Purim 5774

    “And these days of Purim will not expire from among the Jews” (Esther 9:28). The Midrash (Socher Tov, Mishlay 9:2) understands these words to mean that even though in the “next world” other holidays will no longer be observed, Purim will be. Similarly, the Yerushalmi (Megila 1:5) says that the other books of the Prophets and the Writings will (in the future) no longer be relevant; only the Five Books of the Torah and the Scroll of Esther will remain. (See Rambam, Hilchos Megila 2:18, where he defines this “future” as “in the time of Moshiach” and adds that all of our earlier problems will be forgotten, but not [what happened on] Purim.) What is it about Purim that allows it, and its “story,” to endure even after other holidays and Biblical books will not?

    Accepting the Scroll of Esther into the Biblical canon was not a simple matter (see Megila 7a and its parallel in the Yerushalmi, Megila 1:5). Only after a source was found stating that a mention of Amalek being wiped out also belongs in the Writings was it was included. Although Haman did descend from Agag (Esther 3:1), and Agag was an Amalekite king (Sh’muel I 15:8), the Purim story does not seem to be about destroying Amalek, nor is doing so mentioned in the text. Amalek continued to survive (Haman’s grandsons learned Torah in B’nei B’rak, see Gitin 57b), so killing Haman and his sons did not accomplish this. Why, then, was including Esther in the Biblical canon dependant on finding a source about destroying Amalek?

    The mitzvah to wipe out Amalek itself is awkwardly phrased. We are supposed to “remember” Amalek (D’varim 25:17), yet “blot out any remembrance” of  them (25:19). Even though it is specifically “what Amalek did to us” that we must remember, something that can be done even after there is no longer any remnant of the evil-beyond-hope nation that perpetuated those deeds, why necessitate “blotting out their memory” if we are supposed to continue to remember them anyway? It could be suggested that we are to “remember” (and “not forget”) to blot them out, in the sense that once it is accomplished there would no longer be a need to “remember” to do so. However, since wiping them out is no longer a possibility (see B’rachos 28a, see also https://rabbidmk.wordpress.com/2011/09/08/parashas-ki-seitzei-5771/), yet the mitzvah to “remember” them is still intact, one could not have only applied as a prerequisite for the other. Why “blot out” the memory of evil if we are supposed to always remember it?

    When recapping what occurred before commanding us to “blot them out,” the term used regarding Amalek’s attack is “happened upon you” (D’varim 25:18), implying that they didn’t purposely set out to attack us, but, after inadvertently crossing paths with us, decided to do so. However, when the attack had actually occurred (Sh’mos 17:8), we are told that they “came and waged war with Israel,” i.e. it was a premeditated attack. The term “happened upon you” is therefore understood to mean that they (Amalek) attributed things to “happenstance” rather than being purposefully directed by G-d (see Rashbam on D’varim 25:18). Being that their attack came shortly after the exodus from Egypt, which included the miraculous plagues and the splitting of the sea, and Israel was (even at the time of the attack) led by the “clouds of glory,” it would have been extremely difficult for anyone to deny G-d’s involvement in the world. How could they consider attacking the nation that was obviously under G-d’s protection, and do so based on a mindset that G-d was not involved

    Who did Amalek attack? “All who were weak, behind you” (D’varim 25:18) referring to those who had sinned and were therefore rejected by the “clouds of glory,” (see Rashi) which no longer protected them. In other words, it wasn’t that Amalek rejected the notion that G-d was involved with the world at all, but the notion that He stayed involved even with those who no longer merited the “miracles” He performs for the righteous. There are natural laws, and Amalek attributed everything that happens “naturally” to being outside of G-d’s involvement (even if they thought G-d had set those laws up in the first place). Therefore, they weren’t afraid of attacking those outside the “clouds of glory” even though G-d’s presence was obvious right “next door,” where He was protecting those dwelling within them.

    Ramban (Sh’mos 13:16) calls the natural laws “hidden miracles.” That oil burns is no less miraculous than if any other liquid burned, but because G-d decreed that oil should always burn, we become accustomed to oil burning and it loses its “magic.” Everything that occurs does so based on G-d decreeing that it do so (except for how we exercise our free will). As we say in our daily payers, G-d “renews, every day, continuously, the act of creation.” The “obvious miracles,” the Ramban says, which seem to defy the laws of nature, teach us that G-d is involved in the world, and is behind the “hidden miracles,” i.e. nature, too. But that’s not how Amalek approached things. Despite seeing the obvious miracles, Amalek thought the “hidden miracles” were not part of G-d’s constant involvement in the world, and that they could therefore “abuse the system” of natural law even if it went against G-d’s will. This outlook, that G-d is only sporadically involved in the world, is what we are commanded to obliterate. Even though only a select (meritorious) few are worthy of G-d’s divine protection (see Rabbeinu Bachye on B’reishis 18:19), that doesn’t negate His constant involvement in every aspect of the world; it only affects whether He will tweak the outcome of the natural laws He almost always operates through and is the power behind. (For a discussion about how G-d can tweak things while still working within the natural laws He set up, see https://rabbidmk.wordpress.com/2012/10/11/parashas-bereishis-5773/.) There can be no remnant of the nation that denied G-d’s constant involvement even in nature, but we must remember what such a perspective led to and how G-d reacted to it.

    G-d’s name is not mentioned in the Scroll of Ester because His involvement was only “behind the scenes.” There were no obvious miracles, but after the story unfolded, it became obvious that He had directed what had happened. The point of the story is not (just) that G-d will come to the rescue when we turn to Him, but that He also operates within nature, not just through impressive, obvious miracles. This is exactly the opposite of what Amalek believed, and exactly what the commandment to obliterate Amalek is directed towards. Therefore, before the Men of the Great Assembly could add a Book to the Biblical canon whose message was specifically anti-Amalek, they needed to verify that doing so (this time in the Writings) was sanctioned. And because “in the future,” whether that future is in the time of Moshiach or the World to Come, “G-d will be One and His Name will be One” (Z’charya 14:9), i.e. there will be no doubt that G-d is behind everything — even, or especially, things that are “natural” — the Scroll of Esther, which teaches us this lesson, as well as the holiday that celebrates it, will be just as valid as it is now.