This topic is currently marked as "dormant"—the last message is more than 90 days old. You can revive it by posting a reply.
2dchaikin
This thread is a on the biblical Book of Ester. It's a literary take. This is not a religious or anti-religious thread. Please avoid posting anything of the sort, as it will shut this thread down completely. There are (plenty of) other places in LibraryThing for religious (and anti-religious) discussion.
And, after that dour introduction...
This group read originated over two years ago in the Le Salon group (RIP). It has a wandering history of activity and now a will wander in its LT location. With Les Salon all but dead, having been almost inactive for about a year or more, we have decided to move the still living group read over to Club Read. Most of the active members already are here anyway (there were only about four of us, actually, plus many occasional posters.)
Despite the long history, anyone is welcome to join or comment.
No thread title will have anything overtly biblical in the title, just to reduce drive-by religious-battle trollers. In the past the key word for thread titles was "Alter" for Biblical translator Robert Alter. But we are getting farther and farther from his translations. (He has not published a translation of the Book of Ester that I know of). So, I'm ditching "Alter" in favor of the simple prefix "BR", for Bible Read. (I will miss the altar puns...)
(side note: this thread title was supposed to be "BR - Minority Life", but I'm just noticing my typo. Hope Ester and Mordecai will forgive me.)
Here are links to all our previous threads. Each is in Le Salon.
Prep: http://www.librarything.com/topic/127545
Genesis: http://www.librarything.com/topic/129966
Exodus: http://www.librarything.com/topic/131811
Leviticus: http://www.librarything.com/topic/133405
Numbers: http://www.librarything.com/topic/135184
Deuteronomy: www.librarything.com/topic/136380
Joshua: http://www.librarything.com/topic/137927
Judges (same thread as Joshua, starts on post #69): http://www.librarything.com/topic/137927#3452932
Ruth (same thread as Joshua, starts on post #142): http://www.librarything.com/topic/137927#3478722
1 & 2 Samuel: http://www.librarything.com/topic/139684
1 & 2 Kings: http://www.librarything.com/topic/142552
1 & 2 Chronicles: http://www.librarything.com/topic/146697
Ezra and Nehemiah: http://www.librarything.com/topic/154880
Tobit & Judith: http://www.librarything.com/topic/159435
And, after that dour introduction...
This group read originated over two years ago in the Le Salon group (RIP). It has a wandering history of activity and now a will wander in its LT location. With Les Salon all but dead, having been almost inactive for about a year or more, we have decided to move the still living group read over to Club Read. Most of the active members already are here anyway (there were only about four of us, actually, plus many occasional posters.)
Despite the long history, anyone is welcome to join or comment.
No thread title will have anything overtly biblical in the title, just to reduce drive-by religious-battle trollers. In the past the key word for thread titles was "Alter" for Biblical translator Robert Alter. But we are getting farther and farther from his translations. (He has not published a translation of the Book of Ester that I know of). So, I'm ditching "Alter" in favor of the simple prefix "BR", for Bible Read. (I will miss the altar puns...)
(side note: this thread title was supposed to be "BR - Minority Life", but I'm just noticing my typo. Hope Ester and Mordecai will forgive me.)
Here are links to all our previous threads. Each is in Le Salon.
Prep: http://www.librarything.com/topic/127545
Genesis: http://www.librarything.com/topic/129966
Exodus: http://www.librarything.com/topic/131811
Leviticus: http://www.librarything.com/topic/133405
Numbers: http://www.librarything.com/topic/135184
Deuteronomy: www.librarything.com/topic/136380
Joshua: http://www.librarything.com/topic/137927
Judges (same thread as Joshua, starts on post #69): http://www.librarything.com/topic/137927#3452932
Ruth (same thread as Joshua, starts on post #142): http://www.librarything.com/topic/137927#3478722
1 & 2 Samuel: http://www.librarything.com/topic/139684
1 & 2 Kings: http://www.librarything.com/topic/142552
1 & 2 Chronicles: http://www.librarything.com/topic/146697
Ezra and Nehemiah: http://www.librarything.com/topic/154880
Tobit & Judith: http://www.librarything.com/topic/159435
4dchaikin
We don't really have a plan...
