Esther 4:7, Question 3. Why does the verse emphasize that Haman promised money to the treasuries?

  • Rav Hirsch (Collected Writings, Volume II, 404) writes that Mordechai mentions that Haman promised money to the treasuries to emphasize to Esther that, even though Achashverosh refused Haman’s bribe, Achashverosh still had a low character. This is clear from the very fact that Haman felt comfortable enough to even make such an offer, expecting Achashverosh to take it.
  • On the level of drush, hint, R’ Avraham of Slonim notes that this verse alludes to the idea that each and every Jew is treasured before their Creator. He derives this hint from the fact that following the words “ginzei hamelech,” (“the king’s treasuries”), is the word “Yehudim.” In other words, the most precious object in the treasuries of the King of kings are the Yehudim.

Esther 4:7, Question 2. Why does the verse use the word “parashas?”

  • According to R’ Eliezer of Worms, the verse use the word “parashas” (“chapter”) to describe Haman’s meeting with Achashverosh in order to emphasize that this event was not just talk – a financial exchange took place, giving the event legal significance and legally binding consequences.
  • In fact, as the Divrei Shaul points out, Mordechai was communicating to Esther the fact that Achashverosh could not be easily bought off, since Haman had already given/ offered him money (see above 3:11).
  • As R’ Dovid Feinstein notes, Achashverosh’s refusal to accept the bribe only stresses the ferocity of his hate for the Jews, making this a very serious threat to Jewish existence, indeed. Convincing Achashverosh to change his mind would require nothing short of a miracle.
  • Parenthetically, According to Yaaros Dvash, the fact that Achashverosh refused the money was covered up by Haman in an attempt to deny people the opportunity to intercede on behalf of the Jews.
  • The Chasam Sofer writes that Mordechai’s giving the details of this entire episode here served a vital purpose later. In fact, Esther uses this event in detail to convince the king to save the Jews from Haman’s decree. In the Chasam Sofer’s view of the events, Achashverosh refused Haman’s money (see 3:11 above) because he reasoned that killing such a people was a worthwhile responsibility of his, and taking payment for this would be unethical. In Achashverosh’s mind, Haman’s offer and and his refusal were secret. Since Mordechai’s knowledge of this came through a Ruach HaKodesh-like dream, Mordechai kept the information under wraps to be used later, if necessary. Once Esther tells Achashverosh that her people had been “sold” (see 7:4 below), Achashverosh begins to suspect that Haman had libelously spread the rumor that he had, indeed, accepted Haman’s payment. Therefore, he responds by asking who would do such a thing (see 7:5 below). It seems improbable that Achashverosh had forgotten the entire incident, so he is asking who would spread such a rumor.
  • The Brisker Rav interprets the word “parasha” as being related to “lihafreesh” (“to set aside”). In his view, Mordechai was informing Esther of the money that was set aside, or designated for the purchase of killing out the Jews. Such money was legally binding, and eventually, Achashverosh’s only way out of the deal would have be to kill the “buyer” – Haman.
  • Alshich uses Rashi’s seemingly simple explanation that “parsha” means explanation to mean that Mordechai related all of the details of Haman’s and Achashverosh’s meeting, including the mystical interpretations for the reasons Haman had to offer 10,000 loaves of silver.
  • Finally, the Sfas Emes translates “parashas” to mean “sum,” emphasizing Haman’s generosity in contributing towards the kingdom. In view of the concept of “zeh l’umas zeh,” the Jews need to be generous with charity in order to counterbalance the generosity of our enemies.

Esther 4:7, Question 1. What does the verse mean that Mordechai relates “what happened to him?”

ז וַיַּגֶּדלוֹ מָרְדֳּכַי אֵת כָּלאֲשֶׁר קָרָהוּ וְאֵת ׀ פָּרָשַׁת הַכֶּסֶף אֲשֶׁר אָמַר הָמָן לִשְׁקוֹל עַלגִּנְזֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ בַּיְּהוּדִיים [בַּיְּהוּדִים] לְאַבְּדָם

7. And Mordechai told him all that happened to him and the account of the silver that Haman said to weigh out on the king’s treasury in the Yehudim to annihilate them.

