| 1 | On that day King Achashveirosh gave to Esther the Queen the house of Haman the adversary of the Jews; and Mordechai came before the King, for Esther had revealed his relationship to her.
|
"That day, King Achashveirosh gave to the Queen Esther the house of Haman." (8:1)
QUESTION: It is a positive command to destroy the memory of Amalek (Rambam, Melachim 5:5). Since this was "the estate of Haman," why did Esther accept it as a gift?
ANSWER: According to
halachah the property of people who are put to death by the King automatically becomes the King's possession (
Sanhedrin 48b). Since Achashveirosh personally issued the order that Haman be hung, Haman's property automatically became his. Consequently, it was permissible for Esther to take it since it was no longer considered the property of an Amalakite. Thus, after King Achashveirosh said to Queen Esther and Mordechai the Jew, "Behold I have given Haman's estate to Esther," he also added "and he has been hanged because he plotted against the Jews" (8:8) to emphasize that it was permitted for her to take it since he was hung by the decree of the King.
This is analogous to what the Gemara (Gittin 38a) says regarding the land of Amon and Moav. The Torah forbade us from distressing or provoking war with Moav or Amon, and thus we cannot directly take their lands (Devarim 2:10,19). However, after they were defeated by Sichon and the land was considered Sichon's, it was permissible for the Jews to take the land.
Alternatively, according to Rashi (Devarim 25:19) this commandment includes men and women regardless of age, and even sheep and oxen, "So the name of Amalek shall not be mentioned even in connection with an animal by someone saying, 'This animal was of Amalek.' " The Rambam (Melachim 5:4) rules that it is a positive commandment to utterly wipe out the seven nations that lived in Israel, as it is written, "You shall utterly destroy them" (20:17) and "You shall not allow any person to live" (20:16), and he concludes, "Ukevar avad zichram" — "Their memory no longer exists" (because Sancherev the King of Assyria inter-mixed all the nations of the world).
The Rambam (5:5) continues, "It is also a positive command to destroy the memory of Amalek, as it says, 'Timcheh et zeicher Amalek mitachat hashamayim' — 'You shall wipe out the memory of Amalek from under the heaven' (Devarim 25:19)."
- Why doesn't the Rambam add "Ukevar avad zichram" — "Their memory no longer exists" — as he did regarding to the seven nations?
- Why doesn't the Rambam mention that there is also a mitzvah to utterly destroy the possessions of Amalek?
The seven nations were those who occupied
Eretz Yisrael before the Jewish conquest. Amalek was not one of the seven nations, but he was the arch enemy of the Jewish people. Without any justification, merely out of pure hatred, he fought the Jewish people and sought to annihilate them, G-d forbid.
Throughout the millennia there have been "Amalekites" of various kinds, anti-Semites who, regardless of their genealogy, have had an imbedded hatred for the Jewish people and who have seized every opportunity to harm them. The mitzvah of wiping out the memory of Amalek does not only apply to the nation of Amalek, but also to all those who have accepted their vicious obsession with harming the Jews.
Thus, in regard to the seven nations whose existence is no longer known, the Rambam says "Ukevar avad zichram" — "Their memory no longer exists" — and therefore presently the mitzvah of destroying them is not applicable. He does not add these words in regard to Amalek, since the mitzvah applies not only to the nation of Amalek, but to all those who follow the Amalekite philosophy of harming the Jews.
The difference between dealing with the nation of Amalek and dealing with those who follow the Amalekite philosophy is as follows: Wiping out the memory of Amalek also includes utterly destroying their possessions so that the name of Amalek shall not be mentioned, "Even in connection with an animal, by someone saying, 'This was of Amalek.'" However, in the case of the non-Amalek nations who follow in their steps, only the vicious people must be destroyed.
According to the Jerusalem Talmud (Yevamot 2:6) Haman was not an actual descendant of Agag the King of Amalek. He was called "Haman the son of Hammedata the Agagi" to designate him as "kotzeitz ben kotzeitz" — "a murderer and son of a murderer." Since he followed in the footsteps of Amalek and pursued their philosophy of harming the Jewish people, it was incumbent upon Mordechai to do everything possible to destroy him, but it was permissible to benefit from his possessions afterwards.
