Shoftim: all the king’s horses and all the king’s wives – King David and abundance

This week in the Torah we read Deuteronomy 16:18–21:9, “Shoftim” meaning judges. 

This section includes the famous line “Justice, Justice shall you pursue, that you may live and possess the land the Lord, your God, is giving you” 16:20.  We discuss not only judges and the judicial process, but also prophets, priests, and appointing kings.  The first king, Saul, was actually elected.  Shoftim also covers rules for waging war, the definitions of murder and manslaughter, and a special ritual conducted for an unsolved murder, God forbid.

Agency

“If there will be found among you, within one of your cities which the Lord, your God is giving you, a man or woman who does evil in the eyes of the Lord, your God, to transgress His covenant,” (17:2)

We have discussed that the Bible makes crystal clear that men and women have equal agency.  Both men and women have the capacity to make rational and meaningful decisions in their life, and to enjoy the benefits and suffer the consequences of their choices. 

Many men in modern mainstream culture are suffering the consequences of someone else’s poor decisions.  They may be paying off the debts a spouse accrued pursuing a degree that does not pay for itself, or raising the children of another man who wouldn’t stay around.

Society will tell you that “man up” involves taking responsibility for other people’s life decisions.  That is a manipulation designed to saddle you as a plow horse.  Be cognizant of the messages you are being sent that are based on the error that women have less agency and responsibility and therefore men should step up and bail them out.  That idea is against the Bible.

My body, my choice

One of the key features of modern secular society is the concept that your physical body is entirely your own and you can exercise free choice regarding it.  The practical effect of this doctrine is to try to absolve women of any feelings of guilt or shame when they abort a pregnancy.  The same basic idea justifies tattoos, piercings, implants, as well as self destructive habits like smoking and excessive drinking.

Naturally, we don’t realize that most human beings, for most of human history, have had their bodies subject to others in stratified feudal or similar societies.  Regular men and women lived at the whim of lords or knights, the lords served the nobility, all served the king. Anyone could be pressed into royal or state service or sent to prison or sentenced to death for any or no reason. 

We still this a form of this reality in communist societies. We even have a faint echo of the concept in America where men (but not women) are subject to serious consequences for not registering for the draft. 

The state can still, if the politicians feel it necessary or profitable, control a man’s body and obligated him to give up his life. A man who refuses can lose his freedom and reputation instead.

However, the power of the kings, nobles, and the state to make decisions about your physical body has definitely decreased over the past 300 years.  In medieval times, there was no real concept that your body was your own property, as we understand this idea today.

Some of the first political reforms made were to reduce the power of the central authority over your body (see Magna Carta and habeas corpus).  Historically, in practically every ancient society, a woman was viewed as the property of her father and then her husband.  Not only were there no “strong independent women”, there were no independent women at all.

Nowadays, the mainstream expectation is that women are not only independent, but can terminate a pregnancy for any or no reason.  In addition, modern medical technology enables abortion to be easy and safe. 

They did have abortions in ancient times, but they were rare, unsafe, and usually illegal.  We take for granted the idea of “my body my choice”.  Today we don’t appreciate how different your personal authority is compared to what it would have been 200 years ago in most of the world. 

The Bible doesn’t support this concept.  Jews are commanded to eat certain foods, avoid cutting and ripping our out hair in grief, tattoos are forbidden.  Abortion is not banned, but limited to very specific circumstances.  You can understand these commands as demonstrating that God gave you your body and expects you to take care of it.  Even that your body is not truly your own, but is a loan from God that you need to return in good condition.  It sounds very anti-modern.

This week there is another implied prohibition on what you can do with your own body.  Deuteronomy 17:6 says that a man or woman is punished because of the eyewitness testimony.  Biblical law does not allow hearsay.  A man or woman cannot be punished if they walk into court and confess the crime. 

In modern secular courts one of the biggest ways to convict people is to get them to confess some of the crimes they are accused of.  This is why prosecutors add in numerous grave charges then offer a plea bargain: plead guilty to a lesser offense instead of going to trial for all the charges and risking more punishment.  

In recent decades there has been justified criticism of plea bargaining as conducted in the modern legal system.  I’ll stick to the Biblical view: the Bible does not allow plea bargaining.  Indeed, if the criminal confesses he is not punished by the court.  Our great legal sage Rambam (Maimonides) in Mishneh Torah, Laws of the Sanhedrin, 18:6 codified this law for criminal cases.  He also suggests that the person might be using a devious method to commit suicide or get lashes to satisfy a sadomasochistic bend.

We see this in modern men.  Many men live in very frustrating conditions.  Yes, their bodies are technically free but in their minds they are bound to their jobs, spouses, houses, children just as much as peasants in the middle ages were bound to their lord’s land and service.  They are the faithful plow horse for their woman, their employer, their society. 

