The Talmud (Masechet Hulin 139) relates that the Sage Rav Matna was once asked the question of where we might find an allusion to Haman in the Torah. Rav Matna replied by citing God's rhetorical question to Adam immediately after he partook of the forbidden tree: "Ha'min Ha'etz Asher Siviticha Le'vilti Achol Mimena Achalta" ("Have you eaten from the tree from which I commanded you not to eat?" – Bereshit 3:11). The word "Ha'min" has the same letters as the word "Haman," and this verse thus serves as a subtle allusion to Haman, already in the very first chapters of the Torah.
What lesson does this convey? Of what significance is it that the Torah alludes to Haman in the context of Adam's sin of eating from the forbidden tree?
The Rabbis explain that the Talmud here alludes to Haman's permanent state of dissatisfaction, his inability to feel gratified over what he had. He enjoyed immense wealth, a large family, and a stature of power and prestige that was surpassed only by King Ahashverosh. In fact, the king ordered all his subjects to bow before Haman as an expression of honor and acclaim. One would think that nobody would have been happier and more content than Haman. Yet, Haman himself testified, "But all this is worth nothing to me" (Ester 5:13). He had everything – except for one thing: Mordechai, a Jew, would not bow to him. Haman was incapable of enjoying his wealth and power because there was thing he did not have, there was one person who refused to show him respect.
The Sages teach that the allusion to Haman, the precedent of this inability to feel content and satisfied with what one has, is the incident of Adam and the forbidden tree. Adam had everything. He lived in Gan Eden, where he was offered all the comforts and delights of the world. The Sages even teach that angels prepared luxurious food and drinks for him. There was but one tree from which he was commanded to abstain – and it was precisely the fruit of this tree that he desired. He had almost everything, but was still not satisfied because of the one delight that was withheld from him.
This passage in the Gemara thus teaches the importance of feeling content over one's share in the world. As the Mishna famously exhorts in Pirke Avot (4:1), "Who is rich – he who is happy with his share." A person can be content and happy only if he accustoms himself to focus on what he has, and not on what he does not have. If a person always looks at what he has not yet achieved and obtained, he will always feel frustrated and discontented.
The Gemara tells in Masechet Megila that the tribe of Zevulun complained to God over the fact that they received a smaller territory than that assigned to the tribe of Naftali. The people of Zevulun failed to appreciate their blessings. Their territory contained the Hilazon, the snail from which the blue dye was produced for the Sisit. God not only assigned this territory specifically to Zevulun, but also saw to it that people from other tribes would be unable to extract the dye from the Hilazon unless they purchased it from Zevulun. The area of Zevulun also contained a certain fish called the "Tarit" (possibly the tuna), which was considered a delicacy and thus yielded considerable revenue. In addition, this region featured a special kind of sand that was used for producing crystal utensils. What more, the land in Zevulun's territory was especially fertile and conducive to farming. And yet, despite these unique blessings, the tribe of Zevulun still felt dissatisfied and envious of Naftali.
The lesson of Haman, and of ("Le'havdil") Adam and Zevulun, is to count one's blessings and feel a sense of satisfaction and gratitude for all that one has – his family, his home, his job, his synagogue and community, and so on. Rather than always concerning oneself with what he still does not have, he should be thankful for the many blessings in his life, and he will thereby enjoy much happiness and joy, and spare himself aggravation and anxiety.