But Ester, which is only ten chapters, will be a February event. Next will be the Book of Job, which, optimistically, will also be in February. Then the Psalms could begin in March (and, I suspect, could easily continue for a few hundred years.)
But Ester, which is only ten chapters, will be a February event. Next will be the Book of Job, which, optimistically, will also be in February. Then the Psalms could begin in March (and, I suspect, could easily continue for a few hundred years.)
5dchaikin
Some introductory notes:
There are two Esters - A Hebrew version, in the Jewish Bible, and an extended version in Greek, which is in the Catholic Old Testament. (the extra parts are called the Greek Additions)
The Hebrew version of Ester is entirely secular, and never once mentions God in any clear way. The only other biblical book not to mention God is Song of Songs. (There may be one, very subtle reference to God in Ester - when Mordecai claims alternative help could come from "some other quarter"). In the Greek additions there are prayers and religious justifications of any questionable events by the heroes. Further the Hebrew version has a lot of humor, albeit generally as a sort of biting irony and not a laugh-out-loud type. But, it's integral to the story. The Greek version basically cleans out any of this humor, keeping the story didactic.
Note that I have read the Hebrew version. I don't plan to read the Greek additions anytime soon, as I'm anxious to get to Job.
There are two Esters - A Hebrew version, in the Jewish Bible, and an extended version in Greek, which is in the Catholic Old Testament. (the extra parts are called the Greek Additions)
The Hebrew version of Ester is entirely secular, and never once mentions God in any clear way. The only other biblical book not to mention God is Song of Songs. (There may be one, very subtle reference to God in Ester - when Mordecai claims alternative help could come from "some other quarter"). In the Greek additions there are prayers and religious justifications of any questionable events by the heroes. Further the Hebrew version has a lot of humor, albeit generally as a sort of biting irony and not a laugh-out-loud type. But, it's integral to the story. The Greek version basically cleans out any of this humor, keeping the story didactic.
Note that I have read the Hebrew version. I don't plan to read the Greek additions anytime soon, as I'm anxious to get to Job.
6rebeccanyc
Dan, would you like me to add a link to this on the group page under Group Reads and Theme Reads?
7dchaikin
The book itself is an historical justification of the Jewish holiday of Purim. It gives the story of Ester (Chapters 1-8), an explanation of the source of the non-Hebrew word Purim and directions on how to celebrate Purim (chapter 9). The story is also about the life of Jews in the Diaspora.
The setting is Susa, the Persian winter capital and mainly in the courts of King Ahasuerus (which translates to "Chief of Rulers). Ahasuerus doesn't exist and seems to be a generic fictional king, a caricature of a king, but is usually associated with Xerxes I (ruled 486 to 465 bce). The story was likely composed in the 4th century bce, maybe shortly before Alexander took down the Persian Empire in 330 bce.
The four main characters are static - the capricious King Ahaseurus, the heroes Ester and Mordecai and the villian Haman. There are several named minor characters that are given no background and function only to move the plot. They include Queen Vashti, the kings adviser Memucan, the eunuchs Hegai, Hatach & Harbona and Haman's wife Zeresh.
There are a few religious problems in the story that go unmentioned. They include the lack of Jewish tradition, Ester's marriage to a gentile, no mention of God, and, arguably, Mordecai's brash pride that sparks all the trouble for the Jews to begin with. Also, there is a biblically consistent but very disturbing end where the Jews kill 75,000 people and this gives them the reason to celebrate and to keep the tradition of Purim. My edition's introduction calls this kind of stuff ironic, but I'm not sure that's the right word. I think the real irony is the clever lines and actions of the characters in relation to the story itself.
The setting is Susa, the Persian winter capital and mainly in the courts of King Ahasuerus (which translates to "Chief of Rulers). Ahasuerus doesn't exist and seems to be a generic fictional king, a caricature of a king, but is usually associated with Xerxes I (ruled 486 to 465 bce). The story was likely composed in the 4th century bce, maybe shortly before Alexander took down the Persian Empire in 330 bce.
