Subjugating their Poor Brethren

Subscribe to the Daily Daf Yomi Summary here.

Rav Pappa said to Rava: My master should see how the rabbis pay the head tax for others, and then they work them excessively. Rava replied: I might have died without ever having told you this thing: Rav Sheishes said: The seal of bondage of these people lies in the king’s archives, and the king has decreed that he who does not pay his head tax should be made the servant of the one who pays it on his behalf.

Other Rishonim explain this Gemora differently: they say that the rabbis violated the prohibition of ribbis. This is because they paid the tax for their poor brethren, and by working them excessively, they were paid back more than what they laid out.

The Radvaz asks: How can the principle of “the law of the land is the law” trump the prohibition of subjugating a fellow Jew excessively?

He answers that since the excessive work is not regarded as money, for by law, they are obligated to serve them; the prohibition falls off by itself, for if there is no loan, there cannot be any ribbis.

The Ritva writes that by paying their taxes to the king, they acquire them as slaves until they are repaid; the money is not regarded as a debt at all.

Read more!

Obeying a Jewish King in Eretz Yisroel

Subscribe to the Daily Daf Yomi Summary here.

It is evident from the Gemora that the law of the kingdom has the full force of halachah behind it. The Ritva writes that we do not find anyone that disagrees with this principle.

The Rashbam explains the rationale for this halachah: All citizens of a country voluntarily accept upon themselves to obey the king’s decrees and laws. All of their laws are therefore binding. Accordingly, one who possesses his fellow’s property based upon that particular country’s law, does not violate a prohibition of stealing at all.

The Rashba explains it differently: Since the entire land belongs to the king, he is entitled to chase anyone away from his land if he wishes, and he has the right to tax everyone for the privilege of residing in his land.

A difference between these two opinions may be if this halachah would apply in Eretz Yisroel with a Jewish king. According to the Rashba, it might not apply in Eretz Yisroel, for every Jew has an inalienable right to live there, and no king would have the jurisdiction to banish anyone from the Land.

The Ra”n in Nedarim 28a rules that this principle applies only in the lands of the exile. The reason for this, he explains, is that in these countries, the land is the property of the kingdom, and one is therefore obligated to abide by the laws and ordinances of the country in which he resides. But, in Eretz Yisroel, which belongs to the entire Jewish nation, there is no obligation to comply with the laws of a Jewish king. The Rambam and Shulchan Aruch both rule that this principle does apply to a Jewish king in Eretz Yisroel.

Read more!

Renouncing his Honor

Rav Ashi (Daf Yomi: Sotah 41b) said that even according to the opinion that a prince may forgo his honor; a king may not forgo his honor! This is indicated by the verse that states “put for yourself a king,” implying that his awe should (always) be placed upon you.

It is noteworthy that a Torah scholar can renounce his honor. What is the difference between the two?

Reb Chaim Brisker explains: A king has a higher status than an ordinary person because the people appointed him as a king. In truth, everyone is fit to become a king. Once he is appointed king, everyone is obligated to honor him. If the king renounces his honor, it is as if he is reverting to being an ordinary constituent, for there is no tangible difference between them except the honor accorded to him.

This is not the case with respect to a Torah scholar. Everyone is required to honor him because of his inherent status. Even if he chooses to renounce his honor, his higher level remains the same. This is why he is permitted to renounce his honor.

Read more!

Moshe as a King

The Gemora (Kesuvos 74a) had stated: All conditions are learned out from the stipulation that Moshe made with the tribes of Gad and Reuven. (For any condition to be valid, it must be similar to that condition.) A condition that may be executed by an agent, as Moshe did there (Moshe instructed Yehoshua to act, so to speak, as his agent to give the east bank of the Jordan to them), is a valid condition. However, any stipulation that cannot be executed by an agent is not regarded as a valid condition. (Chalitzah cannot be accomplished through an agent and therefore, a stipulation cannot be attached to it.)

The Pnei Yehoshua asks: If Moshe would be giving the tribes of Gad and Reuven something that belonged to him, and he would instruct Yehoshua to act on his behalf, Yehoshua would be regarded as an agent. However, Moshe was only distributing to them land that was an inheritance to them; why should Yehoshua be considered an agent?

He answers that the land of Sichon and Og was not included in Klal Yisroel’s inheritance. Their land belonged to Moshe since it was captured by Moshe and he had the status of a king. As a king, he was allowed to take possession of this land. Moshe, out of his good-heartedness decided to give away this land to the tribes of Gad and Reuven. It emerges that the instructions to Yehoshua rendered him as an agent of Moshe.

Incidentally, I noticed an interesting Makneh in his explanation of a Gemora in Kiddushin (32b). The Gemora relates that Rabban Gamliel was serving his guests by the wedding feast for his son. The Gemora explains that a Nasi is permitted to renounce the honor that should be given to him.

