'Purim is about survival, not slaughter': Chief Rabbi slams Guardian Purim column

The Chief Rabbi explained how The Book of Esther emphasises that when the Jews of Persia were allowed to defend themselves, they took no spoils.

“Precisely because they were motivated not by a desire for revenge or the thrill of conquest, but by self-defence,” he added.

The Chief Rabbi's remarks come in response to Beinart’s article published on Tuesday in which he wrote that Purim’s narrative of Jewish victory over their enemies might be read as a justification for violence.

Beinart wrote: "Purim isn’t only about the danger Gentiles pose to us. It’s also about the danger we pose to them. Most of us ignore the violence that concludes the Esther scroll. Some contemporary Jews justify it as self-defense. With the blood of their foes barely dry, the Jews feast and make merry. That's the origin of Purim."

Mirvis, however, insisted that the Purim festival is a reminder of Jewish survival, not zealotry or vengeance.

"Indeed, this is why Purim is observed to this day without reference to military prowess or vengeance, but with charity for the poor, gifts of food and special meals," the Chief Rabbi said.

"Beinart’s astonishing attempt to present the origin of Purim as an expression of bloodlust and religious zeal for the downfall of our enemies is utterly baseless and a misappropriation of the true meaning of Purim."

In his article, Beinart drew a parallel between the violence in the Book of Esther and modern-day Israel's military actions, suggesting that the Purim story should be read with discomfort in light of Israel's power over Palestinians.

He argued, “The conclusion of the book of Esther was a harmless and even understandable fantasy. Who can blame a tormented people for dreaming of a world turned upside down? But the ending reads differently when a Jewish state wields life and death power over millions of Palestinians who lack even a passport.”

Beinart's piece drew a direct comparison between the Purim story and modern-day Israel, and he suggested that the celebration of Purim should come with a sombre reflection on the violence Jews have committed throughout history.

He wrote: “Today, these blood-soaked verses should unsettle us. When we recite them aloud in synagogue, we should employ the anguished, sorrowful tune in which we chant the book of Lamentations, which depicts the destruction of our ancient temples."

In his piece, Beinart also alluded to historical events, stating: "If only someone had done this to the Nazis in 1938, we could be celebrating Purim II, instead of mourning on Yom HaShoah."

However, Rabbi Mirvis rejected this view, calling it offensive to suggest that Jews are somehow indifferent to the suffering of Palestinians.

He said: "The atrocities of 7 October and the consequent war in Gaza have caused immense human suffering, including for many innocent Palestinian civilians.

“The Jewish communities that I engage with around the UK and across the world are acutely aware of that fact and we long for a day when Israelis and Palestinians can live alongside one another in peace. The suggestion that we are oblivious to such suffering is false and offensive."

Mirvis concluded by denouncing Beinart’s suggestion that Jews are indifferent to the suffering of others. "But the implication that Jews might actively turn away from it precisely because of our Judaism crosses the line from provocative opinion journalism into hateful invective.”