Esther 1:16 Komentář

Several things in this chapter itself are very instructive and of great use; but the design of recording the story of it is to show how way was made for Esther to the crown, in order to her being instrumental to defeat Haman's plot, and this long before the plot was laid, that we may observe and admire the foresight and vast reaches of Providence. "Known unto God are all his works" before-hand. Ahasuerus the king, I. In his height feasts all his great men (Est 1:1-9). II. In his heat he divorces his queen, because she would not come to him when he sent for her (Est 1:10-22). This shows how God serves his own purposes even by the sins and follies of men, which he would not permit if he know not how to bring good out of them.

This chapter relates, how that Ahasuerus, a great king of Persia, made a feast, first for the grandees of his kingdom, and then for his people, as his queen did for the women, Est 1:1, who being sent for by him, and she refusing to come, was, by the advice of one of his counsellors, divorced from him, and an order made and published throughout his dominions, that every man should bear rule in his own house, Est 1:10.

And Memucan answered before the king and the princes,.... Who was the last, and perhaps the least and the youngest of the counsellors; it being appointed by the king, according to the latter Targum that when his counsellors sat, the least should give their counsel first; just as puisne judges, and the youngest peers with us, give their opinion in a case first: Vashti the queen hath not done wrong to the king only, but also to all the princes, and to all the people that are in all the provinces of the King Ahasuerus; he means, by setting a bad example to their wives, as after explained; it is an exaggeration of her crime, and made with a design to incense the king the more against her.

But let us hear what Scripture has to say about the stubbornness of Vashti, that most foolish of queens: “So the king was angered, and enflamed by his excessive rage he questioned his wise men, who were always at his side according to royal custom; and he used to do whatever they advised him, since they knew the laws and the rules of the ancestors. And in the first and second place were Carshena, Shethar, Admatha, Tarshish, Meres, Marsena, and Memucan, the seven leaders of Persia and Media who would see his face and whose authority was normally second only to his own; and it was to their judgment that Queen Vashti was subject when she did not want to obey the command of King Ahasuerus given to her through the eunuchs. And as the king and his officials listened to him, Memucan said: ‘Vashti has injured not only the king, but all the officials and peoples who are in all the provinces of King Ahasuerus. For her words will go out to all the women, so that they will despise their husbands and say: “King Ahasuerus ordered Queen Vashti to come to him, and she did not want to.” And with this example, all the wives of the officials of Persia and Media will hold cheap the authority of their husbands; so that the king’s indignation is just. And if it pleases you, let an edict go forth from your face, and let it be written according to the law of Persia and Media— which it is forbidden to ignore—that Vashti may no longer come into the king’s presence, but that her reign should be given to another who is better than her.’” Now, when Vashti shows her arrogance, King Ahasuerus seeks the advice of the seven wise men who are always at his side according to royal custom, and commands that their judgment about her should be carried out; and this can only mean that our Savior— through his learned men who are filled with the grace of the Holy Spirit, and always take care to stand in his presence with upright faith and good works—bases his verdict upon the stubbornness of the Jewish people who are guilty of punishing and condemning him. He ruled, in other words, that they should be driven from the seat of the king, i.e. from their relationship with God for which they were ordained and chosen; and that another, better people—namely, the Church of the nations—should take its place in genuine faith and full devotion. So the Lord promised by the Law and the prophets shows in the Gospel itself that he was destined, at the behest of the Father, to summon Judea when he says: “I was sent only to the lost sheep of the house of Israel (Matthew 15)”; and likewise: “It is not good to take the bread of children and toss it to the dogs” (ibid.). But when the gentile woman continues to petition him, the Lord himself rightly praises her great faith; and elsewhere the faith of the centurion is shown preference over the faith of the Jews, when he says: “Amen, I tell you, many will come from the East and the West and will recline with Abraham, Isaac and Jacob in the kingdom of Heaven; while the children of this kingdom will be cast into the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth” (Matthew 8). Likewise, in another passage the Truth herself says to Jerusalem: “Jerusalem, Jerusalem, you kill your prophets and you stone those who were sent to you; how often have I wanted to gather your children, like the hen gathers her chicks beneath her wings, but you did not want me to. See, your house will be left to you desolate” (Luke 13). Moreover, after his resurrection he commanded his disciples as follows about summoning the nations: “Go and teach all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to keep everything I have ordered you to do. And see, I myself am with you for all the days until the very end of the age” (Matthew 28). It is also fitting that he was publishing his decision about Vashti through Memucan, who is mentioned last in the series of seven wise men, because he symbolizes the persona of the apostle Paul who was the last to be called as an apostle, and through whom the Jews are properly reproached for their faithlessness. For he says about himself: “But I am the least of the apostles” (1 Corinthians 15).And elsewhere he says: “To me, the least among the saints, has been given this grace, so that I might evangelize Christ among the nations” (2 Corinthians 3). So while he had been preaching the word of God together with Barnabas in the Synagogue of the Jews, and the Jews—who were full of zeal— were speaking out blasphemously against what Paul was saying, he said to them firmly: “It was proper that the word of God should first be spoken to you; but since you reject it, and judge yourselves undeserving of eternal life, see we are turning to the nations. For so the Lord has commanded us: ‘I placed you as a light for the nations, so that you may bring salvation to the ends of the earth.’ And hearing this, the nations rejoiced, and they glorified the word of the Lord, and whoever had been preordained for eternal life believed” (Acts 13).

