Juicy parts of the megillah...!

stem

Sun, Mar 05 2006, 9:23 pm

carrot:

Quote:

Why doesn't the Megilla make it clear why Vashti deserved to be beheaded? Why do we have to turn to Midrashim to find out why we should dislike her?

I recently heard a tape by R' Moshe Meir Weiss where he explains that the megilla had to be written in the time of achashverosh, which means that Mordechai had to be very careful what he allowed to be written, and what had to be orally passed down as additions. The fact that Vashti disobeyed Achashverosh and had to be killed is an embarrassment to the king, and had to be written with great sensitivity. In fact, it doesn't even mention the fact that she was killed in the megilla. It just says something like she was gone and it was time to look for a new queen. (too lazy to look up the exact words).
So, not everything was written for the reason I said above, and there are many other instances in the megilla where it doesn't specify certain details because of fear of censorship or worse.

carrot

Mon, Mar 06 2006, 12:01 am

SaraG wrote:

Yes, some of the feminist movement reveres Vashti, citing that her bad traits are "only medrash".

It's a little hard to argue with that philosophy, although Midrashim are meant to teach us something..

On the other hand, she wasn't Jewish, so why would her name have become part of our culture? B/c she was a "martyr"? That's not really enough, is it?

I don't think the "feminist movement" (whoever that is) really cares about whether something is "only medrash" or not and they don't "cite" anything. They are not into Torah, that is not their issue.

And I don't know if you are talking to me but I never said her name SHOULD be a part of our culture. Believe me I don't want to name my own daughter Vashti, or anybody close to me. I just said that I can see why other people might think it was a good symbol for their cause.

Goldhop wrote:

Which part of Vashti's punishment is more bothersome, the fact that it doesn't seem clear from the P'shat of the Megillah why she deserved beheading or the fact that she was a victim of male exploitation?

I sense a tone of mockage here, but I'll answer anyway. If not that she "was a victim of male exploitation" (as you put it), I wouldn't stop to wonder what the reason was. It catches my attention. You get it?

Stem wrote:

Thank you!!!! That answers my question! I heard about this censorship problem thing but I did not think of that angle. Now it all makes sense!

Amother wrote:

I have one thing to say how come any person who is bad in the Torah has to be ugly Confused Why is it associated with bad and baeuty with good? Why is vashti known for her pimples and tail? Why is AIsav known for his ruddy complexion and red hair etc?

Something I have wondered too! The Imahos were beautiful, and the Avos were rich and physically strong.

There were also "bad guys" who were good looking though. For example, Avshalom. That is an important part of the story.

I can't think of examples where it says that people are ugly though? So maybe this is a misconception I got from reading the Little Midrash Says? You know those evil looking Mitzriyim Twisted Evil

realeez

Mon, Mar 06 2006, 6:42 pm

stem wrote:

carrot:

Quote:

Why doesn't the Megilla make it clear why Vashti deserved to be beheaded? Why do we have to turn to Midrashim to find out why we should dislike her?

I learned that in HS and what my teacher said is that is also a reason why Hashems name isn't written - since it was given out to everyone, ppl would drop it and it could end up in the garbage.

Motek

Tue, Mar 07 2006, 10:02 am

carrot wrote:

No, I haven't. I've been reading the Megilla.

whew! glad to hear that Smile

Quote:

Why do we have to turn to Midrashim to find out why we should dislike her?

I fail to understand your question and let me remind you that I quoted the Gemara, not the Medrash (both are Oral Torah of course). Are you equally as bothered by why the 39 melachos of Shabbos aren't specified clearly in the Torah and only not making a fire is mentioned? How about no laws of shechita, just "slaughter as I told you." How about no clue as to how tefillin should look? How about Avraham's being thrown into the furnace only hinted at? How about almost zero information about Moshe Rabeinu's first 80 years? Etc. Etc.

The Written Torah must be learned with the Oral Torah. You can ask a general question - why did Hashem put some things in the Oral Torah and other things in the Written Torah, but I don't see the point in singling out the Megilla.

