In Parshat Shoftim we find commandments addressed to the general populace, which bear on the life of the nation when it is fully engaged. Four national foundations are detailed: the Torah ("Judges and officers you shall appoint for you in all your gates..." xvi, 18), priesthood ("And this shall be the laws of the priests from the people..." xviii, 1), prophecy ("I will establish a prophet for them like you, from amongst their brothers..."xviii, 18), and kingship ("and you say, 'I will appoint a king over me...'" xvii, 14). Our teacher and master HaRav Tzvi Yehudah Kook based his lectures on Parshat Shoftim on this issue. When we return to our land, and return to live a national life, we must clarify these issues thoroughly in order to establish the nation on holy foundations, for only thus can the nation actualize its Divine function.

One of the questions that has troubled us since the establishment of the state up until this day is its form of government. All the ideas that have been attempted share one thing in common - democracy. In many circles (including religious ones) democracy has been elevated to the status of a "religion" that everyone must bow to, including the Torah and those who uphold it. Conversely, there are those who show complete contempt towards democracy and through this they at times detach themselves from the rest of Israeli society, causing severe damage. The Gemara in Sanhedrin (20b) states: "We have learnt, Rabbi Yosi says: Israel were given three commandments upon their entry into the Land - to establish for themselves a king, to destroy the seed of Amalek, and to build for themselves the Chosen House [temple]. I do not know which of them takes precedence, but when it states, 'for a hand is on the throne of G-d, a war of Hashem against Amalek,' this shows that they had to establish a king first...but I still do not know whether to build the Chosen House first or whether first to destroy the seed of Amalek. When it states, 'And give you relief from all your enemies...and it shall be the place that Hashem shall choose,' this shows that the seed of Amalek must be destroyed first." There is in fact a Tannaic dispute over whether it is a mitzvah to appoint a king: "Rabbi Yehudah says, Israel were given three commandments upon their entry into the Land - to establish for themselves a king...Rabbi Nehorai says, this chapter was only stated because of their complaints" (Sanhedrin ibid). Rashi explains that Rabbi Nehorai holds "that there is no mitzvah to establish a king but rather it was revealed before Him that they will complain about it in the future and say, 'We should also be like all the nations,' as it says: 'I will appoint a king over me' - this is something you will say in the future." The Rambam (Laws of Kings, 1:1) rules that it is a mitzvah to establish a king.

Yet Rabbi Nehorai's claim must be answered, for the Torah does not state in the form of a command "you shall say, 'I will establish a king over me,'" but instead writes "and you say" (xvii, 14), which implies a voluntary action. The Ramban responds to this difficulty and says, "According to our Rabbis this forms a positive commandment, that we are obligated to say this after conquest and settlement. It deploys the expression, 'and you say,' for the mitzvah is that they should approach the priests and Levites and the judge and say to them, 'We wish to appoint a king over us.' Furthermore, in my opinion this is also one of his hints towards the future, for this is what happened when they requested Shaul for themselves - they said to Shemuel, 'Appoint for us a king to judge us like all the nations,' and likewise it states there, 'And we too shall be like all the nations and our king shall judge us.' For why should the Torah state in its commandment, 'Like all the nations surrounding me' - Israel should not learn from them, or be jealous of evil-doers! But rather this hints at what will come to pass, and therefore this chapter is written in the participle form (instead of the imperative)." The Torah uses the participle form to hint to us at what will happen in the future, in Shemuel's time. The Ramban's comments clarify an additional point. His words imply that the mitzvah is to request a king. This implies that a king is not established in a technical, superficial manner, but rather a request must come from the people, in other words there must be an inner desire of the people for a king. According to his approach we can understand why Yehoshua did not appoint a king for Israel, and why they were not concerned to appoint a king after him, in the period of the judges, for as long as there is no internal readiness for a king's rule, we do not appoint one. These ideas are clarified in the Netziv's commentary on our Parsha. The Netziv refers to the "and you say" expression and explains: "This expression implies that it is not an absolute mitzvah to appoint a king but rather a voluntary one, as when it states, 'And you say, I shall eat meat...' Now it is known that according to Chazal it is a mitzvah to appoint a king, and if so, why does it state, 'And you say'? It appears that this is because the leadership of the nation changes depending on whether it is run by a monarchy or by the opinion of the people and their elected. There are states that cannot abide the monarchy, while others are like a rudderless ship without one. This matter cannot be decided forcefully through a positive commandment, for issues of broad leadership are a matter of life-and-death, which overrule a positive commandment. For this reason it is impossible to issue a decisive command to appoint one so long as the people have not agreed to bear the burden of a king. When they see countries surrounding them acting on a better system, then the Sanhedrin is obliged to appoint a king...and even though the appointment of a king is a mitzvah, nonetheless the Sanhedrin is not obligated to act accordingly until the people declare that they desire the leadership of a king. For this reason, for the three hundred years that the Mishkan was in Shiloh there was no king (as there was no agreement on the part of the people)."

