Difference between revisions of "Concerns Regarding the Monarchy/2"
m |
m |
||
Line 31: | Line 31: | ||
<point><b>Positive mentions of monarchy</b><ul> | <point><b>Positive mentions of monarchy</b><ul> | ||
<li>Prof Elitzur claims that the Torah is not against monarchy per se, only against the hopes the people put into the change of regime.<fn>It was their assumptions that changing their ruler, rather than changing their ways,  would make them victorious in battle and usher in peace, that was problematic.</fn></li> | <li>Prof Elitzur claims that the Torah is not against monarchy per se, only against the hopes the people put into the change of regime.<fn>It was their assumptions that changing their ruler, rather than changing their ways,  would make them victorious in battle and usher in peace, that was problematic.</fn></li> | ||
− | <li>Alternatively, in Devarim (and elsewhere) 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.  </li> | + | <li>Alternatively, in Devarim (and elsewhere) 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. </li> |
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
<point><b>Shemuel's speech when anointing Shaul</b> – When Shemuel appoints Shaul as king, he reminds the people that it is Hashem, not their new king, who is their true savior:  "וְאַתֶּם הַיּוֹם מְאַסְתֶּם אֶת אֱלֹהֵיכֶם אֲשֶׁר <b>הוּא מוֹשִׁיעַ</b> לָכֶם מִכׇּל רָעוֹתֵיכֶם וְצָרֹתֵיכֶם וַתֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ כִּי מֶלֶךְ תָּשִׂים עָלֵינוּ" (<a href="ShemuelI10-18-20" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 10:18-20</a>). This further supports this position's understanding of the people's flawed request.</point> | <point><b>Shemuel's speech when anointing Shaul</b> – When Shemuel appoints Shaul as king, he reminds the people that it is Hashem, not their new king, who is their true savior:  "וְאַתֶּם הַיּוֹם מְאַסְתֶּם אֶת אֱלֹהֵיכֶם אֲשֶׁר <b>הוּא מוֹשִׁיעַ</b> לָכֶם מִכׇּל רָעוֹתֵיכֶם וְצָרֹתֵיכֶם וַתֹּאמְרוּ לוֹ כִּי מֶלֶךְ תָּשִׂים עָלֵינוּ" (<a href="ShemuelI10-18-20" data-aht="source">Shemuel I 10:18-20</a>). This further supports this position's understanding of the people's flawed request.</point> | ||
Line 97: | Line 97: | ||
<point><b>Granting the request</b> – Since a king in itself is not negative, Hashem granted the request.</point> | <point><b>Granting the request</b> – Since a king in itself is not negative, Hashem granted the request.</point> | ||
</category> | </category> | ||
− | <category>Dynastic Leadership | + | <category name="Desire for Dynasty"> |
+ | Desire for Dynastic Leadership | ||
<p>Hashem and Shemuel were opposed to the concept of a dynastic leader who would bequeath the position to his sons after him.</p> | <p>Hashem and Shemuel were opposed to the concept of a dynastic leader who would bequeath the position to his sons after him.</p> | ||
<mekorot> | <mekorot> | ||
<multilink><a href="SefornoDevarim17-14" data-aht="source">Seforno</a><a href="SefornoDevarim17-14" data-aht="source">Devarim 17:14</a><a href="R. Ovadyah Seforno" data-aht="parshan">About R. Ovadyah Seforno</a></multilink> | <multilink><a href="SefornoDevarim17-14" data-aht="source">Seforno</a><a href="SefornoDevarim17-14" data-aht="source">Devarim 17:14</a><a href="R. Ovadyah Seforno" data-aht="parshan">About R. Ovadyah Seforno</a></multilink> | ||
</mekorot> | </mekorot> | ||
− | <point><b>"שִׂימָה לָּנוּ מֶלֶךְ לְשׇׁפְטֵנוּ כְּכׇל הַגּוֹיִם"</b> – Seforno understands the request "כְּכׇל הַגּוֹיִם" to mean a dynastic leader, the mode of government found among the other nations.  In Israel, in contrast, leadership should have taken the form of Shofetim, who ruled on their own with no expectation that they would pass the mantle to their children after them</point> | + | <point><b>"שִׂימָה לָּנוּ מֶלֶךְ לְשׇׁפְטֵנוּ כְּכׇל הַגּוֹיִם"</b> – Seforno understands the request "כְּכׇל הַגּוֹיִם" to mean a dynastic leader, the mode of government found among the other nations.  In Israel, in contrast, leadership should have taken the form of Shofetim, who ruled on their own with no expectation that they would pass the mantle to their children after them.</point> |
− | <point><b>What is wrong with a dynasty?</b> Seforno does not address the issue but one could say that dynastic rule runs the risk of inferior leadership since it is not merit based and allows for the possibility that someone who is not qualified, whether morally or politically, will nonetheless rule. In addition it means losing out on the constant intervening of Hashem to appoint an appropriate leader and thus on the continuous feeling of Hashem's presence and providence on the nation.<fn>See <a href="http://www.etzion.org.il/he/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%A4%D7%98%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%9E%D7%A6%D7%95%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%95%D7%99-%D7%9E%D7%9C%D7%9A-%D7%95%D7%A9%D7%90%D7%9C%D7%AA-%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%98%D7%A8-%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%93%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99-%D7%94%D7%A8%D7%A6%D7%95%D7%99-%D7%A2%D7%9C-%D7%A4%D7%99-%D7%94%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94">R"E Samet</a> who develops this idea.</fn></point> | + | <point><b>What is wrong with a dynasty?</b> Seforno does not address the issue but one could say that dynastic rule runs the risk of inferior leadership since it is not merit based and allows for the possibility that someone who is not qualified, whether morally or politically, will nonetheless rule. In addition it means losing out on the constant intervening of Hashem to appoint an appropriate leader and thus on the continuous feeling of Hashem's presence and providence on the nation.