Megillah No.1: The Whole Megillah
כֵּיצַד: חָל לִהְיוֹת אַרְבָּעָה עָשָׂר בַּשֵּׁנִי — כְּפָרִים וַעֲיָירוֹת גְּדוֹלוֹת קוֹרִין בּוֹ בַיּוֹם, וּמוּקָּפוֹת חוֹמָה לְמָחָר. חָל לִהְיוֹת בַּשְּׁלִישִׁי אוֹ בָּרְבִיעִי — כְּפָרִים מַקְדִּימִין לְיוֹם הַכְּנִיסָה, וַעֲיָירוֹת גְּדוֹלוֹת קוֹרִין בּוֹ בַיּוֹם, וּמוּקָּפוֹת חוֹמָה לְמָחָר.
How so? If the fourteenth of Adar occurs on Monday, the villages and large towns read it on that day, and the walled cities read it on the next day, the fifteenth. If the fourteenth occurs on Tuesday or Wednesday, the villages advance their reading to the day of assembly, i.e., Monday, the twelfth or thirteenth of Adar; the large towns read it on that day, i.e., the fourteenth of Adar, and the walled cities read it on the next day, the fifteenth.
״וַיְהִי בִּימֵי אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ״, אָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי וְאִיתֵּימָא רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן: דָּבָר זֶה מָסוֹרֶת בְּיָדֵינוּ מֵאַנְשֵׁי כְּנֶסֶת הַגְּדוֹלָה, כׇּל מָקוֹם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״וַיְהִי״ אֵינוֹ אֶלָּא לְשׁוֹן צַעַר.
§ The Gemara returns to the primary topic of this chapter, the book of Esther. The Gemara cites various aggadic interpretations of the verses of the Megilla. The opening verse of the Megilla states: “And it came to pass [vayhi] in the days of Ahasuerus” (Esther 1:1). Rabbi Levi said, and some say that it was Rabbi Yonatan who said: This matter is a tradition that we received from the members of the Great Assembly. Anywhere that the word vayhi is stated, it is an ominous term indicating nothing other than impending grief, as if the word were a contraction of the words vai and hi, meaning woe and mourning.

"The Babylonian Esther Midrash: a Critical Commentary"

Eliezer Segal

This work, in three volumes, consists of a translation and critical commentary to folios 10b-17a of the Babylonian Talmud Tractate Megillah. The material contained therein comprises the only full midrashic exposition of an entire biblical book to have been incorporated into the Babylonian Talmud, making it the only complete midrashic work that has come down to us from that prominent Jewish community and its rabbinic teachers.

Sermons in the Talmudic Period

Joseph Heinemann

Volume 26, edited by Joseph Heinemann, illustrates with twenty examples one of the central institutions of the Talmudic period: the public sermon.

