[Par-lite] MEGILAT ESTHER - shiur
Menachem Leibtag
tsc at bezeqint.net
Thu Mar 17 07:41:57 EDT 2011
**********************************************************
***
THE TANACH STUDY CENTER [http://www.tanach.org]
In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag
Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem Leibtag
**********************************************************
***
MEGILLAT ESTHER, ITS 'HIDDEN' MESSAGE
Is the Megilla a satire? It certainly contains many
strange details that beg interpretation. But if so, why
would
a satire be included in the Tanach. In the following
shiur,
we attempt to 'unmask' Megillat Esther by considering its
historical and prophetic setting.
INTRODUCTION
We begin our study with one of the most well known
psukim
of the Megilla:
"Ish yehudi haya be-Shushan ha-bira - u-shmo
Mordechai"
(see Esther 2:5).
Even though this pasuk is proudly read aloud by the
entire congregation, most people do not appreciate its
prophetic 'sting'. However, an ear tuned to the
prophecies of
Zecharya and familiar with Tanach immediately catches its
irony, as:
ish yehudi - implies more than simply someone who is
Jewish;
ha-bira - implies more than just 'the capital city';
and
Mordechai - is not a Jewish name!
* The phrase ish yehudi is mentioned only one other time
in
the entire Tanach - in Sefer Zecharya 8:23. There it
describes a devout Jew in the city of Jerusalem - leading
a
group of non-Jewish followers in search of God.
* the word ha-bira in Divrei Ha-yamim (see 29:1 & 29:19)
is
used by King David to describe specifically the bet
ha-mikdash
(the Temple). Prior to the time period of Megillat
Esther,
the Hebrew word bira finds no other mention in Tanach.
* The name Mordechai is probably the most provocative
word
in the entire Megilla for it stems from the name of the
Babylonian deity -Marduk (see II Kings 25:27 & Yeshayahu
39:1!). Prior to the Babylonian exile, no one would have
dared give his son such a 'goyish' name.
[This does not imply that Mordechai was assimilated,
rather
his name may reflect the assimilation of his
generation.]
And this may be only one of many psukim of the
Megilla
that are filled with irony and possibly satire. Yet, if
this
conclusion is correct, we must explain why the Megilla
would
employ satire to deliver its prophetic message.
Furthermore,
we must also determine more precisely what that prophetic
message is, and how it relates to our celebration of
Purim.
To answer these questions, our shiur will take the
following steps:
I. Base our above assumption that the Megilla should
contain
a prophetic message, related to its historical
setting.
II. Review both the historical and prophetic setting of
the
time period of the Megilla.
III Search for a thematic connection between this setting
and
the story in the Megilla, and support it with both
textual and
thematic parallels from other books in Tanach.
IV. Explain why the Megilla employs this unique style.
V. Explain how the celebration of Purim, as defined in
the
Megilla, relates to this theme.
PART I - 'HESTER PANIM'
As every book of the Tanach contains a prophetic
message,
Megillat Esther should be no different. It is commonly
understood that the Megilla teaches us how to see the
'hidden
hand' of God behind the events that ultimately lead to
Bnei
Yisrael's salvation from Haman. Some even suggest that
the
Megilla's use of the name Esther (from the Hebrew verb
'lehastir' - to hide) instead of her real name - Hadassa
(see
2:7) teaches us this very lesson.
However, if the Megilla wants to show us how God
saved
His people, why isn't this message explicit? Furthermore,
why
isn't God's Name ever mentioned? Most every other sefer
in
Tanach expresses this point explicitly. Why is Megillat
Esther different?
Furthermore, most all other seforim in Tanach explain
not
only how God saves Am Yisrael, but also why they are being
punished. This theme of divine retribution is explicit in
the
Torah in the tochachot (Vayikra 26:3-46, Devarim 11:13-17,
28:1-69, etc.) and reiterated over and over again by all
of
the prophets. In fact Chazal's explanation of the name
Esther
reflects this very same concept:
"Esther min ha-Torah minayin?"
[What is the source in Torah for the story of
Esther?]
"ve-Anochi haster aster panai ba-yom ha-hu"
[I will surely hide my face from you on that day.]
(Devarim 31:18 / See Chullin 139b).
However, if we take a closer look at that pasuk in
Devarim, we find that its message is significantly
different.
Rather than explaining how God 'saves' Am Yisrael in a
'hidden
manner', it explains how God 'punishes' them:
"And God told Moshe, after you die... this nation will
leave
Me and break My covenant...And My anger will be kindled
against them on that day and I will forsake them, ["ve-
histarti panai"] and I will hide My face from them...
and
many evils and troubles shall befall them - & they will
say
on that day, these evils are because God is not among
us.
- Ve-anochi haster astir panai ba-yom ha-hu -
and I will hide My face from them on that day because of
all
the bad that they have done... [Therefore,]
- Write down this song and teach it to Bnei Yisrael,
so
that it will be My witness..." (see Devarim 31:16-18).