The four main characters are static - the capricious King Ahaseurus, the heroes Ester and Mordecai and the villian Haman. There are several named minor characters that are given no background and function only to move the plot. They include Queen Vashti, the kings adviser Memucan, the eunuchs Hegai, Hatach & Harbona and Haman's wife Zeresh.
There are a few religious problems in the story that go unmentioned. They include the lack of Jewish tradition, Ester's marriage to a gentile, no mention of God, and, arguably, Mordecai's brash pride that sparks all the trouble for the Jews to begin with. Also, there is a biblically consistent but very disturbing end where the Jews kill 75,000 people and this gives them the reason to celebrate and to keep the tradition of Purim. My edition's introduction calls this kind of stuff ironic, but I'm not sure that's the right word. I think the real irony is the clever lines and actions of the characters in relation to the story itself.
9rebeccanyc
OK to say Bible Read there? Or stick with BR?
10dchaikin
Much of the above (post 7) came from the chapter on Ester in The Literary Guide to the Bible by Jack M. Sasson.
Other things he points out are:
- how much effort the story puts into trying to achieve authenticity
- how the story stresses the exotic behavior of the Persian court.
- such as what he calls "stylized elements like in Arabian Nights", but here underdeveloped. These include the elaborate and long preparation needed before a woman could come to bed with the king, and the here very subtle exhaustion of the king by having to take a different woman every night.
- Ahasuerus's capricious nature and his openness to suggestion is critical for the plot to work. He rarely does anything without advice.
- Sasson notes how the humor is directed at human vanity, gall and blindness, and how it's the humor that gives the story its integrity and morality.
- Also there is humor is the characters "sharp reversals of fate" - it's a bitter humor for Haman and Vashti, to be sure
And he notes that the whole story is a continuation of the battle between Saul and and Agag (See 1 Samuel, chapter 15...which is good stuff, by the way).
- Mordecai is a Benjaminite and descendant of Saul
- Haman is an "Agagite" - that is a Amalekite descendent of poor King Agag.
Other things he points out are:
- how much effort the story puts into trying to achieve authenticity
- how the story stresses the exotic behavior of the Persian court.
- such as what he calls "stylized elements like in Arabian Nights", but here underdeveloped. These include the elaborate and long preparation needed before a woman could come to bed with the king, and the here very subtle exhaustion of the king by having to take a different woman every night.
- Ahasuerus's capricious nature and his openness to suggestion is critical for the plot to work. He rarely does anything without advice.
- Sasson notes how the humor is directed at human vanity, gall and blindness, and how it's the humor that gives the story its integrity and morality.
- Also there is humor is the characters "sharp reversals of fate" - it's a bitter humor for Haman and Vashti, to be sure
And he notes that the whole story is a continuation of the battle between Saul and and Agag (See 1 Samuel, chapter 15...which is good stuff, by the way).
- Mordecai is a Benjaminite and descendant of Saul
- Haman is an "Agagite" - that is a Amalekite descendent of poor King Agag.
11dchaikin
#9 Rebecca - I've been thinking about that since I posted. I think it's fine to call it a Bible Read there. And I think BR would be unintelligible.
12fannyprice
Dan, this is all fascinating stuff. I'm glad you have decided to have this in CR. I don't know that I have the time to participate, but I will definitely be reading the postings.
I have a question, though, and it's going to sound both snarky and idiotic, since you can't hear me. I've never read any religious text solely or even primarily as a literary work; all of my reading of such things has been to examine them for what they can tell the reader about the history and belief systems of the group that considers them sacred. Does reading these texts as literary works mean that you are focusing primarily on things like style and characterization, the way one would study a novel?
I have a question, though, and it's going to sound both snarky and idiotic, since you can't hear me. I've never read any religious text solely or even primarily as a literary work; all of my reading of such things has been to examine them for what they can tell the reader about the history and belief systems of the group that considers them sacred. Does reading these texts as literary works mean that you are focusing primarily on things like style and characterization, the way one would study a novel?
13dchaikin
Kris - I can't imagine looking at this stuff without thinking about history or the history of religion. And the question of what is meant by something being sacred or holy is a fundamental one here. It's just the faith/anti-faith stuff, the religion is good/bad kind of stuff - or, more simply, the fighting words kind of stuff, that I'm hoping to avoid here.