רַבִּי יוֹנָתָן פָּתַח לַהּ פִּיתְחָא לְהַאי פָּרַשְׁתָּא מֵהָכָא: ״וְקַמְתִּי עֲלֵיהֶם וְגוֹ׳ וְהִכְרַתִּי לְבָבֶל שֵׁם וּשְׁאָר וְנִין וָנֶכֶד נְאֻם ה׳״. ״שֵׁם״ — זֶה הַכְּתָב, ״שְׁאָר״ — זֶה לְשׁוֹן, ״נִין״ — זֶה מַלְכוּת, ״וָנֶכֶד״ — זוֹ וַשְׁתִּי. רַבִּי שְׁמוּאֵל בַּר נַחְמָנִי, פָּתַח לַהּ פִּיתְחָא לְהַאי פָּרַשְׁתָּא מֵהָכָא: ״תַּחַת הַנַּעֲצוּץ יַעֲלֶה בְרוֹשׁ וְתַחַת הַסִּרְפַּד יַעֲלֶה הֲדַס״. ״תַּחַת הַנַּעֲצוּץ״ — תַּחַת הָמָן הָרָשָׁע שֶׁעָשָׂה עַצְמוֹ עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, דִּכְתִיב: ״וּבְכֹל הַנַּעֲצוּצִים וּבְכֹל הַנַּהֲלוֹלִים״. ״יַעֲלֶה בְּרוֹשׁ״ — זֶה מָרְדֳּכַי שֶׁנִּקְרָא רֹאשׁ לְכׇל הַבְּשָׂמִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְאַתָּה קַח לְךָ בְּשָׂמִים רֹאשׁ מׇר דְּרוֹר״, וּמְתַרְגְּמִינַן: ״מֹר דְּכֵי״. ״תַּחַת הַסִּרְפַּד״ — תַּחַת וַשְׁתִּי הָרְשָׁעָה בַּת בְּנוֹ שֶׁל נְבוּכַדְנֶצַּר הָרָשָׁע שֶׁשָּׂרַף רְפִידַת בֵּית ה׳, דִּכְתִיב: ״רְפִידָתוֹ זָהָב״. ״יַעֲלֶה הֲדַס״ — זוֹ אֶסְתֵּר הַצַּדֶּקֶת שֶׁנִּקְרֵאתָ הֲדַסָּה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיְהִי אוֹמֵן אֶת הֲדַסָּה״. ״וְהָיָה לַה׳ לְשֵׁם״ — זוֹ מִקְרָא מְגִילָּה. ״לְאוֹת עוֹלָם לֹא יִכָּרֵת״ — אֵלּוּ יְמֵי פוּרִים. רַבִּי יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בֶּן לֵוִי פָּתַח לַהּ פִּיתְחָא לְהַאי פָּרַשְׁתָּא מֵהָכָא: ״וְהָיָה כַּאֲשֶׁר שָׂשׂ ה׳ עֲלֵיכֶם לְהֵיטִיב אֶתְכֶם כֵּן יָשִׂישׂ ... לְהָרַע אֶתְכֶם״. וּמִי חָדֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא בְּמַפַּלְתָּן שֶׁל רְשָׁעִים? וְהָא כְּתִיב: ״בְּצֵאת לִפְנֵי הֶחָלוּץ וְאוֹמְרִים הוֹדוּ לַה׳ כִּי לְעוֹלָם חַסְדּוֹ״, וְאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: מִפְּנֵי מָה לֹא נֶאֱמַר ״כִּי טוֹב״ בְּהוֹדָאָה זוֹ? לְפִי שֶׁאֵין הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא שָׂמֵחַ בְּמַפַּלְתָּן שֶׁל רְשָׁעִים. וְאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן, מַאי דִּכְתִיב: ״וְלֹא קָרַב זֶה אֶל זֶה כׇּל הַלָּיְלָה״ — בִּקְּשׁוּ מַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת לוֹמַר שִׁירָה, אָמַר הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: מַעֲשֵׂה יָדַי טוֹבְעִין בַּיָּם, וְאַתֶּם אוֹמְרִים שִׁירָה? אָמַר רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר: הוּא אֵינוֹ שָׂשׂ, אֲבָל אֲחֵרִים מֵשִׂישׂ. וְדַיְקָא נָמֵי, דִּכְתִיב: ״כֵּן יָשִׂישׂ״, וְלָא כְּתִיב ״יָשׂוּשׂ״. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ. רַבִּי אַבָּא בַּר כָּהֲנָא פָּתַח לַהּ פִּיתְחָא לְהַאי פָּרַשְׁתָּא מֵהָכָא: ״לְאָדָם שֶׁטּוֹב לְפָנָיו נָתַן חׇכְמָה וְדַעַת וְשִׂמְחָה״ — זֶה מָרְדֳּכַי הַצַּדִּיק, ״וְלַחוֹטֶא נָתַן עִנְיָן לֶאֱסוֹף וְלִכְנוֹס״ — זֶה הָמָן, ״לָתֵת לְטוֹב לִפְנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים״ — זֶה מָרְדְּכַי וְאֶסְתֵּר, דִּכְתִיב: ״וַתָּשֶׂם אֶסְתֵּר אֶת מׇרְדֳּכַי עַל בֵּית הָמָן״. רַבָּה בַּר עוֹפְרָן פָּתַח לַהּ פִּיתְחָא לְהַאי פָּרַשְׁתָּא מֵהָכָא: ״וְשַׂמְתִּי כִסְאִי בְּעֵילָם וְהַאֲבַדְתִּי מִשָּׁם מֶלֶךְ וְשָׂרִים״. ״מֶלֶךְ״ — זוֹ וַשְׁתִּי, ״וְשָׂרִים״ — זֶה הָמָן וַעֲשֶׂרֶת בָּנָיו. רַב דִּימִי בַּר יִצְחָק פָּתַח לַהּ פִּיתְחָא לְהַאי פָּרַשְׁתָּא מֵהָכָא, ״כִּי עֲבָדִים אֲנַחְנוּ וּבְעַבְדוּתֵנוּ לֹא עֲזָבָנוּ אֱלֹהֵינוּ וַיַּט עָלֵינוּ חֶסֶד לִפְנֵי מַלְכֵי פָרַס״, אֵימָתַי — בִּזְמַן הָמָן. רַבִּי חֲנִינָא בַּר פָּפָּא פָּתַח לַהּ פִּתְחָא לְהָא פָּרַשְׁתָּא מֵהָכָא: ״הִרְכַּבְתָּ אֱנוֹשׁ לְרֹאשֵׁנוּ בָּאנוּ בָאֵשׁ וּבַמַּיִם״, ״בָּאֵשׁ״ — בִּימֵי נְבוּכַדְנֶצַּר הָרָשָׁע. ״וּבַמַּיִם״ — בִּימֵי פַרְעֹה, ״וַתּוֹצִיאֵנוּ לָרְוָיָה״ — בִּימֵי הָמָן. רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן פָּתַח לֵהּ פִּתְחָא