The Ramchal, Rabbi Kook and other rabbis famously said that on every day that we call a holiday a light glows that preceded the specific historical event that is considered the reason for the holiday, such as the Exodus, the Hanukkah miracle, receiving the Torah, the Purim miracle, etc. They posited that the historic event occurred on that specific date because the Creator filled that date with a unique intrinsic light.
Do not say “We celebrate Pesach on the 15th of Nisan because that is the day we left Egypt,” – say instead, we left Egypt because it was the 15th of Nisan. The special intrinsic light of that period is what caused the historic phenomenon we witnessed in reality.
That is why the Patriarch Abraham served matzah to the three angels who visited him on Pesach, although the Israelites had not yet baked it quickly and there had not yet been an Exodus from Egypt. The historical event had not occurred, but the light of the 15th of Nisan was most certainly there, and is why Avraham marked the holiday by serving matzah. Everyone must see himself as having been redeemed from Egypt, and we do see it because we experience the light of the holiday during this time.
By means of this interpretation of the holiday dates, I humbly suggest that we look at the story of the Megillah as part of the ancient struggle between two material approaches to mankind that touch upon the foundation of our lives at present. One approach is that of the people of Israel, who believe in the Almighty, in the existence of ethics, morality and truth, and also in the idea that these values are what lead and advance all historical developments both behind the scenes and publicly until the entire world attains the heights of realizing Hashem’s existence. The second approach is that of the Amalekites who deny His very existence. As it says in the story of Amalek in the Torah, “who happened upon you when you were on your way” – everything is happenstance, there is no ethical way to live, no objective truth, and in conclusion, deny that these truths are what causes the world’s progress.
Amalekites
Amalek’s outlook on the world is first seen in the snake in the Garden of Eden who is interested in spreading sinful behavior, “the eyes lust for it” that is, “the eyes” which refer to one’s viewpoint in general, are guided by lust and the senses, which lead the world to improve and develop. There is no message from Hashem, only human interests based on our senses. In the snake’s view, even G-d’s actions are motivated by His own interests, jealousy and competitiveness “because G-d knows that on the day you eat of the tree your eyes will open and you will be like a god who knows good and evil.” Egocentricity is what motivates the world, including the religious world.
Esau, Amalek’s grandfather, did not believe in the resurrection of the dead, that there is no overcoming man’s physical state, and therefore the main goal in life is to eat “the red, red soup” as I desire it and when I desire it. Esau thinks: The present is most important, because I am going to die anyway at some point, so why do I need my birthright? That is why he asked his father cynically how to take tithes from salt and hay, two foods that do not need tikkun but are ready to eat as they are – salt for mankind and hay for animals. Esau is really telling his father that there is no need to give tithes for tikkun in this world, swallow the food as it is, as there is no future, no goal, to process of ascending to higher levels of being towards G-d.
The Amalekites were a small tribe that decided to attack G-d’s nation which had just left Egypt after overcoming that monarchy, the most powerful nation of the ancient world. Amalek had no obvious reason to fight us. We had no plans to attack them, no territorial claims from them, and the Amalekites knew they stood not a chance in a battle with the people who had bested Egypt. However, they were willing to sacrifice their lives to fight us because as long as Israel is in the world, that battle is existential to them.
If there is an approach to life that believes in ethics, truth, the divine, it cannot be allowed to survive. Amalek emasculated the sinners ousted by the holy cloud and threw circumcision in the face of the heavens, as if he is saying: ”There is no tikkun in this world and there is no move towards holiness, look at the persons ousted by the cloud, they show that sin and lust overcame the Israeli attempt to make them holy and keep them in check. “
It is a straightforward war of ideologies.
Haman
His descendant Haman, like Amalek, stems from the Tree of Knowledge about which G-d says: “Have you eaten from the tree from which I forbade you to eat?” (In Hebrew, verse is: “Hamin ha’etz asher tsiviticha…etc.” where the first word “Hamin” can also be read “Haman”). It is the approach of lust that sets everything in motion, that mocks any wish for tikkun and morals. Haman’s ideology was one of ego and desire, and that is why he reacted furiously when Mordechai would not bow down. Haman understood that this is not a personal disagreement but an ancient ideological argument between Mordechai’s forebears and Haman’s – “And Haman did not want to lay his hand on Mordechai alone because he had been told who Mordechai’s people were.”
