Esther's Relations with Achashverosh/2

Esther's Relations with Achashverosh

Exegetical Approaches

This topic is still being developed and updated

Overview

Commentators differ in both their evaluation and defense of Esther's marriage to and relations with the idolatrous Achashverosh.  A minority opinion, championed by R. Reggio, castigates Esther and Mordechai for their actions, claiming that Esther's marriage did not conform to Torah law.  However, the majority of sources follow the lead of the Bavli, and while agreeing that a public marriage to an idolater is a serious sin, they nonetheless justify Esther's as she was taken under duress and was a passive victim of Achashverosh's desires. Ralbag opts for a different tack, asserting instead that the benefits gained by being in position to save the nation outweighed the negatives incurred by the misdeed.  Finally, an additional approach argues that in Esther's era, a blanket prohibition of intermarriage was not yet in existence.

Improper Conduct

Esther's behavior did not conform with accepted halakhah, and it was prohibited and inappropriate for her to marry Achashverosh.

Sources:Opinion cited by Ibn EzraEsther Version A 2:10About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, R. Y"S ReggioIntroduction to EstherAbout R. Yitzchak Shemuel Reggio

What prohibition was being transgressed? R. Reggio assumes that the sin was one of relations with a heathen, but since he posits that Esther was not acting under duress, nor on behalf of her nation, he sees no justification for such an action.

Willingness to become queen – According to R. Reggio, Mordechai's main concern throughout the story was that Esther be chosen as queen, not for the good that her position could provide for her nation, but for her own prestige and that of her family.¹  Thus, not only did he not try to prevent her being taken, but he even thought of strategies which would aid her being chosen. R. Reggio criticizes Mordechai for being so power hungry that it blinded him to the problems of his relative marrying a polytheist who prayed to the sun.

Mordechai's and Esther's religious identity – R. Reggio portrays Esther and Mordechai as ordinary Jews who were not particularly knowledgeable in Jewish law.  If so, this position could suggest that it was a mixture of ignorance and desire for honor that distorted Mordechai's priorities.  See the discussions in Esther's Religious Identity and Mordechai's Religious Identity for R. Reggio's general reading of the characters of Esther and Mordechai.²

"לֹא הִגִּידָה אֶסְתֵּר אֶת עַמָּהּ וְאֶת מוֹלַדְתָּהּ" – According to R. Reggio, Mordechai thought that revealing Esther's lowly origins would hinder her chances of becoming queen. R. Reggio points out the additional problem that if becoming queen required hiding Esther's faith, it would make observance of other commandments more difficult as well.³

"וּבְכׇל יוֹם וָיוֹם מׇרְדֳּכַי מִתְהַלֵּךְ לִפְנֵי חֲצַר בֵּית הַנָּשִׁים" – R. Reggio asserts that Mordechai would check daily on Esther to see whether his hopes for her attaining the position were making headway.

Other Biblical cases – Other Biblical cases of intermarriage might similalrly be explained as transgressions.  Thus, for example, Ibn Ezra blames Yehuda for marrying a Canaanite and asserts that he was even punished for the action.⁴

Under Duress

Esther was not culpable since the relations were coerced by Achashverosh, and she was neither a willing nor an active participant.

Sources:Bavli Megillah15a15bAbout the Bavli, Bavli Sanhedrin74a-bAbout the Bavli, Second Targum of Megillat Esther2:84:11About Second Targum of Megillat Esther, R. Saadia GaonEsther 2:8Esther 2:16Esther 2:20About R. Saadia Gaon, RashiEsther 2:7Esther 2:10Esther 2:11Esther 4:16About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki,⁵ Ibn EzraEsther Version A 2:7Esther Version A 2:10Esther Version A 2:15Esther Version B 2:8Esther Version B 2:10Esther Version B 2:15Esther Version B 2:16About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, R. Avraham SabaEshkol HaKopher 2:8About R. Avraham Saba, Akeidat YitzchakEsther 2:10Esther 2:15About R. Yitzchak Arama, R. Meir AramaEsther Part 1About R. Meir Arama

What prohibition was being transgressed?