In these psukim, God warns Bnei Yisrael that should
they
betray His covenant, great evil will befall them. Even
though
it may appear to Bnei Yisrael that God has left them,
these
psukim teach them that God only appears to be 'hiding His
face' ['hester panim"] from them. Nonetheless, Bnei
Yisrael
are expected to realize that their punishment is from God.
Therefore, Moshe is to teach Bnei Yisrael Shirat Ha'azinu
in
order that they recognize this. The shira will teach Am
Yisrael to contemplate their predicament and relate their
punishment to their wayward behavior. To verify this
point,
simply read Shirat Ha'azinu [note especially 31:19-20.]
Above all, Shirat Ha'azinu explains how we are to
determine why we are being punished. In that song, we are
told:
"Zechor yemot olam, binu shnot dor va-dor..." (Devarim
32:7).
[Remember the days of old; consider the years of ages
past.]
The shira teaches us to contemplate our history,
especially how and why we were chosen (see 32:8-9), in
order
to realize why we are being punished. It reminds us that
when
something does go wrong, it is our fault, not God's (see
32:4-6!).
Even though God may hide His face, Shirat Ha'azinu
does
promise that God will ultimately redeem His people,
however,
not necessarily because they deserve redemption. Rather,
God
will have mercy on our pitiful predicament (see 32:26-27,
also
32:37-38) and save us at the 'last minute'.
Most all of the prophets deliver a very similar
message.
They explain to Bnei Yisrael what they have done wrong,
and
hence why they are being punished. Prophecy teaches man
not
only to thank God for salvation, but also to recognize his
faults and correct his mistakes.
Therefore, the Megilla should be no different, and
especially because its name alludes to the pasuk in
Chumash
that commands us to search for a reason why we are
punished.
[This supports the Gemara's question in Masechet Megilla
12a
(middle) "sha'alu talmidav et Rashb"i: mipnei ma
nitchayvu..."]
Even though the Megilla does not provide an explicit
reason for this impending punishment, this background and
its
name suggest that we search for a 'hidden' (or implicit)
one.
To find that reason, we must consider prophetic and
historical
setting of that time period.
PART II - HISTORICAL AND PROPHETIC SETTING
The opening psukim of the Megilla immediately point
us to
its time period (see 1:1-3). Achashverosh is a Persian
king
who reigns from India to Ethiopia in the city of Shushan.
Considering that Cyrus (=Koresh) was the first Persian
king,
the story in Megillat Esther takes place during the
Persian
time period and thus after the time period when the Jews
had
an opportunity to return to Jerusalem.
Even though there is a controversy concerning
precisely
which Persian King Achashverosh was, he most certainly
reigned
after Koresh (the first Persian king), and thus, after
Yirmiyahu's seventy years were over.
[Note: If you are not familiar with this time period, it
is
highly recommended that you review Kings II 23:31-25:12,
Ezra 1:1-10 and 3:1-4:7, and Yirmiyahu 29:1-15. As you
read
Ezra 1:1-9, note how the Jews who did not make 'aliya'
were
encouraged to send 'money' instead! Seems like not much
has
changed in 2500 years!]
For those of you unfamiliar with this time period,
here
is a quick overview:
In the first year of his reign, Koresh issued his
famous
proclamation allowing and encouraging all of the Jews of
the
Persian Empire to return to Jerusalem and rebuild the
Temple.
The prophets clearly understood this historic decree as
the
fulfillment of Yirmiyahu's prophecy (see Ezra 1:1-9, II
Divrei
Ha-yamim 36:20-23). As God had promised, the time of
redemption from the Babylonian Exile had come.
YIRMIYAHU'S SEVENTY YEARS
To appreciate the prophetic importance of this
opportunity, we need only quote Yirmiyahu's final message
to
the Babylonian Exile in regard to what was 'supposed' to
happen when these seventy years were over:
"Thus said the Lord, when the 70 years are complete, I
shall
remember you and keep my promise to return you to this
land.... [At that time.] you shall call out to Me - you
shall come and pray to Me - and I will hear you...and
you
will ask for Me and find Me; if you will search for me
with
all your heart. Then I will be there for you, and I
shall
turn away your captivity and gather you from all the
nations
wherein you may be dispersed... and I will return you to
the
land from which you were exiled ..." (29:10-14).
According to Yirmiyahu, the return of the Exile would
not
be automatic. Rather, it was God's hope that their return
would be catalyzed by sincere repentance and a yearning to
return. In other words, God intended for the Babylonian
Exile [as the word 'exile' implies] to be temporary.
People
don't stay in 'exile' unless they are forced to be there.
Exile implies that one cannot return to his own land.
[Otherwise the translation of 'galut' would be 'diaspora'
instead of 'exile' / hey, not a bad idea!]
Note as well how Yirmiyahu's message is congruent
with a
primary theme of Chumash, i.e. God's desire for the Jewish
people to become His 'model' nation - a vehicle through
which
all nations will come to recognize God (see Devarim 4:5-8
&
Shmot 19:4-6). Recall as well that in that ideal setting,
the
bet ha-mikdash in Yerushalayim was to serve as a symbol of
this national purpose.
