English translation — חיי שרה ג

A.

The law is,

that the haftarah of a parshah must be "related to the parshah" and even more — "related to the conclusion of the parshah².

The connection between our parshah — Chayei Sarah — and its haftarah is simply³

in that the content of the haftarah concerns the events and actions of David when he was "old, advanced in days"⁴

— similar to the parshah which speaks mostly about the time of "And Avraham was old, advanced in days"⁵.

And the correspondence is not only in the similarity of the <b>time</b> of the events — which occurred when Abraham and David were "old, advanced in days" — but also in the content of the matters:

In the haftarah it is told about two sons of David,

Adonijah and Solomon,

and how Adonijah "exalted himself, saying, 'I will reign'"⁶,

and the chain of events which brought about that David swore to Bathsheba that his previous oath "that Solomon your son shall reign after me, and he shall sit on my throne in my place" — is "so I will do this day"⁷

That this is akin to the story in the parshah,

that between the two sons of Avraham,

Yitzchak and Yishmael,

that Yishmael argued&lt;sup&gt;8&lt;/sup&gt;

I am greater

(beloved)

than Yitzchak,

and nevertheless Avraham made Yitzchak the heir; and so too he worried about marrying off Yitzchak&lt;sup&gt;9&lt;/sup&gt;,

until "and Avraham gave all that he had to Yitzchak"&lt;sup&gt;10&lt;/sup&gt;,

but not "to the sons of the concubines...

Avraham gave gifts &lt;b&gt;and he sent them&lt;/b&gt; away from Yitzchak his son while he was still alive"&lt;sup&gt;11&lt;/sup&gt;,

and also regarding the children of Yishmael

(as it was regarding Yishmael — drive him away etc.)

is recounted at the end of the parshah "and these are their names in their courts and in their palaces, twelve princes according to their nations"&lt;sup&gt;12&lt;/sup&gt;,

without a connection to Avraham.

In a slightly different style: the connection consists in this,

that just as David chose&lt;sup&gt;13&lt;/sup&gt;

his youngest son instead of the older son,

that the younger one should be the continuer of the kingdom of David,

so too his youngest son

(of Avraham)

Yitzchak was chosen as the continuer of the house of Avraham.

And other children were excluded,

also the family of his eldest son — Yishmael,

who settled in their courts and in their palaces,

twelve princes

to their nations.

And they dwelt from Havilah unto Shur etc.,

without connection to Abraham.

It remains, however, not yet entirely smooth:

In the parshah is also recounted about the time after the death of Avraham,

that "And it was after the death of Avraham, and G-d blessed Yitzchak his son, etc."¹⁴

— why are not included and said in the haftorah also the subsequent verses where it is recounted how Shlomo was anointed "and also Shlomo sat on the throne of the kingdom"¹⁵?

B.

At first glance, one could say,

that that which one does not say in the haftorah the continuation of the verses regarding the anointing of Shlomo,

is in accordance with the opinion of the Rambam regarding the definition of anointing a king who is the son of a king,

including the anointing of Shlomo:

The Gemara¹⁶

says that "they do not anoint a king who is the son of a king,

and if you say, why then did they anoint Solomon"

(and the Gemara answers)

"because of the dispute of Adonijah."

Further the Gemara asks "from where do we know that when there is a dispute anointing is required, and not every king who wishes may bequeath the kingdom to his son? Rav Papa said: the verse says 'he and his sons in the midst of Israel' — at a time when there is peace in Israel."

Rashi learns¹⁷

"at a time when there is peace in Israel, the kingdom is an inheritance and does not require anointing, but when there is a dispute it is not an inheritance and requires anointing at the outset."

The Rambam¹⁸

rules however "and there is no

They anoint a king, a son of a king, because the monarchy is an inheritance to the king forever, etc. And if there was a dispute, they anoint him in order to remove the dispute and to make known to all that this one alone is king, just as they anointed Solomon because of the dispute of Adonijah, etc.

And as the later authorities explain¹⁹,

that the dispute between Rashi and the Rambam is: according to Rashi, the monarchy comes through inheritance, and accordingly the anointing is for the establishment of a new king²⁰

; and according to the Rambam, the inheritance of the monarchy is not nullified and is not even changed²¹,

and the anointing is only "to remove the dispute."

To take an ad-

<b></b><b>ditional</b> thing.

Based on this, one can say,

And the custom of the Rambam²² is sweetened

to conclude the haftarah with the verse "Long live my lord King David²³

forever" and one does <b>not</b> mention the anointing of Solomon — because according to his view,

the anointing of a king who is the son of a king is not to establish kingship but "to settle the dispute."

