Does Amalek still exist?

How can any religion countenance hate, especially a religion that does its upmost to promote love, such as Judaism? Christianity, at least in theory, condemns hate and revenge. However, it will be argued in this chapter that in very circumscribed circumstances hate is an essential part of Judaism and the role of the Amalek story is to instill this value firmly within Judaism.

​

The Children of Israel were making their way on their 10-day journey from Egypt to receive the law on Mount Sinai. However, near to Mount Sinai, in Rephidim, they were subject to an unprovoked attack from the tribe of Amalek. This was successfully repelled. The command to hate and obliterate the tribe of Amalek follows directly from this attack. It is found in two places in the Torah, the first in the Book of Exodus:

​

Amalek came and fought with Israel at Rephidim. Moses said to Joshua, “Pick some troops for us, and go out and do battle with Amalek. Tomorrow, I will station myself on the top of the hill, with the rod of God in my hand.” Joshua did as Moses told him and fought with Amalek, while Moses, Aaron, and Hur went up to the top of the hill. Then, whenever Moses held up his hand, Israel prevailed; but whenever he let down his hand, Amalek prevailed. But Moses’ hands grew heavy; so they took a stone and put it under him and he sat on it, while Aaron and Hur, one on each side, supported his hands; thus his hands remained steady until the sun set. And Joshua overwhelmed the people of Amalek with the sword. Then YHWH said to Moses, “Inscribe this in a document as a reminder, and read it aloud to Joshua: I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven!” And Moses built an altar and named it Hashem-nissi (YHWH is my banner). And he said: “A hand is upon the throne of YHWH (i.e., I am making an oath), YHWH will be at war with Amalek in every generation” (Exodus 17:2-16).

 

in a speech he makes to the people that forms the substance of the Book of Deuteronomy, Moses adjures them to annihilate Amalek. This passage complements and to a slight extent contradicts the account in Exodus:  

 

Remember what Amalek did to you on your journey, after you left Egypt. He chanced on you on the way, and he killed among you all the weaklings at your rear, when you were faint and exhausted, and he did not fear Elokim. Therefore, when YHWH your God grants you safety from all your enemies around you, in the land that YHWH your God is giving you as a hereditary portion, you shall blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven. Do not forget! (Deuteronomy 25:17-19).

 

The contradictions I consider to be deliberate and are related to the fact that both passages were directed at different audiences. The first passage is relevant to the audience that just left Egypt. Forty years later a new generation is being addressed, as the generation that left Egypt has died in the wilderness.

 

The first seeming contradiction is that Moses’ comment that “YHWH will be at war with Amalek in every generation can leave the impression that the war against Amalek is God’s war, and that somehow He will take care of it. The passage from Deuteronomy dispels that notion. The war against Amalek is an Israelite war and they are ones who will need to combat them.

 

First, though, we need to answer the question — who are the Amalekites?

 

Who were the tribe of Amalek?

The Amalekites were a nomadic people who lived in the Negev, south of the border of Canaan. This is apparent from a number of Biblical verses. Hence, when the Israelites came to the Wilderness of Paran at Kadesh in the Negev, spies were sent out to survey the land of Canaan and they described Amalek as “dwelling in the land of the south” (Numbers 13:29). Also, when the Israelites attempted to penetrate Canaan from their current location in the Negev against Moses’ advice following the sin of the spies:

​

“The Amalekite and the Canaanite who dwelled on the mountain descended, struck them and pounded them until they were destroyed.” (Numbers 14:45).

  

In actuality, the area of habitation of the Amalekites may have been much greater than this. In Samuel I, Saul is described as smiting Amalek “From Havila until you come to Shur, east of Egypt“ (I Samuel 15:7). Both Havila and Shur are close to Egypt.1 Hence, when the Israelites left Egypt “Moses caused Israel to journey from the Sea of Reeds and they went out to the Wilderness of Shur” (Exodus 15:23).

 

It seems likely, therefore, that the habitation of Amalek encompassed not only the Negev, but also parts of the Sinai Peninsula extending towards Egypt. 

