Esther 2:5, Question 5. Why does the verse call Mordechai a “Yimini?”

  • As noted earlier (three posts ago), the Talmud (Megillah 12b) states that Mordechai’s father was from the tribe of Benyamin. Rav Yitzchak Hutner adds that this is an important detail to the story because, when Haman becomes incensed at Mordechai’s refusal to bow to him (Esther 3:5), the Midrash (Esther Rabbah 7:8) has Haman say, “All the tribes bowed to my ancestor, Eisav (Bireishis 33:3)! Why won’t you bow to me?” Mordechai answers, “All the tribes bowed except for Benyamin, for he was not yet born. Therefore, I need not bow to you.”
  • Another reason this is important is that Esther is related to Mordechai by being “daughter of his uncle” (Esther 2:7). Therefore, she too comes from the royal house of King Shaul, and may be prized by Achashverosh for this.
  • “Yimini” could also mean that Mordechai was right-leaning. In Kabbalistic thought, this means he had a focus on “chachmah” – masculine, logical, and linear knowledge – rather than “binah” – feminine, instinctual, global wisdom. With H-Shem’s help, this insight into Mordechai’s character will help us to better understand his argument with Esther (4:11-16) about the best way to combat the coming threat to Jewish survival.
Advertisements

Esther 2:5, Question 4. Why does the verse mention Mordechai’s lineage?

  • In the Talmud’s lengthy exposition on this verse (Megillah 12b-13a), the Rabbis note that the verse seemingly mentions these ancestors of Mordechai out of order, skipping around generations. For example, Shimi was a distant descendant of Kish (Targum Sheini to Esther 2:5), not his son. The Rabbis therefore expound on these names as indicating Mordechai’s characteristics. He was the “son of Yair” in that he brightened (“hey’ir”) the eyes of the Jews to prayer; he was the “son of Shimi” in that his prayers were listened to (“shema”) by H-Shem; he was the “son of Kish” in that he knocked (“hikish”) at the Gates of Mercy. The Ohel Moshe asks the question: should not the fact that his prayers were listened to be more important – thus listed before – than his act of “brightening the eyes” of others to pray? After all, his prayers being answered saved the Jews! He answers that, indeed, as powerful as Mordechai’s prayers were, the combined power of the Jews he roused with his “great cry” (Esther 4:1) led to an unprecedented era of teshuva, return, whose cornerstone is prayer.
  • But like every great man, he was not without his detractors and controversy. Another opinion in the Talmud there (Rava) states that the tribes would deflect from themselves responsibility for Mordechai’s seemingly causing Jewish existence to be threatened in the Purim story, as we will discuss (iy”H) when we get to it (in Esther 3:6). The Jews blamed Yehudah for King David’s (a member of Yehudah) not killing Shimi ben Geira (Shmuel 2 16:7-13 and Melachim 1 2:9), and they blamed Benyamin for King Shaul’s (a member of Benyamin) not killing Agag, ancestor of Haman. Interestingly, Rav Shlomo HaLevi Alkabetz notes that Shaul is noticeably missing in this list of ancestors (see Shmuel 1 9:1). Possibly, this could be a way to avoid embarrassing Mordechai for this relation, especially in light of Shaul’s embarrassing failure to wipe out Amalek leading to the Purim story. Otherwise, Rav Alkabetz ventures to opine that Mordechai could be a “gilgul,” (“reincarnation”) of King Shaul.

Esther 2:5, Question 2. Why does the verse call Mordechai a “Yehudi?”

