Simplicity: Megillat Esther

More than, anyone, the commentator, known as the Malbim is known for explaining the simple meaning of the verses of the Torah, Prophets and Writings. 

The sheer beauty of his interpretation of Megillat Esther is astounding. In America, one grew up hearing, being told that Achashveirosh was a clueless king, with no insights into matters of kingship, to the point where Haman readily pulled the wool over his eyes, and strings to the point where like a puppet Achashveirosh nodded consent to Haman's every whim. 

The Malbim presents Achashveirosh as a brilliant statesman, and even more astute conqueror whose Achilles heel was his own love for Vashti, which led him to capitulate before the even more cunning Haman. 

The Malbim starts his interpretation by saying that there were two types of rule, one that was boundless, the King being the very heart of the kingship, and the latter, far inferior, one that was bounded by the strictures, and impositions of the State, a mechanism, or elaborate apparatus with cabinet, rules and the like. Achashveirosh, obviously, sought the former, unbound power, one where he was the State, and it was subservient to them; in the former, the King had no need, or obligation, to consult with the cabinet, and could claim monopolistic control over the State's coffers; he could enact rules at will, by the sheer prowess of having conquered his enemies. In the latter, though, the King was subservient to State; he needed to confer with his cabinet, the wealth of the State belonged to it, and no other. The dichotomous nature of the two could not be more clear, relates the Malbim...and in the middle, was a woman, who he loved very dearly, and who Haman wanted to wrest from him, so that he, Achashveirosh, could ruled unchecked, and elevate Haman in turn. 

Haman essentially wanted to help Achashveirosh actually his own goals, but interestingly, though the Malbim does not make this comparison, Haman could be compared to the role of the biblical character of Yoav, in his relationship with King David, save the wickedness. Yoav masterminded far-reaching political and military maneuvers, at times in contravention of what David wanted, and perhaps in keeping with greater, strategic statesmanship. When David bemoaned the death of Avshalom, Yoav retorted, "Would you have rathered your whole army would have been annihilated and your son, live?"

Haman, the Malbim writes, "stacked the cards" so that Vashti, who Achashveirosh loved dearly, could be put to death. Achashveirosh asked for clemency, appealing to Haman, and his advisors' mercy; Haman insisted on the most draconic of punishments. Haman said that Achashveirosh could never attain an unbounded, unchecked rule, were Vashti to live. 

More on this next time!