[Par-lite] for Parshat Beshlach - shiur #2

Thu Jan 13 02:59:21 EST 2011

Dedicated in memory of Mr. David Wolfe, on the occasion of
his first Yahrzeit  this week -  on 7 Shvat

**********************************************************
***

     THE TANACH STUDY CENTER [http://www.tanach.org]

          In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag

     Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem Leibtag

**********************************************************
***

                    PARSHAT BESHALACH

             "AMALEK - - V'LO YA'RAY ELOKIM"

     Many nations have attacked and oppressed Am Yisrael

throughout its history. Yet, for some reason, Amalek is

singled out as Israel's 'arch enemy.' What was so terrible

about Amalek's attack that requires a battle 'for all

generations'?

     To answer this question, we examine some very
interesting

details in the Torah's description of this event (that are

often overlooked) in attempt to determine if Amalek is

something 'genetic' or 'generic'.

INTRODUCTION

  The details of Amalek's attack on Israel in Parshat
Besalach

are quite scant.  However, by considering when this battle

takes place, as well as the parallel source in Sefer
Devarim,

a more complete picture emerges - that can help us
understand

why Amalek remains Israel's 'eternal' enemy.

  We begin our study with a discussion of 'who is where'
when

Amalek first attacks.

WHO'S IN REFIDIM?

     Note how the Torah begins the story of Amalek,

immediately after the story of "massa u'meriva":

     "And Amalek came, and attacked Israel at REFIDIM..."

                         (see Shmot 17:8, after 17:1-7)

     From this pasuk alone, it would seem as though ALL of

Bnei Yisrael are encamped in Refidim when Amalek attacked.

However, when we consider what took place during the
previous

event (i.e. the story of "massa u'meriva"), a very
different

picture emerges.  Let's review those events:

  "And Bnei Yisrael traveled from MIDBAR SIN... and
encamped

  in REFIDIM, and there was no water for the people to

  drink... and they quarreled with Moshe..." (17:1-3)

     To solve this water shortage, God instructs Moshe to
take

his staff hit the rock etc.  However, recall where that
rock

is located:

  "God said to Moshe, PASS BEFORE the people, TAKE with
you

  SOME OF THE ELDERS, and take the staff... I will be
standing

  before you at the ROCK at CHOREV; strike the rock
[there]

  and water will issue from it..."  (17:5-6)

     The rock that Moshe hits is NOT in Refidim - rather,
it

is located at Har Sinai!  Therefore, to drink this water,
the

entire nation will now need to travel from Refidim to Har

Sinai (as we discussed in our first shiur on Parshat

Beshalach).

    Imagine the resulting situation: The entire nation,
who

had suffered several days of life-threatening thirst in a
hot

desert, must now first quench its immediate thirst, and
then

move its camp to the new water source at Har Sinai.  Those
who

still had strength probably went first to the water source
to

bring supplies back to those who were too weak to travel.

  One could also assume that this journey was not very

organized, with the stronger men advancing ahead to set up
the

new campsite, while those who were 'weak and tired'
lingered

behind.

AMALEK ATTACKS

     It is precisely at this point when Amalek attacks:

"Amalek came, and attacked Israel at REFIDIM..." (see
17:8).

But who is in Refidim?  - Only a remnant of the camp - the

weak and the tired - most probably, primarily the women
and

children.

  Agreed, our interpretation thus far has been based on

conjecture and 'reading between the lines.' However, in
the

parallel account of this story in Sefer Devarim, we find

precisely these missing details:

  "Remember what Amalek did to you BA'DERECH (on your
journey)

  when you left Egypt - for he surprised you BA'DERECH
[i.e.

  while you were traveling] and cut down ALL THE
STRAGGLERS IN

  YOUR REAR, while you were FAMISHED & WEARY..."    (see

  Devarim 25:17-18)

     Amalek capitalizes on Bnei Yisrael's disadvantage.
[They

break the laws of the 'Geneva Convention.']  Even in war
there

are accepted norms of conduct; men fight men, armies
engage

armies. Amalek's attack is outright unethical, even by
wartime

standards.