[See previous shiurim on Parshiot Re'eh, Noach, and
Vayetze.
Recall that the mikdash is referred to as: "ha-makom
asher
yivchar Hashem le-shaken shmo sham"/ see Devarim
12:5-14.]
God's decision to destroy that Temple and exile his
people was for a rehabilitative purpose. According to
Yirmiyahu, God's hope was for the Exile to 'learn its
lesson'
during these seventy years in Bavel. Afterward, God hoped
that the nation would be spiritually ready and anxious to
return to their homeland, and to reconstruct their
symbolic
shrine - the Temple in Jerusalem.
Precisely as Yirmiyahu had predicted (seventy years
after
Bavel had risen to power), the opportunity to return arose
when the Babylonian empire fell to Koresh (= Cyrus the
Great),
the first king of the Persian Empire (see Yirmiyahu
25:11-12,
Ezra 1:1).
A MISSED OPPORTUNITY
Unfortunately, the response of the Exile to this
historic
opportunity was less than enthusiastic. A group of some
forty
thousand did return; however, the majority of Am Yisrael
remained in Bavel. For an insight into the tragedy of the
missed opportunity we need only quote the explanation
given by
Rav Yehuda Ha-Levi in Sefer Ha-Kuzari (II.24):
"Had the entire nation enthusiastically answered the
divine
call to return to the Land, the idyllic prophecies of
the
return to Zion would have been fulfilled and the Shchina
would have returned. In reality, however, only a small
portion returned. The majority remained in Bavel,
willfully
accepting the exile, as they did not wish to leave their
homes & businesses etc." (sounds familiar...)
Even those who did return lacked enthusiasm. The
apathy
of the returnees is echoed in the prophecies of Chagai and
Zecharya, the prophets of this time period (see Chagai
1:1-3;
2:3 see also Zecharya 4:10; 6:15; 7:4-7; 8:6.
. How does all of this relate to Megillat Esther?
How could it not relate!
Could the fact that Am Yisrael remained scattered
among
the 127 provinces of the Persian Empire, while they could
have
returned a generation or two earlier to Jerusalem, not
relate
to the prophetic message of the Megilla?
Considering that Yirmiyahu's seventy years are over,
why
are so many Jews living in Shushan and all over the
Persian
empire during the time period of Achashverosh?
Could not this fact alone supply sufficient reason
for
God to consider Am Yisrael negligent of their covenantal
responsibilities?
With this in mind, we must now take a second look at
the
Megilla in search of at least a 'hint' of this theme.
PART III - THE THEME OF THE MEGILLA AND ITS SATIRE
Based on this historic and prophetic setting, one
could
suspect that the impending destruction of Am Yisrael by
Haman
may be a Divine punishment for their apathy. After all,
the
Jews living in the Persian empire appear to have:
* preferred Shushan over Yerushalayim;
* opted to subjugate themselves to Achashverosh rather
than
respond to God's call to return to their land;
* Replaced the bet ha-mikdash with the palace of
Achashverosh!
["ve-nahafoch hu"]
Even though this prophetic message is not explicit in
the
Megilla, we will now show how it may be hidden in its
satire.
[Note: Before we continue, it is important to clarify a
problematic issue. We are about to relate many elements
in
the story of the Megilla to a satiric commentary on
Persian
Jewry. This does not mean that these events did not
actually occur. The story of the Megilla is true and
based
on historic facts. However, its prophetic message is
conveyed through the use of literary tools, such as
satire
and irony. Often, criticism is more poignant when
delivered
implicitly rather than explicitly. (Lehavdil, take for
example George Orwell's criticism of the Russian
revolution
in 'Animal Farm'.)]
TEXTUAL AND THEMATIC SUPPORT
For a start, we will bring two examples where there
appears to be an 'echo' of God's voice behind certain
statements in the Megilla.
For example, the story of Vashti may reflect God's
utter
disappointment with Am Yisrael for not returning to Israel
to
fulfill their divine purpose, to become God's 'model'
nation:
"[Vashti was called to] come to the king and show all
the
nations her beauty... but she did not come as the King
commanded, and he became very angry..." (see Esther
1:9-12).
Is not Vashti's behavior similar to that of Am
Yisrael?
Is not the King's conclusion similar to God's? Is not the
fear that all the women in the Persian kingdom will now
disobey their husbands ironic? If Am Yisrael (destined to
be
an 'or la-goyim') does not respond to its divine call,
what
could God expect from other nations?
[Note that in earlier prophecy, Am Yisrael is often
compared
to God's wife - see Hoshea 2:4,16-18. See also Zecharya
1:1-
3, note 'shuvu eilai...' and 'va-yiktzof', compare
1:12.]
Furthermore, who is the real king in the Megilla?
Chazal
raise the possibility that the word 'ha-melech' [the King]
in
the Megilla may be 'kodesh', as it often [in a hidden
manner]
may be referring to God and not to Achashverosh.
