Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 4-6

Hey, let's dive into some fascinating Maimonides!

Hook

Ever wondered if a Jewish king plays by the same rules as everyone else? This passage reveals a monarch’s unique authority, sometimes transcending conventional prohibitions.

Context

Central to this discussion is "Mishpat HaMelech" (the King's Right or Law). When Israel demanded a king, Samuel warned them (1 Samuel 8:11-17) of the king's extensive powers. Maimonides interprets these as legitimate entitlements, not just a prophetic warning of tyranny.

Text Snapshot

"The king is granted license to levy taxes... The statutes that he establishes... are accepted as law..." (Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 4:1) "He may also take wives and concubines... With the act of yichud alone, the king acquires her... A commoner is forbidden to have a concubine." (4:4) https://www.sefaria.org/Mishneh_Torah%2C_Kings_and_Wars_4-6

Close Reading

Insight 1: King as Lawgiver

The text states the king's decrees "are accepted as law" (4:1). Steinsaltz clarifies this means the king "is not subject to rules... rather he establishes the rules" (Steinsaltz on 4:1:1), creating a distinct, top-down legal authority.

Insight 2: Redefining Permissibility

The king is explicitly permitted to take concubines through yichud (seclusion), while the passage immediately states, "A commoner is forbidden to have a concubine" (4:4). This isn't mere privilege; it's a redefinition of what's halakhically permissible specifically for the king.

Insight 3: Tension of Sovereignty

This highlights a tension between divine law and the king's seemingly absolute authority. His actions, like taking concubines, are presented as legitimate expressions of his unique sovereignty, rooted in "Mishpat HaMelech."

Two Angles

Commentators famously debate "Mishpat HaMelech." Rashi (on 1 Sam 8:11) views it primarily as a warning to the people about the potential abuses of monarchical power, not as a divine license. In contrast, Ramban (on Deut 17:14-15 and 1 Sam 8:11) argues it represents the king's actual, legitimate rights and powers, crucial for effective national governance, making his decrees binding.

Practice Implication

This passage challenges us to consider the boundaries of authority and obedience. While we don't have a king today, it informs our understanding of dina d'malchuta dina (the law of the land is law) and the need to balance individual halakhic observance with communal or national needs.

Chevruta Mini

1. If a king's decrees are "accepted as law," what are the inherent limits to his authority, and who enforces them?
2. Does the king's unique status, like taking concubines, imply a different moral standard for leadership, or a higher purpose justifying exceptions?

Takeaway

The Jewish king, through "Mishpat HaMelech," possessed a divinely authorized, unique legal status, allowing actions forbidden to commoners, reflecting a complex interplay of power and purpose.