Quote:

I don't see anything wrong with trying to get your own first impression from Pshat before turning to Midrashim to tell you how to understand everything.

why do you keep referring to Medrash when it's the Gemara (I thought putting the quotes in bold would help ...)?

if you would say that you want to read the text with Rashi before going to the Gemara, fine, but without Rashi?!

Quote:

I find this particular exploration especially illuminating and important davka because we DO live in a time with a lot of "feminist" messages.

a BT friend of mine, when she was very newly committed to Yiddishkeit, showed me an article about the megilla with an anti-Torah, feminist message since she wanted to respond to it, so yes, this is a hot topic and needs clarification

Quote:

So we have to dig out what is wrong-feminist and what is Torah-feminist.

please explain those terms

re censorship of the megilla - at the same time though, let us remember that the megilla is one of the 24 books of the Tanach and as one of the Kesuvim, was written with Ruach Ha'Kodesh

LikeMeDoes

Tue, Mar 07 2006, 10:49 am

I went to a shiur last night on the Megillah and it was FASCINATING!
There is sooo much more to the story than can actually be understood from just reading the pshat. We spent close to an hour just on the background to the Purim story - the histories of Achashverosh, how he became king, Vashti, Haman and Mordechai and the background to the feast.
1. For anyone wanting more info, I definitely recommend 'Let my nation live' (published by artscroll). It's basically written in novel form but has loads of mefarshim in it.
2. One point which the woman giving the shiur made that I thought was very interesting, is that the reason the Megilla is called Megillas Esther is because Esther specifically asked the Chachomim to name it that to show everybody that what she had done was the right thing to do, in her situation, because even though she knew that she did what was right, she always felt guilty about it.
3. The kids Purim tape by Torahvision (2 tapes) is, IMO, excellent. Kids find it entertaining and it's not, like many children's tapes/videos are, unbearable for adults. In fact, there are many mefarshim in it too, and subtle jokes that adults will catch. If you don't have it, its a great investement.

carrot

Tue, Mar 07 2006, 1:15 pm

Motek wrote:

carrot wrote:

No, I haven't. I've been reading the Megilla.

whew! glad to hear that Smile

So we're still buddies? Wink

Quote:

Why do we have to turn to Midrashim to find out why we should dislike her?

Actually I have wondered many of those things. I think they are valid and valuable questions. Rashi asks why the Chumash repeats the whole story of Eliezer 3x's - there are reasons why certain things are written out and others just hinted or passed down.

Quote:

The Written Torah must be learned with the Oral Torah. You can ask a general question - why did Hashem put some things in the Oral Torah and other things in the Written Torah, but I don't see the point in singling out the Megilla.

Because this is the Megilla thread.

Because the Megilla is interesting, especially when you read it yourself inside after all those years as a kid just hearing a simple good guy / bad guy story.

Quote:

I don't see anything wrong with trying to get your own first impression from Pshat before turning to Midrashim to tell you how to understand everything.

why do you keep referring to Medrash when it's the Gemara (I thought putting the quotes in bold would help ...)?

Sorry I wasn't differentiating. Are you sure it is wrong to refer to Aggadita as Medrash? Aren't they learned the same way, and same level of authority? Open to being taught more about this!

Quote:

if you would say that you want to read the text with Rashi before going to the Gemara, fine, but without Rashi?!

A good way to learn Rashi is to first read it and try to understand it without Rashi - then see what Rashi adds. (Especially important method when trying to understand Rashi on Chumash.) That is the style I am advocating.

Quote:

I find this particular exploration especially illuminating and important davka because we DO live in a time with a lot of "feminist" messages.

That is the kind of thing I am talking about. And no, I never read any article like that nor do I read much feminist literature at all. Maybe one or two books - totally botul b'shishim in the other stuff I read.

