Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 3

Sugya Map

• Issue: The unique mitzvot and prohibitions incumbent upon a Jewish king, particularly concerning the writing and constant study of a Sefer Torah, as well as limitations on his personal power and wealth. The central tension revolves around the king's dual identity: an individual subject to Halacha and a sovereign with immense authority.
• Nafka Mina(s):
  • The precise obligation regarding the number and type of Sifrei Torah a king must possess.
  • The scope of a king's judicial and executive powers, especially concerning capital punishment and property confiscation, and how these interact with standard Halacha.
  • The ethical and theological underpinnings of royal conduct, emphasizing humility and devotion to Torah over personal aggrandizement.
• Primary Sources:
  • Devarim 17:16-20 (the Parashat HaMelech).
  • Mishlei 31:3-4 ("Do not give your strength to women..." "It is not for kings to drink wine...").
  • Yehoshua 1:18 ("Whoever rebels against your command... shall be put to death.").
  • Talmud Bavli, Sanhedrin 21b-22a.
  • Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Sefer Torah 7:1-3.

Text Snapshot

The passage opens with the core mitzvah for a king: "כותב לו ספר תורה לעצמו יתר על הספר שהניחו לו אבותיו." (Rambam, Kings and Wars 3:1:1) This immediately establishes a dual obligation: a personal Sefer Torah in addition to any ancestral one. The term "יתר" (additional) is key here, implying a distinct, supererogatory mitzvah.

"אם לא הניחו לו אבותיו ספר... כותב שני ספרי תורה: אחד... שחובתו ככל אחד מישראל... והשני... שלא יזוז מלפניו..." (Rambam, Kings and Wars 3:1:4) This line clarifies the distinction between the two scrolls: one fulfilling the general mitzvah for all Jews, and the second, the king's unique scroll, for constant presence and study. The dikduk of "כותב שני ספרי תורה" when he lacks an ancestral scroll, contrasted with the initial "יתר על הספר שהניחו לו אבותיו," lays the groundwork for significant lomdus.

"ומגיהו מספר העזרה על פי בית דין של שבעים ואחד." (Rambam, Kings and Wars 3:1:2-3) The verb "מגיהו" (he corrects/proofreads it) highlights the precision required and the Sanhedrin's role in authenticating the king's scroll against the authoritative Temple copy. This underscores the scroll's public and communal significance, not just its private use.

Readings

Steinsaltz: The King's Unique Mitzvah and Dual Obligation

Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz's commentary provides crucial insight into the nature of the king's Sefer Torah obligation. On the opening phrase, "כותב לו ספר תורה לשמו יתר על הספר שהניחו לו אבותיו" (Rambam, Kings and Wars 3:1:1), Steinsaltz elucidates: "שחובת המלך לכתוב ספר תורה לאחר מינויו לשם מצוות המלך, ואינו יוצא בספר שהניחו לו אבותיו (ובשל כך גם אם כתב ספר תורה לפני שהתמנה למלך, כפי שמצווה כל אחד מישראל, עליו לחזור ולכתוב ספר נוסף כשמתמנה — הלכות ספר תורה ז,ב)." (Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 3:1:1) This is a significant chiddush. Steinsaltz posits that the king's mitzvah is a distinct obligation specific to his royal office, emerging after his appointment. He cannot fulfill this mitzvah with an ancestral scroll, nor even with a scroll he wrote for himself before becoming king to fulfill the general mitzvah of every Jew. The king must write a new scroll for the sake of the king's mitzvah. This reading emphasizes the qualitative difference of the king's scroll, setting it apart as a symbol of his unique responsibilities.

Further, Steinsaltz clarifies the scenario in Kings 3:1:4, where the king writes two scrolls if he has no ancestral one: "מלבד החובה המוטלת עליו כמלך לכתוב ספר תורה, הוא מחויב בכתיבת ספר תורה נוסף כפי שמחויב כל אדם מישראל." (Steinsaltz on Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 3:1:4) Here, Steinsaltz clearly delineates the two separate mitzvot: one for the king qua king, and another for the king qua individual Jew. If an ancestral scroll exists, it can fulfill the latter obligation. If not, the king must fulfill both obligations anew by writing two distinct scrolls. This interpretation elegantly resolves potential ambiguities regarding the "יתר" (additional) nature of the king's scroll.

