The Jewish Response I: Mordecai’s Plan for Esther: There are now two royal documents that refer directly or indirectly to Mordecai. His protection of the king in chapter 2, recorded in the royal annals, would typically guarantee him a place of protection and prestige among the king’s benefactors. He is also a Jew and therefore a target of Haman’s edict in chapter 3. In fact, he is Haman’s primary target. Which of these two documents will determine the future of Mordecai and the Jews? Over the next two chapters, it appears that Haman’s edict will have more to say about the destiny of the Jews than a forgotten deed of loyalty.
While the citizens of Susa were bewildered over Haman’s decree, the Jews were devastated. The chapter begins with Mordecai, the representative Jew in mourning, reflecting the empire-wide lamentation of the whole Jewish people. Knowing the gravity of the decree, he led them in their rituals of grief. He also knew that their best hope lived in the palace. Mordecai would now challenge the young queen, whose Jewishness he had insisted she keep secret, to consider her providential placement to perform acts of loyalty and courage she could hardly imagine. With some coaxing on his part, the scene ends with Esther joining the rest of the Jewish community in their fast. With the risk of death in full view, she will take up their cause in the inner circle of power to which she alone has access.
The series of conversations in this chapter, though brief, trace a significant development in Esther’s character. We know that Mordecai is a strong, principled person who deliberately defied the king’s order in chapter 3. Esther has hitherto been passive, compliant and obedient to whatever Mordecai “commanded.” What he has asked of her thus far served to protect her. When he asks her to defy the king’s laws at great personal risk, however, she resists. When she does finally agree to go to the king, she owns the decision as her own and emerges as a leader in her own right. It is she who “commands” Mordecai and the Jews how to prepare for a counter-scheme that only she knows (vv. 16–17).
Esther’s Jewishness has been a secret, and she will continue to keep this identity secret. In this chapter, though, she resolves to be an active, loyal Jew. Her first responses to Mordecai indicate that she has not yet fully identified with her people. When she hears of the plot, she apparently assumes that she will be exempt from the attack. Persuaded by Mordecai’s reasoning, Esther eventually acknowledges solidarity with her people. From this point on, she will consider herself their agent in the court.
There is a strong consciousness in this scene of boundaries and spatial distance. Because Mordecai’s attire prohibits him from passing through the palace gate, the cousins converse through an intermediary, Hathach, one of her trusted eunuchs. This distance reinforces Esther’s sense of isolation. She is in the center of the capital, yet she does not know the news that is spreading from one end of the empire to the other. This seclusion is a kind of false sheltering for, as Mordecai points out, she is not safe from the edict. Esther is also distanced from Mordecai, and their relationship is markedly different with her new position (compare 2:11). Perhaps most importantly, she is isolated in her decision making. Whatever she hears from Mordecai is quoted by someone else, and she can decide what to do with it. Mordecai has provided her with a challenge and a rationale, but she must choose her course. Her resolve is formed in solitude, within the palace walls, where she must devise and execute her own plan. Esther decides to take advantage of the unique position destiny has granted her.
There are some unanswered questions in this scene. How does Mordecai know of Haman’s plot when Esther doesn’t? Why do the attendants know that Esther is related to Mordecai when neither the king nor Haman do? Why would Esther necessarily be in danger? (Wouldn’t her status as queen provide immunity?) From what other “place” could deliverance come?
4:1–4 Mordecai is the first to “know” what Haman had decreed. The same verb (yd?) is used of the experts who “know” (NIV “understood”) in 1:13. Mordecai is deeply concerned with Esther’s welfare in 2:11, walking back and forth to “find out (literally, to “know”) how Esther was.” The same verb is used when he “found out” the plot in 2:22. Mordecai is one who has access to important information, and he uses it to help people at risk.
Mordecai’s response is dramatic and public: he tore his clothes, put on sackcloth and ashes, and went out into the city, wailing loudly and bitterly (v. 1). These behaviors in the ancient world are stereotypical expressions of grief and anguish over a loss or in the face of a grave threat (e.g., Gen. 37:29; 2 Sam. 1:2; 2 Sam. 13:19). Taking on these symbols of death also conveys shame and humiliation. Doing so in the city square underscores the public nature of the calamity (see Isa. 15:3; Jer. 48:38). Although there is no direct mention of prayer (the book contains no direct reference to anything “religious”), the reader’s correct assumption is that this lamentation would have constituted a supplication for divine deliverance (2 Sam. 12:22; Jonah 3:5–9). One sees in the Jewish response the postures associated with laments: “I put on sackcloth and humbled myself with fasting” (Ps. 35:13).
