- This topic has 14 replies, 6 voices, and was last updated 9 years, 8 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
The Gemara in Sanhedrin 74a-b discusses aveiros which are ???? ??? ?????. The gemara says:
?? ??? ???? ??? ??? ????? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?? ???? ??? ?????? ??? ??????? ????? ???? ??? ???? ??? ?????
Shortly thereafter the Gemara asks:
??? ???? ?????? ????
Rashi explains:
?????? ????? ??? ???? ???? ?????
Lichora, there is another issur that should have been ???? ??? ????? since it was ??????? – the Rambam in Hilchos Melachim 1:5 writes:
??? ??????? ??? ??????
Esther should have had to give up her life rather than be queen.
The Gemara gives two answers:
??? ???? ???? ???? ???? ???? ??? ??? ???? ???? ????
Rashi explains:
???? ???? ???. ???? ???? ???? ??? ???? ?? ????
???? ????. ???? ????? ?????? ??????? ?????? ??? ????? ???? ?????? ???? ???? ??? ???? ??? ????? ?? ??
Both of these answers would also explain why being queen wasn’t ???? ??? ????? – Achashverosh appointed her as queen but she didn’t actually do anything, and it was ????? ????.
In fact this actually reads beautifully as the Gemara’s question and answer. Though one could argue that the whole issue never begins because the issur is only to appoint a queen over the Jewish Kingdom.
Jewish ????? weren’t married?
Rambam’s issur seems only to be for a woman to be the queen regnant over the Jewish nation not merely the queen consort. If so, that means Esther wasn’t even a problematic question regarding Rambam’s issur since only Achashveiros was regnant and Esther only consort.
Though it does raise the question how the Jewish nation did in fact have a queen regnant on occasion. Perhaps those instances were violations of Jewish law.
I actually posed this very question to my rov, because there is an inyan that Esther was actually married to Mordechai, in which case, was she guilty of arayos. My rov said she was an anusah ,(which we learn from “vatilakach,” she was TAKEN, against her will).
What kind of ???? do you think Esther was?
Rambam’s issur seems only to be for a woman to be the queen regnant over the Jewish nation not merely the queen consort.
Perhaps.
Why is “perhaps” the best response you can muster to my point? There’s a great difference between queen regnant and queen consort that its silly to pretend both are the same or the same application made on one is naturally applicable to the other.
Esther was a Queen Consort. The Queen ruler in eretz yisroel was a concept of eis lasos and the Rambam would admit that in such a case it was OK. She ruled with the assent of Sanhedrin. Wives of ancient kings were either a Queen if the king wanted her as such, or a princess. The women in the harem were just royals with no title. A queen’s consort is never a king.
What kind of authority did Esther have?
She had the kind of authority that every clever wife has over her husband.
i dont get the op’s question
The Rambam “pretends” that any position of authority is the same as being a king.
A queen consort has no inherent authority.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.