לְהָא פָּרַשְׁתָּא מֵהָכָא: ״זָכַר חַסְדּוֹ וֶאֱמוּנָתוֹ לְבֵית יִשְׂרָאֵל רָאוּ כׇל אַפְסֵי אָרֶץ אֵת יְשׁוּעַת אֱלֹהֵינוּ״, אֵימָתַי ״רָאוּ כׇל אַפְסֵי אָרֶץ אֵת יְשׁוּעַת אֱלֹהֵינוּ״ — בִּימֵי מׇרְדֳּכַי וְאֶסְתֵּר. רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ פָּתַח לַהּ פִּתְחָא לְהָא פָּרַשְׁתָּא מֵהָכָא: ״אֲרִי נוֹהֵם וְדוֹב שׁוֹקֵק מוֹשֵׁל רָשָׁע עַל עַם דָּל״, ״אֲרִי נוֹהֵם״ — זֶה נְבוּכַדְנֶצַּר הָרָשָׁע, דִּכְתִיב בֵּיהּ: ״עָלָה אַרְיֵה מִסּוּבְּכוֹ״. ״דּוֹב שׁוֹקֵק״ — זֶה אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ, דִּכְתִיב בֵּיהּ: ״וַאֲרוּ חֵיוָה אׇחֳרִי תִנְיָינָה דָּמְיָה לְדוֹב״, וְתָנֵי רַב יוֹסֵף: אֵלּוּ פַּרְסִיִּים, שֶׁאוֹכְלִין וְשׁוֹתִין כְּדוֹב, וּמְסוּרְבָּלִין בָּשָׂר כְּדוֹב, וּמְגַדְּלִין שֵׂעָר כְּדוֹב, וְאֵין לָהֶם מְנוּחָה כְּדוֹב. ״מוֹשֵׁל רָשָׁע״ — זֶה הָמָן. ״עַל עַם דָּל״ — אֵלּוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל, שֶׁהֵם דַּלִּים מִן הַמִּצְוֹת. רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר פָּתַח לֵהּ פִּתְחָא לְהָא פָּרַשְׁתָּא מֵהָכָא: ״בַּעֲצַלְתַּיִם יִמַּךְ הַמְּקָרֶה וּבְשִׁפְלוּת יָדַיִם יִדְלוֹף הַבָּיִת״, בִּשְׁבִיל עַצְלוּת שֶׁהָיָה לָהֶם לְיִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁלֹּא עָסְקוּ בַּתּוֹרָה, נַעֲשָׂה שׂוֹנְאוֹ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא מָךְ. וְאֵין ״מָךְ״ אֶלָּא עָנִי, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְאִם מָךְ הוּא מֵעֶרְכֶּךָ״, וְאֵין ״מְקָרֶה״ אֶלָּא הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״הַמְקָרֶה בַמַּיִם עֲלִיּוֹתָיו״. רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק פָּתַח לַהּ פִּתְחָא לְהָא פָּרַשְׁתָּא מֵהָכָא: ״שִׁיר הַמַּעֲלוֹת לוּלֵי ה׳ שֶׁהָיָה לָנוּ יֹאמַר נָא יִשְׂרָאֵל. לוּלֵי ה׳ שֶׁהָיָה לָנוּ בְּקוּם עָלֵינוּ אָדָם״. ״אָדָם״ — וְלֹא מֶלֶךְ. רָבָא פָּתַח לַהּ פִּתְחָא לְהָא פָּרַשְׁתָּא מֵהָכָא: ״בִּרְבוֹת צַדִּיקִים יִשְׂמַח הָעָם וּבִמְשׁוֹל רָשָׁע יֵאָנַח עָם״, ״בִּרְבוֹת צַדִּיקִים יִשְׂמַח הָעָם״ — זֶה מׇרְדֳּכַי וְאֶסְתֵּר, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהָעִיר שׁוּשָׁן צָהֲלָה וְשָׂמֵחָה״. ״וּבִמְשׁוֹל רָשָׁע יֵאָנַח עָם״ — זֶה הָמָן, דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהָעִיר שׁוּשָׁן נָבוֹכָה״. רַב מַתְנָה אָמַר מֵהָכָא: ״כִּי מִי גוֹי גָּדוֹל אֲשֶׁר לוֹ אֱלֹהִים קְרוֹבִים אֵלָיו״. רַב אָשֵׁי אָמַר מֵהָכָא: ״אוֹ הֲנִסָּה אֱלֹהִים וְגוֹ׳״.
§ The Gemara cites prologues utilized by various Sages to introduce study of the Megilla: Rabbi Yonatan introduced this passage, the book of Esther, with an introduction from here: “For I will rise up against them, says the Lord of hosts, and cut off from Babylonia name, and remnant, and offspring [nin], and posterity, says the Lord” (Isaiah 14:22). This verse may be interpreted homiletically: “Name,” this is the writing of ancient Babylonia that will disappear from the world. “Remnant,” this is the language of ancient Babylonia. “Offspring,” this is their kingdom. And “posterity,” this is Vashti, who according to tradition was Nebuchadnezzar’s granddaughter, and the book of Esther relates how she too was removed from the throne. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani introduced this passage with an introduction from here: “Instead of the thorn shall the cypress come up, and instead of the nettle shall the myrtle come up; and it shall be to the Lord for a name, for an everlasting sign that shall not be cut off” (Isaiah 55:13). Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥmani interpreted the verse homiletically as referring to the righteous individuals who superseded the wicked ones in the book of Esther. “Instead of the thorn”; this means instead of the wicked Haman. He is referred to as a thorn because he turned himself into an object of idol worship, as he decreed that all must prostrate themselves before him. The Gemara cites proof that the term thorn is used in connection with idol worship, as it is written: “And upon all thorns, and upon all brambles” (Isaiah 7:19), which is understood to be a reference to idol worship. The next section of the verse discusses what will replace the thorns, i.e., Haman: “Shall the cypress [berosh] come up”; this is Mordecai. Why is he called a cypress [berosh]? Because he was called the chief [rosh] of all the spices, as it is stated: “Take you also to yourself the chief spices, of pure myrrh [mar deror]” (Exodus 30:23), and we translate “pure myrrh,” into Aramaic as mari dakhei. Mordecai was like mari dakhi, the chief [rosh] of spices, and therefore he is called berosh. The verse continues: “And instead of the nettle [sirpad],” this means instead of the wicked Vashti. Why is she called a nettle [sirpad]? Because she was the daughter of the son of the wicked Nebuchadnezzar, who burned the ceiling [saraf refidat] of the House of God, as it is written: “Its top [refidato] of gold” (Song of Songs 3:10). The next section of the verse states: “Shall the myrtle [hadas] come up”; this is the righteous Esther, who was called Hadassah in the Megilla, as it is stated: “And he had brought up Hadassah; that is, Esther” (Esther 2:7). The concluding section of the verse states: “And it shall be to the Lord for a name”; this is the reading of the Megilla. “For an everlasting sign that shall not be cut off”; these are the days of Purim. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi introduced this passage with an introduction from here: “And it shall come to pass, that as the Lord rejoiced over you to do you good, and to multiply you; so the Lord will rejoice over you to cause you to perish, and to destroy you” (Deuteronomy 28:63). The verse indicates that just as the Lord rejoiced in the good he did on behalf of Israel, so too, the Lord will rejoice to cause you harm. Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi asked: Does the Holy One, Blessed be He, in fact rejoice over the downfall of the wicked? But it is written: “As they went out before the army, and say: Give thanks to the Lord, for His kindness endures forever” (II Chronicles 20:21), and Rabbi Yoḥanan said: For what reason were the words: “for He is good” not stated in this statement of thanksgiving, as the classic formulation is: “Give thanks to the Lord; for He is good; for His kindness endures forever” (I Chronicles 16:34)? Because the Holy One, Blessed be He, does not rejoice over the downfall of the wicked. Since this song was sung in the aftermath of a military victory, which involved the downfall of the wicked, the name of God was not mentioned for the good. And similarly, Rabbi Yoḥanan said: What is the meaning of that which is written: “And the one came not near the other all the night” (Exodus 14:20)? The ministering angels wanted to sing their song, for the angels would sing songs to each other, as it states: “And they called out to each other and said” (Isaiah 6:3), but the Holy One, Blessed be He, said: The work of My hands, the Egyptians, are drowning at sea, and you wish to say songs? This indicates that God does not rejoice over the downfall of the wicked. Rabbi Elazar said that this is how the matter is to be