The Makneh asks from the Medrash in Parshas Yisro which states that Moshe acted as the waiter for Yisro and the other guests at the feast. Why was it permissible for Moshe, who had the status of a king, to forego the honor that one is required to give to a king? The halacha is that a king is not allowed to waive this honor!

He answers by citing the source for this halacha. The Gemora (Kesuvos 17a) states that it is written [Devarim 17:15]: Surely you shall appoint a king over you. This (the double expression of som tasim) means that his awe shall be over you at all times. The Makneh explains that at the moment a king chooses to waive his honor, it is tantamount to resigning from royalty and this is not allowed, for we are commanded to enthrone a king over us continually. This is only applicable after the Jewish people entered Eretz Yisroel and were commanded to enthrone a king; however, in the Desert, although Moshe was regarded as a king, he was permitted to waive his honor and serve his guests.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Megillah 15 - ESTHER CLOTHED HERSELF IN THE DIVINE SPIRIT

It is written in the Megillah [5:1]: On the third day, Esther donned [garments of] royalty and stood in the inner courtyard of the palace, facing the palace. The Gemora asks: The Megillah should have written that she clothed herself in royal clothing? Rabbi Elozar answers in the name of Rabbi Chanina: The verse is implying that Esther was clothed in the Divine spirit.

Pachad Yitzchak uses this verse to explain a difficulty regarding the story of Purim. The Gemora teaches us that the mitzva of destroying Amalek is only applicable after a king has been appointed over the Jewish people. According to this, the question is asked, how could the Jews in the times of Purim have fulfilled the mitzva of destroying Amalek by killing Haman and his sons, if they did not have a king at that time.

Pachad Yitzchak answers: It is written in the Megillah that Esther donned garments of royalty. This teaches us that she assumed the reign over the Jews, similar to a king, thus allowing the Jewish people to destroy Amalek.

Who gave Esther this right? Pachad Yitzchak does not explain this point.

Rabbi Eliezer Ginzburg, in his sefer Ginzei Hamelech answers: The Shem Mishmuel states that the primary role of a king is to unite his constituents. He explains: “Esther did not literally assume the throne. Rather, she enveloped herself with the intense love for fellow Jews which a monarch must possess if he is to succeed in uniting the people.”

This is the explanation of the Gemora. Esther cloaked herself with an abundance of love towards her fellow Jews and by doing so; she united the entire Jewish people. As a result of this, the Divine spirit rested upon her.

Read more!

Daf Yomi - Rosh Hashana 2 - IS MONARCHY AN INHERITANCE OR NOT?

The Gemora stated that if one king died during the month of Adar and another king succeeded him in Nissan, we count the first year according to the first king and the second year according to the second king. The Gemora explains this case to be referring to a case where it was decided in the month of Adar who should be the second king and he was the son of the previous king. One would think that since the kingdom is an inheritance passed down from the father to his son, it should be regarded as the second king’s reign began in Adar. The braisa teaches us that this is not so and the reign begins when he actually ascends the throne.

The Rambam in Hilchos Melochim (1:7) rules that when the son of a king is appointed to become the king after his father died, there is no need to anoint him since the monarchy is an inheritance which is passed down from father to son.

The Chasam Sofer (O”C 12) asks that if so, why does our Gemora learn that the son is not the king until Nissan and what is all the deliberation about? As soon as the father died in Adar, his son should automatically ascend the throne and become the king?

He answers that there is a distinct difference between the inheritance of the Jewish Kings and those of the Gentiles. By us, it is not automatic that a son who is a fool or an imbecile will succeed his father in becoming the king. He will ascend the throne only if he is fit for it. If the son is an appropriate choice to become the king, it is an inheritance and he takes preference over someone else even if the other person is better qualified. This is the deliberation that our Gemora is referring to.

However, the question is not completely resolved since after the deliberation and the decision that the son is suitable to become the king, shouldn’t he become king automatically? Why was it necessary to wait for Nissan to formally appoint him as the king?

HaRav Elyashiv Shlita answers that while it is true that he becomes the king immediately after the conclusion of their deliberation, he is not considered the king in regards to contracts and documents until he actually ascends the throne and that took place in Nissan. The Sages instituted this in order for it to be extremely clear as to when the king’s year began.

Rabbi Dovid Goldberg cites a Meiri and a Chinuch (497) that one is not considered a king unless there is approval from the entire nation and if they do not approve, he is not regarded as the king. According to this, we can answer that initially the Chachamim deliberated to perceive if the son is fit and after they reached their conclusion in Adar, he still may not ascend the throne until the nation agreed to their decision and that transpired in Nissan.

Read more!