Megillah, Daf Tet Zayin, Part 4
והמלך קם בחמתו וגו‘ והמלך שב מגנת הביתן, מקיש שיבה לקימה, מה קימה בחימה – אף שיבה בחימה, דאזל ואשכח למלאכי השרת דאידמו ליה כגברי וקא עקרי לאילני דבוסתני, ואמר להו: מאי עובדייכו? אמרו ליה: דפקדינן המן. אתא לביתיה – והמן נפל על המטה, נפל? נפל מיבעי ליה! – אמר רבי אלעזר: מלמד שבא מלאך והפילו עליה. אמר: ויי מביתא ויי מברא. ויאמר המלך הגם לכבוש את המלכה עמי בבית.
"And the king rose in his anger…and the king returned from the palace garden." His returning is compared to his arising. Just as the arising was in anger, so too the returning was in anger. For he went and found ministering angels in the form of men who were uprooting trees from the garden. He said to them: What are you doing? They replied: Haman has ordered us. He came into the house, and there "Haman was falling upon the couch." "Falling"? It should say, "had fallen"? R. Elazar said: This teaches us that an angel came and made him fall on it. Ahashverosh then said: Trouble inside, trouble outside! "And the king said, Will he also try to overcome the queen with me in the house?"
This expansion of the story seems to be primarily based on the word "also" that Ahashverosh utters when he sees that Haman had fallen on the couch with Esther. What else made Ahashverosh angry before he seen on the couch with the queen? The midrash is also based on a parallel in the verse the king leaves the palace in anger, and his return is also in anger. These two textual hints lead to the conclusion that Ahashverosh saw something in the garden that angered him as well. What he saw was angels uprooting trees. I suppose that Haman wanted to use the trees to hang the Jews (or impale them, the word for impale and hang is the same in Hebrew). But there may be other interpretations to the need to uproot these trees.
ויאמר חרבונה וגו‘ אמר רבי אלעזר: אף חרבונה רשע באותה עצה היה, כיון שראה שלא נתקיימה עצתו – מיד ברח, והיינו דכתיב +איוב כ"ו /כ"ז/+ וישלך עליו ולא יחמל מידו ברוח יברח.
"Then said Harbonah," etc. R. Elazar said: Even Harbonah was a wicked
man and was part of that plot. When he saw that his plan was not succeeding, he
at once abandoned, and so it is written, "And he cast on him and did not
pity, from his hand he surely flees" (Job 27:22).
Harbonah seems to be a good guy in Esther he suggests to the king that Haman be hanged on the very tree that was prepared for Mordecai. The interpretive problem that seems to lie at the basis of R. Elazar’s accusation that Harbonah was part of Haman’s plot, is how Harbonah could have known that Haman had planned to hang Mordecai on that tree? He must have been part of the plot to kill Mordecai. But when Haman failed, Harbonah jumped ship and abandoned the plot. This is alluded to in the verse, where God does not pity the wicked, and his comrades flee from him when he fails.
וחמת המלך שככה, שתי שכיכות הללו למה? אחת של מלכו של עולם ואחת של אחשורוש, ואמרי לה: אחת של אסתר ואחת של ושתי.
"Then the king’s wrath was assuaged." Why are there two assuagings? One of the King of the Universe, and the other of Ahashverosh. Others say, one on account of Esther and the other on account of Vashti.
The word for "assuaged" is שככה with a double kaf. The Talmud reads the double kaf as alluding to two "assuagings." In the spirit of a double reading, there are two interpretations of what these assuagings were. The first is that God was assuaged, as well as Ahashverosh. The second is that Ahashverosh was assuaged over what Haman had tried to do to Esther and over the fact that Haman had advised Ahashverosh to kill Vashti.