Torah and Jewish Idea > Torah and Jewish Idea
Response from a non zionist, regarding RAMBAN, and vilna gaon 600000
jdl4ever:
I don't accept what you say that there is any difference of opinion between the Ramban and the Rambam. Rather the Ramban is merely explaining the Rambam. When the Rambam talks about tribute for the King and Kings in his chapter on wars, he does not mean that the rules only exclusively applies to Israel having a King and Israel can't wage wars without Kings. He never states this, rather you merely think he implies this to be so and this is not the case. As proof, in Chapter 6 he uses Joshua as an example, and he was not really a King (but interestingly enough the Rambam thinks he was considered like a King in Chapter 1 though). Also he quotes from Torah of Moses many verses to support his positions in those Chapters that all occurred before a King was chosen over Israel so him writing about a King is not required to wage a Milchamat Rishoot and even a Milchamat Mitzvah. Any leader is perfectly fine like the Shoftim waged wars and not all of them were appointed by G-d directly to be a Shofet, Moses and Joshua waged wars and they were not literally Kings, and if you say that G-d told them to do so then I will answer you that that none the less they were not Kings of Israel so these things obviously don't only apply for Kings.
Also I think I found an answer for the question of if a Prophet is needed or not. See this quote of the Rambam in CH1:10 י כיון שנמשח דויד--זכה בכתר מלכות, והרי המלכות לו ולבניו הזכרים הכשרים עד עולם: שנאמר "כיסאך, יהיה נכון עד עולם" (שמואל ב ז,טז). ולא זכה אלא לכשרים, שנאמר "אם ישמרו בניך, בריתי" (תהילים קלב,יב). אף על פי שלא זכה אלא לכשרים, לא תיכרת המלכות מזרע דויד לעולם: הבטיחו הקדוש ברוך הוא בכך, שנאמר "אם יעזבו בניו, בריתי; ובמשפטיי, לא ילכון . . . ופקדתי בשבט, פשעם; ובנגעים עוונם. וחסדי, לא אסיר מעימו" (ראה תהילים פט,לא-לד). It says that anyone who is a decendent of King David is considered valid for King until all eternity and therefore you can imply from the Rambam words that perhaps he doesn't need both a Prophet and the Sanhedrin to be crowned in this case and that answers the apparent contradiction between what he said about R' Akiva who appointed Bar Kochba without a Prophet. Was Bar Kochba a decendant of David? Someone answer please.
q_q_:
--- Quote from: jdl4ever on February 11, 2008, 06:46:48 PM ---I don't accept what you say that there is any difference of opinion between the Ramban and the Rambam. Rather the Ramban is merely explaining the Rambam. When the Rambam talks about tribute for the King and Kings in his chapter on wars, he does not mean that the rules only exclusively applies to Israel having a King and Israel can't wage wars without Kings. He never states this, rather you merely think he implies this to be so and this is not the case. As proof, in Chapter 6 he uses Joshua as an example, and he was not a King (but interestingly enough the Rambam thinks he was considered a King in Chapter 1 though). Also he quotes from Torah many verses before a King was chosen over Israel to support his conclusions so him writing about a King is not required to wage a Milchamat Rishoot and possibly even a Milchamat Mitzvah.
Also I think I found an answer for the question of if a Prophet is needed or not. See this quote of the Rambam in CH1:10 י כיון שנמשח דויד--זכה בכתר מלכות, והרי המלכות לו ולבניו הזכרים הכשרים עד עולם: שנאמר "כיסאך, יהיה נכון עד עולם" (שמואל ב ז,טז). ולא זכה אלא לכשרים, שנאמר "אם ישמרו בניך, בריתי" (תהילים קלב,יב). אף על פי שלא זכה אלא לכשרים, לא תיכרת המלכות מזרע דויד לעולם: הבטיחו הקדוש ברוך הוא בכך, שנאמר "אם יעזבו בניו, בריתי; ובמשפטיי, לא ילכון . . . ופקדתי בשבט, פשעם; ובנגעים עוונם. וחסדי, לא אסיר מעימו" (ראה תהילים פט,לא-לד). It says that anyone who is a decendent of King David is considered valid for King until all eternity and therefore you can imply from the Rambam words that perhaps he doesn't need both a Prophet and the Sanhedrin to be crowned in this case and that answers the apparent contradiction between what he said about R' Akiva who appointed Bar Kochba without a Prophet. Was Bar Kochba a decendant of David? Someone answer please.
--- End quote ---
in answer to some of what you wrote.
your reference to chapter 10 verse 10. Is in my book, Chapter 10 halacha 7.
Different editions number the halachot differently, and before I recall you were numbering verses when you wrote a:b, which is very unusual.
I do not see it saying that anybody who is a descendent of king david is considered a King for all eternity.