• Relations with an Idolater (ביאת עכו"ם) – Most of these sources assume that Esther was unmarried, and was thus transgressing the prohibition of having relations with an idolater.  They all view the transgression as severe, but for different reasons:
• A simple reading of Bavli Sanhedrin⁶ and R. Yitzchak Arama suggest that under normal circumstances this action would not obligate one to forfeit one's life, but due to the public nature of the act, in Esther's case, it did.⁷ 
• R. Saadia and R. Meir Arama, in contrast, maintain that even had the marriage not been public, such relations nonetheless fall under the category of illicit relations prohibitions for which one must be killed rather than transgress (גילוי עריות)
• Adultery (ביאת אשת איש) – According to Bavli MegillahMegillah 13aMegillah 13bMegillah 15aAbout the Bavli,⁸ Esther was married to Mordechai.⁹ If so, sleeping with another man would constitute adultery, and falls into the category of illicit relations for which one is obligated to forfeit one's life rather than transgress.¹⁰

Why is "duress" a sufficient excuse?

• Abayye asserts that the obligation to give one's life rather than transgress only applies if one does an action.¹¹  Since Esther was totally passive ("קרקע עולם") she was not required to forfeit her life, despite the severity of the sin or the public nature of the marriage.
• Rava maintains, instead, that one need not give one's life when the prohibition is being violated solely for the pleasure of the Gentile.¹²

Was Esther forced? – "וַתִּלָּקַח" – Ibn Ezra and R. Meir Arama assert that the word "וַתִּלָּקַח", in both 2:8 and 2:16, implies Esther's being taken by force and against her will.

"לֹא הִגִּידָה אֶסְתֵּר אֶת עַמָּהּ וְאֶת מוֹלַדְתָּהּ" – According to Rashi, the Akeidat Yitzchak, and R. Meir Arama, in not revealing her identity, Esther was trying to avoid being forced into a situation of prohibited relations.¹³

• Rashi and R. Meir Arama claim that Esther hoped to avoid becoming queen altogether.  She thought that if Achashverosh knew of her royal lineage,¹⁴ he would find her an appealing candidate,¹⁵ and thus she tried to conceal her family status.
• The Akeidat Yitzchak maintains that Esther concealed her nationality to make sure that Achashverosh would be forcing her to have relations only for reasons of his personal pleasure, rather than to intentionally cause her to violate her religion publicly.¹⁶  If he did the latter, she would have been forced to forfeit her life rather than transgress.¹⁷  For elaboration and other explanations, see Why Conceal Esther's Nationality.

"לֹא בִקְשָׁה דָּבָר" – The Akeidat Yitzchak and R. Meir Arama¹⁸ suggest that the emphasis on the fact that Esther did not request any jewelry or fragrances is further evidence that she was forced to go before Achashverosh, and did not do anything of her own will before being taken..

"וַאֲנִי לֹא נִקְרֵאתִי לָבוֹא אֶל הַמֶּלֶךְ זֶה שְׁלוֹשִׁים יוֹם" – The Second Targum understands the word "לָבוֹא" (to come) in its sexual sense, and reads the verse to mean that Esther had been praying for thirty days that Achashverosh would not ask for her to have relations again.

Mordechai's obligations – These commentators disagree regarding the level of Mordechai's obligation to prevent Esther from being taken.  If he handed her to the officers, would she still be considered "under duress"?

• Active participation allowed – The Second Targum maintains that Mordechai actively took Esther out of hiding once they were threatened with death.  This suggests that this was allowed and did not affect Esther's status as "forced."
• No need for active resistance – According to R. Saadia, it seems that Mordechai would not have been allowed to actively hand Esther over, but once she was taken by force, he was not obligated to actively resist either.
• Resist at all costs – R. Avraham Saba implies that Mordechai should have even killed Esther (if nothing else would have availed) so as to prevent her from being given to an idolater.  He compares the episode to events in his own time, during the forced conversion of Portuguese Jewry, when many of the Jews preferred to die and even kill their own children rather than have them baptized.¹⁹

Did Mordechai resist? In line with their positions above, the exegetes differ in their understanding of what Mordechai actually did or did not do to protect Esther:

• Resistance – R. Saadia raises the possibility that Mordechai did indeed actively resist the taking of Esther, but was simply overpowered and failed.  Nonetheless, he prefers to say that his resistance was passive in nature since otherwise Esther's Jewish identity would have become apparent.
• Hiding – According to Seder Olam Rabbah29About Seder Olam Rabbah, the Second Targum, and the commentary attributed to Rambam, Esther had gone into hiding, but was eventually found out.
• No opportunity to save – According to R. Avraham Saba,²⁰ in contrast, since Esther and Mordechai lived in or near the palace, she was immediately seized and Mordechai never had opportunity hide or protect her.²¹  Otherwise, he would have even risked his life to prevent her being taken.
• Looked to save even afterwards – See also R. Avigdor Kohen TzedekEsther 2:10About R. Avigdor Kohen Tzedek who proposes that the reason that Mordechai was "יֹשֵׁב בְּשַׁעַר הַמֶּלֶךְ", was that he was looking for a way to steal Esther from the palace.  His daily walks by the women's courtyard "לָדַעַת אֶת שְׁלוֹם אֶסְתֵּר" might be explained in the same manner.

