The Hidden Background of Megilat Esther - R’ Grossman
http://www.vbm-torah.org/purim/pur67-yg.htm
R’ Grossman notes that the Megilah begins not framing the narrative in a time period of Judaic notation - ie, 30 years into the Galut of Yehuda, but rather in a Persian time frame - “V’Yihi Bimai Achasveirosh.... HaMolech M’Hodu V’Ad Kush...”
He notes that most scholars identify Achasveriosh as being the Persian King Xerxes, for several textually based reasons, including the Greek Historian Herodotus identifying Xerxes as a king fond of wine and women, who ruled from a magnificent palace in Shushan and who ruled from Ethiopia (Kush) to India (Hodu).
We found that this parallel of R’ Grossman to be quite compelling, fitting both with historical evidence as well as rather nicely with the Megilah text.
However, he notes an immediate problem with accepting Achashveirosh as being Xerxes I. Based on historical evidence, this would require that the Megliah take place about 100 years after Churban Beit Rishon, and ~30 years after Chanukah Beit Sheini.
This implies that Esther, Mordechai and the Jews of Shushan, and indeed all the Jews of Achashveirosh’s Persian Empire were among those who failed to comply with the proclamation of Cyrus to return to Eretz Yisrael - while the Jews of Israel struggle to rebuild the Jewish homeland, the Jews of Persia sit comfortably in Galut, feasting and partying.
Evidence to the difficulty in Eretz Yisrael is clear in Nechemiah, who notes the heavy taxes and even the end of Terumah to the Cohanim for financial reasons.
However, at the beginning of the Megliah, while the Jews of Israel are struggling, there is nothing to indicate that anything is going wrong for the Jews in Persia. According to this perspective, the beginning of the Megliah and the focus on Persia is not as benign as we would have thought - it is an expression of almost guilt, as the author (Esther and Mordechai, the leaders of Am Yisrael, who we note write the Megilah as we see at the end of the text) try and shift attention away from the fact that they are not in Israel.
IN Ezra, the reference to Haman’s decree mentions a danger to all Jews in both Yehuda and Yerushalayim as well as Persia. R’ Grossman notes this as being a rare event in Tanach, of viewing the same event from two different perspectives - the Jews in Shushan see the decree, which as we know only was decreed against them as a danger only to them. The Jews in Israel note that such a decree endangers all of Klall Yisrael, including the rebuilding effort in Israel.
The two recordings - that of Ezra and that of Mordechai and Esther - highlight the conflict in the Jewish community of the time, and where the center and focus of Jewish life should be - in Persia or in Eretz Yisrael.
Looking at Midrash, we can see hints to this idea - the Gemara that cites Achashveirosh was waiting the 70 years (or so he thought) until after the Churban Beit Rishon to use the Ci HaMikdash, as well as many of the physical descriptions of the party of Achashveirosh that also line up with the Mikdash - Butz, fine linen, used both in Esther as well as by the Cohamin, Argamon, a color used almost exclusively to the Miskan and Mikdash is referenced here, and other examples that he cites. Even the idea of the palace (described as having an inner palace and outer palace) is meant to parallel the inner and outer levels of the Mikdash.
The author of the Megilah is hoping to point out the solidarity in a way that the members of Shushan have - by giving the comparison to the Mikdash, the details that bring associations of the Mikdash make this an atmosphere of mourning in a way - a rebuke of the Jews feasting instead of helping those who have returned.
Obviously, there are many messages in R’ Grossman’s shiur that apply to the situation in Eretz Yisrael today, particularly for us in Galut, and our need to assist those in Eretz Yisrael. The situation in Israel is similar today - Am Yisrael has been given permission to return to Eretz Yisrael after years of exile. His message is two fold for us - 1. That we need to be willing to answer the call, the invitation from H-shem to finally return for the first time in thousands of years to our nation’s homeland, and that 2. If we cannot or will not make this leap, that we must do everything we can to support our brothers and sisters in Israel, and not leave them to their fates while we sit comfortably in Galut.
In regard to sharing at a Seduah, we found that the Dvar Torah was extremely compelling (although his last point doesn’t entirely fit with his chronology point he was making earlier - the idea of Achaveirosh counting down for 70 years after to flaunt the Churban doesn’t work if the Beit Hamikdash has already been rebuilt.) Aside from that, we felt that the unique interpretation of the chronology of the Megliah to be interesting, and the incredibly pertinent messages to be particularly enlightening and relevant for today.
Furthermore, it is also “table-friendly” due to it’s lesser reliance on the text, as well as being based on a text that is more widely familiar.
No comments:
Post a Comment