What the Torah says about King making and the Lorax

Shoftim (D’varim 16:18-21:9)                       

This week’s parasha, Shoftim, is full of pithy quotes and memorable statements. “Justice, Justice, thou shalt pursue” (16:20); a restatement (lex talionis from Shmot 21:23-25) of the famous law of civil compensation (that some interpret as revenge) “an eye for an eye . . .” (19:21); laws regarding legal and military justice; accidental death.  But that’s not what I want to talk about.  It’s almost Labor Day, election season is heating up, and I want to look at what the Torah says about making a king.

While I enjoyed an excellent day school education growing up, I don’t remember studying this text until my sophomore year at the University of Maryland.  In my Tanach class with Dr. Samuel Iwry (zichrono l’vracha) we were studying the selection of Saul as first king of Israel in I Samuel, and the question we were trying to answer was, “What’s bothering Samuel?” The prophet was upset that the people felt the need for a king, and were in essence rejecting (or at least considering inadequate) his leadership.  In a beautiful exchange with God (I Samuel 8:6-9) God tries to comfort Samuel that it is not that the people are rejecting Samuel’s leadership, but God’s.

The question remains.  If you subscribe to the traditional understanding that the Torah was delivered to Moses intact at Sinai, and D’varim 17:14:20 already existed telling the people that it was both permitted to select a King within certain parameters and maybe even expected, what bothered Samuel?  One of the answers, posited by the historical/documentary scholars is that the Book of D’varim is a late addition to the Tanach, perhaps as late as the reign of King Josiah in the 7^th Century BCE.  The problem vexed Samuel precisely because D’varim 17 didn’t yet exist, and he had no guidepost for helping the people select a secular leader.  Let’s look at the text.

If, after you have entered the land that God has assigned to you . . ., you decide “I will set a king over me, as do all the nations about me,” you shall be free to set a king over yourself, one chosen by God.  Be sure to set as king over yourself one of your own people; you must not set a foreigner over you, one who is not your kinsman.  Moreover, he shall not keep many horses . . ., and shall not have many wives; lest his heart go astray; nor shall he amass silver and gold to excess. And when he is seated on his royal throne, he shall have a copy of this Teaching written for him on a scroll…Let it remain with him and let him read it all of his life… (D’varim 17:14-19)

It seems the framers of the US Constitution agreed with the first requirement that a leader of a national group must be of that group and not a foreigner.  It seems the injunction against too many horses was intended as a limit on the king’s military, as horses in service of a king were primarily for cavalry. Shall not have many wives?  Avoidance of distraction and immorality both seem like good ideas. Nor shall he amass silver and gold to excess – is this before or after being a king?  Could this be a warning against buying an election?  And then to make sure the King keeps to the right path, we turn him into a mezuzah, moderating the pull of the crown with the push of the scroll-on-board.  Could all this warn about the real purpose of the king, to be a leader and public servant, and not about enriching oneself while in political power? 

I plan to re-read this section as an antidote to the barrage of political ads this fall. Knowing what the Torah says about selecting a leader, there are, apparently, things we need to keep in mind as we face the election of our next national leader.

On another note, in the section of the parasha about the way to conduct a war, we have an interesting ecological imperative that seems like it could have inspired Theodore Geisel in writing the Lorax: 

When in your war against a city you have to besiege it a long time in order to capture it, you must not destroy its trees, wielding the ax against them.  You may eat of them, but you must not cut them down . . . Only trees that you know do not yield food may be destroyed; you may cut them down for constructing siegeworks against the city that is waging war on you, until it has been reduced. (D’varim 20:19:20)

The importance of trees to sustaining life, even if imperfectly understood at the time the Torah was written, is such a great message.  Even Jewish warfare has to involve concepts of conservation and kavod (respect) and we are not permitted to slash and burn our enemies out.  Trees, as life-sustaining objects take priority over offensive operations.  What a great lesson for us to teach our children. This reflects well in the modern Israeli military value of tohar haneshek, the purity of weapons doctrine, that they are to be used for defensive purposes and for the ultimate value of preserving lives, not destroying them.

As I said to my editor (and teacher, Avi West) this week when he asked me if I loved parashat Shoftim, I was quick to answer “I love Torah”.  I love Torah when it speaks and we hear the relevance after 3000 years.

For further discussion:

1.    What qualities should we require of our leaders?  What skills and experiences should they have before they start the job?

2.    Does our voice count?  Why does it matter if one votes in a national election, one voice in 300 million?

3.    Can you make a job description for a leader based on the Torah’s requirements?

4.    If there is a proper way to treat trees in times of war, what do you think that implies on how to treat prisoners or those civilians captured by a conquering army?

Steve Kerbel, Director of Education, Congregation B’nai Tzedek, Potomac, Maryland, Chair, Education Directors’ Council of Greater Washington.