 

Deuteronomy relates that Amalek attacked “and he killed among you all the weaklings at your rear, when you were faint and exhausted, and he did not fear Elohim.” (Deuteronomy 25:18)  

 

The Amalekites were a war-like people who preyed on poorly prepared travelers on the main trade routes in the Sinai Peninsula and Negev. Their stock in trade was killing and they avoided frontal attacks in which they themselves could suffer casualties. They recognized no moral authority, which is why the Bible says “he did not fear Elohim.” (Deuteronomy 25:18). Violence was part of their way of life. In modern parlance — they were terrorists.

 

One does find the idea among Jewish commentators such as Nachmanides that Amalek went out of its way to find the Israelites and to attack them, despite the terror of the other nations. However, there is no support for this in the Torah and just as likely that this was a chance encounter. In fact, the Deuteronomy version states specifically that the Amalekites “chanced” upon the Israelite camp, using the Hebrew word “korcho” - which means “chanced upon you” or “happened upon you.” 

 

The Amalekites continued to be a threat to Israel during the time of the Judges and they took part in a number of alliances against Israel. They allied with Eglon king of Moab after the death of Othniel son of Kenz (Judges 3:13) and with Midian after the time of Deborah (Judges 6:3). This latter alliance caused widespread destruction in Israel. They also fought together with Midian against Gideon, this time unsuccessfully (Judges 6:33). 

 

The Book of Samuel mentions specifically that their border raiding and disruption of trade in Sinai was a threat to the Israelite kingdom during the time of the monarchy:

 

And he [ Saul] gathered an army, and he smote Amalek, and he saved Israel from the hand of its plunderer (I Samuel 14:48).

 

The warlike nature of Agag king of the Amalekites is also mentioned by the prophet Samuel as he is about to kill him:

​

As your sword bereaved women, so will your mother be bereaved among women’. And Samuel hewed Agag in pieces before YHWH in Gilgal (i Samuel 15:33).

 

But was this really a chance encounter?

 

The above paragraph from Deuteronomy implies that the attack of Amalek was a chance encounter. It did not engage in advance planning, but came across stragglers from the Israelite camp and did what it specialized in doing — attacking the weak. Moses stressed the chance aspect of this encounter so as to emphasize to his audience the need for retribution. But this does not mean necessarily that this entire episode was the product of chance. Jewish commentators such as Rashi, based on midrashim, see a connection between the previous story in the Torah and that of the Amalekite attack, especially as they both took place in the same location, in Rephidim.2

​

In this story, the people complained bitterly to Moses that they lacked water to the point that they were almost ready to stone Moses. They also questioned whether God was still in their midst. This place was called Massah U’meriba, because of the contention of the Children of Israel and becaue of their tests of YHWH, saying ‘Is YHWH in our midst or not?’(Exodus 17:7). Their thirst was eventually relieved when Moses struck a rock with his rod at God’s command and water issued from the rock (ibid 17:1-7). Rashi points out that Amalek’s attack was an answer to the people’s questioning.

 

In support of this, the word “Amalek” appears seven times in the above passage from Exodus and is functioning as a keyword. This sevenfold repetition also implies that the appearance of Amalek was not fortuitous and was orchestrated by God. Amalek would be repulsed, and during the battle, the people would come to the realization that victory had been achieved because God was indeed in their midst.  

It is a difficult idea to rationalize. On the one hand, God facilitated Israel’s victory over Amalek when the Jewish people directed their hearts to Him. He also permitted, or even arranged, for Amalek to appear. This type of duality is found in other places in the Torah. The classic example is when God promised Abraham that his offspring will be exiled in Egypt, but also promised that He would bring them out (Genesis 15:13).  

 

Moses’ hands

The people asked at Riphidim – is God really with us? God will now demonstrate that He is still very much with the Jewish people by providing assistance to Joshua in his fight against Amalek. Nevertheless, His intervention is no longer at the miraculous level it was in Egypt during the Ten Plagues and the splitting of the Reed Sea.

