2020/5780
The Three Tannaitic Opinions
We have the opportunity to drill down to the very essence of Mikra Megillah if we carefully analyze the Mishna in Megillah Perek 2 Mishna 3. The Mishna presents three opinions amongst the Tana’im as to how much of the Megillah a person must hear in order to fulfill the Mitzvah of reading the Megillah.
While Rabi Meir believes we must read the entire Megillah, Rabi Yehuda believes that we need to begin only with the second Perek when Mordechai is introduced (“Ish Yehudi Haya B’Shushan HaBirah” (Megillat Esther 2:5), etc.). Rabi Yosi is even more lenient arguing that we need only begin with the third Perek when Haman is appointed as the Mishneh LaMelech, second in command.
Background for the Analysis – No Hallel on Purim
One of the rituals that are noticeably absent from the celebration of Purim is the recitation of Hallel. Hallel is recited on all other holidays that involve rejoicing, including the rabbinic holiday of Chanukah. As such, the Gemara, Megillah 14a, asks, why don't we recite Hallel on Purim as well?
The Gemara first answers that Purim differs since its miracles occurred outside of Eretz Yisrael. However, this is a problematic answer, as noted by the Gemara, since the miracles of Pesach, Shavu’ot, and Sukkot all took place outside of Eretz Yisrael, yet we still recite Hallel on those holidays.
A second answer is offered by Rava: It makes sense to recite Hallel on Pesach and say "The servants of God sing praise" and not the servants of Paroh. However, here (regarding Purim) we can’t say "The servants of God sing praise" because we are still servants of Achashverosh. In other words, how can we recite Hallel on Purim if the dangerous Achashveirosh remains in power?
But was Achashveirosh really dangerous? It depends on how we understand this Persian emperor. Most of us perceive Achashveirosh as a character who was manipulated by Haman. This, however, is only one approach to Achashveirosh. Chazal (Megillah 12a) argue as to whether Achashveirosh was shrewd or a fool. A major question facing readers of Megillat Esther is whether Haman was manipulating Achashveirosh or vice versa. Unlike Esther and Mordechai, who clearly are Tzadikim, and Haman, who is undoubtedly a Rasha, we are unsure regarding Achashveirosh.
Achashveirosh is dangerous only if he is shrewd. If he is a fool, he poses no danger at the conclusion of the Megillah since Mordechai now serves as the Mishneh LaMelech. Thus, Rava’s answer that the dangerous Achashveirosh remains in power is subject to debate.
The Gemara, Megillah 14a, though, offers a third option - Rav Nachman stated: The reading of the Megillah is Purim's Hallel. In other words, we really do recite Hallel on Purim, it is just a different form of Hallel – recounting stories in which we discern Hashem’s intervention. By reading the Megillah it is if we are saying “Odecha Ki Anitani VaTehi Li LiYeshu’a”, Tehillim 118:21, or in other words, thank you Hashem for saving us from Haman.
Torah Academy of Bergen County Talmid Eitan Akiva Teigman once asked, though, then why not simply tell the story of Yetzi’at Mitzrayim instead of reciting Hallel on Pesach? The answer seems to be that blatant miracles (such as occurred on Pesach) require a blatant Hallel but a subtle Hallel is more suitable in regards to commemorate subtle miracles (such as those that occurred on Purim).
Thus, Rav Nachman’s approach is subtle and out of the box but is unassailable. It is not surprising that of the three explanations presented in the Gemara, Rav Nachman’s explanation is the one cited by the Rambam (Hilchot Chanukah U’Megillah 3:6). We will use this approach as the basis for our analysis of the three-way dispute as to how much of Megillat Esther must be read on Purim.
Rabi Yosi
Let us begin our analysis with Rabi Yosi. Since Megillat Esther is a way of saying “Thank you Hashem for saving us from Haman” we begin the Megillah reading with the point in the story in which we fall into danger – when Haman rises to power as the Mishneh L’Melech.
Rabi Yehuda
Rabi Yehuda, though, counters that if we are thanking Hashem for saving us from Haman, we cannot begin in Perek 3. After all, the rescue of Bnei Yisrael from Haman began in Perek 2 when against all odds Esther became the queen of the Persian Empire. As the Gemara, Megillah 13b, teaches, Hashem does not bring a Makah (problem) to our people unless He has already positioned a Refuah (remedy) solution in place. In Megillat Esther Haman is the Makkah and Esther is the Refuah. Thus, we must begin reading from the beginning of her story, starting with the introduction of Mordechai, Esther’s uncle.
