[Avodah] In defense of Haman -- NOT Purim Torah

[Micha Berger]

On Thu, Mar 21, 2019 at 06:05:15AM -0400, Akiva Miller via Avodah wrote:
:> So, okay, Haman was indeed a rasha. But he wasn't simply attempting
:> to exterminate an entire nation -- he was attempting to exterminate
:> an entire nation that was out to exterminate his own people.
:> And yet Chazal portray him as some unfathomable monster. "Harasha"
:> puts him in a pretty select group.
: 
: Your question is a good one, but I don't think it is new. I think it
: is just a new variation on an old theme, and it is usually phrased in
: terms like: "But what about the children?! How evil can Amalek's
: babies be?!"

I don't see the comparison. I am not asking about the obligation to
kill an Amaleiqi, I am asking why Chazal consider him Haman haRasha
when his acts -- while evil -- are understandable.

The reply:
: To me, the answer is that if an individual Amaleki appears to be
: innocent [whether we are talking about babies, or about an Amaleki
: whose motivation is no more evil than genuine self-defense], we must
: still do our mitzvah, but we must remember to do it very lishmah...

Would only make sense if I asked about the mitzvah, but actually I
asked about the "is not more evil than genuine self-defense." Or at
least something closer to self-defense, tainted by a love of power and
the honor of his office. (After all, Mordechai refusing to bow sets him
off.) But do we have any indication things would have gotten this out of
hand if we didn't have a mitzvah that keeps us in Amaleiq's cross-hairs,
and self-preservation wasn't part of it?

Gut Voch!
-Micha

-- 
Micha Berger             "And you shall love H' your G-d with your whole
micha at aishdas.org        heart, your entire soul, and all you own."
http://www.aishdas.org   Love is not two who look at each other,
Fax: (270) 514-1507      It is two who look in the same direction.