And therefore one does not include the narrative

of the anointing of Solomon, because David's oath "And the king swore etc. 'As the Lord lives, who has redeemed my soul from all distress, just as I swore to you by the Lord, the God of Israel, saying, "Surely Solomon your son shall reign after me, and he shall sit on my throne in my place," so I will indeed do this day'"²⁴ definitively establishes the continuation of the kingship.

Not so the other customs²⁵

that one continues the reading of the Haftarah also regarding the command of David to anoint Solomon until after the actual anointing²⁶,

And it is obvious according to the Abudraham²⁷

to read until after the death of David,

"And Solomon²⁸

sat on the throne of David his father, and his kingdom was firmly established"²⁹,

are according to and in accordance with the view of Rashi that when there is a dispute, the monarchy is not an inheritance and requires anointing at the outset,

That is,

i.e.,

that with the anointing one <b>establishes and</b> <b>appoints</b> the new king — therefore also the appointment of Solomon was <b>through</b> his anointing.

It remains, however, not smooth: after all,

since in the parshah it is told

(not only how<b> </b><b>Abraham</b> did

Sent away the children of the concubines etc. and chosen Yitzchak,

but also)

as was his status and his excellence of Yitzchak after the death of Avraham — "And it was after the death of Avraham &lt;b&gt;and God blessed&lt;/b&gt; &lt;b&gt;Yitzchak&lt;/b&gt; etc." from the new and etc. Rashi&lt;sup&gt;30&lt;/sup&gt;

that the master of blessings specifically — the Holy One, blessed be He — came and blessed him,

one also needed to read in the haftarah about how the appointment of Shlomo was completed

(through his anointing)

and he became king&lt;sup&gt;31&lt;/sup&gt;

in actuality&lt;sup&gt;32&lt;/sup&gt;.

3.

One will understand this with an introduction of additional explanation regarding the nature of the anointing of Shlomo:

The Gemara³³

says regarding the prophecy of Hannah: "Raised is my horn in the Lord³⁴

Raised is my horn and not raised is the flask. David and Solomon, who were anointed with a horn, their kingdom continued; Saul and Jehu, who were anointed with a flask, their kingdom did not continue."³⁵

So it is seemingly not understood: The Rambam indeed rules³⁶

"Since David was anointed, he acquired the crown of kingship, and behold the kingship is his and his male descendants forever, as it is said³⁷

Your throne

"It shall be established forever."

That is,

that the kingdom of Solomon is a continuation

("his kingdom was continued")

from the kingdom of David — now, as they say, David &lt;b&gt;and Solomon&lt;/b&gt; who were anointed with a horn, their&lt;b&gt; &lt;/b&gt;&lt;b&gt;kingdom&lt;/b&gt; was continued,

as if each of them is a separate monarchy,

it is the &lt;b&gt;beginning&lt;/b&gt; of the kingdom

(also)

by Solomon&lt;sup&gt;38&lt;/sup&gt;

not a king son of a king)

— whereas the kingdom of Solomon began "since David was anointed" when then "he merited the crown of kingship etc. forever",

and his anointing was only "in order to &lt;b&gt;remove&lt;/b&gt; the dispute&lt;sup&gt;39&lt;/sup&gt;

and to make known to all that this one is king alone".

Also one must understand: the law that "they do not anoint a king son of a king" the Rambam brings in the Laws of the Temple Vessels and in the Laws of Kings&lt;sup&gt;40&lt;/sup&gt;

: in the Laws of the Temple Vessels he says the aforementioned wording "in order to remove the dispute and to make known to all that this one is king alone&lt;sup&gt;41&lt;/sup&gt;

just as they anointed Solomon because of the dispute of Adonijah and Joash because of Athaliah and Jehoahaz because of Jehoiakim his brother"; in the Laws

Regarding kings he says only "in order to eliminate the dispute" and he does <b>not</b> add "and to make known to all that this is the sole king etc."

And seemingly: the Rambam's way is indeed to rely on what he said earlier⁴²,

and in our case — the laws of the Temple vessels come indeed before the laws of kings,

he does not need to repeat it in the laws of kings.

Here is however the question: the place of this subject of kings,

that he explains in detail the laws of kings including also their anointing,

is <b>originally in the laws of kings</b> and not among the laws

(vessels of the Temple etc. including the laws)

regarding the anointing oil,

which only <b>incidentally</b> come there also the <b>laws</b> of anointing a king with the anointing oil,

and accordingly is seemingly the <b>reason</b> of the law and in particular the additional reason "to make known to all that this one is king alone" its place only in the laws<b> </b><b>of kings</b>.

