Mordechai's Legacy – ורצוי לרב אחיו/2
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This topic has not yet undergone editorial review
Mordechai's Legacy – ורצוי לרב אחיו
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
Commentators debate both the meaning of the phrase "וְרָצוּי לְרֹב אֶחָיו" and what it reveals regarding Mordechai's enduring legacy. Most adopt the Talmud Bavli's approach which renders the word "רֹב" as "most", and thereby suggest that the verse is subtly criticizing Mordechai. The Rid and others, in contrast, translate it as "multitudes" resulting in a much more favorable portrait of Mordechai, a leader who was liked by the masses of his brethren. A middle approach taken by Rashbam and Ibn Ezra maintains the "most" definition, but suggests that this need not cast Mordechai in a negative light.Critical of Mordechai
The Megillah ends with subtle criticism of Mordechai.
Meaning of "לְרֹב" – All of these commentators maintain that "לְרֹב" means "most" and comes to exclude a group of Jews who were displeased with Mordechai. However, while this usage of the word is common in Mishnaic2 and modern Hebrew, in Biblical Hebrew, "רֹב" consistently takes the meaning of "many" or "much".3 Nonetheless, there would seem to be no reason to say that "many brothers" were pleased with Mordechai unless one is implying that not all agreed.
Why were some Jews upset?
- Political rather than religious involvement – Rashi, following the Bavli, suggests that "אֶחָיו" refers specifically to members of the Sanhedrin who were upset with Mordechai for being involved in court life at the expense of immersing himself in Torah.4
- Endangered the nation – R. Yosef Kara, instead, claims that part of the nation blamed Mordechai for endangering the entire people when he refused to bow to Haman.5 See Mordechai's Refusal to Bow for an analysis of Mordechai's motives and how commentators evaluate his actions.
- Power hungry – R. Reggio implies that Mordechai was not respected by the people as they thought that he had chased after honor and glory.6
- Assimilated – M. Eisenberg suggests that the assimilated Jews left in Persia were pleased with Mordechai, while those in Israel, who had maintained their faith, were not.7 Mordechai had climbed to the heights of secular power, serving as a model to fellow Jewish-Persians who were similarly happy to remain in exile and acculterate. The Jews of Israel saw this as the ultimate tragedy, for Mordechai's status all but ensured the further assimilation of the rest of Persian Jewry, leaving little hope that many would opt to make aliyah and help rebuild the struggling community in Jerusalem.
Mordechai's religiosity and character
- Torah giant – The Bavli and Rashi claim that Mordechai was not merely an observant Jew, but also a member of the Sanhedrin. As such, they hold him to a higher standard for not being fully immersed in Torah.
- Layperson – R. Reggio, in contrast, paints Mordechai as a simple Jew, who was not particularly versed in Torah law, and who cared more for his personal honor than observance of mitzvot. It is this which lead to the lack of admiration. For elaboration on this portrait of Mordechai, see Mordechai's Religious Identity.
- Assimilated – M. Eisenberg goes a step further, suggesting that Mordechai had actually assimilated in his pursuit of power and rejected Jewish values.8
Relationship to descriptions of praise – The praises of Mordechai in the rest of the verse would seem to counter this negative reading and require explanation:
- The Bavli and Rashi might suggest that it was only the Sanhedrin who faulted Mordechai. The nation as a whole ("לַיְּהוּדִים" / "לְעַמּוֹ"), in contrast, viewed him positively as he had sought their peace and welfare.
- R. Reggio maintains consistency in the verse by mitigating the positive value of the other phrases. He suggests that Mordechai is considered great in the eyes of his brethren only because of his position as second to the king, but not because of any intrinsic Torah leadership or exemplary character.
- M. Eisenberg assumes that the entire verse is written from the perspective of only those Jews in Shushan. They (as opposed to the Jews of Israel) appreciated not only how his position enabled him to speak on their behalf to the king ("דֹּרֵשׁ טוֹב לְעַמּוֹ"), but also how he ensured that others "of his seed" be able to follow in his path and attain similar positions of power.
Mention of Achashverosh's taxation and chronicles
- M. Eisenberg suggests that this seemingly irrelevant point is included only to show how far Mordechai had risen in the Persian courts; it was his position as second in command that invited revenue and ensured that he was recorded in the Persian Chronicles.9 This, however, is not particularly praiseworthy. The Megillah is hinting that in following a path to power in exile, Mordechai demonstrated his preference to be written in the Persian Chronicles, rather than the Judean ones.
- One might also suggest that the increased taxation caused resentment, leading to the implied criticism of Mordechai. This might be parallel to Yosef, whose policies of taxation may have similarly backfired, eventually causing resentment despite Yosef's earlier role as a savior.10
Complimentary to Mordechai
The ending of the Megillah is intended to cast Mordechai in a positive light.
Meaning of "לְרֹב"
- Many/multitudes – The Rid and the Hoil Moshe define the word as "ריבוי" or "הרבה", explaining that Mordechai was liked by his many brothers. This understanding is supported by the many places in Tanakh where the word "רב" clearly takes this meaning.11
- Exalted – The Hoil Moshe opines that the word might also refer to the exalted members of the nation.12 The verse would then be saying that not only was Mordechai viewed positively by the masses, but also by the important people.13
- Most – Rashbam and Ibn Ezra assume that the word literally means most, but suggest that this need not cast Mordechai in a negative light.
- Rashbam claims that despite the literal definition, the connotation of the phrase is "all his brothers". He explains the verse via "דרכי המקראות", pointing out that it is the way of the text not to be exact in its language.14
- Alternatively, Ibn Ezra points out that realistically it is impossible for any person, and particularly a leader, to please everyone, as man's nature is to be jealous of others and of those in power.
Mordechai's character – These sources read Mordechai positively, and as such, would find it surprising had the Megillah ended with criticism of him. For elaboration, see Mordechai's Religious Identity.
Relationship to descriptions of praise – This reading works well with the other descriptions in the verse which similarly aim to laud Mordechai.
Mention of Achashverosh's taxation – According to this position, this fact, too, serves to praise Mordechai:
- R. Galiko suggest that the fact appears only so as to further increase people's respect for Mordechai. Since he was second in command, the greater the Persian kingdom, the greater Mordechai as well. Ibn Ezra and R. Saba further suggests that the verse might be implying that Achashverosh taxed even those countries not under his control, since they too had begun to fear him in the merit of Mordechai.
- R. Saba proposes that the text might be implying that though others were taxed, Israel was exempt. He even suggests that the tax was a punishment to all those who dared join in Haman's rebellion against the Jews.15 As such, the verse is included as a further demonstration of how the nation benefited from Mordechai's leadership.
"דִּבְרֵי הַיָּמִים לְמַלְכֵי מָדַי וּפָרָס" – R. Saba asserts that the verses are trying to emphasize not only how Mordechai was so accomplished among the Gentiles as to be recorded in their annals, but that he did so while simultaneously being "גָדוֹל לַיְּהוּדִים". He managed to not only remain pious in his position, but also to answer questions from his fellow Jews and even actively seek out their welfare.16