Let's look at the Heb. for a moment (all translations mine):
8.11
אשר נתן המלך ליהודים אשר בכל-עיר-ועיר, להיקהל ולעמוד על-נפשם--להשמיד ולהרוג ולאבד את-כל-חיל עם ומדינה
הצרים אותם, טף ונשים; ושללם, לבוז
..that the king gave to the Jews that are in each in every city, to congregate and to defend themselves - to destroy , kill and make perish all the armies of a people and province that are assaulting them, women and children; and their property, to pillage.
I take
women and children to mean [including women and children], i.e. the Jews have a dispensation to kill not only "hayil" (soldiers) but their women and children. The syntax is ambiguous here, but I am pretty sure the "taf vanashim" refers to women and children of the enemies of the Jews; the pronominal reference would be different if women and children of the Jews were meant. Then again, the syntax of Esther tends to be weird due to Babylonian influences.
However, please remember that this phrasing is the
dispensation from the king of what the Jews were permitted to do. What the Jews actually do is different:
9.15-16
וייקהלו היהודים אשר-בשושן, גם ביום ארבעה עשר לחודש אדר, ויהרגו בשושן, שלוש מאות איש; ובביזה--לא שלחו, את-ידם. ושאר היהודים אשר במדינות המלך נקהלו ועמוד על-נפשם, ונוח מאויביהם, והרוג בשונאיהם, חמישה ושבעים אלף; ובביזה--לא שלחו, את-ידם.
And the Jews in Susan the capital gathered also on the fourteenth of Hadar and killed in Susan 300 men ("ish") and did not lend their hands to pillage.
And the rest of the Jews that were in the provinces of the king congregated to defend themselves and to get respite from their enemies and to kill those who hated them, 75 thousand; and did not lend their hands to pillage.
Anashim, nashim va-taf is an expression that means "men women, and children", showing that men (
anashim; singular
ish and counting form also
ish) were counted separately from women and children. This shows us that in Susan the capital only 300
men were killed by the Jews.
As for whether women and children were killed by Jews in the provinces, the text does not give us an indication since only the numbers are mentioned. As far as I remember the commentators extrapolate from the happenings in Susan to claim that only men were killed in the provinces. I can open the relevant books if you have a real interest.
Beyond this purely academic discussion: no, we are certainly not celebrating the fact that so many people were killed, whether or not they were men, women and/or children. In most synagogues I have been to on Purim, these parts are read very quickly, though not erased (we should not be glossing over our history even when it becomes unpleasant).
As for what we are celebrating: we are celebrating the fact that despite the exile and the shameful and horrible situation for the Jewish people, in which a woman could be taken away from her guardian and basically raped (glamorously - by the king - but it does not change the fact that she was not asked and could be discarded at any moment like the other women before her) and despite the almost-genocide, Jews - through their faith, and smarts, and humility, and other good qualities - managed to avoid this fate.
Both Passover and Purim are essentially stories of almost-genocide and delivery. The difference between Purim and Passover lies, among other things, in the ways Jews remember their enemies. During the events of Passover, it is G-d who punishes the Egyptians by sending them the ten plagues. During Passover Seder(s) we grieve for the Egyptians by spilling drops of wine from our cups for every single plague.
During Purim, it is Jews themselves who punish their enemies, and the celebrations do not include any kind of commiseration for the enemies killed. This is why Passover is a major holiday and Purim a minor holiday.
Hope this helps.
P.S. Bravo, I also read your initial post as antisemitic. The kind of question they used to ask me before they would punch me on the nose for being Jewish.
I would advise you, if you did not intend to come across as antisemitic, to tamper your phrasing somewhat to avoid such misunderstandings in the future.
Rose
