Esther 8:11

Est 8:11 Wherein the king granted the Jews which [were] in every city to gather themselves together, and to stand for their life, to destroy, to slay, and to cause to perish, all the power of the people and province that would assault them, [both] little ones and women, and [to take] the spoil of them for a prey,

Ver. 11. Wherein the king granted the Jews] The slaughter, therefore, that they made of their enemies was not unlawful; because, 1. They were armed with authority. 2. In their own necessary defence.

To gather themselves together] Which till now they might not do, lest it should seem a riot or rebellion. Conquerors use to disarm and disperse those whom they have vanquished, ut sit

Una salus victis, nullam spirare salutem,

that they may not make headway and shake off the yoke.

And to stand for their life] Life is a precious mercy, such as all creatures make much of, from the highest angel to the lowest worm. See the sweetness of it, 1Ki 20:32 Jer 39:18; Jer 45:5; Ecc 9:4; Job 2:4. Quis vitam non vult? Who does not wish life? saith Austin. Joseph is yet alive, saith Jacob, Gen 45:26. This was more joy to him than all his honour. A man is bound to sacrifice all he hath to the service of his life, and to die in the defence of it; to kill another rather than to be killed by another. If it be the defence of a man’s own life which the king himself attempteth, violently and iniuriously, to take away, in such a case ordinarily it shall be lawful for a subject to defend himself, although the death of the prince follow thereupon, saith Suarez. In the defence of himself and his friends, it may be lawful for a private person to lay hands upon his lawful prince that setteth upon him without cause, saith another casuist. Only such an act as this must not proceed out of hatred or desire of revenge, but out of right self-love and pure necessity; adhibita magna inculpatae tutelae moderatione, as the lawyers call it, using great moderation of harmless defence.

To destroy, and to slay, and to cause to perish] Mordecai maketh use of the selfsame terms that Haman had done, Est 3:13, that all men might know that his commission was altogether as large as the

others, and that they would vim vi repellere, force to repell force, stand upon their guard, slay all such as should seek their lives, and fight stoutly, pro aris et soris. for the altars and their limbs. This, saith Cicero, is:

Lex non scripta sed nata; ad quam non docti, sed facti; non iustituti, sed imbuti sumus, &c., Law is not written but born, at someone, not taught, but done, not established but absorbed, that which uncorrupted nature teacheth every man (Cic. pro Milone).

Both little ones and women] This seemeth spoken in terrorem, in fear that the enemy might forbear to meddle, if not for their own sakes, yet for their wives and children, whom many hold more dear to

themselves than their own lives. But the text may be better read thus: To destroy, to slay, and to cause to perish all the power of the people and province that would assault them, their little ones and women.

And to take the spoil of them for a prey] This also would work much with those that had estates to lose: for money is the monarch of this present world; and many had as leave part with their blood as

their goods.

John Trapp, A Commentary or Exposition upon All the Books of the Old and New Testament (1647–1656) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Est 8:11. To stand for their life — To fight for the defence of their lives, against all that should seek to destroy them. To cause to perish the power of the people, &c. — Either governors or governed, without any exception either of age, dignity, or sex. Both little ones and women — Which is here added, to strike the greater terror into their enemies; and according to the laws and customs of that kingdom, whereby children were punished for their parents’ offences: yet we read nothing, in the execution of this decree, of the slaughter of women or children; nor is it probable they would kill their innocent children, who were so indulgent to their families as not to meddle with the spoil.

Joseph Benson's Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1811–1818) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

8:11 The king’s decree did not permit the Jewish people to start a war but to defend themselves and plunder the property of those who attacked them (reversing the decree in 3:13). • The phrase kill, slaughter, and annihilate is an ironic repetition of the words in Haman’s original edict (3:13; see also 9:5).

Tyndale Open Study Notes — © Tyndale Open Resources, licensed CC BY-SA 4.0. Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

That is, to defend themselves against all that would assail them.

