Although women are generally exempt from time-bound positive commandments, the mitzvah to read or hear Megillat Esther on Purim is a noted exception.  Along with the mitzvot of Chanukah candles and the four cups of wine drunk at the Pesach seder, the reason given is “אף הן היו באותו הנס,” that women, also, were part of the miracle.[1]  Rashbam[2] explains that women were instrumental in all three of the miracles that precipitated these commemorative mitzvot.  The Gemara elsewhere[3] states that “because of the righteous women were we redeemed from Egypt,” and includes a list of the virtuous acts done by the women at that time.  A large part of the Chanukah victory is attributed to Judith, who killed the Greek general Holifernes.[4]  Finally, the role of Esther in the Purim story is obvious.  Rashbam says that because these miracles were so dependent on the acts of women, women have an unusual connection to these mitzvot and are obligated in them, though one might think they are exempt. 

Tosfot[5] quotes Rashbam on this matter and rejects his explanation.  In Rashbam's view, we have these mitzvot because the miracles were precipitated by the acts of women.  However, the language of “they, too, were part of the miracle” implies that the miracles would have happened anyway, but since women were included too, they also take part in the commemoration.  Tosfot suggests that a better understanding of this idea is that since, in all of these stories, the women were being persecuted along with the men, the miracles saved their lives just as much as those of the male population.  Therefore, women are obligated to take part in these mitzvot that are tributes of praise and thanks to Hashem. 

Although much has been written about this topic, I would like to focus on these two approaches.  Why would Rashbam, who is tremendously attuned to linguistic nuances in his Biblical commentary, offer an explanation that is counter to the implication of the words of the Gemara?  Is there some reason he didn’t offer the same explanation as Tosfot, which seems to be more obvious? 

Although I can’t guess what Rashbam was actually thinking, it does occur to me that there is a fundamental difference between these two possible approaches.  The way Tosfot explain it, these three mitzvot commemorate miraculous acts of Hashem that brought salvation for the entire Jewish nation.  Rashbam’s view, however, takes into account the human effort involved.  Hashem performs miracles for all of us every day, whether we see them or not.  How often, though, does the entire Jewish nation rise as one and leave exile or fight for our very existence?  By pointing out the unusual contributions of women to these causes, Rashbam draws our attention to everyone’s contributions.  Hashem did not simply smite the Persian mobs given free reign to kill all the Jews.   The Jews themselves had to fight back, and they did.  As their neighbors turned against them, they fought, suffered casualties, and surely witnessed some of the worst aspects of human nature. They survived, however, and succeeded in defending their identity. 

Obviously, as Tosfot points out, we owe our continued existence as a nation to Hashem.  Nevertheless, sometimes Hashem requires effort and action from us.  If we indeed put forth that effort, don’t we deserve to be proud?  Shouldn’t we also celebrate the effect these experiences had on our sense of national unity and identity?  Is it wrong to look back at our history and use our past victories as a source of confidence and strength in facing modern adversaries?

Again, there is much more to be said about the idea of “אף הן היו באותו הנס,” and no one can say exactly what caused Tosfot and Rashbam to write what they did.  However, perhaps the thoughts I’ve laid out here still have some merit.  I fervently hope that such calamities never befall us again, but if they do, we know that we have survived in the past, and we can survive it again in the future.

[1]  Megilla 4a, Pesachim108a-b.

[2]  Pesachim108b.

[3]  Sotah11b.

[4]  Shabbos 23a and Rashi "היו באותו הנס".

[5]  Megilla 4a, “שאף הן היו באותו הנס”.