An examination of the books of Maccabees, Josephus, the Addenda to the Book of Esther, the Mishnah, the Tosefta, and the Talmud reveals a surprising picture: the story of salvation itself is hardly discussed, while the customs of the holiday, the feast, the procession, and the community take center stage.
In the previous episode, The Book of Esther as a Historiographical Complexity: Between Legend and Haggadah (Part 1), I addressed the question of the feasibility of the story, which does not appear in external sources from that period.
What interested me in this chapter is the question - whether outside the Bible, the Old Testament, we find references to the holiday of Purim, its origin, its history, its content, its contexts, and of course the various customs that were associated with it in the ancient, post-Biblical era.
It has already been said that the answer to the above question and its various implications is very problematic in the context of examining the literary sources that are later than the Bible. More on this later in the section under discussion.
And in the meantime, the question arises: What, if anything, beyond what is narrated in the biblical Book of Esther lies in later literature? Before answering this, we should note that in contrast to the major holidays written in the Bible, such as Rosh Hashanah, Sukkot, Shavuot, etc., there appear literary works, such as the literature of the Sages, which cover front and back, length and breadth, and depth and height, mounds and mounds of information regarding the aforementioned holidays, but not so with Purim, for beyond the desire to glean later details on the subject, we are exposed to almost complete obscurity. And in order to shed a beam of light, however faint and vague, regarding the aforementioned details in the darkness, less regarding the holiday customs on the individual and public levels on the other hand, and more regarding the "heroes" of the scroll, the chapter in question is intended, and I cannot guarantee with certainty that my conclusions are like seeing gold within the corridors of post-biblical history, that is, external history and "Joseph ben Matityahu" on the one hand, and the literature of the Sages on the other. But here too we are swallowed up and fall into the abyss of ignorance. And from this, a seemingly strange explanation emerges, that the Jewish public in the generations following the Persian era deliberately ignored and spoke of an atmosphere that surrounded the Jewish heroes of the scroll, or the "doubtful Jews", such as the names of the heroes of the scroll that are characterized by a pagan, idolatrous identity card and not only that, but of a dominant "non-Jewish", "non-Hebrew" identity and an attempt to hide the image of the pagan Esther-Ishtar in a Hebrew disguise such as "Hadassah". And perhaps - perhaps all of this was in order to qualify the known heroes of the scroll.
However, we should not ignore the fact that there is in any case some doubt, even the slightest, regarding the pure, unadulterated Jewishness of the protagonists of the story, such as Mordechai and Esther, which makes it difficult, it seems, to see them as the leaders and saviors of the nation. This is certainly food for thought. And let us not forget that their names in the Bible, namely "Esther" on the one hand and "Mordechai" on the other, do not appear at all in the Bible beyond the "Megillat Esther." This is very true regarding the name "Esther" and unlike the name "Mordechai", which, except for two places in the Bible, appears outside the aforementioned scroll and the reference to the book of Ezra (2:2), there was indeed a person named "Mordechai", and he is the one who is mentioned as having risen from the exile (ibid. and also in the book of Nehemiah 7:7) in the same historical context.
Moreover, it should be noted now that the above narrative story about the content of the "Megillat Esther" in the entire biblical collection is, for the most part, very surprising, as if it did not exist, did not take place, and did not take root among the Jewish public of the Hellenistic and Roman eras in the Land of Israel, both on the information level. That is, the details of the event as narrated in the biblical Megillat Esther, chronologically, somewhere during the fourth-third century BCE, and perhaps, as stated above, as if "they were lost," and what remains are the details of the holiday's customs, both the theoretical, prayerful, and gastronomic.
Let us now move on to the relevant testimonies in some chronological order concerning the holiday of Purim. And before that, I will clarify my basic assumption, that for some reason what remained of it was social-communal on the one hand and gastronomic on the other. The discussion regarding the history of the Jews in late Babylonia-Persia does not seem to have interested the writers of the times – the Tanai, the Amoraic and the Midrashic. On the other hand, the customs of the holiday interested them more in the social aspects. Even this comment, like its predecessors, casts doubt, in my humble opinion, on the very credibility of the story about the miracle of Purim, as it appears in the aforementioned biblical scroll.
We will now turn to the post-biblical sources, chronologically as much as possible, that touched on the subject of the holiday and its customs. And I will already point out with emphasis that the accuracy in the chronological aspect, which is so lacking in historical research, is quite detrimental to reaching the conclusions that are required from reading the relevant texts. However, I will seek to reach the conclusions that are required, with the support of quite a few intellectual steps in the available chronological scale.