4.

Is the point of the explanation in this: the subject of "to make known to all that this one is king alone" pertains primarily to the kings of the house of David

(as follows),

and therefore: in the laws of the vessels of the Temple,

where the details of the laws regarding anointing a king come as a detail in the anointing oil,

that anointing with the anointing oil is only for "the kings of the house of David alone"⁴³,

he says <b>there</b> that anointing a king the son of a king is also in order "to make known to all that this one is king alone";

But not in the laws of kings — "Laws of Kings"

(plain)

— where he speaks about "since David was anointed, he merited the crown of royalty, and behold the kingdom is his and his sons',"

and — that "a prophet⁴⁴

who appointed a king from the other tribes

of Israel, and that king walked in the way of the Torah and the commandment and fought the wars of the Lord, behold this is a king, <b>and all the commandments of the kingdom apply to him</b> etc., for Ahijah the Shilonite appointed Jeroboam and said to him⁴⁵

And it shall be, if you indeed listen⁴⁶

listen to all that I command you, then I will build you a faithful house, as I built <b>for David</b> etc."

Therefore, when he states there the law that "they do not anoint a king the son of a king unless there was a dispute or war, they anoint him,"

he states only the reason "in order to remove the dispute,"

but not regarding kings of Israel.

As follows.

5.

The explanation in this*⁴⁷

Even though that according to the Rambam, also after David merited the crown of kingship, "a prophet who appointed a king from the rest of the tribes of Israel, behold this is a king,

as above — nevertheless there is a fundamental difference,

as the Rambam explicitly says"⁴⁸

that "the kings of the house of David are they who stand forever, as it is said, 'Your throne shall be established forever'; but if a king from the rest of Israel stands, the kingship will cease from his house",

and even <b>during</b> that there is a king from the rest of the tribes of Israel, "the main kingship is to David"⁴⁹,

Bis,

as the Rambam says in his Sefer HaMitzvos⁵⁰

: Aval⁵¹

the kingdom alone already

You know from the expressions of the books of prophecy that David merited.

And explicitly they said: the crown of kingship David merited,

and likewise his descendants after him until the end of all generations, there is no king for one who believes in the Torah of Moses our teacher except from the seed of David and from the seed of Solomon specifically⁵²,

and whoever is from other than this honored seed regarding kingship, "foreigner" is called regarding him, just as whoever is from other than the seed of Aaron regarding the service, "stranger" is called regarding him."

Based on this it follows that the difference between the monarchy of the House of David and the kings of Israel is not only regarding time — that the kings of the House of David are enduring forever,

as opposed to the kings of Israel — rather it is a difference in the very definition of kingship: David <b>merited</b> the crown of kingship.

The very definition of kingship is always only in David and his descendants,

except that "by the command of God"⁵³

it can be that there should be a particular king from the rest of the tribes of Israel⁵⁴,

but it is not the "essence of kingship"⁵⁵,

until that regarding the kingship of David "he is called a stranger"⁵⁶,

and as he says in the Mechilta⁵⁷

"When David was chosen, all of Israel went out"⁵⁸.

6.

And one can say that this is the reason why only kings of the house of David are anointed with the anointing oil,

and as it is understood from the simple language of the Rambam "Since David was anointed, he merited the crown of royalty, and behold the royalty is his and his male descendants forever, as it is said etc.",

that the matter of anointing with the anointing oil of David is not just another detail in his appointment as king,

rather this established⁵⁹

the permanence and eternity of the kingdom of David,

"forever".

And the reason can be said: The anointing oil is the oil that Moshe made in such a way that "it will be for Me &lt;b&gt;for your generations&lt;/b&gt;" and "it is entirely preserved for the future to come"&lt;sup&gt;61&lt;/sup&gt;.

And as the Rambam says in Hilchos Klei HaMikdash,

"he placed it in a vessel for generations"&lt;sup&gt;62&lt;/sup&gt;

"and never was another oil made besides that which Moshe made"&lt;sup&gt;63&lt;/sup&gt;.

And therefore the anointing with the anointing oil also effects the "for your generations,"

the existence and eternity of the kingdom⁶⁴,

that "the kings of the house of David are those who stand forever."

About this the Rambam says "They do not anoint a king who is the son of a king, for the kingdom is an inheritance for the king forever ..