Even when a man is aware of the frustration and pain he goes through for others, there is often some sadomasochistic satisfaction in being the martyr, the rock, the oak.  It can take a great emotional shock for a man to realize he can begin to make choices for himself rather than to put his wife, child, job, boss, coworker first. Sometimes choosing to help yourself enables you to better help others.

Understand that real power is not controlling others, but your ability to control yourself and freely make decisions for your personal benefit.  A man should be attuned to the messages modern society pushes on men, encouraging men to  sacrifice for others and become willing servants for women.

Unlike criminal law, in Jewish monetary (civil) laws, an admission is considered fact.  If two men argue about the amount owed on a loan, the admission of either party is binding “like 100 witnesses” (Talmud Gittin 40b).  Your money is considered yours, but your body is not. 

To a certain extent, whatever you earned and gathered in this life is the result of your own work and initiative.  If you put your time and energy into your fortune, you can admit that you owe some of it to another man.  The court will accept that even if it is not factually true.  Your possessions are under your jurisdiction. 

By comparison, your body is not fully yours.  It is a gift or a loan from God and your parents.  In conventional Judaism we teach that every person is created by a partnership between Father, Mother, and God (Talmud Kiddushin 31).  This is to teach us that we should honor our parents who gave us life (Leviticus 19:3).

Part of the underlying cause of the problems we have in modern secular society stem from a lack of appreciation for the value of human life.  Children are not taught to respect parents, that isn’t cool.  People outside of minority religious subcultures are totally unfamiliar with the idea of respecting God who gives us life.  If we don’t even appreciate the gift of our own lives, how do we even begin to respect other human beings?

It’s good to be the king

You shall set a king over you, one whom the Lord, your God, chooses; from among your brothers, you shall set a king over yourself; you shall not appoint a foreigner over yourself, one who is not your brother.

Only, he may not acquire many horses for himself, so that he will not bring the people back to Egypt in order to acquire many horses, for the Lord said to you, “You shall not return that way any more.” And he shall not take many wives for himself, and his heart must not turn away, and he shall not acquire much silver and gold for himself.  (17:15-17)

A historical note, Egypt was known as a source of fine horses, and apparently ancient kings would sell their people as slaves to Egypt in return for these horses.  But too many horses (also representing military power), too much wealth, and too many wives can corrupt even the most righteous king. 

Rashi, a prominent commentator on the Bible 1000 years ago, drawing from more ancient sources in the Talmud, explains what the Bible actually means by many wives.  ולא ירבה לו נשים “Nor shall he multiply for himself wives”: only eighteen, for we find that David had six wives, and then it was announced to him (by Nathan the prophet): “Thus saith the Lord … I gave thy master’s wives into thy bosom… and if they are too little, add unto thee such as these and such as these i.e. thrice as many as before” (2 Samuel 12:8, Talmud Sanhedrin 21a).

The limit of 18 wives (there is discussion in the Talmud if this total includes concubines or just full wives) was based on the fact that King David had six wives already when he became king over all of Israel.  II Sam. 3:2–5 records his six wives when in Hebron as: Ahinoam of Jezreel, Avigail wife of Naval the Carmelite, Maacah daughter of Talmai, Haggith, Abital, and Eglah.  Eglah refers to Michal the daughter of King Saul. 

Later in Jerusalem (2 Samuel 12) Nathan told him, based on prophecy, that he should add on “like these and like these” meaning six more and six more, for a total of 18. 

While King Solomon amassed many more than 18, most of these were political marriages designed to cement alliances between Israel and other kingdoms.  We can assume the “700 wives who were princesses” were foreign princesses, some of the 300 concubines may have been from less important kingdoms as well (1 Kings 11:3). 

Those foreign wives who were married for political ends became a source of problems when they brought idolatry to Israel.  Of course, Solomon had converted these foreign women to Judaism, but he did not ensure they were totally weaned from idolatry. 

We understand instinctively that there is a vast difference between a woman converting out of love and devotion for a man rather than due to political expediency.  In fact, a woman willing to change her religion for a man is a tremendous sign of her genuine desire for him.  Solomon, the wisest man who ever lived, thought that since these marriages were for politics and not love, the extra wives would not corrupt him.  Perhaps with so many women he thought it was impossible.  No one can outsmart the Bible.

David’s wives

By contrast, King David did not marry for politics, but had personal romantic pursuits with specific women throughout his career, even before he became a king.  It does appear that his first wife, Michal the daughter of King Saul, was given as a prize by Saul.  1 Samuel 18:27: “David took his men and went out and killed two hundred Philistines and brought back their foreskins.  They counted out the full number to the king so that David might become the king’s son-in-law.  Then Saul gave him his daughter Michal in marriage.” 