Mordechai's Day
Let us first recall that in the book of Maccabees 2 (chapter 15, 36) the expression "the day of Mordecai", meaning "the day of the biblical Mordecai", is mentioned, which should not be fasted or eulogized", but rather woven into an atmosphere of joy and deliverance from trouble. Thus the aforementioned Maccabean source states: "And they all agreed with one heart not to let that day pass (i.e. the day of the victory over the Hellenistic army of Nicanor, which was reinforced with war elephants in 161 BCE in a campaign called the Edessa/Hadashah campaign east of Beth Horon, and in this battle Judah Maccabeus inflicted a bitter defeat on the Hellenistic army when even its commander, Nicanor, fell in this battle and his soldiers, who were cut off from Jerusalem, fled towards the royal fortress in Gezer, with Judah and his units pursuing them to the gates of the fortress). "Therefore, it is not specified, except to celebrate it on the thirteenth of the twelfth month, (the month) Adar, which is called in the language of Yahweh, one day before the day of Mordecai." And by the way, Orcha, the author of 2 Maccabees, did not know that the victory was on the 13th of Adar, and therefore added his own note that it occurred one day before Purim.
It is interesting that the author of 2 Maccabees does not refer to Purim in connection with Esther, but calls it "Mordechai Day," after Esther's father, or husband, i.e. Mordechai, and in other sources it is called "Mordechai Day." Very interesting. Whether this was due to the superiority of masculinity over femininity, is unknown, but in any case the above evidence is quite interesting. In any case, he ignores, or "for some reason," both the clear pagan element embedded in his name and in the name "Esther" (which is the pagan Ishtar) that cries out for something and seeks clarification.
We will continue, chronologically of course, and examine Josephus's work, "The Antiquities of the Jews," which parallels the stories of the Bible almost "one-on-one." This refers to the events of Purim as narrated in the biblical Book of Esther (Josephus, The Antiquities of the Jews, 11:184-296), without deviating to the right or left, as stated, from what is narrated in the Bible in the aforementioned book. In any case, Josephus does not analyze in one way or another what is narrated in the Bible, almost one-on-one. And for this reason, it will be difficult to know additional details about the above, not to mention analyzing the events that appear in the Bible. In other words, we will not proceed from here in the context of this article.
Egyptian Jewish addition to the Book of Esther
The following source is relevant and interesting. It is a work called "Additions to the Book of Esther" written in Hellenistic Egypt, with its Hebrew parts written in the Land of Israel, probably between the years 114 and 30 BCE, paralleling the details in the antediluvian Book of Esther. Its description indicates significant knowledge of everything involved in the biblical Book of Esther, of course in an interpretative sense in light of the difference in years between. That is, between the fifth-fourth century BCE and his time (30-114 BCE). However, the mention of the same Ptolemy Lysimachus, "one of the inhabitants of Jerusalem," the Hellenistic, Ptolemy, under whose instruction the aforementioned "Letter of Purim" was translated is astonishing. And this was written under the instruction of no less than Latyrus, namely Ptolemy VIII, the ruler of Hellenistic Egypt and Cleopatra his wife. And apparently Lysimachus son of Ptolemy was also an Egyptian Jew who came to Jerusalem and there saw the biblical Book of Esther, in Hebrew of course, and because of its importance and the importance of its distribution, he chose to translate it into Greek.
It should be noted, incidentally, that in external literature, such as the Vision of Ezra, the Books of the Maccabees, the Proverbs of Sira, and more, not a single shred of information or mention of the Book of Esther is found. In other words, we do not learn from it.
We will therefore turn to the secondary sources in order to deal with the "historiographical, historiological deficiency" in relation to the "Megillat Esther". Perhaps that is where we will be saved?! And what dominant, central source may bring us closer to deciphering the somewhat "mysterious" affair that is right before our eyes, at the threshold of our clarification?!
The Talmud deals with customs, not essence.
Well, in the Megillah tractate in the Mishnah, which is supposed to discuss our matter, there is no mention beyond the laws of the holiday in question and its customs. No mention of the story of Ahasuerus, Vashti, Esther, Mordecai, Haman and his ten sons, and certainly not of the decree of Haman, the confrontation between Mordecai and Esther, the rescue of the Jews, and more of that kind. It is astonishing, but it is a fact. We would be very pleased to know what the leaders of later generations thought of the very uprising of the Jews, one that was organized following Haman's failure and with the support of Ahasuerus. So what does the aforementioned conditional tractate contain? Through it, we can learn about the holiday, the holiday of Purim, its many laws, as well as the very details of its celebration, such as: what do we do? What do we eat? Where do we gather on the holiday, and more of that sort. As well as the laws of reading the scroll, the dating of its celebration, various restrictions associated with it, such as when the holiday of Purim falls on Shabbat. Likewise, Chazal learned from the words "joy and feasting and a good day" that characterize the holiday according to the scroll, that there are three prohibitions on the holiday of Purim: "joy - which teaches that it is forbidden in mourning, feasting - which is forbidden during fasting, and a good day, meaning that it is forbidden in doing work." Again, without any proper and serious historical conclusions regarding the very presence and persistence of the Jewish communities under Parthian-Persian rule. And this is in light of the danger that threatened their very existence and their future existence.
