“Now there was a man of Benjamin, whose name was Kish…the son of a
Benjamite, a mighty man of valor…and he had a son, whose name was Saul…”
The prophet Samuel, in response to the people’s decidedly dumb demand for a king, had harsh
words. In no uncertain terms, the seer gave his co-religionists an earful (Samuel 8). On the
perils of a monarchy, Abravanel writes much, as stated above. Nonetheless, the Maker says to
Samuel in the previous chapter’s concluding verse: “And the LORD said to Samuel, hearken unto
their voice, and make them a king…” The die was cast, the Rubicon crossed.
In Samuel 9, Abravanel asks: Considering that God “conceded” a monarch for the Jews, why did
He inform – and command – Samuel to anoint a man from the tribe of Benjamin: “Tomorrow
about this time I will send you a man out of the land of Benjamin, and you shall anoint him to
be prince over My people Israel, and he shall save My people out of the hand of the Philistines;
for I have looked upon My people, because their cry is come unto Me?”
Abravanel explains his question and its context. The Hebrews suffered from the Philistine’s
military occupation of the Holy Land. The Creator heard His people’s wailing and pledged to
save them via a unified leader, a prince. But, Abravanel probes, if now was an auspicious time
for a king, why hadn’t God sent Samuel a man from the tribe of Judah? After all, Jacob, on his
death bed designated Judah to lead the tribes: “The scepter shall not depart from Judah, nor
the ruler's staff from between his feet, as long as men come to Shiloh; and unto him shall the
obedience of the peoples be” (Genesis 49). Thusly, had the hoary patriarch urged and directed
his flourishing family.
Moreover, Abravanel adds, during the period of the Hebrew judges, after Joshua’s passing, the
tribes sought leadership. Heaven provided guidance: “And it came to pass after the death of
Joshua, that the Children of Israel asked the LORD, saying: Who shall go up for us first against
the Canaanites, to fight against them? And LORD said: Judah shall go up. Behold, I have
delivered the land into his hand” (Judges 1).
Still, Abravanel continues, if the nation hankered for a tribe other than Judah, then why not
choose Reuben? Wasn’t he Jacob’s firstborn? Or, why not hand the reins of power to Joseph, as
he was beloved by all his brethren? In sum, why, Abravanel asks, did Samuel anoint and
coronate Saul from Benjamin? David, the Jewish sages teach, was nearly thirty years old. Surely,
he would have been a prudent choice.
Below, Abravanel gives four rationales for Samuel’s choice of Saul, rationales that bespeak
divine wisdom and forethought. We present them in brief form.
- Kish, father of Saul, was a mighty man of valor. God saw fit to designate one of his
offspring to fight the Philistines. - Saul’s name in Hebrew means “borrowed.” The Maker understood that Saul’s reign
would be short-lived or borrowed, as the first king’s name insinuates. - Saul is described here as “young and goodly.” Despite his youth, a time normally
associated with immaturity and galloping hormones, Saul stood apart; he acted
judiciously with God and man. - Physically, the young man was well-built and handsome, as our chapter attests: “From
his shoulders and upward he was taller than any of the people.” Good looks, naturally,
play a part in leadership.
In sum, Abravanel’s close read of our lead verses establishes Saul’s lineage and strengths. But
we have not answered why Samuel promoted a man from Benjamin to lead the Hebrews. To do
so requires us to study the broader question. Our next essay tackles this issue.