[Par-lite] for Parshat Bshalach - additional shiur

[Menachem Leibtag]

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

     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/20150129/a64fdfad/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- 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/20150129/a64fdfad/attachment-0001.pdf>