If that were true, then we would have thousands of Kings in every generation. This is absurd. Furthermore, we have had Kings, King Saul for example. He was the only King in the time of King Saul. Similarly, King David was the only King in the time of King David. They were not just one of thousands of Kings who ruled at the same time.
What RAMBAM does say, in my translation, and this is consistent with what he says later..
1:7 "......Once David was annointed King, he acquired the crown of kingship. Afterwards, the kingship belonged to him and to his male descendents forever..... Nevertheless , his acquisition of te monarchy was conditional, applying only to the righteous among his descendents.
Then 1:8 says
"If a prophet appoints a King from any other tribe of israel and that King follows the path of Torah and mitzvot..."
So a King has to be annointed.
But just incase you think that Kings of the tribe of David are not appointed.
1:10 "Only a descendent of David may be appointed as King in jerusalem".
RAMBAM does not mention the messianic King as getting appointed.. (that may be because he already said Kings are appointed in 1:3). But anyhow, the messianic king e.g. Bar Kochba, is one we PRESUME is the messiah. We are not in that situation where we have a guy fighting the wars of G-d and we presume that he is the messiah.
It does not take a genius to work this one out.
Descendents of David can be Kings. IT IS POTENTIAL.
Descendents from other tribes can be kings too. IT IS POTENTIAL
They have to be appointed though. One person, appointed!
jdl4ever:
Combine this "Once David was annointed King, he acquired the crown of kingship. Afterwards, the kingship belonged to him and to his male descendents forever..... Nevertheless , his acquisition of te monarchy was conditional, applying only to the righteous among his descendents" with what the Rambam writes at the end of the first chapter where he makes a distinction between the anointing process of a non-Davidic King and a Davidic King in the last 2 verses of Chapter one vs the other distinctions between the two types of Kings. It is possible to see from this the possibility that there is a big difference between a Davidic King and a non Davidic King and perhaps the Davidic King doesn't need both the Prophet and the Sanhedrin. As proof, David the King was appointed by only Shmuel the Prophet in secret without the Sanhedrin. Although this is not a solid proof but mere speculation. Also what the Rambam writes is that only those descendants worthy may become King; not everyone of them. How do we know who is worthy? Obviously they are appointed by the Sanhedrin who determines this. Perhaps this is an answer to the contradiction. I prefer the words of the Ramban since he makes sense. I wished the Rambam would have been clearer as to not leave any doubt as to what he meant; but I can still see the Ramban in the Rambam.
q_q_:
still regarding your previous post, (while i was writing this you posted the response above)
I do not see anything in chapter 1 or chapter 6 that says Moses or Joshua were Kings.
The commentary I have (by rabbi eliyahu touger) says it , and refers to other things the RAMBAM has written, not in hilchot melachim. I do not have these books
I notice that in chapter 6, he refers to events in Moshe`s time, and says certain things as examples are applicable to milchemet reshut. Similarly, he refers to an example in Joshua`s time, where Joshua sends out offers of peace, (there is clearly a parallel here with what a King does).
It is a good question.. I think the answer, or part of the answer might be "muhleetzah". But even if it meant that Joshua and Moshe were like Kings. it is a STRETCH (And that`s a compliment) to say that therefore we are all like Kings or the whole tribe of david are like Kings, and we do not need to be appointed.
Again, you are taking a apparent PROBLEM, a QUESTION, with the RAMBAM and making wild conclusions that are invented, and contradict alot of other things that he has said. You just ignore the other things. Like 1:3, that only a sanhedrin and a prophet can appoint a King.
Now, if Moshe and Joshua are treated a bit differently(in the RAMBAM`s description), and the Messianic King is treated a bit differently(in the RAMBAM`s description). Then they are good questions but nothing to draw wild conclusions about. Nothing to CANCEL out everything else the RAMBAM said!!! If you want to take an apparent contradiction and treat it like that, then you may as well throw the whole book out. Because you are just ignoring bits you don`t like.
jdl4ever:
There is a contradiction in the Rambam and I'm trying to answer it. It is between what he wrote about Bar Kochba and what he wrote in 1:3. It is a good question since the commentators themselves were bothered by it and it is worth trying to find an answer. My answers are pretty good attempts since they piece everything together, but are a stretch like you say. You are free to try to find better answers.
The source for the Rambam saying Joshua was considered a King is this verse in the first Chapter:
ד [ג] אין מעמידין מלך תחילה, אלא על פי בית דין של שבעים זקנים ועל פי נביא--כיהושוע שמינהו משה רבנו ובית דינו, וכשאול ודויד שמינה אותם שמואל הרמתי ובית דינו.
"4 (or 3) We don't appoint a King to begin with, unless it is on the mouth of a court of 70 elders and on the mouth of a Prophet -- like Joshua that Moses appointed and his court, and like Saul and David that Samuel appointed and his court. "
In this verse he calls Joshua a King even though he was never officially a King!
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version