Even Haman's petition to Achashverosh to destroy Am
Yisrael may echo a similar complaint that God may have
against
His own nation:
"There is a certain nation scattered among the nations
whose
laws are different than any other nation, but the laws
of
the King they do not keep, and it is not worthwhile for
the
King to leave them be. Therefore, if it please the
king,
let it be written that they be destroyed..." (see
3:8-9).
In a certain way, Haman's accusation is similar to
God's
threat in Shirat Ha'azinu to destroy am Yisrael for not
keeping His laws (32:26). After all, what purpose is
there
for God to keep His people if they refuse to obey Him and
fulfill their divine goal?
TEN THOUSAND KIKAR KESEF
Recall as well the continuation of the above pasuk,
re:
the handsome bribe that Haman had paid to Achashverosh to
assure that this edict would be issued, noting the amount
of
money Haman 'donates' and its purpose:
"...If it please the king, let it be written that they
be
destroyed; and I will pay ten thousand KIKAR KESEF
[talents
of silver] by way of the hands of the OSEI HA'MLACHA
[those
who 'do the work'!] to bring it into the king's
treasuries.
And the king took his ring from his hand, and gave it
unto
Haman... And the king said unto Haman: 'The silver is
given
to you, the people also, to do with them as they see
fit..."
(See Esther 3:8-11)
Was it be 'just by chance', that during the
construction
of the first Temple, the leaders of the people of Israel
(during the time of King David) donated the exact same
amount
of silver to be used by the workers of its construction:
"Then the princes of the fathers' houses, and the
princes of
the tribes of Israel, and the captains of thousands and
of
hundreds, with the rulers over the king's work, offered
willingly; and they gave for the service of the house of
God... and of silver ten thousand KIKARIM [talents] ...
Then the people rejoiced, for that they offered
willingly,
because with a whole heart they offered willingly to the
LORD; and David the king also rejoiced with great joy!"
(see Divrei Hayamim I 29:6-9)
Recall as well that the book of Divrei Ha'yamim was
composed at approximately the same time as Megillat Esther
-
i.e. by the Anshei Knesset ha'gdola during the Persian
time
period of the Second Temple. Hence, this parallel should
not
surprise us!
====
Even though these first three examples may appear a
bit
'stretched', a more convincing textual proof is found in
the
parallel between Achashverosh's palace and the bet
mikdash.
This parallel is significant for it reflects the fact the
Bnei
Yisrael had neglected the bet ha-mikdash in Yerushalayim,
preferring instead to be dependent on the palace of
Achashverosh. We begin by comparing the overall structure
of
each:
KODESH KODASHIM - CHATZER PNIMIT
The Megilla refers to the most inner chamber of the
king's palace as the 'chatzer ha-pnimit' (5:1), where
entry to
anyone is forbidden under threat of death - unless called
to
enter (as Esther feared in 4:11). Here we find an obvious
parallel to the kodesh ha-kodashim in the mikdash (Purim -
kippurim!).
KODESH - CHATZER CHITZONA
The 'waiting area' outside the inner chamber is
called
the 'chatzer ha-chitzona' (6:4). Here 'ro'ei pnei
ha-melech'
(1:14) like Haman himself are allowed to enter freely.
This
is parallel to the kodesh where kohanim are permitted to
enter.
[See description of the Temple in Yechezkel
40:18-19.]
AZARA - SHA'AR BET HA-MELECH
In front of the palace is 'sha'ar bet ha-melech'
where
people like Mordechai are permitted to stand (2:18,21).
However, here one must dress properly ('aveilut' is not
permitted), therefore he cannot be there dressed in
sackcloth
(see 4:2!). This area is parallel to the azara in the
mikdash.
YERUSHALAYIM - REHOV HA-IR SHUSHAN
This is the area 'lifnei sha'ar ha-melech' (4:2) or
'rechov ha-ir' (4:6) where Mordechai can dress in
sackcloth.
This is parallel to the city of Yerushalayim surrounding
the
mikdash.
This parallel is strengthened by the Megilla's use of
the
word bira to describe Shushan. As we explained in our
introduction, in Divrei Ha-yamim, the only other time in
Tanach prior to Megillat Esther where this word is
mentioned,
bira describes specifically the bet ha-mikdash, and in the
context of its purpose to serve as a national center and
symbol of God's Name. [See DH I 29:1 & 19, you should
read
from 29:1-25 to see the context. (You'll find there a
familiar passage from davening, which maybe you will now
understand a little better.)]
[See also Masechet Middot I:9, where the Mishna refers
to
the bet ha-mikdash as the bira.]
Other parallels to mikdash are found in the use of
key
words such as 'yekar ve-tif'eret' (1:4); 'tekhelet, butz,
ve-argaman' (1:6) in the Megilla's description of the
king's
party.
[Based on these psukim, the gemara (Megilla 12a) claims
that
Achashverosh donned the 'bigdei kohen gadol' at his
party!]