"וּבְכֵן אָבוֹא אֶל הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲשֶׁר לֹא כַדָּת וְכַאֲשֶׁר אָבַדְתִּי אָבָדְתִּי" – R. Abba in Bavli Megillah²² understands the word "אָבוֹא" to have sexual connotations, suggesting that Esther intended to seduce Achashverosh into saving the Jews. Though until that point she had been under duress, from this point on she went willingly, and as such, violated the Torah's prohibitions on improper sexual relations.  Thus, she says that she is coming "אֲשֶׁר לֹא כַדָּת", against Torah laws (and not the Persian law against entering the King's throne room). Similarly, when Esther laments "וְכַאֲשֶׁר אָבַדְתִּי אָבָדְתִּי", she refers not to her potential death by the hand of Achashverosh but to the Torah requirement that she leave her husband, Mordechai, after having relations with another man.²³

Other Biblical cases – This approach would claim that in many of the instances of purported intermarriage in Tanakh, either the Gentile converted beforehand,²⁴ or the seemingly heathen identity of the spouse refers to something else.²⁵

Mordechai's and Esther's religious identity – According to this approach, Esther and Mordechai were fully observant Jews.

Ends Justify the Means

Esther was permitted to act as she did since her transgression was necessary to save the Jewish people.

Sources:Mekhilta DeRabbi YishmaelBeshalach Amalek 2About Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael, Others say in Ibn EzraEsther Version A 2:10About R. Avraham ibn Ezra,  Commentary attributed to RambamEsther 2:8Esther 5:1,²⁶ RalbagEsther 2:10Esther Toelet 15About R. Levi b. Gershom, R. Yosef ChayyunEsther 2:8Esther 2:10About R. Yosef Chayyun

What prohibition was being transgressed? These sources maintain that Esther was not married, and as such limit the transgression to that of having relations with an idolater.  It is not clear, however, how severely they view this act. 

• Ralbag believes that this is a Torah level prohibition,²⁷ but nonetheless describes it as only a  "גנות מועט" (small disgrace).  As such, it is possible that he might assert that it does not fall under the category of גילוי עריות
• This position might also maintain that relations with an idolater is only a rabbinic prohibition, which did not exist yet in the time of Esther.²⁸  As such, there was no legal issue with the action at all, just a discomfort with the concept.

Why do the ends justify the means? R. Yosef Chayyun compares Esther's actions to the law that one is allowed to violate Shabbat once in order to enable a person to observe many Shabbatot.²⁹  Thus, too, Esther was allowed to violate one prohibition to ensure that the nation as a whole would be able to keep their religion intact, and observe many Torah laws.  Ralbag similarly expresses that the benefits that the nation could gain from Esther's misdeed by far outweighed any of the negatives of the act.

Mordechai's precognition – These sources disagree regarding whether Mordechai acted knowing that the nation was in danger:

• Knew via prophecy – According to the opinion cited in Ibn Ezra, Mordechai knew via prophecy that Esther was to save the Jews.
• Did not know – According to Ralbag and R. Yosef Chayyun, in contrast, Mordechai was not aware of any specific threat, and was only hoping to maneuver Esther into a useful position since life under foreign rule is always uncertain.³⁰  According to them, even the chance of Esther's bringing salvation sufficed to permit the relations with Achashverosh.³¹

"וַתִּלָּקַח" – R. Chayyun asserts that not only was Esther not taken by force, but Mordechai actively placed her in in the public eye, hoping that she would be taken.  He might explain that the passive language of "וַתִּלָּקַח" simply means that she, like all candidates, was taken to the palace by the king's officers, but not necessarily against her will.

"לֹא הִגִּידָה אֶסְתֵּר אֶת עַמָּהּ וְאֶת מוֹלַדְתָּהּ" – These sources assert that Esther concealed her nationality to increase her chances of being chosen as queen.  If Achashverosh had known her lowly origins, he might have rejected her out of hand.  See Why Conceal Esther's Nationality for more.

