ויך שאול את עמלק מחילה בואך שור אשר על פני מצרים ויפס את אגג מלך עמלק חי ואת כל העם החרים לפי חרב.
So the entire people of Amalek, the entire nation of Amalek, Shaul decimated, destroyed, le-fi charev, but Agag was taken captive alive. ויחמל שאול והעם על אגג ועל מיטב הצאן והבקר והמשנים ועל הכרים ועל כל הטוב ולא אבו החרימם וכל המלאכה נמבזה ונמס אותה החרימו.
Shaul and the people had a sense of chemla, a sense of compassion on Agag and the choice of the livestock and they didn't want to destroy them. Generally, we understand the cheit of Shaul and the people here to have been a cheit of אל תהי צדיק הרבה. To have been a cheit that the mitzvah of mechiyas Amalek is from our vantage point can seem to be a Draconian mitzvah. From our vantage point it can seem to be a very austere, harsh mitzvah and that Shaul and the people weren't ready to take what they perceived as those harsh measures. That they followed their own moral instinct when it conflicted with the tzivui Hashem. Now, it goes without saying that that understanding of the cheit is clearly a colossal cheit. The only validity and the only worth our moral instinct has is to the degree that it's shaped and formed by ratzon Hashem and tzivui Hashem. As Chazal say in attributing the words to Hakadosh Baruch Hu in a different context about why one doesn't cry for a meis for more than thirty days, כי אי אתם רחמנים יותר ממני. You're not more compassionate than I am, Hakadosh Baruch Hu says. But the emes is, if that is really all there is to the cheit, it's very strange. What was the Shaul's marching orders that he received? וישמעאל מה' צבאות פקדתי את אשר עשה עמלק לישראל אשר שם לו בדרך בעלותו ממצרים עתה לך והכית את עמלק והחרמתם את כל אשר לו ולא תחמול עליו והמתה מאיש עד אישה מעולל ועד יונק משור ועד שה מגמל ועד חמור.
If the rebelliousness, the rebellion against the tzivui Hashem is because of the seeming austerity, what we can mistakenly perceive as being harsh or austere in an inappropriate fashion, that we mistakenly perceive it that way, so then what... Should have been when they went into the Amalek preschool, how can we how can we kill all these cute little kids? So that apparently they were able to do. I mean the tzivui says me'olal ve'ad yonek, me'olal ve'ad yonek. And it doesn't say subsequently that vayachmol Shaul ve'ha'am on on the three-year-olds who were playing Lego. No, it says vayachmol Shaul ve'ha'am. If there was one person in Amalek whom you would have thought that that there our moral instinct would would be attuned to the tzivui Hashem, if there's one one person in the nation that they should have no compunctions about killing, it would be Agag. It's hard to imagine that one rose to become Melech Amalek because of gutkeit and so instead it's vayachmol Shaul ve'ha'am on Agag and the meitav hatzon. So yitachen, yitachen. And what we're saying now is al derech aggadah, but yet maybe simultaneously also al derech hapsat. אהבי ה' שנאו רע. Our attitude to what HaKadosh Baruch Hu identifies as ra, you know, whether it's ra in human embodiment, which is what we're told Amalek is, or whether it's ra in terms of ma'asim assurim or devarim assurim, our attitude should be one which is unequivocal. Should be one which is unequivocal. The reality is that that sometimes our opposition or our commitment is 98 or 99%, maybe 99.5%, .9%, but not always 100%. Maybe what's represented by the chemla, especially on the tzon va'bakar as opposed to the olal ve'ad yonek is if there's anything equivocal about our opposition, about our resolve against ra, so that equivocation will be exposed when when there's a vested interest, when there's something to be gained, when there's a hana'ah to be had. Now let's take an example. Okay, we're talking about ra, so let's talk about lashon hara. So we can be nizhar in lashon hara, neither Rachmana litzlan initiate nor go looking to hear lashon hara. And yet, there can be something, it can be 98, it can be 99%, but when we overhear it, maybe totally inadvertent, there can be a a modicum of oh wow, that's a juicy Azoy? Really? If we have that reaction, so that's an indication, that's a reaction, again, I'm not talking about, I'm not equating anything rachmana litzlan, but in terms of, in terms of extrapolation and applying in other contexts, I'm not intimating rachmana litzlan any equivalences in anything we're talking about. That's a reaction of ויחמול על מיטב הצאן והבקר, as if there's an opposition, and the opposition let them be mikayeim olah ad yonek because there was nothing to be gained there. So the fact that it was a 98 or 99 percent opposition, it wasn't going to translate into a lack of fulfillment of the tzivuy Hashem. But the test case is going to be when there's an hana'ah to be had. That's be-zos nibachen whether it's a 98, 99.5 percent resolve and commitment or whether it's no, totally unequivocal, or whether it's a 100 percent commitment. Let's say we don't, we don't talk, again, no equivalences here, just extrapolating and applying, no equivalences rachmana litzlan. Let's say, so we don't talk during davenning, we don't talk during kaddish. So we certainly don't initiate. But someone comes over and says something to us, if there's a 100 percent unequivocal commitment