Mordecai was leading a community ritual that extended to every province (v. 3). Jews everywhere were apparently informed of the threat quite quickly. There was fasting, weeping and wailing among all of the Jews (v. 3), except in the palace. There is a striking contrast between Mordecai, the representative leader of the Jews, and Esther, insulated from the news but the one on whom their hopes depend.
Between descriptions of mourning by Mordecai and the Jews, verse 2 depicts Mordecai’s efforts to communicate with Esther: he went only as far as the king’s gate, because no one clothed in sackcloth was allowed to enter it. While some speculate that Mordecai might have been trying to get the king’s attention, it is obvious to those in the story that he needs Esther’s. The one who is the cause of the problem is also the source of information, the gravity of which Esther needs to understand.
Esther is terrified (in great distress) when she hears about Mordecai’s appearance (v. 4). Without knowing the cause of his predicament (and without asking why), she sends clothes to cover his self-imposed state of ritual humiliation. Her intention may have been to give him access into the palace compound to talk face to face. If so, Mordecai refuses to give up his provocative appearance for such an important conversation: he would not accept them (v. 4).
4:5–9 The next verses detail the indirect communication between the cousins through one of the eunuchs who is under orders with the queen. Intermediaries are apparently trusted in this environment (2:3, 8, 15; 7:9). Esther wanted to find out what was troubling Mordecai and why (v. 5).
Mordecai sends back a message regarding everything that had happened to him (v. 7), acknowledging thereby that this tragedy was a result of his behavior. He does not use first-person plural pronouns (“us” or “our”) yet. Mordecai’s message also included the exact amount of money Haman had promised to pay (v. 7). The mention of the money had been, for the king, a sign of loyalty and generosity. For Esther, however, it is a signal of the alarming scope of Haman’s plan and the depth of his resolve.
Mordecai gave him a copy of the text of the edict for their annihilation (v. 8), asking the eunuch to explain the details and ramifications of it to the queen. He also tells Hathach to “command” (NIV urge) Esther to go into the king’s presence to beg for mercy (v. 8). This is an important emphasis in this narrative for, even after Esther became queen, she had “continued to follow Mordecai’s instructions as she had done when he was bringing her up” (2:20). Now Mordecai was asking her to do something much more dangerous than keep her nationality secret; he was asking her to make it public.
Mordecai makes Esther’s relationship with her kin foundational to his command: he asks her to plead with [Xerxes] for her people (v. 8). It will take some persuasion for Esther to see herself as an integral part of the dispersed Jewish community with whom she no longer has ongoing contact.
4:10–17 This section begins with Esther commanding Hathach to respond to Mordecai’s incredible request with certain things that she thinks Mordecai should know. All the king’s officials and the people of the royal provinces know that the king has but one law for those who approach him unbidden: death (v. 11; Herodotus, Hist. 3.72, 77, 84, 118, 140). Esther is not simply protecting herself. She has not been called to go to the king for thirty days and cannot presume to hold any special favor with him.
Mordecai has a sense of urgency that supersedes any of Esther’s concerns. If she doesn’t go to the king, she will not escape (v. 13). She may have had grounds for thinking that some Jews in the extremities of the empire would be harmed, but those in the palace would be safe. (Esther will tell the king in 7:4 that she would have kept silent if the threat were less grave.)
Mordecai’s comments become even more pointed. If she does not respond to this call, he expresses hope that the Jews will be delivered somehow. But in that case, you and your father’s family will perish (v. 14). Perhaps Mordecai is suggesting that both of them will perish (at the hands of other Jews? or God?), and that this would end the family line he had preserved by adopting her. Maybe he is insinuating that he would disown her and that she would suffer the consequences of this choice as a member of the family to which she was born.
The use of “holy war” terms and themes in other portions of Esther would encourage us to read this phrase in light of the stories of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram (Num. 16) and Achan (Josh. 7). These individuals stepped outside of God’s will and brought about the destruction of their families. Mordecai is pronouncing a warning of judgment on one who is on the verge of abandoning her people.
