Amalek: Final Solution or Endless Problem?

זכור, את אשר-עשה לך עמלק, בדרך, בצאתכם ממצרים. אשר קרך בדרך, ויזנב בך כל-הנחשלים אחריך--ואתה, עיף ויגע; ולא ירא, אלהים. והיה בהניח יהוה אלהיך לך מכל-איביך מסביב, בארץ אשר יהוה-אלהיך נתן לך נחלה לרשתה--תמחה את-זכר עמלק, מתחת השמים; לא, תשכח.

Devarim 25:17-19

“Remember What Amalek did to you on the road while leaving Egypt. How he attacked you in cold-blood on that road, and cut down those who straggled behind, while you were exhausted and fatigued. And when God finally relieves us of the enemies around us, in the land which He gives you as an inheritance; you must erase the memory of the people Amalek from humanity; Never forget this.”

The RamBam in Hilchos Melochim U’Milchomos 1:5 comments:

וכן מצות עשה לאבד זרע עמלק, שנאמר "תמחה את זכר עמלק" (דברים כה,יט); ומצות עשה לזכור תמיד מעשיו הרעים ואריבתו, כדי לעורר איבתו--שנאמר "זכור, את אשר עשה לך עמלק" (דברים כה,יז). מפי השמועה למדו, "זכור" בפה; "לא, תשכח" (דברים כה,יט) בלב, שאסור לשכוח איבתו ושנאתו.

“It is an active mitzvah to destroy the seed of Amalek…..and to constantly remind oneself of his treachery, and to arouse within oneself a bitter hatred in one’s heart.”

Notice what the Torah is saying here; that even when we are finally at peace in our homes and at peace with our other neighbors, even 1000s of years later, it remains a mitzvah to eradicate the people, possessions, artifacts, books, and history of Amalek from human memory. Not a trace of their existence is to remain for posterity. I need not remind anyone of the 20^th century parallel to this ‘mitzvah’.

What strikes me as odd is why Amalek catches so much flack over his attacking the Jews when several nations did so as well, but there was no mitzvah to eradicate them, only to subdue or defeat them in battle, as part of the normal conquest or self-defense of the Israel. Amalek, however, is even a peace-time enemy! Maybe it’s always important to have something to fear and hate? Let’s look at the Israelites short history with the Amalekites so far to find out why Moshe hated them so much. It seem they were akin to the first ‘terrorists’, or so the Torah would like you to believe.

Dev. 25:18 says “attacked you in cold blood, and cut down those who straggled behind”. This attack occurred in Refidim (Shemos 17) when the Jews, headed toward Har Sinai, were attacked by the Amalekites, who came many miles out of their way to attack the Jews who had fallen behind the larger and better protected caravan. The assumption is that Amalek had no reason to attack the Jews, since his nation was not under direct threat by the Israelite invasion. This assumption brings up some troubling questions.

1) The Medrash tells us that the entire world knew of Yitzias Mitzrayim and knew that the Jews were coming to claim their homeland. It is not unreasonable, even without a Medrash, that traders and others fleeing Egypt would have spread the word of the Israelite rebellion, the plagues, and the Jews desire to emigrate northward. So, even if the Jews current destination was not toward Israel, since Har Sinai was a detour to the southeast, the Amalekites KNEW that eventually this newly established and well armed nation was going to be coming their way in a short time. The Amalekites were conducting a preemptive strike on an immanent threat. See any parallels in current times?

2) Who doesn’t attack in cold blood? Especially in those days, long before human rights legislation and Geneva Conventions were ever conceived. No man can conduct a war with empathic or sympathetic feelings toward the enemy. Why should Amalek have been held to higher standard than anyone else? Why does our brutal conquest not come under the same scrutiny?

3) Moshe was mad because the Amalekites did not mount a full frontal assault on the Jews. The Torah claims that there were approximately 600,000 men of fighting age and ability among those who left Mitzrayim, which is much more than the Amalekites, a nomadic people, could have ever mustered, even if they mustered every man woman and child for battle. It seems to me that the Amalekites conducted the same military strategy that every army would use when vastly outnumbered by an enemy; one never attacks a strong position or gives up the element of surprise when attacking a much larger and powerful foe. Secondly, for the Amalelites to have attacked the main body of Jews, they would have had to delay their attack for several days, if not weeks, and thereby lose time and perhaps also the element of surprise.

4) Why did Moshe leave the ‘necheshalim’ unguarded? Moshe grew up as a prince in Pharoah’s house and must have known something about military tactics and planning, since that sort of training is part and parcel of being among the royal household. Is Moshe now trying cover up his own tactical errors by shifting blame to the Amalekites? What caused Moshe to allow people to fall so far behind anyway, knowing that they would be vulnerable to attack? And why wasn’t HaShem protecting these poor souls who fell behind?

5) The question of ‘necheshalim’ and the attack becomes a bit stronger when you consider the structure and shape of the Israelite caravan. Whether one believes that is was a system of Napoleonic Squares or an elongated rectangular formation, the Tribe of Dan was called in the Torah “measeph mikol hamachanos” (the gatherer or rear guard of all the encampments.) It was the responsibility of the sheyvet Dan to make sure that stragglers and their possessions would not be left behind and were well guarded. So even if there were ‘nechshalim’ they were, at least according to the Torah account, guarded to some extent by the warriors of Dan. So why the outrage?

6) Moshe claimed that the Jews were “tired and weary” when the Amalekites attacked them, yet when one looks at the Torah, the Jew already had the Manna, the quails, they had plenty of water, and at least a weeks rest before arriving at Refidim. Even if many of the women, children, and elderly were weakened from desert travel, the warriors, who Yehoshua easily called to arms, seem to have handled the initial attack with great success. Maybe the Amalekite warriors were tired, too?

7) The word ‘necheshalim’ means to venture out. Don’t the people themselves bear some responsibility for leaving the safety of the caravan? One has to wonder where exactly it was they would be ‘venturing out’ to do in the middle of a desert, especially when all their needs were met by the encampment and HaShem. It is probable that these ‘nechashalim’ were people who thought they could do some commerce with the local Bedouin tribes, and were cut down upon leaving the camp. The other meaning of ‘necheshalim’(from the word nachush) is bold or brazen, and these might have been people who decided to travel on their own.

8) There is another interpretation of ‘necheshalim’; those who complained against Moshe at Refidim. If this is the case, it would explain why HaShem didn’t protect them, but not why Moshe was so enraged by their murders! Moshe ordered the deaths of those who opposed his regime without much regret, so why would he now be upset that someone else, from the outside no less, came along to do the job for him? Especially if that seemed a Providential punishment for disloyalty? Maybe Moshe enjoyed being the ‘enforcer’.

9) The account in Shemos 17 says nothing about stragglers, the bold and brazen, or the loners. Why weren’t they mentioned there?

There is one issue that I have not elaborated upon, but does require mentioning. There is far more archaeological evidence for Amalekites of that era than there is for the Israelites of that same period. That’s something to think about and seems quite ironic; that the ones commanded to eradicate the memory of others have no evidence of their own existence, yet for those who are to be destroyed, more evidence seems to come forth. Is it possible that the command to destroy Amalek was really because he, being the first to attack us, saw us for what we really were, or were not, and that we had to silence these witnesses to prevent them from exposing our fraud?

I just don’t see any good reason why the Amalekites should be singled out for such virile and eternal hatred, to point of eradication and “Final Solution” simply for choosing to be the first among many nations to defend themselves against a larger and more imposing foe. This question becomes stronger from considering the apparent contradictions in both Torah and Midrashic accounts of the wars with Amalek.

What did Moshe expect them to do, throw a welcome party?