Ahasuerus
Let us spend some time on Ahasuerus. We met him in the Vashti episode. We read about his queen-finding contest. Was he good? Unlike the kings described in the book of Kings, the narrator does not rate Ahasuerus, but rather narrates events from his reign. We, the readers, are left to render a verdict.
Esther 2:21-23 – Long live the king
What are we to conclude about Ahasuerus from this little episode?
Assassination of leaders is an old sport. The reason behind each event is the interesting part. We are given almost no details here, but we discover that it is a conspiracy, not a lone person in a moment of rage. Was it possible that some did not view Ahasuerus as a benevolent king? Or perhaps not as a legitimate monarch? (As Rashi suggests on 1:1.) Mordochai finds out about the conspiracy. (How? To what extent was he involved in palace politics?) This episode will be crucial in turning around the events, starting in chapter 6.
Esther 3:8-15 – A lesson in due diligence:
Is the kings response to Hamans request acceptable?
Try to create a ghost text an alternative text that might be more in line with what we would have expected, so that we can see if the abnormalities in the story told in the Megilla.
Consider the information that Haman provides the king with in v.8. The name of the nation is not given. The accusations are strange: In a kingdom of 127 provinces there must be many different nations with individual costumes. The Persians were known for their tolerance. If the kings rules are not followed, should not the appointed governors be the mean for dealing with the infraction? As for being scattered: The Assyrian method of keeping quiet was to move populations to new locations. This was hardly a new phenomenon. (The Assyrian empire preceded the Babylonians, which were peacefully taken over by the Persians, as the empire controlling the Fertile Crescent.)
How should the king have responded? How did he respond?
Note how the narrator describes Haman in v.10. If indeed the king knew what that verse tells us, it probably gave rise to the following Midrash:
אסתר רבה (וילנא) פרשה ז ד”ה כ ויסר המלך
כ ויסר המלך את טבעתו ויתנה להמן – רבנן אמרין: אחשורוש שונא את ישראל יותר מהמן הרשע. מנהגו של עולם, דרכו של לוקח ליתן ערבון למוכר, ברם הכא המוכר נותן ערבון. ההא דאמר: ויסר המלך את טבעתו מעל ידו ויתנה להמן.
Esther Rabba section 7:20
And the king removed his ring and gave it to Haman The rabbis say: Ahasuerus hates Israel more than the wicked Haman. It is customary in the world that the buyer gives a guarantee to the seller. But here the seller gives a guarantee, as it says: And the king removed his ring and gave it to Haman.
What in our section caused the Midrash to claim that Ahasuarus was a greater hater of the Jews than Haman was?
The execution of the Jews is presented as a business deal. Ahasuerus stands to gain a substantial amount for the treasury. But what is being sold? Lives. In his eagerness, Ahasuerus hands over his seal-ring without getting the detailed information that any business person would have demanded. He was not the last ruler eager to carry out a deal by which Jews would be gotten rid of so their property would pad the governments coffers. Just think of the Jews of Spain in 1492 and the Jews under the Third Reich.
Abraham Joshua Heschel
The opposite of good is not evil, it is indifference.
How would you apply this well known idea of Heschel to Ahasuerus?
Along the lines of the Midrash, while Haman is easy to vilify, Ahasuerus indifference to the consequences of Hamans heinous plan (other than his own profit) is a much more subtle and dangerous form of evil.
How do you understand the kings behavior in v.15?
While the city is in turmoil the king and Haman are having a wine party. What image is the
narrator painting?
Consider the following Midrash:
ספרי דאגדתא על אסתר – מדרש פנים אחרים (בובר) נוסח א פרשה א ד”ה הרצים א”ל הקב”ה לשבטים: אתם מכרתם את אחיכם מתוך מאכל ומתוך משתה, [שנאמר “וישבו לאכול לחם”] (בראשית לז כה), חייכם שאחשורוש מוכר בניכם מתוך מאכל ומשתה, הה”ד והמלך והמן ישבו לשתות.
Midrash Panim Aherim (on Esther) version I section 1
Said the Holy One Blessed be He to the tribes: You sold your brother while eating and drinking [as it says and they sat to eat food] (Gen. 37:25.) [I swear by] your lives that Ahasuerus will sell your children while eating and drinking. As it says: and the king and Haman sat down to drink (Esther 3:15.)
How does the Midrash highlight the inappropriateness of Ahasuerus behavior?
Drawing on a familiar story, one that we know well enough to have passed judgment on, helps highlight points in a different story.
Why does the Midrash decide to draw on the story of the sale of Joseph?
The story of Joseph is woven into the Esther story all over the place. Here the Midrash saw a measure for measure situation. Actions will be repaid later by the same token that they were done in. This helps answer the troubling question of why this happened to the Jews in Shushan.
So, is Ahasuerus absolved of blame since he is only helping to carry out the plan of God (according to the Midrash?)
Not so fast. Isaiah deals with this question regarding Assyria. It is worth reading Isa. 10:5 and onward. One can be a tool of God, but that does not absolve the tool from responsibility for its actions. In other words, Ahasuerus is acting out of his own free will and deserves to be punished for his actions. God may use those actions as a payback to the Jews, but that is not what is motivating Ahasuerus. He does not even know how he, unwittingly, stumbled into an old injustice that needs to be corrected. He will be judged on his own faults and actions.