Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2

Sugya Map

• Issue: The unique halakhic status and conduct of a Jewish king, particularly concerning his honor (kevod ha'melech) and its implications for personal and dynastic law.
• Nafka Mina(s):
  • The transferability of a deceased king's property and personnel (e.g., servants, pilagshim) versus the eternal prohibition on his wife.
  • The king's disqualification from chalitzah and yibbum due to bizayon (disrespect), and the subsequent agunah status of his widow.
  • The non-waivable nature of kevod ha'melech.
  • The king's protocol when interacting with religious authorities (Kohen Gadol, Prophets, Sanhedrin, Chachamim).
  • The king's public versus private demeanor: requiring awe externally, yet demanding humility internally.
• Primary Sources:
  • Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Melakhim u'Milchamot 2:1-7.
  • Torah: Devarim 17:15 ("שׂוֹם תָּשִׂים עָלֶיךָ מֶלֶךְ"), 17:20 ("לְבִלְתִּי רוּם לְבָבוֹ מֵאֶחָיו"), 25:9 ("וְיָרְקָה בְּפָנָיו"). Bamidbar 27:21 ("לִפְנֵי אֶלְעָזָר הַכֹּהֵן יַעֲמֹד"). Shemot 16:8 ("וּמָה אֲנַחְנוּ").
  • Nevi'im/Ketuvim: Shmuel II 7:18 ("וַיֵּשֶׁב הַמֶּלֶךְ דָּוִד לִפְנֵי ה'"); Melakhim I 1:23 ("הִנֵּה נָתָן הַנָּבִיא בָּא אֶל הַמֶּלֶךְ וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ לַמֶּלֶךְ"); Melakhim I 2:13-25 (re: Avishag); Melakhim I 12:7 ("אִם הַיּוֹם תִּהְיֶה עֶבֶד לָעָם"); Yeshayahu 33:17 ("מֶלֶךְ בְּיָפְיוֹ תֶּחֱזֶינָה עֵינֶיךָ"), 40:11 ("כְּרֹעֶה עֶדְרוֹ יִרְעֶה"); Divrei HaYamim I 28:2 ("שִׁמְעוּנִי אַחַי וְעַמִּי"); Tehillim 78:71 ("לִרְעוֹת בְּיַעֲקֹב עַמּוֹ"), 109:22 ("וְלִבִּי חָלַל בְּקִרְבִּי").
  • Talmud Yerushalmi Ketubot 5:1, Yevamot 13:2 (as cited by Ohr Sameach).

Text Snapshot

The Rambam delineates the king's unique status with striking precision, highlighting the paradox of divine elevation and personal humility. Several lines warrant close attention:

• "וְכֵן לֹא יִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בַּעֲבָדָיו וְשִׁפְחוֹתָיו אֶלָּא מֶלֶךְ אַחֵר. לְפִיכָךְ אֲבִישַׁג הָיְתָה מֻתֶּרֶת לִשְׁלֹמֹה וַאֲסוּרָה לַאֲדֹנִיָּה. אֲבָל אֵשֶׁת מֶלֶךְ אֲסוּרָה לְכָל אָדָם לְעוֹלָם, וְאַף מֶלֶךְ אַחֵר אֵינוֹ נוֹשֵׂא אֵשֶׁת מֶלֶךְ אַלְמָנָה אוֹ גְּרוּשָׁה."^1^

  • Dikduk/Leshon Nuance: The Rambam draws a sharp distinction: "עבדיו ושפחותיו" (his servants and maids) are transferable, but "אשת מלך" (a king's wife) is absolutely forbidden, "לעולם" (forever), even to another king. The inclusion of "אלמנה או גרושה" further emphasizes the permanence of this prohibition, contrasting with the general permissibility of marrying a widow/divorcee. This distinction is central to the sugya of Avishag.