"That day, King Achashveirosh gave to Esther the Queen the house of Haman." (8:1)
QUESTION: Why the emphasis "bayom hahu" — "that day"?
ANSWER: In his decree Haman wrote, "To exterminate all Jews...in a single day...and to plunder their possessions" (3:13). Since Hashem conducts Himself with man
"midah keneged midah" — "measure for measure" — therefore
"bayom hahu" — "on that very day" — i.e. the day of Haman's downfall, he was killed and all his possessions were taken away from him and given over to Esther.
Though she was the Queen and lacked nothing, Achashveirosh gave her beit Haman — the house of Haman — and she appointed Mordechai over it (8:2), so that his punishment would be "measure for measure." Since the gallows he made was "omeid bebeit Haman — standing in the house of Haman (7:9), he deserved to be hanged on a gallows which is standing in the house of Esther and Mordechai.
| 2 | And the King took off his signet-ring which he had taken away from Haman, and gave it to Mordechai; and Esther appointed Mordechai over the house of Haman.
|
"Esther appointed Mordechai over the house of Haman." (8:2)
QUESTION: Why did Esther appoint Mordechai over the house of Haman?
ANSWER: In the famous incident in which Mordechai and Haman were both in command of armies (see p. 83), Haman sold himself as a slave to Mordechai for food.
According to halachah, "mah shekanah eved kanah rabo" — "Whatever a slave acquires becomes the property of his master" (Pesachim 88b). Consequently, in keeping within the realm of halachah, Esther appointed Mordechai over Haman's house since in reality he was the rightful owner of it.
| 3 | And Esther spoke again before the King, and fell down at his feet, and wept, and begged him to rescind the evil of Haman the Agagite, and his scheme which he had plotted against the Jews.
|
| 4 | And the King held out toward Esther the golden sceptre; and Esther arose, and stood before the King;
|
| 5 | And she said, "If it be pleasing to the King, and if I have found grace before him, and the thing seem proper before the King, and I be pleasing in his eyes, let it be written to countermand the letters, the scheme of Haman the son of Hammedata the Agagite, which he had written to exterminate the Jews who are in all the provinces of the King.
|
| 6 | "For how could I endure to look on the disaster that is to befall my people, and how could I endure to look on the extermination of my relatives?"
|
"For how could I endure to look on the disaster that is to befall my people, How could I endure to look on the extermination of my relatives?" (8:6)
QUESTION: Why did Esther speak in redundancies?
ANSWER: Esther was saying to Achashveirosh, "I don't know the precise nature of Haman's deal with you regarding the Jews. It may have been
'le'abdam' with an
'alef,' which means physical annihilation or spiritual annihilation, i.e. forced to forsake their religion, or
'le'abdam' — with an
'ayin' — which means slavery. Thus, I beg of you to countermand the letters of decree he issued, because if the intention was slavery, then how can I bear to witness the disaster that will befall my people (should they all become slaves or forced to assimilate), and if the letters meant annihilation, how can I bear to witness the extermination of my relatives?"
| 7 | Then King Achashveirosh said to Esther the Queen and to Mordechai the Jew: "Behold, the house of Haman I have given to Esther, and he has been hanged on the gallows, because he had stretched out his hand against the Jews.
|
| 8 | "And you — write concerning the Jews, as it may be good in your eyes, in the King's name, and seal it with the King's signet-ring; for a writing which is written in the King's name, and sealed with the King's signet-ring, cannot be revoked."
|
"Then King Achashveirosh said to Esther...and he has been hanged on the gallows...And you write concerning the Jews, as it may be good in your eyes, in the King's name." (8:7, 8)
QUESTION: Why did he preface his permission to send favorable letters annulling the decree with the fact that Haman had been hanged on the gallows?
ANSWER: Achashveirosh was concerned about his own image. How would the people view the fact that he had written one letter condemning the Jews and then a second one exonerating them? The
Gemara (
Ta'anit 29a) says that there was a rule among many ancient governments that when a decree was issued and one of the high officers would die, the decree would be nullified. Therefore, he told Mordechai and Esther, "Now that 'he has been hanged on the gallows,' the entire populace will know that the decree which was issued is no longer valid. Hence, you have a 'green light' to send a new letter with the royal signet-ring regarding the Jews, and no one will question my integrity or state of mind."