And if there was a dispute, they anoint him in order to remove the dispute and to make known to all that this one is king alone": When there is <b>no</b> dispute,

a king who is the son of a king does not need to have an anointing,

because the "anointing that anointed his father also affects them and they are like their father"⁶⁵

; but when "there was a dispute" — when then the matter of existence and eternity — the effect of the anointing with the anointing oil — is not revealed and known regarding the son,

then they anoint him for the sake of <b>two</b> matters: a)

in order to remove the dispute

(which applies not only to kings of the house of David

(with the anointing oil)

but also to a king from the other tribes of Israel

(with balsam oil)).

b)

"And <b>to make known</b> to all that this one is king <b>alone</b>" — which is the <b>unique</b> matter of the kings of the house of David alone⁶⁶.

That this is also the precision and addition in the language of the Rambam "to inform everyone that He is King &lt;b&gt;alone&lt;/b&gt;" — apparently, "alone" what does it come to teach us?&lt;sup&gt;67&lt;/sup&gt;

Rather, with this the Rambam means not only that &lt;b&gt; &lt;/b&gt;&lt;b&gt;He&lt;/b&gt; is the King and not the second one who led the dispute,

rather "that He is King &lt;b&gt;alone&lt;/b&gt;" always,

not only as it was in the days of David and Solomon&lt;sup&gt;68&lt;/sup&gt;,

rather also when there is a king from the other tribes of Israel,

he is "King &lt;b&gt;alone&lt;/b&gt;" — "the crown of kingship" is merited specifically by David and his descendants after him&lt;sup&gt;69&lt;/sup&gt;,

forever.

And therefore the Rambam says this in the laws of the Temple vessels&lt;sup&gt;70&lt;/sup&gt;

— because this

is a detail

(not in the laws of a king — rather it can also be not "alone",

but)

in the laws of <b>anointing oil</b> — it is also revealed regarding a king who is the son of a king

(about whom there was a dispute)

the concept of "a king alone" which exists regarding the kings of the house of David,

that also regarding him there is the concept of the eternality within them⁷¹

who stand forever⁷².

7.

Based on this, one can explain why the Gemara explicitly lists "David and Solomon who were anointed with a horn, their kingdom continued"⁷³,

even though Solomon was a king who is the son of a king,

and was anointed only "to settle the dispute" as above:

Even though that "since David was anointed he merited the crown of kingship",

but because the continuation of the essential matter of kingship is specifically through Solomon,

until as the Rambam says in Sefer HaMitzvos as above "there is no king for one who believes in the Torah of Moses except from the seed of David and specifically from the seed of Solomon",

and the Rambam counts

the inclusion⁷⁴

in

(the essential principle 12 of)

the 13 principles "and from the category of this foundation

(of the days of Moshiach)..

that there is no king for Israel except from the house of David and specifically from the seed of Solomon",

It follows automatically,

that the kingship of Solomon and his anointing is not merely a continuation⁷⁵

of the kingship of David because he was actually the one who inherited the kingship of David,

but rather the definition of the kingship of the House of David,

a kingship "&lt;b&gt;forever&lt;/b&gt;",

came

(after David)

specifically — through the kingship of Solomon.

Therefore one finds that the kingship of Solomon was distinguished from all the other kings of the House of David,

that he was "king alone" actually and openly &lt;b&gt;exactly&lt;/b&gt; like his father David,

not like the other kings of the House of David who were not king alone over all Israel,

for by a prophet a king was made from the rest of the tribes of Israel over the ten tribes.

And the reason for this — because regarding the kingdom of Solomon there was an explicit prophecy to David from the beginning about the eternity of the kingdom of Solomon,

"Behold,⁷⁶

a son is born to you, he will be a man of rest etc. Solomon will be his name etc. he will build a house for My name ..

<b>And I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel forever</b>".

Furthermore: just as it is said a special choice regarding David,

"And He chose David His servant"⁷⁷,

by which "all

"Israel" from the kingdom as above in the Mechilta,

it is said in this regard concerning Solomon⁷⁸

"And He chose" Hashem etc. from my entire father's house to be king over Israel forever etc. He desired to make king over all Israel and from all my sons for many sons Hashem gave me "and He chose Solomon my son" to sit upon the throne of the kingdom of Hashem over Israel",

and consequently all the other sons of David were excluded.

And therefore one includes both together,

"David and Solomon who were anointed with a horn, their kingdom continued": because the eternity of the kingdom of David was said specifically and only in relation to Solomon as above "and I will establish the throne of his kingdom over Israel forever",

this itself was also drawn forth in the anointing of Solomon,

"to make known to all that this is the king "alone"",

And therefore the name Malchus is called after both of them,

David and Shlomo.

8.