After David became popular as a military leader, Saul was concerned he was becoming a rival for the throne and began to plot against him.  When David fled, before he claimed Michal as his bride, Saul gave Michal to Palti ben Layish to punish David.  Palti to his credit never consummated the sham marriage with Michal, because he knew David had already betrothed her with the foreskins (Sanhedrin 19).  Saul relied on a minority opinion that this engagement was not valid per the Law. 

During this period when David was out of Jerusalem, he indeed became a rival power to King Saul, building up prestige and an independent military force.  During this time he met and married a number of other women, including Avigail, who stopped David from executing her first husband Naval (I Samuel 25).  Naval later died and Avigail married David. That episode we will explore another time, God willing.

By the time he moved to Jerusalem David had six wives.  This was not unusual in ancient times, as we explained regarding polygyny.  King David is an example that when it comes to women, nothing succeeds like success.  In other words, women want a man that other women want.  This known as “preselection“.  Since women have selected a man as a good mate, other women become interested as well.  Even before he was king, women were interested in David because women were interested in David.

This concept can be applied in a variety of circumstances.  If you are perceived as comfortable around women around you, other women will assume they approve of you.  Even if you are not going out to meet people, but you are dating in order to get married and start a family, women can tell if you are at ease around them.  If you are calm and speak naturally around a woman you just met, this shows you already have had positive conversations with women.  This is an element of preselection and puts her at ease as well.

Another kingly asset of David was the mindset of abundance, allowing him to be honest with his wives.  As a man who was successful with women, and had multiple wives, he could afford to risk offending one wife.  A man who lacks a feeling of abundance may refrain from speaking openly with his woman for fear of losing her affection.  We see David’s approach in the famous incident of bringing the Holy Ark of the Covenant into Jerusalem (2 Samuel 6:16-23): 

“As the Ark of the LORD entered the City of David, Michal daughter of Saul looked out of the window and saw King David leaping and whirling before the LORD; and she despised him for it”…”David went home to greet his household.

And Michal daughter of Saul came out to meet David and said, “Didn’t the king of Israel do himself honor today—exposing himself today in the sight of the servant girls of his subjects, as one of the riffraff might expose himself!”

David answered Michal, “It was before the LORD who chose me instead of your father and all his family and appointed me ruler over the LORD’s people Israel!  I will dance before the LORD and dishonor myself even more, and be low in my own esteem; but among the servant girls that you speak of I will be honored.”

Our sages elaborate that David, compared to Saul, did not care as much about public opinion.  He was willing to risk looking like a commoner to glorify God.  Saul by contrast refrained from completing the Divine command to wipe out Amalek because the men with him urged him to spare the best animals (1 Samuel 15).  Saul’s openness to being influenced by public opinion cost him the monarchy. 

David by contrast is not influenced by his wife’s criticism, or popular opinion.  Since he knows he was doing God’s will and doesn’t care what her or the people think about it.  David can afford to be honest with Michal and reject her criticism even though it was offensive to bring up her father’s failure.  He has the mindset of abundance. 

If one wife criticized him, David would not feel hurt or be tempted to change his appropriate behavior to appease her.  He could be objective about her criticism and calmly evaluate if it was true. He had 17 other wives to take care of his physical and emotional needs.  When a man is independent of the need to get approval from a woman, he can do what is right by him and God, and doesn’t need to worry about doing right by her.  

David shows us that having abundance leads to confidence in dealing with women. Confidence is derived from options.

You don’t need an actual harem, having the experience to know that you could attract a new woman if you want gives you the mindset.  You can deal with the women you have in your life with more poise and self assurance.  You don’t have to accept bad behavior as part of the deal because you can find a different deal that doesn’t involve bad behavior. 

It may sound rude or shocking to advise a man to keep in mind that he can replace his woman.  However, you should know that many women think precisely this way.  A 2014 study of women in relationships reported that about half, including married women, admitted to having a backup man to turn to if her relationship does not go how she wants.

Some admitted wanting to go over to the backup guy when she could, and that he had confessed love for her.  That is not merely creating a mentality of abundance, but acting to allow to change to new partner whenever she wants.  You shouldn’t feel strange for doing what many women already do.

This study was for society at large, conventional Judaism retains some buffers that make it more impractical for a woman to have male friends.  For example, men and women never alone together when it could lead to sin, and this prohibition is extra stringent for married women.  In more traditional circles, while of course men and women talk politely, it is considered odd for a man and woman to have more than a casual exchange of greetings unless they are family or dating.