to it, so we're not going to answer. We'll motion that we can't answer, I'll answer you in a minute. We'll motion the person outside if it's really something that needs to be attended to now. But if it's 98 or 99 percent, so we'll takke be mikatzeir. Like Beruriah told the talmid how to be mikatzeir. We'll say it as succinctly as possible, but le-ma'aseh it will be discernible whether it's an unequivocal 100 percent commitment or whether it's 99.5 percent. And where you see that is again when there's some, well I don't want to offend him, how can I not respond? You see that by the tzon vehabakar. That's where you see the difference between the 98 or 99 percent and the 100 percent. Avada everyone is, we're all committed be-leiv va-nefesh to avoid ma'achalos asuros. Avada that's the case. But there's going to be a difference between whether it's 99 percent or 100 percent. Are we going to make assumptions when we could be mevarrer? Are we going to make assumptions, of course they're nizhar on whatever the correct standard should be for bedikas tola'im? How is it, it's inconceivable otherwise. Well no, maybe if we don't know it for a fact. If the commitment is not 99.5 percent but is 100 percent, so then we won't make an assumption where we can be mevarrer. Or if we can't be mevarrer, maybe we'll forego this opportunity and look for a context where we don't need to make. It's when there's some benefit to be had, where there's potential for enjoyment, for use. That's where the difference between again the unequivocal 100% versus the very strong, but something less than 100%. In the summary that we have in the siddur of the Yud-Gimmel Ikarim, so we say אני מאמין באמונה שלמה. Ani Ma'amin. That's an אני מאמין באמונה שלמה. So the teretz is it's possible to believe sincerely, and yet that emuna isn't necessarily going to be an emuna shelema. אני מאמין כל מזונותיו של אדם קצובים לו מראש השנה ועד יום הכיפורים.
And I go into the store and the guy tells me, well, if you'll pay cash, so then I won't have to charge the sales tax and you can save a few dollars. So not only whether I accept that offer, but whether I'm tempted by that offer. If I'm tempted by that offer, so lich'ora it's an indication that Ani Ma'amin but not necessarily an emuna shelema. Because if it's an emuna shelema, so what do you mean? You're not going to save me five dollars by going against the dina d'malchusa. So how can it be by doing something that I'm not supposed to do, it can't be that I'm going to outsmart the Ribbono Shel Olam and I'm going to pull a fast one and have an extra ten dollars in my pocket. But if I'm tempted, even if I'm misgaber, even if I'm misgaber על אחת כמה וכמה Rachmana litzlan I'm not misgaber. But even if I'm misgaber, the temptation lich'ora is an indication that I need to work harder that it shouldn't just be Ani Ma'amin but it should be אני מאמין באמונה שלמה. And there is a connection on Purim between, the Ramban famously in Parshas Ki Seitzei says סמך למקרא מגילה מן התורה is זכור את אשר עשה לך עמלק. The perspective or the context of Purim in terms of Mekhiyas Amalek and the context or perspective of Purim as Kiyemu v'kiblu as a time of Kabalas HaTorah, so Chazal tell us ויחן שם ישראל כאיש אחד בלב אחד. Because the emes is you can have the achdus amongst Klal Yisrael as a k'ish echad, but even a k'ish echad cannot be b'lev echad. When as a k'ish echad if I lack the emuna shelema, so it's not b'lev echad. It's a little bit b'shnei levavos. It's a little bit b'shnei levavos. Kabalas HaTorah, it's not just that you need the achdus of Klal Yisrael, but then you also need that within that achdus there also be this unequivocal, unequivocal, without again, that at times. And then that's that's where it's going to surface. And the Gemara Avodah Zarah, one of the, I think one of the Tanna'im was, I forget, was it one of the Tanna'im is taken by the Roman government and he's making a cheshbon hanefesh why this is happening to him. So and another one says to him, did you ever hear a dvar minus and have a little bit of hanoah from it? And he taka remembers that it happened once. So the convergence of the mitzvah of mechiyas Amalek, it's not only that one's moral instinct has to be totally meshubad to ratzon vetzivui Hashem, but that's the case. But it also has to be, again, the אני מאמין באמונה שלמה and in making hachanos for kimu vekiblu, it's a time to try to measure to what extent, again, our commitment Baruch Hashem is 98, 99, 99 plus and to what extent it's 100%. And that 100% is the goal for two reasons: A, again, because a person should be לבו שלם עם השם. And number two, because it's got to translate. It's got to translate. If it's 98 or 99 percent, I won't initiate speaking or looking to hear lashon hara, but maybe if I find myself beginning to overhear, I'm going to be tempted to hear the end of the sentence. And kahena vekahena. The goal and the avodah is to strive, again, to be able to say both literally in these thirteen instances and more broadly, it should reflect our commitment to the totality of Torah mitzvos to be able to taka say that אני מאמין באמונה שלמה with again, a complete and unequivocal emuna, a complete and unequivocal commitment of bechol levavecha.