[Par-reg] Megillat Esther -- shiur
Menachem Leibtag
tsc at bezeqint.net
Wed Mar 23 23:26:48 EST 2005
*************************************************************
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
More information about the Par-reg
mailing list