Quote:

So we have to dig out what is wrong-feminist and what is Torah-feminist.

please explain those terms

I am using the word "feminist" to mean pro-woman, or from a woman's perspective. So there is some of that even within the Torah. For example statements about the wisdom of women, or in Chassidus about the special quality of Malchus, etc. (<-- Two random examples - there are many more.)

On the other hand a lot of what may be called feminist is anti-Torah.

So I think it is worthwhile to not just knock "feminism" but to try to find what "feminist ideas" may actually be Torah ideas.

There are a lot of different ideas that can be called "feminist", just like there are a lot of different philosophies that can be called "existential" and they can even contradict each other. I don't think it's a good idea to completely reject a whole complex area of thought without examining it.

Quote:

re censorship of the megilla - at the same time though, let us remember that the megilla is one of the 24 books of the Tanach and as one of the Kesuvim, was written with Ruach Ha'Kodesh

All the more reason to question it - it can withstand it, right? Believe me, I would not give so much attention or indignition to a flimsy work of human imagination.

Well that's not true. I would, but it would be just for fun or as a springboard for my own thoughts - I wouldn't be serious.

Motek

Tue, Mar 07 2006, 3:55 pm

carrot wrote:

So we're still buddies? Wink

but of course!

Quote:

I'm sure you know that Rashi explains why the story with Eliezer is repeated ("yafa sichasan shel avdei avos lifnei ha'Makom m'torasan shel banim" - Hashem likes the talk of the servants of the Avos more than the Torah of the children)

Quote:

Sorry I wasn't differentiating. Are you sure it is wrong to refer to Aggadita as Medrash? Aren't they learned the same way, and same level of authority? Open to being taught more about this!

I wondered about the difference between something in Medrash as opposed to Gemara as I typed. I don't know, would have to ask. Still, it's proper (I think) to refer to the "story stuff" in Gemara as Agadta and not as Medrash.

have you seen the book "Women in the Talmud"?

http://www.artscroll.com/Books/wtah.html

I think you'd find it interesting.

Quote:

So I think it is worthwhile to not just knock "feminism" but to try to find what "feminist ideas" may actually be Torah ideas.

for your research paper on the how women are treated in the Torah? because of your Bible study class with women? other reasons?

Quote:

I don't think it's a good idea to completely reject a whole complex area of thought without examining it.

contrariwise, one can say - why bother examining it altogether? study Torah!

Quote:

All the more reason to question it

To understand it better, yes, if that's what you mean.

carrot

Tue, Mar 07 2006, 5:05 pm

Motek wrote:

Yes.

Quote:

Yeah, you're probably right.

Quote:

have you seen the book "Women in the Talmud"?

http://www.artscroll.com/Books/wtah.html

I think you'd find it interesting.

Nope, never seen that book. The sample pages I just read don't look they say anything I haven't heard before, though. You really think I would find it interesting?

Quote:

So I think it is worthwhile to not just knock "feminism" but to try to find what "feminist ideas" may actually be Torah ideas.

for your research paper on the how women are treated in the Torah? because of your Bible study class with women? other reasons?

I have no research paper, no Bible study class, just a habit of taking ideas seriously and trying to find the truth of things.

Quote:

I don't think it's a good idea to completely reject a whole complex area of thought without examining it.

contrariwise, one can say - why bother examining it altogether? study Torah!

Maybe ideally we could get all our ideas from Torah but it is really not possible practically speaking. Just the fact that I speak English and not Lashon HaKodesh automatically leads me to see things a certain way. Add that to the fact that I am also living in a particular time and place, raised by specific parents, etc. - all this means that I am already not a "blank slate". I already understand things in a certain way. The best I can do is try to discover why I think the way I do - and then whether that is correct or not.

Even the things that seem obvious to me may have seeped into me from the prevailing culture, not necessarily because it is really that obvioius - for example the idea that if two things contradict each other they can't both be true at the same time. (In logic, something and it's negation cannot both be true - it is either one or the other. If P, then not not P.) I think you are also a subscriber to this belief. If I remember correctly you mentioned in another thread your strong aversion to hypocracy is rooted in this idea, or something like it.

