« Serving Hashem Without Expectation of Reward | Main | On the Value of Tears During Tefila »

A Connection Between Yibum and Purim?

This post examines a pasuk from last week's parsha, Ki Taytzei, and welcomes input from readers since I haven't found any commentaries discussing the question raised.

The pasuk concerns the procedure of chalitza, which is implemented when the brother of a deceased man who had no children chooses not to marry the man's widow through yibum (levirite marriage). The pasuk (Devarim 25:9) states:

V'nigsha yevamto elav l'aynei hazekeinim v'chaltza na'alo may'al raglo v'yarka b'fanav; v'anta v'amra ka'cha ya'aseh l'ish asher lo ivneh et beit achiv.

And she proceeds towards her yavam [i.e., her brother-in-law] before the elders and removes his shoe from his foot and spits in his face; and declares, "This shall be done to the man that will not build his brother's house."

I would like to focus on the phrase "ka'cha ya'aseh l'ish" - "this is what shall be done to the man" - now where else do we see that phrase?

Answer: see Megilas Esther (6:5-11) where Achasverosh asks Haman what reward shall be given to a man whom the king wishes to honor. Arrogantly thinking Achasverosh must be referring to him, Haman suggests dressing such a man in royal garments and having him led through the streets on horseback declaring, "kacha ya'aseh l'ish asher hamelech chafetz bikaro." (6:9) Yes, the phrase "kacha ya'aseh l'ish appears in Megilas Esther (and appears again in 6:11 after Achasverosh reveals that Mordechai is the man he wishes to honor, and Haman actually implements for Mordechai all that he recommended - including calling out: "ka'ach ya'aseh l'ish" as he leads Mordechai through the streets).

For the same phrase ka'cha ya'aseh l'ish to appear in both Devarim in connection with the discussion of chalitza and the humiliation of the yavam, and in Megilas Esther in connection with the humiliation of Haman, is surely no coincidence. Instructive connections between seemingly unconnected portions of Tanach have been built on slimmer reeds than that. Yet, after looking at various sources that tend to delve into ta'ami hamitzvos (e.g., Rav Hirsch, Ramban, and Sefer Hachinuch), I could not find any discussion of the significance of the repetition of the phrase ka'acha ya'aseh l'ish in Devarim and Megilas Esther.

Maybe someone has seen a commentary discussing this? For now, let me share some possible thoughts.

Rav Hirsch in his commentary in Devarim stresses that the foundation of the whole institution of yibum is chesed. Chesed in the sense of perpetuating the legacy (indeed, perhaps the soul) of the deceased through the unity of his wife (with whom he was "basar echas;" one flesh) and his brother (see Ruth 3:10 - "chasdaych").

Two prominent instances of yibum (actually, technically, the related institution of geulah since these marriages were not performed by brothers of the deceased), are Boaz and Ruth, and Yehuda and Tamar. In both stories, two righteous women assumed personal risks to persuade those obligated to perform yibum to do so in order to continue the legacy of their deceased husbands. In exchange for these acts of chesed, Ruth and Tamar were rewarded with being the mothers whose offspring ultimately led to David HaMelech.

The connection to Purim? Well, what's interesting about Purim is that the gemara in Shabbos (88a) relates that, after initially being "coerced" into the acceptance of the Torah at Har Sinai, the Jews voluntarily reaccepted the Torah in the days of Achasverosh ("kimu v'kiblu") due to the great miracle performed for them by Hashem in saving them from physical destruction. It seems that the Jews at the time of the Purim story displayed a certain achdus in their dedication to the Torah that was reminiscent of their achdus at Har Sinai when the Torah was originally given.

The outcome of this achdus was the institution of the holiday of Purim, for which the two key mitzvos are mishloach manos and matanos la'evyonim - acts of chesed that promote achdus and demonstrate compassion for our less fortunate brethren.

So perhaps the message here might be that when the Jews perform acts of chesed for each other - as in yibum or on Purim - then we will be raised up (on a "horse," so to speak, dressed in royalty like Mordechai) and our enemies will be humiliated. That is, the "kacha ya'aesh l'ish" will be applied in a positive way - others will perceive the glory that is attained by a nation whose members show compassion for each other.

On the other hand, when we neglect our chesed obligations, and do not show compassion for our fellow Jews - such as when a Jew declines (for reasons that were not valid when yibum was still practiced) to marry the widow of his brother - we will suffer humiliation, and the "kacha ya'aseh l'ish" will be applied to us (chas v'shalom) in a negative way.

This make sense given that "chesed" and "humiliation" are really the opposite sides of the same coin. "Chesed" represents sensitivity to the needs of others; "humiliation" represents insensitivity. So, midah k'neged mida: when we are insensitive and ignore opportunities for chesed, we risk humiliation. But when when we are sensitive, we are protected from humiliation.

An interesting story in the gemara Megila 16a that reinforces the centrality of chesed as protection for the Jewish people from humiliation is that when Haman came to Mordechai to implement Achasverosh's direction, Mordechai was studying the laws of the korban mincha in preparation for the omer offering. Mordechai saw Haman coming and warned his students to flee lest they suffer at Haman's hands.

The Midrash Rabba on Bamidbar (13:16) provides an allegorical explanation of the korban mincha of the nesi'im described in Naso (7:13), which was comprised of oil mixed into ("shemen belulah") flour ("solet"). The Midrash explains that Hashem obtains "nachas" (derived from "nun" and "chet" in mincha) when a person's Torah (represented by "solet") is accompanied by good deeds ("ma'asim tovim" as represented by the "belulah b'shemen").

As it turns out, Mordechai's students had no reason to flee since Haman was coming, ironically, to honor Mordechai. It could be that the zechus of Mordechai's study of the laws of korban mincha (which, as noted, alludes to Torah mixed with acts of chesed, which gives Hashem nachas) protected him and turned the tables resulting in the humiliation of Haman.

This is what I have come up with for now. Clearly, the connection between yibum and Purim is one that can be developed further, and all thoughts are welcome.

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d83455b64e69e20120a5930e3d970c

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference A Connection Between Yibum and Purim?:

Comments

Perhaps the reacceptance of the Torah by the Jews on Purim is like the brother taking the wife of the deceased husband (representing Jewish people prior to reacceptance).

The comments to this entry are closed.