Talmudic Interpretations of the Book of Esther: Esther 1:10-14 (Megillah 12b)

Part of a series on the extended aggadic sugya in Tractate Megillah 10b-17a. See the previous installments here, here, here, and here.

The Talmud’s interpretation of the opening chapter of the Book of Esther transforms what appears to be a simple court intrigue into a complex meditation on power, morality, and divine justice. The sages of the Talmud analyze the text with an eye for deeper meaning, reinterpreting Ahasuerus’ drunken banquet, Vashti’s defiance, and the king’s fateful decision through the lens of Jewish tradition and theology.

This passage from Megillah 12b explores a series of striking themes: the contrast between non-Jewish revelry and Jewish revelry on Shabbat, the moral consequences of Vashti’s past cruelty, and the unseen workings of divine measure-for-measure justice. The sages also debate Vashti’s motivations—was she punished with tzara’at or even given a tail by the angel Gabriel?—and grapple with the political dilemma faced by the Jewish sages in exile, who cautiously avoid involvement in Vashti’s trial.

Beyond political and moral lessons, the Talmud embeds midrashic wordplay into the text, finding sacrificial allusions in the names of Ahasuerus’ advisors, highlighting the enduring sanctity of Jewish ritual in contrast to Persian decadence.

Outline

1. The Seventh Day and the Contrast Between Jews and Non-Jews (Esther 1:10): The Different Focus of Shabbat Meals

2. The Debate at the Banquet Over Which Ethnic Group Has the Most Beautiful Women

3. Vashti’s Punishment as Measure for Measure (Esther 2:1): Vashti’s Cruelty; Fitting Punishment

4. Vashti’s Defiance (Esther 1:12): Stricken with Tzara’at or Given a Tail by the Angel Gabriel, Rendering Her Unwilling to Appear

5. Vashti’s Insult and Ahasuerus’ Rage (Esther 1:12)

6. The Jewish Sages Avoid Judging Vashti’s Fate (Esther 1:13-14, Jeremiah 48:11)

7. The Names of the King's Seven Advisors as Allusions to Sacrificial Service (Esther 1:14): The Verse and the Ministering Angels’ Argument (Exodus 28:20)

The Passage

Megillah.12b.2-10

The Seventh Day and the Contrast Between Jews and Non-Jews (Esther 1:10): The Different Focus of Shabbat Meals

The Talmud questions why the verse specifies that the king's “heart became merry” (טוב לב) with wine on the seventh day, implying that he had not been merry before.

Rava explains that the seventh day refers to Shabbat, a day that highlights the distinction between Jews and non-Jews.

On Shabbat, Jews begin their meals with words of Torah (דברי תורה) and praise of God (דברי תשבחות), whereas non-Jews, when feasting, begin with licentious/foolish talk (תיפלות).

״ביום השביעי כטוב לב המלך ביין״.

אטו עד השתא לא טב לביה בחמרא?

אמר רבא:

יום השביעי שבת היה.

שישראל אוכלין ושותין — מתחילין בדברי תורה ובדברי תשבחות.

אבל אומות העולם שאוכלין ושותין — אין מתחילין אלא בדברי תיפלות.

The verse states: “On the seventh day, when the heart of the king was merry with wine” (Esther 1:10).

The Gemara asks: Is that to say that until now his heart was not merry with wine? Did it take seven days for him to achieve merriment?

Rava said:

The seventh day was Shabbat, when the difference between the Jewish people and the gentiles is most apparent.

On Shabbat, when the Jewish people eat and drink, they begin by occupying themselves with words of Torah and words of praise for God.

But the nations of the world, when they eat and drink, they begin only with words of licentiousness.

The Debate at the Banquet Over Which Ethnic Group Has the Most Beautiful Women

At Ahasuerus’ feast, the men debated whether Median or Persian women were the most beautiful.

The king asserted that “the vessel that I use” (i.e., my wife, Vashti), was neither but was Chaldean.¹

They requested to see her naked (desiring to view her beauty without adornments. In general, compare the famous Judgement of Paris, considered in Greek mythology to have been the ultimate divine cause of the Trojan War).

וכן בסעודתו של אותו רשע,

הללו אומרים: מדיות נאות,

והללו אומרים: פרסיות נאות.

אמר להם אחשורוש:

כלי שאני משתמש בו,

אינו לא מדיי ולא פרסי

אלא כשדיי,

רצונכם לראותה?

אמרו לו: אין, ובלבד שתהא ערומה.

The Gemara continues to detail what occurred at the feast. So too, at the feast of that wicked man, Ahasuerus, when the men began to converse,

some said: The Median women are the most beautiful,

while others said: The Persian women are the most beautiful.

Ahasuerus said to them:

The vessel that I use, i.e., my wife,

is neither Median nor Persian,

but rather Chaldean.

