Why do we need a king?

Motek

Thu, May 15 2008, 11:24 am

grin wrote:

I think we all agree that Torah and mitzvos cannot reach their fullest expression in galus as long as we lack the beis hamikdosh, korbanos, our benevolent talmid chochom king, no material lack, no fear of terrorists or suicide bombers...

One of the 613 mitzvos is to appoint a king and there are other mitzvos that pertain to the king. What is the reason given for this mitzva (anyone have a Sefer Ha'Chinuch handy?)?

NotInNJMommy

Thu, May 15 2008, 12:50 pm

I thought it is for him to fight our wars...

Imaonwheels

Thu, May 15 2008, 1:26 pm

No, sefer mitzvot in my hand, but some memory of Maamar Mitzvas Minui Melech in Derech Mitzvosecha.

The idea is that the king is a moshol of HaShem,. More importantly, the people should be batul (subservient) to the king and the king batul to HaShem. If the king is in the right place then his subjects should be as well.

grin

Thu, May 15 2008, 1:37 pm

NJMommy wrote:

I thought it is for him to fight our wars...

no, we need him during peacetime also. Yes, I think we're supposed to learn from him bitul (subservience).

Motek

Sun, May 18 2008, 10:25 am

Imaonwheels wrote:

The idea is that the king is a moshol of HaShem,.

The Gemara in Brachos 58a says, "malchusa d'ar'a k'ein malchusa d'rakia" -Kingship on earth is a prototype of the Heavenly Kingship."

Interesting that a bracha is made even on seeing a gentile king!

gonewiththewind

Tue, May 20 2008, 12:10 am

I thought I had always remembered learning that Hashem would prefer not having a king, but He knew the people would demand, so he allows it.

The pesukim in Sefer Devarim are phrased in a style similar to so many other mitzvot detailed in Devarim, "Ki tavo ... som tasim," – when you arrive in the land, the following must be done. "Som tasim" is formulated in lashon tzivui, the imperative mode. This would seem to imply that there is a mitzva to appoint a king. On the other hand, though, there are numerous indications in Tanakh that the request for a king was frowned upon, both by leaders such as Gidon and Shemuel, and by God Himself who told Shemuel that the appointment of a king is tantamount to rejection ("me'isa") of Him. (See Shoftim 8:22-23 and Shemuel 8:1-22.) Actually, the pesukim in Devarim also present the need to appoint a king as a function of pressure from the people ("ve-amarta asima alai melekh") rather than initiated from above. R. Nehorai's solution to these conflicting signals, based upon our previous analysis, is quite simple. The Torah endorses and commands shilton but not melukha, I.e. establishing a government is a mitzva (unlike the negative state of anarchy described in Sefer Shoftim as "everyone did as he pleased"), but the specific form of the governing body is not mandated by the Torah. The word melekh in thpasuk is thereby interpreted as malkhut – government.

http://www.ou.org/torah/tt/576.....t.htm
-another article discussing why Hashem was "reluctant" to appoint a king

Imaonwheels

Tue, May 20 2008, 1:55 am

The particular request at the time Shaul was chosen was for improper motives. HaShem tells Shmuel, that he was not rejected but rather HaShem Himself. They wanted a king not to point to G-d but to be like the other nations.

Appointing a king is one of the 3 mitzvot required of Am Israel when coming into the land, along with mechias Amelek and building the Beis HaMikdash. Mashiach will be a king. Monarchy by a holy person in touch with HaShem is the way he commanded the Jewish people to be ruled.

TzenaRena

Tue, May 20 2008, 7:59 am

Positive mitzvah 183. -the commandment that we have been commanded to appoint on ourselves a Jewish king who will gather our nation and ( unify us by having one leader) and will lead us. This is what He said "Thou shalt appoint upon yourselves a king" (Devorim 17:15), and we already mentioned their words (the chachomim) in Sifrei (Devorim 17:15). " The Jews were commanded three mitzvos when they entered the land: To appoint for themselves a kig, and to build the Beis HaBechira, and to eliminate the descendants of Amalek".

