אֲנִי֙ פִּי־מֶ֣לֶךְ שְׁמ֔וֹר וְעַ֕ל דִּבְרַ֖ת שְׁבוּעַ֥ת אֱלֹהִֽים׃
איך זאָג: היט דעם מלכס באַפֿעל פֿון װעגן דער שבֿועה צו גאָט.
Rabbeinu Bahya
אני ה, “I am the Lord.” These words are a reminder that G’d’s stature as the Lord means that He either rewards or punishes those that observe or transgress the laws of the Torah. Wherever the words אני ה' appear they mean that the commandment they refer to is a very important commandment and that G’d is the one Who rewards or punishes people who observe it or ignore it. This is the reason that this portion concludes with these two important commandments. It is natural that a king commands his subjects to respect and honour him. He does not need to explain why he demands such obeisance. It is enough for him to remind his subjects that he is the king.
Tanchuma (Bereshit 12) in commenting on Genesis 41,44 draws a comparison for us from when Pharaoh said to Joseph: “I am Pharaoh but without you no one shall lift a hand or foot in the whole land of Egypt.” Pharaoh had already given Joseph his ring of office empowering him to exercise his authority. If the use of the word אני when spoken by a ruler who was only flesh and blood such as Pharaoh carried so much weight, imagine how much weight the word אני when spoken by G’d the ruler of the whole universe must carry. Solomon made a similar point in Kohelet 8,2 where he wrote: אני פי מלך שמור ועל דברת שבועת אלוהים, “whenever the word אני appears, I warn you to observe it carefully; it is an oath of G’d.”
Tanchuma (Bereshit 12) in commenting on Genesis 41,44 draws a comparison for us from when Pharaoh said to Joseph: “I am Pharaoh but without you no one shall lift a hand or foot in the whole land of Egypt.” Pharaoh had already given Joseph his ring of office empowering him to exercise his authority. If the use of the word אני when spoken by a ruler who was only flesh and blood such as Pharaoh carried so much weight, imagine how much weight the word אני when spoken by G’d the ruler of the whole universe must carry. Solomon made a similar point in Kohelet 8,2 where he wrote: אני פי מלך שמור ועל דברת שבועת אלוהים, “whenever the word אני appears, I warn you to observe it carefully; it is an oath of G’d.”
Rabbeinu Bahya
In this verse Solomon warns man to fear the Lord, Hashem, first and foremost, and to fear the mortal king only as someone subordinate to Hashem. He applies the same term יראה, “fear, awe,” as applicable to man’s relations with higher authority be it celestial or terrestrial. The message is: “just as you must fear the Lord Who is everywhere at all times and you must abstain from sin because you know you are being watched although you cannot see the One Who watches you, so you must be in awe of the terrestrial king even when he is not present seeing he can decree death upon you even when he personally has not seen you sin.” It is simply not possible for a mortal king to be in all parts of his domain all the time. Instead of taking advantage of his temporary absence to violate his laws you must engrave in your heart the appropriate degree of awe and fear to help you not to transgress his laws. Simply remember that this is the way you relate to the supreme authority whom you cannot see but whose eye is upon you all the time.
“Do not associate with the ones who keep changing” This is a warning not to display more fear for the visible terrestrial king (because he is visible) than for the invisible celestial king in the event the decrees of the celestial king and those of the terrestrial king are in conflict with one another. There are many people who are concerned first and foremost with what they perceive to be the danger from the local authority. They fear for their lives perceiving the power of terrestrial authority to be immediate and that of G’d to be relatively remote. Solomon warns against such perceptions and conduct based on such faulty perceptions. Seeing that G’d is not only the ultimate authority of the private citizen but also that of the terrestrial king it would be foolish to be more afraid of mortal kings than of immortal G’d. The reason that Solomon interposed the word בני, “my son,” between the word Hashem and the word king, is to emphasize the difference between the two although he had told you first to relate with “fear” to both of them. If not for this consideration, Solomon should have written: בני ירא את ה' ומלך, as he does in other similar instances when the verse commences with the word בני. The difference between G’d and a mortal king is as great as the difference between day and night.
The basic message of our verse is that fear of the terrestrial authority in the guise of a king is something absolutely necessary as otherwise earth would be in a state of chaos, anarchy. This is also why our sages (Avot 3,2) have instructed us to pray for the well being of the government (any government) as without such a government, i.e. legally appointed authority, the world would revert to tohu vavohu and people would tear each other apart as a daily occurrence.