Yitzchak Yeranen and the Kesef Mishneh: Reconciling the Dual Obligation

The commentary of R' Yitzchak Yeranen on Kings 3:1:1, "עיין מה שתמה מרן ומה שכתבתי בחי' להל' ספר תורה פ"ז ה"ב," directs us to the Kesef Mishneh on Rambam, Hilchot Sefer Torah 7:2. This reference points to a deep kushya regarding the relationship between the king's two Sifrei Torah.

Rambam, Hilchot Sefer Torah 7:2 states: "ואם לא היה לו ספר תורה מאבותיו, או שאבד הספר שהניחו לו אבותיו - כותב שנים: אחד שיוצא בו ידי חובת כל אדם, ואחד שאינו זז מלפניו..." The Kesef Mishneh (ad loc.) notices an apparent tension between this text and the Sifrei (Devarim 17:19) and Sanhedrin 21b. The Sifrei states: "והיה עמו וקרא בו כל ימי חייו, אם אין לו כותב לו שניהם." This implies that the obligation to write two scrolls only arises if he lacks an ancestral scroll. If he has one, he seemingly only needs to write the second scroll (the one for constant study). However, Rambam in Kings 3:1:1 seems to suggest that he always writes an additional scroll, even if he has one from his ancestors. The Kesef Mishneh asks: If he has an ancestral scroll, why does he need to write another one for the general mitzvah of every Jew (as implied by Kings 3:1:4 when he lacks one)? He should just need the "king's scroll" (the one that doesn't leave him).

The chiddush implied by the Kesef Mishneh's question, and likely addressed by Yitzchak Yeranen, lies in defining the status of the ancestral scroll. Is it merely a Sefer Torah he possesses, or does it fulfill his personal mitzvah as an individual Israelite? A common approach to resolve this, aligning with Steinsaltz, is that the ancestral scroll does fulfill his obligation as an individual Jew. Therefore:

1. If he has an ancestral scroll: He fulfills his individual mitzvah with it. He then writes one more – the king's special scroll, as per Kings 3:1:1 ("יתר על הספר שהניחו לו אבותיו").
2. If he does not have an ancestral scroll: He must write two new scrolls. One for his individual mitzvah (since he has none from ancestors), and one for his specific kingly mitzvah. This precisely matches Kings 3:1:4 ("כותב שני ספרי תורה: אחד... שחובתו ככל אחד מישראל... והשני...").

This reconciliation highlights the Rambam's meticulous precision in distinguishing between the two mitzvot and the varying circumstances of their fulfillment. The Mar'an's t'mimah forces a deeper understanding of what constitutes "fulfilling the mitzvah of every individual Israelite" in the king's context.

Friction

The Knot: Rambam's Apparent Contradiction on the Two Sifrei Torah

The most significant kushya in our passage, keenly identified by the Kesef Mishneh and alluded to by Yitzchak Yeranen, arises from the seemingly contradictory phrasing of Rambam regarding the king's Sefer Torah obligations.

On the one hand, Rambam states at the outset: "כותב לו ספר תורה לעצמו יתר על הספר שהניחו לו אבותיו." (Rambam, Kings and Wars 3:1:1) This implies that regardless of whether he has an ancestral scroll, he always writes an additional one for himself. The plain reading suggests that the ancestral scroll fulfills some role, and the king adds a new one.

However, just a few lines later, Rambam writes: "אם לא הניחו לו אבותיו ספר... כותב שני ספרי תורה: אחד... שחובתו ככל אחד מישראל... והשני... שלא יזוז מלפניו..." (Rambam, Kings and Wars 3:1:4) This statement indicates that if he lacks an ancestral scroll, he writes two. The explicit mention of "אחד שחובתו ככל אחד מישראל" suggests that if he did have an ancestral scroll, that scroll would fulfill the general mitzvah for every Jew, and he would not need to write a new one for that purpose. If so, then if he has an ancestral scroll, he should only write one (the special king's scroll), not an "additional" one on top of the ancestral one, if the ancestral one already fulfills his personal obligation.

