[Avodah] why davka? amalek??

[Lisa Liel]

On 8/10/2011 10:29 PM, Harvey Benton wrote:
> why does Hashem say regarding the battle with amalek, that His throne will
> not be complete, until "amalek" is destroyed?
> 2 questions: what does amalek represent (so reprehensibly) that Hashem's
> throne won't be complete??
> weren't/aren't there more depraved, evil, etc, people(s) on the earth
> that have
> existed, that "quote/unqote" been in existence, stood against Hashem's
> glory
> and his teachings???
> Why davka Amalek??
> 2. do we hold that the battle of amalek is both a physical one (as well
> as a
> spiritual one?? or is one (you choose the one) sufficient a battle to
> engage in??
> 2a. some hold that amalek = doubt, or sowing the seeds of doubt (eg in a
> rational or philosophical way), but wouldn't that be more in the realm
> of "greek"
> philosopy?? where nothing, to a degree of 100% certainty (eg, our reality,
> torah's validity given that we weren't there, other philosophical
> constructs including
> the validity of math, reason, logic, euclidean geometry (basic building
> blocks
> of western societies' thinking, etc) can ever be proven..............

http://lamrot-hakol.blogspot.com/2006/02/israel-and-amalek.html

The quote that sums the article up is "Israel sees the sacred even in 
the profane. Amalek sees the profane even in the sacred."  It's always 
possible to look at the world through a lens of kedusha or a lens of 
"keri".  Amalek embodies the "keri" principle.

When we attacked Amalek in the days of Shaul, the tribal Amalekites of 
Moshe's time had settled down and become civilized.  We attacked the 
*city* of Amalek.  And when Shmuel has Agag brought before him, it looks 
like this:

Shmuel said, "Bring me Agag, king of the Amalekites."  And Agag walked 
to him, pleasantly, and said, "Surely the bitterness of death has passed?"

I've seen a lot of different explanations of this, some even translating 
"maadanot" as "in chains", but what it looks like to me is that Agag was 
aghast.  From his point of view, it would be like Israel attacking Spain 
today because of the expulsion in 1492.  He was like, "You have got to 
be kidding me.  You slaughtered all my people because of an attack in 
the desert 400+ years ago?!  Can't we just be friends?"

That's Amalek thinking.  There is no significance other than the 
immediate, prosaic, politics of the moment.  But we know better.  And 
Shmuel knew better.  And Agag may have figured it out himself in the 
moments before Shmuel hacked him to death.  But I doubt it.

Lisa