"Write concerning the Jews as it may be good in your eyes, in the King's name, and seal it with the King's signet-ring, for a writing which is written in the King's name and sealed with the King's signet-ring cannot be revoked." (8:8)
QUESTION:
- Achashveirosh seems to be contradicting himself. If an edict issued by the King cannot be revoked, what will be accomplished by a second letter?
- Instead of "kitvu al haYehudim" — "write about the Jews," he should have said, "kitvu laYehudim — write to the Jews?"
ANSWER: To save face, Achashveirosh told Esther that he was a sincere friend of the Jewish people and furious at Haman. He told Esther, "We agreed to write
'lehashmid laharog ule'abeid et kol haYehudim' — 'to destroy, to slay, and to exterminate all Jews' (3:13). However, I had instructed him to
put a comma before the word
'haYehudim' because my intent was
le'abaid et kol — to exterminate all — i.e. all the
goyim should be wiped out, and it should be accomplished through
'haYehudim' — 'the Jews.' Haman left out a comma between the words
'kol' — 'all' — and
'haYehudim.' Thus, it can be interpreted to mean 'to annihilate the entire Jewish people.'
"Therefore, I advise you to write a letter explaining 'al haYehudim' — the reference to 'Yehudim' in the previous letter — in a way which is favorable and beneficial to you. Consequently, your second letter will merely clarify and support my intention in the first letter: that all the goyim should be killed through — haYehudim — the Jews. A second letter which is only for clarification is in accordance with accepted decorum."
| 9 | And the King's scribes were summoned at that time, in the third month, that is, the month Sivan, on the twenty-third day thereof; and it was written according to all that Mordechai commanded to the Jews, and to the satraps, and the governors and the princes of the provinces who were from Hodu to Cush, one hundred and twenty-seven provinces, to every province according to its writing, and to every nationality according to its language, and to the Jews according to their writing, and according to their language.
|
"And the King's scribes were summoned at that time, in the third month — that is the month of Sivan, on the twenty-third day thereof." (8:9)
QUESTION: Haman's letters to annihilate the Jews were written in the first month on the thirteenth of Nissan (3:12). Why did Mordechai wait seventy days to send his letters of countermand (announcing the repeal of the decree)?
ANSWER: When Yaakov expired, "Egypt mourned him for seventy days" (
Bereishit 50:3). The honor they gave Yaakov was so great that even the Canaanites exclaimed, "This is a grievous mourning to Egypt" (ibid. 50:11). The seventy days which elapsed between the first letter and the second correspond to the seventy days that the Egyptians showed kindness to Yaakov.
As a reward for their behavior they merited that during the seventy days the Jews feared them instead of the reverse.
The seventy day period, on the basis of "a day for a year" (Bamidbar 14:34), corresponded to the seventy year average lifespan of man (Psalms 90:10). During these seventy days of profound repentance and preparedness to die al kiddush Hashem — in sanctification of Hashem — they merited to rectify their entire lives and were worthy of His salvation.
| 10 | And he wrote in the name of King Achashveirosh, and sealed it with the King's signet-ring, and he sent letters through the couriers on horseback, and riders of swift mules, bred of mares,
|
| 11 | That the King had granted to the Jews who were in every city [the right] to assemble and to defend themselves; to destroy, to slay, and to exterminate all the military strength of the people and province that would assault them, both little ones and women, and to take their property as spoil,
|
| 12 | On one day in all the provinces of King Achashveirosh, on the thirteenth day of the twelfth month, which is the month Adar.
|
| 13 | The copy of the writ was that an edict be given out in every province, published before all the peoples, and that the Jews be ready for that day to avenge themselves on their enemies.
|
| 14 | The couriers that rode upon swift mules, went out hastened [lit. bewildered] and pushed by the King's order; and the edict was given in Shushan the Capital.
|
"The couriers...went out bewildered and pushed by the King's order." (8:14)
QUESTION: When the first letters were sent, the Megillah writes, "Haratzim yatzu dechufin" — "The couriers went forth hurriedly [by order of the King]" (3:15). Why does it say here, "The couriers went mevohalim udechufin — bewildered and hurriedly"?
