י"ז:י"ד
כִּֽי־תָבֹ֣א אֶל־הָאָ֗רֶץ אֲשֶׁ֨ר יְהוָ֤ה אֱלֹהֶ֙יךָ֙ נֹתֵ֣ן לָ֔ךְ וִֽירִשְׁתָּ֖הּ וְיָשַׁ֣בְתָּה בָּ֑הּ וְאָמַרְתָּ֗ אָשִׂ֤ימָה עָלַי֙ מֶ֔לֶךְ כְּכָל־הַגּוֹיִ֖ם אֲשֶׁ֥ר סְבִיבֹתָֽי׃
17:14
If, after you have entered the land that the LORD your God has assigned to you, and taken possession of it and settled in it, you decide, “I will set a king over me, as do all the nations about me,”
17:14
When thou art come unto the land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, and shalt possess it, and shalt dwell therein; and shalt say: ‘I will set a king over me, like all the nations that are round about me’;
י"ז:י"ד
אֲרֵי תֵעוֹל לְאַרְעָא דַּיְיָ אֱלָהָךְ יָהֵב לָךְ וְתֵירְתַהּ וְתֵיתֵב בַּהּ וְתֵימַר אֱמַנִּי עֲלַי מַלְכָּא כְּכָל עַמְמַיָּא דִי בְסַחֲרָנָי:
י"ז:י"ד
אור החיים
1כִּי תָבֹא וְגוֹ׳ וְאָמַרְתָּ וְגוֹ׳ שׂוֹם תָּשִׂים וְגוֹ׳. מֵאָמְרוֹ כִּי תָבֹא וְגוֹ׳ וְאָמַרְתָּ, מַשְׁמַע כִּי לֹא מִצְוַת ה׳ עֲלֵיהֶם לִמְלוֹךְ מֶלֶךְ, אֶלָּא אִם יֹאמְרוּ הָרְשׁוּת בְּיָדָם, וּמִמַּה שֶׁגָּמַר אוֹמֶר שׂוֹם תָּשִׂים, שִׁעוּר הַלָּשׁוֹן מוֹכִיחַ שֶׁמִּצְוַת ה׳ הִיא לְהַמְלִיךְ עֲלֵיהֶם מֶלֶךְ.
בי תבא..ואמרת..שום תשים עליך מלך. "When you come to the land…and you will say..l want to appoint a king,…appoint a king over yourself, etc." The wording: "when you come and you will say, etc." shows that G'd did not decree that the people have to appoint a king for themselves. If they want to, however, the Torah gives them the right to do so. The repetition of שום תשים at the end of the verse appears to suggest that it is indeed a positive commandment to appoint a king. Are we faced with a contradiction here?
2וְנִרְאֶה שֶׁכַּוָּנַת הַכְּתוּבִים הִיא עַל זֶה הַדֶּרֶךְ, לְפִי שֶׁיֵּשׁ בְּמִנּוּי הַמֶּלֶךְ שְׁנֵי גְּדָרִים: אֶחָד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה הַמִּבְטָח בּוֹ לְהַנְהִיג הַמִּלְחָמוֹת בְּעֹצֶם חָכְמָתוֹ וְלָצֵאת כְּגִבּוֹר בְּיוֹם קְרָב כְּסֵדֶר מַלְכֵי הָאֻמּוֹת, וְזֶה הוּא דָּבָר שָׂנאוּי בְּעֵינֵי ה׳, כִּי סֵדֶר מַלְכֵי הָאֻמּוֹת לֹא יֵלְכוּ בָּהֶם אַחֲרֵי כִּשְׁרוֹן הַמַּעֲשֶׂה אֶלָּא אַחֲרֵי תּוֹעֲלִיּוֹת הַחוּשִׁיּוֹת, הֲגַם שֶׁלֹּא יִמָּצֵא בּוֹ דָּבָר טוֹב מֵהַמֻּשְׂכָּל, גַּם יָשִׂימוּ בּוֹ כִּסְלָם וְתִקְוָתָם וּמִן ה׳ יָסוּר לְבָבָם. וְגָדֵר שֵׁנִי הוּא לִכְבוֹד וּלְתִפְאֶרֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל וּכְדֵי שֶׁה׳ יַעֲשֶׂה בִּזְכוּתוֹ כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁהָיָה ה׳ מוֹשִׁיעַ יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּיַד הַשּׁוֹפְטִים וּבְיַד מַלְכֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל הַכְּשֵׁרִים, וְצֵא וּלְמַד מִדָּוִד הַמֶּלֶךְ וְכוּ׳, וְדָבָר זֶה הוּא חֵן וְשֵׂכֶל טוֹב בְּעֵינֵי אֱלֹהִים וְאָדָם.
