Taanit Esther

[magid]

Today is a dawn-to-dusk fast day, Taanit Esther*, commemorating Esther's three-day fast before going to ask her husband the king not to kill her people the Jews. Usually it's the day before Purim, but because this year Purim falls on a Saturday night, it's pushed back to Thursday; no fasts other than Yom Kippur on Shabbat (though in a post-Holocaust world, I could imagine dire times when there might be one-off fasts on Shabbat, unfortunately), nor on Friday, when one needs strength to prepare for Shabbat. Hence, Thursday**.

Anyway. I was lying in bed not thinking about how long it will be before breakfast today (also thinking about what to put in mishloach manot****), it occurred to me how this story would never happen today. Sure, there's a lot fewer absolute monarchs around in the first place. And there's more possibility for due diligence, so it's less likely a crypto-Jew as obvious as Esther (her Jewish uncle***** Mordechai seems pretty prominent...) would be able to hide her religion. But even if that all happened, Haman was foiled, the non-changeable edict of the king worked around by allowing self-defense, it wouldn't end up as a clear story at all. Instead, there would be tons of right-wing Jewish media decrying Jewish intermarriage. And how a woman could not be Torah-true if she is living in such a goyische palace. And it's a place steeped in sensuality (pretty literally, given the descriptions of months of perfuming before going to the king, plus the whole king-trying-each-chick-out-for-a-night contest at the beginning). It might have worked out well for us, but certainly we could not celebrate such a woman. Or, really, any woman taking on that public a role. I bet it would have been reworked to be a Mordechai story, all the way through, perhaps with Esther in a small supporting role.

I suspect that the only way such right-wingers deal with some of the independent women in the Bible (more independent than they want women to be now, certainly) is saying that they were of a greater level back then, blah blah blah. More of the cult of ancestors that we can never even hope to get close to in stature, etc. And yet, we (or at least I) need those people to be people, not perfect paragons of virtue, unblemished and without fault. That's not a person, that's an idol. I can't become perfect, but I can try to make myself a better person (for whatever value of better) if I have role models who are human, showing me that accomplishments are attainable if I try.

* I'm still not sure why it's not "Tzom Esther."
** Which makes it into a whole holiday weekend, really: Taanit Esther today, Parshat Zachor on Shabbat (reading the Torah section about Amalek; baddie Haman is often seen as a descendant of the Amalekites), Purim after Shabbat, and Shushan Purim*** the day after that.
*** Because the Jews in the capital of Shushan were given a second day to defend themselves, Purim is observed one day later in walled cities that existed at the time of Joshua (why then? it's complicated). Which mostly means Jerusalem, these days.
**** Packages of food given to friends on Purim. The minimum to fulfill the requirement is sending two kinds of food to one person, but it often becomes a social tit-for-tat social thing; my mom said something about making 80 packages last year, which is just nuts!
***** unless he's her husband, as some midrashim suggest.

Comments

[gingicat]

And yet, we (or at least I) need those people to be people, not perfect paragons of virtue, unblemished and without fault. That's not a person, that's an idol. I can't become perfect, but I can try to make myself a better person (for whatever value of better) if I have role models who are human, showing me that accomplishments are attainable if I try.

Well said, and there's at least me to add to you and make it we. :)

[magid.livejournal.com]

Two down, millions to go ;-).

And thanks. Hope you have a lovely Purim!

[fetteredwolf.livejournal.com]

Love this post! Have a happy Purim!

[magid.livejournal.com]

Thank you!

Hope you also have a freilichen Purim :-)

[scholargipsy.livejournal.com]

I had a very bright, articulate woman from The Curriculum Initiative (http://www.tcionline.org) talk to my ninth-grade Ancient and Medieval World History class about Esther. We had them read the Book of Esther for homework, then had a really great discussion about women in the Book of Esther and in the Ramayana, which they'd also read recently. Given how much of ancient history is -- or at least seems -- relentlessly patriarchal, it was a really cool counterexample for them to read and talk about.

p.s. Never read that about Mordechai -- interesting.

[magid.livejournal.com]

I hadn't heard of TCI before; thanks for the link. It's very cool that you included Esther in your class (somehow my 9th grade ancient and medieval class never managed anything like women's roles. Nor did we make it to the medieval part...).

I haven't read the Ramayana; I feel a bit uncouth unlettered.

(And there are all sorts of bizarre midrashot around Esther; not sure why, particularly.)

[laurens10.livejournal.com]

And yet, we (or at least I) need those people to be people, not perfect paragons of virtue, unblemished and without fault.

How do the rabbis explain the intermarriage bit?

