At the end of his life, Yaakov gathers his children together, the brothers that would be the foundation of the tribes of Israel. He gives them each a unique blessing. Yehudah is identified with the future political leadership of the Jewish people.

בראשית מט:י

לֹֽא־יָס֥וּר שֵׁ֨בֶט֙ מִֽיהוּדָ֔ה וּמְחֹקֵ֖ק מִבֵּ֣ין רַגְלָ֑יו עַ֚ד כִּֽי־יָבֹ֣א שִׁילֹ֔ה וְל֖וֹ יִקְּהַ֥ת עַמִּֽים:

Bereisheet 49:10

The scepter will not leave Judah, nor a scribe from between his feet, until he comes to Shiloh, and to him the nations will be obedient (translation based on Ibn Ezra)

רמב"ן בראשית מט:י

ואיפשר גם כן שהיה עליהם חטא במלכותם מפני שהיו כהנים, ונצטוו: תשמרו את כהונתכם לכל דבר המזבח ולמבית לפרכת ועבדתם עבודת מתנה אתן את כהונתכם (במדבר י"ח:ז'), ולא היה להם למלוך רק לעבוד את עבודת י"י. [וראיתי בירושלמי במסכת הוריות (ירושלמי הוריות ג':ב'): אין מושחין מלכים כהנים. ר' יהודה ענתוריא על שם לא יסור שבט מיהודה.

Nachmanides on the Torah - Bereisheet 49:10

It is also possible that, [in addition to the Hasmoneans having sinned for assuming royalty when they were not of the tribe of Judah], they sinned in ruling on account of their being priests, who have been commanded: “Guard your priesthood in everything that pertaineth to the altar, and to within the veil; and ye shall serve; I give you the priesthood as a service of gift” (Numbers 18:7). Thus it was not for them to rule, but only to perform the Service of G-d. In Tractate Horayoth of the Jerusalem Talmud (3:2) I have seen the following text: “We do not anoint priests as kings. Rabbi Yehudah Anturya said that this is on account of the verse, ‘The sceptre shall not depart from Judah.’”

The Ramban explains that one error of the Hashmonaim, also known as the Macabees, was that they assumed the monarchy despite not being from the tribe of Yehudah (see Rambam, Melachim 1:8 who allows monarchs on a temporary basis from other tribes). But beyond this, they also tried to combine the monarchy with the priesthood. The source prohibiting this in the Jerusalem Talmud directly cites our verse.

The phrase “separation between church and state” was coined by Thomas Jefferson in a letter from 1802. But we find a source for this concept in the separation of the spiritual and the political within the Torah system. That’s not to say we don’t aspire to have political leaders with spiritual depth. But we recognize that such a combination is rare.

תלמוד בבלי – גמרא גיטין נט

ואמר רבה בריה דרבא ואיתימא רבי הילל בריה דרבי וולס מימות משה ועד רבי לא מצינו תורה וגדולה במקום אחד.

Talmud Bavli - Gittin 49a

Raba the son of Rava, and some say it was Rebbe Hillel the son of Vallas, said: From the days of Moshe until Rebbe (Yehudah the Prince), we do not find Torah and greatness in a single person

The Gemara proceeds to question this statement. What about the great King David? The Gemara answers, that while he certainly embodied both spiritual and political greatness, there was someone in his generation who exceeded him in Torah.

It is indeed possible to have leadership and spirituality combined in a single individual. Moshe Rabbeinu and Rebbe Yehudah HaNasi were unparalleled in each sphere during their era. Rashi (Bereisheet 49:3) indicates that Yaakov’s firstborn son Reuven could have combined the priesthood and the monarchy. But he failed to live up to this possibility. Throughout subsequent Jewish history this combination has been elusive. It is thus important not to have too much power concentrated in one institution. We must leave room for greatness to evolve in multiple segments of society.

The late Rabbi Dr. Nachum Eliezer Rabinovitch brought these concepts forward into the modern state of Israel. In a recent article in the Torah U-Madda Journal discussing his political theology, Rami Schwartz writes: “While in his writings R. Rabinovitch unquestioningly endorses modern Israel’s democracy, his political theology does carry with it some pointed criticisms of the current system. Chief among these is that too often the State of Israel fails to maintain a proper separation between the civil and the spiritual” (Schwartz, 2021). Here is Rabbi Rabinovitch in his own words:

Thus the legal system of Torah consists of two parts. One, the proper jurisdiction of the government, deals with affairs of society. The other - the commandments between man and God - belongs to every Jew. This division has important implications. The rulers are charged with implementing the laws between man and his fellow men, and are granted wide legislative and administrative powers in this realm…The ultimate goals of spiritual welfare are to be achieved by means other than government (Rabinovitch, 1992).

Judah is given the mantle of monarchy. But he is not given the priesthood. Nor are the priests allowed to be monarchs. Each has its own sphere of influence. Government must concentrate on providing man’s physical needs, to sustain and preserve justice, peace, and security among men. It must be careful not to overstep. The Kohanim –priests, must maintain a degree of separation from this enterprise, for they must focus on man’s spiritual development. It is not that these endeavors cannot be combined, but due to the faults of men, they are best left to be pursued independently. Ultimately though, the efforts toward sovereignty and spirituality can work in concert and need not conflict.

Believing with you that religion is a matter which lies solely between Man & his God, that he owes account to none other for his faith or his worship, that the legitimate powers of government reach actions only, & not opinions, I contemplate with sovereign reverence that act of the whole American people which declared that their legislature should "make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof," thus building a wall of separation between Church & State. Adhering to this expression of the supreme will of the nation in behalf of the rights of conscience, I shall see with sincere satisfaction the progress of those sentiments which tend to restore to man all his natural rights, convinced he has no natural right in opposition to his social duties (Jefferson, 1802).

References

Thomas Jefferson (1802). Letter to Danbury, Connecticut, Baptist Association, January 1, with Copy. -01-01. [Manuscript/Mixed Material] Retrieved from the Library of Congress, https://www.loc.gov/item/mtjbib010955/ Jefferson's Letter to the Danbury Baptists: The Final Letter, as Sent. Library of Congress Information Bulletin, 51(6). https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danpre.html

James Hutson. (1998). 'A Wall of Separation’ FBI Helps Restore Jefferson's Obliterated Draft. Library of Congress Information Bulletin, 57(6). https://www.loc.gov/loc/lcib/9806/danbury.html

Nahmanides & CB Chavel (1999). Commentary on the Torah. New York: Shilo. https://mg.alhatorah.org/Full/Bereshit/49.10#e0n6

Nachum L. Rabinovitch. (February 6, 1992). The Civil and the Spiritual. The Jerusalem Report. Retrieved from Nexis Uni®

Rami Schwartz. (2006). The Political Theology of Rabbi Nachum Eliezer Rabinovitch. The Torah U-madda Journal, 18, 1-32. Retrieved from: https://content.yutorah.org/viewer/2021/1053/1005707.pdf

This is a public episode. If you would like to discuss this with other subscribers or get access to bonus episodes, visit bentorah.substack.com