It appears to us that the best way to understand the wording of the verse is as follows. There may be two reasons why the people want to appoint a king. 1) They want a king with superior intelligence in whose ability to conduct wars successfully they have confidence. They want him to be able to compete successfully with the bravery, etc., of Gentile kings. This is something G'd mightily disapproves of. The reason for this is that the kings of the Gentile nations are not motivated by what is right but merely what appears expedient, even if objectively speaking their undertakings are not even useful in the long run. Not only that, but they do not trust in G'd but in their own prowess. The second reason for Israelites wanting a king is that they want their king to represent the glory of Israel, G'd's people. They want the king to be the kind of person on whose account (merits) G'd will make the whole nation successful in its undertakings. G'd had done so repeatedly in the days of the Judges when the merit of the individual judge ensured that G'd would grant him victory over enemies who were (or appeared) much stronger. King David too enjoyed success all the time becaue he merited G'd's personal assistance. The request to appoint this kind of king is one which G'd approves of.
3וְלָזֶה בָּא דְּבָרוֹ הַטּוֹב כָּאן וְאָמַר כִּי תָבֹא וְגוֹ׳ וְאָמַרְתָּ אָשִׂימָה עָלַי מֶלֶךְ כְּכָל הַגּוֹיִם וְגוֹ׳, וְזֶה גָּדֵר הָרִאשׁוֹן שֶׁזָּכַרְנוּ, וְגָמַר אוֹמֵר שׂוֹם תָּשִׂים וְגוֹ׳, פֵּרוּשׁ, לֹא יָקוּם הַדָּבָר הָרַע הַזֶּה, אֶלָּא הַמְּשִׂימוֹת שֶׁתָּשִׂים הוּא עַל זֶה הַדֶּרֶךְ אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר ה׳ אֱלֹהֶיךָ בּוֹ. וְאָמְרוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (תוספתא סנהדרין פ״ג) וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנָם: אֵין מַעֲמִידִין מֶלֶךְ בַּתְּחִלָּה אֶלָּא עַל פִּי בֵּית דִּין שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים זְקֵנִים וְעַל פִּי נָבִיא וְכוּ׳, עַד כָּאן. וּמֶלֶךְ הַמִּתְמַנֶּה בְּסֵדֶר זֶה אֵינוֹ כְּסֵדֶר מֶלֶךְ הַמִּתְמַנֶּה עַל הַגּוֹיִם כְּמוֹ שֶׁבָּא בְּדִבְרֵיהֶם ״כְּכָל הַגּוֹיִם״. וּכְפִי זֶה מַאֲמַר שׂוֹם תָּשִׂים הִיא מִצְוָה וּשְׁלִילַת גָּדֵר שֶׁכְּנֶגֶד תְּנָאֶיהָ. וְלָזֶה נִתְחַכֵּם ה׳ לְהַקְדִּים מַאֲמַר וְאָמַרְתָּ אָשִׂימָה וְגוֹ׳ לְהָעִירְךָ אֶת אֲשֶׁר יְכַוֵּן אֵלָיו, לִשְׁלֹל אוֹתוֹ בְּמַאֲמַר ״שׂוֹם תָּשִׂים״ וְגוֹ׳, שֶׁזּוּלַת זֶה לֹא הָיִיתִי מֵבִין שֶׁאוֹסֵר לָשׂוּם מֶלֶךְ כְּכָל הַגּוֹיִם, וַהֲגַם שֶׁיֹּאמַר ״אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר״, אֵין מוּבָן שֶׁבָּא לֶאֱסֹר כְּכָל הַגּוֹיִם וְיִהְיֶה זֶה וָזֶה, וְלֹא חָשׁ לְהָבִין בְּמַאֲמַר ״שׂוֹם תָּשִׂים״ שֶׁהוּא רְשׁוּת מִכֶּפֶל ״שׂוֹם תָּשִׂים״.
