Question

“You shall blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven; do not forget” (Deut. 25:19). “Blot out the memory of Amalek”—from man to woman, from infant to suckling, from ox to sheep, so that the name of Amalek should not be mentioned even in connection with an animal, by saying: this animal belonged to Amalek (Rashi). The Minchat Chinukh (commandment 604) cites Rashi’s wording and writes: This matter—that even the animals must be killed—is not explained in Maimonides or Sefer HaChinukh, and I do not know from where Rashi derived it, etc. And from the episode of Saul [who was commanded by Samuel to kill the animals as well (I Samuel 15:3)] there is no proof, because the Holy One, blessed be He, commanded him then through Samuel, but that this should be an ongoing commandment for future generations—we have not heard, end quote.

However, we do find a source for Rashi’s words in Lamentations Rabbah (end of chapter 3), which states: Jeremiah said, “Pursue them in anger and destroy them” (Lam. 3:66), and Moses said, “For I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven” (Ex. 17:14), etc. “From under heaven”—so that people should not say: this tree belonged to Amalek, this camel belonged to Amalek, this ewe belonged to Amalek, end quote. It is thus clear that there is a commandment to blot out even the animals of Amalek, as Rashi wrote.

But this requires clarification in light of what is written (I Samuel 27:8–9): “And David and his men went up and raided the Geshurites, the Girzites, and the Amalekites… and he took sheep and cattle and donkeys and camels and clothing.” The verse explicitly says that David took Amalek’s animals and did not kill them. Even more difficult is what is written (I Chronicles 18:11): “King David also dedicated these to the Lord, along with the silver and gold that he had taken from all the nations—from Edom, Moab, the Ammonites, the Philistines, and Amalek.” So David did not refrain from taking the silver and gold that he carried off from Amalek, and he did not destroy them from under heaven; not only that, he dedicated them to Heaven, to be fixed in the Temple. (See the responsa Oneg Yom Tov, introduction, sec. 6.)

Another difficulty on this topic: there is a Jewish custom to write the name Amalek under one’s shoe and erase his name. The source of this custom is in Orchot Chayim of Lunel (laws of Purim, sec. 41), who writes that in Provence and France the children would take small stones and write “Haman” on them, and bang them against each other, based on the verse “the name of the wicked shall rot” and the verse “for I will utterly blot out the memory of Amalek,” end quote. [And so too in Sefer HaMinhagim (laws of Megillah, sec. 18) and in Sefer Yesod Yosef (chapter 82); and see Sefer Sichot Chafetz Chaim, vol. 2, p. 71, which says that this was also the custom of the Chafetz Chaim.]

Seemingly, the idea is because of the commandment “you shall blot out the memory of Amalek” [as implied by the wording of Orchot Chayim and as also seems from the Rema (Orach Chayim 690:17)].

But this is unclear: the commandment of eradicating Amalek obligates us to kill him and remove him from the world, so how can one fulfill the commandment of erasing him merely by erasing his name?

And even more unclear: what kind of erasure is this, after all he himself created it and brought it into the world? Before writing it, his name was not mentioned at all; he wrote it, and then erased it only to return things to their previous state. [Examine carefully the wording of Maimonides (Sefer HaMitzvot, positive commandment 189) on the basis of the commandment to remember Amalek.]