Even the 6-month party followed by a seven-day
special
celebration may parallel the six months that it took to
build
the mishkan (from Yom Kippur till Rosh Chodesh Nissan)
followed by the seven-day 'milu'im' ceremony. Likewise,
Chazal explain, 've-keilim mi-keilim shonim' (1:7) as
referring to the vessels of the bet ha-mikdash.
Chazal even suggest that Haman's decree may have been
Am
Yisrael's punishment for drinking from these keilim or
alternately for their participation in and enjoyment of
the
royal party (see Megilla 12a).
[Note that according to pshat, the keilim had returned
with
Sheshbatzar during the time of Koresh (see Ezra 1:7-8).
However, the Midrash emphasizes the thematic connection
between the party and Bnei Yisrael's lack of enthusiasm
to
build the mikdash.]
Hence we can conclude that the Megilla's satire
suggests
that during this time period Am Yisrael had replaced:
* God with Achashverosh;
* God's Temple with Achashverosh's palace; and
* Yerushalayim ha-bira with Shushan ha-bira!
['ve-nahafoch hu']
70 DAYS / 70 YEARS
Another seemingly unimportant detail in the Megilla
concerning when the two decrees were sent might also
allude to
this prophetic backdrop.
Recall that the original decree calling for the
destruction of the Jews was sent out on the 13th day of
Nisan
(3:12). Several days later Haman was hanged and Esther
pleaded from the king to repeal this decree (8:3-6).
Achashverosh agreed; however, the actual letters were not
sent
out until the 23rd of Sivan - some two months later (8:9)!
What took so long?
By carefully comparing these two dates, we again find
an
amazing reminder of Yirmiyahu's prophecy of the seventy
years.
Between the 13th of Nisan until the 23rd of Sivan - 70
days
elapsed (17+30+23). During these seventy days, all of the
Jews throughout the Persian Empire were under the
tremendous
peril of impending destruction, thinking that their doom
was
inevitable. Could this be an ironic reminder to the
Jewish
people that they had not heeded Yirmiyahu's prophecy of
what
he expected from Bnei Yisrael once the seventy years had
expired (see 29:10-14!)?
A similar concept of suffering for a sin, a day for a
year (and vice versa), is found twice in Tanach in related
circumstances. After the sin of the 'meraglim', the forty
days are replaced by the punishment of forty years of
wandering. Here, too, the nation opted not to fulfill
their
divine destiny, preferring a return to Egypt to the
conquest
of Eretz Yisrael. Yechezkel, too, is required to suffer
'a
day for each year.'
[For 390 days followed by an additional 40 days, he must
lie
on his side and repent for the sins of Israel and Yehuda
that led to the destruction of Yerushalayim (Yechezkel
4:1-14!)].
A similar claim is made by the Midrash which suggests
that Achashverosh threw his 180 day party in celebration
of
the fact that Yirmiyahu's seventy years were over and the
bet
ha-mikdash was not rebuilt. In pshat, this explanation is
unreasonable. Why should the most powerful king of
civilization worry about the prophecies of Yirmiyahu,
while
the Jews themselves do not listen to him?
However, on the level of drash, this explanation is
enlightening. Chazal, in the spirit of the Megilla -
've-nahafoch hu' - put into Achashverosh's mind what
should
have been in the mind of Am Yisrael, i.e. the fulfillment
of
Yirmiyahu's prophecy of seventy years and the desire to
return.
PESACH AND PURIM
Based on our understanding thus far, it is also
understandable why Israel's salvation from Haman's decree
comes only after Am Yisrael collectively accept a three
day
fast. This fast takes place on the 15, 16, & 17th of
Nisan.
Interestingly enough, the events that led to the repeal of
Haman's decree take place 'davka' during the holiday of
Pesach
- the holiday on which we celebrate our freedom from
subjugation to a foreign nation and the beginning of our
journey to the Promised Land.
PART IV - WHY SATIRE?
We have shown that the Megilla is laced with
allusions to
the fact that Am Yisrael does not answer its divine call
during the Persian time period. But the question remains,
why
is this message only hinted at but not explicitly stated
by
Chazal? Most probably for the same reason that it is not
explicit in the Megilla.
This is the power of satire. In order to strengthen the
message, a powerful point is not explicitly stated, but
only
alluded to. The direct approach used by the other 48
nevi'im
of Tanach had not been very successful.
[See Masechet Megilla 14a (top) - "gedola hasarat
ha-taba'at
shel Haman yoter mi-48 nevi'im..."!]
One could suggest that Anshei Knesset Ha-gdola, in
their
decision to write (see Bava Batra 15a] (and later
canonize)
Megillat Esther, had hoped that a satirical message would
be
more powerful than a direct one. Hence, Midrashim of
Chazal
that comment on the Megilla may follow a similar approach.
[Note how the prophet Natan's message to David ha-melech
in
regard to his sin with Bat-sheva was much more powerful
because he used the 'mashal' of kivsat ha-rash" (see II
Shmuel
12:1-7!).]
