Rosh Chodesh Adar Torah Essay

A Tragic Opportunity

In the final chapter of Tractate Sanhedrin, Perek Helek, the sages discuss concepts of redemption and the Messianic era. Among many subjects, they debate the reason for the lengthy exile, whether there is a set date for the redemption (ketz), and whether our redemption is dependent on teshuva (return to God).

A Time for Redemption

In this context, we find a dispute spanning generations. Rav claims that redemption is completely dependent on teshuva and good deeds, whereas Shmuel believed “there is a limited time a mourner can remain in mourning.”   The gemara compares their dispute to an earlier Tannaitic dispute:

“Rabbi Eliezer said: If they do teshuva they are redeemed, and if not, they are not redeemed. Rabbi Yehoshua said to him: [How can you say] if they don’t do teshuva they won’t be redeemed?! Rather, the Holy One, blessed be He, will establish a king upon them whose decrees are as harsh as those of Haman, and Israel will do teshuva and it will return them to the goodly way.” (B. Sanhedrin 97b)

At first it seems Rav and Shmuel dispute whether Israel must return to God to be redeemed. But if this is the case, then there seems to be a lack of parity between the Amoriac and Tannaitic disputes. As opposed to Rav and Shmuel, Rabbi Yehoshua ultimately agrees with Rabbi Eliezer that Israel must return to God before the redemption. If so, what is the dispute?

It seems Rabbi Yehoshua, like Shmuel, believes there is a predetermined time the exile is meant to end and Israel is meant to be redeemed. While Rabbi Eliezer and Rav believe that the redemption is utterly dependent on Israel’s actions, Rabbi Yehoshua and Shmuel believe that at some point, enough is enough and God will make the first step. In subsequent discussions Rabbi Yehoshua will bring proofs that God is willing to initiate our reconciliation, but here he agrees that Israel must respond accordingly. If they do not, it seems the appointed time will pass and Israel will remain unredeemed.

It’s curious that Rabbi Yehoshua brings the example of “a king whose decrees are as harsh as Haman’s.” Haman was not a king. There have been other kings with harsh decrees, such as Pharaoh and Nebuchadnezzar, why use Haman as an example?

An Unprecedented Response

The gemara in Megilla teaches:

“’The king [Achashverosh] removed his ring [and gave it to Haman].’ Rabbi Abba bar Kahana said: The removal of the ring was greater than the forty-eight prophets and seven prophetesses, for none of them returned Israel to the good [way], but the removal of the ring returned them to the good [way].” (B. Megilla 14a)

Achashverosh gave Haman his ring, along with the authority to decree the extermination of the Jewish people. According to Rabbi Abba bar Kahana, this threat spurred the Jewish people to an unprecedented level of teshuva. What was this teshuva?

Mordechai’s original plan was for Esther to beg Achashverosh to spare the Jewish people. Esther disagreed, not because she was scared for her life, but because she realized it would not work. Political machinations alone were insufficient and if she appeared before Achashverosh uninvited, he would execute her, and there would be no one left to plead their case. So, Esther made a new plan, incorporating a vital aspect Mordechai overlooked. She ordered Mordechai:

“Go and gather all the Jews found in Shushan and fast on my behalf, do not eat and do not drink for three days, night and day, myself and my maidservants will also fast, and then I will go to the king, unlawfully, and if I perish, I perish.” (Esther 4:16)

Esther’s plan of gathering and fasting is a typical description of teshuva, but there is no direct mention of God and prayer as God is never explicitly mentioned in the megilla. Still, Esther speaks of going “to the king.” The midrash teaches that the megilla uses hamelekh, the king, instead of hamelekh Achashverosh, to obliquely reference God’s intervention in the story. (Midrash Abba Gorion, Buber, 1:16)

This sheds new light on both Haman’s claim and Esther’s proposal. Haman claims the Jewish people deserve to be massacred because they are divided and do not fulfill the king, God’s, statutes. Esther understands that the only way to overturn this decree is to unite as one, “gather” and heal the divide. “And then I will go to the king.” After they unite in prayer, the Jewish people gather again on the day of Haman’s decree to defend themselves against those who sought their destruction. The megilla uses the term gather (K-H-L) four times to describe Jewish united defense. (9:2,15, 16, 18)

Could Rabbi Yehoshua be hinting at the idea that Haman’s decree was God’s way of encouraging the people to do teshuva at an appointed time for their redemption? If so, why didn’t their teshuva work?

Too Little? Too Late?

While there is some dispute over the timing of the events in Megillat Esther, it’s agreed that they take place after the Persian King Coresh permitted the Jewish people to return to Judea and rebuild the Temple in Jerusalem. In the Kuzari, Rabbi Yehudah HaLevi teaches that this time period of the Return to Zion was an opportunity for a complete redemption, a potential ketz after the seventy years of Babylonian exile Yirmiyahu the Prophet foretold. But, he explains, they missed the opportunity; even though they rebuilt the Temple, the Divine Presence did not return. Why not?

People often misunderstand Rabbi Yehudah HaLevi, thinking he believed that the Jewish people did not return from exile when given the chance. This is an oversimplification. There is no way to fulfill all the mitzvot in the Torah if there is no Temple and the Jewish people do not reside together in the land of Israel. The land of Israel is a tool that allows us to fulfill the will of God, the key to a redemption like the one from Egypt is “to prepare to receive the God of our ancestors, wholeheartedly, with a yearning.” (Kuzari, 2:24)

To merit redemption, the Jewish people must have the capacity to receive the Divine Presence in their midst. Individual people can connect with God, but Judaism is not a religion of individuals. We must be united as one to truly fulfill our mission in this world, “as one person with one heart.” (Rashi on Exodus 18:2) But the nation remained divided and as a collective they missed an opportunity for redemption.

Chazal ask why it is we don’t sing Hallel, the praise of redemption, on Purim. One suggestion is we can’t pray falsely. In Hallel we say “hallelu avdei Hashem,” “give praise, those who serve God,” but “we are still servants of Achashverosh.” (B. Megilla 14a) Can we really praise the salvation of Purim if nothing truly changed?

The problem is reflected in the megillah.  A careful reading suggests that Mordechai wanted everyone to celebrate two days of Purim, on the 14^th of Adar when the Jews outside of Shushan were safe from their enemies, and on the 15^th when the Jews of Shushan rested. Instead, the walls between the communities remain standing and the Jewish people celebrate the day their individual community rested, instead of celebrating our collective fate. (Esther 9:19-21)

The megillah describes the despair and wailing in Jewish communities as the news of Haman’s evil plot spread. The horror brings them together. But what happens when the threat passes? The hope is that we will continue to focus on our shared values and priorities, work together for the collective good, celebrate our shared triumphs and mourn our shared losses. That is the aspiration.

I pray we do not miss another chance. May we know no more suffering and merit a complete redemption, speedily.