סנהדרין כא ע"ב - כב ע"א

מתני׳ לא ירבה לו סוסים אלא כדי מרכבתו וכסף וזהב לא ירבה לו מאד אלא כדי ליתן אספניא וכותב לו ס"ת לשמו יוצא למלחמה מוציאה עמה נכנס הוא מכניסה עמו יושב בדין היא עמו מיסב היא כנגדו שנאמר (דברים יז, יט) והיתה עמו וקרא בו כל ימי חייו: גמ׳ תנו רבנן (דברים יז, טז) לא ירבה לו סוסים יכול אפילו כדי מרכבתו ופרשיו תלמוד לומר לו לו אינו מרבה אבל מרבה הוא כדי רכבו ופרשיו הא מה אני מקיים סוסים סוסים הבטלנין מניין שאפילו סוס א' והוא בטל שהוא בלא ירבה ת"ל (דברים יז, טז) למען הרבות סוס וכי מאחר דאפילו סוס אחד והוא בטל קאי בלא ירבה סוסים למה לי לעבור בל"ת על כל סוס וסוס טעמא דכתב רחמנא לו הא לאו הכי ה"א אפילו כדי רכבו ופרשיו נמי לא לא צריכא לאפושי: וכסף וזהב לא ירבה לו אלא כדי ליתן אספניא: ת"ר (דברים יז, יז) וכסף וזהב לא ירבה לו יכול אפילו כדי ליתן אספניא ת"ל לו לו אינו מרבה אבל מרבה הוא כדי ליתן אספניא טעמא דכתב רחמנא לו הא לאו הכי הוה אמינא אפילו כדי ליתן אספניא נמי לא לא צריכא להרווחה השתא דאמרת לו לדרשה (דברים יז, יז) לא ירבה לו נשים מאי דרשת ביה למעוטי הדיוטות רב יהודה רמי כתיב (מלכים א ה, ו) ויהי לשלמה ארבעים אלף ארוות סוסים למרכבתו וכתיב (דברי הימים ב ט, כה) ויהי לשלמה ארבעת אלפים (ארוות) סוסים הא כיצד אם ארבעים אלף איצטבלאות היו כל אחד ואחד היו בו ד' אלפים ארוות סוסים ואם ד' אלפים איצטבלאות היו כל אחד ואחד היו בו ארבעים אלף ארוות סוסים (רבי) יצחק רמי כתיב (דברי הימים ב ט, כ) אין כסף נחשב בימי שלמה למאומה וכתיב (מלכים א י, כז) ויתן) שלמה את הכסף בירושלים כאבנים לא קשיא כאן קודם שנשא שלמה את בת פרעה כאן לאחר שנשא שלמה את בת פרעה אמר רבי יצחק בשעה שנשא שלמה את בת פרעה ירד גבריאל ונעץ קנה בים והעלה שירטון ועליו נבנה כרך גדול שברומי ואמר ר' יצחק מפני מה לא נתגלו טעמי תורה שהרי שתי מקראות נתגלו טעמן נכשל בהן גדול העולם כתיב (דברים יז, יז) לא ירבה לו נשים אמר שלמה אני ארבה ולא אסור וכתיב (מלכים א יא, ד) ויהי לעת זקנת שלמה נשיו הטו את לבבו וכתיב (דברים יז, טז) לא ירבה לו סוסים ואמר שלמה אני ארבה ולא אשיב וכתיב (מלכים א י, כט) ותצא מרכבה ממצרים בשש וגו': וכותב ספר תורה לשמו: תנא ובלבד שלא יתנאה בשל אבותיו אמר (רבא) אף על פי שהניחו לו אבותיו לאדם ספר תורה מצוה לכתוב משלו שנאמר (דברים לא, יט) ועתה כתבו לכם את השירה איתיביה אביי

וכותב לו ספר תורה לשמו שלא יתנאה בשל אחרים מלך אין הדיוט לא לא צריכא לשתי תורות וכדתניא (דברים יז, יח) וכתב לו את משנה וגו' כותב לשמו שתי תורות אחת שהיא יוצאה ונכנסת עמו ואחת שמונחת לו בבית גנזיו אותה שיוצאה ונכנסת עמו (עושה אותה כמין קמיע ותולה בזרועו שנאמר (תהלים טז, ח) שויתי ה' לנגדי תמיד כי מימיני בל אמוט) אינו נכנס בה לא לבית המרחץ ולא לבית הכסא שנאמר (דברים יז, יט) והיתה עמו וקרא בו מקום הראוי לקראות בו

אמר מר זוטרא ואיתימא מר עוקבא בתחלה ניתנה תורה לישראל בכתב עברי ולשון הקודש חזרה וניתנה להם בימי עזרא בכתב אשורית ולשון ארמי ביררו להן לישראל כתב אשורית ולשון הקודש והניחו להדיוטות כתב עברית ולשון ארמי מאן הדיוטות אמר רב חסדא כותאי מאי כתב עברית אמר רב חסדא כתב ליבונאה תניא רבי יוסי אומר ראוי היה עזרא שתינתן תורה על ידו לישראל אילמלא (לא) קדמו משה במשה הוא אומר (שמות יט, ג) ומשה עלה אל האלהים בעזרא הוא אומר (עזרא ז, ו) הוא עזרא עלה מבבל מה עלייה האמור כאן תורה אף עלייה האמור להלן תורה במשה הוא אומר (דברים ד, יד) ואותי צוה ה' בעת ההיא ללמד אתכם חקים ומשפטים בעזרא הוא אומר (עזרא ז, י) כי עזרא הכין לבבו לדרוש את תורת ה' (אלהיו) ולעשות וללמד בישראל חוק ומשפט ואף על פי שלא ניתנה תורה על ידו נשתנה על ידו הכתב שנאמר

