5 min read

Mordecai Redeems Israel Sold Cheap in Media

Israel grew poor through sin and sold itself in Media under Haman. Mordecai, nearest redeemer, covers a people that ate at the wrong tables.

Curated by Arthur · Told by Maggid ·
Table of Contents
  1. When the Relative Becomes Poor
  2. The Redeemer Steps In
  3. The Banquet That Priced Them
  4. The Lot and the Covering
  5. Near Kin
Mordecai Redeems Israel Sold Cheap in Media Click for full size

When the Relative Becomes Poor

Israel did not look poor in the streets of Shushan. Some sat at Ahashverosh's second banquet, great and small, for seven days after the nobles had already drunk their fill. The midrash is harsher than the furniture. "When your relative becomes poor" is Israel, who became poor through their iniquity. "And sells some of his property" is the sale in Media in the days of Haman. The people had already put themselves on the block before Haman paid the silver.

They had eaten cooked food of star worshipers at the king's tables. That meal stuck to the teeth of the story. Slaughter was not only Haman's idea. It was a bill coming due.

Poverty here is not empty pockets. It is empty defenses. The meal at mixed tables stuck to the teeth of the story like grease that will not wash. Slaughter was a bill coming due, not only a villain's whim.

The Redeemer Steps In

"Then his redeemer shall come." This is Mordecai. "And redeem what his relative has sold." He covered the sins of Israel when they all deserved slaughter. Haman cast the pur, the lot, and tormented them. Due to Mordecai's merit the opposite happened, and the Jews gained control over their enemies. The law of land redemption in Leviticus became a map of Purim: a people sold, a kinsman who buys them back, a transfer written in blood and fasting instead of shekels.

Another voice in the same teaching says the Redeemer is the Holy One, blessed be He, mighty, the Lord of hosts, the One near to His people. Mordecai on the ground and God above do not cancel each other. The human redeemer moves because the near God has not stepped away.

Kinship is a legal category and a burning in the chest. Mordecai used both. God near above and the cousin near on the ground do not cancel each other. The human redeemer moves because the near God has not stepped away from the sale.

The Banquet That Priced Them

Ahashverosh had poured wine according to the king's own hand, matching every guest. The generosity was a kind of trap. When the days of drinking closed, the city still held the taste of mixed tables. Haman did not invent contempt for Jewish daughters; the midrash says the nations demeaned them as ugly, so heaven answered with a dragnet of virgins into Hegai's custody. Media rose against those who had once ravished women in Zion, not for silver or gold, but for the bow and the womb.

A people that had sat at the wrong feast discovered that the empire's appetite had shifted from gold to bodies. Mordecai's pacing at the harem was already a kinsman's move toward property sold too cheap.

The price of a nation is never posted on a single board. It is paid in small shames first. Media's appetite shifted from gold to bodies, and Mordecai's pacing was already a kinsman's claim on property sold too cheap.

The Lot and the Covering

Haman's lot clattered. Dates for killing filled the calendar. Mordecai tore clothes, sat in ash, and pushed Esther toward the throne room where law said she could die for entering. The redemption did not look like a quiet land deal at the city gate. It looked like three days without food, a scepter tipped forward, a second pair of letters racing the first.

What had been sold was not a field in Judah. It was the right of a people to wake up. Mordecai bought that right back with stubbornness and with a queen who finally named her people.

Covering sins means standing between the bill and the body until the bill changes hands. Three days without food, a scepter tipped forward, letters racing letters: that was the price of repurchase in Persian roads.

Near Kin

"The one most closely related to him" is also a name for God, who raised a horn for His people, a people near to Him. Purim keeps both nearnesses on the page: the cousin who will not stop walking the courtyard, and the Redeemer whose name is hosts. Israel had sold itself in Media. The repurchase left them armed on the day that was meant to erase them.

Poverty through iniquity. Sale. Redeemer. The statute of Behar put on Persian clothes and walked into the citadel.

Near is a distance measured in risk, not in miles. The statute of Behar put on Persian clothes and walked into the citadel, and the city learned that a sold people can still have a kinsman who reads the fine print of heaven.


← All myths

From the tradition

Sources

3 sources

The texts behind this telling. Some cards carry a translation of the source; others are our own retelling of it, and each card says which. Every card links out to the original.