• "וְאֵינוֹ חוֹלֵץ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְיָרְקָה בְּפָנָיו – וְזֶהוּ בִּזָּיוֹן לַמֶּלֶךְ. וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמּוֹחֵל עַל כְּבוֹדוֹ אֵין כְּבוֹדוֹ מָחוּל."^2^

  • Dikduk/Leshon Nuance: The pasuk "וְיָרְקָה בְּפָנָיו" (Devarim 25:9) is the explicit source for the bizayon. The subsequent clause, "וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמּוֹחֵל עַל כְּבוֹדוֹ אֵין כְּבוֹדוֹ מָחוּל," is a fundamental yesod (principle) unique to kevod ha'melech. It signifies that the king's honor is not merely personal, but institutional, representing the dignity of the monarchy itself, hence he cannot waive it. Steinsaltz further elaborates on this point.^3^

• "מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁאֵינוֹ חוֹלֵץ, אֵינוֹ רַשַּׁאי לְיַבֵּם. וְכֵן אִם מֵת הוּא, מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁאֵין אִשְׁתּוֹ מֻתֶּרֶת לְיִבּוּם, אֵין חוֹלְצִין לָהּ אֶלָּא יַשְׁבִּינוּהָ עֲגוּנָה לְעוֹלָם."^4^

  • Dikduk/Leshon Nuance: This statement reveals the severe halakhic consequence of the king's unique status: his widow becomes an agunah "לעולם" (forever). The reciprocal nature – he cannot perform chalitzah (and thus yibbum), and his widow cannot undergo either – underscores the absolute nature of the royal distinction. The term "ישבינוה עגונה" highlights the tragic outcome.

Readings

Ohr Sameach: Rambam's Evolution and the Ta'am for Yibbum

The Ohr Sameach^5^ on Hilkhot Melakhim 2:2-3 offers a profound analytical deep dive, primarily focusing on the Rambam's distinction between a king's tashmishei ha'melech (royal accoutrements/personnel) and his eshet melech (wife).

1. Rambam's Apparent Shift on Eshet Melech: The Ohr Sameach notes an apparent change in the Rambam's position. In his Peirush HaMishnayot (on Masekhet Sanhedrin 2:3), the Rambam seemingly ruled in accordance with Rabbi Yehudah, who permits a king to marry the widow of another king. However, in the Mishneh Torah, the Rambam now distinguishes: while a king's servants and sherivit (scepter/royal staff – a metaphor for non-marital consorts) are indeed permitted to another king (thus Avishag was permitted to Shlomo, as she was a meshareret and not a wife), an eshet melech (a fully married wife) is "forbidden to any person forever," including another king. The Ohr Sameach attributes this shift to the Rambam's "old age" (בזקנותו שנה לן רבי), implying a maturation of his halakhic thought.

2. Addressing the Yerushalmi's Ra'aya: The Yerushalmi (Ketubot 5:1, Yevamot 13:2), in explaining Rabbi Yehudah's view, cites the case of David marrying Ratzpa bat Aya, who was Shaul's pilgesh. The Yerushalmi seems to suggest that a pilgesh (concubine) might possess ketubah and kiddushin, effectively making her an eshet melech. This would provide a source for Rabbi Yehudah's leniency and seemingly contradict the Rambam's final, stricter ruling in Mishneh Torah regarding an eshet melech. The Ohr Sameach suggests that the Rambam, in his Mishneh Torah, might have considered a pilgesh to be within the category of tashmishei ha'melech (like a sherivit), thus permitted to another king, rather than an eshet melech proper. This nuance allows the Rambam to maintain his distinction while acknowledging the Yerushalmi's discussion.

3. New Ta'am for King's Chalitzah Prohibition: The Ohr Sameach observes that if tashmishei ha'melech are permitted to another king, then the act of chalitzah (where the yevama removes the yavam's shoe) would also be permitted if the yavam were a king, as it's a form of "using" the king's items. This would undermine the Rambam's stated reason for prohibiting chalitzah for the king (due to bizayon). Thus, the Ohr Sameach implies that the Rambam must have a different reason for prohibiting chalitzah for the king, one that doesn't conflict with the transferability of royal effects.

