root out and destroy Amalek in a literal sense today. Our batei din don't even have the power to judge capital offenses and sentence a person to death, let alone wage a war of this type.

So you're not Shaul--what does that have to do with the rightness or wrongness of G-d's command? YOU did not get a direct command from G-d to kill anyone, so if you're seeing yourself as a one-woman Amalek-extermination team planning to find and destroy seeds of Amalek across the globe--get thee to a therapist.
Back to top

louche




 
 
    
 

Post Mon, Mar 09 2009, 10:31 am
It's a mistake to attempt to apply human reasoning and human criteria to G-d. By definition anything G-d does is moral. For a human being to kill an infant, knowing that this infant is going to grow up and become a murderer, is immoral--because a human being CANNOT KNOW that this infant will, in fact, grow up to be a murderer. But G-d is all-knowing and DOES know that this infant will become a murderer. So if G-d were to tell you "break this baby's neck" AND you were a bona fide Navi, you would do it. (If G-d speaks to you and you aren't a bona fide Navi, well, then psychiatric evaluation is in order.) If you were a bona fide navi you would possibly be shocked, maybe think you had misunderstood and wait for G-d to repeat the message. Neviim have argued with G-d before.

Look at the destruction of Sodom. Mind you, G-d didn't tell Avraham to kill the people; He informed him of His plans. Avraham evidently thought as you do: Hashofet kol haaretz lo yaaseh mishpat? G-d's plan seemed supremely unjust, even immoral--and it was G-d doing the killing here. So Avraham argues with G-d, only to discover in the end that indeed, there are no righteous people in Sodom. G-d knows what He's doing. If He says "kill this baby," there's a good reason for it. We just aren't privy to what that reason is.
Back to top
Page 1 of 1 Recent Topics




Post new topic   Reply to topic    Forum -> Interesting Discussions