Skip to main content

Haman v Mordecai


                “Go at once,” the king commanded Haman. “Get the robe and the horse and do just as you have suggested for Mordecai the Jew, who sits at the king’s gate. Do not neglect anything you have recommended.” 
                So Haman got the robe and the horse. He robed Mordecai, and led him on horseback through the city streets, proclaiming before him, “This is what is done for the man the king delights to honor!” 
                 Afterward Mordecai returned to the king’s gate. But Haman rushed home, with his head covered in grief, and told Zeresh his wife and all his friends everything that had happened to him. 
            His advisers and his wife Zeresh said to him, “Since Mordecai, before whom your downfall has started, is of Jewish origin, you cannot stand against him—you will surely come to ruin!” While they were still talking with him, the king’s eunuchs arrived and hurried Haman away to the banquet Esther had prepared. (Esther 6:10-14)
 
            Lightning out of a clear blue sky. Mordecai? Mordecai?! 
           There is some wonderful comparisons and contrasts going on here.
 
Mordecai
Haman
Reports treasonous activity to king
Reports treasonous activity to king
King responds to report
King responds to report
Returns to life as usual
Campaigns for a specific result
Involved only those who were involved
Involved the whole Jewish community
Romance and life
Tragedy and death
             Don’t get me wrong Haman told the king the truth. The Jews were a rebellious bunch. That’s why they weren’t in Israel. But Haman didn’t report it for the king’s sake. He reported it for his own. And now his tragedy is unfolding.
            A tragedy isn’t just a story in which “everyone dies, the end.” A tragedy is a story in which the decisions of the character lead to his destruction and the destruction of all those around him. Haman went way beyond Lex Talionis. He was not interested in justice, he was interested in revenge against people who did nothing wrong to him, whose crime (if it was a crime) was against his ancestors by their ancestors. 
            The lesson I’m hearing in this is that we need to be very careful about our motivations. Justice does not equal revenge, and when the “justice” we seek is in excess of the damaged caused and not from those who actually caused the damage, it is no longer justice. This means “social justice” is not justice. It is inherently unjust and the sort of thing we must associate with the Hamans of the world, not the Mordecais.

Comments