A Theory Connecting Purim to Yom ha’Kipurim Which is NOT Based on Specious Linguistics

Have you heard someone connect Purim to Yom ha'Kippurim? I used to dismiss such ideas as fanciful and lacking any basis ... until I found an actual basis!

Mar 18, 2024

Article voiceover

1×

0:00

-7:00

The Torah content from now through Shushan Purim has been sponsored by Yael. Thank you, Yael, and thank you to all those who support my free shiurim, podcasts, videos, and articles through your sponsorships, Patreon memberships, and paid Substack subscriptions. May Hashem grant the entire Jewish people a happy Purim and a complete redemption from all our enemies!

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this article.

Note: this was originally published on 3/16/22 and 3/17/22 in two parts. I decided to combine them and record an audio version, which is why I’m republishing it on 3/18/24.

A Theory Connecting Purim to Yom ha’Kipurim Which is NOT Based on Specious Linguistics

One of my “Purim pet peeves” is when someone gives a dvar Torah about the thematic relationship between the holidays of Purim and Yom ha’Kipurim on the sole basis of their similar sounding names. This claim rests on two pillars: (1) that both names contain the transliterated word “purim,” and (2) that the prefix “k-” means “like” in Hebrew. The claimant usually starts off with saying: “Yom ha’Kipurim is a yom (day) ki’Purim (like Purim)!” and then goes on to weave their own tapestry of ideas on that foundation.

This cute play on words can serve as a platform for an idea that stands on its own two feet, but anyone who thinks that this constitutes actual evidence hasn’t carefully read the megilah. The pasuk says:

In the first month, which is the month of Nisan, in the twelfth year of King Achashverosh, he cast a pur, which is a lottery, before Haman, from day to day and from this month to the twelfth month, which is the month of Adar. (Esther 3:7, translated by Neima Novetsky)

Why does the pasuk need to clarify what “pur” means? Ibn Ezra (ibid.) answers: because it’s a Persian word. Neima Novetsky, citing the BDB entry for פור, suggests that “pur” might stem from the Akkadian "puru," meaning “stone” or “lot.” Either way, “Purim” is not a Hebrew word, and therefore has no linguistic relationship to Yom ha’Kipurim – a Hebrew word from the root K.P.R. meaning “atone.”

Folk etymology aside, I was curious about the origins of the claim that there exists any sort of relationship between Purim and Yom ha’Kipurim. Despite the ubiquity of this notion, I barely found any references in the early sources. The Maharal of Prague (16th century) writes about this in his introduction to Ohr Chadash, referencing material from the medieval (11th century) Midrash Mishlei (9:2, Buber). This relationship is also mentioned in Tikkunei Zohar (21, 57b). Still, I wasn’t able to find any direct references in the works of Chazal, the Geonim, or the Rishonim … until yesterday. Rambam (Hilchos Megilah v’Chanukah 2:17) writes:

It is better for a person to be excessive in gifts to the poor than to be excessive in his meal and in sending [gifts] to his fellows, for there exists no greater or more glorious simchah (joy) than to bring simchah to the hearts of the poor, the orphans, the widows, and the converts, for one who brings simchah to the hearts of these downtrodden individuals resembles the shechinah (divine providence), as it is stated: “to bring life to the spirit of the lowly and to bring life to the heart of the oppressed” (Yeshaya 57:15).

Where do we hear this pasuk in Yeshayahu every year? In the haftarah of Yom ha’Kipurim. This makes Rambam the earliest source (to my knowledge) who relates the two holidays, albeit indirectly. Even though the application of this pasuk from Yeshayahu to Purim is a chidush (novel insight) on the Rambam’s part, caring for downtrodden individuals is undeniably one of the major themes of Purim. Moreover, Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik notes that it is always preferable to base a philosophical idea on a halachic (legalistic) source rather than an aggadic (homiletical) one:

With aggada, we are not sure that what we say is correct. We have no tradition as to the interpretation of the maxim, as we do in halachah. When testing philosophical ideas, it is thus preferable to introduce a halachic, rather than aggadic, motif. (The Rav Thinking Aloud, by David Holzer, p.65)

Now that we’ve established that there is a thematic relationship between Purim and Yom ha’Kippurim which is reflected in halacha, the question remains: What is that relationship?

