parsha bit: Ki Teitze

[cellio]

Our parsha reminds us to remember what Amalek did to Israel. What was the great wrong that Amalek did? The rabbis draw the following analogy: There is a pool of scalding water that people fear to step into, but a simpleton comes along and jumps in. He is scalded, but what people see is that the pool might not be as dangerous as it looked. Similarly, until Amalek attacked, Israel was like the pool -- after the exodus from Egypt and God's splitting of the sea, none dared attack. After Amalek attacked, even though he was scalded, Israel was perceived by other nations as being weaker (like a lukewarm pool) and they felt enpowered to attack. (Tanchuma Ki Teitze 9)

Comments

[nsingman.livejournal.com]

I'd never heard that explanation before. I'm afraid it doesn't change my mind regarding God's exhortation to genocide (and why the children and animals?), but it certainly is interesting.

[cellio]

Yeah, I have trouble with that, too. Fortunately, the written torah is rarely the final word on something. (We're not fundamentalists.) Take, for example, another part of this week's parsha: the rebellious son. According to the torah, if your son doesn't listen to you and is a glutton (food and wine), you bring him before the people at the gate... and kill him. The rabbis understood all sorts of restrictions on this, to the point where, they assert, this never actually happened.

(This is kind-of, sort-of related to the d'var torah I gave this morning. More on that anon.)