14FlorenceArt
Wow, this thread is off to a great start! Thank you for reviving the Bible read Dan. I was in need of a little prod I admit. I'll try to keep up with you but I haven't started reading Ester yet. Or rather I started it too long ago and need to start anew.
ETA: can't wait to get to Job either!
ETA: can't wait to get to Job either!
15fannyprice
>13 dchaikin:, Ah, ok, I get it. I can definitely understand wanting to avoid that debate.
17dchaikin
Hi Susie.
Flo - I will try posting some chapter notes soon.
When I read this, only chapter six caught my attention, partly because I noticed the short chapter was too complex for my simple notes. But the rest seemed simple and uninteresting to me. But after reading Sasson's commentary, well, there is a lot more that went into the writing then I noticed. I may re-read as I post.
Flo - I will try posting some chapter notes soon.
When I read this, only chapter six caught my attention, partly because I noticed the short chapter was too complex for my simple notes. But the rest seemed simple and uninteresting to me. But after reading Sasson's commentary, well, there is a lot more that went into the writing then I noticed. I may re-read as I post.
18dchaikin
Chapter 1
This happened in the days of Ahasuerus, the same Ahasuerus who ruled over one hundred twenty-seven provinces from India to Ethiopia.
Setting - 3rd year of the reign of Ahasuerus in Susa, the Persian winter capitol, at some time during the high point of the First Persian Empire (or Achaemenid Empire).
A whole story happens here. We meet Ahasuerus and his luxury. His first words are drunken. He asks his seven attending eunuchs for the queen, Vashti, who refuses to come.
What to do? The king consults his seven advisers, one of whom, Memucan, suggests Vashti be banished or all wives may stand up to her husband.
So, a proclamation is made and sent out to all provinces, declaring that every man should be master in his own house.
Several things I'm noting
- The story is very casually told, from the opening line. There is no formality, which relaxes the reading experience (well, unless you are like me and focusing on all the notes). This is supposed to be fun.
- Ahasuerus is incompetent, and dependent on his advisers.
- Note the humor in his proclamation. A man "should" be master in his own house. This is a rule Ahasuerus has completely failed. He has condemned himself.
- as the notes in my version say over and over, the proclamation is the first of many parts that highlight the famous and extensive Persian courier system.
This happened in the days of Ahasuerus, the same Ahasuerus who ruled over one hundred twenty-seven provinces from India to Ethiopia.
Setting - 3rd year of the reign of Ahasuerus in Susa, the Persian winter capitol, at some time during the high point of the First Persian Empire (or Achaemenid Empire).
A whole story happens here. We meet Ahasuerus and his luxury. His first words are drunken. He asks his seven attending eunuchs for the queen, Vashti, who refuses to come.
What to do? The king consults his seven advisers, one of whom, Memucan, suggests Vashti be banished or all wives may stand up to her husband.
So, a proclamation is made and sent out to all provinces, declaring that every man should be master in his own house.
Several things I'm noting
- The story is very casually told, from the opening line. There is no formality, which relaxes the reading experience (well, unless you are like me and focusing on all the notes). This is supposed to be fun.
- Ahasuerus is incompetent, and dependent on his advisers.
- Note the humor in his proclamation. A man "should" be master in his own house. This is a rule Ahasuerus has completely failed. He has condemned himself.
- as the notes in my version say over and over, the proclamation is the first of many parts that highlight the famous and extensive Persian courier system.
19FlorenceArt
OK, I caught up with you Dan! Just finished Esther, but I'm afraid I don't have much to say about it. No one comes across as particularly likeable in this story. Asahuerus is a weak and irresponsible king. Esther just does what she is told to do. The only actors are Haman and Mordecai, and they are both happy to cause the death of thousands of people, even if Mordecai's motives are less contemptible since he is only trying to ensure the safety of his people, not to elevate himself as Haman was seeking to do.
And again I am reminded of Girard and his analysis of the endless cycle of violence. A pogrom, then a counter pogrom, and then what next? Even if the counter pogrom is probably fictional, or at the very least highly exaggerated.