The friction is clear: Does the king always write a new scroll for his personal mitzvah as an individual Jew, in addition to the king's scroll (as implied by 3:1:1's "יתר" if read as meaning "a new personal scroll plus a new king's scroll")? Or does the ancestral scroll count for his personal mitzvah, requiring him to write only the king's scroll in that scenario (as implied by 3:1:4's conditional "שני ספרי תורה")? The Kesef Mishneh (Hilchot Sefer Torah 7:2) notes this by asking: "וצריך עיון דמסתמא אם יש לו ספר מאבותיו יצא בו ידי חובת כל אדם ואינו צריך לכתוב אלא ספר שני."

The Unraveling: Distinguishing the Mitzvot

The most compelling resolution, which harmonizes the two statements and aligns with the understanding of commentators like Steinsaltz, lies in a precise distinction between the two separate mitzvot involved:

1. Mitzvah 1: The general obligation to write a Sefer Torah (or possess one) incumbent upon every Jew. (Devarim 31:19, Menachot 30a, Rambam, Hilchot Sefer Torah 7:1)
2. Mitzvah 2: The specific obligation for a king to have a Sefer Torah that remains constantly with him. (Devarim 17:19, Sanhedrin 21b, Rambam, Kings and Wars 3:1:1)

With this distinction:

• Scenario A: The King has an ancestral Sefer Torah.
  • This ancestral scroll fulfills his obligation for Mitzvah 1 (as an individual Jew).
  • He must then write one additional scroll to fulfill Mitzvah 2 (the king's special scroll). This new scroll is "יתר על הספר שהניחו לו אבותיו" (Rambam, Kings and Wars 3:1:1) in the sense that it is in addition to the scroll that already satisfies his first obligation.
• Scenario B: The King does not have an ancestral Sefer Torah.
  • He has no scroll to fulfill Mitzvah 1. Therefore, he must write a new scroll for this purpose.
  • He also needs a scroll to fulfill Mitzvah 2.
  • Thus, he must write two new scrolls: one for Mitzvah 1, and one for Mitzvah 2. This is precisely what Rambam states: "כותב שני ספרי תורה: אחד שיוצא בו ידי חובת כל אדם... והשני... שלא יזוז מלפניו..." (Rambam, Kings and Wars 3:1:4).

This terutz clarifies that the "יתר" in Kings 3:1:1 refers to the king's scroll being an addition to whatever scroll (ancestral or newly written) fulfills his individual obligation. The Rambam's initial statement is a general principle, while the later one addresses a specific contingency, both entirely consistent when the two distinct mitzvot are properly parsed. The ancestral scroll's role is not to be replaced, but to fulfill one of the king's two (potentially) distinct Sefer Torah obligations.

Intertext

Sanhedrin 21b-22a: The Gemara's Foundation

The primary talmudic source for the laws of the king's Sefer Torah is Sanhedrin 21b-22a. The Gemara there expounds upon Devarim 17:18-19, "וְהָיָה כְתֹב לוֹ אֶת מִשְׁנֵה הַתּוֹרָה הַזֹּאת עַל סֵפֶר מִלִּפְנֵי הַכֹּהֲנִים הַלְוִיִּם. וְהָיְתָה עִמּוֹ וְקָרָא בוֹ כָּל יְמֵי חַיָּיו." The Gemara interprets "משנה התורה" (a copy of this Torah) not as a duplicate, but as referring to the king's personal scroll. It states that the king has two Sifrei Torah: one that is placed in his treasury ("בבית גנזיו") and another that accompanies him wherever he goes, except for ritually impure places. The Gemara explicitly derives the need for two scrolls from the Sifrei (as quoted in the Kesef Mishneh), confirming the dual nature of the obligation. This talmudic discussion forms the bedrock of Rambam's halachot, particularly concerning the constant presence of the king's scroll to foster humility and prevent his heart from straying. The Gemara's focus on "למען ילמד ליראה את ה' אלהיו" (Devarim 17:19) underscores the pedagogical and ethical purpose of this unique mitzvah.

Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Sefer Torah 7:1-3: Parallel and Elucidation

Rambam's own Hilchot Sefer Torah (Laws of the Torah Scroll) chapter 7 provides a critical parallel text that clarifies the nature of the king's Sefer Torah. In Hilchot Sefer Torah 7:1, Rambam first states the general mitzvah for every Jew: "כל אחד ואחד מישראל מצווה לכתוב ספר תורה לעצמו." Then, in 7:2, he addresses the king's specific obligation: "מלך ישראל מצווה לכתוב לו ספר תורה לשמו, יתר על אותו שהניחו לו אבותיו." This is almost identical to Kings 3:1:1. Immediately following, 7:3 elaborates on the scenario where the king has no ancestral scroll: "ואם לא היה לו ספר תורה מאבותיו, או שאבד הספר שהניחו לו אבותיו - כותב שנים: אחד שיוצא בו ידי חובת כל אדם, ואחד שאינו זז מלפניו..." This mirrors Kings 3:1:4. The juxtaposition of these halachot in Hilchot Sefer Torah serves as an internal intertextual commentary on our passage from Kings and Wars. It explicitly shows that Rambam views the king's obligation as an extension of the general mitzvah, adding a specific royal dimension. The Kesef Mishneh's aforementioned kushya is precisely on 7:2 and 7:3, further highlighting that the internal consistency within Rambam's own work is a central point of lomdus. This cross-reference underscores that the "king's scroll" is not a replacement but an additional layer of devotion to Torah, reflecting his elevated station and magnified responsibility.

Psak/Practice

While the halachot pertaining to a king are currently theoretical, given the absence of a reigning Jewish monarch, the underlying principles offer profound insights into meta-psak heuristics and the ideal of leadership within Judaism.

Firstly, the detailed regulations surrounding the king's Sefer Torah—its personal writing, constant companionship, and the rigorous proofreading by the Sanhedrin—serve as a powerful symbol. It underscores that even (and especially) the highest authority is utterly subservient to divine law. The king is not above the Torah; he is its most diligent student and guardian. This establishes a heuristic for all leadership: authority is legitimate only when exercised within the bounds of and in devotion to Halacha.

Secondly, the prohibitions against accumulating excessive wives, horses, and personal wealth (Devarim 17:16-17) are explicitly linked to the danger of the king's "heart going astray" ("לבלתי רום לבבו מאחיו ולבלתי סור מן המצוה ימין ושמאל" Devarim 17:20). This teaches that power inherently carries corrupting tendencies, and Halacha proactively mitigates these risks by imposing stringent self-discipline. For any leader, the lesson is clear: personal indulgence, pride, and self-aggrandizement are antithetical to true leadership and spiritual integrity. This forms a meta-psak principle that a leader's personal conduct and priorities are intrinsically tied to their public function.

Finally, the king's exceptional powers in executing rebels or dispensing justice in cases where rabbinic courts might be constrained (e.g., circumstantial evidence, lack of warning) demonstrate the need for a strong executive to maintain social order and deter wickedness ("להטיל אימה בלב הרשעים"). However, these powers are not absolute, as he cannot confiscate property, and his decrees cannot negate a mitzvah. This outlines a balanced approach to governance, where authority is granted for communal welfare but is circumscribed by divine and moral boundaries. It highlights that even in matters of hora'at sha'ah (temporary decree for the hour), fundamental halachic principles remain inviolable.

Takeaway

The Jewish king, though a sovereign, is uniquely bound by Halacha, particularly through the dual mitzvah of constant Torah study, serving as a safeguard against the corrupting influence of power and a model of humility. His authority is divinely sanctioned but circumscribed by divine law, emphasizing that true leadership is rooted in subservience to a higher truth and devotion to communal welfare over personal gain.