What makes the world go round? Is it ego, sexuality, desire - or is it spirituality and G-d’s requests?
Haman’s personality is filled with egocentricity and opportunism, starting with his advice to Ahasueros to rid himself of Vashti because her behavior harms his, Haman’s, ego – she will cause women to mock their husbands. Then he continues by commanding everyone to bow down to him. The reason he gives the king for killing the Jews is that letting them live is not worthwhile. He suggests the king reward the person he wishes to honor (thinking it is himself) with pomp and majesty. He is a man of ego, money, honor – that is what his world revolves around, and in his opinion, the rest of the world is the same.
Germany
This approach to life became doubly accepted from the middle of the 19th century up to our times. We meet German philosophy that is identical to that of Haman and his followers. Friedrich Nietzsche opined that man is motivated by his desire for strength and power, stating that it is proper for man to kill his god in order to be free to decide on his own values, and that empathy is weakness. Martin Heidegger believed that there is no objective truth and that everything is a narrative, each man and his own story. There is no objective justice and everything depends on the individual’s interpretation of occurrences. Western law does not say “do not murder”, but that he who does so will sit in jail, this to protect the individual. Even the basic laws and constitutions of the western states (including Israel today) stem from the general public’s agreement to obey them and not from Divine revelation of truth and morals. Arthur Schopenhauer believed that the world has no purpose and no G-d, that the fate of the world and humanity is like a blind alligator lashing out at everything in its way, which is why he felt it is wrong to bring children into the anarchistic world (and what is amazing is that the five most important European Prime Ministers decided to remain childless).
The Theory of Evolution, which has enlightened aspects, claims that man is simply a more developed form of animal. Karl Marx, a German Jews, used dialectic materialism to refer to socialist phenomena and analyzed reality as a power struggle sans spiritual motivation, in that only material needs affect society. To him, religion is the opium of the masses, invented to preserve the different social classes and allow the weak to survive (possibly Freud’s writings psychoanalyzing Moses should be added here.)
All these theories have a common denominator which is lack of faith in G-d, in Providence and in the world’s ability to rise to the level of divine objective truth and morality, placing mankind on a continuum with animals, where the difference is quantitative and not qualitative. They all negate the belief that man is in the image of G-d, negate the knowledge of G-d and morality. Instead, they stress the size of man’s brain, his technical abilities, his ego and desire for power, control and fulfilling his lusts along with aesthetics. Sexuality and honor are the gods running the world’s progress.
Naziism
Adolf Hitler has a place on this continuum. His well-known words that “while there is still a Jew, I have not finished my work, because the Jews brought the idea of a conscience to the world, and destroyed the body’s perfection by performing circumcision.” This is the view of the primeval snake-Amalek-Heidegger. There is no way both israel and Amalek can be in the world together. Either there is truth and the divine, or there is an animalistic, solely materialistic human being.
Hitler realized that the world recognizes morals, but he explained this in the following amazingly impure way – because the Jews are a lower and weak race, they developed an ethical system that protects the weak to ensure their own survival, as part of the process of evolutionary survival from ancient times to the present. There is no absolute morality, no ethics, and the claim to their existence is the biggest lie in history.
The Jewish position
On Purim we are not dealing with Christianity or Islam, but with atheism, that of ancient times and that of the West, especially in Germany. The debate on Purim is over the very existence of a Creator, and on His having Will and defining Morality. As the Kuzari said, defining “an action desired by G-d.” In contrast to the rest of the year when we argue over who the Creator is and what His ethics entail, on Purim we debate His very existence and whether there are absolute truth and morality in our world. In contrast to the impurity of the German approach from the days of the snake up until our time, G-d the Creator’s Word stands steadfast, having chosen us from among all the nations and given us His Torah. Mordechai and Esther are the antithesis of Haman, the atheist materialist who turns himself into god. Mordechai and Esther are believers who put the nation’s good in the center of existence, the moral way of doing things in that center, and not their own benefit.