Do you wish to see her?

They said to him: Yes, provided that she be naked, for we wish to see her without any additional adornments.

Vashti’s Punishment as Measure for Measure (Esther 2:1): Vashti’s Cruelty; Fitting Punishment

The Talmud states that Vashti’s punishment corresponded directly to her own transgressions, following the principle that one is punished in the manner they sinned (במדה שאדם מודד).

She would humiliate Jewish women by stripping them (מפשיטתן) naked (ערומות) and forcing them to work on Shabbat.

As a result, it was decreed that she herself would be brought before the king naked on Shabbat.

The verse in Esther 2:1 is interpreted as evidence of this retributive justice—just as she had acted, so was she punished.

שבמדה שאדם מודד — בה מודדין לו,

מלמד:

שהיתה ושתי הרשעה מביאה בנות ישראל

ומפשיטתן ערומות

ועושה בהן מלאכה בשבת.

היינו דכתיב:

״אחר הדברים האלה

כשוך חמת המלך אחשורוש

זכר את ושתי

ואת אשר עשתה

ואת אשר נגזר עליה״,

כשם שעשתה — כך נגזר עליה.

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.

Vashti’s Defiance (Esther 1:12): Stricken with Tzara’at or Given a Tail by the Angel Gabriel, Rendering Her Unwilling to Appear

The Talmud questions why Queen Vashti refused to appear before King Ahasuerus, despite being described as immodest (פריצתא).

He explains that Vashti was afflicted with tzara’at.²

A baraita offers a different reason: the angel Gabriel miraculously caused her to grow a tail.³

״ותמאן המלכה ושתי״.

מכדי:

פריצתא הואי,

דאמר מר: שניהן לדבר עבירה נתכוונו,

מאי טעמא לא אתאי?

אמר רבי יוסי בר חנינא: מלמד שפרחה בה צרעת.

במתניתא תנא: [בא גבריאל ועשה לה זנב].

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?

R' 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.

Vashti’s Insult and Ahasuerus’ Rage (Esther 1:12)

The Talmud questions why Ahasuerus reacted with such intense fury to Vashti’s refusal to appear.

Rava explains that Vashti did not simply refuse; she also sent an insulting message:

She mocked Ahasuerus by calling him her father’s stableman⁴ and comparing him unfavorably to her father (Belshazzar). She pointed out that Belshazzar could drink before a thousand men without becoming drunk (רוי), while Ahasuerus had become senseless (אשתטי) from his wine.

Because of her bold insult, Ahasuerus’ anger was immediately inflamed, as stated in the verse.

״ויקצף המלך מאד״.

אמאי דלקה ביה כולי האי?

אמר רבא:

שלחה ליה:

בר אהורייריה דאבא!

אבא לקבל אלפא חמרא שתי ולא רוי,

וההוא גברא אשתטי בחמריה,

מיד: ״וחמתו בערה בו״.

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).

The Jewish Sages Avoid Judging Vashti’s Fate (Esther 1:13-14, Jeremiah 48:11)

The Talmud identifies the "wise men who knew the times" (Esther 1:13) as the Jewish Sages, renowned for their knowledge of intercalating (לעבר) years and setting the calendar.

Ahasuerus commands the Sages to judge Queen Vashti’s fate. However, they hesitate, fearing the consequences of either decision: if they order her execution, the king may regret it when sober; if they spare her, they would be seen as tolerating royal disrespect.

To avoid ruling, they claim that, since the destruction of the (First) Temple and their exile, they lack the wisdom to judge capital cases (דיני נפשות). Instead, they suggest consulting the Ammonites and Moabites, who, unlike the Jews, have remained settled in their land.

They support their reasoning with Jeremiah 48:11, which describes Moab as retaining its judgment and character due to its stability. Ahasuerus accepts their advice and turns to his non-Jewish advisors for counsel (Esther 1:14 - as stated in the next section).

״ויאמר המלך לחכמים״,

מאן חכמים — רבנן.

״יודעי העתים״ — שיודעין לעבר שנים ולקבוע חדשים.

אמר להו: דיינוה לי.

אמרו:

היכי נעביד?

נימא ליה: קטלה --

למחר פסיק ליה חמריה, ובעי לה מינן.

נימא ליה: שבקה —

קא מזלזלה במלכותא,

אמרו לו:

מיום שחרב בית המקדש, וגלינו מארצנו,

ניטלה עצה ממנו, ואין אנו יודעין לדון דיני נפשות.

זיל לגבי עמון ומואב, דיתבי בדוכתייהו כחמרא דיתיב על דורדייה.

