Thoughts for Parashat Zachor: Genocide and Amalek

Originally Posted February 27, 2026 - 10 Adar, 5786

This Shabbat, prior to Purim, is designated as Parashat Zachor. This is the second of the four special maftir readings and haftarahs preceding Purim and Passover at this season. “Zachor” means “remember,” the opening word of the maftir reading from Deuteronomy 25:17 – 19. “Remember what Amalek did to you on your journey, after you left Egypt…You shall blot out the memory of Amalek from under heaven. Do not forget!” This Torah reading is paired with a haftarah from the book of I Samuel in which the prophet conveys this message to King Saul, “Thus says the Lord of Hosts: I am exacting the penalty for what Amalek did to Israel, for the assault he made upon them on the road, on their way up from Egypt. Now go, attack Amalek, and proscribe all that belongs to him. Spare no one, but kill alike men and women, infants and sucklings, oxen and sheep, camels and asses!”

              Later, after Saul does this, but fails to complete the task, sparing the king, Agag, and the best of the animals to be offered on the altar, Samuel condemns him for failing to obey the divine decree and announces that the kingdom will be taken from Saul and his family and given to someone else. Tradition takes the name of King Agag and links it with Haman in the Megillah who is described as an “Agagite” who is ultimately defeated by descendants of King Saul’s family, Mordecai and Esther. Whether Haman is genetically an Amalekite is of little importance, for the term comes to be a designation for people who act with brutality toward others in every generation.

              Since the brutal attack by Hamas on Israeli citizens on October 7, the word “genocide” has been used repeatedly by critics of Israel. This term was invented in the 1940s to describe “the deliberate and systematic extermination of an ethnic or national group.” The Oxford English Dictionary documents its earliest use in 1944 with reference to the war crimes committed by Nazi Germany.  Considering the battle of Saul with the Amalekites (one of countless examples in the ancient world) in a modern moral and legal sense, it can be described as a genocide even if decreed, according to the prophet Samuel, by no less an authority than God Almighty. It is no warrant for destroying nations, oppressing minorities, or brutalizing violators of civil law.

              Accusations of genocide in Gaza and the invocation of “Amalek” in Jewish discourse have collided in the public square with explosive force. These words carry centuries of trauma and moral weight. When they are used without context, they can inflame rather than illuminate. It has been suggested that when we take them seriously – historically, legally, and ethically – they can help us speak more responsibly about the present.

              From an historical perspective, we must recognize that the commandment to “blot out Amalek” belongs to a world with very different assumptions about war than in our modern times. War at that time was tribal, intergenerational, and often had an element of the sacred. For ancient warriors, destroying an enemy’s women and children was seen not as murder but as eliminating the next generation of warriors who would inevitably arise to seek revenge. This worldview is morally unacceptable today, but it explains how ancient societies viewed total warfare. We no longer live in the pages of the Bible.

              Often non-Jews may read Scripture as if it were the latest breaking news. Years ago, I used to get regular calls from Bible readers who wanted to know when the next jubilee year would be celebrated by the Jewish community. I think they knew that we had stopped offering animal sacrifices, but I’m not sure of that. In the case of the commandment to blot out Amalek, the rabbis have long since transformed it in ways that resonate strongly with contemporary ethics. They ruled that Amalek cannot be identified today because ancient nations became intermixed. They insisted that even Amalek must be offered peace terms and spared if they accept basic moral norms. Amalek, according to the rabbis, becomes a symbol of predatory cruelty, no longer a specific ethnic group. Beyond that, even when one does go to war, they placed strict limits on combat, including the protection of noncombatants. As viewed through the eyes of our sages, there is no blank check for violence against any nation. The commandment to blot out Amalek today is seen as a warning against cruelty, not as a license to commit it.

              The term “genocide” has a specific meaning. It is not a synonym for tragedy, devastation, or even mass civilian deaths. Under international law, it refers to the intent to destroy a national, ethnic, racial, or religious group as such. That intent – not the scale of suffering alone – is the legal threshold. Anyone familiar with Israeli society knows that in spite of imperfections, Jews and people of other faiths and ethnicities work and often socialize side by side and all are subject to the same laws and their application.

              The suffering of civilians in Gaza we must concede is immense and demands moral seriousness. On the other hand, the trauma of Israelis after the mass atrocities of October 7 is real and should not be dismissed. The tragedy of the ongoing war is not helped by applying inappropriate terms to inflame passions, particularly when used by people who have no understanding of the past history of the area and who glibly echo slogans and apply inappropriate terminology to a very complex and troubling situation.

              People can and do argue over the conduct of the war, the policies of the current Israeli coalition government, and other such matters both in Israel and without. However, we know very well that war is not neat and precise even with modern weapons and technology. Civilians are too often unintentional victims of battles to defeat an intractable enemy no matter how many precautions and warnings may be given, particularly when the enemy chooses to imbed its fighters in civilian institutions, hospitals, school, mosques, and apartment complexes, to provide human shields for their operations.

              We must point out that even though Hamas has continually fired missiles into Israeli civilian centers for two decades, on October 6, there was no actual war going on. People in Israel were going about their business, celebrating a holiday, enjoying a music festival, spending time with their families. War did not break out until the barbaric attacks, murders, rapes, destruction unleashed by Hamas began on October 7.

  If the term “genocide” is to be applied to anyone, I suggest reviewing the 1988 Hamas charter which is widely cited as “genocidal/antisemitic.” It calls for the obliteration of Israel and the establishment of an Islamic state in all of Mandatory Palestine and repeatedly speaks of “the Jews” in conspiratorial, antisemitic terms. Though a somewhat moderated document of “general principles and policies” was issued in 2017, Hamas never formally revoked the 1988 charter. The new document still rejects recognizing Israel and speaks of a struggle against “Zionists,” using that term instead of ”Jews,” though the terms are practically inseparable, except for a small minority of Jews.

Jews and others should recognize the suffering of civilians in Gaza, just as we should recognize even more brutal suffering inflicted by Russia in Ukraine, or China upon the Uighurs, or the massacres of civilians in countless other places in the Arab world and around the globe. Singling out Israel among all the nations of the world for condemnation and claiming it has no legitimacy and should not exist as a nation is simply antisemitism Watching otherwise bright students on our college campuses and elsewhere, fall for the Hamas propaganda and echo its slogans cannot be construed otherwise than as blatant antisemitism either. It is inaccurate in its characterization of Israeli policy and dangerous in its impact upon our Jewish communities here and around the world, particularly for our children in on college campuses. It is frightening and devastating to their well-being.

Calling the tragic results of a war forced upon Israel “genocide” or, for that matter, labeling any group or individuals as “Amalek” and claiming an obligation to apply the crude and ancient proscriptions found in scripture upon them does nothing to advance the cause of peace and harmony in our society and around the world today. On Shabbat Zachor, we remember past atrocities and traumas and reframe our understanding of the commandment to blot out Amalek as a reminder of the obligation of all people to fight prejudice, hatred, and bigotry against all groups in all nations singled out as “the other.” We are commanded to blot out evil and hatred from the world.

As we recall Haman’s decrees, historically accurate or fictional, in the Book of Esther on Purim this week, we are called upon not to attack the Persian Empire (Iran) of our day or any other perceived enemy, but to stand up to bigotry and oppression wherever it exists around the world and work to bring greater understanding and compassion into this world.

Shabbat Shalom,

Rabbi Edward Friedman

Apologies for late posting, Admin