4. Novel Ta'am for King's Yibbum Prohibition: For the king's inability to perform yibbum, the Ohr Sameach proposes a chiddush: yibbum must be performed in the presence of witnesses. This requirement, he argues, would constitute a genai (disgrace) for the king "to come upon a woman in the presence of witnesses." He references Tosafot Kiddushin 12a, s.v. "רב מנגיד אמאן דקדיש בביאה," which discusses Rav flogging someone who performs kiddushin through bi'ah in public, as it's an act of pritzut. This provides a unique ta'am for the king's disqualification from yibbum, separate from the chalitzah issue.

Chiddush of Ohr Sameach: The Ohr Sameach's brilliance lies in uncovering the systemic coherence of Rambam's Mishneh Torah. He highlights Rambam's evolution of thought concerning the eshet melech and, crucially, offers a novel, internally consistent rationale for the king's inability to perform yibbum – namely, the public nature of the act and the resulting genai for the monarch.

Steinsaltz: The Non-Waivable Honor of the King

Rabbi Adin Even-Yisrael Steinsaltz's commentary provides invaluable contextualization and clarification for the Rambam's text.

1. Clarifying Terms: Steinsaltz clarifies specific terms like "ומשימין לו אימה ויראה בלב כל אדם" (causing people to feel awe and fear of him)^6^ and "מסתפג" (drying himself)^7^, ensuring a precise understanding of the text.

2. Avishag's Status: He explicitly states that Avishag "לא נישאה לדוד אלא הייתה משרתת שלו" (was not married to David but was his attendant),^8^ confirming the Rambam's distinction that she falls under the category of a king's meshareret (servant) rather than an eshet melech. This is pivotal for understanding why she was permitted to Shlomo but forbidden to Adoniyahu (who was not yet king).

3. The Unique Nature of Kevod HaMelech: Steinsaltz particularly highlights the profound yesod "שהמלך שמחל על כבודו אין כבודו מחול" (that a king who waives his honor, his honor is not waived).^9^ He contrasts this with other figures who can waive their honor, such as a father, a Kohen Gadol, or a Nasi (prince/head of Sanhedrin), and even a Torah scholar. This emphasizes that the king's honor is not merely personal but institutional and divinely ordained, essential for the stability and awe of the monarchy.

Chiddush of Steinsaltz: Steinsaltz's primary contribution here is to meticulously underscore the unique, non-negotiable nature of Kevod HaMelech within the broader halakhic framework of honor, clearly distinguishing it from other forms of kavod that may be waived.

Friction

The Strongest Kushya

The most significant kushya arises from the Ohr Sameach's analysis concerning the Rambam's distinction between a king's tashmishei ha'melech (transferable to another king) and his eshet melech (forbidden forever), particularly in light of the Yerushalmi's discussion regarding Ratzpa bat Aya.

The Rambam states definitively: "וְכֵן לֹא יִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בַּעֲבָדָיו וְשִׁפְחוֹתָיו אֶלָּא מֶלֶךְ אַחֵר. לְפִיכָךְ אֲבִישַׁג הָיְתָה מֻתֶּרֶת לִשְׁלֹמֹה וַאֲסוּרָה לַאֲדֹנִיָּה. אֲבָל אֵשֶׁת מֶלֶךְ אֲסוּרָה לְכָל אָדָם לְעוֹלָם, וְאַף מֶלֶךְ אַחֵר אֵינוֹ נוֹשֵׂא אֵשֶׁת מֶלֶךְ אַלְמָנָה אוֹ גְּרוּשָׁה."^10^ This creates a clear dichotomy: servants/concubines (Avishag) are transferable; wives are absolutely forbidden.

