2021/5781
It is too much of a coincidence to ignore: the Jews ask [1] “HaYeish Hashem BeKirbenu Im Ayin,” “Is Hashem among us or not” (Shemot 17:7), and the next words are “VaYavo Amalek VaYilachem Im Yisrael BiRefidim,” “and Amalek came and fought with the Jews in Refidim” (Shemot 17:8). Not only are these two episodes juxtaposed, but the Torah goes so far as to say “VaYavo,” “and they came”, with a conjunctive vav meaning “and.” Noting this, Rashi quotes a Midrash which teaches that the two episodes are next to each other to serve as a reminder that Hashem is always there. This might seem straightforward, but it broaches a larger issue: what makes Amalek so bad, if their attack was just a punishment for the Jews?
The notion of a nation being inherently bad may seem familiar because of one’s familiarity with Amalek, but if one takes a step back, everything is turned upside down. Rav Eliyahu E. Dessler points out that every nation has some dominating characteristic that has potential to further God’s purposes in this world or has, at the very least, some redeeming characteristic. The prime example is Mitzrayim: Hashem says, “VeYadeu Mitzrayim Ki Ani Hashem,” “The Egyptians shall know that I am Hashem” (Shemot 14:18). Even Mitzrayim, the nation that enslaved, oppressed, and killed the Jews, has the potential to recognize Hashem. Yet, Amalek is absolutely an anomaly. Quoting Midrash Tanchuma, Rashi (Shemot 17:16 s.v. Ki Yad) states that Hashem’s name is not in harmony, is not full, until the name of Amalek is blotted out completely. Amalek is characterized by the Torah and Chazal as a heinous nation, but what makes Amalek so much worse than any other nation?
Perhaps the best place to gather information is from Megillat Esther, which provides the most information about any Amalekite. The scene is set: “VeChol Avdei HaMelech Asher BeShaar HaMelech Koriim UMishtachavim LeHaman,” “All the king’s servants in the king’s gate would kneel and bow to Haman” (Esther 3:2). What a great moment for Haman. King George III claimed that if it was true that George Washington would give up the presidency and step down from power, he would be the greatest man in the world. Most people naturally enjoy feeling power, including Haman. He holds a high position in the palace of a King that rules Earth. One can imagine this entitles him to the best food, best bed, best technology, and so on and so forth - it is a dream come true. (As the story progresses, though, it is revealed that his relationship with his wife is not defined by love. His wife, Zeresh, comes up only a handful of times in Megillat Esther, and every time her name is mentioned, she is contrasted with a group of people, primarily Haman’s loved ones (Esther 5:10, 5:14, 6:13) and one time with Haman’s advisors (Esther 6:13). His relationship with his kids does not appear to be such a strong one either. [2] It is evident that Haman does not have a life with any underlying meaning or depth, and this ‘dream come true’ is nothing but fools' gold.) To return to the pasuk quoted at the beginning of this paragraph, it reveals why everyone bowed down: “Ki Chein Tziva Lo HaMelech,” “because this is what the king commanded”. Eshkol HaKofer points out that no one wanted to bow to Haman, because no one respected him. The famous Midrash that Haman had an idol on a necklace around his neck seems to echo this very same point - no one wanted to bow down to Haman, but they would bow down to the idol. Haman was just not a man that had anything of real value.
Furthermore, on the second day of feasting, [3] when Achashveirosh asks Esther what her request is, she asks to have Haman killed, and titles him as “Haman HaRa,” “Haman the evil” (Esther 7:6). This seems superfluous, as she just described Haman as “Ish Tzar Ve’Oyeiv,” “A man who is the adversary and the enemy,” (ibid.), so is it really necessary to describe Haman as evil? Or Chadash points out that Eshter is not adding another adjective to Haman’s repertoire, but is just calling him by his name. It would make sense that if evil is at Haman’s essence, it is part of his name. [4] What makes Haman earn this status?
The Midrash (Bereishit Rabbah 34:10) defines what it means to be a bad person. It is not to kill people or hurt people, but to be imprisoned in one’s own mind and way of being. Essentially, what defines someone as bad is being unwilling to improve. To explain, when one is unwilling to change, it is a result of a belief in existence being hopelessness. If he believes that existence is hopeless, then he would believe that nothing he does matters. If he believes nothing he does matters, then he would feel no reason to be a good person and improve himself. Therefore, the real root of being a bad person lies in believing that existence is meaningless. A person like this does not place any value on a human life and would easily kill or harm someone, because he would believe that life is meaningless. Life is meaningless if existence is meaningless, and this would make it easy to kill, steal, and so on and so forth. A person like this would feel no need to develop any relationship with anyone. This is why Amalek is said to be the root of evil, because Amalek's philosophy is what leads to evil. Of course, since he is part of Amalek, this state of being is at the core of Haman. In fact, Haman knows he is wrong. He sees Mordechai not bowing down and his reaction is not to kill Mordechai, but to kill all Jews, because the Jews prove the reason for existence and thrive on it. However, Haman refuses to change, so he must remove any Kedushah, the ultimate purpose of life, which demonstrates everything that he believes is wrong, from the world.