Nonetheless, the even more important kind of fear without which the terrestrial universe would not endure is the fear vis-a-vis Hashem, the ultimate authority in the universe. The lives of all earthly kings are in His hands and terrestrial power is only delegated power. In order to remind us of all this, Solomon said in Kohelet 8,2: “I counsel you: ‘obey the king’s command and that in the manner of an oath to G’d.’”
Concerning the whole subject of how to relate to imposed authority Solomon means that he views it as important to obey the king’s laws because a king is someone who perceives himself as duty bound to observe the KING’S command. When the terrestrial king fails to honour his king’s laws, i.e. no longer views himself as bound by G’d’s laws, his subjects’ obligation to obey him is no longer valid. Sinaitic law which we accepted by means of a solemn oath precedes and therefore overrides legislation by any terrestrial king.
The Midrash (Vayikra Rabbah 33,6) understands the verse we quoted from Kohelet as follows: “I am obligated to obey the decrees of the Gentile nations who rule over me (Israel in the Diaspora) as far as their imposing taxes, head-duties, etc., is concerned. However, על דברת שבועת אלו-הים, concerning a matter which is an obligation by oath vis-a-vis G’d, I am not required to obey the king’s laws.” This is why we find that Chananyah, Mishael, and Azaryah said to Nevuchadnezzar (Daniel 3,16) “behold we are not concerned about this matter; behold there is a G’d Whom we worship — He is able to save us.” The verse had commenced with: “Shadrach, Mishach, and Abed Nego” (the Chaldaen names of Chanayah, Mishael and Azaryah) answered the king: O Nevuchadnezzar, we are not concerned, etc.” Why would the three men have been described first as answering the “king”, when in the same breath they address him by his title, i.e. as Nevuchadnezzar? Surely either one of these descriptions is enough! The fact is that they meant: “you are indeed the king over us concerning matters of taxes, etc.” But when you presume to command us to worship idols you are overstepping your authority seeing we cannot violate an oath we have taken hundreds of years before you ever were king, i.e. the oath we took at Mount Sinai.” This is the meaning of ועל דברת שבועת אלו-הים in the verse from Proverbs which we quoted at the outset.
It is a well known fact that the whole subject matter of an oath is related to fear of and reverence for the Lord. Man is not supposed to utter the name of the Lord even in an oath which testifies to the truth, much less so in an oath in which he perjures himself by using the name of the Lord. It happened once (Bamidbar Rabbah 22,1) during the reign of King Yannai, that this king who had ten thousand towns under his control lost them all (they were destroyed) due to an oath which was true. How was this possible? A person would say to his friend: “I swear by G’d that I will go to a certain place and eat such and such.” The people in these towns were in the habit of confirming all their intentions by using such a formula involving the name of the Lord. Although these people all lived up to the undertakings they had made, their towns were ruined as they should not have involved the name of the Lord unnecessarily. If this is what happens to people to swear truthfully, we can imagine what must be in store for people who swear falsely. The story teaches how very careful we must be not to render a needless oath. There is no sin as great as that of swearing falsely or merely using the name of the Lord in an unnecessary oath. Seeing that the Torah describes man’s nature as evil from birth (Genesis 8,21) and as a result he tends to be angry a lot, his anger often causes him to swear oaths about what he will not do. The Torah, in its customary manner of providing the remedy before the disease has struck, here introduces the legislation of oaths and vows and how such can be annulled by either one expert or three ordinary adults.
“Do not associate with the ones who keep changing” This is a warning not to display more fear for the visible terrestrial king (because he is visible) than for the invisible celestial king in the event the decrees of the celestial king and those of the terrestrial king are in conflict with one another. There are many people who are concerned first and foremost with what they perceive to be the danger from the local authority. They fear for their lives perceiving the power of terrestrial authority to be immediate and that of G’d to be relatively remote. Solomon warns against such perceptions and conduct based on such faulty perceptions. Seeing that G’d is not only the ultimate authority of the private citizen but also that of the terrestrial king it would be foolish to be more afraid of mortal kings than of immortal G’d. The reason that Solomon interposed the word בני, “my son,” between the word Hashem and the word king, is to emphasize the difference between the two although he had told you first to relate with “fear” to both of them. If not for this consideration, Solomon should have written: בני ירא את ה' ומלך, as he does in other similar instances when the verse commences with the word בני. The difference between G’d and a mortal king is as great as the difference between day and night.