We will reiterate with your permission, and again this time, again and again, there is no hint or even a hint about Esther, Mordechai, the salvation of Jewish society at that time in Persia beyond the customs of the holiday. Why and for what purpose is all this? Perhaps we will leave it to the reader's imagination...
This scroll also mentions the practice of "sending gifts" to family members and acquaintances and the "obligation to drink wine" - "without knowing between the cursed Haman and the blessed Mordecai." Which seems to me not to be serious after the confrontation, given the danger of a serious blow being inflicted on the head of the Jewish community in ancient Persia, and also, unfortunately, lacking a body of conclusions from its leaders, as would be expected from this.
It is therefore, and so throughout the Tanach and Talmudic literature as well as the Midrash, about "What do we do?", "What do we eat?", Where do we gather?", and so on. On the other hand, there has been an almost complete disregard for the actual story of the scroll and especially the relevant conclusions that arise from it as a holy and holy book, also with regard to the discussion of the very existence of the Jewish community in the Diaspora in general, in its present and future. And perhaps the reason lies in the folds of the Jewish community in the Diaspora's reluctance to seriously discuss the subject at hand. There is also a disregard for a kind of historical research regarding the analysis of the central story of Mordechai and Esther dealing with Haman's diabolical plans as a warning sign for the Jewish communities in the Diaspora.
Let's move from the Mishnah to the Tosefta, and perhaps from here we will see, except that the Tosefta does not refer to the events of Purim, and among them it ignores the presence of Esther and Mordechai, with the exception of a secondary reference to the "Purim towel" without any historiological or historiographical mention of the great event itself, at least as it is unfolded before our eyes in the biblical scroll.
A similar picture emerges from the Babylonian and Jerusalem Talmuds, which do mention the stories of Mordecai, Esther, Ahasuerus, etc., and of course there are relevant discussions regarding the customs of the holiday, but not beyond that, both in the details of the customs and certainly not in relation to the results of the story, which might, if it were not so, open an interesting window for us into the reaction of the Jews in light of the failure of Haman's wickedness and the successes of Mordecai. Again, in the Jerusalem Talmud, we discuss Adar 1 and 2, the laws of the holiday foods. And in some text, such as in the Jerusalem Talmud (Chapter 2, 33, p. 1), it is stated that: "What is the difference between books and the Book of Esther, except that the books are written in every language and the Book of Esther is written only in Assyrian. Rabbi Shmuel bar Susserti said that (the problem) will be solved (i.e.), that it was written in Giganton." In other words, a term indicating uniqueness, which has complexity.
And what about the Babylonian Talmud? Well, the Talmud ties together the holiday of Hanukkah and the holiday of Purim, to teach us about the uniqueness of the miracles in this regard and the common connection between the two holidays, even though one appears in the Megillah and the other only in post-biblical literature.
Changing Esther's name to Hadassah
In one of the passages above, the interesting parallel between Esther and Hadassah is mentioned. It seems strange, it seems puzzling, and perhaps the later writers of the biblical period and external literature, namely the Tannaim and the Amoraim, whose opinion, it seems, was not at all comfortable with the name "Esther", whose linguistic origin was completely pagan. And perhaps as an image of idolatry, since the phonetic origin of the word/name "Esther" is closely connected to the central goddess "Ishtar". What seemed bad and similar preoccupied the Tannaim and the Amoraim, who chose, it seems, to remove her name, that is, they found a kind of alternative to her name: under Esther, or perhaps together with her, the word/name "Hadassah" was born for her, and "Hadassah", which has a biblical origin, which is sacred from within and through, is deeply rooted in the Bible in the meaning of a fine plant (1 Chronicles 7:87; Isaiah 41:19; Zechariah 1:8 and 11). To the point that it is written there that "the angel of the Lord standing among the myrtles," with the Latin, botanical explanation being myrtus. In other words, it was so important to the Tannaim and the Amoraim to extract Hadassah from Esther-Ishtar with all her beauty and magnificent and instructive qualities.
It should be noted in this context that Rabbi Yehoshua ben Hananiah, the famous Tanna, suggested that by the name "Hadassah," she is Esther in the sense of Hadassah, that is, in connection with the ideal facial color in Persian culture. And perhaps - perhaps from here the name "Hadassah" may hint at her royal connection. Perhaps behind this linguistic move, Rabbi Yehoshua ben Hananiah sought to purify the pagan allusion that was embedded in the name of the biblical Esther.