PART V - THE MINHAGIM OF PURIM
Up until this point we have explained how the satire
in
the Megilla may reflect a prophetic censure of Am Yisrael
in
Bavel for not returning to Yerushalayim when the
opportunity
arose during the time of Koresh. However, if our
assumptions
are indeed correct, then we would expect the outcome of
the
Megilla, or at least the celebration of Purim for future
generations to reflect this theme.
Instead, we don't find any 'mass aliya' movement
after
our salvation. Nor does the celebration of Purim (with
'mishteh' and sending 'mishloach manot') appear to reflect
this theme in any manner.
However, with a 'little help' from the prophecies of
Zecharya, we can suggest an answer for these questions as
well. To do so, we must first identify who the specific
Persian King Achashverosh was.
SOME MORE HISTORICAL BACKGROUND
The topic of the history of the Persian time period
is
very complicated and the subject of a major controversy
between most Midrashei Chazal and the historians (& a
minority
opinion in Chazal). To explain this controversy is beyond
the
scope of this shiur, instead we will simply present the
two
conflicting opinions concerning when Achashverosh reigned.
According to Seder Olam (and hence the majority
opinion
in Chazal), Achashverosh was the Persian King immediately
after Koresh, but before Daryavesh, and thus the story of
the
Megilla takes place after 'shivat tzion' (the return to
Zion
during the time of Koresh) but before the second bet ha-
mikdash is actually built.
According to this opinion, the events of the Megilla
had
a tremendous affect on the situation in Yerushalayim.
Only
two years after the story of Megilla, King Darius, son of
Esther gives the Jews permission to return and build the
Second Temple. Construction began during the second year
of
Darius (= Daryavesh).
The events of the Megilla also appear to have
catalyzed a
major aliya movement. According to Chazal, Ezra's aliya
from
Bavel took place only a few years afterward, during the
seventh year of his reign of Daryavesh (who Chazal
identify
with Artachshasta / see Ezra 7:1-9).
Thus, according to Seder Olam's opinion, the events
of
the Megilla indeed had a major effect on the rebuilding of
the
Temple and shivat tzion - the return to Zion.
According to most historians (and a minority opinion
in
Chazal / see Tirgum ha-shiv'im & Pirkei de-Rabbi Eliezer
chapter 49), Achashverosh was the Persian king who
succeeded
Darius (486 - 465 BCE), and thus the story of the Megilla
takes place some forty years after the second Temple was
built, and thus after Chagai & Zecharya's plea to return
and
fulfill the potential of Bayit Sheni. [Its construction
began
in 521 BCE / in the second year of Darius the Great; hence
the
story in the Megilla takes place in 474 BCE.]
According to this opinion, no major event takes place
immediately after the events in the Megilla. In fact,
over
two decades pass before a new wave of olim come with Ezra
and
Nechemya to help strengthen the city of Yerushalayim.
[The
historians identify Artachshasta with Artexerxes, not the
same
king as Darius.]
If our assumption concerning the satire of the
Megilla is
correct, why don't we find a mass aliya movement
immediately
after the miracle of Purim. [Jews of the twentieth
century
could ask themselves a similar question!]
Furthermore, according to either opinion, shouldn't
the
manner by which we celebrate Purim relate to this theme
and
satire?
Finally, why is it necessary to celebrate Purim for
all
generations? Purim is not the only time in our history
when
Bnei Yisrael are saved from terrible enemies. Chazal go
even
one step further. They claim that Purim will be the only
holiday kept at the time of the final redemption! (See
Rambam
Hilchot Megilla, Esther 9:28 and commentaries).
THE MEGILLA AND SEFER ZECHARYA
If we follow the opinion of the 'historians' in
regard to
the time period of Megillat Esther, then the prophecies of
Zecharya concerning the potential of Bayit Sheni precede
the
story in the Megilla. If so, then we posit that numerous
textual parallels between the Megilla and Sefer Zecharya
are
intentional. In other words, when 'anshei knesset
ha-gedola'
wrote Megillat Esther (most likely during the time period
of
Ezra / see Bava Batra 15a), they assumed that anyone
reading
the Megilla was familiar with Sefer Zecharya, and hence
would
understand the implicit meaning of these parallels.
We will now show how the Megilla may suggest that Am
Yisrael's predicament during the time period of
Achashverosh
was caused because of Zecharya's prophecies (a generation
earlier) were not taken seriously! To appreciate this
message, we must study Zecharya chapters 7->8.
For a background, review the first six chapters of
Sefer
Zecharya, noting how they focus on one primary theme - the
return of the Shchina to Yerushalayim. However, Zecharya
warns numerous times that the Shchina's return will be a
function of Am Yisrael's covenantal commitment (see 6:15).
Redemption is indeed possible; however, Zecharya insists
that
the 'spiritual' return of Am Yisrael was no less important
than their physical return:
"Shuvu eilai.. ve-ashuva aleichem" (1:3, see also
8:7-8).