<fn>See <a href="http://www.etzion.org.il/he/%D7%A4%D7%A8%D7%A9%D7%AA-%D7%A9%D7%95%D7%A4%D7%98%D7%99%D7%9D-%D7%9E%D7%A6%D7%95%D7%95%D7%AA-%D7%9E%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%95%D7%99-%D7%9E%D7%9C%D7%9A-%D7%95%D7%A9%D7%90%D7%9C%D7%AA-%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%A9%D7%98%D7%A8-%D7%94%D7%9E%D7%93%D7%99%D7%A0%D7%99-%D7%94%D7%A8%D7%A6%D7%95%D7%99-%D7%A2%D7%9C-%D7%A4%D7%99-%D7%94%D7%AA%D7%95%D7%A8%D7%94">R"E Samet</a> who develops this idea.</fn> Finally, as <multilink><a href="ShadalDevarim17-14" data-aht="source">Shadal</a><a href="ShadalDevarim17-14" data-aht="source">Devarim 17:14</a><a href="R. Shemuel David Luzzatto (Shadal)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shemuel David Luzzatto</a></multilink> says, it leads to a feeling of entitlement and arrogance which might it express itself in abuse of the people.<fn>It should be noted that though Shadal sees this a a danger of dynastic leadership, he himself does not agree that therefore a dynasty is necessarily a poor choice.  In certain eras and societies, this could still be the preferred from of government. He suggests that the problem in the people's request was that they were motivated by a desire for glory.  They were no longer satisfied with a ruler who had no wealth and no entourage and desired a monarch with all the pomp and ceremony, looking to the honor he would bring the nation.</fn></point> |
− | <point><b>Is appointing a king obligatory or permissible?</b> Seforno maintains that the Torah does not command the nation to appoint a king, but rather permits it as a concession to human nature. Knowing that the nation will be obstinate in their desire for a king, the Torah regulates the appointment, ensuring that the ruler be picked by Hashem. Seforno compare it to the case of a beautiful captive woman, which is also only permitted as a last resort.<fn>He adds that just as marrying such a woman inevitably leads to hating her and rebellious children, so too, anointing a king will result in abuse and the people's crying to Hashem as described by Shemuel (Shemuel I 8:11-18).</fn> </point> | + | <point><b>Is appointing a king obligatory or permissible?</b> Seforno maintains that the Torah does not command the nation to appoint a king, but rather permits it as a concession to human nature. Knowing that the nation will be obstinate in their desire for a king, the Torah regulates the appointment, ensuring that the ruler be picked by Hashem, and that he not be haughty. Seforno compare it to the case of a beautiful captive woman, which is also only permitted as a last resort.<fn>He adds that just as marrying such a woman inevitably leads to hating her and rebellious children, so too, anointing a king will result in abuse and the people's crying to Hashem as described by Shemuel (Shemuel I 8:11-18).</fn> </point> |
<point><b>"מִשְׁפַּט הַמֶּלֶךְ"</b> – According to Seforno, Shemuel explains to the nation that the inevitable result of appointing a dynastic ruler will be his extortion of the people.</point> | <point><b>"מִשְׁפַּט הַמֶּלֶךְ"</b> – According to Seforno, Shemuel explains to the nation that the inevitable result of appointing a dynastic ruler will be his extortion of the people.</point> | ||
<point><b>Granting the request</b> – Hashem grants the request, but lets it be known that the people will pay the price.</point> | <point><b>Granting the request</b> – Hashem grants the request, but lets it be known that the people will pay the price.</point> |
Version as of 11:21, 6 December 2016
What is Wrong With a 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 – Or HaChayyim adds that having a king makes it likely that the people will attribute all their successes to their human leader3 as opposed to Hashem.4 This, in turn, will result in their not even turning to Hashem for aid when needed, as they replace Him with their new king.5
- Misconception as to causes of war – R. D"Z Hoffman6 adds that the request betrays the people's lack of understanding that wars and troubles come as a result of sin.7 The solution was not to find a king, but rather to repent and return to God.8
- 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. Or HaChayyim similarly finds the phrase problematic, suggesting that it is this phrase which points to the desire for a military leader, since that is the role played by other monarchs.9
- Not problematic – R. D"Z Hoffmann and Prof. Elitzur, in contrast, see 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.
- Prof Elitzur claims that the Torah is not against monarchy per se, only against the hopes the people put into the change of regime.11
- Alternatively, in Devarim (and elsewhere) 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.
Rejection of the Shofet
The people's desire for a king "to judge us" was problematic either because it was a personal affront to Shemuel specifically or because it usurped the institution of judges as a whole.
Insult to Shemuel
Though the institution of monarchy is not in and of itself problematic, 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 kingship, in this era of miraculous providence, there was no need for a king.
Desire for Dynastic Leadership
Hashem and Shemuel were opposed to the concept of a dynastic leader who would bequeath the position to his sons after him.