​

An appreciation of the function of Moses’ staff provides useful insights into the transition between the miraculous events accompanying the Exodus and the more natural post-Exodus events that followed in the desert.3

​

At least half of the miracles that occurred in Egypt during the Ten Plagues were related to Moses’ staff. At the Reed Sea, God commanded Moses to stretch his staff over the water so it would part. The people needed to do no more than step into the water: 

​

Moses said to the people: “ …… YHWH will do battle on your behalf, and you shall remain silent.”  And YHWH said to Moses: “…….. And you – lift up your staff and stretch out your arms over the sea and split it. . . . ’ (Exodus 17:14-16).

 

During Moses’ strife with the people at Rephidim regarding a lack of water, Moses was also told to hit the rock with his staff so that it would issue forth water (Exodus 17:6). In all these instances, Moses’ staff functioned as a manifestation of God’s power to manipulate the forces of nature. The miracles during the Ten Plagues would demonstrate to Israel, and also the Egyptians, God’s control over all aspects of nature and His ability to manipulate the natural world to His will.  

 

It was logical, therefore, that when confronted with the challenge of Amalek’s attack, Moses’ first thought would be to fetch his staff. As at the Reed Sea, Moses would herald God’s intervention with his staff:

 

And Moses said unto Joshua: “Choose men for us, and go out, do battle with Amalek; tomorrow I will stand on the top of the hill with the staff of Elohim in my hand” (Exodus 17:9). 

​

However, at no time did Moses receive a specific command to raise his staff. He may not even have used it. Rather, he soon discovered that the act of raising his hand, with or without his staff, led Israel to prevail, while lowering his hands led to Amalek prevailing. His staff had become irrelevant.4 

 

The Amalek story consists of nine verses. The first three describe Amalek’s attack and Moses’ preparations for war (ibid 17:8-10). The final three sentences describe God’s reaction to the battle and His oath to wage a perpetual fight against this tribe. The middle three sentences detail the battle itself.

 

To review these verses again: 

 

And it came to pass that when Moses held up his hand that Israel prevailed; and when he lowered his hand, Amalek prevailed. But Moses' hands were heavy; so they took a stone, and put it under him, and he sat on it; and Aaron and Hur supported his hands, one on this side, and one on that side; and he was with his hands in faith (literally: and he was his hands faith) until the setting of the sun. And Joshua weakened Amalek and its people with the edge of the sword.” (Exodus 17:11-13) 

T

he question is an obvious one and is raised in Mishna Rosh Hashanah. How was it possible for Moses’ hands to influence this battle?  This is its answer to this question: 

 

Was it Moses hands that won the battle or lost the battle? Rather, as long as Israel looked heavenward and subjected their heart to their Father in heaven, they would prevail; but when they did not, they would fall.5

 

God would continue to fight for them, just as He did at the Reed Sea; but overt miracles were now to be the exception rather than the rule. In the future the Israelites will need to physically fight to acquire the land Canaan and its conquest will be accomplished primarily by natural means (the battle of Jericho was perhaps an exception). There were two prerequisites, however, for God’s assistance in the battle with Amalek. One was that the Jewish people recognize that God is ultimately responsible for the outcome of the battle, and the second is that their hearts be directed and subjected to God. The position of Moses’ hands raised heavenwards would be seen by all the people when Moses went to the “to the top of the hill.” This could also explain why the battle needed to be fought “on the morrow” — during daylight.

 

This may explain why the verse continues: “. . . and he was with his hands in faith (emuna)” (ibid 17:12).

 

This is a difficult phrase to translate. Literally, it reads “and his hands were faith.” Nachmanides translates it as “and his hands remained firm until sunset.”7 Rashi, though, sees within it Moses’ appreciation that his hands were expressing faith.8  

 

This is also why the connection between the people and God needed to be acknowledged communally, as well as individually. Hence, Moses as the religious leader, and Aaron as the future representative of the priests, as well as Hur of the tribe of Judah, the tribe that would one day become the political leader of the Israelite nation, stood together on top of the mountain to assist Moses in elevating his hands. 

