Derech Mitzvosecha Minu Melech #2 - Difference between Kings: Dovid & Shlomo - RC Dalfin

So good day. We're learning the second uh the second shel appointing a king which is a mitzvah in the from his from his holy book where he questions the whole idea of what a king is and how we are to understand a king. a melik. And like I said yesterday, you have to move away from thinking about a king like uh King Charles or monarchs of the past and uh of course not the uh presidents of today and all of that. They they do have leadership power and there is a concept in that God gives a leader special powers you know and and hopefully they don't abuse it. But as Isa and I were just talking before the class started, we don't find many great virtues about many of the Jewish kings either. If you go through the Tanakh, the prophets, nevertheless, like I told him, it doesn't detract from God's purpose and the and and idea behind appointing king, which is that the king is to to to live a life where he's subservient to God. In Hebrew, he's bleos. He's anulled and subservient to godliness. Hence, we are to we follow the king because we wish that he instill in us and help us attain the same thing. This is what we learned yesterday and today we'll continue. We're on top of page 216. If you have the all the the entire safer of there 216 let's go. So he says the top line there are those amongst the Jews that are called Jewish souls called brothers and friends of the king. brothers and brothers and friends of Hashem. And then there are those that are called children. Children do not need a king at all. You don't say to your son or your daughter, "I'm your king." And if you do, you could pack your bags and uh and leave or they will leave before you pack your bags. You're not Mark. You're not you're not a king over your son or your daughter. You you're you're you're a father to a child. Let's continue. Why? Because the whole idea of the kingship, the king subject relationship is for the subject to anult their ego, their yesesh to the king like a servant before a king. They have this I this this feeling of ble of subservience. Why? Because they understand that the God Almighty is the real king and we have this ego and therefore we are null to Hashem. Look at this is very interesting. The the the angels they do have a king. You hear that? Not only is and everyone else a yesh have ego but the angels have ego Michael the angel Gabriel and Gabriel although they constantly stand in with with love and awe before God. Nevertheless, They are a separate entity for themselves who have instilled within themselves fear of God the love of God. But are we going to say that an angel is um egoless? No. An angel is not legal eagleless. An angel has an agenda and and and yes it's But it's still an agenda. Okay? An agenda doesn't mean necessarily bad. An agenda doesn't but it has a definition and it's not it's not it's this and not that. And as soon as you say that you are displaying some refined form of ego. So that's what the Reb says that says in the name of I guess that are also have a yes in them that's why angels also have a kingdom the concept of a king is is applicable to who to what to a subject that's a yesesh and that the yesesh is unknows their ego their yesesh to the King. But we say this is similar to what we say. Your kingship is the kingship of all worlds. Is the and the same concept is true regarding the souls of remember he mentioned before two types of souls. But we talk about the ex elevated souls. For example, the soul of they are like children to God. and they're above the whole concept of accepting a king about themsel a physical king which is below them. The king again is only for someone who is a servant which means he's a separate being from the king. Even if you have a thousand kids, none of them would call their f their father king. Even though there's so many different types of kids. Skip the brackets, the parenthesis. Now here he answers the question. Listen carefully, right? We I think we we asked this yesterday. Why did the prophet Mosha why didn't he WANT TO APPOINT A KING? He know he knows it says in the he should appoint a king when he come to Israel says that you know why he didn't want to appoint a king he wanted them to to be on the level of the to be the higher souls he was expecting of them more than that was his mistake more than who they really were but from his perspective he was coming from a justified perspective WHAT DO YOU NEED A KING FOR we're in Israel we went to the land of Israel. So now this is the plateau. This is the domain of holiness. So be more holy. So what do you need a king for? Back to the text. And then if you're in the higher level, you don't need a king. Just like right. This is what we say our father our king. Why don't we say two things? Father and king. Because regarding our father, we say we've sinned. The word and the concept of refers to an accidental