Bible Commentaries
Esther 9

Verses 14-19

The Triumph of the Jews (6:14-9:19)

The climax having been passed, the story moves to its resolution with dispatch, the elements of suspense being now discarded. The last verse of chapter 6 introduces the denouement and does so appropriately by stressing the "haste" with which events begin to move. After the long postponement Esther’s request is made, in which she identifies herself with her stricken people. Although the meaning of (Esther 7:4) is not clear, it appears that Esther here plays on the idea of having been "sold" and the consequent loss or gain to the king. It may be that, as the last half of the verse indicates (understanding "would be" for "is"), she is boldly arguing that the destruction of the Jewish people would be not only a moral tragedy but actually a financial loss to the empire, far outweighing the bribe offered by Haman.

The extent of Haman’s involvement in inevitable punishment is emphasized by the next incident (Esther 7:7-8) where, as a result of another of the seeming coincidences which mark the story but which are obviously the working out of the divine purpose, Haman is caught in a compromising situation, his intent completely misunderstood, and his execution is ordered. (The phrase "they covered Haman’s face" may be a reference to a practice of so indicating a condemned man.) The final touch of ironic justice is, of course, the reminder of the immense gallows upon which the persecutor meets his deserved fate.

The reversal of the fortunes of the Jews is similarly exemplified in the story by the figure of Mordecai, who now takes Haman’s place as vizier and adviser to the king. When Esther again presents a petition to the king it is perhaps to be understood that Haman’s plot had not been completely thwarted. Consequently a new edict is prepared which provides that the Jews may "defend their lives" and as well "annihilate any armed force . . . that might attack them," and that the Jews may "plunder their goods" (Esther 8:11). As the decree is carried out by the usual Persian couriers there is recounted the exact reversal of the preceding mourning (Esther 8:15-17; see 3:15-4:3) and then the execution of the decree when, in a day of bloodshed, 500 inhabitants of Susa are slain (Esther 9:6). It appears that the author assumes that this massacre is in reaction either to lingering hostility of the kind typified by Haman or even to an outright attack by continuing enemies of the Jews. The account itself, however, does not emphasize the action of the Jews as self-defense but as legitimate retribution upon those whose intent it was to destroy the people of God.

The section closes (Esther 9:16-19) with a repeated account of the slaughter, extending it another day in the capital and including in it a tally of the total slain (the number is considerably smaller in the Greek version). This section probably was intended to explain the fact that observance of the Feast of Purim varied from the fourteenth of Adar to the fifteenth of Adar. Verse 19 identified the variation as presumably a matter of residence in rural or urban areas.

The Feast of Purim (9:20-10:3)

The connection of the Book of Esther with the Feast of Purim is clear in the closing section of the book. Here the preceding story is emphasized as giving support to the observance of the feast for which there was no authority in the Law of the Old Testament, and its name is associated with the incidents recorded in the book. Since the feast lacked canonical authorization it is substantiated by the joint letter of Mordecai and Esther, both of whom are designated as of particular authority, the one by his connection with the "power and might" of Ahasuerus, the other as queen. Their letter or letters (it has been proposed that "this second letter" in Esther 9:29 refers to the present Book of Esther) direct the continual observance of the feast (Esther 9:28) and give directions concerning it (Esther 9:22).

The section summarizes the whole account of Esther’s intervention for her people and follows the motif of the entire book in reiterating the fact that Haman was an Agagite, thus making solid the relationship to the past and confirming the symbolic character of the man as "the enemy of all the Jews."