     [See Rashi & Ibn Ezra on "ayeif v'yagaya" on Devarim

25:18.]

YIRAT ELOKIM

     Further support of this interpretation may be drawn
from

the conclusion of the pasuk cited earlier from Sefer
Devarim:

  "...v'LO YA'RAY ELOKIM - and he (Amalek) did not fear
God."

        (Devarim 25:18, see Rashi & Ibn Ezra in contrast
to

Chizkuni)

     This phrase - YA'RAY ELOKIM - in the context of
unethical

(or immoral) behavior is found numerous times in Chumash.
For

example, Avraham offers Avimelech the following
explanation

for lying about his wife:

  "And Avraham explained (to Avimelech), for I said (to

  myself) there is no YIRAT ELOKIM in this place, and

  therefore they will kill me (to take my wife)."
(Breishit

  20:11)

     In this context, a lack of "yirat Elokim" describes
one

who would kill a visitor in order to take his wife. [Quite

unethical according to even the lowest moral standards.]

     Similarly, Yosef - pretending to be an Egyptian
official

- tells the brothers that he will release them from jail,

allowing them a chance to prove that they are not spies.
He

prefaces his decision to his brothers with the phrase:
"... ET

HA'ELOKIM ANI YA'RAY..." (see Breishit 42:15-18).  From
this

conversation, we see once again how the phrase "yirat
Elokim"

in the Bible seems to be 'internationally' understood as a

description of ethical behavior.

     We find yet another example at the beginning of Sefer

Shmot, as the Torah describes how the midwives 'feared
Elokim'

by not obeying Pharaoh's command to kill the male babies:

"v'ti'rena ha'myaldot et ha'Elokim..."  (see Shmot 1:21).

  [Note as well Yitro's comment in Shmot 18:21, suggesting
to

  appoint judges who are "yirei Elokim", among a list of
other

  'ethical' characteristics. / See also our TSC shiur on
the

  Akeyda. (www.tanach.org/breishit/vayera.doc), which

  discusses this phrase in greater detail.]

     All of these examples support our interpretation of
the

phrase "v'lo yarey Elokim" by Amalek - as reflective of
their

unethical behavior - waging war on the weak and
unprotected.

     Based on this analysis, we conclude that Torah may
have

singled out Amalek as Israel's 'arch enemy' not merely
because

they were the first nation to attack Israel, but rather
due to

the unethical nature of that attack.

     In this sense, one could suggest that "zecher Amalek"
-

the remembrance of Amalek - could be understood as a
'generic'

term describing any aggressive nation that would act in a

similar unethical manner, and not necessarily a 'genetic'

term, describing any family descendent of those people who

attacked Israel at Refidim.

     Let's attempt to support this conclusion, and its

underlying logic.

AMALEK IN THE BIBLE

     The commandment to remember what Amalek did (see both

Shmot 17:16 and Devarim 25:17) seems to apply to every

generation, even after the original ('genetic') Amalek is

wiped out.  The eternal nature of this law - to 'remember

Amalek' - suggests that Amalek may also represent any
similar

('generic') type of enemy that may emerge in future

generations.

  To support this understanding, note how Amalek emerges
in

mass numbers during the time of David (see Shmuel Aleph
27:7-9

and 30:1-3!), only a short time after they were 'totally
wiped

out' by Shaul (ibid. chapter 15).

  Note as well how Amalek attacked the 'women and
children' of

David's camp in Tziklag, taking them captive - at the same

time when David and his men had left on a mission.  [It is

recommended that you read that entire account (see
30:1-19).]

Here, we find not only the name Amalek, but a very similar

manner of ('unethical') warfare.

  In fact, if one follows Amalek's whereabouts in Chumash
- we

find them all over:

  * In the western Sinai desert -

     when Bnei Yisrael leave Egypt (Parshat Beshalach).