  • The Talmud (Megillah 12b) states that Mordechai’s mother was from the tribe of Yehudah, while his father was from Benyamin. Although the tribal ancestry was paternal, members of the two tribes would later vie over his heritage to take credit for Mordechai’s greatness. The Alshich teaches that the verse is stressing that his mother was from the royal house of Yehudah. Rav Yehonasan Eibshutz says there is a mystical reason for this. According to the Talmud (Sanhedrin 99a), Haman’s female ancestor, Timna (see Bireishis 36:12 and Divrei HaYamim 1 1:36), also came from royal blood. Since, as Rav Elie Munk writes most cogently in Ascent to Harmony, “the division into masculine and feminine principles provides the pattern for all of creation” (80), the feminine aspect of Mordechai had to match the feminine aspect of Haman in order to defeat it. Therefore, Mordechai’s mother had to come from royalty to counter Haman.
  • R’ Yochanan’s opinion in the Talmud (Megillah 12b) is that Mordechai actually was from Benyamin, but was called a Yehudi because he fought against idol worship. According to Rav Yaakov Kaminetsky (in Emes L’Yaakov), the name “Yehuda” is especially apt for someone who stands against idolatry because the first three letters of the name (yud, hey, and vuv) are letters that spell the Name of H-Shem that represents His mastery over all, and is thus a rejection of pagan beliefs. The Chida adds that the gematria of Mordechai HaYehudi (40+200+4+20+10+5+10+5+6+4+10=314) is the same as Sha-d-ai (300+4+10=314), the name of H-Shem that connotes His ability to keep things from growing out of control, as in “He who said “dai!” (“enough!”)” while creating the borders of the world (Talmud, Chagigah 12a). Therefore, He controls everything, and can turn everything around, as He does through Mordechai and Esther in the Purim story.
  • The Sfas Emes gives three reasons for Mordechai’s being called “Yehudi,” all three relating the word in its guttural etymology to the word “echad,” (“one”). First, Mordechai was a “yachid,” (“a unique individual”) in that he saved an entire generation (see Midrash, Esther Rabbah 6:2). Second, he unified the Jewish people to counter Haman’s criticism that they were splintered in disunion (Esther 3:8). Finally, Mordechai sacrificed everything for H-Shem who is One, Echad (Devarim 6:4).

Esther 2:2, Question 2. Why does the verse stress that the women had to be “searched for?”

The Talmud (Megillah 12b) relates that most loving parents wanted to spare their daughters this fate worse than death (see next answer after Passover for details regarding their futures), and actually hid them. Therefore, the king has his men actively search for and forcibly gather these potential future queens.

Esther 1:22, Question 2. What is the significance of Achashverosh’s law saying that every man should rule his home?

  • According to the Talmud (Megillah 12b) this decree made the king seem foolish in the eyes of the people. They thought to themselves, “This king is a fool! He has to tell me that I rule my home? Ha! Even the lowest laborer rules his shack.” This, in turn, allowed for future decrees to be treated irreverently. If the king is saying foolish things in this instance, future edicts can also be ignored. In particular, the decree to exterminate the Jews (Esther 3:13) could have been taken more seriously, with the Persians preparing for the big day by stockpiling weapons, planning an assault strategy, and beginning the process of choosing and harassing their prey.
  • Another reason for the people’s perspective on the decree is, as Rav Soloveitchik writes in Days of Deliverance (pg. 59), that if a woman is strong, “she will dominate her husband regardless of the royal decree.”
  • According to Megillas Sesarim, Achashverosh’s decree restricted the citizens’ influence over the home, in effect telling them that only the king can tell them when to attack the Jews. Along those lines, it could be that since it was a given before this edict that men rule their homes, and the king’s having to command it meant that nothing was a given anymore. Therefore, a “given” conventional wisdom like “it’s perfectly acceptable to terrorize the Jews” was no longer a given, and this is why the people refrained from doing so.

Esther 1:16, Question 1. Why is Memuchan the first (and only) adviser to speak if he was mentioned last?

טז וַיאמֶר מְומֻכָן [מְמוּכָן] לִפְנֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ וְהַשָּׂרִים לֹא עַלהַמֶּלֶךְ לְבַדּוֹ עָוְתָה וַשְׁתִּי הַמַּלְכָּה כִּי עַלכָּלהַשָּׂרִים וְעַלכָּלהָעַמִּים אַשֶׁר בְּכָלמְדִינוֹת הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ

16. And Memuchan said before the king and the ministers, “Not the king alone has Vashti the Queen wronged. Rather, all of the ministers and all the peoples in the states of Achashverosh.”

