In making his accusation against the Jews, Haman carefully avoids identifying them by name. This pattern of accusation without identification is repeated several times in the book of Esther until the climactic accusation by Esther of Haman (see 7.4-6).
The Jews were scattered abroad and dispersed among the peoples in all the provinces. The Jews were scattered, that is, they were living in exile.
The word dispersed is often understood as a synonym of scattered (so Revised Standard Version, Good News Translation), meaning that the Jews were separated from one another. But the Hebrew word translated as dispersed in Revised Standard Version should probably be understood to mean “separated from other peoples” (so New Revised Standard Version), meaning that the Jews did not eat with or intermarry with the Gentiles among whom they lived (also Bible en français courant). This latter interpretation is found in New American Bible, “Dispersed among the nations throughout the provinces of your kingdom, there is a certain people living apart, with laws differing from those of every other people,” and New Jerusalem Bible, “There is a certain unassimilated nation scattered among the other nations throughout the provinces of your realm.” Other models for this interpretation are “a certain people scattered and unassimilated among the peoples” (FOX) and “There is one people scattered and distinctive among the nations” (Gordis).
Provinces: see 1.1.
Their laws: Haman’s indictment of the Jews rests on their laws and the king’s laws. The laws obeyed by the Jews are different from everyone else’s, and they do not obey the king’s laws. The word for laws is the same as that found in “the laws of the Persians and the Medes” (1.19; see also 1.8, 13; 2.8) and is used for both the laws of the Jews and the king’s laws. Some versions interpret the first to be “customs” (Bible en français courant, New International Version), but this lessens the impact of the contrast presented by the author.
And they do not keep the king’s law: these words are connected to the preceding words with the conjunction and (waw), which joins together nouns and clauses. The precise function of this conjunction is often determined by the surface grammar of a passage within its context. In this instance interpreters differ on the exact relationship between this clause and the preceding clause. According to Revised Standard Version (and), the second criticism of the Jews is no more severe than the first, that is, that their laws are different (so also New International Version, New Jerusalem Bible, Traduction œcuménique de la Bible, Bible en français courant). Good News Translation, however, understands the second clause to be a heightening of the accusation and translates the Hebrew conjunction with the word “moreover.” Similar to Good News Translation are Nova Tradução na Linguagem de Hoje and Parola Del Signore: La Bibbia in Lingua Corrente, “but in addition.” The context is sufficiently ambiguous that translators must decide between these two interpretations without any more evidence to help make the decision.
It is not for the king’s profit to tolerate them: this means that it is of no use or of no benefit to the king to let them be. “It will not help the king” to let the Jews continue to exist as they have been, or “to let them continue living in your kingdom” (Biblia Dios Habla Hoy).
Quoted with permission from Omanson, Roger L. and Noss, Philip A. A Handbook on Esther (The Hebrew Text). (UBS Helps for Translators). New York: UBS, 1997. For this and other handbooks for translators see here .