Mordechai
Immediately prior to reading about how the king raised Haman’s status, the Megillah tells us about Bigthan and Teresh who tried to poison the king and were exposed by Mordechai. Why does Mordechai report their plans and save the king? He should have helped them kill him and thereby bring his cousin back home.
This can be explained in two ways – it’s possible that Mordechai knew what was going on, and realized that there must be a divine master plan, which makes it is a good idea for the king to be beholden to him, as he may need him later on. It is also possible that Mordechai was concerned that if the king dies, Haman will become king, an even worse situation than having Ahasueros as ruler.
Let us suggest another answer: Mordechai saved the king because that was the moral thing to do. As a minister of the kingdom, he was loyal to the king, and did the right thing, even though he had nothing to gain from it. He put truth above personal interests. Sometimes, being moral is not directly achieved and necessitates manipulation, but the Megillah presents the principle that morals and truth are what guide the Jews even when it is against their best interests. Lust and personal honor guide the Amalekites and come before morality and truth in their world.
Esther
Throughout the Megillah, Esther’s personality is portrayed as one of simplicity, honesty and loyalty. She refuses to bathe in the oil and ointments provided by the king’s courtier Sha’ashgaz, she is “taken” to the king against her will because she does not want to live in the palace’s dissolute atmosphere despite the personal luxury and pomp it offers. She joined Mordechai in revealing the attempt to kill the king, opting to tell the truth, although she could have abstained from action. She keeps silent about her origins, which some commentators explain was to prevent the king from taking revenge on her people as well in case he decides to kill her as he did her predecessor. Keeping this secret endangers her, but she prefers her people’s welfare to her own. She came to the king although he had not called her for thirty days, endangering herself. What motivated her was “I cannot watch the destruction of my people ” – concern for the wellbeing of her nation.
Like Mordechai, Esther understands the essence of the confrontation with Haman, understanding that it is not a personal matter but an ideological one about the way the world is to be – German Amalekness or Jewish Ethics and Morality. This is what gave her the strength to continue living with Ahasueros, the debased idol worshipper, endangering the loss of her share in the World to Come – when she says “and if I perish, I perish” (Esther, chap. 4), she means in this world and the next. Esther and Mordechai declare a fast on Seder night exactly for this reason – the struggle with Haman is not personal but over principles: what is this world, does it have a G-d and a moral purpose – allowing a fast on Pesach, on the night of G-d’s revealing His Hand through the Exodus, symbolizes the supplication for G-d’s Hand to be revealed once again in the Shushan’s political morass.
Ahasueros
Ahasueros represents the non-Amalekite Gentile who has no love for the Jewish People, is wicked “from beginning to end”, but who supports Mordechai and Esther in the long run. It seems as if he was unsure which way the world should go, whether it should be oriented towards Israel’s morality and the Word of G-d or towards Amalek’s hedonistic embrace of the physical and the ego. This is why he waited to throw his grand party until 70 years had passed since the first Temple’s destruction (which is the time set by the prophets for redemption and rebuilding) to see if that prophecy would come true. When it did not occur (he had calculated the years incorrectly) he threw a six-month long party, 180 days according to the Megillah. On the exact date of the middle of what he thought was the 70th year since the Jewish exile from Jerusalem, he held a party for his most trusted servants and ministers, wearing the High Priest’s garments, seated on King Solomon’s throne, serving food on the Temple’s utensils. He is making a statement in favor of the Amalekite orientation. The Jews have not been redeemed, their attempt for tikkun olam has gone up in the First Temple’s flames due to their sexual immorality, spilling of blood and idol worship. There is no tikkun in this world.
We find motifs of German philosophy in Ahasueros’s actions: he does “what each person desires”, there is only individual, subjective desire, no heavenly command. Lust holds sway over him and he wants to show everyone that uninhibited sexuality is the cornerstone of the world, so he calls for his Queen Vashti. However, he kills her because she dares to express her own stance and refuses to take part in the public display of lasciviousness he desires. This is diametrically opposed to doing “what each person decides,” a selective pluralism that cannot bear an opinion different to his and is summed up in “what shall be done to Queen Vashti for her refusal to come.”