וטעמא אמרו ליה,

דכתיב:

״שאנן מואב מנעוריו

ושוקט הוא אל שמריו

ולא הורק מכלי אל כלי

ובגולה לא הלך

על כן עמד טעמו בו

וריחו לא נמר״,

The following verse states: “Then the king said to the wise men, who knew the times” (Esther 1:13).

The Gemara asks: Who are these wise men?

These wise men are the Sages of the Jewish people,

who are referred to as those “who knew the times,” for they know how to intercalate years and fix the months of the Jewish calendar.

Ahasuerus said to them: Judge her for me.

The Sages said in their hearts:

What should we do?

If we say to him: Kill her,

tomorrow he will become sober and then come and demand her from us.

If we say to him: Let her be,

she has scorned royalty, and that cannot be tolerated.

Consequently, they decided not to judge the matter, and they said to him as follows:

From the day that the Temple was destroyed and we have been exiled from our land,

counsel and insight have been removed from us, and we do not know how to judge capital cases, as they are exceptionally difficult.

Go to the people of Ammon and Moab, who have remained permanently settled in their places like wine that is settled on its lees, and so their minds are settled as well.

And they provided a good reason when they spoke to him, as they proved that one who is settled retains his reasoning:

For it is written:

“Moab has been at ease from his youth,

and he has settled on his lees,

and has not been emptied from vessel to vessel,

neither has he gone into exile;

therefore his taste has remained in him,

and his scent is not changed” (Jeremiah 48:11).

The Names of the King's Seven Advisors as Allusions to Sacrificial Service (Esther 1:14): The Verse and the Ministering Angels’ Argument (Exodus 28:20)

R' Levi states that the names of the king’s advisors in the verse all allude to aspects of the sacrificial service unique to the Jewish people. The ministering angels cite these offerings as a merit for the Jewish people.

The angels rhetorically ask if non-Jews ever performed these rituals before God:⁵

1. "Carshena" (כרשנא) hints at the offering of year-old lambs (כרים בני שנה - “karim b’nei shana”)

2. "Shethar" (שתר) at the two turtledoves (שתי תורין - “shetei torin”)⁶

3. "Admatha" (אדמתא) at building an earthen altar (אדמה - “adama”)

4. "Tarshish" (תרשיש) connects to the priestly vestments (בגדי כהונה), as the stone “tarshish” appears in the breastplate.

5. "Meres" (מרס) refers to the stirring (מירסו - “meirsu”) of sacrificial blood

6. “Marsena" (מרסנא) refers to the stirring of meal-offerings (מנחות).

7. "Memucan" (ממוכן) alludes to preparing (הכינו - “hekhinu”) the table (שלחן - for the showbread).

מיד:

״והקרוב אליו כרשנא שתר אדמתא תרשיש״.

אמר רבי לוי:

כל פסוק זה על שום קרבנות נאמר.

״כרשנא״ —

אמרו מלאכי השרת לפני הקדוש ברוך הוא:

רבונו של עולם!

1. כלום הקריבו לפניך כרים בני שנה, כדרך שהקריבו ישראל לפניך?!

2. ״שתר״ — כלום הקריבו לפניך שתי תורין?!

3. ״אדמתא״ — כלום בנו לפניך מזבח אדמה?!

4. ״תרשיש״ — כלום שימשו לפניך בבגדי כהונה?!

   1. דכתיב בהו ״תרשיש ושהם וישפה״

5. ״מרס״ — כלום מירסו בדם לפניך?!

6. ״מרסנא״ — כלום מירסו במנחות לפניך?!

7. ״ממוכן״ — כלום הכינו שלחן לפניך?!

Ahasuerus immediately acted on their advice and asked his advisors, as it is written:

“And next to him was Carshena, Shethar, Admatha, Tarshish, Meres, Marsena, and Memucan” (Esther 1:14).

R' 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!

1. did the gentiles ever offer before You lambs [karim] of the first year [shana], as the Jewish people have offered before You?!

2. “Shethar”; have they ever offered before You two turtledoves [shetei torim]?!

3. “Admatha”; have they ever built before You an altar of earth [adama]?!

4. “Tarshish”; have they ever ministered before You in the priestly vestments?!

   1. 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).

5. “Meres”; have they ever stirred [meirsu] the blood of the offerings before You?!

6. “Marsena”; have they ever stirred [meirsu] the meal-offering before You?!

7. “Memucan”; have they ever prepared [hekhinu] the table before You, on which the shewbread was placed?!

1. כשדיי - and the most beautiful.

2. צרעת - a skin disease, which caused her embarrassment and prevented her from appearing publicly.

3. זנב, humiliating her and making her unwilling to be seen.

4. בר אהורייריה.

However, Jastrow says that it means “store-keeper, steward“:

m.

(horrearius (from horreum = granary, storehouse), ὁρριάριος; [see] Sm. Ant. s. v. Horreum)

store-keeper, steward.

