Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 1-3

Sugya Map

• Issue: The foundational mitzvot associated with Israel's entry into the Land, specifically the institution of monarchy, its prerequisites, qualifications, and the king's prescribed conduct and limitations. The sugya explores the nature of the mitzvah to appoint a king, its temporal ordering relative to other mitzvot, and the intricate details governing royal succession, anointing, and authority.
• Nafka Mina(s):
  • Whether appointing a king is an absolute mitzvah (chovah) or a permissive option (reshut).
  • The proper sequence of national mitzvot: King, Amalek, Temple.
  • Specific disqualifications for kingship (e.g., convert, woman, specific professions).
  • The conditional nature of Davidic rule versus the inherent legitimacy of other righteous kings.
  • The king's unique judicial and executive powers (din melech) contrasted with standard halachic procedure.
  • The king's personal obligations regarding Torah study, humility, and limitations on wives, horses, and wealth.
• Primary Sources:
  • Deuteronomy 17:15, 17, 19-20 (King, wives, horses, wealth, Torah scroll, succession)
  • Deuteronomy 12:5 (Temple)
  • Deuteronomy 25:19 (Amalek)
  • I Samuel 8:7 (God's displeasure with king request)
  • I Samuel 10:1 (Saul's anointing)
  • II Samuel 7:1-2, 16 (David, Temple, eternal dynasty)
  • Psalms 89:31-38, 132:12 (Davidic covenant)
  • Sanhedrin 20b-22b (Talmudic basis for many laws)
  • Sifrei Devarim 150 (Source for many Rambam's rulings)
  • Noda B'Yehudah, Choshen Mishpat 1 (regarding convert kings)

Text Snapshot

Ordering of Mitzvot

The Rambam opens with a clear enumeration and prioritization of the three mitzvot Israel was commanded upon entering the land:

"ישראל נצטוו בשלוש מצוות בכניסתן לארץ: א) להעמיד עליהם מלך, שנאמר: 'שום תשים עליך מלך' (דברים יז, טו). ב) להכרית זרעו של עמלק, שנאמר: 'תמחה את זכר עמלק' (דברים כה, יט). ג) לבנות להן בית הבחירה, שנאמר: 'לשכנו תדרשו ובאת שמה' (דברים יב, ה)." ¹ Note the definitive "נצטוו" (were commanded), asserting these as absolute obligations. The double infinitive "שום תשים" in Deuteronomy 17:15, often debated, is here taken as a categorical imperative. Rambam then immediately establishes a strict order: "והעמדת המלך קודמת למלחמת עמלק, שנאמר לו לשאול על ידי שמואל: 'ואותי שלח ה' למשחך למלך ... ועתה לך והכיתה את עמלק' (שמואל א טו, א-ג)." ² This explicit sequence—King, then Amalek—is grounded in the narrative of Saul's anointing.

Displeasure vs. Mitzvah

Rambam addresses the apparent tension between the mitzvah to appoint a king and God's negative reaction:

"ומפני שהיתה מצוה להעמיד מלך, למה כעס הקב"ה על ישראל כששאלו מלך משמואל? לפי ששאלו ברוח של תרעומת, ולא שאלו כדי לעשות מצוה, אלא מפני שקצו בשמואל הנביא, שנאמר: 'כי לא אותך כי אותי מאסו' (שמואל א ח, ז)." ³ The dikduk of "קצו בשמואל" (they were disgusted with Samuel) highlights the people's flawed intention, contrasting with the pure fulfillment of a mitzvah. The emphasis on "אותי מאסו" (they rejected Me) underscores the spiritual gravity of their complaint.

Readings

The Rambam's Assertive Chiddush: Monarchy as an Absolute Mitzvah Asei

The Rambam, in this opening chapter of Hilchot Melachim U'Milchamot, presents a singular and highly influential chiddush: the appointment of a king is not merely a prerogative or a circumstantial necessity, but an unequivocal positive commandment (mitzvah asei), one of three pivotal mitzvot incumbent upon Klal Yisrael upon their entry into Eretz Yisrael. ⁴ This position stands in stark contrast to other major Rishonim.

Rambam's formulation, "ישראל נצטוו בשלוש מצוות בכניסתן לארץ: א) להעמיד עליהם מלך," ⁵ sets the tone. The use of "נצטוו" (they were commanded) leaves no room for ambiguity; it is an obligation, not an option. He explicitly includes it in the canonical triad alongside wiping out Amalek and building the Beit HaMikdash. ⁶ This elevates the institution of monarchy to a foundational pillar of national existence, rather than a concession to popular demand. The dikduk of "שום תשים" (Deuteronomy 17:15) is thus interpreted as a definitive command, a double infinitive emphasizing the imperative.

Furthermore, Rambam's precise ordering of these mitzvot—King, then Amalek, then Temple—is itself a significant chiddush. ⁷ He grounds this sequence in specific pesukim: Saul's anointing preceding his command to smite Amalek, ⁸ and David's desire to build the Temple only after God had given him "peace from all his enemies," ⁹ which implicitly includes Amalek. This ordering is not merely chronological but halachically prescriptive, suggesting that a unified, authoritative leadership is a prerequisite for achieving national security and, subsequently, spiritual culmination. The king, therefore, is not just a ruler but a facilitator of other divine commands.