understood: Indeed, God Himself does not rejoice over the downfall of the wicked, but He causes others to rejoice. The Gemara comments: One can learn from the language of the verse as well, as it is written: “So the Lord will rejoice [ken yasis]” (Deuteronomy 28:63). And it is not written yasus, the grammatical form of the verb meaning: He will rejoice. Rather, it is written yasis. The grammatical form of this verb indicates that one causes another to rejoice. Consequently, these words are understood to mean that God will cause others to rejoice. The Gemara concludes: Indeed, learn from it that this is the case. Rabbi Abba bar Kahana introduced this passage with an introduction from here. The verse states with regard to God’s reward to the righteous: “He gives to a man that is good in His sight wisdom, and knowledge, and joy” (Ecclesiastes 2:26). The Gemara explains that this verse is referring to the righteous Mordecai. With regard to the next part of the verse: “But to the sinner He gives the task of gathering and heaping up,” this is referring to Haman. The conclusion of the verse states: “That he may give it to one who is good before God” (Ecclesiastes 2:26). This is Mordecai and Esther, as it is written: “And Esther set Mordecai over the house of Haman” (Esther 8:2). Rabba bar Oferan introduced this passage with an introduction from here: “And I will set my throne in Elam, and destroy from there the king and the princes, says the Lord” (Jeremiah 49:38). “The king” who was destroyed; this is referring to Vashti. “And the princes”; this is referring to Haman and his ten sons. Rav Dimi bar Yitzḥak introduced this passage with an introduction from here: “For we are bondmen; yet our God has not forsaken us in our bondage, but has extended mercy unto us in the sight of the kings of Persia” (Ezra 9:9). When did this occur? In the time of Haman. Rabbi Ḥanina bar Pappa introduced this passage with an introduction from here: The verse states: “You have caused men to ride over our heads; we went through fire and through water; but You brought us out into abundance” (Psalms 66:12). “Through fire”; this was in the days of the wicked Nebuchadnezzar, who cast the righteous into the furnace. “And through water”; this was in the days of Pharaoh, who decreed that all newborn males be cast into the water. “But You brought us out into abundance”; this was in the days of Haman, where abundant feasts played a pivotal role in their peril and salvation. Rabbi Yoḥanan introduced this passage with an introduction from here: The verse states: “He has remembered His mercy and His faithfulness toward the house of Israel: All the ends of the earth have seen the salvation of our God” (Psalms 98:3). When did all the ends of the earth see the salvation of our God? In the days of Mordecai and Esther, for their peril and salvation became known through the letters sent throughout the empire. Reish Lakish introduced this passage with an introduction from here: “As a roaring lion, and a ravenous bear, so is a wicked ruler over a poor people” (Proverbs 28:15). “A roaring lion”; this is the wicked Nebuchadnezzar, as it is written about him: “The lion has come up from his thicket” (Jeremiah 4:7). “A hungry bear”; this is Ahasuerus, as it is written about him: “And behold, another beast, a second one, like a bear” (Daniel 7:5). And Rav Yosef taught that these who are referred to as a bear in the verse are the Persians. They are compared to a bear, as they eat and drink in large quantities like a bear; and they are