Difference between revisions of "Concerns Regarding the Monarchy/2"
m |
|||
Line 80: | Line 80: | ||
</mekorot> | </mekorot> | ||
<point><b>"כְּכָל הַגּוֹיִם"</b> – These sources focus on the people's request that they have a king "like the other nations," understanding this to mean that they desired a king who would act like Gentile rulers, deciding the law on his own rather than following Torah law.  </point> | <point><b>"כְּכָל הַגּוֹיִם"</b> – These sources focus on the people's request that they have a king "like the other nations," understanding this to mean that they desired a king who would act like Gentile rulers, deciding the law on his own rather than following Torah law.  </point> | ||
− | <point><b>Monarchy in Devarim</b> – Malbim explains that though the command to appoint a king in Devarim uses the language of Devarim also uses the language of "וְאָמַרְתָּ אָשִׂימָה עָלַי מֶלֶךְ כְּכׇל הַגּוֹיִם" he Torah calls for a constitutional monarchy (with the Torah being the constitution).  Thus, Devarim commands that a king must write his own Sefer Torah, highlighting how he, too, is subservient to the Torah's laws and not above them. | + | <point><b>Monarchy in Devarim</b> – The fact that when -- laws of  a king also Malbim explains that though the command to appoint a king in Devarim uses the language of Devarim also uses the language of "וְאָמַרְתָּ אָשִׂימָה עָלַי מֶלֶךְ כְּכׇל הַגּוֹיִם" he Torah calls for a constitutional monarchy (with the Torah being the constitution).  Thus, Devarim commands that a king must write his own Sefer Torah, highlighting how he, too, is subservient to the Torah's laws and not above them. Had the people requested such a king neither Shemuel nor Hashem would have been upset. They, however, requested an absolute monarchy in which the king dictates his own laws.</point> |
<point><b>"לְשׇׁפְטֵנוּ"</b> – This approach must explain why, when the verses describes Shemuel's distress at the people's request, they make no mention of the fact that the nation desired a king "like all the nations" emphasizing instead that they wanted one to "judge" them. These sources respond that Shemuel mentions the aspect of judgement, since this is the area in which the king won't be abiding by Torah law, as he will, instead, be making his own משפט.</point> | <point><b>"לְשׇׁפְטֵנוּ"</b> – This approach must explain why, when the verses describes Shemuel's distress at the people's request, they make no mention of the fact that the nation desired a king "like all the nations" emphasizing instead that they wanted one to "judge" them. These sources respond that Shemuel mentions the aspect of judgement, since this is the area in which the king won't be abiding by Torah law, as he will, instead, be making his own משפט.</point> | ||
<point><b>Hashem's response: "כִּי אֹתִי מָאֲסוּ"</b> – In choosing a king who won't follow the Torah's dictates the people in effect reject Hashem.</point> | <point><b>Hashem's response: "כִּי אֹתִי מָאֲסוּ"</b> – In choosing a king who won't follow the Torah's dictates the people in effect reject Hashem.</point> |
Version as of 03:12, 23 November 2016
Problem With the King
Exegetical Approaches
Rejection of Hashem for Human Military Leader
In requesting a human monarch to fight their wars, the people betrayed a lack of faith in and recognition of Hashem as their warrior and savior.
- Lack of trust – Radak asserts that the desire for a human warrior displays a lack of trust in Hashem to save the nation.
- Attribution of success to self – In addition, having a king makes it likely that the people will attribute all their successes to their human leader,2 as opposed to Hashem.3 This, in turn, will result in their not even turning to Hashem for aid when needed, as they replace Him with their new king.4
- Misconception as to causes of war – Prof. Elitzur adds that the request betrays the people's lack of understanding that wars and troubles come as a result of sin.5 The solution was not to find a king, but rather to repent and return to God.6
- Problematic – Radak suggests that the people should not have asked for a king "like all the other nations" since they were not like other nations. As long as they observed Hashem's laws, Hashem would fight for them. Thus unlike others, Israel really did not need a warrior-king.
- Not problematic – Prof. Elitzur, in contrast, sees nothing wrong in this formulation pointing out that it is identical to Hashem's language in Devarim. In fact, the people of Shemuel's time might simply be echoing Hashem's own words.
- It is possible that Shemuel understood the people correctly, (with "שפט" having a military connotation) and, like Hashem, was upset that the nation wanted to replace their old warrior, Hashem, with a new one.
- Alternatively, it is possible that Shemuel misunderstood the people's request, understanding "לְשׇׁפְטֵנוּ" in its judicial sense. He took their request as a personal affront, as he assumed that they found him lacking.
- Prof Elitzur claims that the Torah is not against monarchy per se, only against the hopes the people put into the change of regime.8
- Alternatively, in Devarim Hashem is referring to a king whose primary role was not military in nature but judicial or spiritual. Such a monarch would not have been problematic, yet, even so, Hashem enacts laws to curb his power and remind him that he is subservient to Hashem. Otherwise there is a fear that he will become haughty and see himself as a replacement for Hashem, leading him and the nation to depend on the monarch and not God.
Rejection of the Shofet
The people's desire for a king "to judge us" was problematic either because it usurped the institution of judges as a whole, or because it was a personal affront to Shemuel specifically.
Insult to Shemuel
Though there is nothing wrong with the institution of monarchy, asking for a king to serve as a judge when Shemuel was still judging the nation was an insult to his honor.
Usurping the Role of Judges
The nation's request was problematic because they wanted a king to fulfill a judicial rather than a political or military role .
Rejection of Torah Law
Hashem was upset by the people's request since they desired a king who would be like the other nations and not subject to the laws of Torah.
Wrong Timing
Though there is nothing inherently wrong with the institution of monarchy, in this era of miraculous providence, there was no need for a king.