The basic message of our verse is that fear of the terrestrial authority in the guise of a king is something absolutely necessary as otherwise earth would be in a state of chaos, anarchy. This is also why our sages (Avot 3,2) have instructed us to pray for the well being of the government (any government) as without such a government, i.e. legally appointed authority, the world would revert to tohu vavohu and people would tear each other apart as a daily occurrence.
Nonetheless, the even more important kind of fear without which the terrestrial universe would not endure is the fear vis-a-vis Hashem, the ultimate authority in the universe. The lives of all earthly kings are in His hands and terrestrial power is only delegated power. In order to remind us of all this, Solomon said in Kohelet 8,2: “I counsel you: ‘obey the king’s command and that in the manner of an oath to G’d.’”
Concerning the whole subject of how to relate to imposed authority Solomon means that he views it as important to obey the king’s laws because a king is someone who perceives himself as duty bound to observe the KING’S command. When the terrestrial king fails to honour his king’s laws, i.e. no longer views himself as bound by G’d’s laws, his subjects’ obligation to obey him is no longer valid. Sinaitic law which we accepted by means of a solemn oath precedes and therefore overrides legislation by any terrestrial king.
The Midrash (Vayikra Rabbah 33,6) understands the verse we quoted from Kohelet as follows: “I am obligated to obey the decrees of the Gentile nations who rule over me (Israel in the Diaspora) as far as their imposing taxes, head-duties, etc., is concerned. However, על דברת שבועת אלו-הים, concerning a matter which is an obligation by oath vis-a-vis G’d, I am not required to obey the king’s laws.” This is why we find that Chananyah, Mishael, and Azaryah said to Nevuchadnezzar (Daniel 3,16) “behold we are not concerned about this matter; behold there is a G’d Whom we worship — He is able to save us.” The verse had commenced with: “Shadrach, Mishach, and Abed Nego” (the Chaldaen names of Chanayah, Mishael and Azaryah) answered the king: O Nevuchadnezzar, we are not concerned, etc.” Why would the three men have been described first as answering the “king”, when in the same breath they address him by his title, i.e. as Nevuchadnezzar? Surely either one of these descriptions is enough! The fact is that they meant: “you are indeed the king over us concerning matters of taxes, etc.” But when you presume to command us to worship idols you are overstepping your authority seeing we cannot violate an oath we have taken hundreds of years before you ever were king, i.e. the oath we took at Mount Sinai.” This is the meaning of ועל דברת שבועת אלו-הים in the verse from Proverbs which we quoted at the outset.
It is a well known fact that the whole subject matter of an oath is related to fear of and reverence for the Lord. Man is not supposed to utter the name of the Lord even in an oath which testifies to the truth, much less so in an oath in which he perjures himself by using the name of the Lord. It happened once (Bamidbar Rabbah 22,1) during the reign of King Yannai, that this king who had ten thousand towns under his control lost them all (they were destroyed) due to an oath which was true. How was this possible? A person would say to his friend: “I swear by G’d that I will go to a certain place and eat such and such.” The people in these towns were in the habit of confirming all their intentions by using such a formula involving the name of the Lord. Although these people all lived up to the undertakings they had made, their towns were ruined as they should not have involved the name of the Lord unnecessarily. If this is what happens to people to swear truthfully, we can imagine what must be in store for people who swear falsely. The story teaches how very careful we must be not to render a needless oath. There is no sin as great as that of swearing falsely or merely using the name of the Lord in an unnecessary oath. Seeing that the Torah describes man’s nature as evil from birth (Genesis 8,21) and as a result he tends to be angry a lot, his anger often causes him to swear oaths about what he will not do. The Torah, in its customary manner of providing the remedy before the disease has struck, here introduces the legislation of oaths and vows and how such can be annulled by either one expert or three ordinary adults.
From David to Destruction
Da’at Mikra notes that Navot HaYizre’eili does not exercise prudent caution in his interaction with the unscrupulous Achav. Da’at Mikra notes that Shlomo HaMelech advises to “keep the king's command” (Kohelet 8:2) to “fear both the Hashem and king” (Mishlei 24:21). Accordingly, we begin to see that Navot is not entirely innocent in this situation.