ANSWER: Throughout history it has been common for the gentiles to persecute, oppress, and torture the Jews. Haman's decree was nothing new, but merely history repeating itself. Thus, the couriers who usually are quick, went hurriedly. The second letters, however, in which Mordechai called on the Jews to declare war against their enemies, surprised them. Hence, though by nature they operate hurriedly, the King's consent for the Jews revenge against the gentiles left the couriers
"mevohalim" — "bewildered."
| 15 | And Mordechai went out from the King's presence in a royal apparel of blue and white, and with a great crown of gold, and with a cloak of fine linen and purple; and the city of Shushan was glad and joyful.
|
| 16 | For the Jews there was light, with joy and gladness, and honor.
|
"For the Jews there was light." (8:16)
QUESTION: Why does the Megillah use the word "hayetah" — "there was" — which is past tense?
ANSWER: According to the
Sefer Midrash Eliyahu, (R. Eliyahu Hakohen of Izmir, Izmir, 5519) Haman was happy when the lots he cast fell on
Adar because the plague of darkness in Egypt took place in that month. His mistake, however, was failing to realize that the Torah states, "For all the Children of Israel
there was light in their dwellings" (
Shemot 10:23). The
Megillah is thus telling us that the foundation upon which Haman built his hopes to annihilate the Jewish people was illusory because he miscalculated and failed to realize that there
was light then for the Jews in Egypt.
| 17 | And in every province, and in every city, wherever the King's command and edict reached, there was joy and gladness for the Jews, feasting, and a holiday; and many of the people of the land became Jews, for the fear of the Jews had fallen upon them.
|
"There was joy and gladness for the Jews...and many of the people of the land became Jews." (8:17)
QUESTION: The pasuk starts with the happiness and joy the Jews experienced. Why does it conclude with the fact that the non-Jews began to "act" like Jews?
ANSWER: The term
"am ha'aretz" — "people of the land" — can be an allusion to worldly and bodily matters, which apply to Jew and non-Jew alike. Physically the Jew and non-Jew appear similar. All mankind eat and drink to sustain themselves, and all engage in business to earn a livelihood. The difference is that we conduct all our worldly and mundane affairs in accordance with Torah guidance and instruction. The food we eat must meet
kashrut standards, and a blessing must be recited before and after eating. In the world of business, Torah has established many laws for ethical business and financial dealing, and the Jew, in his endeavor to succeed, may not succumb to the glitter of the dollar, but must adhere strictly to Torah guidance and restrictions.
Rabbi Moshe Isserlis of Krakow, in his commentary Mechir Yayin on Megillat Esther, explains that the words "ki nafal pachad hayehudim aleihen" — "for the fear of the Jews had fallen upon them" — do not mean that they were afraid of the Jews, but that the fear for the One for whom the Jews have fear, i.e. Hashem, had fallen upon them, and they too now had yirat shamayim — fear of Heaven.
The Megillah is telling us that not only did the Jews have much joy and happiness, but even in regard to "am ha'aretz" — "worldly matters" — they were "mityahadim" — openly acting like Jews. From their conduct it was obvious to all that "pachad hayehudim" — fear of Heaven — was upon them. When non-Jews see Jews living such a lifestyle, the result is that literally "pachad hayehudim aleihen" — they are permeated with fear for such Jews.
"Many of the people of the land became Jews." (8:17)
QUESTION: According to the Gemara (Yevamot 24b) a proselyte can be accepted only if he wholeheartedly desires to adopt the Jewish religion, and not if he is merely seeking to benefit from the glory the Jews are experiencing.
Since they were only motivated by fear of the Jews, why were they converted?
ANSWER: The
Beit Din in the days of Mordechai and Esther did not accept any of these gentiles as members of the Jewish people. However, out of fear for the Jewish people, the gentiles were
"mityahadim" — masquerading as proselytes hoping that the Jews would be friendly to them and not do them any harm.
Incidentally, this may be a source for the custom of dressing up on Purim and hiding one's true identity. Just as non-Jews "masqueraded" as proselytes, we also masquerade to commemorate the miracle.
Chapter Seven