[It is highly suggested that you read at least the
first
two chapters of Zecharya (note 'hadassim' and 'ish
rochev
al sus' in chapter 1, and 'prazot teshev Yerushalayim'
in
chapter 2) and then chapters 7-8 before continuing.]
SHOULD WE FAST ON TISHA BE-AV?
According to Chagai 2:18, construction of the Temple
began on this same year, i.e. during the second year of
Daryavesh. Zecharya chapter seven opens two years later
when
an official delegation from Bavel arrives in Jerusalem to
ask
Zecharya a very fundamental question:
"Ha-evkeh be-chodesh ha-chamishi?" Should we continue
to
fast in the 5th month (i.e. the fast of Tisha Be-av)?
(see
7:3)
The question appears to be quite legitimate. After
all,
now that the Temple is rebuilt, there no longer appears to
be
a need to fast. However, Zecharya's lengthy and official
reply (7:4-8:23) to this question contains an eternal
message
that relates to the very nature of the ideal redemption
process.
In Zecharya 7:4-7, God appears to be quite disturbed
by
the people's question regarding the need to fast. Instead
of
showing their interest in the greater picture of the
redemption process, the people seem only to be interested
in
whether or not they have to fast. In the eyes of the
prophet,
their question reflected a general attitude problem in
regard
to the entire redemption process.
God's answer implies that the fast of Tisha Be-av is
not
a divine commandment - rather it was a 'minhag' instituted
by
Chazal to remember not only the Temple's destruction, but
also
the reason why the churban took place (see 7:5-6). Thus,
God
explains, feasting or fasting is man's decision, while God
is
interested in something much more basic - that Bnei
Yisrael
keep the mitzvot which they had neglected during the first
Temple period (see 7:5-14).
Zecharya continues his answer with two chapters of
'musar' (rebuke) in which he emphasizes the most basic
mitzvot
that Bnei Yisrael must keep in order for the Shchina to
return:
"EMET u-mishpat shalom shiftu be-sha'areichem, ve-chesed
ve-rachamim asu ish et achiv. Almana, ve-yatom ve-ani
al
ta'ashoku..." (7:8-10).
- Truth, social justice, helping the poor and needy,
and
thinking kindly of one's neighbor, etc.
God is anxious for His Shchina to return, but in
order
for that to happen, Yerushalayim must first become a city
characterized by truth (8:1-3). God foresees the return
the
exiles from lands in the east and west. With their
return,
God and His nation will become once again covenantal
partners,
through "emet & tzedaka" (see 8:7-8).
Finally, after many words of encouragement and
repeated
'musar' (see 8:11-17), God finally answers the original
question concerning the fast days. Should Am Yisrael
return
to Israel and keep "emet ve-shalom, the four fast days
commemorating the destruction of Yerushalayim will become
holidays:
"tzom ha-rvii, v'tzom ha'chamishi... [The four fast
days]
will be instead for Yehuda days of celebration... [on
the
condition that] they will love emet & shalom" (see
8:18-19 /
note parallel to Megilla 9:30-31!)
After two chapters of rebuke, Zecharya finally
answers
the people's original question. Should Bnei Yisrael
indeed
show their devotion to God, i.e. if they practice 'emet
u-mishpat shalom', then the fast days, the days of crying
for
Jerusalem, will become holidays instead.
Should Bnei Yisrael indeed love keeping emet & shalom
(these two words simply summarize the primary points
raised by
Zecharya in this perek), then the redemption process will
be
complete.
ISH YEHUDI
Zecharya concludes this prophecy with his vision of
numerous people from many great nations will one day come
to
Yerushalayim in search of God. They will gather around
the
ish yehudi, asking for his guidance, for they will have
heard
that God is with His people (8:20-23).
Had Am Yisrael heeded this prophetic call in the time
of
Koresh and Daryavesh, then they would not have been
scattered
among 127 provinces during the time of Achashverosh. One
could suggest that instead of celebrating with the
Persians at
the party in Shushan, the Jews could (& should) have been
celebrating with God at His bet ha-mikdash in
Yerushalayim.
The ish yehudi would have been in the bira in
Yerushalayim, making God's Name known to other nations;
instead, the Megilla opens as an ish yehudi is found in
the
bira of Achashverosh in Shushan, ironically carrying the
name
of foreign god.
[One could also suggest that Mordechai's institution of
the
yearly celebration of Purim relates specifically to this
prophecy. First of all, note how this day is described
as
one that turns around from 'yagon' to 'simcha', from
'mourning to holiday' (see Esther 9:22). Purim may
symbolize the manner in which the fast days for
Jerusalem
will one day become holidays.]
This parallel to Zecharya could explain the reason
for
the special mitzvot that Mordechai instituted for Purim in
his
first letter (see Esther 9:20-22). They reflect
Zecharya's
repeated message of helping the needy (matanot le-evyonim/
note Zecharya 7:10) and thinking nicely of one's neighbors
(mishloach manot ish le-re'eihu / note 8:16-17!). Once a
year
we must remind ourselves of the most basic mitzvot that we
must keep in order that we become worthy of returning to
Yerushalayim and rebuilding the Bet ha'mikdash.
