1

We are directly ordered to kill Amalek (once the chance presents itself) so that 'the name of Amalek not be mentioned even with reference to an animal by saying "This animal belonged to Amalek" '. What about Amalek's accomplices? About Amaleks friends? People who unbeknowingly take Amaleks side, not knowing the true nature of things?

To clarify the question: The accomplices of Amalek are NOT descendants from Amalek, in fact they are from an entirely different nation.

Improve this question
6
  • Meguillat Esther would seem to be a guide for how to treat Amelek's accomolices.
    – יהושע ק
    Commented Dec 17, 2018 at 16:30
  • I think there is a good question - possibly even a couple good questions - here. Are you asking about people related to Amalek in the same way the animal would be - i.e. keeping their memory alive just by being mentioned alongside them or by the association itself? Or are you asking about the accomplice's being sucked into the Amalek category with respect to the mitzva? (And can you source the animal prohibition?)
    – WAF
    Commented Dec 17, 2018 at 18:24
  • The command to obliterate Amalek is clearly tied in Deut. 25 to her actions of Ex. 17. By "accomplices" and "friends", do you refer to those on her side in that action, or even later but before the command was given? Or are you asking whether the command applies even to people who would later become Amalek's accomplices?
    – msh210 ♦
    Commented Dec 17, 2018 at 18:38
  • I don't know who is responsible for administrating the comments (I hope it's not a bot, if it was an admin I'd be a bit annoyed), but the three comments that were deleted (one of the user 'Levi', two of mine) gave an answer to those two inquiries... Anyways, I have to clarify again. @WAF and msh210 : The idea is that a 'mate' or 'buddy' (the term 'accomplice' in that context might be too harsh - I was talking about a rather innocent and simple comradeship) is hanging out with an Amalekite. Chit chat and such. The 'mate' of Amalek has no genetic nor historic ties to the latter and just holds a
    – user16556
    Commented Dec 17, 2018 at 19:42
  • simple childish admiration for Amaleks culture and history. He is a friend of Amalek but by no means Amalek himself. Neither did he participate in the raidings against us nor does he harmed us in any way. Let's say he is a neutral person who bares no ill-will against Jews at all and just finds a liking in Amalek without caring much about their predicament and their (mis)actions regarding us. There will be a clash between us and Amalek and he is the neutral subject between those two fronts, though let's assume he is living amongst the Amalekits without being one themself. Is he to be killed
    – user16556
    Commented Dec 17, 2018 at 19:46

0

Reset to default

You must log in to answer this question.