 

It is logical to assume that by raising his hands, Moses was pointing to the connection between earth and heaven, the two-way influence of this connection over the affairs of the Jewish people, and possibly the need for this battle to be fought physically with hands and not through the influence of a “magic” staff.    

 

The literary format of the story also draws attention to the importance of Moses’ hands in determining the outcome of this battle. The word “hand” is mentioned seven times in this passage as a keyword.

 

The first six mentions relate to the hands of Moses, whereas the seventh relates to the hand of God.

 

And YHWH said unto Moses: “Write this for a memorial in the Book, and recite it in the ears of Joshua, because I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under the heavens.” And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it “YHWH is my Banner.” And he said: “For there is a hand upon the throne of God: YHWH will have war with Amalek from generation to generation” (Exodus 17:14-16).

​

It was the practice in the ancient world to accompany an oath with a physical action. Hence, Abraham swears to the king of Sodom “I have raised my hand to YHWH ….  If I shall take anything that is yours.” (Genesis 14:22). Eliezer, Abraham’s servant, placed his hand under Abraham’s though when promising to keep to the conditions for his finding a wife for Isaac in Aram Naharaim (Genesis 24:9). Here, God raises his hand to His throne that He will be at perpetual war against Amalek. Moreover, just as Moses raised his hand in acknowledging the presence of God, so did God raise His hand in acknowledging the Jewish people as His people.

​

Moses commemorated the victory by building an altar to God: 

 

And Moses built an altar, and called the name of it “YHWH is my Banner.” (Exodus 17:15)

 

A banner is held aloft — as Moses’ hands had been. The name of this altar will be relevant not only to this battle but to all Israel’s future battles. The miracles of the Exodus with their frequent involvement of Moses’ staff are past; but this is not the end of God’s engagement in Israel’s military struggles. This was demonstrated by Moses’ hands.    

  

The command to hate

God will wage war against Amalek from generation to generation, but it is the role of the Jewish people to blot out its memory. But Judaism is all about love and not war. The Torah contains numerous statements about love – love of one’s neighbor, love of the stranger. Nevertheless, despite the exuberance of love in the Torah, there is one exception — the hatred of Amalek. The Torah thought this hate to be important enough to include it as an integral part of the Torah. One might almost say that if the Amalekites had not appeared, Jewish tradition would have needed to invent them.

 

It could be that an operative phrase for this hatred is the Torah’s comment “that he [Amalek] did not fear God” (Deuteronomy 25:18). Following the Exodus, God’s reputation in bringing the Israelites out of Egypt, particularly the destruction of  the Egyptian army at the Reed Sea spread throughout the Middle East. Yet despite this, Amalek had no inhibitions about attacking them.8

 

Nachmanides explains: 

 

Whereas all the nations “heard and were agitated” and Philistia, Edom, Moab and “all the dwellers of Canaan dissolved” “because of the fear of God and glory of His greatness,” yet Amalek came from afar and brazenly acted as one who would attempt to overcome God. It is for this reason Scripture said about Amalek: “and he did not fear God.”9

​

However, the world is full of people and nations that do not fear God. There must be more to it than just this.

​

Judaism is not only about bringing goodness into the world. It is also about destroying evil. Judaism cannot eradicate all the evil in the world. That is God’s job. But if a nation seeks the genocide of the Jews who are God’s people, then this also is an attack against God. When Israel is powerless, as it has been for the last 2,000 years, then God will have to take care of it Himself. But when Israel is not powerless, as is the situation today, then Israel becomes responsible for eradicating the evil against it. With the help of God, of course.

​

Jewish tradition makes sure that this admonition is not overlooked. There happens to be a redundancy in the following passage from Deuteronomy:

​

Remember what Amalek did to you” the Bible states: “ on the way, when you were leaving Egypt, that he happened upon you on the way …………….. It shall be that when YHWH your God gives you rest from all your enemies around, in the land that YHWH your God gives you as an inheritance to take possession, you shall wipe out the remembrance of Amalek from under the heaven— you shall not forget (Deuteronomy 25:17-19).    