"לֹא בִקְשָׁה דָּבָר" – Ralbag might suggest³² that this was part of Esther's strategy to be picked as queen.  Esther asked for nothing on her own, instead putting her trust in Hegai's recommendations, assuming that he would know best what the king desired.

"וּבְכֵן אָבוֹא אֶל הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲשֶׁר לֹא כַדָּת וְכַאֲשֶׁר אָבַדְתִּי אָבָדְתִּי" – The commentary attributed to Rambam reads this verse to mean that after Haman's decree, Esther willingly set out to seduce the king in an attempt to save her people.  Though she herself initiated the act, it was permitted due to the lofty goal of saving her people.

Mordechai's and Esther's religious identity – These commentators understand that Esther and Mordechai were observant Jews who put the interests of the nation above their own personal good.

No Prohibition

The prohibition was only of Rabbinic origin and did not yet exist in the time of Esther. 

Prohibition of intermarriage – According to this approach, the prohibition of intermarriage is of Rabbinic origin, rather than Biblical.³³

Mordechai's and Esther's religious identity – This position could posit that Mordechai and Esther kept all of the laws of the Torah.

Esther's willingness to become queen – According to this approach, there is no mention of resistance because there was no transgression involved.

Other Biblical cases – Esther is but one of numerous Biblical characters (such as Shimshon, David, and Shelomo) who had heathen spouses.³⁴  Until the era of Ezra and Nechemyah, this was not viewed as problematic, as it was not prohibited by Torah law.

¹ He even posits that when Mordechai told Esther to plead with Achashverosh for salvation, his real worry was not for the nation, who would be saved regardless ("רֶוַח וְהַצָּלָה יַעֲמוֹד לַיְּהוּדִים מִמָּקוֹם אַחֵר"), but for her potential loss of personal status ("וְאַתְּ וּבֵית אָבִיךְ תֹּאבֵדוּ").

² See also his position regarding Mordechai's Refusal to Bow.

³ He assumes that had Esther requested certain foods or treatment because her faith so required, those requests would have been granted.  By pretending not to be Jewish, however, there would then be no justification for asking for kosher foods, and she would be forced to transgress such prohibitions as well. Cf. Ibn Ezra below who maintains the opposite, assuming that observance would be easier if her faith was unknown.

⁴ See Did Yaakov's Sons Marry Canaanites? for elaboration.

⁵ Rashi also points out, like the position below, that Esther was put into the position so that she could save the nation.  However, he does not use this as a reason to justify her actions, but rather to explain why Hashem had a righteous woman meet such a fate.

⁶ See Ramban who points out that the Bavli Sanhedrin does not question Esther's actions in its discussion of the cardinal sin of illicit relations, but only in connection to acts of a public nature, suggesting that the Bavli does not think that relations with a heathen is included in the sin of גילוי עריות.

⁷ In the case of Esther, even though no one would have been witness to the actual sexual act, the fact that it was public knowledge that Esther and Achashverosh were living together as man and wife, is considered sufficient to view the act as a "public" one.

⁸ See also Rashi in its wake.

⁹ On the verse, "לְקָחָהּ מׇרְדֳּכַי לוֹ לְבַת", R. Meir remarks, "אל תקרי לבת אלא לבית" (do not read 'as a daughter' but as a 'house').  As support, he notes the parallel between Mordechai "taking Esther as a daughter" and the description in Shemuel II 12:3 of the poor man of Natan's parable viewing his lamb as a "daughter".  Just as in the parable, the lamb-daughter (analogous to Batsheva) is really wife of the poor man (Uriah), so too Esther was not a daughter but a wife.
R. Nachmiash points out that the text's description of Achashverosh's officers gathering "virgin" women specifically would seem to argue against this reading. These sources would likely suggest that the officers did not limit themselves to virgins, but gathered other women as well.  See Rashi on 2:17, that the phrase "וַיֶּאֱהַב הַמֶּלֶךְ אֶת אֶסְתֵּר מִכׇּל הַנָּשִׁים וַתִּשָּׂא חֵן וָחֶסֶד לְפָנָיו מִכׇּל הַבְּתוּלוֹת" suggests that Esther was favored above both the virgins and the wives who were gathered.

¹⁰ See Ramban who posits that under normal circumstances, this too might not obligate one to forfeit one's life.  In cases of adultery, if it is a heathen who is having relationsr, the action is not considered גילוי עריות and there is no obligation to forfeit one's life. It was only the public nature of Esther's marriage that led to the requirement of martyrdom.

