More On Returning Our Judges
A colleague claimed that the ideal Jewish government was that of the time of the Judges; I agree with that view.
The Maimonidean viewpoint: although the Talmud says that Israel was commanded to both appoint a king and build the Temple, Maimonides’s formulations of these halachoth show that the kingdom does not have to be led by a hereditary king, but rather that the role of the king can also be filled by a prophet or judge, and thus we have Talmudic statements that Moses, Joshua, Gideon, Jephtah, and Samuel all counted as kings, and explains why Samuel himself felt that the arrangement that had existed until then should remain. Further, the Tabernacle at Shilo was considered a Temple for all intents and purposes, even if it was eventually relocated. Thus, the situation as described at the end of the Book of Joshua was an ideal and optimistic situation. The nation had a king and a Temple, and they had a golden opportunity to complete the conquest of the land.
As for the book of Judges and how it describes periods of backsliding into paganism, the book also makes clear that is was the judges themselves who brought about the return to proper worship, and the backsliding only happened once a judge was dead. If anything, the prophetic voice might be implicitly criticizing the leaders for not ensuring that they would be succeeded by other suitable leaders. Moses himself made sure he would be succeeded, but we do not find that Joshua or any others sought to do likewise. Samuel himself was the first to set the stage for his own succession, but it was his unpopular choices that partially led the people to request the appointment of an established hereditary monarch. The last chapters of Judges, which describe two catastrophies shortly after Joshua’s death, also have a refrain, almost like a chorus, that “in those days, there was no king in israel.” One could be excused if he were to understand this to mean that the people had an established idolatrous shrine and a disastrous civil war because they had no hereditary king to enforce Torah law. However, a closer look at the text indicates as the Redak and the other mideival commentators understood it: these tragedies happened because there was no “king” then. I.e., Joshua had died, and no judge had yet arisen, but had Joshua or one of the judges been around, it would not and could not have happened.
…
As we prepare for yet more elections here in Israel, and as we see America reeling in the midst of a sweeping regime change, I wonder what people honestly expect from government. Too many people I know voted against Trump because they blamed him for Covid and all of its repercussions, that he should have done something, but they have yet to consider that had he done any of those somethings that they suggest, they would have hated him even more for restricting their freedoms. Trump is and was far from perfect, but at least he realized that certain things can and should not be in the hands of government, because not only can it not succeed, it will cause even more harm. Here is Israel, we should be held to a higher standard, and we will only have a proper government when, as a people we realize what government’s role should be: absolutely nothing except national security and the enforcement of the rule of law.
From Rabbi Avi Grossman, here.