The Talmud in Megillah 13b records Haman's exchange with Achashverosh before the decree. Rava observes: "There was no one who knew evil speech like Haman." Haman said, "Come, let us destroy them." The king hesitated: "I fear their God—what He did to those who came before me." Haman answered: ישנו מן המצוות—they are lax in the commandments. The king noted, "But there are rabbis among them." Haman insisted: עם אחד הן—they are one nation.
Then in Megillah 16a, Haman encounters Mordechai teaching his students. He asks what they are studying. They tell him: when the Temple stood, one who donated a mincha would bring a kemitzah of fine flour and receive atonement. Haman looks at them and declares: אתא מלי קומצי קמחא דידכו ודחי עשרה אלפי ככרי כספא דידי—your handful of flour has come and pushed aside my ten thousand talents of silver.
Several things demand explanation. First, Haman has specific arguments to Achashverosh. What is the deeper meaning behind the argument? Second, the kemitzah. Of all the Torah Mordechai could have been teaching, what is the significance of kemitzah in this context? And why does Haman, of all people, recognize its power over his silver? And third, the ending. After the victory, Mordechai goes out in royal garments of tekhelet and white. The Gaon of Vilna identifies these as tzitzit. Why does the text emphasize that he went out with tzitzit? What does it mean that the story concludes with this image?
The Talmud in Chullin 139b asks where the figures of Mordechai, Esther, and Haman are found in the Torah itself. Haman is found in the words המן העץ (hamin ha'etz)—God's question to Adam after the sin of the tree: "Did you eat from the tree I commanded you about?" Mordechai is found in mor dror—the fragrant spice of the anointing oil, which Targum Onkelos renders as mira dachia. Esther is found in הסתר אסתיר—I will surely hide my face, the divine declaration of concealment in exile.
These are not decorative allusions. They locate each figure within a precise theological coordinate. Taken together, they suggest that the story of Purim is not merely a historical episode, but the playing out of something that began at the very first sin.
The Birth of the Ego
Let us return to the Tree of Knowledge. Adam was told not to eat from the tree. The act of choosing against the Divine command birthed something that had never existed before: a self that experiences itself as separate. We call this the ego. This ego is what blinds us to our own flaws and projects into our consciousness idealized versions of ourselves, either clinging to a version of our past or a fantasy of a pristine future. Such a mindset drives one into perfectionist thinking. Rather than accept that one is flawed and has the capacity for growth and change, they develop a fixed mentality of either "I am perfect and need no change at all," or that they are "incapable of change and therefore cannot become better." This is an all-or-nothing mentality.
One example that illustrates how this perfectionist mindset works can be gleaned from a detail of the story of the Tree of Knowledge itself. The sages tell us that in Genesis 3:3, Eve tells the serpent that she is not to touch the tree. This was not the divine command, but an additional stringency. The serpent enticed her to touch it and proved that doing so would be harmless. But Eve went further and ate it. That is an example of how failing the added stringency test caused her to sin with the actual prohibition. Because she failed an extra stringency, she labeled herself as no longer good enough to comply with the divine will.
Haman: The Serpent's Voice
According to the Zohar, this evil inclination that entered our consciousness at the primordial sin is the serpent itself. The Zohar further connects the serpent to Amalek. Thus Haman, who embodies Amalek both genealogically and spiritually, is the ego personified.
Now, we can read Haman’s argument: עם אחד. They are one nation. Even if there are some good parts, the bad parts poison the whole. They can be destroyed because they are imperfect as a nation. This is the voice of the serpentine, destructive ego.
The Kemitzah Counter-Logic
Mordechai, however, was teaching the laws of kemitzah. When one brings a mincha offering, only a small and meager amount is taken to be consumed on the altar. But this small amount is sufficient to sanctify the entire mincha. This is diametrically opposed to Haman’s argument. Not only does the negative part not poison the whole, but on the contrary, the positive consecrates and sanctifies the whole! This is a direct challenge to Haman’s prior argument and collapses his evil speech.
The Principle in Torah
The idea that the good rescues the bad rather than the bad poisoning the good is found in two other areas in the Torah. The Talmud in Keritot 6b says that when a public fast day is announced, we must include even sinners in the prayers. Just like the temple incense, which included the harsh חלבנה (galbanum) along with the sweet fragrances. Not only do they not poison the whole, they are an essential part that enhances and strengthens the group.
Mordechai’s name, says the Talmud, is alluded to in the word Mor Dror, which the Targum translates as mira dachia. This shares the same letters and phonetic sound as Mordechai. The deeper connection is that Myrrh, although the verse appears by the anointing oil, was also one of the fragrances included in the ketoret incense that is related just a few verses later. And Myrrh needed galbanum, the harsh scent, to go along with it. Mordechai, as the foil to Haman, demonstrates the consciousness of life, of growth, of imperfection, and grace. The good elevates the whole just like the kemitzah does.