¹¹ See R. Yitzchak b. Mordechai Sanhedrin 74bAbout Ba'alei HaTosafotwho explains that one can extrapolate from the laws of murder to illicit relations.  Just as one is not expected to forfeit his life unless he is told to actively kill another (thus, if he is thrown on a baby and suffocates it there would be no such requirement), so too a passive woman who is forced into illicit relations may transgress rather than be killed. 

¹² The ZoharRa'aya Meheimna Ki Tetze 276aTikkunei Zohar 57bAbout the Zohar perhaps goes the furthest in defending Esther's spiritual integrity, suggesting that Mordechai used his mystical knowledge to replace Esther with a female spirit when approached by Achashverosh, so that Esther never actually had carnal relations with him.

¹³ Ibn Ezra, instead, claims that Esther hoped that it would be easier to observe commandments in general if no one knew her religion.

¹⁴ According to these sources, Esther was a descendant of King Shaul.

¹⁵ Cf. Ibn Ezra who questions whether Achashverosh would really be impressed by such lineage, claiming that "all Jews were contemptible in the eyes of the throne."

¹⁶ See also R. Saadia who does not present this as the reason for the silence, but does point out that as a consequence it was clear that Achashverosh was acting only for his own pleasure.

¹⁷ See above point that when someone asks another to transgress a prohibition in public, but solely for their personal pleasure, then one is not obligated to forfeit one's life.  However, if the person's request is for the intention of making the Jew violate his religion, then one is required to die rather than act.

¹⁸ See also the commentary found in MS Munich 5MS Munich 5 Esther 2:15About Ba'alei HaTosafot.

¹⁹ R. Saba speaks from personal experience and anguish; his own two sons were forcibly taken from him and baptized during the decree.  See B. Walfish, Esther in Medieval Garb, (New York, 1993): 122-123, who elaborates on the biographical motivations for R. Saba's reading of the story.

²⁰ See Ibn Ezra as well.

²¹ Here, too, R. Saba might be speaking somewhat autobiographically, wishing that he could have saved his own children from being taken. 

²² See also the Second Targum and Rashi who follow his understanding.

²³ R. Abba agrees with the opinion that Esther was married to Mordechai, and says that Esther was sacrificing her relationship with Mordechai, since a married woman who willingly sleeps with another man is prohibited to her husband. See also the Second Targum which says this explicitly.

²⁴ See, for example, Radak regarding the marriage of Shelomo to the daughter of Paroh.

²⁵ See the discussion in Did Yaakov's Sons Marry Canaanites? regarding Yehuda's marriage to Bat-Shua, the daughter of a "Canaanite" and how this term is understood to refer to a merchant.

²⁶ This commentary combines this approach with that above.  It justifies Esther's initial marriage and relations due to her being under duress, but suggests that later, in order to save her nation, she willingly went to seduce Achashverosh.  This latter act was allowed because of its benefit to the nation.  The commentary probably does not use the explanation for the original marriage, however, since at that point the nation was not yet endangered.

²⁷ In his comments to Devarim 7:1-4 he claims that the prohibition there includes marriage to idolaters. 

²⁸ See approach below.

²⁹ See Yoma 85b, and the discussion there about violating Shabbat in order to save a life.

³⁰ Although Ralbag maintains that Mordechia "saw" that Esther was to be chosen as queen, R. Chayyun presents Mordechai as not knowing even that for certain and simply hoping for the best.

³¹ See above note that the commentary attributed to Rambam only uses the explanation that the ends justified the means for Esther's later actions, when the nation is clearly in danger, and not for the initial marriage, when there was no reason to think that her marriage was necessary for the people's salvation.

³² See similarly, Y. Hazony, The Dawn, (Jerusalem, 1995): 36-38.

³³ See Yereim 27, Semag Lav 112, Tur Even HaEzer 16.  [Also cf. Meiri Yevamot 76a who maintains that the only Biblical prohibition is an implicit one learned from the verses in Devarim 21 regarding a captive woman.]

³⁴ Cf. the approaches above which would claim that, in all of these cases, the heathen spouse converted.  However, see Rambam Issurei Biah 13:16 who appears to retroactively invalidate these conversions, Tosafot Yeshanim Yevamot 76b, and Tosafot Evreux Sotah 9b "תניא".