However, the Yerushalmi Ketubot 5:1 (cited by Ohr Sameach) supports Rabbi Yehudah's view that a king may marry the widow of another king, and brings a ra'aya from David marrying Ratzpa bat Aya, who was Shaul's pilgesh. The Yerushalmi, according to Ohr Sameach, implies that a pilgesh could have ketubah and kiddushin, making her equivalent to an eshet melech. If so, David marrying Ratzpa (Shaul's pilgesh/eshet melech) would prove that an eshet melech is permitted to another king. This directly contradicts the Rambam's unequivocal ruling in Mishneh Torah that "אֵשֶׁת מֶלֶךְ אֲסוּרָה לְכָל אָדָם לְעוֹלָם, וְאַף מֶלֶךְ אַחֵר אֵינוֹ נוֹשֵׂא אֵשֶׁת מֶלֶךְ." How does Rambam reconcile his pesak with this Yerushalmi ra'aya?

The Best Terutz (or two)

1. Rambam's Re-evaluation (Ohr Sameach's Approach): The Ohr Sameach suggests that the Rambam simply changed his mind between his Peirush HaMishnayot and the Mishneh Torah. In his earlier work, he may have sided with Rabbi Yehudah (hence the compatibility with the Yerushalmi's ra'aya). However, in his later, more definitive codification, he adopted a stricter view, finding the institution of Malchut Yisrael to impart a unique, eternal sanctity to the king's wife, making her forbidden to anyone else, even another king. This is a common approach when reconciling apparent contradictions within a single author's oeuvre, attributing it to intellectual development.

2. Differentiating Pilgesh from Eshet Melech (Conceptual Distinction): A more nuanced terutz would be to argue that the Rambam, even if aware of the Yerushalmi, understands the term pilgesh differently than the Yerushalmi's interpretation of Ratzpa. Even if a pilgesh has certain contractual rights (like a ketubah according to Rabbi Yehudah), she may not attain the full halakhic status of an eshet melech in the context of the severe prohibition Rambam describes. The Rambam's issur for an eshet melech is not merely about kiddushin and ketubah but about the inherent sanctity and dignity of the monarchy. A pilgesh, while perhaps having a form of marital bond, might not carry the same degree of kevod ha'melech that would render her eternally forbidden to another king. Therefore, David marrying Ratzpa (a pilgesh) would not serve as a ra'aya for a king marrying an eshet melech proper. This allows the Rambam to maintain his strict ruling for an eshet melech while acknowledging the Yerushalmi's discussion of a pilgesh as a distinct category.

Intertext

1. The Kohen Gadol's Waivable Honor

The Rambam's declaration, "וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמּוֹחֵל עַל כְּבוֹדוֹ אֵין כְּבוֹדוֹ מָחוּל,"^11^ is a pivotal statement that defines the unique nature of kevod ha'melech. This principle is best understood in contrast to other figures whose honor is halakhically mandated but can be waived. The Rambam himself outlines these distinctions in various places:

• Parents: "הַמּוֹחֵל עַל כְּבוֹדוֹ, כְּבוֹדוֹ מָחוּל." (Hilkhot Mamrim 6:8)^12^ A child may waive the honor due to parents.
• Kohen Gadol: "וְאִם מָחַל עַל כְּבוֹדוֹ, כְּבוֹדוֹ מָחוּל." (Hilkhot Klei HaMikdash 5:3)^13^ Even the High Priest, despite his elevated status, can forgo his honor.
• Nasi (Head of Sanhedrin): The same principle applies to the Nasi, as derived from the Kohen Gadol.
• Talmid Chacham: "כָּל תַּלְמִיד חָכָם שֶׁמּוֹחֵל עַל כְּבוֹדוֹ, כְּבוֹדוֹ מָחוּל." (Hilkhot Talmud Torah 6:6)^14^

This series of cross-references highlights that kevod ha'melech is not merely the honor of an individual, but of the institution of Malchut Yisrael, which represents Malchut Shamayim on earth. It is an honor inherent in the office, not simply the person, and thus cannot be personally relinquished. This is a profound conceptual distinction within Rambam's halakhic framework.