Sanhedrin 21b

about seclusion, that a man should not be secluded with women who are forbidden to him, and about a single woman. The Gemara objects: Seclusion with a woman forbidden by familial ties is prohibited by Torah law, and was not a rabbinic decree issued in the time of David. As Rabbi Yoḥanan says in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yehotzadak: From where is there an allusion to the halakha that seclusion is forbidden by Torah law? As it is stated: “If your brother, the son of your mother, entices you” (Deuteronomy 13:7). One can ask: But does the son of a mother entice, and does the son of a father not entice? Why mention only the son of a mother? Rather, this verse serves to tell you that only a son may be secluded with his mother. Sons are frequently with their mother, and two half-brothers of one mother consequently have the opportunity to grow close to one another. But another individual may not be secluded with those with whom relations are forbidden by the Torah, including a stepmother. Therefore, half-brothers of one father spend less time together. Since seclusion, then, is prohibited by Torah law, how did Rav say that it was prohibited by a decree issued in King David’s time? Rather, say that they decreed against seclusion of a man with a single woman, to prevent occurrences like that of Amnon and Tamar. Apropos Amnon, the Gemara cites traditions about another son of David: “Now Adonijah, son of Haggith, exalted himself, saying: I will be king” (I Kings 1:5). Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: The term “exalted himself” teaches that he sought for the monarchy to fit him, but it did not fit him. The verse continues: “And he prepared for himself chariots and riders and fifty people to run before him” (I Kings 1:5). The Gemara asks: What is the novelty of these actions, since other wealthy people do the same, even if they are not the sons of kings, with designs on the throne? Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: What was unique was that the runners all had their spleens removed and had the soles of their feet hollowed, removing the flesh of their feet, and these two procedures enhanced their speed. MISHNA: The king “shall not accumulate many horses for himself” (Deuteronomy 17:16), but only enough for his chariot in war and in peace. “Neither shall he greatly accumulate silver and gold for himself” (Deuteronomy 17:17), but only enough to provide his soldiers’ sustenance [aspanya]. And the king writes himself a Torah scroll for his sake, as stipulated in Deuteronomy 17:18. When he goes out to war, he brings it out with him. When he comes in from war, he brings it in with him. When he sits in judgment, it is with him. When he reclines to eat, it is opposite him, as it is stated: “And it shall be with him and he shall read it all the days of his life” (Deuteronomy 17:19). GEMARA: The Sages taught in a baraita with regard to the verse: “He shall not accumulate many horses [susim] for himself nor return the people to Egypt for the sake of accumulating horses [sus]” (Deuteronomy 17:16): One might have thought that he shall not have even enough horses for his chariot and riders. Therefore, the verse states: “For himself,” teaching that only if the horses are for himself, for personal pleasure, he shall not accumulate them, but he may accumulate horses for his chariot and riders. How, then, do I realize the meaning of “horses [susim]” in the verse? It is referring to idle horses, which serve no purpose other than glorifying the king. From where is it derived that even if the king has one horse that is idle, that he transgresses “he shall not accumulate”? The verse states: “For the sake of accumulating horses [sus],” with the term for horses written in the singular. The Gemara asks: But once the verse taught that even one horse that is idle stands to be included in the prohibition of “he shall not accumulate,” why do I need the plural form “horses” in the first clause of the verse? The Gemara responds: Its purpose is to teach that a king would transgress the prohibition an additional time for each and every idle horse. The Gemara questions this ruling: The specific reason for limiting the prohibition to idle horses is that the Merciful One writes: “He shall not accumulate for himself,” which indicates, consequently, that if the Torah had not written this, I would say that even enough horses for his chariot and riders are not permitted; and this is unreasonable, since the king needs an army. The Gemara responds: No, the term “for himself” is necessary to teach that it is permitted for the king to add a reasonable number of horses beyond the necessary minimum, and it is only strictly personal use that is prohibited. The mishna teaches: “Neither shall he greatly accumulate silver and gold for himself” (Deuteronomy 17:17), but only enough to provide his soldiers’ sustenance. The Sages taught in a baraita: From the command “neither shall he greatly accumulate silver and gold for himself,” one might have thought that he should not have even enough to provide his soldiers’ sustenance. To counter this, the verse states: “For himself,” teaching that only if the silver and gold is for himself, for personal pleasure, he shall not accumulate it, but he may accumulate enough silver and gold to provide his soldiers’ sustenance. The Gemara questions this ruling: The specific reason for limiting the prohibition to personal wealth accumulation is that the Merciful One writes: “Neither shall he greatly accumulate silver and gold for himself,” which indicates, consequently, that if the Torah had not written this, I would say that it is not permitted for the king to accumulate even enough silver and gold to provide his soldiers’ sustenance; this is unreasonable, since the king needs an army. The Gemara responds: No, the term “for himself” is necessary to teach that the king is permitted to allow for a liberal appropriation to the military budget, so that the army has a comfortable financial cushion. The Gemara asks: Now that you have said that the term “for himself” in the verse is stated for the purpose of a derivation for practical halakha, which limits and narrows the verse’s scope, what do you derive from the next phrase in the verse: “He shall not add many wives for himself”? The Gemara answers: That usage of “for himself” serves to exclude ordinary people, to specify that only the king is restricted from having many wives, but a civilian may marry as many women as he wants, provided he can support them financially. § Rav Yehuda raises a contradiction: It is written in one verse: “And Solomon had forty thousand stalls of