War Ecology

When you lay siege to a city for a long time, fighting against it to capture it, do not destroy its trees by putting an ax to them, because you can eat their fruit.  Do not cut them down. Are the trees people, that you should besiege them? 
However, you may cut down trees that you know are not fruit trees and use them to build siege works until the city at war with you falls.  Deuteronomy 20:19–20.

In modern culture, Judaism gets associated with environmentalism.  This is partly due to more secular strains of Judaism embracing environmentalist agendas.  When people have abandoned ancient Jewish concepts, they need something to do in place of actual Jewish practice.  People without strong faith will buy into something, anything to feel important and useful.  However, the Bible does inform mankind to preserve the environment when possible, even during a war, when trees were needed to build fortifications.

There is a Biblical commandment not to waste fruit trees, which our sages extend to wasting food in general: “Not only does this apply to trees, but also whoever breaks vessels or tears garments, destroys a building, blocks a wellspring of water, or destructively wastes food, transgresses the command of bal tashchit (do not waste)” Rambam, Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Melachim 6:10.

However, it is clear that regular trees should be cut down to make the siege engines to allow men to attack walled cities.  The environment is valuable but ultimately is given by God for the service of men: “Fill the earth and subdue it. Rule over the fish in the sea and the birds in the sky and over every living creature that moves on the ground.” (Gen 1:28). 

This allowance comes with a responsibility to act as a responsible caretaker over the earth and safeguard it for the next generation (Gen 2:15).  The Bible views man as the pinnacle of creation, when men are acting appropriately all of the prior creations are for our careful use.  This concept helps men to understand our importance in the vast universe.  Sure, you are a tiny and temporary speck.  But you are a speck of Divine power and can accomplish great things.

This piece of the Bible is also instructive regarding war.  War is inevitable, and inherently destructive. However, even the soldiers engaged in the siege need to keep in mind their duty to minimize the damage to the land by preserving the fruit trees.  After the war the land will need to be rebuilt, as King Solomon stated: “a time to love and a time to hate, a time for war and a time for peace”  Ecclesiastes 3:8.  Taking the long view helps you get through whatever life battle you are in.  Now is the time to struggle, but there will come a time to rebuild.

War and one-itis

The Bible informs us that there are exemptions from serving in combat.  One of these carries serious implications for modern men:

And what man is there who has betrothed a woman and has not yet taken her? Let him go and return to his house, lest he die in the war, and another man take her. (20:7)

A man on the battlefield who has betrothed (engaged) his future wife will be distracted by thoughts of her, and the very real fear of never coming home to build a life with her.  The young soldier will be thinking about the tragic possibility that he will perish and never marry this girl.  If he goes MIA or is captured, she will be trapped as an agunah, forbidden to marry since she was betrothed to him. 

Even the bravest soldier may, subconsciously, shirk from his duties in war and avoid danger due to these intensely emotional issues.  The other men might also feel that it would be tragic for this future groom to die and take unnecessary risks to protect him in battle.  The groom to be may abandon his comrades during a fateful attack, pulled by his feelings for his fiancé and the urge to avoid having her wed another.

This soldier seems to have a condition known as “one-itis”, meaning a man’s fixation on a certain specific woman as his soul mate.  His feelings for this girl can degrade his effectiveness in war, and the tragic scenario can put other soldier at risk.  The Bible allows this soldier to return home instead of endangering his unit.  The Bible recognizes the depth of a man’s emotions and the practical effects they can have.

Our sages explain that this exemption also applies in the first year of marriage, a man is supposed to stay home and “gladden the heart of his new wife”.  This verse appears in next week’s reading: “When a man takes a new wife, he shall not go out in the army, nor shall he be subjected to anything associated with it. He shall remain free for his home for one year and delight his wife, whom he has taken.” 24:5.

The Bible teaches that the first year of marriage is the ideal time for a man and woman to grow together as couple, and that the man has an obligation to make his wife happy.  Modern society has a bizarre slogan “happy wife, happy life” which is usually invoked by a man to explain why he cannot do what he wants to do, since he has to be careful not to offend his woman. 

The conventional Jewish approach is nothing like this.  A Jewish man has to learn what drives his woman’s emotional states and make use of her emotions to strengthen their marriage.  Men and women are different.  Women are more emotional and sensitive, a man needs to be aware his wife is not a man, she does not respond the same way to logic and reason.  He has to appeal to her heart, not her mind.  The first year of marriage is his prime time to learn these concepts and to deal with her nature in a mature and productive manner.

Part of appealing to women is actually not always giving in to make her happy.  This will sound counter intuitive, but women prefer a man who can say no when appropriate over a man who always says yes to her.  Of course, a man has to say yes when it is warranted.

A man with a mission who can say no to her whims to further his mission is more attractive and actually makes her happy.  This is how the Bible intends men to gladden their wives.