coated with flesh like a bear; and they grow their hair long like a bear; and they never rest like a bear, whose manner it is to move about from place to place. “A wicked ruler”; this is Haman. “Over a poor people”; this is the Jewish people, who are referred to in this manner because they are poor in their observance of the mitzvot. Rabbi Elazar introduced this passage with an introduction from here: “Through laziness the rafters [hamekare] sink in [yimakh]; and through idleness of the hands the house leaks” (Ecclesiastes 10:18). Rabbi Elazar interprets the verse homiletically: Through the laziness of the Jewish people, who did not occupy themselves with Torah study, the enemy of the Holy One, Blessed be He, a euphemism for God Himself, became poor [makh], so that, as it were, He was unable to help them, as makh is nothing other than poor, as it is stated: “But if he be too poor [makh] for the valuation” (Leviticus 27:8). And the word mekare in the verse is referring to no one other than the Holy One, Blessed be He, as it is stated: “Who lays the beams [hamekare] of His chambers in the waters” (Psalms 104:3). Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak introduced this passage with an introduction from here: “A song of ascents of David. If not for the Lord Who was with us, let Israel now say; if not for the Lord who was with us, when a man rose up against us” (Psalms 124:1–2). The verse speaks of “a man” who rose up against us and not a king. This occurred in the days of Haman, as he, and not King Ahasuerus, was the chief enemy of the Jewish people. Rava introduced this passage with an introduction from here: “When the righteous are on the increase, the people rejoice; but when the wicked man rules, the people mourn” (Proverbs 29:2). “When the righteous are on the increase, the people rejoice”; this is Mordecai and Esther, as it is written: “And the city of Shushan rejoiced and was glad” (Esther 8:15). “But when the wicked man rules, the people mourn”; this is Haman, as it is written: “But the city of Shushan was perplexed” (Esther 3:15). Rav Mattana said his introduction from here: “For what nation is there so great, that has God so near to them” (Deuteronomy 4:7), as to witness the great miracles in the days of Mordecai and Esther? Rav Ashi said his introduction from here: The verse states: “Or has God ventured to go and take Him a nation from the midst of another nation?” (Deuteronomy 4:34), as in the times of Esther, God saved the Jewish people who were scattered throughout the Persian Empire.
אָמַר רַבִּי לֵוִי: כׇּל פָּסוּק זֶה עַל שׁוּם קׇרְבָּנוֹת נֶאֱמַר. ״כַּרְשְׁנָא״ — אָמְרוּ מַלְאֲכֵי הַשָּׁרֵת לִפְנֵי הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא: רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם, כְּלוּם הִקְרִיבוּ לְפָנֶיךָ כָּרִים בְּנֵי שָׁנָה כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁהִקְרִיבוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל לְפָנֶיךָ? ״שֵׁתָר״ — כְּלוּם הִקְרִיבוּ לְפָנֶיךָ שְׁתֵּי תוֹרִין? ״אַדְמָתָא״ — כְּלוּם בָּנוּ לְפָנֶיךָ מִזְבֵּחַ אֲדָמָה? ״תַּרְשִׁישׁ״ — כְּלוּם שִׁימְּשׁוּ לְפָנֶיךָ בְּבִגְדֵי כְהוּנָּה דִּכְתִיב בְּהוּ ״תַּרְשִׁישׁ וְשֹׁהַם וְיָשְׁפֵה״? ״מֶרֶס״ — כְּלוּם מֵירְסוּ בְּדָם לְפָנֶיךָ? ״מַרְסְנָא״ — כְּלוּם מֵירְסוּ בִּמְנָחוֹת לְפָנֶיךָ? ״מְמוּכָן״ — כְּלוּם הֵכִינוּ שֻׁלְחָן לְפָנֶיךָ? ״וַיֹּאמֶר מְמוּכָן״. תָּנָא: מְמוּכָן זֶה הָמָן, וְלָמָּה נִקְרָא שְׁמוֹ מְמוּכָן? שֶׁמּוּכָן לְפוּרְעָנוּת. אָמַר רַב כָּהֲנָא: מִכָּאן שֶׁהַהֶדְיוֹט קוֹפֵץ בָּרֹאשׁ.