This is the ridiculous paradox of the postmodern narrative, of Heidegger, of Germany. On the one hand there is unlimited tolerance for all human behavior, as a part of man’s being simply a more developed animal. On the other hand, there is extremist intolerance for anyone who dares question one’s status and open sexuality, whether it is the moral Jews or any other nation vying for political dominance in Europe. The followers of this view of life can sit in a setting of pomp and circumstance, drinking brandy and listening to Wagner one minute, and the next minute murder a Jew, or engage in debauchery with married women. This is the essence of Amalekite degeneracy, seemingly pluralistic and refined, while actually, its foundation is lust, sense and ego that motivate every action, damaging efforts to elevate the status of the world in the direction of the heavens.
Despite all this, Ahasueros is attracted to Esther’s character. He does not consider her beautiful, the Megillah makes no mention of that, only that “she found favor in his eyes,” her charm and personality attracted him. This lowlife had his way with all the women of his kingdom, but found no respite until he met her and saw her character, soul, truth, morality, sensed the hidden. The fact that she did not reveal her people and birthplace only increased his longing for her and when she came to him after thirty days of fasting, weak and mysterious, it only intrigued him. Her requesting him to attend mysterious parties with Haman brought him close to her.
It seems that deep in the soul of non-Amalekite Gentiles there is a yearning for the light of Israel, for that of G-d, and for the existence of ethics and integrity. The king searches for Esther, does not know why he is sleepless, he wishes to understand his desires and realizes that Mordechai the Jew has helped him with loving kindness. He begins to understand that it is morality that moves the world. That is why he asks the Amalekite outside his chamber what how to reward a man the king wishes to honor without telling him that he is referring to Mordechai, because the king wants to hear how Haman sees his own self. When he hears that it is only pomp and majesty that Haman wants for himself, along with the king’s crown, Ahasueros understands everything and commands, “Go do what you have just described to Mordechai the Jew.” This explains the kings unusual fury at Haman’s falling on the queen’s couch –“Do you want to conquer the queen in my own home?” he demands. Does Amalekite sexuality have no bounds, must it destroy the entire kingdom? Is Germany prepared to endanger the entire world including all of Europe, all for its power-hungry depravity?
The Exiled Jews
Along with Ahasueros, the Jews are experiencing a similar but not identical process. The Jews of Persia seem religious, but are actually non-believers, they arrive at the king’s party and declare that there is no halakhic problem in partaking of the food because everything is kosher. “There is no force” and they could have avoided that. They are angry at Mordechai who does not bow to Haman and dispute his calling for a fast on Seder night. Their way of looking at things is individual and detached, not general and fundamental. This causes them to behave in a way that is opposed to G-d’s Torah, despite their awareness of what G-d has commanded them. They celebrate at a party that is entirely a rebellion against the Kingdom of Heaven, and the Jewish people’s mission in the world. After the turnabout, they realize that Mordechai was right, and do not touch the spoils, this is to emphasize the purity of the war fought on a foundation of integrity and ethics, not for possessions or personal gain.
Continuity
There is a surprising verse in the Megillah, when Esther asks how she can ask the king to have mercy on the Jews if he will have her put to death for entering the throne room uninvited. Mordechai answers her:“Don’t think you can escape the decree by being in the king’s palace” and we wonder, did he think for a minute that this righteous woman protested because was interested in saving her own skin? Esther’s doubts clearly made sense. If the king orders her killed, she will be of no help to the Jews. She is not trying to arrange her own escape.
In my humble opinion, the chapter must be read this way:
Esther hears the decree and she wishes to remain married to Ahasueros because if all the Jews are killed, at least she and her future offspring will be left and they can rebuild the Jewish nation. It is a political tactic that stems from deep concern for the future of her nation and it is the reason she tells Mordechai that if she goes to the king uninvited, she will be put to death as well and the Jews will have no future.