2. Adoniyahu's Request for Avishag

The narrative of Melakhim I, chapter 2 provides the direct textual foundation for the Rambam's ruling regarding Avishag. After David's death, Adoniyahu, David's elder son, requests to marry Avishag, who had attended to King David in his old age: "וְעַתָּה שְׁאֵלִי מִן הַמֶּלֶךְ שְׁלֹמֹה כִּי לֹא יָשִׁיב אֹתָךְ פָּנִים וְיִתֶּן לִי אֶת אֲבִישַׁג הַשּׁוּנַמִּית לְאִשָּׁה."^15^ When Batsheva relays this request to Shlomo, he immediately perceives it as a claim to the throne: "וַיַּעַן הַמֶּלֶךְ שְׁלֹמֹה וַיֹּאמֶר לְאִמּוֹ וְלָמָה אַתְּ שֹׁאֶלֶת אֶת אֲבִישַׁג הַשּׁוּנַמִּית לַאֲדֹנִיָּהוּ וְשַׁאֲלִי לוֹ אֶת הַמְּלוּכָה כִּי הוּא אָחִי הַגָּדוֹל מִמֶּנִּי וְלוֹ אֶבְיָתָר הַכֹּהֵן וְיוֹאָב בֶּן צְרוּיָה."^16^ Shlomo understood that possessing the previous king's attendant or consort was tantamount to claiming the kingship itself.

The Rambam interprets this incident halakhically: Avishag, as a meshareret (attendant) and not a fully married eshet melech, was considered among the king's "servants and maids" which are transferable to another king. Thus, Shlomo, as the reigning king, could have taken her. Adoniyahu, however, was not the king, and therefore his request was a usurpation of royal privilege, leading to his execution. This narrative underscores the profound symbolic and halakhic weight attached to the king's possessions and personnel, reflecting the transfer of Malchut.

Psak/Practice

The halakhot concerning the king's honor and conduct, as delineated by the Rambam, are primarily prescriptive for an ideal future state, specifically relating to the Davidic monarchy in the messianic era. In contemporary Jewish practice, where there is no reigning king, these laws do not have direct, practical application.

However, the underlying principles have significant meta-halakhic and conceptual implications:

1. Dignity of Leadership: The emphasis on the king's non-waivable honor establishes a heuristic for the inherent dignity required of public leadership within a Torah framework. It underscores that authority, especially divinely appointed authority, carries a sanctity that transcends personal preference.
2. Balancing Public Awe and Private Humility: The Rambam's nuanced portrayal of the king—demanding awe in public yet requiring profound humility in private—serves as a timeless model for ethical leadership. It teaches that true leadership is a delicate balance between commanding respect and embodying service.
3. Future Redemption: These laws form a crucial component of hilkhot Mashiach. Understanding the full scope of Malchut Yisrael as envisioned by the Rambam provides a blueprint for the messianic age, where the king will embody these very characteristics and halakhot.
4. Separation of Powers (Conceptual): The interaction protocols between the king, Kohen Gadol, and Sanhedrin reflect a conceptual "separation of powers" within the Torah system, ensuring that even the highest temporal authority is bound by spiritual and legal checks.

Takeaway

The king's unique status elevates him beyond mere human authority, embodying Malchut Shamayim on earth, thus his honor is not waivable and his person/possessions carry unique sanctity. This text reveals a profound tension between the king's elevated public persona, demanding awe and non-waivable honor, and his private imperative for humility and service, underscoring the spiritual nature of Jewish leadership.

---

^1^ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:2. ^2^ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:3. ^3^ Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:3:4. ^4^ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:3. ^5^ Ohr Sameach on Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:1:1 (referencing 2:2 and 2:3). ^6^ Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:1:1. ^7^ Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:3:1. ^8^ Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:1:3. ^9^ Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:3:4. ^10^ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:2. ^11^ Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 2:3. ^12^ Mishneh Torah, Mamrim 6:8. ^13^ Mishneh Torah, Klei HaMikdash 5:3. ^14^ Mishneh Torah, Talmud Torah 6:6. ^15^ I Kings 2:17. ^16^ I Kings 2:22.