Geneva Bible (1599) marginal notes — public domain. Text via Bolls.life.

the king granted the Jews . . . to stand for their life . . . to slay . . . all . . . that would assault them--The fixed and unalterable character claimed for Persian edicts often placed the king in a very awkward dilemma; for, however bitterly he might regret things done in a moment of haste and thoughtlessness, it was beyond even his power to prevent the consequences. This was the reason on account of which the king was laid under a necessity not to reverse, but to issue a contradictory edict; according to which it was enacted that if, pursuant to the first decree, the Jews were assaulted, they might, by virtue of the second, defend themselves and even slay their enemies. However strange and even ridiculous this mode of procedure may appear, it was the only one which, from the peculiarities of court etiquette in Persia, could be adopted. Instances occur in sacred (Dan 6:14), no less than profane, history. Many passages of the Bible attest the truth of this, particularly the well-known incident of Daniel's being cast into the den of lions, in conformity with the rash decree of Darius, though, as it afterwards appeared, contrary to the personal desire of that monarch. That the law of Persia has undergone no change in this respect, and the power of the monarch not less immutable, appear from many anecdotes related in the books of modern travellers through that country.

Jamieson, Fausset & Brown — Commentary Critical and Explanatory on the Whole Bible (1871) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

Verse 11. To destroy, to slay, and to cause to perish] The same words as in Haman's decree: therefore the Jews had as much authority to slay their enemies, as their enemies had to slay them.

Little ones and women] This was the ordinary custom, to destroy the whole family of those convicted of great crimes; and whether this was right or wrong, it was the custom of the people, and according to the laws. Besides, as this edict was to give the Jews the same power against their enemies as they had by the former decree against them, and the women and children were there included; consequently they must be included here.

Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible (1810–1826) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

(11) To stand for their life.—It will be noticed that, so far at any rate as the edict authorises, the Jews are not permitted to take the initiative, but merely to stand on the defensive. As it was, it was risking civil war in all the cities of the empire, though the results were considerably lessened by numbers of people taking the hint obviously presented by the second edict. “Many of the people of the land became Jews, for the fear of the Jews came upon them.”

Take the spoil of them.—We find that when the storm actually came, the Jews declined to take advantage of this part of the edict.

A Bible Commentary for English Readers, edited by Charles John Ellicott (1878–1897) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

11. The LXX. express the permission in much gentler form, viz. ‘to defend themselves and to treat their adversaries and foes as they please.’ But the author of the Book evidently means to bring out forcibly the fact that the parts which by the first decree had been assigned respectively to the Jews and their foes are now reversed.

The Cambridge Bible for Schools and Colleges (gen. ed. J. J. S. Perowne; Cambridge University Press, 1878–1918) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Upon one day, in all the provinces of King Ahasuerus, namely, upon the thirteenth day of the twelfth month, which is the month Adar. The day appointed and fixed in the former letters for the destruction of the Jews, Est 3:13.

.

Esther 8:13

est 8:13

est 8:13

est 8:13The copy of the writing, for a commandment to be given in every province, was published to all people,.... A copy of the letters sent to the governors of provinces; the sum and substance of them was published by an herald, or fixed in public places, that all might know the contents thereof; and take care not to assault the Jews, as it would be to their peril:

and that the Jews should be ready against that day to avenge themselves on their enemies; Abendana thinks this is to be restrained to those that were of the seed of Amalek, who were their principal enemies; but no doubt it includes all that should rise up against them.

John Gill's Exposition of the Whole Bible (1746–1763) — public domain (CC PDM 1.0). Text via the HelloAO Bible API.

This fresh decree allowed the Jews to stand on their defense, and to kill all who attacked them. It has been pronounced incredible that any king would thus have sanctioned civil war in all the great cities of his empire; but some even of the more skeptical critics allow that “Xerxes” might not improbably have done so.

Albert Barnes' Notes on the Bible (1834–1885) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

Spoil. This was retaliating, as they were to have been treated in like manner. (Calmet) --- Such were the barbarous customs of the country. (Haydock) --- It might not still be lawful thus to involve the innocent with the guilty, though the king did not ill in allowing the Jews to stand up in their own defence, 2 Kings xxi. 6. Some think that they were only to prevent the execution of the former edict, which could not be revoked. See chap. iii. (Calmet) --- A form of trial was observed, chap. xvi. 20. (Menochius)

George Leo Haydock (1774–1849), Haydock's Catholic Family Bible and Commentary, 1859 edition — public domain. Excludes Psalms (Douay-Rheims chapter numbering differs from Protestant) and Deuterocanonical books (Catholic canon only).

To stand for their life; to stand up and fight for the de fence of their lives against all that should seek to destroy them.

All the power of the people; either governors or governed, without any exception, either of age, dignity, or sex, as it follows.