Rabbi Levi said: This entire verse listing the names of the king’s advisors is stated on account of offerings. Each name alludes to an aspect of the sacrificial service that was unique to the Jewish people, which the ministering angels mentioned as merit for the Jewish people. “Carshena”; the ministering angels said before the Holy One, Blessed be He: Master of the Universe, did the gentiles ever offer before You lambs [karim] of the first year [shana], as the Jewish people have offered before You? “Shethar”; have they ever offered before You two turtledoves [shetei torim]? “Admatha”; have they ever built before You an altar of earth [adama]? “Tarshish”; have they ever ministered before You in the priestly vestments, as it is written that on the fourth of the four rows of precious stones contained on the breastplate were: “A beryl [tarshish], an onyx, and a jasper” (Exodus 28:20). “Meres”; have they ever stirred [meirsu] the blood of the offerings before You? “Marsena”; have they ever stirred [meirsu] the meal-offering before You? “Memucan”; have they ever prepared [hekhinu] the table before You, on which the shewbread was placed? The verse states: “And Memucan said” (Esther 1:16). A Sage taught in a baraita: Memucan is Haman. And why is Haman referred to as Memucan? Because he was prepared [mukhan] to bring calamity upon the Jewish people. Rav Kahana said: From here we see that the common man jumps to the front and speaks first, for Memucan was mentioned last of the king’s seven advisors, and nevertheless he expressed his opinion first.
(א) בַּלַּ֣יְלָה הַה֔וּא נָדְדָ֖ה שְׁנַ֣ת הַמֶּ֑לֶךְ וַיֹּ֗אמֶר לְהָבִ֞יא אֶת־סֵ֤פֶר הַזִּכְרֹנוֹת֙ דִּבְרֵ֣י הַיָּמִ֔ים וַיִּהְי֥וּ נִקְרָאִ֖ים לִפְנֵ֥י הַמֶּֽלֶךְ׃
(1) That night, sleep deserted the king, and he ordered the book of records, the annals, to be brought; and it was read to the king.
״וַתְּמָאֵן הַמַּלְכָּה וַשְׁתִּי״. מִכְּדֵי פְּרִיצְתָּא הֲוַאי, דְּאָמַר מָר: שְׁנֵיהֶן לִדְבַר עֲבֵירָה נִתְכַּוְּונוּ, מַאי טַעְמָא לָא אֲתַאי? אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָא: מְלַמֵּד שֶׁפָּרְחָה בָּהּ צָרַעַת. בְּמַתְנִיתָא תָּנָא: [בָּא גַּבְרִיאֵל וְעָשָׂה לָהּ זָנָב].
The verse states: “But the queen Vashti refused to come” (Esther 1:12). The Gemara asks: Since she was immodest, as the Master said above: The two of them had sinful intentions, what is the reason that she did not come? Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: This teaches that she broke out in leprosy, and therefore she was embarrassed to expose herself publicly. An alternative reason for her embarrassment was taught in a baraita: The angel Gabriel came and fashioned her a tail.
וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: שֶׁהוּשְׁחֲרוּ פְּנֵיהֶם שֶׁל יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּיָמָיו כְּשׁוּלֵי קְדֵרָה. וְרַבִּי יוֹחָנָן אָמַר: כֹּל שֶׁזּוֹכְרוֹ אֹמֵר ״אָח לְרֹאשׁוֹ״. וְרַבִּי חֲנִינָא אָמַר: שֶׁהַכֹּל נַעֲשׂוּ רָשִׁין בְּיָמָיו, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וַיָּשֶׂם הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ מַס״.
And Shmuel said: The name Ahasuerus should be understood in the sense of black [shaḥor], as the face of the Jewish people was blackened in his days like the bottom of a pot. And Rabbi Yoḥanan said a different explanation: Everyone who recalled him said: “Woe upon his head” [aḥ lerosho]. And Rabbi Ḥanina said: The name alludes to the fact that everyone became poor [rash] in his days, as it is stated: “And the king Ahasuerus laid a tribute upon the land” (Esther 10:1).

