On the morality of the command to destroy Midian and Amalek
On the subject of the killing of a Midianite child, I have not found in the classical commentators a plausible answer as to why they were killed.
The Abarbanel gives 2 excuses – they were judged for their future, and for the iniquity of their ancestors
And it is difficult for both of them – from the act of Ishmael, who was condemned at the time (and perhaps their judgment was like a rebellious son?), and from the general rule that a person will be put to death for his sin.
I would love to hear your opinion.
לגלות עוד מהאתר הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
0 Answers
Indeed, it is similar to a rebellious and teacherless son who is condemned to death. I assume that Amalek was a people who educated all their sons to be murderous, and therefore there is justification for killing them even when they are small. The future is clear in advance. Think of a Jew in a concentration camp who prays that all the Germans, old men, women, and children, die. That sounds reasonable, doesn't it? The assumption was that there was something corrupt in this people, and therefore there was justification for wiping them out from the face of the earth. I assume that the Torah sees Amalek this way and therefore commands their destruction.
It should be remembered that the Rambam is very moderate in his judgment of the Amalekites. He rules that one should call them to peace when besieging their city, and not kill them if they have complied. Thus he writes in 1 Kings 6:4:
And if they did not fulfill or fulfilled and did not receive the seven commandments, they wage war against them and kill all the great males, and plunder all their wealth and children, and do not kill a woman or a child, as it is said, "And the women and the child are the children of men." What are the things mentioned in the war of the authority that is with the rest of the nations? But seven nations and Amalek who did not fulfill, they do not leave a soul among them, as it is said, "Thus you shall do to all," etc. "Only from the cities of the nations not a soul shall live." And so it says about Amalek, "You shall blot out the memory of Amalek." And why is it that he is not speaking except of those who did not fulfill, as it is said, "There was no city that made peace with the children of Israel except the Hivites. The inhabitants of Gibeon took everything in the war, because it was from the Lord to strengthen their hearts for the war against Israel in order to destroy them, from all that they sent to them in peace, and they did not receive it.
Although in the act of sinning it means that there is an obligation to destroy them all, and there is hardly any room to say that he is speaking here only of the 7 ammin. But the commentators there did not understand it that way, as a result. Therefore, it seems that his intention is that the obligation to destroy them all is only if they have not completed, and then they kill everyone, including children. But if they have completed, then no. And there is a difference in this.
לגלות עוד מהאתר הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
השאר תגובה
Please login or Register to submit your answer