The Ramban's Counter-Argument: Monarchy as Reshut

The Ramban (Nachmanides), in his commentary on Deuteronomy 17:15, famously offers a robust counter-interpretation that challenges Rambam's foundational premise. ¹⁰ Ramban argues that the verse "שום תשים עליך מלך" should not be understood as an absolute command but as a reshut (permission or option). He interprets the double infinitive as "if you will desire to place upon yourselves a king," implying that the initiative must come from the people, and it is not a divine imperative imposed upon them regardless of their will.

Ramban's primary proof for this position stems from the narrative in Sefer Shmuel, where the people's request for a king leads to God's displeasure, as articulated to Samuel: "כי לא אותך כי אותי מאסו." ¹¹ If appointing a king were an absolute mitzvah, Ramban reasons, how could God express such strong disapproval? He would not be displeased by the fulfillment of His own command. Ramban understands God's response as validating the idea that the desire for a king, while permissible, should ideally stem from a pure motivation to fulfill the mitzvah, rather than a rejection of divine governance through prophets and judges. Thus, the sin of the generation was not in requesting a king per se, but in their motivation – a desire to be "ככל הגוים" (like all the nations) ¹² and a rejection of God's direct rule, rather than a pure intention to fulfill "שום תשים."

This fundamental machloket between Rambam and Ramban regarding the nature of the mitzvah has profound implications. For Rambam, the monarchy is an essential, divinely mandated institution, reflecting an ideal state of Jewish sovereignty. For Ramban, it is a divinely sanctioned but ultimately secondary form of governance, permissible only when the people desire it, with the prophetic-judicial model being the primary ideal.

Friction

The Core Kushya: God's Displeasure vs. Mitzvah Obligation

The most significant point of friction within Rambam's presentation, and indeed the focal point of the machloket with Ramban, is the apparent contradiction between his assertion that appointing a king is an absolute mitzvah asei and the explicit account in Sefer Shmuel where God expresses displeasure over Israel's request for a king.

The Kushya: If "להעמיד עליהם מלך" ¹³ is one of the three foundational mitzvot upon entering Eretz Yisrael, an obligation akin to eradicating Amalek or building the Temple, why did God tell Samuel, "כי לא אותך כי אותי מאסו" ¹⁴ when the people requested a king? This divine rebuke seems to strongly suggest that the request was, at best, suboptimal, and at worst, sinful. How can one be rebuked for fulfilling a mitzvah? This kushya underpins Ramban's entire argument for the mitzvah being a reshut rather than a chovah.

Rambam's Terutz: Rambam directly addresses this kushya within the very fabric of his text, offering a precise and nuanced distinction:

"ומפני שהיתה מצוה להעמיד מלך, למה כעס הקב"ה על ישראל כששאלו מלך משמואל? לפי ששאלו ברוח של תרעומת, ולא שאלו כדי לעשות מצוה, אלא מפני שקצו בשמואל הנביא, שנאמר: 'כי לא אותך כי אותי מאסו'." ¹⁵ The terutz hinges entirely on the concept of kavvanah (intention) and derech (manner). The mitzvah itself is an immutable obligation, but the way in which Israel sought to fulfill it was deeply flawed. They approached the request "בְּרוּחַ שֶׁל תַּרְעוּמֶת" (in a spirit of complaint) and "בְּכַוָּנַת דְּחִיַּת שְׁמוּאֵל הַנָּבִיא" (with the intention of rejecting Samuel the Prophet). It was not the act of seeking a king that was problematic, but the underlying motivation: a rejection of divine leadership through prophets and a desire to mimic the gentile nations, rather than a pure intention to establish a Torah-mandated monarchy.

This terutz highlights a crucial principle in halacha and machshavah: the performance of a mitzvah is not solely about the physical act, but also about the spiritual disposition and intention with which it is carried out. A mitzvah performed with an improper spirit or ulterior motives can still be considered a fulfillment of the mitzvah on a technical level, but it forfeits the spiritual merit and can even incur divine displeasure. In this case, Israel's request, while ultimately leading to the fulfillment of the mitzvah, was tainted by their lack of faith and their ingratitude towards Samuel, thereby rejecting God Himself. The mitzvah remained, but their method was censurable.

Intertext

Talmudic Foundations: Sanhedrin 20b-22b

Much of Rambam's detailed exposition on the laws of kingship finds its roots and elaboration in the Gemara, primarily in Masechet Sanhedrin, spanning from daf 20b to 22b. This sugya is a rich tapestry of drashot and halachot derived from Parashat Shoftim, particularly Deuteronomy 17.