sin. But regarding regarding our king, we say, we sinned deliberately intentionally. In other words, the the the the concept of au Aino, you're too close. Your son, your child is too close. So when they goof up, it's accidental. In other words, to begin with, they're not separated from you. You and your child are one. Whereas a king, a mel and the subject are two separate entities who come together. So over there, if you're separate, not only will you do something that's accidentally wrong, you'll do something that's intentionally wrong because you're coming from a different place. SO THEREFORE, THE KING, AS MUCH as you understand what a king is, he's not you. So ultimately, you can do a not only a that's what the says here. But his overall point is to answer the question, why didn't Schmool want to appoint a king? Is this might have been part of your question yesterday? I'm not sure. The answer is because he considered the Eden on a higher level than they really were. And on that level of of of Aenu, not Malenu on the it's not Shia the idea of a king because a king is a king is a king to subjects, not a king to children. A chapter 2 became contin but we see that said to commit he says you are to anoint for them a king basically you misjudge them they're not on that level and they do need a king yes because they are at least on the level They need to have the anulment of ego. Listen now carefully. It was king who married it to have the crown of kingship zoo forever. And if you want to see more about this idea that kingship royalty mus has been saved given and saved to the offsprings he doesn't go into it because that's a that's a concept in all that is >> yes precedes Sure. Now the says that he married having the the crown of kingship. So now he he analyzes the word. It's because David was a chariot to the level of and he's called the fourth leg of the chariot. That's why we conclude in mug and do it the shield of dovet. He gets his own recognition. Right? First there is mug of right and there's mug and dvet. I'm sorry not in I take that back. in the there's a not so we have to understand what this David is all about. We have to preface the the virtue and quality of David regarding his kingship and rulership over Jews of the over the Jews. You hear this? It was way above above all the other levels of all other kings that came AFTER DAVID OF HIS OWN DESCENDANTS. DAVID'S A class for himself of all kings that followed. The purpose of the kings was like we said earlier uh in the first chapter that they they should instill bit in the Jews. That's actionorientation to sub to submit to God. That's a very low level like action says that's not the entire virtue of to get you to listen to him. That was the virtue of the kings after him. And this might answer your question right here because the of the even from his own children was to get people to do to action orientation. Therefore, that also allows for goof ups action mess ups. Mashing conversely here use your cup conversely. is not celus. It's not about action. It's about divinity. In a in divinity, there's it's God. Look what he says. David regarding Dave Mila more advantageous and greater quality much greater was regarding his kingship. So in other words, the here is making a distinction between and the kings that follow. So I told you this answers I believe your question or at least gives you some food for thought. Hello. that the woman she says is a base my referring to my master he's he has the wisdom of a of an angel of God all kings all kings are actionorient oriented which is malus of DOING OH WISDOM WITH it's the brains behind the action it's the intellectualism behind the action which is in touch with divinity because the is one with the let's go further that's what he says you take from the sheep over there to pasture the the the nation of Yakov. So he uses the the imagery and the and the and the parable of a shepherd who conducts and leads his his flocks and conducts them and leads them in every detail in divine providence. He makes sure that they PASTURE IN GOOD PASTURE good fields and he makes sure that the wolves and others aren't around to harm the sheep. So in other words, IT'S NOT JUST ABOUT HERE EAT GRASS, GO AND EAT GRASS. aa a properya proper shepherd grazes the sheep and in a place and has where they they won't be damaged by other animals and things. So he's using this that's the mush that's the the parable. So too in the moral he was a leader and he was he was careful. He was he was he was observant and made sure to give them all of their needs spiritual and physical to every single individual person of his nation. Because of the everything nothing should be prevented from the king because was the one who gave the gosh to everyone cautioned them about keeping mitzvah and he justified the righteous and he and he scolded the the one that didn't do it properly. So that's as far as that was a regarding the