Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2

Sugya Map

• Issue: The unique halachic status of a king regarding chalitzah and yibbum, rooted in the non-waivable nature of royal honor.
• Nafka Mina(s): A king cannot perform chalitzah or yibbum; his widow becomes an agunah as neither is possible for her.
• Primary Sources: Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:3-4; Devarim 25:9; Sanhedrin 19a-b.

Text Snapshot

"וְאֵינוֹ חוֹלֵץ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְיָרְקָה בְּפָנָיו – וְהוּא גְּנַאי לַמֶּלֶךְ. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא רוֹצֶה לַעֲשׂוֹת מִצְוָה זוֹ – אֵין מַנִּיחִין אוֹתוֹ, שֶׁהַמֶּלֶךְ שֶׁמָּחַל עַל כְּבוֹדוֹ אֵין כְּבוֹדוֹ מָחוּל." (MT Kings and Wars 2:3-4)

Dikduk/Leshon Nuance

The phrase "וירקה בפניו" (Devarim 25:9) is cited as the source for the bizayon (disgrace) inherent in chalitzah. The definitive declaration "מלך שמחל על כבודו אין כבודו מחול" is a foundational principle unique to the king's status.

Readings

Ohr Sameach

The Ohr Sameach¹ notes a difficulty: if a king's sharvit (e.g., Avishag, in the sense of a royal attendant) is permitted to another king, why is the act of chalitzah a bizayon? He suggests the bizayon of chalitzah (spitting, removing the shoe) is intrinsic to the king's person, not merely his possessions. He offers an alternative reason for the king's inability to perform yibbum: it requires witnesses, which is a genai for a king.

Steinsaltz

Steinsaltz² clarifies the principle "מלך שמחל על כבודו אין כבודו מחול" by contrasting it with an Av, Kohen Gadol, or Nasi, who can waive their honor, highlighting the king's singular, non-waivable honor.

Friction

Kushya

If the king's honor is paramount, why does Rambam state that a king's sharvit (e.g., Avishag, who was "used" by David) can be utilized by a subsequent king (Shlomo)? This seems to be a bizayon to the first king's legacy. How is this different from the bizayon of chalitzah?

Terutz

The bizayon of chalitzah is a direct, active humiliation performed before the king, infringing upon his personal dignity. The "use" of a deceased king's attendant by a successor is a matter of status transfer, not a direct affront to the person of the deceased king. The Ohr Sameach's alternative terutz for yibbum—that it requires witnesses, which is a public genai—further distinguishes between bizayon of the act and the transfer of royal assets.

Intertext

The Gemara in Sanhedrin 19a-b³ discusses how a king does not rise for a Torah scholar in public, contrasting with his private humility. This reinforces the idea that kavod Melech is a public, non-negotiable imperative.

Psak/Practice

The principle מלך שמחל על כבודו אין כבודו מחול establishes a unique category of honor. It dictates that even if a king desires to waive his honor to perform a mitzvah, he cannot; his honor is a societal obligation (כבוד מלכות), not a personal right. This meta-halachic rule results in the agunah status for a king's widow.

Takeaway

The king's honor is not a personal prerogative but an objective, public imperative, essential for the monarchy's stability and thus cannot be waived, leading to unique halachic outcomes.

---

¹ Ohr Sameach on Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:1:1 ² Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:3:4 ³ Sanhedrin 19a-b