Character Selection

King Shaul (Saul), the first king of Israel, is a pivotal figure in the Tanach. His life and reign are chronicled in Shmuel Aleph (1 Samuel) and Shmuel Bet (2 Samuel). Shaul’s character is marked by his initial humility, military successes, and eventual tragic downfall, making him an ideal subject for psychoanalytic exploration.

Biography

Shaul was a member of the tribe of Binyamin (Benjamin) and the son of Kish. He was chosen by the prophet Shmuel (Samuel) to be the first king of Israel, as described in Shmuel Aleph 9-10. Initially reluctant to assume leadership, Shaul displayed humility, hiding among the baggage during his public anointing (1 Samuel 10:22). His reign began with military victories, such as his triumph over the Ammonites (1 Samuel 11) and his campaigns against the Philistines.

However, Shaul’s reign was marred by disobedience to G-d’s commands, particularly in the war against Amalek (1 Samuel 15), where he failed to fully carry out the divine directive to destroy Amalek. This act of disobedience led to his rejection by G-d and the prophet Shmuel.

Shaul’s later years were characterized by paranoia and jealousy, especially toward David, whom he perceived as a threat to his throne. His obsession with David led to erratic behavior, including attempts to kill him and the massacre of the priests of Nov (1 Samuel 22). Shaul’s life ended tragically in battle against the Philistines on Mount Gilboa, where he fell on his sword to avoid capture (1 Samuel 31).

Character Traits and Rabbinic Commentary

Rabbinic literature portrays Shaul as a tragic figure with great potential undermined by his flaws. The Talmud (Yoma 22b) praises Shaul for his modesty and initial suitability for kingship, noting that he was “without sin” when he ascended the throne. However, his inability to fully obey G-d’s commands and his excessive concern for public opinion are seen as his primary failings. The Midrash (Bereishit Rabbah 82:10) contrasts Shaul’s humility with his later descent into jealousy and paranoia, emphasizing the dangers of unchecked emotions.

Psychoanalytic Analysis

Freudian Perspective

From a Freudian perspective, Shaul’s character can be analyzed through the lens of the id, ego, and superego. His initial humility and obedience to Shmuel reflect a strong superego, guided by moral and religious authority. However, his later actions, such as his disobedience in the war against Amalek and his obsessive pursuit of David, suggest a conflict between his id (his primal desires for power and control) and his superego. This internal conflict leads to his psychological instability, manifesting in paranoia and erratic behavior. Freud’s concept of the “death drive” (Thanatos) is also relevant, as Shaul’s self-destructive tendencies culminate in his suicide.

Jungian Perspective

In Jungian terms, Shaul embodies the archetype of the “tragic hero” and the “shadow.” His initial anointing as king aligns with the archetype of the “hero,” chosen to lead and protect his people. However, his shadow—his jealousy, fear of inadequacy, and inability to reconcile his divine mission with his personal insecurities—ultimately consumes him. Shaul’s relationship with David can be seen as a projection of his shadow; David represents the qualities Shaul lacks (charisma, divine favor, and future kingship), leading to Shaul’s obsessive attempts to destroy him. Jung’s concept of individuation, the process of integrating the shadow into the self, is absent in Shaul’s life, resulting in his tragic downfall.

Lacanian Perspective

From a Lacanian perspective, Shaul’s tragedy can be understood through the lens of the “Symbolic,” “Imaginary,” and “Real.” Shaul’s kingship represents his entry into the Symbolic order, where he assumes the role of a leader bound by divine law and societal expectations. However, his failure to fully internalize this role and his fixation on David (the Imaginary rival) reveal a fundamental lack in his sense of self. Lacan’s concept of the “objet petit a” (the unattainable object of desire) is relevant here; Shaul’s desire for divine approval and security in his kingship remains unfulfilled, driving his obsessive and self-destructive behavior.

Historical and Theological Relevance

Shaul’s reign marks a significant transition in Jewish history, from the period of the Judges to the monarchy. Theologically, his story underscores the importance of obedience to G-d’s will and the dangers of prioritizing personal desires or public opinion over divine command. Shaul’s rejection by G-d serves as a cautionary tale about the consequences of failing to fulfill one’s spiritual mission.

Linguistic Notes

The name “Shaul” (שָׁאוּל) means “asked for” or “borrowed,” reflecting the people’s request for a king (1 Samuel 8:5). The gematria (numerical value) of Shaul is 337, which can be connected to themes of leadership and divine testing in Jewish numerological interpretations.

Philosophical Notes

Philosophically, Shaul’s story can be examined through various lenses:

• Plato: Shaul’s struggle with his desires and his failure to align with the “ideal” of kingship reflect Plato’s concept of the philosopher-king, who must harmonize reason, spirit, and appetite.
• Nietzsche: Shaul’s downfall can be seen as a failure to embrace the “will to power” in a constructive way. His jealousy of David reflects a ressentiment, a Nietzschean term for the bitterness of the weak toward the strong.
• Heidegger: Shaul’s existential crisis and his inability to confront his own “being-toward-death” (Heidegger’s term for the awareness of mortality) are central to his tragedy.
• Zizek: Shaul’s obsession with David can be analyzed as a symptom of his inability to reconcile his symbolic role as king with his personal insecurities, leading to a breakdown of the Real.
• Neoplatonism: From a Neoplatonic perspective, Shaul’s failure to ascend toward the divine “One” (Plotinus’ ultimate source of unity) reflects his entrapment in the material and emotional realm, preventing spiritual transcendence.

Bibliography

1. Tanach (Hebrew Bible), Books of Shmuel Aleph and Shmuel Bet.
2. Talmud Bavli, Yoma 22b.
3. Midrash Bereishit Rabbah 82:10.
4. Freud, Sigmund. The Ego and the Id. 1923.
5. Jung, Carl. Archetypes and the Collective Unconscious. 1959.
6. Lacan, Jacques. Écrits: A Selection. 1966.
7. Plato. The Republic.
8. Nietzsche, Friedrich. On the Genealogy of Morality. 1887.
9. Heidegger, Martin. Being and Time. 1927.
10. Zizek, Slavoj. The Sublime Object of Ideology. 1989.
11. Plotinus. The Enneads.

Character Impact Note

Shaul’s significance extends beyond the Tanach, serving as a symbol of the complexities of leadership and the human condition. His story resonates in broader cultural and religious contexts as a cautionary tale about the dangers of unchecked emotions, the challenges of fulfilling divine missions, and the psychological struggles inherent in positions of power. Shaul’s interactions with David, in particular, highlight the profound impact of rivalry and jealousy, shaping the trajectory of Israel’s monarchy. His life invites reflection on the interplay between personal flaws and divine destiny, making him a timeless figure in Jewish thought and beyond.