[lbo-talk] Amalek

Seth Kulick skulick at seas.upenn.edu
Thu Mar 30 11:47:05 PST 2006


www.forward.com/main/printer-friendly.php?id=7601

Conservative Rabbi Compares Islamic Fundamentalists to Amalek

By Steven I. Weiss

March 31, 2006

A prominent Conservative rabbi suggested in a recent Torah commentary

that Islamic fundamentalists be classified as "Amalek", an evil nation

that the Bible marks for extermination.

"I am becoming convinced that Islamic fundamentalism, or, as some

people prefer to call it, Islamo-fascism, is the most dangerous force

that we ever have faced and that it is worthy of the name: Amalek,"

Rabbi Jack Riemer wrote in a sermon that he e-mailed to Conservative

rabbis in advance of the Sabbath, which started February 10.

Riemer is a widely cited author in Conservative circles. In 1998 his

translation of Ecclesiastes was read by President Bill Clinton during

the National Prayer Breakfast.

Amalek is described in the Bible as attacking the wandering Hebrews

from the rear shortly after the Exodus from Egypt. In the Book of

Esther, Haman, the mastermind of a plot to kill all the Jews, is

identified as a descendant of Amalek. Building on such texts, the

ancient rabbis argued that Amalek was driven by an all-consuming, even

self-destructive hatred of the Jewish people.

The Bible commands the Israelites to wage an eternal war against this

enemy nation, calling for the killing of every Amalek "man and woman,

child and infant, ox and sheep."

While the Jewish tradition of comparing oppressive nations to Amalek

is centuries old, many rabbis of the later part of the 20th century

sought to discourage these comparisons, asserting that such

theological classifications calling for genocide were extremely

dangerous following the founding of the State of Israel and the

simultaneous rise of Jewish power and influence worldwide.

"This isn't 1936, and we are no longer powerless," said Rabbi Bradley

Shavit Artson, dean of the Conservative rabbinical school at the

University of Judaism, in an interview with the Forward. "We have a

very powerful democracy in Israel, and as citizens of the United

States and Canada we are part of powerful democracies who are

remarkably sensitive to the survival of the Jewish people and the

State of Israel."

Artson argued that "there is some degree of hysteria in labeling Muslim

radicals as Amalek." He said that it was import to use "different

language to reflect power."

When asked about the sermon, Reimer said that his weekly Torah

commentary is sent only to rabbis so that it can "teach them technique."

"It was written during the height of the hysteria of the Arab rioting"

over the cartoons of the Prophet Muhammad and "was probably an

overreaction."

"I think it was a very strong statement and that it reflected a

temporary mood, but I would be hesitant to declare it as a permanent

position," Riemer said. He also said that as a permanent position the

use of the term Amalek would be "dangerous."

In addition, Reimer revealed that he doesn't "want to be classed with

the Jewish bigots who feel this as a systematic deal," but with "the

scholars who are not bigots but notice the similarities."

Riemer said that he probably should have used the term "Amalek-like" and

attributed his original phrasing to what he described as "frustration"

over the current situation in the Muslim world and uncertainty over

how you "fight this kind of enemy."

"One thing I was trying to say is that realism and understanding of

whats on the other side is really necessary," Riemer said. He added

that those Islamic fundamentalists to whom he is referring are "very

bad people, and that the image of Amalek is a useful one to dramatize

and make us conscious of what this is."

In the end, Riemer said, the entire discussion is an academic one

because at least 1,500 years ago, the Talmud ruled that it no longer

was possible to identify a descendant of Amalek. As a result, he said,

it would be forbidden to act on any contemporary comparison to the

ancient nation.

Still, Artson said, such comparisons as Riemers have the chance to

spur people to violence.

"That's why I dont think it's wise," the University of Judaism rabbinical

dean said, adding, "I just think it's almost never helpful, and we've

seen too many instances in the last century of people labeling others

'Amalek.'"



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list