The Babylonian Talmud took care to link the name "Hadassah" with an interesting connection to her being righteous, such as in Tractate Megillah (10, p. 1) when Rabbi Meir the Tanna asks and answers: "And why is her name called Hadassah? (And he answers:) After the name of the righteous who were called Hadassim..." And Rabbi Yehuda explains on the subject: "Her name is Hadassah. And why is her name called Esther? Because she was secretive, as it is said: Esther does not betray her people, etc." Before us, in the context of what is being discussed here, is an attempt to erase the name Esther from its pagan origins, which turns out to be an artificial move with a clear meaning. And "Rabbi Nehemiah says: Hadassah is her name (meaning to keep her away from all sin and impurity of foreigners). And why is she called Esther? (Because) there were nations of the world calling her (=calling her) Ishtar." And perhaps here the connection between her clearly pagan name and the desire to obscure it by adding one letter or another is revealed again.
Furthermore, it should be noted that in the Babylonian Talmud, in Tractate Megillah (15, p. 1), it is stated that "Our rabbis taught (i.e., the opening to a somewhat sacred baraita): There were four beautiful women in the world: Sarah (and Abigail, Rahab) and Esther..." in the sense of giving kosher to her name and to its linguistic, theological-pagan origin.
And perhaps in this context it should be noted that the Book of Esther is the only one of the books of the Bible that was not found among the Qumran Scrolls. Apparently it was so problematic because of the names of its heroes, here Esther and Mordechai?!
In this article, I have therefore attempted to open a somewhat problematic window into the entire Purim holiday in ancient times. It is from the biblical story in the "Megillat Esther" that the later sources emerge, starting with external literature, through the Hasmonean period and the writings of Josephus, and ending with the Tanach, Amoraic, and somewhat Midrashic literature. In doing so, I have pointed out the pagan connection in the names of Esther and Mordecai, and the attempt to soften this linguistic-mythological phenomenon through the "strange" appearance of Esther's alternative, which is the purified and pure "Hadassah."
It is therefore not surprising that the story of the biblical Book of Esther was completely hidden in the Tanach, Tosefta, and Amoraic literature, unlike, for example, the events of Rosh Hashanah, Sukkot, and especially Passover. And what remained of it, and the move was quite logical, was condensed into the events of the holiday in terms of family, gastronomic, and social ties, as a fairly normal and clear move.
Disguise – Adopting a Pagan European Custom In the Middle Ages
I will conclude this list by highlighting the fact that the theme of Purim dressing up as all sorts of different characters originated in 13th century Europe, in Germany for example, as appears in the Jewish writer Klonymus ben Klonymus. These are costumed processions of pagan origin, with ancient roots in the period of transition between winter and spring, which is "as is well known" shrouded in diverse, pagan, demonic legend, which means the expulsion of evil demons, the "kings of winter", and the promotion of the forces of light and good, the "princes of spring" on the other. On this basis, carnival processions of exorcists on one side and promoters of the forces of good on the other side developed in Europe. Some of which exist to this day, such as in Spain for example. And among Jewish communities, customs developed of large dolls, figures of "evil Haman" who were stabbed and burned at various community celebrations. And as a little boy, I remember similar phenomena here in our country in various squares in the country, somewhere in the late 1940s and early 1950s. And here you have a kind of personal historical "closing of the circle."
More of the topic in Hayadan:
4 תגובות
And by the way, they exaggerated, to put it mildly, that the tombs of Mordechai and Esther were found somewhere in contemporary Iran, and this, without harming or anything like that, for "not so "clean" purposes, to put it mildly, as is customary to find at all kinds of sites, including in our country, for various and strange purposes. And in the meantime, their pseudo-imaginary immortality will remain the property of wild imagination. And that can only be regretted.
Thank you, Dr. Sorek, for both articles.
How did the award itself treat the scroll?
From what I understand, over the years, recognition has built up at least for Mordechai and Esther. Was this following the Muslim conquest? Or perhaps it appeared before?
And by the way, I refrained from dealing with the figure of Ahasuerus and his family, due to the length of the second part of the article in question. I will say only this about it, and briefly, of course. Let us not forget that the name of Vashti the wife was not far from that of Esther, and the two have an almost identical Aramaic typological name. That is, from the name of both of them emerges the name of the goddess, the central goddess in all ancient worship, which is "Ishtar." And the phonetic connection between Esther and Vashti is quite interesting in relation to the interesting story that stands before us in the scroll in question.
You are an idiot and ignorant to a pitiful degree. I write this with all seriousness and a pure heart. Go take care of yourself, lots of health. And a happy Purim.