 

Why does the Torah add “you shall not forget” at the end? Clearly, if there is remembrance there is no forgetting. 

 

One possibility is that “you shall not forget” is linked to the preceding phrase regarding annihilating Amalek – hence do “not forget” to destroy them. Alternatively, there is a poetic format to this passage with the end of the paragraph emphasizing that which was stated at the beginning — “Remember what Amalek did to you” …  and “do not forget.”  

 

However, Jewish tradition understood this paragraph differently. “Remember” means to verbalize the command not to forget what Amalek did. For this reason, this passage is read aloud once a year in the synagogue. The phrase “you shall not forget” means to internalize the command to remember.10  

In sum – the Jewish people are to hate Amalek and make a declaration of this hatred at least once a year so that it remains embedded in their memory. They are also to internalize it and eventually bring this hatred to its conclusion by obliterating the memory of this people in a preemptive attack.

 

The massacre of Amalek

To the modern mind the words of the Bible may grate: 

 

You shall wipe out the remembrance of Amalek from under the heaven — you shall not forget (Deuteronomy 25:19).

 

Amalek perpetrated war crimes. Now you also commit a war crime by annihilating it. But does one crime really excuse another? The Human Rights Council of the United Nations would have a hay day on this!

 

The actualization of this directive to obliterate the memory of the Amalekites was attempted in the days of the prophet Samuel. The Jewish nation had achieved a degree of stability under King Saul.  One battle had already been fought against Amalek (I Samuel 15:3). It was now time to deal with the Amalekites as adjured by the Bible: 

​

And Samuel said to Saul: “. . . So said the Lord of Hosts: ‘I remember that which Amalek did to Israel, what he did to him on the way, when he came up out of Egypt. Now go and you shall smite Amalek, and you shall utterly destroy all that is his, and you shall not have pity on him; and you shall slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass’” (1 Samuel 15:1-3). 

 

A discussion about the morality of massacring the people of Amalek, and in particular the killing of its animals, is found in the following midrash:

​

Saul came to the city of Amalek . . . The Rabbis taught that he began to question God’s command. “Master of the universe, so Samuel said to me: ‘Go and smite Amalek and destroy them completely. . .. A person may sin, but how can an animal be guilty? A heavenly voice declared: “Do not be overly righteous — more than your Creator.’11 

 

It is a poignant question. God is the yardstick for justice and mercy. How then can He perpetrate revenge on Amalek to the extent of annihilating it and everything that belongs to it? Yet it is precisely the killing of Amalek’s animals that provides an understanding of the reasoning of the Bible.

 

The ancient world would have had no trouble in empathizing with the Bible’s command to destroy Amalek. Massacring one’s foes and taking their women and property as booty were commonplace in warfare. However, this was not how the Amalekites were to be treated. None of their property was to be taken. All was to be annihilated, including the women and children. This was a marked departure from the practices of that time.

 

Such a massacre is not an isolated occurrence in the Bible. If a Jewish city after careful investigation has been found to practice idolatry, the Bible commands thus: 

​

You shall surely smite the inhabitants of that city with the edge of the sword; lay it waste and everything that is in it, and its animals, with the edge of the sword.  You shall gather together all its booty to the midst of its open square, and you shall burn by fire completely the city and all its booty to YHWH your God, and it shall be an eternal heap, it shall not be rebuilt (Deuteronomy 13:17).

 

According to Jewish tradition, there has never been an instance of of destruction of such a city. Nevertheless, the Torah recognizes that such a command appears cruel and lacking in mercy; and it addresses this objection:

 

No part of the banned property (cherem) may adhere to your hand, so that YHWH will turn back from His burning wrath; and He will give you mercy and be merciful to you and multiply you, as He swore to your forefathers (Deuteronomy 13:19).

I

n your eyes, this vengeance may seem to be lacking in mercy, but if you adhere to the words of the Torah, mercy will be bestowed upon you.  