For instance, the Gemara in Sanhedrin 20b discusses the verse "שום תשים עליך מלך," ¹⁶ from which many of the king's unique laws are derived. The discussion there addresses the king's exemptions from chalitzah and yibbum, ¹⁷ a point Rambam explicitly includes: "הוא אינו חולץ, שנאמר בְּחֲלִיצָה: 'וירקה בפניו' (דברים כה, ט), וזה בזיון למלך." ¹⁸ The Gemara elucidates that the king's honor (כבוד המלך) overrides even his personal desire to perform a mitzvah, a powerful statement on the public role of monarchy. ¹⁹ Similarly, the Gemara's discussion on the king's limitations regarding wives, horses, and wealth, derived from Deuteronomy 17:16-17, ²⁰ forms the bedrock for Rambam's detailed halachot in Hilchot Melachim 3:2-5. ²¹ The requirement for the king to write a Torah scroll and keep it with him constantly ²² is also extensively discussed in Sanhedrin 21b. ²³ These Talmudic passages provide the hermeneutical framework through which Rambam constructs his comprehensive code.

Responsa Literature: The Convert King and Dynastic Succession

The Rambam states definitively that a king "לא ימנו מלך מן הגרים, אפילו אחר כמה דורות, אלא מלך מישראל." ²⁴ This is based on Deuteronomy 17:15: "לא תוכל לתת עליך איש נכרי אשר לא אחיך הוא." ²⁵ A footnote in the provided text points to the Tosafot (Yevamot 102a) and the Noda B'Yehudah.

The Noda B'Yehudah, in Choshen Mishpat, Responsum 1, ²⁶ delves into the nuances of this prohibition, particularly concerning a king whose yichus (lineage) is questioned. He distinguishes between the initial appointment of a king and the succession within an established dynasty. The Noda B'Yehudah explains that the primary concern of "לא תוכל לתת עליך איש נכרי" applies to the founding of a dynasty. Once a dynasty has been established, even if a subsequent king's mother is a convert, his claim to the throne (if his father was a native-born Israelite) might be legitimate, reflecting the principle of rov d'ruba (majority of the majority) within established lineage, or the idea that the initial appointment is the critical juncture for yichus. This responsa highlights the intricate interplay between the ideal halachic requirements and the practicalities of governance and dynastic continuity, even within the strictures laid out by Rambam.

Psak/Practice

The Rambam's Hilchot Melachim U'Milchamot 1-3, though pertaining to a monarchy not currently in existence, lays down foundational principles that resonate deeply within halacha and Jewish thought.

• The Nature of Sovereignty: Rambam's forceful assertion that appointing a king is a mitzvah asei (in contrast to Ramban's reshut) shapes the meta-halachic understanding of Jewish sovereignty. It posits that an independent, divinely sanctioned government, headed by a king, is an ideal, not merely a necessary evil or a concession. This vision underlies Zionist thought and the aspiration for national self-determination guided by Torah.
• Leadership Heuristics: The detailed rules regarding the king's conduct – his obligations for Torah study, humility, involvement in the welfare of the people, and limitations on personal indulgence ²⁷ – establish a powerful heuristic for all forms of leadership, secular or religious. The king is simultaneously elevated to a position of immense honor and constrained by profound moral and spiritual responsibilities. His example serves as a blueprint for the ideal leader, one who balances authority with service, and power with piety.
• Limits of Executive Power (Din Melech): The Rambam's discussion of the king's unique judicial and executive powers, such as executing individuals without standard beit din procedures "לפי צורך השעה" (according to the needs of the time) and "לתקן העולם" (to improve society), ²⁸ delineates the scope of din melech. While extraordinary, this power is not arbitrary; it is for the preservation of public order and the deterrence of evil, acting as a necessary complement to din Torah in maintaining a functional society. This distinction is crucial for understanding the relationship between halacha and secular law (dina d'malchuta dina) and the legitimate authority of governmental institutions in the absence of a Sanhedrin.

Takeaway

Rambam transforms the institution of monarchy from a mere political structure into a divine imperative, a cornerstone of national existence, and a paradigm for ideal leadership, balancing immense authority with profound spiritual and moral responsibility. The tension between its mandatory nature and the people's flawed request highlights the critical role of intention and manner in fulfilling even the most fundamental mitzvot.

---

¹ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 1:1:1. ² Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 1:1:2. ³ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 1:1:3. ⁴ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 1:1:1. ⁵ Ibid. ⁶ Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 1:1:1, s.v. "להכרית זרעו של עמלק"; Ibid., s.v. "ולבנות להן בית הבחירה." ⁷ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 1:1:2. ⁸ I Samuel 15:1-3. ⁹ II Samuel 7:1-2. ¹⁰ Ramban on Deuteronomy 17:15, s.v. "שום תשים עליך מלך." ¹¹ I Samuel 8:7. ¹² I Samuel 8:5. ¹³ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 1:1:1. ¹⁴ I Samuel 8:7. ¹⁵ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 1:1:3. ¹⁶ Deuteronomy 17:15. ¹⁷ Sanhedrin 20b. ¹⁸ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:3:5. ¹⁹ Sanhedrin 20b. ²⁰ Deuteronomy 17:16-17. ²¹ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 3:2-5. ²² Deuteronomy 17:19. ²³ Sanhedrin 21b. ²⁴ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 1:4:1. ²⁵ Deuteronomy 17:15. ²⁶ Noda B'Yehudah, Choshen Mishpat, Responsum 1. ²⁷ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:6-7; 3:1-5. ²⁸ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 3:10:1.