And again I am reminded of Girard and his analysis of the endless cycle of violence. A pogrom, then a counter pogrom, and then what next? Even if the counter pogrom is probably fictional, or at the very least highly exaggerated.
20FlorenceArt
And I discovered that Alter has translated Job! This should make the next reading even more interesting. Can't wait to start on it, and I will begin by buying Alter's translation of The Wisdom Books: Job, Proverbs, and Ecclesiastes.
21dchaikin
Flo - Alter has done Job! Oh, I had forgotten and and was fretting about reading this as NRSV. Cool. I actually have the book and will start it tomorrow.
- Also, I think, like me, you took Ester seriously. On re-reading I'm thinking I should have read it more casually. No feminist work is this. But it is told like a tale, and perhaps should be read like one.
- "Girard and his analysis of the endless cycle of violence" - I'm not familiar with this (or I've forgotten). Can you tell more about it?
- Also, I think, like me, you took Ester seriously. On re-reading I'm thinking I should have read it more casually. No feminist work is this. But it is told like a tale, and perhaps should be read like one.
- "Girard and his analysis of the endless cycle of violence" - I'm not familiar with this (or I've forgotten). Can you tell more about it?
22dchaikin
Chapter 2
I'm intentionally going to try to say less and keep this simpler, to see if I can enter these notes quicker...will see...
Anyway, this is the chapter we meet Mordecai and Ester and that Ester enters the Kings harem, gets a 12 month prep ("six months with oil of myrrh and six months with perfumes and cosmetics") and finally she is ready for the king to have sex with her - although the book is less direct. Each women gets one night with the king and he's pretty much done with her and ready for the next virgin. Anyway, Ester is good enough in bed that the king "loved Ester more than all the other women; of all the virgins she won his favor and devotion, so that he set the royal crown on her head".
At the end Mordecai exposes a plot by two eunuch's to kill this wonderful king.
---
This is a great moment for the Jews. They have successfully whored themselves out to the king, and saved Persia from potentially sane rule.
---
NRSV 2:19 begins "when the virgins were being gathered together..."
Sasson translated it this way: "when various shonot young women were gathered" - he claims shonot means 'a second time', ie the used up women. The reference is that the king is exhausted by all these women, or so Sasson claims...
I'm intentionally going to try to say less and keep this simpler, to see if I can enter these notes quicker...will see...
Anyway, this is the chapter we meet Mordecai and Ester and that Ester enters the Kings harem, gets a 12 month prep ("six months with oil of myrrh and six months with perfumes and cosmetics") and finally she is ready for the king to have sex with her - although the book is less direct. Each women gets one night with the king and he's pretty much done with her and ready for the next virgin. Anyway, Ester is good enough in bed that the king "loved Ester more than all the other women; of all the virgins she won his favor and devotion, so that he set the royal crown on her head".
At the end Mordecai exposes a plot by two eunuch's to kill this wonderful king.
---
This is a great moment for the Jews. They have successfully whored themselves out to the king, and saved Persia from potentially sane rule.
---
NRSV 2:19 begins "when the virgins were being gathered together..."
Sasson translated it this way: "when various shonot young women were gathered" - he claims shonot means 'a second time', ie the used up women. The reference is that the king is exhausted by all these women, or so Sasson claims...
23FlorenceArt
I felt a bit sad for all those young women condemned to the harem after one night with the king. Although there were probably much worse fates, but it seems such a waste of a life.
About Girard, I don't know how well known he is outside France, and even here his theory is not very popular I think. I think his books La violence et le sacré and Des choses cachées depuis la fondation du monde (see touchstones for the English titles) are the only ones I keep thinking about years after reading them. I read the first one following a recommendation from my philosophy teacher when I was a student. I read the book a few years later, that must have been in the 80s. And a few years ago I read the second one, in which he develops the whole theory that he didn't want to expose in the first book, he said, because he knew how unpopular it would be.
Basically he says that religion, or specifically the sacrificial part of religion, is a mechanism that evolved to stop the cycle of violence among human communities. The cycle of violence is the well known spiral of retribution: you hurt me or one of mine, I hurt you or one of yours, and in turn you or your surviving relatives turn against me or my relatives... We see this every day.