Thus, by including Perek 2 in Mikra Megillah we thank Hashem for arranging for Esther to become the queen as part of our thanking Him for saving us from Haman. After all, hundreds of women were vying for the coveted position as queen, yet Esther emerged against what appeared to be almost impossible odds to become queen.
Moreover, Achashveirosh’s security team was, generally speaking, a competent outfit. The fact that he remained in power for at least twelve years in the very volatile Middle East is a testimony to their capability.
Yet, this otherwise competent security group permitted a woman to become the queen without conducting a proper background check. They did not even know what family from which she came and yet she emerged as queen! Thus, we thank Hashem for manipulating Achashveirosh’s guardians thereby facilitating Esther’s becoming the queen who would save us from Haman.
Rabi Meir
Why must we, according to Rabi Meir, read Perek 1 of Megillat Esther describing Achashveirosh’s extreme parties and Vashti’s removal? How does this contribute to our thanking Hashem for saving us from Haman?
One approach may be that Perek 1 is also part of Makdim Refua L’Maka. Had Vashti not been removed from power under the bizarre circumstances outlined in Perek 1, Esther would not have become queen and save us from Haman.
A second approach addresses a much more fundamental issue. We cannot, argue, Rabi Meir, genuinely thank Hashem from Haman, unless we understand why Hashem allowed Haman to rise to power in the first place. For this, we need Megillat Esther Perek 1.
Rabi Shimon bar Yochai (Megillah 12a) explains that we deserved the scare of Haman since we enjoyed Achashveirosh’s extreme parties. Accordingly, we became much too comfortable and assimilated into Persian society. How could we have enjoyed a party that celebrated Achashveirosh’s rule over one hundred and twenty seven provinces which include Eretz Yisrael?!
Not to mention the Midrashic assertions that Achachveirosh’s parties degraded the Beit HaMikdash by using the holy utensils of the Beit HaMikdash at the extreme parties and that he wore the Bigdei Kehunah at these terrible events (Megillah 12a). This is especially the case in light of this Gemara’s assertion that these parties were Achashveirosh’s celebration of the fact that in his calculation the prophecy that the Jews would return to rebuild the Beit HaMikdash after seventy years of exile, was not fulfilled (Megillah 11b).
Haman’s ascent to power and subsequent terrifying decree was intended by Hashem to “scare us straight”. After severely veering from the intended Torah path, we needed the extreme decree of Haman to restore our spiritual equilibrium. The extreme three day fast in which we engaged served as a Tikkun (correction) for our illicit indulgence in Achashveirosh’s extreme party. At this point, we were ready for Hashem to intervene and save us from Haman.
Our approach to Rabi Meir’s opinion brings to mind the Beit HaLevi’s explanation of “Odecha Ki Anitani VaTehi Li LiYeshu’a” (Tehillim 118:21). Anitani is conventionally understood as answering me. Thus, the Pasuk is translated, thank you Hashem for answering my prayers and providing for salvation from my troubles.
However, the Beit HaLevi understood Anitani to mean you have afflicted me (from the word, Inu’i – torment). Thus, “Odecha Ki Anitani VaTehi Li LiYeshu’a” according to the Beit HaLevi means thank you Hashem for afflicting me and then saving me. We thank Hashem not only for the rescue but even for the affliction. Spiritually mature individuals understand that consequences from Hashem are necessary and in the long run beneficial.
In the case of the Megillah, we can appreciate in retrospect that the torment of Haman’s decree was necessary. We had fallen from the path and were on the road to spiritual obliteration, were it not for Haman’s decree reminding us that we are a people apart (“Hein Am L’Vadad Yishkon”). Thus our Hallel on Purim must not only serve as expressing a thank you for the liberation from Haman’s tyranny but also to thank Hashem for holding us accountable and facilitating our spiritual restoration as a result of the rise of Haman. This could not be accomplished without including Perek 1 in the reading of the Megillah.
Thus, according to Rabi Meir, it is not sufficient to thank Hashem for saving us from Haman. We first acknowledge the spiritual necessity for Haman’s decree and then we thank Hashem for rescuing us from the decree when our behavior warranted this rescue. The cogency of Rabi Meir’s approach explains why his opinion prevailed and emerged as the normative Halachic position.
Conclusion
What may have seen as a simple and dry dispute as to how much of the Megillah must be read is in truth the key to help unlocking the deep essence of Keriat Megillah. We have accepted Rabi Meir’s opinion to read the Megillah in its entirety in order to fully express our gratitude to Hashem. We thank him for bringing the danger of Haman and then, when it was appropriate to do so, saving us from Haman and his evil decree.