Here, however, Mordechai teaches us something new: When there is a controversy over principles, political tactics have no place. Instead, we must fearlessly declare our Jewishness. She cannot escape to the palace and influence the situation indirectly. Haman’s way of life is being tested now, and it is incumbent upon us to declare openly that we are Jews and this is our identity, this is our holy mission. It is this declaration that will bring salvation to the Jews from somewhere else, the situation will work itself out somehow. It is similar to the commandment to sacrifice one’s life over the most minor mitzvot during a time of evil decrees because when there is a deep and not tactical study of reality, there is no room for personal salvation, only for a steadfast and proud stance over G-d’s Words to the nation.
Esther’s suggestion was correct for ordinary times in life. Sometimes tactics and politics whose goal is to achieve the possible are the way to go. But on Purim, we have a deeper discussion and Mordechai is correct. Esther realizes that this time she must be willing to sacrifice her life for the truth – and that only this will bring salvation.
There is, of course, room for influencing slowly, at a person’s own pace, for approaching the debate educationally. In all the years of our national rebirth in all times this has been the norm. However, we must also declare the unmovable principles that brook no compromise – the eternity of Israel and our willingness to give our all for it.
In order to allow the rays of Purim light to continue to shine, we must remain in the light of Heavenly Providence in every facet of our personal lives and especially in our national lives. The idea that we can be like all the other nations in the public sphere, but remain observant in our private lives, is a German Jewish concept from which we have suffered greatly and which characterized the Reform Movement -Be a man outside your home and a Jew inside it-was the motto. Mordechai moved the controversy from a private circle to a general one, to the areas of culture and national and global activity, and he was right to do so, because the Torah is truth and given by the Hand of G-d. We must work to correct principles, not specific people, to do so on national and international levels and not to deny that while worrying only about our own private world while the public space is nihilistic and bereft of G-d.
Ze’aka vs. Tze’aka (A cry vs. a scream)
Rabbi Kook zts”l wrote that we have a certain amount of love even for Amalek: “The attribute of love in the souls of the righteous includes all of creation, excluding nothing, no people and language, and even Amalek is not erased except for under the heavens; if he is purified enough to reach his good roots above the skies he merits heavenly love. But it requires great strength and purity to reach this high place.”
Explaining his words (whose main content is esoteric and found in the works of the Ramchal), shows that the obliteration of Amalek requires two stages, the first being the actual destruction, as the words in the Torah command. The second is obliterating the idea Amalek represents, which cannot be accomplished if we do not see what it is we are trying to erase. G-d is the creator of everything, and if there is evil in the world, it is also part of the general process leading to pure goodness. Obliterating ideas, ironically, must include understanding them, empathizing with the existence of the basic dispute. That is why obliterating Amalek itself forces us to love the fact that there is Amalek in this world, which we have to erase. This is what allows for free will to choose the bad or the good, and then once we have chosen the good although we could have decided differently – we reach the goal of creation – the free choice of G-d and His Torah.
Why do we drink on Purim? The simple explanation by Rashi and Ralb”ag is that the miracle occurred at a party and we remember it by having a party with wine.
But kabalistically, wine elevates us to the sources of knowledge and whatever is above that, to where even the impure realize that the concept that everything happens by chance and there is no guiding hand of Hashem is not acceptable..
Let us compare Mordechai and Eisav: According to our Sages, Mordechai cried a bitter and loud cry because Esav screamed a loud and bitter scream over losing the blessing to Jacob. But we must take note of the difference between ze’aka and tze’aka. Tze’aka is the expression of emotional pain and has no room for tikkun or arising above the crisis that caused it. Ze’aka, however, is a call that includes repairing the situation, not only wailing about the situation of the world, but a cry for change, for truth and tikkun, making the free choice between the truth of our Torah and the heresy of Amalek.
The Megillah is a call of Israel to awaken. You witnessed G-d’s revelation. Tell of Him in all the world, everywhere, and obliterate the memory of Amalek from under the heavens.
Rabbi Baruch Efrati- studied at Merkaz HaRav yeshiva in Jerusalem and serves as a rabbi in Efrat. He is a prolific and much-read writer on Torah issues and heads the Religious Zionist "Derech Emunah" (Way of Torah) movement of young Israeli Orthodox rabbis.
Translated from Hebrew by Rochel Sylvetsky
