וּפְלִשְׁתִּ֖ים נִלְחָמִ֣ים בְּיִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וַיָּנֻ֜סוּ אַנְשֵׁ֤י יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ מִפְּנֵ֣י פְלִשְׁתִּ֔ים וַיִּפְּל֥וּ חֲלָלִ֖ים בְּהַ֥ר הַגִּלְבֹּֽעַ׃
Ora, os filisteus pelejaram contra Israel; e os homens de Israel fugiram de diante dos filisteus, e caíram mortos no monte Gilboa.
Siftei Chakhamim
Do not run away, for running away is the beginning of downfall. Rashi is of the opinion that whoever flees ends up having a downfall because it says (Shmuel I 31:1), “And the men of Israel fled from before the Plishtim and they fell corpses in Mount Gilboa.” And so it says in Sotah (44b).
Rabbeinu Bahya
שום תשים עליך מלך, “You shall surely appoint a king over yourself.” According to the plain meaning of the text the Torah commands the people to appoint a formal king at some time in the future. It is one of the three commandments which take effect after the people enter the land of Israel (Sanhedrin 20b). Maimonides bases this on our verse here and states that the purpose of the election of this king is that he will lead the fight to exterminate Amalek (Deut. 25,19). The commandment becomes effective after G’d has given the people rest from all its surrounding enemies (ibid). The commandment to build a permanent Temple was implied in Deut. 12,8: “you shall seek out His presence, His residence.” This appointment of the king is to be accomplished before the building of the permanent Temple. Samuel makes this quite clear when he said to King Shaul: “G’d has appointed me to anoint you as king, now go and wipe out Amalek” (Samuel I 15,1). It is clear that the destruction of Amalek had to precede the building of the Temple from Samuel II 7,1-2: where David said to the prophet Natan that he thought the time had come for the Ark of the covenant to be accommodated in a building with a solid roof, seeing that he himself lived in a solid palace.
This commandment is an example of G’d accommodating Himself to the wishes of the Jewish people. G’d knew that in the foreseeable future the people would demand to be ruled by a king of flesh and blood; although, basically, G’d prefers to be the direct king of the people of Israel. Seeing that only He can traverse all their camps and benevolently supervise the fate of every individual, there certainly is no objective need for a king of flesh and blood whose reign, however well intentioned, cannot match that of G’d Himself.
This feeling that the wish of the people to have a king of flesh and blood was perceived by G’d as an insult directed at Him rather than at the prophet Samuel, was made clear to the prophet in Samuel I 8,7. Although G’d did give the people (through His prophet Samuel) King Shaul, this did not represent G’d’s first choice. In the event that we do not realise this, read Hoseah 8,4: “they have made kings, but not with My sanction; they have made officers but not of My choice.” We have an even more outspoken verse on the subject in Hoseah 13,11: “I give you kings in My anger, and take them away in My wrath.” The word באפי, “in My anger,” refers to King Shaul the first king, whereas the words ואקח בעברתי, “and I will take away in My wrath,” refer to Tzidkiyahu, last King of Yehudah. He was taken into captivity by Nevuchadnezzar who was granted permission to do that only because G’d was angry.
It would do well for us to study our history and to learn what happened to the Jewish people during the centuries when their political system was headed by a king of flesh and blood. Devarim Rabbah 5,11 sums it up in these words: the Jewish kings caused many of their people to fall in battle because of their faulty policies. Shaul caused many casualties at Gilboah (Samuel I 31,1) David caused a plague (Samuel II 24,15). Achav, King of Israel, became the cause of the three year famine (Kings I 17,1). Tzidkiyah’s policies became the immediate cause for the destruction of the Temple .
How was it that the entire people [who had experienced a tremendous renaissance under the leadership of the prophet Samuel. Ed.] agreed to ask for a king? The Talmud Sanhedrin 20 dissects the wording in Samuel I 8, pointing out that the elders of the people were motivated by pure considerations asking that the purpose of the king be “to judge us,” (rather than Samuel’s sons whom they did not consider fit). The common people were motivated by the desire for their king to be a general who would lead them in war, and their sin was in saying “like all the nations.” They spelled this out in greater detail in verse 20 of that chapter. The people were agreed that they wanted a king, but they differed regarding the tasks of that king.
This commandment is an example of G’d accommodating Himself to the wishes of the Jewish people. G’d knew that in the foreseeable future the people would demand to be ruled by a king of flesh and blood; although, basically, G’d prefers to be the direct king of the people of Israel. Seeing that only He can traverse all their camps and benevolently supervise the fate of every individual, there certainly is no objective need for a king of flesh and blood whose reign, however well intentioned, cannot match that of G’d Himself.
This feeling that the wish of the people to have a king of flesh and blood was perceived by G’d as an insult directed at Him rather than at the prophet Samuel, was made clear to the prophet in Samuel I 8,7. Although G’d did give the people (through His prophet Samuel) King Shaul, this did not represent G’d’s first choice. In the event that we do not realise this, read Hoseah 8,4: “they have made kings, but not with My sanction; they have made officers but not of My choice.” We have an even more outspoken verse on the subject in Hoseah 13,11: “I give you kings in My anger, and take them away in My wrath.” The word באפי, “in My anger,” refers to King Shaul the first king, whereas the words ואקח בעברתי, “and I will take away in My wrath,” refer to Tzidkiyahu, last King of Yehudah. He was taken into captivity by Nevuchadnezzar who was granted permission to do that only because G’d was angry.
It would do well for us to study our history and to learn what happened to the Jewish people during the centuries when their political system was headed by a king of flesh and blood. Devarim Rabbah 5,11 sums it up in these words: the Jewish kings caused many of their people to fall in battle because of their faulty policies. Shaul caused many casualties at Gilboah (Samuel I 31,1) David caused a plague (Samuel II 24,15). Achav, King of Israel, became the cause of the three year famine (Kings I 17,1). Tzidkiyah’s policies became the immediate cause for the destruction of the Temple .
How was it that the entire people [who had experienced a tremendous renaissance under the leadership of the prophet Samuel. Ed.] agreed to ask for a king? The Talmud Sanhedrin 20 dissects the wording in Samuel I 8, pointing out that the elders of the people were motivated by pure considerations asking that the purpose of the king be “to judge us,” (rather than Samuel’s sons whom they did not consider fit). The common people were motivated by the desire for their king to be a general who would lead them in war, and their sin was in saying “like all the nations.” They spelled this out in greater detail in verse 20 of that chapter. The people were agreed that they wanted a king, but they differed regarding the tasks of that king.