  • The Talmud (Megillah 12b) interprets Memuchan’s jumping ahead of the other advisers as a display of his insolence. A wiser man would have waited to give his advice after greater people had spoken.
  • The Talmud goes on there to identify Memuchan as Haman. As such, Rashi there interprets his name to mean “prepared” – prepared for the death of Vashti and himself. The Ben Ish Chai notes that a hint to this idea is the fact that the gematria of “Memuchan” is equal to that of “eitz” (160), the tree on which Haman was hanged1. A “tree” may also refer to the Talmudic statement (Chulin 139b): Where is there an allusion to Haman in the Torah? In the verse (Bereishis 3:11) “did you eat from the tree?,” wherein the word “hamin” (“from the”) is spelled with the same letters as “Haman.” This occurred in the story of Adam and Chava’s temptation to eat the fruit in Gan Eden, and since (as we shall see be”H in our last blog on this verse next week) the Vilna Gaon believes Haman to be representative of the Evil Inclination, it is a fitting allusion.
  • The Midrash (Esther Rabba 4:6) asks why Memuchan was so eager to have Vashti killed, and offers three reasons: she slapped him in the face, Memuchan’s wife was not invited to the party, and because Memuchan wanted his daughter to be able to marry the king. All three reasons are really one, with each moving further from practical predictability; he wanted more influence over the king. Memuchan wanted to yield his own influence, his wife’s influence through the queen, and (more indirectly) the theoretical influence of his daughter as a queen.
  • We must however, contend with another Talmudic opinion regarding the identity of Memuchan. The Yerushalmi quotes the Pirkei d’Rebbi Eliezer as saying that Memuchan was the prophet, Daniel. On the one hand, Memuchan’s advice is evil and murderous. On the other hand, it is ridding the world of the evil Vashti2, a sworn enemy of the Jews. Therefore, it is “Haman-advice” in its evil means and “Daniel-advice” in its simultaneous beneficial ends.
  • In Ohr Chadash, the Maharal writes that there are seven advisers present before Achashverosh at this point. There are similarly seven major constellations (as they were understood then), the seventh being me’adim (Mars), which represents bloodshed and has a numerical value of 95. This is the same gematria as Haman and Daniel.
  • The Maharsha adds that the unscrambled, initial letters in the words in Tehillim 22:21, which are interpreted as Esther’s prayer for rescue from the Jews’ fate at the hands of Haman (see our tenth blog), “mey’cherev nafshi mi’yad kelev yichidasi” form the name, Memuchan.

1Memuchan would have to be spelled with a “yud” in the place of a “vuv” (which is acceptable on the level of remez) for ממיכןto be equal to עץ.

2Rabbi Moshe Meir Weiss points out that Vashti is the only woman in TaNaCh with that unfortunate appellation.

Esther 1:14, Question 2. Why does the verse mention the names of these ministers?

According to the Midrash and Talmud (see chart below) each of these names means something. Their names representing various parts of the Temple service, Rabbi Moshe Meir Weiss points out, is another example of mida kineged mida, measure for measure. The advice to which the king is forced to turn brings about his queen’s eventual downfall.

1

כרשנא

Karshena

2

שתר

Shesar

3

אדמתא

Admasa

4

תרשיש

Tarshish

5

מרס

Meres

6

מרסנא

Marshena

7

ממוכן

Memuchan

Esther Rabbah 4:2 (first opinion)

In charge of king’s plants In charge of king’s wine In charge of king’s land measures In charge of king’s household**Radal has “ships” Made diced poultry for the king Beat flour for the king Provided food for the king

Reason

Carshinin Shasa Adama Adorned with beryls (tarshish)**According to Radal, ships traveled to Tarshish Mimares Mimares Muchan

Talmud Bavli, Megillah 12b

One year-old sheep Two turtledoves Altar of earth Kohen’s garments Mixing of blood Mixing of flour and oil Preparing shulchan

Reason

“kar ben bakar” (Bamidbar 28:3) shtei torim (Vayikra 5:7) Adama (Shemos 20:21) Fourth row on breastplate (Shemos 28:20) Mimares (Mishnah, Yuma 43b) Mimares (Mishnah, Menachos 18a) Muchan (Shemos 25:23-30)

Esther Rabbah 4:2 (second opinion)

One year-old ox Two turtledoves Altar of earth Kohen’s garments Mixing of blood Mixing of flour and oil Preparing mizbeach

Reason

“par ben bakar” shtei torim (Vayikra 5:7) Adama (Shemos 20:21) Fourth row on breastplate (Shemos 28:20) Mimares (Mishnah Yuma 43b) Mimares (Mishnah Menachos 18a) Muchan (Ezra 3:3)

Esther Rabbah 4:2 (third opinion)

Scatter lupines and remove from world Make them drink “cup of reeling” Make their blood… …flow like water Stir their souls Twist their souls Crush their souls

Reason

Feeding animal before slaughter Zecharya 12:2 Dam Tarshish is port city Mimares Mimares Mima’ek