The advice which King Ahasuerus asks of his seven sages who were, according to royal custom always by his side, concerning the insolent Vashti—as well as the sentence he orders them to pass concerning her—undoubtedly signifies the sentence our Savior passes against the arrogance of the Jewish people. He passes this sentence through his teachers who are always in his presence and full of the grace of the Holy Spirit in their orthodox faith and good works. The Jewish people themselves who incurred this judgment bear the responsibility for the punishment and condemnation they have received of being expelled from the royal bridal room, that is, from the congregation of God for which they had been ordained and elected, so that another, better bride, namely, the church of the nations, may take their place with sincere faith and full devotion.

Ahasuerus makes royal feasts for his nobles and people, Est 1:1-9. Vashti is sent for by the king, but refuses to come, Est 1:10-12. Vashti is disgraced; and a law made for the subjection of women, Est 1:13-22. The whole history of this book in its connected order, with the occurrences in the Persian empire at that time, will be found in the introduction: to which the reader is referred. Concerning the author of this book there are several opinions: some attribute the work to Ezra; some to one Joachim, a high priest; others, to the men of the Great Synagogue; and others to Mordecai. This latter is the most likely opinion: nor is that to be disregarded which gives to Mordecai for co-partner Ezra himself; though it is likely that the conclusion, from Est 9:23 to the end of the book, was inserted by another hand, and at a later time. Though some Christians have hesitated to receive the book of Esther into the sacred canon; yet it has always been received by the Jews, not only as perfectly authentic, but also as one of the most excellent of their sacred books. They call it מגילה megillah, The Volume, by way of eminence; and hold it in the highest estimation. That it records the history of a real fact, the observation of the feast of Purim, to the present day, is a sufficient evidence. Indeed, this is one of the strongest evidences that any fact can have, viz., that, to commemorate it, a certain rite, procession, feast, or the like, should have been instituted at the time, which, without intermission, has been continued annually through every generation of that people, and in whatsoever place they or parties of them may have sojourned, to the present day. This is the fact concerning the feast of Purim here mentioned; which the Jews, in all places of their dispersion, have uninterruptedly celebrated, and do still continue to celebrate, from the time of their deliverance from the massacre intended by Haman to the present time. Copies of this book, widely differing from each other, exist in Hebrew, Chaldee, Syriac, Greek, and Latin. All these differ much from the Hebrew text, particularly the Greek and the Chaldee: the former has many additional paragraphs; and the latter, as it exists in the London Polyglot, contains five times more than the Hebrew text. To notice all the various readings, additions, and paraphrases, in the above copies, would require a volume of no inconsiderable magnitude. The reader who is curious may consult the above Polyglot. This book does not appear to be extant in Arabic, or in any other of the Oriental languages, besides the Hebrew and Syriac. The question may naturally arise, What was the original of this book? or, In what language was it written? Though learned men in general decide in favor of a Hebrew original, yet there are many reasons which might be urged in favor of the Persian. Several of the proper names are evidently of a Persian origin; and no doubt all the others are so; but they are so transformed by passing through the Hebrew, that they are no longer discernible. The Hebrew has even retained some of the Persian words, having done little else than alter the character, e.g., Esther, Mehuman, Mishak, Melzar, Vashti, Shushan, Pur, Darius, Paradise, etc., several of which will be noted in their proper places. The Targum in the London Polyglot is widely different from that in the Complutum, Antwerp, and Paris editions. The principal additions in the Greek are carefully marked in the London Polyglot, but are too long and too numerous to be inserted here. It is a singular circumstance that the name of God does not once occur in the whole of this book as it stands in Hebrew.