This same principle—that the whole is sanctified by the inclusion of all its parts—appears again in the laws of Sukkot. The Midrash (Vayikra Rabbah 30) notes that the four species of the Lulav represent different parts of society. The Etrog, which is both tasty and fragrant, represents people with both Torah and good deeds. The willow, which has no taste and no scent, represents those in society who have no Torah and no good deeds. We bind them together to have them cover for each other: יבואו אלו ויכפרו על אלו. Esther’s name was also Hadassah. That is one of the four species that show how one part elevates the other. She also embodies this idea.
Esther is found in the Torah in the words הסתר אסתיר פני. The verse talks about the difficult times when people will sin, be exiled, and God will hide His face from them—the most imperfect situation one can describe. But even in this case, the verse continues with redemptive hope. This is precisely what Esther symbolizes as a foil to Haman: not the perfected future, but the messy now.
The Failed Perfectionist: Saul
The commandment to eradicate Amalek contains the harshest language. We are to annihilate everything: man, woman, child, even animals. Why such extreme measures? Precisely because we have established that Amalek-consciousness operates as an all-or-nothing approach. Therefore, we are commanded to fight them in the most uncompromising and perfect manner.
King Saul was commanded to this task. Because Saul was without sin—as the Talmud (Yoma 22b) says Saul was like a child of one year old, without sin—he was chosen to counter Amalek. He was a perfect specimen to perfectly annihilate those who operate with the perfection narrative. But he failed on one point: he did not kill the animals. Saul deflects responsibility, saying that the people had mercy. He is demonstrating the same ego mechanism he was meant to defeat.
God tells Samuel through this that the true way to defeat Amalek is not through perfection, but through surrender of the ego—through allowing space for failure and thus taking the power away from it. He chooses David as the next king. David is not the immaculate example that Saul is. But he rebounds, he repents, he falters, but he does not fail. He is the one who defeats the Amalekites at Ziklag.
The Garment of the Unfinished
This is illustrated poignantly in the episode where Saul grabs the corner of Samuel’s garment and it tears. Samuel declares, "God has torn the kingdom of Israel from you today and given it to your neighbor who is better than you." What is the deeper symbolism here?
The Meshech Chochmah in Parshat Korach explains the logic of the mitzvah of tzitzit. A garment, after weaving is completed, has stray threads and fringes on all sides. The garment needs to be finished to create a smooth edge. All of creation is likened to a garment; when God created the world, He left some things purposefully unfinished. That is our work: to partner in creation by following the way of the Torah and good deeds and thus elevating ourselves and the world around us to a more completed state. The tzitzit we wear is a garment with fringes that symbolize the work we need to do to become more complete.
When Korach feuded with Moses, Rashi (Numbers 16:1) cites the Midrash that Korach wore garments made completely of Tekhelet and asked Moses whether such a garment is obligated to have tzitzit. When Moses affirmed they did, Korach mocked him. According to Kabbalah, Korach’s soul belongs to a perfected future state. Tekhelet derives from the root of Tachlit—finality and completion. His garment did not have fringes, for he placed himself in the realm of perfection. But before its time, this is an ego-driven mechanism. The inability to live within a space where one accepts their shortcomings is precisely what caused his demise.
The sons of Korach, however, repented. The verse says ובני קרח לא מתו—the sons of Korach did not die. They stayed in a state of being alive. That is to say, they understood that they were flawed and had the capacity to grow. They were unfinished garments with fringes.
Samuel was the direct descendant of the sons of Korach. When Saul grabbed the corner of his garment and tore it, he ripped off the fringed end. This is exactly what Saul’s problem was: he lived in perfectionist consciousness, and that was precisely his downfall. Samuel declares, "God has torn the kingship from you," because to rule means to surrender—for true mastery comes not from perfection, but from the ability to see one’s own fractures and persevere.
Mordechai's Restoration
Mordechai, the descendant of Saul, demonstrates through his name (which requires galbanum) and through his teachings of kemitzah that perfection at this time is a myth. He brings a faltering people to repentance and he achieves malchut (kingship), thus rectifying his ancestors' folly. This malchut is embodied in tekhelet and chur—the white and blue—not the perfected state of blue alone. He wears his fringes proudly because the path to completion is not from holding on to past perfectionist ideals or future rectified states. It is to live in the hidden and broken "now," to surrender one’s image of perfection, and allow oneself to grow towards becoming a better man and a better people.
Comments
Post a Comment