Midrash Tanchuma, Behar 4Midrash Tanchuma

Retold in our words. Read the original at the link below.Townsend 1989 translation of Midrash Tanhuma, S. Buber Recension · CC-BY

(Lev. 25:25:) “When your relative becomes poor.” This is Israel, of whom it is stated (in Ps. 106:43), “so they became poor through their iniquity.” (Lev. 25:25, cont.) “And sells some of his property,” in Media in the days of Haman. (Lev. 25:25, cont.) “Then his redeemer shall come.” This is Mordecai. (Lev. 25:25, cont.) “And redeem what his relative has sold,” in that he covered the sins of Israel, since they all were deserving of slaughter, because they had eaten some cooked food of star worshipers. It is so stated (in Esth. 1:5), “And when these days were fulfilled, [the king made a seven-day banquet for all the people that were to be found in Shushan the capital, both great and small].” Now Haman tormented them (i.e., the Jews), as stated (in Esth. 3:7), “a pur, i.e., the lot, [was cast before Haman…].” But due to the merit of Mordecai they were delivered, as stated (in Esth. 9:1), “the opposite happened, [in that] the Jews gained control over their enemies.” Ergo (in Lev. 25:25, cont.), “and redeem what his relative has sold.”Another interpretation (of Lev. 25:25, cont.), “then his redeemer shall come”: This is the Holy One, blessed be He, since it is stated (in Jer. 50:34), “Their Redeemer is mighty, His name is the Lord of hosts.” (Lev. 25:25), “The one most closely related (qarov) to him.” This is the Holy One, blessed be He, since it is stated (in Ps. 148:14), “He has raised up a horn for His people, praise for all His righteous ones, even the Children of Israel, a people near (qarov) to Him. Hallelujah”.

Full source
Esther Rabbah 5:3Esther Rabbah

Retold in our words. Read the original at the link below.The Sefaria Midrash Rabbah, 2022 · CC-BY

“Have the king appoint officials in all the provinces of his kingdom and they will gather every virgin young woman of fair appearance to the Shushan citadel, to the harem, to the custody of Hegai the king's eunuch, guardian of the women, and their cosmetics will be provided.” (Esther 2:3).“Have the king appoint officials in all the provinces of his kingdom” – What did he [the king] see? Rabbi Huna said: Because they would demean the daughters of Israel and call them ugly, and that no person would look at them; therefore, they [the women of the kingdom] came into the hands of this purveyor.Rabbi Ḥanina bar Shilka and Rabbi Yehoshua of Sikhnin and Rabbi Levi in the name of Rabbi Yoḥanan said: When a Jew and a gentile are residing in one courtyard, and the Jew places his pot on the fire and the gentile touches it, it is not ritually impure. If the gentile places his pot on the fire and the Jew touches it, he [the gentile] would say it is impure. Even if several repugnant creatures and creeping animals fall into it, he would eat it, but if a Jew places his food in it, he [the gentile] would break it. So, it is written: “Muster archers against Babylon, all who draw the bow, […repay it in accordance with its actions]” (Jeremiah 50:29). Did it take silver that it will repay silver, gold that it will repay gold? “They ravished women in Zion” (Lamentations 5:11). What does it teach? Rather, so said the Holy One blessed be He: You are eager for licentiousness; by your lives, I will bring upon you a nation that seeks neither silver nor gold from you. That is what is written: “Behold, I will rouse Media against them, who do not appreciate silver and do not desire gold” (Isaiah 13:17). What do they seek from you? “And bows will cleave youths, and they will not have mercy on the fruit of the womb” (Isaiah 13:18).“To the custody of Hegai, the king’s eunuch [seris], guardian of the women” (Esther 2:3) – he was crushed,14His testicles were crushed. and was appointed over the virgins. Similarly, “to the custody of Shaashgaz, official [seris] of the king, guardian of the concubines” (Esther 2:14) – he was withered and was appointed over the wives.

Full source
Esther Rabbah 2:12Esther Rabbah

Retold in our words. Read the original at the link below.The Sefaria Midrash Rabbah, 2022 · CC-BY

This teaching from Esther Rabbah, the midrashic commentary on the Scroll of Esther, examines the description of the great feast that King Ahasuerus held in his palace, where Scripture reports "abundant royal wine, in keeping with the king's bounty." The rabbis read every phrase of the Megillah closely, and here they compare Ahasuerus to an earlier monarch whose banquet ended in catastrophe.

The comparison is with Belshazzar of Babylon. Of him it is written, "King Belshazzar made a great banquet for his thousand nobles, and before the thousand he drank wine" (Daniel 5:1). The midrash notices a telling contrast in how the two kings drank. Belshazzar drank wine before his thousand nobles, that is, he drank in their sight while keeping the best for himself, displaying his greatness over them rather than sharing with them.

Ahasuerus, by contrast, served wine "in keeping with the king's bounty," which the rabbis read through a play on the Hebrew. The word for "in keeping with" sounds like "according to the hand of the king," and they take it to mean that the wine was poured according to the number of goblets in the king's own hand. In other words, Ahasuerus allowed each of his guests to drink exactly as much as he himself drank, withholding nothing. Where Belshazzar flaunted his superiority, Ahasuerus extended his generosity, letting his nobles match the royal portion cup for cup. The midrash uses the small grammatical hint to draw a moral distinction between two kings and two styles of rule.

Full source