[Comment.: fr. ארווה, v. אוריא, equerry.]

Meg. 12b בר אהורייריה דאבא thou, son of my father’s steward.

The term is used as well in the passage in Shabbat.113b.11, where the Talmudic passage interprets Ruth’s simple act of eating roasted grain as a prophetic allegory for the fortunes of Israel across different eras:

R’ Elazar offers a chronological interpretation:

• “She ate” refers to the prosperity during King David’s reign.

• “She was satiated” corresponds to the wealth and stability under King Solomon.

• “She left some over” signifies the surplus and religious success under King Hezekiah.

An alternate version shifts the periods slightly:

• “She ate” includes both David and Solomon’s reigns.

• “She was satiated” refers to Hezekiah’s time.

• “She left some over” points to the era of R’ Yehuda HaNasi, whose steward was said to be wealthier than the Persian King Shapur (indicating the affluence of that rabbinic period).

A baraita reinterprets the sequence in metaphysical terms:

• “She ate” symbolizes sustenance in This World (עולם הזה).

• “She was satiated” represents the abundance of the future messianic age (ימות המשיח).

• “She left some over” anticipates the unbounded plenty of the World-to-Come (לעתיד לבא).

״ויצבט לה קלי ותאכל״.

אמר רבי אלעזר:

1. ״ותאכל״ — בימי דוד,

2. ״ותשבע״ — בימי שלמה,

3. ״ותתר״ — בימי חזקיה.

ואיכא דאמרי:

1. ״ותאכל״ — בימי דוד ובימי שלמה,

2. ״ותשבע״ — בימי חזקיה,

3. ״ותתר״ — בימי רבי.

דאמר מר:

אהוריריה דרבי הוה עתיר משבור מלכא.

במתניתא תנא:

1. ״ותאכל״ — בעולם הזה,

2. ״ותשבע״ — לימות המשיח,

3. ״ותתר״ — לעתיד לבא.

It also says in the verse: “And he gave her roasted grain and she ate, and she was satiated, and she left some over.”

The Gemara explains:

“And he gave her roasted grain and she ate”; this is also interpreted as a prophetic message.

R’ Elazar said:

1. “And she ate” was fulfilled by her children’s children in the days of David;

2. “And she was satiated” was fulfilled in the days of Solomon;

3. “And she left some over” was fulfilled in the days of Hezekiah.

And some say that there is a different interpretation:

1. “And she ate,” was fulfilled in the days of David and Solomon;

2. “And she was satiated,” was fulfilled in the days of Hezekiah;

3. “And she left some over” was fulfilled in the days of R’ Yehuda HaNasi.

As the Master said: R’ Yehuda HaNasi’s horsekeeper [ahuriyarei] was richer than the king of Persia.

It was taught in a baraita:

1. “And she ate,” in this world;

2. “and she was satiated,” in the days of the Messiah;

3. “and she left some over,” in the future, at the end of days.

5. Broader analysis:

Each of the names of Ahasuerus’ advisors from Esther is creatively reinterpreted as a Hebrew word or phrase connected to the Temple service.

This follows a common midrashic technique of extracting meaning from foreign or obscure names by reanalyzing them as Hebrew roots. (Compare my piece at my Academia page, ““Why Was He Called Thus?”: An Anthology of Talmudic Passages Relating to Explanations of Biblical Names, Unification of Ostensibly Separate Biblical Personalities, and Etymologies of Biblical Words“.)

Each clause follows the same rhetorical structure:

כלום הקריבו לפניך … ?!

"Have they ever offered before You … ?!

The repetition of this structure reinforces the contrast between the Jewish people and the gentile nations.

The words are linked to elements of Temple service:

• Animal offerings (karim, torim).

• Construction of the altar (adama).

• Priestly garments (tarshish as part of the breastplate).

• Sacrificial blood manipulation (meireis - see Hebrew Wikipedia, זריקת הדם).

• Meal offerings (meireis again).

• The Table of the Showbread (hekhin).

The angels act as advocates for the Jewish people, reminding God of their historical service. This reflects a recurring midrashic trope in which angels plead on behalf of Israel.

6. The interpretation reads שת"ר as an allusion to שתי תורין ("two turtledoves"), which were commonly used as sin offerings (חטאת) and olah offerings (עולה), especially for the poor. See Leviticus.5.7 (=Leviticus.12.8):

ואם־לא תגיע ידו די שה

והביא את־אשמו אשר חטא

שתי תרים או־שני בני־יונה ליהוה

אחד לחטאת ואחד לעלה

But if one’s means do not suffice for a sheep,

that person shall bring to YHWH, as the penalty for that of which one is guilty,

two turtledoves (תרים) or two pigeons (בני יונה)—

one for a sin offering and the other for a burnt offering.