דרכי האגדה

Isaac Heinemann

שֶׁבַּמִּדָּה שֶׁאָדָם מוֹדֵד — בָּהּ מוֹדְדִין לוֹ, מְלַמֵּד שֶׁהָיְתָה וַשְׁתִּי הָרְשָׁעָה מְבִיאָה בְּנוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל וּמַפְשִׁיטָתָן עֲרוּמּוֹת וְעוֹשָׂה בָּהֶן מְלָאכָה בְּשַׁבָּת. הַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״אַחַר הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה כְּשׁוֹךְ חֲמַת הַמֶּלֶךְ אֲחַשְׁוֵרוֹשׁ זָכַר אֶת וַשְׁתִּי וְאֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂתָה וְאֵת אֲשֶׁר נִגְזַר עָלֶיהָ״, כְּשֵׁם שֶׁעָשָׂתָה — כָּךְ נִגְזַר עָלֶיהָ. ״וַתְּמָאֵן הַמַּלְכָּה וַשְׁתִּי״. מִכְּדֵי פְּרִיצְתָּא הֲוַאי, דְּאָמַר מָר: שְׁנֵיהֶן לִדְבַר עֲבֵירָה נִתְכַּוְּונוּ, מַאי טַעְמָא לָא אֲתַאי? אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בַּר חֲנִינָא: מְלַמֵּד שֶׁפָּרְחָה בָּהּ צָרַעַת. בְּמַתְנִיתָא תָּנָא: [בָּא גַּבְרִיאֵל וְעָשָׂה לָהּ זָנָב]. ״וַיִּקְצֹף הַמֶּלֶךְ מְאֹד״. אַמַּאי דְּלַקָה בֵּיהּ כּוּלֵּי הַאי? אָמַר רָבָא, שְׁלַחָה לֵיהּ: בַּר אַהוּרְיָירֵיהּ דְּאַבָּא, אַבָּא לָקֳבֵל אַלְפָּא חַמְרָא שָׁתֵי וְלָא רָוֵי, וְהָהוּא גַּבְרָא אִשְׁתַּטִּי בְּחַמְרֵיהּ, מִיָּד: ״וַחֲמָתוֹ בָּעֲרָה בוֹ״.
The Gemara comments: Vashti was punished in this humiliating way for it is with the measure that a man measures to others that he himself is measured. In other words, God punishes individuals in line with their transgressions, measure for measure. This teaches that the wicked Vashti would take the daughters of Israel, and strip them naked, and make them work on Shabbat. Therefore, it was decreed that she be brought before the king naked, on Shabbat. This is as it is written: “After these things, when the wrath of King Ahasuerus was appeased, he remembered Vashti, and what she had done, and what was decreed against her” (Esther 2:1). That is to say, just as she had done with the young Jewish women, so it was decreed upon her. The verse states: “But the queen Vashti refused to come” (Esther 1:12). The Gemara asks: Since she was immodest, as the Master said above: The two of them had sinful intentions, what is the reason that she did not come? Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina said: This teaches that she broke out in leprosy, and therefore she was embarrassed to expose herself publicly. An alternative reason for her embarrassment was taught in a baraita: The angel Gabriel came and fashioned her a tail. The verse continues: “Therefore the king was very wrathful, and his anger burned in him” (Esther 1:12). The Gemara asks: Why did his anger burn in him so greatly merely because she did not wish to come? Rava said: Vashti not only refused to come, but she also sent him a message by way of a messenger: You, son of my father’s stableman [ahuriyyarei]. Belshazzar, my father, drank wine against a thousand men and did not become inebriated, as the verse in Daniel (5:1) testifies about him: “Belshazzar the king made a great feast to a thousand of his lords, and drank wine before the thousand”; and that man, referring euphemistically to Ahasuerus himself, has become senseless from his wine. Due to her audacity, immediately “his anger burned in him” (Esther 1:12).

From Sermon to Commentary: Expounding the Bible in Talmudic Babylonia

Eliezer Segal

The Bible has always been vital to Jewish religious life, and it has been expounded in diverse ways. Perhaps the most influential body of Jewish biblical interpretation is the Midrash that was produced by expositors during the first five centuries CE. Many such teachings are collected in the Babylonian Talmud, the monumental compendium of Jewish law and lore that was accepted as the definitive statement of Jewish oral tradition for subsequent generations.

However, many of the Talmud’s interpretations of biblical passages appear bizarre or pointless. From Sermon to Commentary: Expounding the Bible in Talmudic Babylonia tries to explain this phenomenon by carefully examining representative passages from a variety of methodological approaches, paying particular attention to comparisons with Midrash composed in the Land of Israel.

Based on this investigation, Eliezer Segal argues that the Babylonian sages were utilizing discourses that had originated in Israel as rhetorical sermons in which biblical interpretation was being employed in an imaginative, literary manner, usually based on the interplay between two or more texts from different books of the Bible. Because they did not possess their own tradition of homiletic preaching, the Babylonian rabbis interpreted these comments without regard for their rhetorical conventions, as if they were exegetical commentaries, resulting in the distinctive, puzzling character of Babylonian Midrash.