Another factor is the scapegoat reflex: when there is tension in a group, there is a tendency to focus the violence on one individual or sub-group. This allows the rest of the group to repair the broken bonds among them through their common hatred of the scapegoat.
Girard's theory is that sacrifice is a ritualization of this phenomenon. Many cultures have founding myths based on a sacrifice, which he says reflects events that must have happened repeatedly in the past. Tensions appear in a human group and build up to a crisis. The crisis culminates in the murder or expulsion of an individual, allowing peace to return after this explosion of violence. This in turn confirms the fact that the victim was indeed responsible for the crisis, since things get better after they are gone.
There are two types of sacrificial victims: either the victim is evil and their murder put an end to the crisis by killing it at the root, or the victim offers their life willingly to allow the community to find peace again. Either way, the sacrifice is what keeps the community going by neutralizing the destructive violence, or at least providing a channel to express it without destroying the group altogether.
According to Girard, the whole of human history as we moved from primitive to modern society is that of this mechanism spiraling out of control and resulting in a radicalization of the sacrificial violence. We are no longer entirely fooled by the sacrificial narrative so it doesn't work so well any more, but we keep increasing the level of violence in the hope that it will work this time. Hence the crazy mass violence of the 20th century, which will probably continue in the 21st unfortunately.
In Des choses cachées depuis la fondation du monde, Girard examines the Bible in the light of his theory. The Old Testament is full of stories of sacrifice gone wrong, because the victims is never a clear cut villain. The most obvious example is Cain. Of course he is the murderer of his brother and as such a perfect scapegoat, but on the other hand there are some troubling elements: why did God favor Abel's offerings over Cain in the first place, driving him to this murder out of jealously? And if he is really utterly evil and guilty, why does God place a protection on him? You can see the doubt starting to take a hold here.
So how can we escape this endless cycle? The answer is also in the Bible, in the person of Jesus. The only way to break the cycle is to refuse to retaliate and, yes, to turn the other cheek:
Matthew 5:39
But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also;
Ironically, Jesus failed so completely that his story was immediately transformed into another sacrificial myth: he gave his life to save us.
Sorry for hogging your thread with this, but I hope it will make you want to read Girard, I think it's worth it. And of course you shouldn't entirely trust my summary to accurately reflect his ideas, I only gave you what I took away from it but there is more.
About Girard, I don't know how well known he is outside France, and even here his theory is not very popular I think. I think his books La violence et le sacré and Des choses cachées depuis la fondation du monde (see touchstones for the English titles) are the only ones I keep thinking about years after reading them. I read the first one following a recommendation from my philosophy teacher when I was a student. I read the book a few years later, that must have been in the 80s. And a few years ago I read the second one, in which he develops the whole theory that he didn't want to expose in the first book, he said, because he knew how unpopular it would be.
Basically he says that religion, or specifically the sacrificial part of religion, is a mechanism that evolved to stop the cycle of violence among human communities. The cycle of violence is the well known spiral of retribution: you hurt me or one of mine, I hurt you or one of yours, and in turn you or your surviving relatives turn against me or my relatives... We see this every day.
Another factor is the scapegoat reflex: when there is tension in a group, there is a tendency to focus the violence on one individual or sub-group. This allows the rest of the group to repair the broken bonds among them through their common hatred of the scapegoat.
Girard's theory is that sacrifice is a ritualization of this phenomenon. Many cultures have founding myths based on a sacrifice, which he says reflects events that must have happened repeatedly in the past. Tensions appear in a human group and build up to a crisis. The crisis culminates in the murder or expulsion of an individual, allowing peace to return after this explosion of violence. This in turn confirms the fact that the victim was indeed responsible for the crisis, since things get better after they are gone.
There are two types of sacrificial victims: either the victim is evil and their murder put an end to the crisis by killing it at the root, or the victim offers their life willingly to allow the community to find peace again. Either way, the sacrifice is what keeps the community going by neutralizing the destructive violence, or at least providing a channel to express it without destroying the group altogether.
