tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post1417415711879978465..comments2024-03-28T21:21:02.777-04:00Comments on Divrei Chaim: minuy melech and binyan hamikdashChaim B.http://www.blogger.com/profile/02231811394447584320noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-14831612602522687472008-09-25T10:15:00.000-04:002008-09-25T10:15:00.000-04:00I think the Chilluk is that there is a Reshus or a...I think the Chilluk is that there is a Reshus or a Kiyum Mitzvah to build the Mikdash upon sovereignty, and the sorry state of the Aron should have been the impetus for the people to have done so, but a Chiyuv to move on to Mechiyas Amalek and Binyan HaMikdash exists only upon Minui of a Melech Mamash. Otherwise it is not clear why the Ramban refers to the sorry state of the Aron and not to the Chiyuv of Binyan Beis HaBechirah. (So this Ramban is actually a proof AGAINST RHS' thesis that sovereignty counts as the Mitzvah of Minui Melech.)<BR/><BR/> The Rambam in Melachim 1:2 seems to link Minui Melech Mamash to Mechiyas Amalek and Binyan HaBayis.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-88812575117044611752008-09-10T19:52:00.000-04:002008-09-10T19:52:00.000-04:00I don't think a melech has to have national jurisd...I don't think a melech has to have national jurisdiction or even be the sole ruler - simple proof being that there existed two independent "kingdoms" of Yehudah and Yisrael for the greater part of Jewish history.Chaim B.https://www.blogger.com/profile/02231811394447584320noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-15462310673250164812008-09-10T09:57:00.000-04:002008-09-10T09:57:00.000-04:00My recollection is that is the Ramban he was refer...My recollection is that is the Ramban he was referring to in his piece. Interesting that elsewhere I saw an idea quoted from RYBS which seems to imply that the "melech" requirement of Sanhedrin 20 is more literal than not. RYBS notes a mechilta (I think) that states that Yehoshua had some type of minui as a melech before fighting Amalek because a melech is necessary for the mitzvah of hacrasas zaro shel amalek. Then again maybe that can be turned on its head and note that whatever minui there was of Yehoshua in parshas Beshalach it clearly was not a full fledged minui melech as Moshe Rabenu had a din of melech throughout and Yehoshua was subsequently appointed later. So perhaps that shows that melech for both the mitzvah of binyan mikdash and mechiyas amaleik. Again from memory so all of this is a little fuzzy. I will try to find the mechilta(?) later.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-20173285.post-83044463849716975262008-09-10T06:02:00.000-04:002008-09-10T06:02:00.000-04:00Were the shofetim national leaders?I took it from ...Were the shofetim national leaders?<BR/><BR/>I took it from the repeated references to "ein melekh beYisrael, ish hayashar be'einav ya'aseh" (particularly in megillas Rus, where it's that they were small pockets of leadership in what was otherwise chaos.<BR/><BR/>IOW, did Yiftach lead Benei Yisrael, or was he a leader in the Yardein / Gil'ad / sheivet Menasheh area?<BR/><BR/>OTOH, if shofetim were national leaders, what was the big deal of BY asking for Shaul and what was the whole need for Shemuel to hold a coronation? How was Shaul not simply the last shofeit?<BR/><BR/>-michamichahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13610506439687098313noreply@blogger.com