  * in the northen Negev (near Kadesh Barnea)

     when the spies return (in Parshat Shlach / see
14:25).

  * east of the Dead Sea (in Jordan),

    when Bilam 'blesses' them in Parshat Balak (see
24:20).

     Then, in Sefer Shoftim, we find them joining in
battle

against Israel, no matter who the primary enemy was:

     * joining the Moabites in battle in the time Ehud

               (see Shoftim 3:13)

     * attacking in the area of Efraim in the time of
Devora)

               (see Shoftim 5:14, precise context unclear)

     * attacking Emek Yizrael, joining Midyan, in the time
of

Gidon

               (see Shoftim 6:3 & 6:33)

    [Not to mention the battles of Shaul and David against

    Amalek, as mentioned above.]

  Yet in all of these battles, we never find Amalek living
in

any specific land, rather a nomadic tribe - roaming the

desert, looking for easy prey.  Furthermore, we never find
a

mention of their god.  Even when Sefer Shoftim mentions
the

gods of the other nations that Bnei Yisrael worshiped, we
find

the gods of Aram, Tzidon, Edom, Moav, Amon, and Phlishtim
(see

Shoftim 10:6), we never find even a mention of the god of

Amalek.

     Amalek emerges as a nation with no god, and no land.

Their primary goal appears to be the denial of Israel's
right

to exist.  At any time of Israel's weakness, they swoop in
and

attack.

     Another proof that Amalek must be destroyed because
of

their deeds, and not only because of their 'genes' is
found in

Sefer Shmuel when God commands Shaul to destroy them.
Note

how Shmuel describes Amalek (at that time) as a nation who
had

sinned against God (see Shmuel Aleph 15:18).

     Furthermore, from the commandment not to take any
booty

from that battle (see again 15:18 and context of that
entire

chapter), we find a parallel to Avraham's attitude to the
city

of Sedom.  Recall from Breishit 14:22-23, how Avraham
shunned

the very thought of taking anything that once belonged to

Sedom - the city of iniquity.

     Therefore, it is not incidental that it becomes the

mitzvah of the King of Israel to defeat Amalek (see I
Shmuel

15:1-2 and Rambam Hilchot Melachim 1:1).  Recall how the
king

of Israel should be known for his ability to establish a

nation characterized by acts of "tzedaka & mishpat" - see

Shmuel Bet 8:15, Melachim Aleph 10:9, and Yirmiyahu
22:1-5,13-

16 & 23:5-8.  From that perspective, it also becomes his

responsibility (when capable of doing so) to pursue
nations

such as Amalek, who wage war in unethical ways - taking

advantage of the weak and helpless.

  [Note as well at the end of Parshat Ki-teyze,
immediately

  before the mitzvah to 'remember Amalek', we find a set
of

  laws that emphasize the enforcement of "tzedek
u'mishpat" -

  see Devarim 25:13-16).]

  In summary, there definitely appears to be something

'genetic' about Amalek, at least in Am Yisrael's first

encounter with that nation.  However, the unethical nature
of

that attack, and the Torah's immediate command to remember

that event for all generations, suggests a 'generic'

understanding as well, for by remembering what Amalek had
done

wrong - Am Yisrael is encouraged to remember their own

national goal - to do what is 'right and just'.

                                  shabbat shalom,

                                  menachem

FOR FURTHER IYUN

=================

PRO'S & CON'S

     There are certain pro's & con's that come with this

'generic' understanding of Amalek. The obvious advantage,
is

that it would solve the 'ethical' problem of how and why
would

God command us to kill any descendant of that nation, even
if

those later generations did nothing wrong.  After all,
Chumash

itself teaches us that: " parents should die for the sins
of

their children, nor children for the sins of their
parents,

each man is responsible for his own sin" (Devarim 24:16).