The haftarah of Yom ha’Kippurim opens with the pasuk cited by the Rambam in Hilchos Megilah 2:17. The navi then goes on to answer the question asked of Hashem by the Jews at that time: “Why did we fast and You did not see? Why did we afflict our souls and You did not know?” (ibid. 58:3). The navi answers:

Can such be the fast I choose: a day when man merely afflicts himself? Can it be merely bowing one’s head like a bulrush and spreading sackcloth and ashes? Do you call this a fast and a day of favor to Hashem? Surely, this is the fast I choose: to break open the shackles of wickedness, to undo the bonds of injustice, and to let the oppressed go free, and annul all perversion. Surely you should break your bread for the hungry, and bring the moaning poor [to your] home; when you see a naked person, clothe him; and do not hide yourself from your kin. Then your light will burst out like the dawn and your healing will speedily sprout; your righteous deed will precede you and the glory of Hashem will gather you in. Then you will call and Hashem will respond; you will cry out and He will say, “Here I am!” If you remove from your midst perversion, finger-pointing, and evil speech, and offer your soul to the hungry, and satisfy the afflicted soul; then your light will shine in the darkness, and your deepest gloom will be like the noon. (ibid. 58:3-10)

The message is clear: no matter how devoutly we fast and cry out in prayer, Hashem will not respond until we repair our relationships with our fellow human beings. One can only enter the realm of bein adam l’Makom (between man and God) through the gate of bein adam l’chaveiro (between man and his fellow man).

This theme is certainly appropriate to Yom ha’Kippurim: a day on which we appeal to Hashem to accept our prayers, our fasting, and our teshuvah. But what does this have to do with Purim? According to the Rambam: everything! In his introduction to the Mishneh Torah, at the end of the list of mitzvos, Rambam explains the central theme of Purim and identifies its basis in the Torah itself:

… the Prophets, along with Beis Din, instituted and commanded us in the reading of the Megilah in its proper time in order to recall the praises of Ha’Kadosh Baruch Hu and the salvations He did for us, that He was near to our outcry, in order to bless Him and to praise Him, and in order to make known to the coming generations that that which was stated in the Torah is true, as it is stated, "For which is a great nation that has a God Who is close to it, as is Hashem, our God, whenever we call to Him?" (Devarim 4:7).

Purim memorializes the most dramatic instance in history of Hashem’s promise to be “a God Who is close to [us] … whenever we call to Him.” The Megilah clearly states that the Jews fasted at the behest of Esther in response to the threat of Haman. We can infer that this fasting was accompanied by prayer and teshuvah as well. But the narrative in the Megilah alone might lead us to make a grave error, namely, to assume that fasting and prayer are enough to warrant a response from Hashem. But they are not enough, as Yeshayahu and all the other neviim have reminded us throughout the ages.

This, I believe, is the thematic connection between Purim and Yom ha’Kippurim. Both days share the theme of calling out to Hashem in hopes that He will answer us. Both, therefore, are in need of the reminder that Hashem only responds to those who “walk in His ways” (ibid. 11:22), “to bring life to the spirit of the lowly and to bring life to the heart of the oppressed.” Perhaps this is why the mitzvos of mishloach manos and matanos la’evyonim were instituted: to remind us, on a day commemorating Hashem’s response to our outcry, that we will only merit such a response if we promote love and peace between our fellow Jews and enact righteousness and justice on behalf of the oppressed.

What do you think of this explanation? Can you think of another substantive connection between the two holidays — one which is not based on spurious linguistics?

The Rabbi Schneeweiss Substack

Discussion about this post