It makes sense that Amalek is different from all other nations, and it makes sense that Amalek is inherently evil, but why is Amalek punished for attacking the Jews if this was just a punishment? In fact, there is a parallel case in the Torah. Hashem tells Avraham “Yadoa Teidah Ki Ger Yihyeh Zarachah Be’Eretz Lo Lahem VaAvadum VeInu Otam,” “Know that your descendants will be residents in a land that does not belong to them and they will be enslaved and oppressed” [5] (BeReishit 15:13). The classic question is, of course, Why is Mitzrayim punished? All Mitzrayim did was carry out Hashem’s will. Rambam answers that any nation could have been the one to enslave and oppress the Jews, but because Mitzrayim did it, they were punished. Ramban asserts that this can not be true, because it would be a good thing to carry out Hashem’s will, and Mitzrayim only should have only rewarded. Thus, asserts Ramban, the problem was not that Mitzrayim fulfilled Hashem’s will, but that Mitzrayim enslaved and oppressed the Jews with a malicious intent and to a malicious extent. The best example is when Paroh commands Mitzrayim to kill all the baby boys, which is not under the category of oppression or enslavement, but under the category of mass infanticide. In fact, Hashem says, “VeGam Et HaGoy Asher Yaavodu Dan Anochi,” “And also the nation that they will work for I will judge” (BeReishit 15:14). Hashem is not looking for vengeance, but he will exact punishment when it is deserved. It seems that Amalek did not attack to fulfill Hashem’s will, but Amalek attacked for the same reason that Haman wanted to kill every Jew - to remove the testimony that the philosophy of a hopeless existence is wrong. As the Midrash Tanchuma says, the nations of the world trembled from fear of the Jews after Yetziat Mitzrayim, but Amalek wanted to diminish that fear, so they attacked. Amalek was in a situation where they had lost the battle - their philosophy was disproved. If such a nation could have such overt miracles performed for them, it must be that something, which we know to be Hashem, needed the Jews. If Hashem needed the Jews, then it must mean that existence has a purpose. So, to prove that Hashem must have not needed them that badly, they attacked. If Amalek won, it proved that it was just a coincidence and nothing protected the Jews. [6] Therefore, Hashem punishes Amalek for being the root of evil, which is the reason that they attacked.
Remember what Amalek did, because the war is not over - it is an everlasting battle. One has to constantly improve as a Jew and continue to build the bridge from Hashem to this world, step by step, bit by bit. [7] It is important to internalize Amalek’s flaw as the Megillah is read, and recognize that existence is meaningful, an important message learned from the Megillah, as Pesach approaches.
[1] Interestingly, the Pesukim never record the Jews saying these words, but Moshe quotes the Jews as saying these words.
[2] It is not explicit in the Pesukim, but I would argue that Haman’s relationship with his children was very poor, if not horrific. Because Yaakov did not want to marry Leah, he did not have the unconditional parental love for her children, while he did for the children of Rachel. It was a relationship that did not originate from love, but it had to evolve to love. Haman, as someone who clearly was not in a great relationship with his wife, probably did not have the best relationship with his kids. It appears that he did love them, but not very much, leading to a relationship that would deteriorate over time. Not to mention, the few times he does speak to his kids, it is for advice, which suggests that this was his relationship with his kids, which, although I am not a parent, does not seem to be a very strong relationship. This also indicates that Haman was not the smartest guy either, something that is also anything but praiseworthy.
[3] This is interesting in its own right. When Achashveirosh asks Esther her request the first time, she requests a feast. She has just had all of the Jews fast, and when told by the King that she can have up to half of the kingdom, she requests a feast. That just does not seem right. Moreover, during the first feast, she requests a second feast. See Rabbi David Fohrman’s The Queen you Thought you Knew.
[4] On that topic, I recommend looking at my Kol Torah article on Parshat Shemot.
[5] This is translated as Targum Onkelos renders the Pasuk.
[6] This is also behind the translation made by Midrash Tanchuma of “Asher Karecha BaDerech,” “They happened upon you” (Devarim 25:18). This was Amalek’s philosophy - nothing was planned and everything was random because existence was meaningless. If existence had some purpose, God would plan some things to happen.
[7] I would just like to say that there is much more to be said on this topic, given that Amalek is the root of all evil.