According to Girard, the whole of human history as we moved from primitive to modern society is that of this mechanism spiraling out of control and resulting in a radicalization of the sacrificial violence. We are no longer entirely fooled by the sacrificial narrative so it doesn't work so well any more, but we keep increasing the level of violence in the hope that it will work this time. Hence the crazy mass violence of the 20th century, which will probably continue in the 21st unfortunately.
In Des choses cachées depuis la fondation du monde, Girard examines the Bible in the light of his theory. The Old Testament is full of stories of sacrifice gone wrong, because the victims is never a clear cut villain. The most obvious example is Cain. Of course he is the murderer of his brother and as such a perfect scapegoat, but on the other hand there are some troubling elements: why did God favor Abel's offerings over Cain in the first place, driving him to this murder out of jealously? And if he is really utterly evil and guilty, why does God place a protection on him? You can see the doubt starting to take a hold here.
So how can we escape this endless cycle? The answer is also in the Bible, in the person of Jesus. The only way to break the cycle is to refuse to retaliate and, yes, to turn the other cheek:
Matthew 5:39
But I say to you, Do not resist an evildoer. But if anyone strikes you on the right cheek, turn the other also;
Ironically, Jesus failed so completely that his story was immediately transformed into another sacrificial myth: he gave his life to save us.
Sorry for hogging your thread with this, but I hope it will make you want to read Girard, I think it's worth it. And of course you shouldn't entirely trust my summary to accurately reflect his ideas, I only gave you what I took away from it but there is more.
25FlorenceArt
Oh, right. Still, a bit off topic. Though did you notice how deftly I reintroduced the bible at the end? :-P
27dchaikin
Chapter 3
After all these things King Ahasuerus promoted Haman son of Hammedatha the Agagite, and advanced him and set his seat above all the officials who were with him
Mordecai refuses to bow down to the Haman. This so upsets Haman that "he plotted to destroy all the Jews". He suggests the idea to the suggestible king, without mentioning the Jews by name, and promising rich rewards in the looting. Given the king's ring and seal, Haman writes the proclamation commanding the destruction of the Jews on the13th of Adar.
And we learn the Pur means "the lot". It's from casting Pur that the 13th of Adar is chosen.
---
"After all these things..." - the irony is intended.
We know Haman is bad from the opening line, because he's a descendent of Agag, an Amalekite enemy of the Jews from Saul's time.
I can't help but be annoyed at how Mordecai caused this whole thing for such a silly reason, but never apologizes or gets any blame.
One thing that strikes me is how final the proclamation is made to feel. We get three entire biblical lines describing how the proclamation was composed, how it has the weight of the king behind it and how it was sent out to every region within the empire. Like a private e-mail accidentally replied to all, there is no way to take back this proclamation.
After all these things King Ahasuerus promoted Haman son of Hammedatha the Agagite, and advanced him and set his seat above all the officials who were with him
Mordecai refuses to bow down to the Haman. This so upsets Haman that "he plotted to destroy all the Jews". He suggests the idea to the suggestible king, without mentioning the Jews by name, and promising rich rewards in the looting. Given the king's ring and seal, Haman writes the proclamation commanding the destruction of the Jews on the13th of Adar.
And we learn the Pur means "the lot". It's from casting Pur that the 13th of Adar is chosen.
---
"After all these things..." - the irony is intended.
We know Haman is bad from the opening line, because he's a descendent of Agag, an Amalekite enemy of the Jews from Saul's time.
I can't help but be annoyed at how Mordecai caused this whole thing for such a silly reason, but never apologizes or gets any blame.
One thing that strikes me is how final the proclamation is made to feel. We get three entire biblical lines describing how the proclamation was composed, how it has the weight of the king behind it and how it was sent out to every region within the empire. Like a private e-mail accidentally replied to all, there is no way to take back this proclamation.
28FlorenceArt
Also, my notes (Harper Collins Study Bible) mention that the renowned Persian courier service plays an important role in the book.
ETA: and the fact that all the king's edicts are translated into all the languages of his large kingdom(that's my observation, not HC's).
