The day of the great reversal reaches its dramatic peak as the Jews, once living under the shadow of total annihilation, assume absolute control. Acting with immense power and unwavering confidence, they execute justice against those who sought their ruin.
The assault against these attackers unfolds in three escalating stages: a strike of the sword, guaranteed death, and total destruction. A blow from a weapon does not always result in death, so the narrative emphasizes that these strikes ended in certain fatalities [עמנואל הרומי, אור חדש, מנות הלוי]. The final stage of destruction represents an even more absolute end. While a slain person is typically brought to burial, this ultimate ruin implies the complete physical obliteration of the body until nothing remains [אור חדש], or the total erasure of the attackers' memory from history [מנות הלוי]. Some commentators suggest this final devastation specifically targeted the families of the aggressors [אבן עזרא], or involved physical punishments designed to sever the males' reproductive capabilities, ensuring they would leave no future offspring [מחיר יין, אלשיך].
The retribution is divided between two distinct groups: the enemies who suffered the fatal blows, and the haters who were subjected entirely to the will of the victors. This division prompts an exploration of the fundamental difference between an enemy and a hater. One approach suggests that an enemy is someone who actively and openly pursues harm, whereas a hater harbors secret animosity in their heart, merely wishing to cause pain [מגילת סתרים, מלבי״ם]. Conversely, others argue the exact opposite. They propose that an enemy keeps their hostility hidden, while a hater brings their malice into reality, actively oppressing the people of Israel much like the historical nation of Amalek [אלשיך]. These adversaries are specifically identified as Haman, Zeresh, and their sons [מחיר יין], or as the enduring, historical enemies of God [יוסף אבן יחיא].
The distinction between these groups dictated the nature of the retaliation. General adversaries were met with a swift strike of the sword [יוסף אבן יחיא]. However, the treatment of the haters, who were dealt with however the victors pleased, is understood in several ways. Because the Jews operated with complete security and without government interference, they were able to carry out their actions calmly and methodically [מנות הלוי]. Some explain that those who only harbored hatred in their hearts were not physically harmed at all. Instead, they were merely subdued, stripped of their authority, and publicly humiliated [מלבי״ם, מגילת סתרים]. Another perspective argues that the most notorious and inherently evil haters actually faced much heavier penalties, suffering varied, unusual, and disgraceful executions [אבן עזרא, יוסף אבן יחיא, אור חדש]. Finally, a profound reading suggests that acting according to will does not refer to the desires of the Jews, but rather to the original intentions of the haters themselves. In a perfect execution of poetic justice, the Jews did to their haters exactly what those haters had plotted to do to Israel in the original decrees of annihilation, closing the circle measure for measure [אלשיך, עמנואל הרומי, מנות הלוי].