  • According to M’nos HaLevi, when the verse says that Mordechai related to Hasach “what happened to him,” it means that Mordechai told him absolutely everything – his refusal to bow to Haman, the Jews’ sin, and even the answer from the three students cited earlier.
  • Megillas Sesarim points out that Mordechai emphasized that this was happening to him personally because he felt responsible for this turn of events. Therefore, due to the Talmudic concept of “ein kateigor naaseh sineigor” (“the prosecutor cannot be the defender”) (see Rosh HaShanah 26a), Mordechai needed Esther to act in his stead.
  • Other commentators focus on alternative meanings to the Hebrew word karahu, “what happened to him.” For instance, the Midrash (Esther Rabbah 8:5) writes that Mordechai was telling Esther that a descendant of the nation that which karcha, “happened upon” (Devarim 25:18) the Jewish people in the desert, had launched an attack. That verse is explicitly about Amalek, ancestor of Haman. This is important, writes the Ginzei HaMelech, because Mordechai was indicating that the Jewish people were being punished by a specific enemy for a specific sin. In other words, since H-Shem gave Amalek permission, as it were, to attack the Jews for their laxity in Torah study (see Rashi to Shemos 17:8), Mordechai recognized that the solution to Haman’s threat was to infuse the Jewish people with a rejuvenated alacrity.
  • Besides the cause, this word also alludes to the manner in which this threat may be annulled – nature. The Ohel Moshe quotes the Yismach Yisroel that every battle between the Jewish people and Amalek involved nature. In the first battle, Moshe’s ordering Yehoshua to draft men to fight (Shemos 17:9) showed a stark contrast to the miraculous defeat of the Egyptians at the Sea of Reeds. The constant battle against Amalek cannot be miraculous, since H-Shem would never command us to perform something we naturally could not do.
  • The Midrash (Esther Rabbah 8:5) also opines that in the words “what happened to him,” Mordechai was referring to the dream he dreamed ten years earlier, alluding to the Jewish people facing mortal danger1.
  • According to the Torah Temimah, the reason Mordechai received this message in the form of a dream is because dreams generally feel as though they are b’mikra, a natural happenstance occurrence.

1The entire text of the Midrash gives the details of the dream: Behold! There was a great, strong noise and terror on the land, and fear and trembling on all its inhabitants. And behold, two great dragons, and they yelled at each other and waged war. And after hearing their voices, the nations of the land fled. And behold! Among them was one small nation. And all of the other nations rose up against the small nation to destroy its memory from the land. On that day, there was darkness over the entire world, and they bothered the small nation greatly, and they cried out to H-Shem. And the dragons warred with violent hate, and there was nothing separating them. And Mordechai saw: Behold! One small spring of water passed between these two dragons, and separated between them, from the war that they were fighting. And the spring strengthened. It flowed as strongly as the great [Mediterranean] sea. It spilled over the entire land. And he saw the sun shining over the entire land and bringing light to the world. The small nation was rising. And the big nations were brought low. And Behold! There was peace and truth throughout on the entire land.

Esther 4:6, Question 1. Why does the verse emphasize that Hasach encounters Mordechai on the “rechov?”

ו וַיֵּצֵא הֲתָךְ אֶלמָרְדֳּכָי אֶלרְחוֹב הָעִיר אֲשֶׁר לִפְנֵי שַׁעַרהַמֶּלֶךְ

6. And Hasach went out to Mordechai to the street of the city that was before the king’s gate.

  • According to the Alshich, the verse emphasizes that Hasach encounters Mordechai in the “rechov” because Hasach walked to Mordechai indirectly in order to seem like theirs was a casual meeting.
  • Similarly, Me’am Loez writes that they met in public to avoid spies and suspicion.
  • According to the Vilna Gaon, Hasach was asking Mordechai why he wasn’t embarrassed to weep here, out in public.
  • R’ Moshe Dovid Valle writes that the gematria of rechov (200+8+6+2) is 216, which is the same gematria as “gevurah” (3+2+6+200+5) (“strength”). He continues that the initial letters of the phrase in Tehillim (55:10) “rayisi chamas v‘riv b‘ir” also spell out rechov. This indicates a certain form of moral strength in publicizing one’s faith.