According to all the above, it is to be explained the "&lt;b&gt;inyan&lt;/b&gt; of the parshah" of the haftarah,

in the content of their subject,

and also the continuation to the parshah:

That which "the kings of the house of David are those who stand forever",

and as the language at the conclusion of the haftarah — which Bathsheba said after David swore "so I will do this day"

(that Solomon will be the king)

— "Let my lord <b>King David</b> live <b>forever</b>",

so "the monarchy will not be cut off from the seed of David <b>forever</b>"⁷⁹,

even when they do not conduct themselves properly, heaven forbid,

"the Holy One, blessed be He,⁷⁹

promised him in this, as it is said⁸⁰

If his children forsake My Torah and do not walk in My judgments, I will punish their transgression with a rod and their iniquity with stripes

their iniquity, <b>but My kindness I will not remove from him</b>" — so since the crown of kingship of David is connected with the choice of the Holy One, blessed be He,

therefore no cessation is possible in this

(true)

or change.

And this is in the manner of the distinctiveness of Jews from the aspect that they are the children of Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov: That which the Patriarchs,

Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov drew down to their children after them, to every single one of the Jewish people,

is this until the end of all generations⁸¹.

Because the choice of the Holy One, blessed be He, "Whom You chose, Avram"⁸²

is not subject to any change.

And just as with the kings of the house of David, the matter of "Let my lord &lt;b&gt;the king&lt;/b&gt; David &lt;b&gt;live forever&lt;/b&gt;" was actualized in the continuation of the monarchy,

in that "Solomon your son shall reign after me",

for "I have chosen Solomon my son to sit upon the throne of the kingdom of the Lord over Israel",

as above,

so too in our portion the continuation of Abraham

(You chose Abram)

came to fruition in the fulfillment of God's promise "For in Isaac shall your seed be called"&lt;sup&gt;82&lt;/sup&gt;,

Isaac actually continues the house of Abraham.

And based on this it can be said that therefore in the version of the Rambam

(and according to the custom of most of Israel now)

the verse about the actual kingdom of Solomon is not said in the haftarah,

because also in our portion the matter is the patriarchs,

Abraham, Isaac

(and Jacob),

as the foundation of the entire people of Israel which they transmitted to their children after them forever&lt;sup&gt;84&lt;/sup&gt;

is not yet

Was completed in completeness

(in our parshah),

that "in Yitzchak shall your seed be called, and not all Yitzchak"⁸⁵,

until the birth of Yaakov

(in parshas Toldos),

specifically then was completed the completeness of the matter of the Patriarchs,

"We call 'Patriarchs' only the three"⁸⁶.

9.

And it can be said that the "matter of the parshah" in this haftarah is not only in the thematic connection of the kingdom of the House of David,

David and Shlomo,

with the Patriarchs,

but also in that the completion of the choice in Avraham and Yitzchak — the <b>foundation</b> of the people of Israel — is revealed in the kings of the House of David.

The explanation of this:

The conclusion and perfection of a nation is specifically when it becomes a nation <b>one</b> together,

not when each one is on his own.

And this is accomplished by the king,

And in the language of the Rambam regarding the commandment of appointing a king⁸⁷

: that we are commanded to appoint over us a king who will <b>gather</b> our entire nation and <b>lead us</b>⁸⁸.

And thereby is expressed the choice of the entirety of the people of Israel as one nation in that the Almighty chose a king over Israel <b>forever</b>,

the choice of David and Solomon — "the kings of the house of David ..

who stand forever",

through whom comes the "kingdom of God over Israel"⁷⁸.

But no matter in this: as has been discussed already several times, the kingdom of the house of David

Connected with the Beis HaMikdash,

as it is written⁸⁹

"I did not choose <b>a city</b> from all the tribes of Israel to build a house for My name to be there, and I chose <b>David</b> to be over My people Israel"⁹⁰.

And therefore the building of the Beis HaBechirah was specifically through David

(who had prepared everything to build the Beis HaMikdash⁹¹)

and Shlomo

(who "he will build a house for My name" in practice).

That through the choice of the kings of the House of David and the building of the Beis HaMikdash, Jews came to rest and to inheritance⁹²,

togeth-

rest and inheritance of the Shechinah,

the indwelling of the Shechinah,

"This is the house of God, the Lord, etc."⁹³,

"This⁹⁴

is My resting place forever"⁹⁵.

And therefore the revelation of free choice in Avraham and the Patriarchs after him as fathers of the Jewish people came at the time of the fulfillment of "May my lord King David live forever",

the kingdom of David and Shlomo,

through whom was the building of the Chosen House — the indwelling of the Shechinah permanently <b>in the Jewish people</b>.

(From the sichos of Shabbos Parshas Vayeira and Shabbos Parshas Chayei Sarah 5743)