Both little ones and women; which is here added, because it was put into the former decree; and to strike the greater terror into their enemies; and according to the laws and customs of this kingdom, whereby children were punished for their parents’ offences; which also in some cases was allowed and practised in sacred story. Yet we read nothing in the execution of this decree of the slaughter of women or children, nor is it probable that they would kill their innocent children, who were so indulgent to their families, as not to meddle with the spoil.

Matthew Poole's English Annotations on the Holy Bible (1683–1685) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword/MySword module.

11. The king granted the Jews… to stand for their life — But would not the Jews have defended themselves without any such order from the king? They could expect nothing but death at the worst, and every human instinct would have prompted them to have fought with all energy for their lives and their families. True; but without special grant from the king they would not have been allowed to arm and prepare themselves for self-defence at all. Any movement looking to a general preparation to stand on the defensive would have been watched by the rulers of the provinces, and crushed at its very inception as an act of treason. A spasmodic defence with empty hands would have accomplished nothing; but the king’s decree gave the Jews authority to arm themselves with the sword. Est_9:5. Observe, the Jews were not authorized by this second edict to take the offensive, and destroy whom they would, but only to defend themselves when any would assault them. There would be no slaughter at all if their enemies did not first attack the Jews. This again obviates the objection often urged against the credibility of this history, that no king would have authorized such a civil war throughout all his dominions. The probability was, that when the Jews were thus permitted to arm themselves and stand on the defensive, there would be no conflict at all. But the result showed that so bitter was the hatred of the heathen towards the Jews, that in many parts of the empire they endeavoured, in spite of all the danger, to destroy the Jewish population. The result was the slaughter of seventy-five thousand men, (Est_9:16,) besides those that fell in Shushan. All arguments based on an assumption of what ordinary rulers would have done or would not have done are futile and foolish when dealing with such a king as Xerxes.

Little ones and women — These would hardly be expected to assault the Jews, but Mordecai would make his letters as broad and comprehensive as those of Haman. Compare Est_3:13. This clause authorized the Jews to carry their vengeance to the wives and children of those who assaulted them, for their enemies would not spare the Jewish wife and child.

Daniel D. Whedon (gen. ed.), Commentary on the Old and New Testaments (1874–1909) — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

Wherein the king granted. Rather, "that the king granted." Mordecai sent "letters," which said "that the king granted to the Jews to gather themselves together," etc. To gather themselves together. Union is strength. If all the Jews of a province were allowed to collect and band themselves together, they would at once be a formidable body. Scattered in the various towns and villages, they might easily have been overpowered. To stand for their life. The Jews have sometimes been spoken of as the aggressors on the actual 13th of Adar, but there is no evidence to support this view. The edict clearly only allowed them to stand on the defensive. Of course, when fighting once began, both sides did their worst. In repelling attack the Jews had the same liberty to destroy, to slay, and to cause to perish as their adversaries. (Est_3:13) Little ones. Rather, "families." Take the spoil of them for a prey. i.e. "seize their property." The earlier edict had given the same permission to the Jews" enemies. (Est_3:13)

The Pulpit Commentary (1880–1919), ed. H.D.M. Spence-Jones & Joseph S. Exell — public domain. Text from a community e-Sword module.

To stand - To fight for the defense of their lives against all that should seek to destroy them. The power - Either governors or governed, without any exception either of age, dignity, or sex, Both little ones and women - Which is here added, to strike the greater terror into their enemies; and according to the laws and customs of this kingdom; whereby children were punished for their parents offenses: yet we read nothing in the execution of this decree of the slaughter of women or children, nor is it probable, they would kill their innocent children, who were so indulgent to their families, as not to meddle with the spoil.

John Wesley, Explanatory Notes Upon the Whole Bible (1754–1765) — public domain. Text via the GEBible commentary corpus.

and to take their spoils for plunder as was written in the first [letters], but they”—upon the spoils they did not lay their hands,” for they showed everyone that it was not done for the sake of money.

Rashi on the Tanakh — English translations: “The Judaica Press complete Tanach with Rashi, translated by A. J. Rosenberg” (CC BY 4.0); “Pentateuch with Rashi's commentary by M. Rosenbaum and A.M. Silbermann, 1929-1934” (public domain); “The Metsudah Tanach series, Lakewood, N.J” (CC BY 4.0); and “The Book of Joshua, Metsudah Publications, 1997” (CC BY 4.0). Text via Sefaria.