horses for his chariots” (I Kings 5:6), and it is written in another verse: “And Solomon had four thousand stalls for horses and chariots” (II Chronicles 9:25). How can these texts be reconciled? If there were forty thousand large stables [itztablaot], each and every one of them had in it four thousand stalls, or rows, for horses. And alternatively, if there were four thousand large stables, each and every one had in it forty thousand stalls for horses. Therefore the two verses are reconciled. Rabbi Yitzḥak raises a contradiction: It is written in one verse: “Silver was not worth anything in the days of Solomon” (II Chronicles 9:20), and it is written in another verse: “And the king made silver in Jerusalem as stones” (I Kings 10:27), i.e., gems. The Gemara responds: It is not difficult: Here, where silver was worthless, this was before Solomon sinfully married Pharaoh’s daughter. There, where the silver was valuable, this was after Solomon married Pharaoh’s daughter. Rabbi Yitzḥak says: When Solomon married Pharaoh’s daughter, the angel Gabriel descended from Heaven and implanted a pole in the sea. And it gradually raised up a sandbar [sirton] around it, creating new, dry land, and on it the great city of Rome was built. This shows that the beginning of the Jewish people’s downfall to Rome came with Solomon’s marriage to Pharaoh’s daughter. And Rabbi Yitzḥak says: For what reason were the rationales of Torah commandments not revealed? It was because the rationales of two verses were revealed, and the greatest in the world, King Solomon, failed in those matters. It is written with regard to a king: “He shall not add many wives for himself, that his heart should not turn away” (Deuteronomy 17:17). Solomon said: I will add many, but I will not turn away, as he thought that it is permitted to have many wives if one is otherwise meticulous not to stray. And later, it is written: “For it came to pass, when Solomon was old, that his wives turned away his heart after other gods” (I Kings 11:4). And it is also written: “Only he shall not accumulate many horses for himself nor return the people to Egypt for the sake of accumulating horses” (Deuteronomy 17:16), and Solomon said: I will accumulate many, but I will not return. And it is written: “And a chariot came up and went out of Egypt for six hundred shekels of silver” (I Kings 10:29), teaching that not only did Solomon violate the Torah, but he also failed in applying the rationale given for its commandments. This demonstrates the wisdom in the Torah’s usual silence as to the rationale for its mitzvot, as individuals will not mistakenly rely on their own wisdom to reason that the mitzvot are inapplicable in some circumstances. § The mishna teaches that the king writes a Torah scroll for his sake. The Sages taught in a baraita (Tosefta 4:4): The king fulfills the mitzva provided that he does not beautify himself with the Torah scroll of his ancestors for this purpose, i.e., he must write his own scroll. Rava says: With regard to the mitzva for every Jew to write himself a Torah scroll, even if a person’s ancestors left him a Torah scroll, it is a mitzva to write a scroll of one’s own, as it is stated: “Now, therefore, write for yourselves this song and teach it to the children of Israel” (Deuteronomy 31:19). Abaye raised an objection to him from a baraita concerning the king’s Torah scroll: And he writes himself a Torah scroll for his sake, so that he does not beautify himself with the Torah scroll of others. Read precisely, this indicates that a king, yes, he is included in the halakha not to have a scroll inherited from his ancestors suffice, but an ordinary person is not. The Gemara dismisses Abaye’s objection: No, the ruling of that baraita is necessary to teach that the king is commanded to write two Torah scrolls; he writes one scroll as does any Jew, and he writes an additional scroll because he is king. And this is as it is taught in a baraita: The verse states: “That he shall write for himself a second Torah in a scroll, out of that which is before the priests the Levites” (Deuteronomy 17:18). This teaches that he writes for his sake two Torah scrolls, one that goes out and comes in with him at all times, and one that is placed in his treasury. The baraita continues: With regard to the one that goes out and comes in with him, he makes it very small, like an amulet, and he hangs it on his arm, as it is stated: “I have set the Lord always before me; He is at my right hand, that I shall not be moved” (Psalms 16:8). This alludes to the small Torah scroll that is always on his right hand. He does not go into the bathhouse with it, nor into the bathroom, as it is stated: “And it shall be with him and he shall read from it” (Deuteronomy 17:19), meaning, it shall remain in a place that is appropriate for reading from it. § Mar Zutra says, and some say that it is Mar Ukva who says: Initially, the Torah was given to the Jewish people in Ivrit script, the original form of the written language, and the sacred tongue, Hebrew. It was given to them again in the days of Ezra in Ashurit script and the Aramaic tongue. The Jewish people selected Ashurit script and the sacred tongue for the Torah scroll and left Ivrit script and the Aramaic tongue for the commoners. The Gemara asks: Who are these commoners? Rav Ḥisda said: The Samaritans [Kutim]. The Gemara asks: What is Ivrit script? Rav Ḥisda says: Libona’a script. It is taught in a baraita (Tosefta 4:5): Rabbi Yosei says: Ezra was suitable, given his greatness, for the Torah to be given by him to the Jewish people, had Moses not come first and received the Torah already. With regard to Moses the verse states: “And Moses went up to God” (Exodus 19:3), and with regard to Ezra the verse states: “This Ezra went up from Babylon and he was a ready scribe in the Torah of Moses, which the Lord, the God of Israel, had given” (Ezra 7:6). Just as the going up stated here, with regard to Moses, is for the Torah, which he received from God and transmitted to the Jewish people, so too, the going up stated there, with regard to Ezra, is for the Torah, as he taught Torah to the Jewish people and was suitable to have originally merited to give it. The baraita continues: With regard to Moses the verse states: “And the Lord commanded me at that time to teach you statutes and ordinances” (Deuteronomy 4:14), and with regard to Ezra the verse states: “For Ezra had set his heart to seek the Torah of the Lord his God and to do it and to teach in Israel statutes and ordinances” (Ezra 7:10). And even though the Torah was not given literally by him, the script of the Torah was changed by him, as it is stated:

סנהדרין כ״ב א

(עזרא ד, ז) וכתב הנשתוון כתוב ארמית ומתורגם ארמית וכתיב (דניאל ה, ח) לא כהלין כתבא למיקרא ופשרא להודעא למלכא וכתיב (דברים יז, יח) וכתב את משנה התורה הזאת כתב הראוי להשתנות למה נקרא אשורית שעלה עמהם מאשור תניא רבי אומר בתחלה בכתב זה ניתנה תורה לישראל כיון שחטאו נהפך להן לרועץ כיון שחזרו בהן החזירו להם שנאמר (זכריה ט, יב) שובו לביצרון אסירי התקוה גם היום מגיד משנה אשיב לך למה נקרא שמה אשורית שמאושרת בכתב רשב"א אומר משום ר' אליעזר בן פרטא שאמר משום רבי אלעזר המודעי כתב זה לא נשתנה כל עיקר שנאמר (שמות כז, י) ווי העמודים מה עמודים לא נשתנו אף ווים לא נשתנו ואומר (אסתר ח, ט) ואל היהודים ככתבם וכלשונם מה לשונם לא נשתנה אף כתבם לא נשתנה אלא מה אני מקיים את משנה התורה הזאת לשתי תורות אחת שיוצאה ונכנסת עמו ואחת שמונחת לו בבית גנזיו אותה שיוצאה ונכנסת עמו עושה אותה כמין קמיע ותולה בזרועו שנאמר (תהלים טז, ח) שויתי ה' לנגדי תמיד ואידך האי שויתי מאי דריש ביה ההוא מיבעי ליה כדרב חנה בר ביזנא דאמר רב חנה בר ביזנא אר"ש חסידא המתפלל צריך שיראה עצמו כאילו שכינה כנגדו שנאמר שויתי ה' לנגדי תמיד לר"ש דאמר כתב זה לא נשתנה מאי לא כהלין כתבא למיקרא אמר רב בגימטריא איכתיב להון יטת יטת אידך פוגחמט מאי פריש להו (דניאל ה, כה) מנא מנא תקל ופרסין מנא מנא אלהא מלכותך (והשלמת לך) תקיל תקילתא במאזניא והשתכחת חסיר (פרסין) פריסת מלכותך ויהיבת למדי ופרס ושמואל אמר ממתוס ננקפי אאלרן ור' יוחנן אמר אנם אנם לקת ניסרפו רב אשי אמר נמא נמא קתל פורסין: מתני׳ אין רוכבין על סוסו ואין יושבין על כסאו ואין משתמשין בשרביטו ואין רואין אותו כשהוא מסתפר ולא כשהוא ערום ולא כשהוא בבית המרחץ שנאמר (דברים יז, טו) שום תשים עליך מלך שתהא אימתו עליך:

Sanhedrin 22a

“And the writing of the letter [hannishtevan] was written in the Aramaic script, and set forth in the Aramaic tongue” (Ezra 4:7). The term “hannishtevan” is similar to the word nishtana, meaning changed, alluding to the fact that the script had been changed. And it is written with regard to the writing on the wall of Belshazzar’s palace: “Then came in all the king’s wise men. But they could not read the writing, nor make known to the king the interpretation” (Daniel 5:8), and the reason they could not read it is that it was written in the new script that Ezra would transmit. And it is written: “That he shall write for himself a second [mishne] Torah” (Deuteronomy 17:18), where “second [mishne]” teaches that it is written in a script that is apt to be changed [lehishtannot]. The baraita continues: Why is this script called Ashurit? Because it ascended with the Jewish people from Ashur when they returned from their exile in Babylonia. It is taught in a baraita (Tosefta 4:5): Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi says: Initially, the Torah was given to the Jewish people in this script, Ashurit, which is in use today. Once the Jewish people sinned, it turned into an impairment for them and they began writing with a different script, Libona’a. Once they repented, the first script was returned to them, and they resumed writing with Ashurit script, as it is stated: “Return to the stronghold, you prisoners of hope; even today do I declare that I will render double [mishne] unto you” (Zechariah 9:12), meaning that God restored to the Jewish people this script that had been changed [nishtanna]. The baraita continues: If this script predates the exile to Babylonia, why is it called Ashurit? Because it is meusheret, beautiful and straight, in script. The baraita continues: Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says in the name of Rabbi Eliezer ben Perata, who said in the name of Rabbi Elazar HaModa’i: This script did not change at all, as it is stated with regard to the construction of the Tabernacle: “The hooks of [vavei] the poles” (Exodus 27:10). This teaches that just as the poles were not changed, so too, the hooks [vavim] were not changed. The letter vav in Ashurit script has the shape of a hook. Evidently, this is why the term for hook in the Torah is vav. And the verse states: “And to the Jews according to their script and according to their language” (Esther 8:9). This teaches that just as their language was not changed over the generations but remained Hebrew, so too, their script was not changed. The baraita continues: But if the script was in fact not changed, how do I realize the meaning of the phrase “a second [mishne] Torah” (Deuteronomy 17:18)? This serves to teach the halakha concerning the two Torah scrolls that the king writes, one that goes out and comes in with him, and one that is placed in his treasury. With regard to the one that goes out and comes in with him, he makes it very small, like an amulet, and he hangs it on his arm. As it is stated by King David: “I have set the Lord always before me; He is at my right hand, that I shall not be moved” (Psalms 16:8). This verse alludes to the two Torah scrolls, one that is before him and one that is in his right hand. The Gemara asks: And with regard to the other Sage, i.e., Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, who does not hold that the king must write and affix the second scroll to his arm, what does he expound from that verse: “I have set” (Psalms 16:8)? The Gemara responds: He requires that verse in accordance with the statement of Rav Ḥana bar Bizna, as Rav Ḥana bar Bizna says that Rabbi Shimon Ḥasida says: One who prays needs to see himself as if the Divine Presence is opposite him, as it is stated: “I have set the Lord always before me” (Psalms 16:8). The Gemara asks: According to Rabbi Shimon, who says that this script was not changed at all, what is the reason “they could not read the writing” (Daniel 5:8)? Rav says: Because it was written for them in the obscure code of gimatriyya. It was written: Yod, tet, tav; yod, tet, tav; alef, yod, dalet, khaf; peh, vav, gimmel, ḥet, mem, tet. These letters correspond with: Mem, nun, alef; mem, nun, alef; tav, kuf, lamed; vav, peh, reish, samekh, yod, nun; this is based on the exchange of letters known as at bash, or the exchanging of a letter with its counterpart in the opposite place in the alphabet, e.g., alef, the first letter, for tav, the last letter. What did Daniel explain to them? The letters stand for the terms: “Mene mene tekel ufarsin” (Daniel 5:25). He then explained the meaning: “Mene”: God has numbered [mena] the days of your kingdom and brought it to an end. “Tekel”: You are weighed [tekilta] on the scale and are found lacking. “Parsin”: Your kingdom is divided [perisat] and given to the Medes and Persians” (Daniel 5:26–28). And Shmuel says: The writing used the correct letters for those terms, but instead of being written in order, the four words, mene mene tekel ufarsin were written vertically and were therefore meant to be read from the top down. If read in the usual way, from right to left, it says: “Mamtos nankafei a’alran.” And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Each word was written backward, so that read right to left, they spelled, Anem anem leket nisrapu. Rav Ashi says: They were written with the first two letters of each word reversed: Nema nema ketal pursin. MISHNA: One may not ride on the king’s horse, and one may not sit on his throne, and one may not use his scepter, and one may not see him when he is having his hair cut, nor when he is naked, nor when he is in the bathhouse, as it is stated: “You shall set a king over you” (Deuteronomy 17:15), meaning, ensure that his fear should be upon you. All of these actions would lessen one’s fear of and reverence for the king. GEMARA: Rav Ya’akov says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: Abishag the Shunammite was permitted to Solomon but forbidden to Adonijah, who in fact wanted to marry her. She was permitted to Solomon, as he was a king, and a king may use the scepter of a king. Abishag’s status was similar to the king’s scepter, as she had been designated to serve King David. She was forbidden to Adonijah, as he was an ordinary person, not a king. The Gemara clarifies: The story of Abishag, what is it? As it is written: “Now King David was old and stricken in years…and his servants said to him, let there be sought…a young virgin…and let her lie in your bosom, that my lord the king may get heat” (I Kings 1:1–2); and it is written: “So they sought for a beautiful maiden…and found Abishag” (I Kings 1:1–3); and it is written: “And the maiden was very beautiful and she became a companion to the king and ministered to him, but the king did not know her” (I Kings 1:1–4). Abishag said to King David: Marry me. King David said to her: You are forbidden to me, as I already have eighteen wives. Abishag said to him: When the thief is lacking what to steal, he makes himself like a man of peace. In other words, she was saying that since King David was physically unable to engage in intercourse, he devised an excuse not to marry her. King David said to his attendants: Call Bathsheba to me. And it is written: “And Bathsheba went in to the king into the chamber; now the king was very old and Abishag the Shunammite ministered to the king” (I Kings 1:15). Rav Yehuda says that Rav says: At that time, Bathsheba wiped herself with thirteen cloths, corresponding to the number of words in the verse, indicating that she engaged in intercourse with King David thirteen times. Rav Shemen bar Abba says: Come and see how severe a matter divorce is, as they rendered it permitted for King David to be secluded with Abishag without marrying her, but they did not render it permitted for him to divorce one of his wives to enable him to marry Abishag. § Rabbi Eliezer says: Concerning anyone who divorces his first wife, even the altar sheds tears about him, as it is stated: “And further, this you should do: Cover the altar of the Lord with tears, with weeping and sighing, from His no longer showing regard to the offering, nor receiving it with goodwill from your hand” (Malachi 2:13), and it is written: “Yet you say: Why? Because the Lord has been witness between you and the wife of your youth, against whom you have dealt treacherously, though she is your companion and the wife of your covenant” (Malachi 2:14). Rabbi Yoḥanan, and some say Rabbi Elazar, says: A man’s wife does not die unless his creditors ask him for money that he owes and he does not have it, as it is stated: “If you do not have with what to pay, why should he take away your bed from under you?” (Proverbs 22:27). The bed mentioned in the verse alludes to one’s wife. And Rabbi Yoḥanan says: For any man whose first wife dies, it is as if the Temple were destroyed in his days, as it is stated: “Son of man, behold, I take away from you the desire of your eyes with a stroke; yet neither shall you make lamentation nor weep, neither shall your tears run down” (Ezekiel 24:16). And it is written: “So I spoke to the people in the morning and in the evening my wife died” (Ezekiel 24:18). And it is written in the continuation of the same passage: “Behold I will profane My Sanctuary, the pride of your power, the desire of your eyes” (Ezekiel 24:21), illustrating that a man’s wife is as precious to him as the Temple is for the entire Jewish nation. Rabbi Alexandri says: For any man whose wife dies in his days, the world is dark for him, as it is stated: “The light shall be dark in his tent and his lamp over him shall be put out” (Job 18:6), since the word tent is commonly employed as a metonym for a wife. Rabbi Yosei bar Ḥanina says: His steps get shorter, as it is stated: “The steps of his strength shall be constrained” (Job 18:7). Rabbi Abbahu says: His counsel falls, as it is stated: “And his own counsel shall cast him down” (Job 18:7). Rabba bar bar Ḥana says that Rabbi Yoḥanan says: It is as difficult to match a couple as the splitting of the Red Sea, as it is stated: “God makes the solitary dwell in a house; He brings out prisoners into prosperity” (Psalms 68:7). Do not read the verse as “brings out prisoners”; rather, read it as: Like bringing out prisoners. Accordingly, the act described in the first clause of the verse, God’s causing the solitary to dwell in a house, i.e., to marry, is compared to the act described in the next clause in the verse, i.e., bringing out prisoners. And do not read the verse as “into prosperity [bakkosharot]”; rather, read it as: Crying and singing [bekhi veshirot], which alludes to the splitting of the Red Sea, when there was both crying and singing. The Gemara asks: Is that so that it is this difficult to find a match? But doesn’t Rav Yehuda say that Rav says: Forty days before the formation of the fetus a Divine Voice emerges and states: The daughter of so-and-so shall be the wife of so-and-so? Why should matching them be so difficult, since they are prepared for this from before their birth? The Gemara responds: This is not difficult. This latter statement, about predestined matches, is stated with regard to the first match; that former statement, about the difficulty of matchmaking, is stated with regard to the second match. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman says: For everything that is lost there is a substitute, except for one’s wife from youth who dies, as it is stated: “And a wife from youth, can she be rejected?” (Isaiah 54:6). Rav Yehuda taught Rav Yitzḥak, his son: A man finds calmness of spirit only from his first wife, as it is stated: “Let your fountain be blessed and have joy with the wife of