This is why our verse commences with: "when you come to the land and you want to appoint a king over yourself to match what other nations are doing, etc." Clearly, here the Torah describes the first of the two scenarios we described for the Israelites wanting a king. This is the scenario, which, basically, G'd does not approve of. The verse concludes with the Torah encouraging us to appoint a king, i.e. שום תשים. This means that the prerequisite for the Israelites appointing a king is that G'd approves, i.e. אשר יבחר ה׳ אלוקיך (you consult the Supreme Court of 71 elders who in turn consult with a prophet as they are G'd's representatives). When a king is appointed on such a basis he cannot be compared to the kind of king Gentile nations appoint for themselves. Under such conditions we are entitled to understand the words שום תשים עליך מלך as a positive commandment. These words are simultaneously a positive commandment and a negative commandment not to appoint the wrong kind of king for the wrong reasons. Without these words I would have assumed that the appointment of a king with the powers of kings amongst Gentile nations was altogether forbidden. Even though the Torah also writes that a Jewish king is subject to being chosen by G'd, i.e. אשר יבחר ה׳ אלקיך, this would not have been enough to forbid the monarchy as a valid form of government in a Jewish state. Once the Torah wrote שום תשים, repeating the instruction, it was not worried that we would interpret the verse as merely offering us the monarchy as an option.
4וְתִמְצָא שֶׁה׳ הִקְפִּיד עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל כְּשֶׁשָּׁאֲלוּ בִּימֵי שְׁמוּאֵל לָתֵת לָהֶם מֶלֶךְ (שמואל א ח:ה), וְהָעִנְיָן קָשֶׁה, לָמָּה יַקְפִּיד ה׳ עֲלֵיהֶם, וַהֲלֹא לוּ יִהְיֶה שֶׁכַּוָּנַת ה׳ בְּפָסוּק זֶה לִרְשׁוּת וְלֹא לְמִצְוָה, סוֹף סוֹף הָרְשׁוּת נְתוּנָה. וּכְפִי מַה שֶׁכָּתַבְנוּ יֵשׁ מָקוֹם לַה׳ לְהַקְפִּיד עַל הַדָּבָר, כֵּיוָן שֶׁצִּוָּה ה׳ עֲלֵיהֶם לְבַל יֹאמְרוּ לָשׂוּם מֶלֶךְ כְּכָל הַגּוֹיִם כְּמוֹ שֶׁפֵּרַשְׁנוּ, וְשָׁאֲלוּ הַמֶּלֶךְ וְאָמְרוּ (שמואל א ח:ה) ״לְשָׁפְטֵנוּ כְּכָל הַגּוֹיִם״, לָזֶה הִקְפִּיד ה׳. אֲבָל אִם הָיוּ שׁוֹאֲלִים לָהֶם מֶלֶךְ כִּרְצוֹנוֹ יִתְבָּרַךְ, לֹא לְכֹחַ וְלִגְבוּרָה כְּדֶרֶךְ הַגּוֹיִם, הָיוּ מְקַיְּמִין מִצְוַת עֲשֵׂה.
You will have noted that G'd was quite upset about Israel in the days of the prophet Samuel when the people demanded from the prophet that he would appoint a king who would rule over them. (Samuel I chapter 8). At first glance this appears quite out of step with what we have learned here. Why would G'd (or the prophet) have been upset if the permission to appoint a king was already solidly based on our passage in the Torah? When you consider what we have written you will have no difficulty understanding why G'd was angry at that time. The Torah had specifically commanded that the reason for establishing a monarchy should not be in order to become more like the Gentile nations; however, this was precisely what motivated the people who demanded that Samuel appoint a king over them. We are told in Samuel I 8,5 that the reason for demanding a king was inter alia לשפטנו ככל הגוים, "to judge us like all the other nations." It was the rationale for the request which angered G'd at that time. Had they asked for a king who would be guided first and foremeost by G'd's wishes, instead of because they hoped to increase their military clout once they had a king, they would have performed a positive commandment with their very request.