Also it says in Sifrei "Som Tasim alecha melech - this is a mitzvas Asei." And the Peirush is that "You shall appoint for yourselves a king - that his fear shall be upon you". that in our hearts there should be the greatest kovod and greatness and exaltedness that can't be surpassed, until his maalah should be greater by us than a Novi,from amongst the Neviim in his generation. Abnd in the Peirush (Mishnah) they said " Melech precedes Novi". etc. ( to be cont.)

from Sefer Hamitzvos of the RamBam

gonewiththewind

Tue, May 20 2008, 10:38 am

The establishment of a monarchy does not conform to our usual idea of a mitzva, R. Yitzchak Abarbanel (Devarim 17:14) argues that no mitzva exists to appoint a king. Although the Gemara (Sanhedrin 20b) lists it as one of “three mitzvot that Israel was commanded upon entering the Land,” Abarbanel claims that the Gemara never obligates the Jewish people to institute a monarchy; rather, should they desire a king, there is a mitzva to obey the Torah’s instructions for his selection and powers. Abarbanel draws a parallel between this mitzva and the mitzva to repent. Just as the Torah never obligates the Jewish people to sin, but if they do, then they must repent, they similarly need not appoint a king, but if they do he must follow the mitzvos of the king
R. Moshe Alshich asserts that the Torah does actually mandate crowning a king, yet he still considers monarchy negative. God, he explains, recognized that the Jewish people would insist on appointing a king. Since He could not prevent them from establishing this ill-advised form of government, He instead commands them to establish it with specific guidelines, so that the monarchy would not impact the people too adversely. (This idea may be compared to the mitzva of yefat to’ar in Devarim 21:10-13, in which the Torah delineates the rules for marrying a foreign woman captured in war; this, we may suggest, is not an endorsement of the practice, but an acknowledgement of its inevitability and a method of minimizing the spiritual damage inherent in it.)
.
Many traditional sources dispute interpreting the passage in Devarim as mandatory. For example, Devarim Rabba (5: 8 ) relates the following aggadic tale:
God said to Israel, “My sons, I thought that you should be free from [human] monarchy... but you did not request this way; rather, ‘[You] snuff up the wind in [your] desire’ (Yirmiyahu 2:24).” This “wind” refers to kings... God said, “And if you think I do not realize that you will ultimately abandon me [as a result of having a king], I already warned [you] through Moshe. I told him, ‘Since ]? From what we read in the passage of “when you will eventually say, ‘We would like to appoint a king...

In depicting the severity of punishment for national sins, the Rebuke of Ki Savo warns:
God will bring you and the king whom you have appointed to a nation unknown to you and your fathers, and there you will serve foreign gods of wood and stone. (Devarim 28:36) This final stage both places the Jews in a worse state than they would find themselves (as slaves in Egypt) had God not intervened in world events as well as subjects them to human force unbridled by God, a fitting ending for people who rely too heavily on their king and fail to acknowledge their dependence on God.

from rabbi Ezra Frazer, published in Haretzion

Motek

Tue, May 20 2008, 11:51 am

I looked it up. The reason the Chinuch gives for the mitzva is a simple one, because people need one leader.

Motek

Sun, Sep 07 2008, 5:19 pm

2 reasons a king is appointed: 1) the simple reason - he prescribes a proper manner of conduct for his subjects. Even when people know how to behave, that's not enough because your passions can overcome your logic. Fear of a king serves to guarantee that the people will conduct itself properly

2) When people are on a level at which they are in full control of their emotions and are able to police themselves, a king serves no useful purpose in this regard. However, there are things about which the people may lack discernment. Only a king, being "head and shoulders above the entire populace," understands these matters. He therefore issues various decrees that his subjects faithfully obey.

On a more spiritual level, for Jews, whose true King is G-d, a human king is appointed in order that he may serve as a conduit to reveal Hashem's Malchus to the people.

Jews inherently believe, understand, and feel that their life-force comes from Hashem and this results in their natural bittul (subjugation) to Him. When this is lacking though, it becomes necessary for them to have a human king. The fear and awe of him will eventually lead to their feeling awe and self-nullifcation before the King of kings.

When Jews are as they should be, then appointing a king serves a much loftier purpose. It leads them to levels of G-dliness that they could not otherwise reach alone. The king enables them to attain a higher and deeper level of fear of G-d and bittul to Him.

based on Likutei Sichos vol. XXIV p. 104-6

lamplighter

Sun, Sep 07 2008, 7:38 pm

learned that sicha on shabbos motek...beautiful explanation and hora'ah

yo'ma

Sun, Sep 07 2008, 7:44 pm

My kids were playing with purim puppets this past shabbos. I'm not sure what their show was, but I heard them saying:
achashveirosh- I am the king
the kids (the audience)- no, hashem is the king
I had to explain to them, that yes, hashem is the king of all kings, but there was once jewish kings.
That's it, just sharing Confused