​

There is probably no another textual source in history in which those about to perpetrate a massacre are promised they will be rewarded with mercy for participating in it! 

 

In some way, this city becomes dedicated to God. In the Bible, its status is known as being in “cherem” or being “banned property.” As such, no benefit may be obtained from it.

​

Although the Bible does not state it in precisely this way, Jericho after being captured by Joshua, also seems to have been placed in a state of cherem and dedicated to God. 

​

And they burned the city and everything in it with fire. Only the silver, gold and vessels of copper and iron they gave to the treasury of the house of YHWH. . .  And Joshua swore at that time: “Cursed be the person before YHWH who rises and builds this city, Jericho. With his oldest son he will lay its foundation and with his youngest son he will set up the gates” (Joshua 6:24-26).

 

In a similar way, at the time of Samuel, the people and property of Amalek were placed in cherem and dedicated in their entirety to God. However, King Saul, following the wishes of his soldiers, let Agag the king of the Amalekites live, probably for a public execution, and also the best of the sheep, which he designated for sacrifices to God. This was contrary to Samuel’s instructions and Saul was severely punished for it.

 

It is possible to extrapolate the midrash’s comment to Saul: “Do not be overly righteous — more than your Creator” as follows: 

 I, God, am the measure of mercy. Do not try now to outdo Me on this. The tribe of Amalek no longer warrants My mercy because of what it has done in the past and what it will continue doing if not prevented. Because of its evil, it is now dedicated to Me. Be accepting of this — for this is My decree.

 

The new Amalekites

 

There is a contradiction in the Torah regarding God’s conflict with Amalek. God commands the annihilation of Amalek. Yet He also promises that He will be at war with Amalek “from generation to generation.” If the Jewish people succeed in destroying Amalek, against whom will God wage war?  

Moreover, the Torah is consistent in foreseeing Amalek’s total annihilation. The Book of Numbers relates a prophecy made by the non-Jewish prophet Bilaam:

​

Then he looked on Amalek and took up his discourse and said: “Amalek was the first among the nations, but its end is utter destruction” (Numbers 24:20).  

 

There is evidence from the Bible that the annihilation of Amalek was indeed achieved. After Israel became united under a monarchy and had achieved relative stability, King Saul was Instructed by the prophet Samuel to wage war against Amalek, and Saul succeeded in decimating them: 

 

He took Agag king of the Amalekites alive, and all his people he totally destroyed with the sword (1 Samuel 1:15).

 

Further raids were carried out by David when he was living under protection of the Philistines of Gath and their king, Achish, although these raids would not appear to have had any theological significance as David kept the animals for his own use: 

 

Now David and his men went up and made raids against the Geshurites, the Girzites, and the Amalekites, for these were the inhabitants of the land of old, as far as Shur, even to the land of Egypt. And David would strike the land and would leave neither man nor woman alive, but would take away the sheep, the oxen, the donkeys, the camels, and the garments, and come back to Achish (1 Samuel 27:8-9).

 

Finally, the Book of Chronicles relates that during the time of Hezekiah the last remnant of Amalek was destroyed:

 

And of them five hundred men of the children of Simeon went to Mount Seir, and Pelatiah, Neariah, Rephaiah and Uzziel, the sons of Ishi at their head. And they smote the remnant of Amalekites that had escaped, and [the children of Simeon] they have lived there to this day."(1 Chronicles 4:42–43).

 

Given all these massacres, it seems unlikely that Amalek remained as a viable entity, although it is conceivable that isolated members of the tribe escaped. Haman the Aggagite, the villain of the story of the Book of Esther, is considered by Jewish tradition to have been an Amalekite, and if so, his forebears must have been escapees.35

 

Nevertheless, the question remains. How can God wage a perpetual war against a people that no longer exists?  

 

One answer is that Amalek was not only a tribe, but as much a concept. God is promising to wage war against people or nations who embody the characteristics of the now destroyed Amalek.

