Judaism and Monarchy

 

Upon entering Eretz Yisrael, Am Yisrael is instructed to “be sure to appoint over you a king the Lord your God chooses. He must be from among your fellow Yisraelites. Do not place a foreigner over you, one who is not an Yisraelite,” Devarim (Deuteronomy) 17:15.

This decree by G-d seems inconsistent with Shmuel’s displeasure and rejection of the demands of Am Yisrael to anoint a king over them when they challenge him “We want a king over us. Then we will be like all the other nations, with a king to lead us and to go before us and fight out battles,” 1 Shmuel 8:19-21.

What seems to be the basis for this appeal to Shmuel, by Am Yisrael, is their apparent desire to be “like all the other nations.” In fact, that is the only form of ruling they had been exposed to before, both as former slaves and as a young nation. The long list of Pharaohs’ dynasties is what had been ingrained in their minds through the hundreds of years they had served as slaves in Egypt. Later, the terrain of their journey to Eretz Yisrael was mottled with kingdoms. That was the practice of governance throughout the ancient middle east. That is the only kind of authority Am Yisrael was familiar with. Their plea to Shmuel is merely to be no different than their neighbours. They had not yet mastered the idea of an invisible G-d, the king of kings, one that is both omnipotent and omnipresent.

G-d, in His wisdom, had anticipated the request or rather demand posed to Shmuel. G-d realized that it was forthcoming. There was, therefore, a need to prepare and forewarn Am Yisrael towards such an eventuality. This week’s parashah is establishing the model.

To ensure that the king does not abuse his power, there are restrictions appended to such an appointment. The parameters of such a designation, its boundaries and limitations follow the decree and are dictated in this week’s parashah (Devarim 17:16-17).

There are three restrictions imposed on the monarchy that Devarim sets up. The first is military and armament. “The king, moreover, must not acquire great numbers of horses for himself or make the people return to Egypt to get more of them, for the Lord has told you, “You are not to go back that way again.” Egypt, evidently, bred horses from the latter part of the 18^th dynasty and had the finest and most well-trained horses. In addition to pulling the king’s chariots, horses were deployed during wars. Having them in one’s arsenal was essential. G-d was concerned that in trying to upgrade his means of transportation and his military, the king may want to attain them from Egypt.

Such a necessity may force the Yisraelites to become dependent on Egypt, their former slave masters. That would defeat to whole purpose of God’s deliverance and the Exodus from Egypt. Though G-d has not forbidden Am Yisrael to build an army, its survival should depend primarily on their trust in G-d and not in human beings (especially those who had tormented them, as did Egypt), who can turn against them any time. Verse 16 states the prohibition to engage with Egypt very clearly, “You are not to go back there again.” Egypt, where kings were considered gods, is not only the enemy of the ancient Yisraelites, but also the enemy of G-d.

The second realm where a king may have much influence is in the diplomatic one. That parameter is expressed in the prohibition “He must not take many wives, or his heart will be led astray.” (Devarim 17:17).

The practice of marrying many wives was very common in ancient societies. Most of the royal courts included a harem which served as the dwelling place of the ruler’s wives, his concubines, their female attendants, and eunuchs, their guards. In many instances, kings added wives for the purpose of forging, reinforcing political alliances and securing political power through intermarriage between royal families. Moreover, in many harems, wives tried to maneuver themselves and their sons to secure high positions for them. This command serves to ensure that the king does not focus his attention on keeping his wives to safeguard his political pacts rather than attending to the needs of G-d’s People and His commandments.

The third delineated limitation is fiscal. Earthly kings may feel that they can exempt themselves from the laws that they create for their people. The temptation to amass their personal fortune is alluring to anyone who is in a position of power. The Yisraelite king is commanded to accumulate wealth for his nation and the benefit of his subjects only.

One very striking obligation that rests with the king is the one described in verses 18-19:
“When he takes the throne of his kingdom, he is to write for himself on a scroll a copy of this law, taken from that of the Levitical priests.  It is to be with him, and he is to read it all the days of his life so that he may learn to revere the Lord his G-d and follow carefully all the words of this law and these decrees.” Upon ascending the throne, the first command that the king is required conform to is obtain the original Torah scrolls that are in the custody of the priests and copy that document himself, word for word. He is then to keep it close by his side wherever he is.