משנה תורה, הלכות מלכים ומלחמות ג׳

(א) בְּעֵת שֶׁיֵּשֵׁב הַמֶּלֶךְ עַל כִּסֵּא מַלְכוּתוֹ כּוֹתֵב לוֹ סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה לְעַצְמוֹ יֶתֶר עַל הַסֵּפֶר שֶׁהִנִּיחוּ לוֹ אֲבוֹתָיו. וּמַגִּיהוֹ מִסֵּפֶר הָעֲזָרָה עַל פִּי בֵּית דִּין שֶׁל שִׁבְעִים וְאֶחָד. אִם לֹא הִנִּיחוּ לוֹ אֲבוֹתָיו אוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱבַד כּוֹתֵב שְׁנֵי סִפְרֵי תּוֹרָה. אֶחָד מַנִּיחוֹ בְּבֵית גְּנָזָיו שֶׁהוּא מְצֻוֶּה בּוֹ כְּכָל אֶחָד מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל. וְהַשֵּׁנִי לֹא יָזוּז מִלְּפָנָיו אֶלָּא בְּעֵת שֶׁיִּכָּנֵס לְבֵית הַכִּסֵּא. אוֹ לְבֵית הַמֶּרְחָץ. אוֹ לְמָקוֹם שֶׁאֵין רָאוּי לִקְרִיאָה. יוֹצֵא לַמִּלְחָמָה וְהוּא עִמּוֹ. נִכְנָס וְהוּא עִמּוֹ. יוֹשֵׁב בַּדִּין וְהוּא עִמּוֹ. מֵסֵב וְהוּא כְּנֶגְדּוֹ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יז יט) "וְהָיְתָה עִמּוֹ וְקָרָא בוֹ כָּל יְמֵי חַיָּיו":

(ב) לֹא יַרְבֶּה לוֹ נָשִׁים. מִפִּי הַשְּׁמוּעָה לָמְדוּ שֶׁהוּא לוֹקֵחַ עַד שְׁמוֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה נָשִׁים בֵּין הַנָּשִׁים וּפִלַּגְשִׁים הַכּל שְׁמוֹנֶה עֶשְׂרֵה. וְאִם הוֹסִיף אַחַת וּבְעָלָהּ לוֹקֶה. וְיֵשׁ לוֹ לְגָרֵשׁ וְלִשָּׂא אַחֶרֶת תַּחַת זוֹ שֶׁגֵּרֵשׁ:

(ג) וְלֹא יַרְבֶּה לוֹ סוּסִים אֶלָּא כְּדֵי מֶרְכַּבְתּוֹ. אֲפִלּוּ סוּס אֶחָד פָּנוּי לִהְיוֹת רָץ לְפָנָיו כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁעוֹשִׂין שְׁאָר הַמְּלָכִים אָסוּר. וְאִם הוֹסִיף לוֹקֶה:

(ד) וְלֹא יַרְבֶּה לוֹ כֶּסֶף וְזָהָב לְהַנִּיחַ בִּגְנָזָיו וּלְהִתְגָּאוֹת בּוֹ אוֹ לְהִתְנָאוֹת בּוֹ. אֶלָּא כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּתֵּן לְחֵילוֹתָיו וְלַעֲבָדָיו וּלְשַׁמָּשָׁיו. וְכָל כֶּסֶף וְזָהָב שֶׁיַּרְבֶּה לְאוֹצַר בֵּית ה' וְלִהְיוֹת שָׁם מוּכָן לְצָרְכֵי הַצִּבּוּר וּלְמִלְחֲמוֹתָם הֲרֵי זֶה מִצְוָה לְהַרְבּוֹתוֹ. וְאֵין אָסוּר אֶלָּא לְהַרְבּוֹת לְעַצְמוֹ בְּבֵית גְּנָזָיו שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יז יז) "וְלֹא יַרְבֶּה לּוֹ". וְאִם הִרְבָּה לוֹקֶה:

(ה) הַמֶּלֶךְ אָסוּר לִשְׁתּוֹת דֶּרֶךְ שִׁכְרוּת. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (משלי לא ד) "אַל לַמְלָכִים שְׁתוֹ יָיִן". אֶלָּא יִהְיֶה עוֹסֵק בַּתּוֹרָה וּבְצָרְכֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בַּיּוֹם וּבַלַּיְלָה. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יז יט) "וְהָיְתָה עִמּוֹ וְקָרָא בוֹ כָּל יְמֵי חַיָּיו":

(ו) וְכֵן לֹא יִהְיֶה שָׁטוּף בְּנָשִׁים. אֲפִלּוּ לֹא הָיְתָה לוֹ אֶלָּא אַחַת לֹא יִהְיֶה מָצוּי אֶצְלָהּ תָּמִיד כִּשְׁאָר הַטִּפְּשִׁים. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (משלי לא ג) "אַל תִּתֵּן לַנָּשִׁים חֵילֶךָ". עַל הֲסָרַת לִבּוֹ הִקְפִּידָה תּוֹרָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יז יז) "וְלֹא יָסוּר לְבָבוֹ". שֶׁלִּבּוֹ הוּא לֵב כָּל קְהַל יִשְׂרָאֵל לְפִיכָךְ דִּבְּקוֹ הַכָּתוּב בַּתּוֹרָה יֶתֶר מִשְּׁאָר הָעָם שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים יז יט) "כָּל יְמֵי חַיָּיו":

(ז) כְּבָר בֵּאַרְנוּ שֶׁמַּלְכֵי בֵּית דָּוִד דָּנִין אוֹתָן וּמְעִידִין עֲלֵיהֶן. אֲבָל מַלְכֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל גָּזְרוּ חֲכָמִים שֶׁלֹּא יָדוּן וְלֹא דָּנִין אוֹתוֹ. וְלֹא מֵעִיד וְלֹא מְעִידִין עָלָיו. מִפְּנֵי שֶׁלִּבָּן גַּס בָּהֶן וְיָבוֹא מִן הַדָּבָר תַּקָּלָה וְהֶפְסֵד עַל הַדָּת:

(ח) כָּל הַמּוֹרֵד בְּמֶלֶךְ יִשְׂרָאֵל יֵשׁ לַמֶּלֶךְ רְשׁוּת לְהָרְגוֹ. אֲפִלּוּ גָּזַר עַל אֶחָד מִשְּׁאָר הָעָם שֶׁיֵּלֵךְ לְמָקוֹם פְּלוֹנִי וְלֹא הָלַךְ אוֹ שֶׁלֹּא יָצָא מִבֵּיתוֹ וְיָצָא חַיָּב מִיתָה. וְאִם רָצָה לְהָרְגוֹ יֵהָרֵג. שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (יהושע א יח) "כָּל אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יַמְרֶה אֶת פִּיךָ". וְכֵן כָּל הַמְבַזֶּה אֶת הַמֶּלֶךְ אוֹ הַמְחָרְפוֹ יֵשׁ לַמֶּלֶךְ רְשׁוּת לְהָרְגוֹ. כְּשִׁמְעִי בֶּן גֵּרָא. וְאֵין לַמֶּלֶךְ רְשׁוּת לַהֲרֹג אֶלָּא בְּסַיִף בִּלְבַד. וְיֵשׁ לוֹ לֶאֱסֹר וּלְהַכּוֹת בְּשׁוֹטִין לִכְבוֹדוֹ. אֲבָל לֹא יַפְקִיר מָמוֹן וְאִם הִפְקִיר הֲרֵי זֶה גֵּזֶל:

