Spiritual and
Ethical Issues in the Historical Books of Tanach;
JOSHUA, JUDGES, SAMUEL, KINGS (Nevi’im Rishonim) These four books ostensibly are merely the history of Israel from the entry into the Promised Land until the destruction of the Temple and the temporary loss of independent statehood. In fact they are actually, in a specifically Jewish sense, the most deeply religious and spiritual books of the Bible. One does not have to be specifically Jewish to see or feel the religion and spirituality in the revelations of the prophetic writings or in the words of the Tehillim. They speak to all people, as evidenced by the fact that the Bible is still the world's bestseller and there are millions of non-Jews who regularly recite the Psalms. However, it is specifically and intrinsically Jewish to understand that G-d is revealed in the prosaic material, in the political, social and military events in the lives of ordinary men and women, kings and leaders that are described in the Nevim Rishonim. Here are described the ideology and religious thoughts in Judaism, while in Chronicles we have the purely historical. Political Leadership and Kingship (Shoftim
9:1-6) Avimelekh, the son of Gideon and his concubine [a Canaanite?] from Shechem, with the financial help of his mother’s townsmen and hired thugs, had himself elected as a ruler. It is true that this was not as a king, that would require a prophet and a Sanhedrin, but only as a ‘sar’, a minister; however, this was still meant to be an appointment of a ruler. Avimelekh’s first act as a ruler was the murder of the 69 legitimate sons of Gideon, primarily in order to secure his position. Chazal saw this as a punishment for Gideon’s transgression of a mitzva of kingship, “he shall not multiply his wives, that they turn not his heart” [from Hashem (Deut 17:17). Even though in halakhic terms he was not a king and as a private citizen was not be liable to observe this mitzva, nevertheless, because the people saw him as such, he bore some responsibility. Perhaps, the numerous wives he had, maybe seen as an indication of sexual immorality on the part of Gideon, that led, since morality is indivisible, later to the bloodshed by his son. Irrespective, such acts of violence make it easy to de-legitimize regimes that do them or similarly blatantly immoral acts. However, what about a ruler who treats
his subjects well and administers moral justice, yet at the same time
usurps power, as did the kings of Israel who were not of the Davidic
dynasty or those who did not keep the mitzvot? Despite his idolatry, Achav had respect for Talmidei chakhamim and appreciation for the importance of Torah. When the king of Damascus demanded the royal treasures as tribute, Achav gave them up. However, he refused, even if it meant war, to give up his special treasure, the special Sefer Torah that a king had to write (1Kings, 20:1-11: Sanhedrin, 102b). The food that ravens fed Eliyahu was kosher from the table of Achav (1Kings 17:6; Hullin 5a). Eliyahu’s act of homage was there- fore as recognition for that strange mixture in the spiritual make up of the man, secular in some respects yet very positively religious in others. So much of the constitutional history of the Western world has revolved around govern- ments rights of taxation and their implementation. Therefore, perhaps we can see most clearly the Jewish perspective on usurpers of powers or illegal governments is its treatment of that controversial right. The right to levy taxes is recognized halakhically as one of the primary powers of a government. “Everything that was said in [1 Samuel 8; giving a king the right of taxation in money, labor and in kind], the king has the right to do” (Sanhedrin20b). However, “When is the law of the king binding? When his coinage is accepted by everybody as his subjects accept his rule and agree to be his subjects… However, where his coinage is not legal tender, rather he rules only by force, then he and his officials are like a band of armed robbers and his laws are invalid “ (Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Gezeila vaAveida 5:14-18). This ruling applies to a ruler, both Jewish and non-Jewish, and would seem to show that an illegal government frees people to evade all its laws. However, when a legitimate ruler willfully exceeds his legal rights, then he is no longer to be obeyed. This would flow from a verse in the Torah. “Neither shall he greatly multiply to himself gold and silver [beyond what he needs for purposes of governing]” (Sanhedrin 21b, explaining Devarim, 17:17). When this is transgressed, we see prophetic sanction for taxpayers revolt in the case of Yeravam ben Nevat in the days of Rechavam, the heir of Shlomo, a revolt that led to the breakup of the Davidic kingdom into two separate states. When Shlomo HaMelekh died the elders of Israel approached his son Rechavam, not to complain about their fiscal obligation per se, but only about the high level of taxes. Rechavam’s answer, “My father chastised you with whips, I’ll do so with scorpions”, served to foment a revolt, that had the support of the prophet Achiya HaShiloni (1Kings, 12: 1-20). That revolt, together with the latter prophets involvement against the corruption and abuse of political power, formed the religious basis for the tax rebellions of the English Puritans, of the American colonists and perhaps even of the Great Trek of the fundamentalist Boers in South Africa. Indeed, the Tanach’s rejection of such
abitary and immoral governments is a message that has been repeated and
re-echoed throughout world history. [The
Parshat Haazinu Homepage]
|