[magid.livejournal.com]

The one midrash that springs to mind first is one claiming that, basically, she lay there like the ground, and did nothing active in having sex, so she wasn't considered to be doing anything. Which makes one wonder how she would have kept his attention, really, but that is not something I've seen addressed.

And I suspect it's slightly different rules when living in an absolute monarchy; intermarriage isn't one of the things to die rather than do on pain of death.

[(Anonymous)]

Mordechai Esther's husband? That's a new one for me.

The text actually says he is her cousin, she is the daughter of his uncle.

[magid.livejournal.com]

Well, there's midrash that says a lot of stuff, not necessarily true to the pshat. Early fanfic with moral leanings didn't always stay strictly to canon :-)

[(Anonymous)]

Oops, sorry, those were two separate thoughts.

The first was in response to your footnote, that that particular midrash was new to me.

The second was in response to the description earlier in your post of Mordechai as Esther's uncle; this seems to be what we are all told as pshat, yet the text actually says differently.

[lucretia-borgia.livejournal.com]

And yet, we (or at least I) need those people to be people, not perfect paragons of virtue, unblemished and without fault. That's not a person, that's an idol. I can't become perfect, but I can try to make myself a better person (for whatever value of better) if I have role models who are human, showing me that accomplishments are attainable if I try.

I've had this issue with the "perfect avot" thing, and with hagiographies of the various great rabbis, for a long time. Over at The Rebbetzin's Husband a recent post suggested that our relating Yosef's ability to avoid committing adultery with his boss' wife with his perfection as a tzaddik, has granted some of our leaders a heter of sorts, to behave as ... well, alas, as they have been behaving.

[magid.livejournal.com]

I've also had issues with the 'perfect avot' view, ditto the great rabbis (for whoever's value of great).

I hadn't seen anything about our small level giving us a heter to do some of the absurdly obviously problematic things certain rabbis have made the news for having done; that's horrible. (I keep wondering in what universe they see X as ok, whether X is trafficking in body parts or demanding affairs or whatever. I mean, those are not small things, nor close to edges of permissibility. And yet, I bet I'd get at least as much condemnation for just wearing the wrong clothes, which harms no one (and those guys can keep averting their eyes, if they have a problem and decide to live in the world at large).

Um, much ranting possible here.

[lucretia-borgia.livejournal.com]

Oh, I'm sorry, I miscommunicated. I don't mean a literal heter, I mean a psychological heter, of the sort that props the internal dialog you have to excuse yourself for doing something you know damn right well is wrong but you want to do anyhow. If only a man as great as Yosef HaTzaddik can keep from doing X then how can I, a mere benoni, be expected to avoid this temptation?

[magid.livejournal.com]

No, I got what you meant. But really, even just seeing it as permission to not bother to try bothers me.

A story that feels relevant:
I was out at Burning Man 2.5 years ago, meandering around early one morning picking up bits and pieces that people had dropped out on the playa (it's a leave no trace event). A guy saw me doing that, and came over to talk because of it: he'd been doing the same thing. Except that in his case, he'd found someone's stash of illegal substances. And this was the first time this guy hadn't been using such things in years and years. He had found the strength to give it away rather than use it, and now he needed to talk. I was privileged to hear, and all I kept thinking, loudly, was that his was the perfect tshuvah of the Rambam, being given the chance to do something again, and finding that one has, in fact, truly changed, however hard. (I managed not to mention the Rambam when I talked, though ;-).

If someone who is not a big rabbi, etc, can change something this difficult about himself, I don't see how someone who *does* have stature of some sort to hold himself to lower standards. (I think I'm not being fully coherent here. Sorry about that; this stuff gets me frothing at the mouth.)

[globedoc.livejournal.com]

I'm going on a limb here because I'm just guessing, but it's not Tzom Esther because she agonized over her decision. Her brother's speech, one of the most powerful in the bible, shook her out of her accepting acquiescence and, after much self-deliberation, she went to the king. It was torturous without a doubt, hence Taanit. Again, just a guess.

I liked your last paragraph, and I submit that Esther was, indeed, a very flawed person -- until her brother spoke to her she was going to say nothing out of fear for her life and position; Mordechai, too, wasn't the square-jawed action hero, his first inclination is to tear his clothes and grieve rather than ACT.

I really liked this post!

[magid.livejournal.com]

*wave* long time no see!

I've never gotten a feel for when tzom or taanit were preferred, other than guessing based on current usage. Your idea is helpful. (Brother?)

In Mordechai's defense, though it may have been necessary for plot purposes, he had acted before then as well, reporting the plot to the necessary authorities. So he's not completely a sit around and wail guy.

And thanks :-)