(ט) הַמְבַטֵּל גְּזֵרַת הַמֶּלֶךְ בִּשְׁבִיל שֶׁנִּתְעַסֵּק בְּמִצְוֹת. אֲפִלּוּ בְּמִצְוָה קַלָּה הֲרֵי זֶה פָּטוּר. דִּבְרֵי הָרַב וְדִבְרֵי הָעֶבֶד דִּבְרֵי הָרַב קוֹדְמִין. וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר אִם גָּזַר הַמֶּלֶךְ לְבַטֵּל מִצְוָה שֶׁאֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לוֹ:

(י) כָּל הַהוֹרֵג נְפָשׁוֹת שֶׁלֹּא בִּרְאָיָה בְּרוּרָה. אוֹ בְּלֹא הַתְרָאָה. אֲפִלּוּ בְּעֵד אֶחָד. אוֹ שׂוֹנֵא שֶׁהָרַג בִּשְׁגָגָה. יֵשׁ לַמֶּלֶךְ רְשׁוּת לְהָרְגוֹ וּלְתַקֵּן הָעוֹלָם כְּפִי מַה שֶּׁהַשָּׁעָה צְרִיכָה. וְהוֹרֵג רַבִּים בְּיוֹם אֶחָד וְתוֹלֶה וּמַנִּיחָן תְּלוּיִים יָמִים רַבִּים לְהָטִיל אֵימָה וּלְשַׁבֵּר יַד רִשְׁעֵי הָעוֹלָם:

Mishneh Torah, Kings and Wars 3

(1) When the king sits on the throne of his monarchy, he must write a Sefer Torah for himself, this in addition to the Sifrei Torah which were left for him by his forefathers. He checks his Sefer against the one¹⁸It was an ancient Sefer Torah. in the Temple Courtyard, in accordance with the Court of Seventy-One. If his forefathers did not leave him a Sefer or if it was lost, he has to write two Sifrei Torah. The first one will be kept in his Repository; this is the same Commandment which all of Israel must observe. The second one must never leave his side, other than when he goes to the lavatory or the bath or a place where it would be improper to read from it¹⁹e.g. a cemetery.. When he goes to war, it is with him. When he returns, it is with him. When he sits in judgment, it is with him. When he eats²⁰Lit., reclines., it is next to him, as it says, “And it shall be with him, and he shall read from it all the days of his life” (Deut. 17:19).

(2) "He must not have too many women" (Deut. 17:17). By Tradition we have learned that he may have up to eighteen women including wives²¹Those with a marriage contract. and concubines²²Those without a marriage contract.. Were he to add even one and have intercourse with her, he is given stripes. He may divorce one and marry another one in her place.

(3) "He must not accumulate many horses" (Deut. 17:16), but only as many as he needs for his chariots²³For war.. He may not even have one spare horse to trot before him, as is done before other kings. If he adds, he is given stripes.

(4) He must not amass too much silver and gold for his treasury in order to be proud about it or for his enjoyment. He may only have as much as he needs to pay his soldiers, servants and attendants. However, it is a Mitzvoh to increase the coffers of the Temple Treasury. Any extra silver and gold is to be ready for use for the public needs and their wars. The prohibition only forbids him from increasing his own wealth in his own treasury, as it says, “and he shall not increase for himself” (Deut. 17:17). He is given stripes if he increase his riches.

(5) The king must not drink himself drunk, as it says, “not for kings is the drinking of wine” (Proverbs 31:4). Rather, he must be engaged in Torah and the needs of Israel, day and night, as it says, “and it shall be with him, and he shall read from it all the days of his life” (Deut. 17:19).

(6) Similarly, he must not be preoccupied with women. Even if he has but one (wife) he should not be found by her all the time as with the fools, and as it says, “Give not your strength to women” (Proverbs 31:3). Regarding the steering of his heart away, the Torah has already been exacting and said, “Do not veer your heart” (Deut. 17:17). For his heart is the heart of the entire Congregation of Israel. Therefore, Scriptures has attributed to him that which is written in the Torah, more so than any other member of the nation, saying, “all the days of his life” (Deut. 17:19).

(7) We have already explained that the kings of the House of David may judge and may be judged and testimony can be brought against them. Not so the kings of Israel regarding whom our Sages have decreed that they do not judge and are not judged, they cannot give testimony and no one can testify about them. This is because their hearts are coarse, and from these matters only fiascoes will result, and there will be a loss to the religion.

(8) The king has the right to execute anyone who rebels against a king. One is liable to the death penalty even if the king decreed that he is to go to a particular place and he did not go there or that he not leave his house and left. If he so wishes, he may execute him it says, “any man who disagrees with your words” (Joshua 1:18). Similarly, the king has permission to execute anyone who disgraces²⁴Or, embarrasses. him or insults him, as was the case with Shimi ben Gera. The king has permission to execute only by the sword. He may imprison and beat someone with a whip for the sake of his honor. However, he may not declare their money ownerless, for it would be robbery were he to do so.

(9) Anyone who fails to obey the king’s orders because he is engaged in the performance of Commandments, even of one simple Commandment, is exempt. This is so since whenever a dictate of the Master (G-d) conflicts with a dictate of the servant (the king), the dictate of the Master takes precedence. Needless to say, the king is not heeded if he decrees something which cancels a Commandment.

(10) The king has the right to execute a killer, even when there is no clear proof (against him) or no warning was given him or even if there was only one witness. He may execute someone who killed accidentally out of hatred. He may do so for purposes of establishing Public Order, as is necessary depending on the prevailing circumstances. He may even execute many people on one day and hang them and leave them hanging for many days in order to instill fear and crush the hands of the wicked of the world.