Verse 14 contains one of the most memorable lines in the story of Esther. At the height of this intense interchange, Mordecai persuades Esther with words of hope and threat. The hope is found in an unexplained assurance that relief and deliverance for the Jews will arise from another place. Esther must decide whether or not she will accept her appointed role in their deliverance. “Relief” (revakh) and “deliverance” (hatsalah) are rare words in the Hebrew Bible, but they represent important themes in Esther. The goal of the fighting in the later chapters will be “rest” and “relief,” translations of a similar Hebrew verb nukh (Esth. 9:16, 17, 18, 22).
Many find in Mordecai’s reference to “another place” the book’s clearest allusion to God. If this is religious language, it is veiled. The term “place” in Hebrew (maqom) functions in the Bible (and in later rabbinic literature) as a veiled reference to Zion, God’s dwelling place (Deut. 12:5, etc.). However, in Deuteronomy it is the definite form of the word, hammaqom (“the place”), that refers to the dwelling place, not “another place.” It would be very unexpected for a subtle reference to Zion to surface in this story that otherwise has such an exclusively Diaspora perspective.
It is still likely that Mordecai is expressing his belief that God will deliver through some means, whether through Esther or not. The whole Jewish community has been fasting and mourning, presumably in prayer for deliverance. Esther fasts for three days in preparation for her role as the chosen deliverer. It is hard to imagine that ancient Jewish readers had anything other than God in mind when they read Mordecai’s words. Both Josephus and the Targums make this association.
Mordecai finishes his appeal with a muted reference to providence: who knows but that you have come to royal position for such a time as this? (v. 14). The phrase “who knows?” recalls the hopes of those who are in distress elsewhere in the Hebrew Bible (2 Sam. 12:22; Joel 2:14; Jonah 3:9). In this case, it is a way of suggesting a destiny for Esther. Haven’t all of the serendipitous events in the last four years put her in this position for this very moment? Mordecai uses the word “time” (?et) twice in this verse. The Septuagint translators appropriately use the Greek term kairos here. This is indeed Esther’s “moment.”
Esther resolves to defy the king’s law (dat) in verse 16, even at the risk of perishing (sooner rather than later). Like Shadrach, Meshach, and Abednego, she will be faithful whatever the results (Dan. 3:16–18). She accepts her providential role. This includes more than risk taking; she also assumes the new role of leadership over her own people, and even over Mordecai himself. She now commands (by the use of imperatives) Mordecai and the rest of the Jews along with her coterie (v. 16). And Mordecai went away and carried out all that she “commanded” (v. 17, NIV Esther’s instructions).
Esther requires the Susan Jews and her maids to participate in a severe fast (no water or food). Fasts in the Bible were typically from morning until night (Judg. 20:26; 2 Sam. 1:12), involving abstinence from certain foods. Esther’s fast effectively overturns or overrules Passover, which began that night. It also, perhaps, demonstrates that her trust is not in her beauty alone (her previous source of favor with the king), but in the providence of God. Her final, haunting words, if I perish, I perish, suggest a resignation to fate (compare Gen. 43:14).
This whole chapter finds the Jews filled with apprehension and disquiet while maintaining a ritual state of supplication and hope. In marked contrast is the “drinking” of Haman and the king in 3:15. In fact, the fasting in chapter 4 is situated in the center of all of the “feasts” in the book and sets the stage for the reversals that ultimately lead to Purim.
Additional Notes
4:1–3 Sackcloth and ashes: Biblical instances of ritual mourning using many of these terms are found in Gen. 37:34; 2 Sam. 13:19; Job 2:12. For a fuller understanding of these rituals of mourning and humiliation in their ancient Near Eastern context, see DeVaux, Ancient Israel (vol. 1; New York: McGraw Hill, 1965), p. 59; G. A. Anderson, A Time to Mourn, A Time to Dance: The Expression of Grief and Joy in Israelite Religion (University Park, Pa.: Pennsylvania State University, 1991), pp. 87–89; and M. Gruber, Aspects of Nonverbal Communication in the Ancient Near East (Rome: Pontifical Biblical Institute, 1979), pp. 412, 417–18, 446, 457, 460; or the summary in Laniak, Shame, pp. 91–95.