Vashti - hath not done wrong to the king only - This reasoning or arguing was inconsequent and false. Vashti had not generally disobeyed the king, therefore she could be no precedent for the general conduct of the Persian women. She disobeyed only in one particular; and this, to serve a purpose, Memucan draws into a general consequence; and the rest came to the conclusion which he drew, being either too drunk to be able to discern right from wrong, or too intent on reducing the women to a state of vassalage, to neglect the present favorable opportunity.

AHASUERUS MAKES ROYAL FEASTS. (Est. 1:1-22) Ahasuerus--It is now generally agreed among learned men that the Ahasuerus mentioned in this episode is the Xerxes who figures in Grecian history.

The Banquet of King Ahashverosh and the Divorce of Queen Vashti - Esther 1 Ahashverosh, king of Persia, gave, in the third year of his reign, a banquet to the grandees of his kingdom then assembled in Susa, for the purpose of showing them the greatness and glory of his kingdom; while the queen at the same time made a feast for the women in the royal palace (Est 1:1-9). On the seventh day of the feast, the king, "when his heart was merry with wine," sent a message by his chief courtiers to the queen, commanding her to appear before him, to show the people and the princes her beauty, and on her refusal to come, was greatly incensed against her (Est 1:10-12). Upon inquiring of his astrologers and princes what ought in justice to be done to the queen on account of this disobedience, they advised him to divorce Vashti by an irrevocable decree, and to give her dignity to another and better; also to publish this decree throughout the whole kingdom (Est 1:13-20). This advice pleasing the king, it was acted upon accordingly (Est 1:21 and Est 1:22).

The counsel of the wise men. Est 1:16. Memucan, who was the last mentioned in Est 1:14, comes forward as spokesman for the rest, and declares before the king and the princes, i.e., in a solemn assembly, and evidently as the result of a previous joint consultation: Vashti the queen has not done wrong to the king alone, but also to all the princes and all the people, because the example of the queen will lead all the Median and Persian wives to despise their husbands. Therefore an irrevocable edict is to be published decreeing the divorce of Queen Vashti, and this law published throughout the whole realm, that all wives may show honour to their husbands. Vashti has not transgressed against the king alone (Est 1:16), but against all the princes and people in all the provinces of King Ahashverosh (Est 1:16). In what respect, then, is the latter assertion true? We are told Est 1:17 and Est 1:18. "For the deed of the queen will come abroad to (על for אל) all women, to bring their husbands into contempt in their eyes (the infin. להבזות stating the result), while they will say," etc. (the suffix of בּאמרם relates to the women, who will appeal to the disobedience of the queen). Est 1:18. "And this day (i.e., already) the princesses of the Persians and Medians, who hear of the act of the queen (דּבר, not the word, but the thing, i.e., her rejection of her husband's command), will tell it to all the princes of the king, and (there will be) enough contempt and provocation. קצף is an outburst of anger; here, therefore, a provocation to wrath. Bertheau makes the words זק בז וּכדי the object of תּאמרנה, which, after the long parenthesis, is united to the copula by w, and for, "to speak contempt and wrath," reads: to speak contemptuously in wrath. But this change cannot be substantiated. The expression, to speak wrath, is indeed unexampled, but that is no reason for making קצף stand for בּקצף, the very adoption of such an ellipsis showing, that this explanation is inadmissible. The words must be taken alone, as an independent clause, which may be readily completed by יהיה: and contempt and wrath will be according to abundance. כּדי is a litotes for: more than enough. The object of תּאמרנה must be supplied from the context: it - that is, what the queen said to her husband. In the former verse Memucan was speaking of all women; here (Est 1:18) he speaks only of the princesses of the Persians and Medes, because these are staying in the neighbourhood of the court, and will immediately hear of the matter, and "after the manner of the court ladies and associates of a queen will quickly follow, and appeal to her example" (Berth.).