Our Gemara on Amud Aleph discusses the halachic principle that often drinking is subsumed under the verbal definition of eating. Therefore, drinking might violate an oath not to eat.

Megillas Esther (4:16) relates Queen Esther’s instructions to Mordechai to declare a fasting period:

“Go, assemble all the Jews who live in Shushan, and fast in my behalf; do not eat or drink for three days, night or day.”

Rav Chaim Kanievsky ZT’L (Taame Dekra) asks why it was necessary for Esther to specify “do not eat or drink,” when she already stated “fast on my behalf.” Additionally, why state “do not eat or drink” when to not eat would equally imply abstaining from liquids as well? Rav Chaim answers that since we have a tradition that this fast took place on the first night of Pesach, we can understand that Esther’s words were a prophetic hint at the deeper truth of what was going on. It was not merely a fast; it was also to “not eat,” which relates to the bitter herbs and the matzah, and to “not drink,” which relates to the four cups. So, aside from the directive to observe a fast, she was noting the imperative to do so even on Pesach night.

Another answer that occurred to me was that since the original sin had to do with eating and drinking at the feast of Achashveirosh, see Rashi Esther (4:1), this hinted at the need to repent specifically for the sins of eating and drinking in a fashion that promoted assimilation and debauchery. I was pleased to find out later that I was mechaveyn to a Maharal, who says the same idea in Ohr Chadash (4:16).

In general, it is interesting to consider how we are actually supposed to understand Esther’s state of mind when she spoke this. We have a couple of choices:

1. Psychologically, there are many people who are capable of speaking in innuendo, and it is possible that Esther actually was hinting at these things.
2. We might also say that, even if she wasn’t thinking about it consciously, perhaps the Midrash is picking up on an unconscious thought pattern. That is, somewhere in the back of Esther’s or Mordechai’s mind,  they were thinking, “and it’s Pesach, or perhaps this is a punishment for partaking in Achashveirosh’s party.” The unconscious thought produced the Freudian slip, so to speak, of the extra words.
3. Esther and Mordechai did not have anything in mind in particular, but later on, the Ruach Hakodesh that informed and influenced the process and choice of words inserted this commentary, like a narrator’s observation in the middle of the story.
4. Esther or Mordechai were not aware of what they were saying, but it was a minor prophecy that came out spontaneously. This is a phenomenon in Chazal known as Niba v’lo yada ma sheniba, “He prophesied but was not aware of what he prophesied.” (See for example, Rashi (Shemos 15:17.)

In general, the way our tradition pays attention to words and nuances, what is said, and what might be meant, I think, stimulated progress toward abstract and symbolic thinking that greatly benefited and advanced Western civilization. As one example, it is now well known that Freud had an extensive and sophisticated Jewish education and had many Hebrew classics in his library, which we have access to. It definitely makes me wonder if Freud’s incredible attention to nuance and symbolic meaning of words, in dreams and via free association, came partially from his exposure to rabbinic Midrashim. Midrashim are almost like God’s unconscious, expressing content that is important but not necessarily easily converted to specific verbal packets of data. Remember, the unconscious mind is not just some kind of miniature homunculus inside a person’s head. If it were that straightforward, it would be conscious thought. It’s unconscious because it represents a different level of symbolic, associative thought that is more intuitive than syllogistic, and is not verbal.