There are some parallels in this account to the fasting of the Ninevites in Jonah 3. Both stories feature the reversal of an irreversible (!) edict after widespread fasting in sackcloth and ashes. As noted above, the “who knows?” of Jonah 3:9 echoes in the words of Mordecai in 4:14.
4:4 Instead of his sackcloth: The only times the verb svr is used in Esther are in this phrase (lit., “to turn aside his sackcloth from him”), when the ring of the king was turned over to Haman in 3:10, and then when it is turned over to Mordecai in 8:2. Change in dress is an important indication of status change in the book, esp. in this chapter. Turning and (ex)changing are hints of reversals in Esther, marked in subtle ways throughout and eventually summarized in 9:1.
4:5–9 The verb “to know” (yd?) continues to be important in chapter 4, although it is partially lost in translation. In verse 5 Esther sends the eunuch “to know” (NIV “to find out”) what is wrong with Mordecai. He tells Hathach exactly what had happened, including how much money Haman had offered. In verse 11 she tells Mordecai, All the king’s officials and the people of the royal provinces know . . . that she could not go to the king without his summons. Mordecai has the last use of the verb in verse 14 when he asks her rhetorically, And who knows but that you have come to royal position for such a time as this?
4:11 Any man or woman who approaches the king . . . without being summoned: Josephus (Ant. 11.205 note), quoting Herodotus, describes the throne of Xerxes surrounded by men with axes ready to execute those who approach the throne unsummoned. A relief found in Persepolis shows the king guarded by a Median soldier with an ax in hand (for a picture see Yamauchi, Persia, p. 360). There is evidence that the king’s chiliarch (see note on 3:1) was in charge of the guests whom the king would see. If this is the position that Haman held, Esther was in a precarious position indeed.
4:14 If you remain silent at this time: There are some parallels between Esther, a Jewess in the Persian court, and Moses, a Jew in the Egyptian court. Both enjoyed the privileges of nobility without being born into them. Both gave up the comforts of their unusual positions when they began to identify with their own people over those with whom they resided. When God called Moses to rescue his people, it involved interceding with the king. Moses’ response, like Esther’s, was hesitant (Exod. 3:11; 4:10, 13; 6:12, 30). Esther considers “remaining silent”; Moses declares he is unable to speak eloquently (Exod. 4:10). The encounter for both was life threatening (Exod. 10:28). In both accounts there is a complication (increased threat) before the people of God are rescued and find rest. God promises Moses “favor” with the Egyptians (Exod. 3:21), just as Esther will find favor with the king. Ultimately, both will risk their favored status before the Gentile king as they seek the deliverance of their people (compare Heb. 11:24–25).
Deliverance for the Jews will arise: J. M. Wiebe (“Esther 4:14: ‘Will Relief and Deliverance Arise for the Jews from Another Place?’” CBQ 53 (1991), pp. 409–15, followed by Bush, Ruth, Esther, pp. 395–97) argues that Mordecai’s words should be understood as a rhetorical question, Will relief and deliverance arise . . . ? This is a legitimate rendering of the Hebrew that communicates a stronger sense of urgency and hopelessness and that fits with a nontheological meaning of “another place.” It seems more likely, however, that the theological suggestiveness seen throughout the book of Esther (and implicit in the rituals of this chapter) is also present here. Conquest motifs include the theme of family punishment (“perishing,” from ?bd) prominent in Num. 16:27–33 and Josh. 7:24–26.
And who knows?: A prophetic passage that may be in the background of Esth. 4 is Joel 2. The exact phraseology translated as “fasting and weeping and mourning” in Joel 2:12 is found elsewhere only in Esth. 4:3. The prophet expresses hope in God’s deliverance as a response to these gestures with the same question, “Who knows? He may turn and have pity and leave behind a blessing . . .” (Joel 2:14). The next verse in Joel encourages the people to “declare a holy fast.” Esther does just that in Esth. 4:16. This kind of intertextual linkage reinforces a tacit theological meaning for the Jewish fasting and hope in Esther. It suggests that hope for the Jews can be found apart from Zion. For reflections on the relation between these two passages, see K. H. Jobes, Esther: NIV Application Commentary (Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1999), pp. 135–36.
4:17 Mordecai went away: Mordecai (lit.) “crossed over.” That is, he crossed a bridge or causeway over the Ab-Kharkha River, which separated Susa from the fortress.