Certain halachot instituted by Chazal may reflect
this
message. Interestingly, Shushan Purim is replaced with
Yerushalayim Purim for the walled cities from the time of
Yehoshua bin Nun replace the walled city of Shushan! [See
Yehoshua 21:42 and its context, compare to Esther 9:2.]
SHALOM VE-EMET
Although this explanation for certain minhagim of
Purim
may seem a bit 'stretched', textual proof is found in the
closing psukim of the Megilla (9:29-32 / read it
carefully!).
Recall how Mordechai and Esther found it necessary to
send out a second 'igeret' (letter) - whose purpose was
not
only to give authority ('tokef') to the holiday that they
had
instituted, but also to explain the reason for these
'minhagim' [customs] of Purim, as detailed in their
original
letter.
What was the content of this special second letter?
To
our surprise, accordingly to the Megilla, its content is
summarized by one very short phrase:
" And sent letters unto all the Jews, to the 127
provinces
of the kingdom of Achashverosh, containing divrei shalom
ve-emet - words of peace & truth"!
[See Esther 9:30, read carefully.]
These two key words - "shalom v'emet" - are not
simply
the opening words of this letter. Rather, they describe
the
entire content of this second letter. But this very
special
phrase also points us directly back to Zecharya's prophecy
about the fast days becoming holidays (read Zecharya
8:18-19
again) - for they explain not only when, but also why
(i.e.
under what conditions) the fast days will become holidays
- if
and when Bnei Yisrael keep 'shalom' and 'emet'!
But that short two word phrase in Zecharya is chosen by
the
navi for it beautifully summarizes the entire content of
his
prophecy concerning values that he expects the people to
focus
on, to assure that the redemption process of the Second
Temple
will continue in the proper direction - so that God's
"Shechina" could return.
[For example, note how many time Zecharya had mentioned
"ish
el re'eyhu" or "ish el achiv" in 7:9 & 8:16-17, as well
as
caring for the poor and needy in 7:10. Note as well how
the
words "shalom" and "emet" are used numerous times by
Zecharya in chapters 7 and 8!]
Hence, we conclude, that the second "igeret" was sent to
explain to the people, based on the earlier prophecies of
Zecharya, the purpose of these special minhagim of Purim.
Mordechai and Esther had established Purim as a yearly
reminder of the prophecies of Zecharya. Even though they
remained unfulfilled, those customs would help remind Am
Yisrael concerning what is required of them in order for
that
redemption process to reach its highest goals.
The continuation of this second "igeret" strengthens
this
interpretation. Note how the Megilla also explains under
what
authority (tokef) Mordechai and Esther institute these
halachot:
"Ka'asher kiymu al nafsham divrei ha-tzomot
ve-za'akatam"
(9:31) [Compare these psukim carefully to Zecharya
8:18-19.]
Recall, God had told Zecharya that fast days and
feast
days are up to man to decide. Now, according to the
second
igeret, just like ('ka'asher') the prophets instituted the
four fast days in order that we remember Yerushalayim,
Mordechai now institutes a 'feast day' to remember
Yerushalayim. In other words, our yearly special
celebration
on the 14th and 15th of Adar can remind us of how we will
(in
the future, when worthy) celebrate those four fast days -
once
Yerushalayim will be re-built and the nation will be
acting in
the proper manner.
[Note that this pasuk cannot be referring to our Ta'anit
Esther, for if it refers to the three day fast, that
fast
was a one time event and was not "al nafsham ve-al
zar'am".
Likewise, it cannot be the fast of the 13th of Adar, as
that
custom only began during the time period of the Ge'onim.
Therefore, it must refer to the four fast days on
Jerusalem.]
DID THEY 'GET THE MESSAGE'?
So why didn't everyone return immediately afterward
to
Israel?
Most probably, after the events of the Megilla, a
mass
return to Yerushalayim was not realistic.
In fact, the rather anti-climatic' final lines of the
Megilla (see 10:1) seem to indicate that 'all said and
done',
nothing really changed (people are paying taxes to
Achashverosh). Nonetheless, Mordechai wanted to institute
a
holiday that would remind Am Yisrael that should such an
opportunity arise (once again), that they will know how to
relate to it properly. Sefer Zecharya and its theme of
"shalom ve-emet" serve as the spiritual guide.
[This interpretation may help explain why the
celebration of
Purim will remain even after our final redemption.]
Purim, therefore, has deep meaning for all
generations.
Its message may have been 'hiding' behind the costumes,
the
drinking ("ad de-lo yada"), the 'purim Torah', and
'shalach
mannos'. It may have been lost within our ignorance of
Tanach. Its message, however, remains eternal, just as
our
aspirations for Yerushalayim and the establishment therein
of
a just society - remain eternal.
purim sameiach,
menachem
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20110317/01c3794c/attachment-0001.htm
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: purim.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 77720 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-lite/attachments/20110317/01c3794c/attachment-0001.pdf
More information about the Par-lite
mailing list