But who says this is even true in the first place? People in Eastern cultures are likely to not see the wisdom at all in what we see as "obvious logic." It follows that non-Western people might also have a much easier time with certain things that people often question about the Torah: for example, the concept of Shivim Panim L'Torah. We say it, but for a lot of us it doesn't really make sense. We want to know, But what REALLLY happened? Maybe after hearing it enough times as kids we grow out of asking that - but I don't think it's because we really accept it.

Of course the Torah does talk about Atzmus, the level that contains opposites - so we know that such a thing exists. But even to describe it that way, is to couch it in terms of logic. We are still stuck in our mindset and in our language.

Interestingly I seem to recall when they compared Jews to the general American culture re certain patterns of perception, the Jews were closer to the Asians in certain respects than to the other Americans.

Maybe the Torah is meant to be that way - to be revealed at different times and different places through the lens of different cultures and languages. But it doesn't dissuade me from trying to find where Torah ends and the keli of the era begins, which starts with awareness of my own thought processes and where they might come from.

Quote:

All the more reason to question it

To understand it better, yes, if that's what you mean.

Of course. That is always my purpose. I don't think I am so brilliant that the things I think have never been thought before... I rather believe that the answers are there, somewhere...

(Perhaps an Enlightenment idea? The belief that anything can be found out, that every question has an answer...)

(Hoping that I have not stuck my foot in my mouth somewhere in this long post... Am I allowed to edit in this section?)

Motek

Tue, Mar 07 2006, 5:22 pm

carrot wrote:

Nope, never seen that book. The sample pages I just read don't look they say anything I haven't heard before, though. You really think I would find it interesting?

it's that he goes systematically through the Gemara, has only done this one volume so far
if you know everything it says about women in seder Zeraim and Moed, well then, it's not for you!

Quote:

I have no research paper, no Bible study class, just a habit of taking ideas seriously and trying to find the truth of things.

oh, I'm all for taking ideas seriously and trying to find the truth about things, I just don't see why you need to bother finding out which feminist ideas are actually Torah ideas, stam azoi

Quote:

Maybe ideally we could get all our ideas from Torah but it is really not possible practically speaking.

my comment was a continuation of the one preceding it - if you don't have a specific need to study feminism as it relates or doesn't relate to Torah, why deal with it?

Quote:

The best I can do is try to discover why I think the way I do - and then whether that is correct or not.

sounds right

Quote:

Even the things that seem obvious to me may have seeped into me from the prevailing culture

no doubt that we are influenced in many ways, including our thinking and mentality, by the culture we live in

Quote:

We want to know, But what REALLLY happened?

yup!

Quote:

... Am I allowed to edit in this section?)

yes

my, how philosophical! and not a word about the megilla!

back to "juicy" parts - there's the part when Haman is pleading with Esther while the king goes out to cool off and the angel pushes Haman so that when Achash. returns he is horrified to see Haman seemingly (s-xually) attacking Esther!

and on a different note - I think it's fascinating that the Gemara says (Sanhedrin and Gittin), that the descendents of Haman learned Torah in Bnei Brak!

Motek

Sun, Mar 12 2006, 11:40 am

Crayon210 wrote:

That is fascinating! Can you provide a source for that?

Yes, the Maharal says that Esther was never intimate with Achashveirosh.

In response to those who wonder how Purim is such a joyous YomTov when the salvation of the Jews came at the expense of Esther's personal life, someone gave me a good answer -

she said that the story is problematic if you look at it from the perspective of SELF, MY relationship, MY life

that's not how Esther viewed it

as a righteous woman and prophetess, Esther's concern was solely: what does G-d want me to do?

and with Mordechai's guidance (and he was a member of the Sanhedrin and also had ruach ha'kodesh) she did what G-D wanted her to do which was to save the Jewish people

this was her mission, her purpose, it was "take it or leave it"

as Mordechai said - if you don't do it, salvation will come from another source