 

These ideas speak for themselves and are in no need of further clarification. Yet difficulties may arise when it comes to the actual performance. How do we know when the "people" want it, and when do we say that they are not yet ready? There are undoubtedly many possibilities here, with significant ramifications.

The great virtue of a king is that he is appointed according to the word of Hashem, as the pasuk states, "You shall surely appoint a king over you, whom Hashem your G-d shall choose..." (15). And the Rambam rules (Laws of Kings, 1:3): "The original appointment of a king is only through the Bet Din of seventy elders and through a prophet, like Yehoshua who was appointed by Moshe and his Bet Din, and like Shaul and David who were appointed by Shemuel the Ramite and his Bet Din." If the king is righteous he will perform his mission from Hakadosh Baruch Hu throughout his life, for he was chosen by Hashem. Such a king would not be held hostage to his personal accounts, or minor pressures that result from poles and the like. The Torah commands the king, "And it shall be when he sits on his royal throne and he shall write for himself this Torah twofold in a scroll before the priests and Levites." Rashi explains: "'this Torah twofold' - Two Torah scrolls, one of which was placed in his treasury, while the other was by him at all times." Like every man of Israel, the king is commanded to write a Torah scroll; he must, however, write an additional one. Rav Kook ("Mishpat Kohen," p. 316) explains: "The king must write two Torah scrolls, each one for a unique holiness. One is like that of every Israelite, and the other is for the laws of the monarchy." First of all, the king must perfect his personality like every member of Israel and he must be completely attached to the Torah. This is the first scroll. Once he has perfected his personality he can work on establishing the next level, that of the king. If his personality is damaged then the kingship will lead him into arrogance and tyranny, and he must therefore perfect his private personality beforehand. This is the second scroll that the king writes, which is the scroll of the laws of monarchy, of the upper level of purified kingship. The Torah emphasizes, "And he shall write for himself this Torah twofold in a scroll before the priests and Levites," that the king must connect the scroll of monarchy to the great people of the nation - the priests and Levites. In this fashion the possibility that the king will abuse his authority is barred, as he draws his strength from the nation's spiritual leaders.

 

As we have seen, the king is appointed through a prophet and there is no doubt that he must continue to seek the prophet's council as his leadership progresses, as was the case with Shemuel and Shaul, and many other examples. Yet sometimes tensions can arise between the prophet's spiritual leadership and the king's political one. A meeting had to be held between Yishayahu the prophet and Chizkiyahu the king. The Gemara in Berachot (10a) relates: "Chizkiyahu said that Yishayahu should come to him, for we find that Eliyahu went to Achav, whereas Yishayahu said that Chizkiyahu should come to him, as we find that Yehoram ben Achav went to Elisha. What did Hakadosh Baruch Hu do? He brought sufferings to Chizkiyahu and instructed Yishayahu to go and visit the sick."

Rav Kook explains (Ein Ayah, ibid) "that the spirit of prophecy which Hakadosh Baruch Hu granted to Israel was designed to fulfill the eternal needs of the nation, to enable it to receive an everlasting spiritual life, whereas the spirit of monarchy was to improve the people's lot in their current national existence. For there are matters and customs that temporarily increase the people's courage but take away from its strength for future standing, and conversely there are many matters that might even weaken it in the meantime and yet add strength and might in the future. Thus any tendency towards the extremes is oppressive and harmful. Since if the people were to concern themselves with their future existence alone without paying any attention to their current situation, strangers will come and plunder it until they will lose their spirit and aspiration for eternal existence. On the other hand, how much damage is caused if the people focus solely on the here-and-now, for in that case their strength will fade over the course of a generation and they will stumble and fall." The correct path is one that connects the eternal (prophecy) with the temporary (monarchy). It is absolutely forbidden for the king to detach himself from the prophet, for then the damage will be tremendous (these issues are very prominent today, as the political leadership distances itself from the forces of the Torah and Divine morality, and as a result performs great injustices).

 

One of the functions of the king is the leadership of the nation at a time of war (this is clearly implied by the Rambam, who used the title, "Laws of Kings and their Wars"). Even during a time of war the king must connect himself to the spiritual leadership. "When you go out to war against your enemies...and it shall be when you draw near to the war and the priest shall approach and speak to the people...do not let your hearts melt...for Hashem your G-d is accompanying you to fight for you against your enemies to save you" (xx). The job of the priest, the "anointed for war" who is anointed specially for this role, is to uplift the nation's spirit and connect it to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. Only then can the nation, with the king at its head, go out to war. Only then will it go out to war and be saved both spiritually and physically.

 

Be'ezrat Hashem we will speedily merit the establishment of true monarchy that is connected to priest and prophet, and all its actions will come from holiness and be aimed towards holiness.

 

Shabbat Shalom from Beit Orot in Yerushalayim