 

A person who has spoken and written about this is R’ Joseph Soloveitchik. In relation to the passage in the Book of Deuteronomy he said:  

 

The fight against Amalek is a fight against those who embody hatred, cruelty, and opposition to the sanctity of human life. This is not merely a physical war, but a spiritual battle that endures in every generation.

 

And from the Book of Exodus:

​

Amalek or man-Satan is the enemy of man, and enjoys causing misery and injury to all people. Yet, Amalek is particularly preoccupied with the Jew. He hates the Jew more than anyone else. . . . No matter what economic-sociopolitical program man-Satan adopts — socialist, capitalist, fascist, progressive, reactionary, agnostic-secular, or religious clerical — the hatred of the Jew is his central preoccupation. . . . This experience is not restricted to Diaspora Jewry as secular Zionism would have us think. It is an intergral part of the Jewish experience, a universal, all-inclusive experience. For our enemies, the problem of the State of Israel is not only of the existence of a political institution. The desire of Arab radicals is to destroy both the state and its population. (Days of Deliverance, p16).12

 

This passage, last published in 2014, and in particular its ending, is incredibly prescient.

Amalek-like characteristics could include the following:

 1. Belief in violence almost as almost a creed

2.  Exhibiting a pathological hatred of the Jewish people.

3.  Attempting genocide of the Jewish people. 

 

Based on R’ Soloveitchik’s writings, it has been pointed out that there are two aspects to the commandment regarding Amalek. One is to wipe out Amalek’s memory. This is an individual obligation and does not currently apply because all of Amalek’s descendents have been destroyed. There are none left. But there is also a communal obligation to war with Amalek and this still applies.13

Radical Islam has declared war on the State of Israel and by extension all Zionists, in effect all Jews.

The role of the State of Israel is to destroy Radical Islam. Not Islam. Radical Islam. No one else is going to do it. The Democratic administration of the United States has announced time after time in this current war that the answer is no escalation and that negotiations can solve all problems. Events in the United Nations have shown that the world is not going to do it either. That leaves only Israel.

 

References

1. Commentary of Nachmanides to Genesis 2:11.

 

2. Commentary of Rashi to the Torah on Exodus 17:8 based on Tanchuma Yithro 3 and Shemos Rabbah 26:2.

  

3. See also “Do the hands of Moses wage war? By Rav Mordechai Sabato in Torah Metzion. New Readings in Tanach. Shemot. P211, Maggid Books, a division of Koren Publishers, CT, USA 2012.

 

4. Nachmanides in his commentary to Exodus 7:19 sees the use of the staff as an initial step to bring upon the Amalekites “strikes of plague, sword and annihilation”.  Joshua also used his spear for this function when attacking Ai (Joshua 8:18)  Thereafter, his hands would need to be kept free.

 

5. Mishna Rosh Hashona 3:8.

 

6. Nachmanides, Commentary to the Torah on Exodus 17:12.

 

7. Rashi, Commentary to the Torah on Exodus 17:12.

 

8. Rashi’s Commentary to the Torah on Deuteronomy 25:18.

   

9. Nachmanides Commentary to the Torah on Exodus 17:16. Also Fourth Paragraph. The War with Amalek in A Commentary on the Book of Exodus by Umberto Moshe David Cassuto, p204, Varda Books, Skokie, IL, USA 2005.

 

10. Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim U’Milchamoteihem 5:5. Also Maimonides, Sefer Hamitzvot, Negative Commandment 59 and Sefer HaChinuch, Mitzva 605. Based on TB Megillah 18a.

 

11. Midrash Kohelet Zuta, parsha 7.

 

12. The Neuwirth Edition. Chumash Mesora Harav. Sefer Shemos, with commentary based upon the teachings of Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik, compiled and edited by Dr. Arnold Lustiger. Commentary on “Amalek came and fought with Israel in Rephidim” Exodus 17:8., p140. OU Press, New York, NY 2014.

 

13. See also “Rav Soloveitchik on Amalek: Peshat or Derach?” In Torah Musings http://www.torahmusings.com/2007/02/rav-soloveitchik-on-amalek-peshat-or/