The emphasis on the importance of the king copying the Torah by himself contains much wisdom. As any teacher knows, it has a pedagogical value. Through the act of copying, the king will come to a better understanding of G-d’s laws, enhance his adherence to them and serve as a role model to his people.

The law in Devarim, while sanctioning the appointment of a king, is designed to preserve the notion that G-d is the ultimate king of Am Yisrael. The human king is merely His representative on earth who is entrusted with the basic role of inspiring his subordinates to become closer to G-d, the King of the universe. In the words of the Talmud, “Royalty on earth reflects royalty in Heaven,” (Berochot 58a).

Shavua tov

 

Zion

“Where does the word ‘Zion’ appear first?’” I asked one of my Facebook friends during a discussion over the subject of “Zionism.”

“In the dictionary,” came the surprising answer from a fellow Jew whom I consider intelligent and educated.

After the waves of the initial shock had subsided and at the risk of me, a secular Jewess, being accused of “religionization,” I decided to cite the sources for that name, that place that is so central to our Jewish lifeblood, a name that has developed into an enriching concept which, unfortunately, more often than not, gets misunderstood and misused.

The name “Zion” first appears in the Tanach, in 2 Samuel 5:7: “Nevertheless, David captured the fortress of Zion – which is the City of David.” In a later chapter and in the Book of Chronicles, we are told that David paid money for land which Ornan, its owner, was willing to give him for free. In fact, “Zion” appears in the Tanach 152 times as a title for Yerushalayim.

The answer I received above for my opening question, raises for me a rather serious issue that is symptomatic of the challenges facing our People nowadays. And I love challenges!

As a first step and out of curiosity, I decided to look the word “Zion” up. Since I hold my Facebook friends in high esteem, I decided to look it up not on just any online dictionary. I decided to go to one of the best and more highly regarded, the Oxford dictionary. Here is its definition:

“1. A hill in Jerusalem, on which the Temple was built (used to symbolize the city itself, especially as a religious or spiritual center).

2. The Jewish People

3.Palestine as the Jewish Homeland and symbol of Judaism

4.heaven as the final gathering place of true believers

5. A city in Illinois.

I hope that, as a Jew, my FB contender would not consider the last three points of the definition as relevant to the Concept of “Zionism,” which is derived from “Zion.” As the verse above shows, “Zion” is the name of a place. It is a few millennia old and has been the spiritual center of the Jewish people almost as long. The Oxford definition even ventures to take it further and identify it with the Jewish People.

I hope this settles the issue of where the word appears first and that we can all agree then that “Zionism” or “Zion” are not just some words, or entries in some dictionary where strangers define that which only Jews can. Rather, it is a notion that goes hand in hand with the Jewish People only along its odyssey through major milestones in our history, tradition, culture, art, literature, prayers, writings and, above all, our essence.

It was that concept which pushed Jews only to weep “by the rivers of Babylon… when” they “remembered Zion.” It is also the same concept that vibrates in Jews only when we recall the destruction of Yerushalayin (AKA Zion) at the height of our joy under the Chuppah and pledge, “If I forget you Oh, Yerushalayim..”
It is the very same belief that animates Jews only to rise from the Passover table and vow, “Next Year in Yerushalayim,” pray towards Yerushalayim three times a day, and what pushed Rabbi Yehuda Halevi in the 12^th century, to lament,

“How can I find savour in food? How shall it be sweet to me?
How shall I render my vows and my bonds, while yet

Zion lieth beneath the fetter of Edom, and I in Arab chains?
A light thing would it seem to me to leave all good things in Spain--
Seeing how precious in mine eyes to behold the dust of the desolate sanctuary.”

Zion and Zionism, that which is at the core of our Jewish spirit, cannot be reduced or watered down to merely an item in a dictionary. That is a slap in the face of all our brothers and sisters whose blood is flowing in the rivers of history while struggling to keep the vows and remain loyal to that which we are.

If you wish, however, to show support and endorse the political movement established by Herzl in the late 19^th century, a movement that bears the same name as the concept, please accept my gratitude but please also understand that it is merely a fraction of what Zionism, the few millennia old Jewish only notion, is.

All I ask of you, dear readers and supporters, is that you respect it.

Thank you and Shabbat Shalom. ❤️🇮🇱❤️