ETA: and the fact that all the king's edicts are translated into all the languages of his large kingdom(that's my observation, not HC's).
29dchaikin
Chapter 4
Mordecai convinces Ester to help intervene for the sake of the Jews.
The chapter is sort of an epistemological conversation, except there aren't any letters. Mordecai, in sackcloth and ashes for mourning, cannot enter the king's gate where Ester is. So, they communicate by sending word through a eunuch, Hathach, who travels back and forth with the messages.
---
I find a few things interesting here and a bit disturbing. My Sunday school teachers never told me that Ester was reluctant to help, or that Mordecai has to castigate her (through Hathach) to get to help. The story is highlighting the perils of court where a false step means you die. Ester has to take a terribly risky step. Mordecai roughly tells her that she is going to die anyway.
His words are worth quoting:
"Do not think that in the King's palace you will escape any more than all the other Jews. For if you keep silence at such a time as this, relief and deliverance will rise for the Jews from another quarter, but and your father's family will perish. Who knows? Perhaps you have come to royal dignity for just such a time as this."
Then Ester prepares to act
---
So, then are there really any heroes in this story? Mordecai started this all because his (foolish) pride. He's a cause. But is even Ester flawed? The supposed hero only acts, not out of altruism, but because she has no choice. And even then, she still must be essentially yelled out before she acts.
Mordecai convinces Ester to help intervene for the sake of the Jews.
The chapter is sort of an epistemological conversation, except there aren't any letters. Mordecai, in sackcloth and ashes for mourning, cannot enter the king's gate where Ester is. So, they communicate by sending word through a eunuch, Hathach, who travels back and forth with the messages.
---
I find a few things interesting here and a bit disturbing. My Sunday school teachers never told me that Ester was reluctant to help, or that Mordecai has to castigate her (through Hathach) to get to help. The story is highlighting the perils of court where a false step means you die. Ester has to take a terribly risky step. Mordecai roughly tells her that she is going to die anyway.
His words are worth quoting:
"Do not think that in the King's palace you will escape any more than all the other Jews. For if you keep silence at such a time as this, relief and deliverance will rise for the Jews from another quarter, but and your father's family will perish. Who knows? Perhaps you have come to royal dignity for just such a time as this."
Then Ester prepares to act
---
So, then are there really any heroes in this story? Mordecai started this all because his (foolish) pride. He's a cause. But is even Ester flawed? The supposed hero only acts, not out of altruism, but because she has no choice. And even then, she still must be essentially yelled out before she acts.
30dchaikin
Chapter 5
Ester begins her plan.
She dresses to get the kings attention, who offers her "to the half of my kingdom." Her request is for the king and Haman to attend a banquet. Then at the banquet the scene repeats. The king again offers her any request "to the half of my kingdom" and Ester requests the King and Haman attend a second banquet the next day.
Haman takes this as a huge compliment. He goes home to brag to his wife, Zeresh, of all his accomplishments, and then makes plans to have the hated Mordecai impaled on a 75 ft tall "gallows".
---
The scene is set for Haman's fall.
Ester begins her plan.
She dresses to get the kings attention, who offers her "to the half of my kingdom." Her request is for the king and Haman to attend a banquet. Then at the banquet the scene repeats. The king again offers her any request "to the half of my kingdom" and Ester requests the King and Haman attend a second banquet the next day.
Haman takes this as a huge compliment. He goes home to brag to his wife, Zeresh, of all his accomplishments, and then makes plans to have the hated Mordecai impaled on a 75 ft tall "gallows".
---
The scene is set for Haman's fall.
31dchaikin
I have run out of steam on Ester. I don't plan to finish my chapter-by-chapter comments. I'm more interested in Job, but need to do some prep to get a Job thread going. For the record, Job Chapter 3 is maybe the best thing I have come across in the OT so far. Reading it, even in bad translations, it feels like poetry...I mean is has that multi-textured affect along with the experience of the poem, the stuff good poetry can do...or maybe I was just in the right mood when I read it...not sure that makes any sense anyway... Anyway, I feel like I'm experiencing something special while reading Job, and that hasn't happened with OT since Samuel and Job is much more powerful than Samuel.