5וְרָאִיתִי בְּסַנְהֶדְרִין פֶּרֶק כֹּהֵן גָּדוֹל (סנהדרין כ.) שֶׁנֶּחְלְקוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה, וְזֶה לְשׁוֹנוֹ: רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר שָׁלֹשׁ מִצְווֹת נִצְטַוּוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּכְנִיסָתָן לָאָרֶץ – לְהַעֲמִיד לָהֶם מֶלֶךְ, וּלְהַכְרִית זַרְעוֹ שֶׁל עֲמָלֵק, וְלִבְנוֹת בֵּית הַבְּחִירָה. רַבִּי נְהוֹרַאי אוֹמֵר: לֹא נֶאֶמְרָה פָּרָשָׁה זוֹ אֶלָּא כְּנֶגֶד תַּרְעוֹמְתָּן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״וְאָמַרְתָּ אָשִׂימָה עָלַי מֶלֶךְ״ וְגוֹ׳, עַד כָּאן. וּדְבָרֵינוּ עוֹלִין לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְלֹא לְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי נְהוֹרַאי, וַהֲגַם שֶׁהֲלָכָה כְּרַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְכֵן פָּסַק רַמְבַּ״ם בְּפֶרֶק א׳ מֵהִלְכוֹת מְלָכִים, אַף עַל פִּי כֵן צָרִיךְ לְיַשֵּׁב הַכָּתוּב לִסְבָרַת רַבִּי נְהוֹרַאי שֶׁפְּשַׁט אָמְרוֹ ״שׂוֹם תָּשִׂים״ יַגִּיד שֶׁמִּצְוַת ה׳ לָשׂוּם מֶלֶךְ.
We find a dispute in Sanhedrin 20 concerning the three commandments the Israelites were to fulfil after taking possession of their homeland. Rabbi Yehudah said the three were: 1) to appoint a king; 2) to exterminate the descendants of Amalek; 3) to construct a permanent Temple. Rabbi Nehorai claimed that our passage was written only as a response to people who would demand to be ruled over by a king, but that it does not constitute a positive commandment. Our comments are based on the viewpoint of Rabbi Yehudah and this is the halachah. Maimonides also rules like Rabbi Yehudah that appointment of a king is a positive commandment in chapter one of Hilchot Melachim. Nonetheless the viewpoint of Rabbi Nehorai deserves further examination. After all, the plain meaning of the words שום תשים עליך מלך is clearly a commandment and not merely an option.
6וְאֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר, כִּי אִם יִשְׂרָאֵל יִהְיוּ כְּשֵׁרִים וְלֹא יִשְׁאֲלוּ מֶלֶךְ, וְהָיָה ה׳ לְמֶלֶךְ עֲלֵיהֶם, כְּדֶרֶךְ אָמְרוֹ (שמואל א יב,יג) ״וַה׳ אֱלֹהֵיכֶם מַלְכְּכֶם״, גַּם ה׳ יַחְפּוֹץ לִהְיוֹת מֶלֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל הוּא לְבַדּוֹ. אֲבָל אִם יִשְׂרָאֵל יִכָּנְסוּ בְּגֶדֶר שְׁאֵלָה שֶׁחֲפֵצִים בְּמֶלֶךְ עֲלֵיהֶם, אָז מִצְוַת הַמֶּלֶךְ עֲלֵיהֶם לַעֲשׂוֹתוֹ, כְּאָמְרוֹ ״שׂוֹם תָּשִׂים״. וְלָזֶה לֹא אָמַר הַכָּתוּב שׂוֹם תָּשִׂים אֶלָּא אַחַר מַאֲמַר וְאָמַרְתָּ אָשִׂימָה וְגוֹ׳, וּכְפִי זֶה אֲפִלּוּ אַלִבָּא דְּרַבִּי נְהוֹרַאי יְפָרֵשׁ שׂוֹם תָּשִׂים מִצְוָה אַחַר שֶׁיֹּאמְרוּ ״אָשִׂימָה״ וְגוֹ׳:
Perhaps we can understand the situation as follows. If all of Israel were to be righteous, would not request a king, and would be content to let G'd be their only king as the prophet said in Samuel I 12,13, then G'd would be willing to act as its exclusive king. If, however, Israel had already reached the stage where they asked for a king other than G'd or in addition to G'd, then the commandment שום תשים would become applicable. This may be the reason the Torah did not commence the passage with the words שום תשים, but prefaced it with the words: "if you will say 'I want to appoint a king over myself.'" When you look at the two verses 14 +15 in this way you find that provided the conditions of the first verse have been met even Rabbi Nehorai could agree that the words שום תשים constitute a positive commandment.