     The obvious disadvantage is that the simple pshat of
the

psukim suggests that this commandment applies specifically
to

the people Amalek, the descendants of Esav's grandson (see

Breishit 36:12).  Furthermore, this nation appears again

several times in Tanach, which supports the 'genetic'

interpretation.  For example, in Bilam's blessings, he
sees

Amalek, in a manner very similar to how he sees Israel,
and

the Kenites etc. (see Bamidbar 24:20-22).  Later on, the
books

of Shoftim and Shmuel, the nation of Amalek appears
numerous

times, and appears to a nation like any other in the
Bible.

     Therefore, in our shiur, we have tried to find the

'middle ground'.

THE COUNTER ATTACK

     This interpretation also explains an enigmatic detail
in

the Torah's description of the counterattack, as presented
in

Parshat Beshalach.  When Moshe hears of Amalek's attack,
he

instructs Yehoshua to launch a counteroffensive - machar -
on

the next day:

    "Go fight Amalek... MACHAR - TOMORROW - I (Moshe) will
be

      standing at the top of the hill with the MATEH
ELOKIM..."

                (17:9/ See Ibn Ezra - "givah" = Har
Sinai!)

 Should not Yehoshua engage Amalek immediately? Why wait

for another day of hostilities to pass before mobilizing
the

nation's defense? According to our explanation, the
leaders

(Moshe & the elders) and most of the men are already at
Har

Sinai. It will therefore take a full day for Yehoshua to

organize the troops and march them back towards Refidim.

THE WATER AT SINAI

     The Moshav Zekeinim (Ba'alei Tosfot on the Torah)
cites

the question as to how the water-producing rock in Chorev

(Sinai) gave water to Bnei Yisrael in Refidim.  However,
the

Ramban (17:5) claims, as we mentioned in the shiur, that
the

gushing water formed several rivers and streams that
flowed to

Refidim.

     As for the significance of the water flowing
specifically

from Har Sinai - this point is developed at length by the

Abarbanel, in his commentary to this parsha.  He writes
that

as water symbolizes Torah, Hashem had intended all along
to

provide the nation's water needs from Sinai, the site of
the

giving of the Torah.  Refidim was to have been a brief,

preparatory stopover before the nation's arrival at Sinai.

  The Abarbanel adds that for this reason Hashem ordered
Moshe

to bring the elders along with him to Sinai.  The
presentation

of water was to correspond to the presentation of the
Torah,

which also required the presence of the zekeinim (Shmot
24:9).

The Abarbanel also notes that the Beit Hamikdash, which,
like

Har Sinai, is the place where Torah is given ("ki mi'Tzion

tetze Torah" - Yeshayahu 2:3; Michah 4:2), is also
destined to

serve as a source of water - Yoel 4:18; Zecharya 14:8.

SPOILING HAR SINAI

     Up until this point we have discussed the
particularly

unethical nature of Amalek's attack. Yet, the eternal
mitzvah

to 'erase the memory of Amalek' for all generations may
also

suggest a spiritual theme.  Recall from Part I that the
entire

journey from Egypt to Har Sinai served as a 'training
mission'

of sorts to spiritually prepare Bnei Yisrael for Matan
Torah.

At Refidim, the 'stage has been set' for Matan Torah - but

Amalek's attack 'spoils' this encounter. [See Shir
Ha'shirim

1:4.] In effect, Amalek attempts to prevent Am Yisrael
from

achieving their Divine destiny.

  The nature of this struggle remains throughout our
history.

Even once Am Yisrael conquers its internal enemy and is

finally prepared to follow God, external, human forces of

evil, unwilling to allow God's message to be heard, will

always make one last attack. Am Yisrael must remain
prepared

to fight this battle against Amalek for all generations:
"ki

yad al kes Kah, MILCHAMA l'HASHEM b'AMALEK, m'dor dor."

(17:16)

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20110113/f00a6f5e/attachment-0001.htm 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: bshal2.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 40316 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20110113/f00a6f5e/attachment-0001.pdf 