spirituality of the Jews of the Eid and so to regarding the physical regarding the physical material needs of the Jewish people they need sustenance livelihood and you know because it there wasn't enough and So David had gave found ways of how to open up the floodgates from heaven so they have more gashmas and so he tells them go and extend your hands in this in this group go over THERE AND OVER THERE YOU'LL make a good business deal. So who did who who gave the advice for material matter for when we talk about within the attribute of this was specifically by conversely all kings that followed him they were great they were wise Mish answered your question is says he was the smartest man or human being and so too this is true about however they were smart had wisdom FOR ACTION. DO THIS AND DON'T DO THAT. DON'T CUT THE BABY IN HALF. You know, they didn't have the they weren't given the the godly wisdom not for for material decisions, which they had, but for spirituality. IN OTHER WORDS, THEY WEREN'T THEIR WASN'T A of godliness. It it it was it was a a a HUMAN of smarts. THAT'S WHAT HASHEM GAVE ME. It doesn't say anywhere that as far as I know that was gifted. I I know it says that I know the term used in but the obviously knows that too. And he's explaining that there's a difference BETWEEN DA THE FATHER AND THE SON AND THAT THE SON AND AS WISE AS THEY WERE IT wasn't know it wasn't I'M SORRY as it was by again you got to look at the text although they were smart I knew that means means that they themselves in their own individual spark there they're shined from the level of in the in the parentheses to comprehend and understand God's and everything that was in the WORLD THEY HAD SMARTS TO UNDERSTAND THE WORLD BASED on on on but regarding THE KINGSHIP REGARDING THE ROYALTY the mus of of ando not regarding their individual smarts, their individual knowledge, BUT REGARDING RULERSHIP, a king over all that they a king over this nation. They did not have the illumination of the that we're talking about. to show me clothes did. Now this is answers your question. I hope you see you ASK THE QUESTION HOW IS IT THAT YOU look at MOST OF THE KINGS ARE SITTING and goofing up. THE ANSWER IS BECAUSE THEY DIDN'T HAVE THE CLOTHES. They weren't living with that reality of divinity was. And don't ask me questions how can you live with you look at the commentaries. I'm not going into that. But the is making a clear distinction between for example. Conversely all other kings their kingship. OH THEIR KINGSHIP WAS NOT THE way we explained the concept of kingship in chapter one of BL. THAT ANSWERS YOUR QUESTION AGAIN. Also you asked me sir if it's about BL they didn't have BL the answer IS THEY WERE NOT ABOUT BL they were leaders to construct and make sure that the people do things properly but it wasn't they were only the action the last level the the the what do they the dregs aa of David's divinity. So of course they goofed up etc. Let's continue four or five lines in the bottom on page 1216 to explain further the concept of that in his kingship as a king he had and he lived with the divinity of will understand is based on a a a will preface something to understand I'll that gave David, King David 70 years that really belonged to him showed the first man. He showed him every generation and his leadersh. And he saw that David was had no life. He was going to be a stillborn or a miscarriage. That's called the from the word falling. So that's why took of 70 years of his life. He should have lived how many years. How many years? A THOUSAND YEARS. HE TOOK 70 OF HIS YEARS AND HE GAVE to a soul that he saw i.e. of it is going to be born and or not whatever doesn't have any years and saw that this person is needs to be in the world say took 70 years and that's why the records that he only lived 930 years let's go further says it's explained listen to that not only did he get 70 years from he got 70 years from the patriarchs from the and he explains this comes from the zy top of page top of the next page gave him five years he should have lived 180 and only lived 175 He was missing five years. He should have lived like, but he lived he only lived 147 years. So he's missing 28. Stop. He lived 110. He should have lived 147 like his father. He was missing 37 years. what happened that they're all missing these you know 375 all these years because um Jacob and they gave those years to so that he exists they gave him 70 if you add them up look what it says asks why do they HAVE TO GIVE HIM 70 years then. SO THEN IF HE GOT 70 FROM FROM 70 FROM THE patriarchs first of all what does he need to have two 70s he got 70 years and if he does need then he should be living 70 plus 70 140 and he live 70 seemingly he should have lived 140 If you take off the 70 years from and we'll stop here the fifth line and tomorrow we will hopefully find out the answer to this question. Have a great day everyone. Byebye. Go ahead. Byebye.