The Kli Yakar notices that in Parshat Shoftim, three major forms of leadership are described: the judge, the king, and the priest. Is there any theme that these three leaders have in common? Consider the mitzvah regarding appointing the king. The Torah says: “Som tasim alecha melech,” “You shall place upon you a king.” Why then, did Shmuel subsequently become angry at the people for requesting a king if it is a mitzvah in the Torah? The Rambam (Hilc. Melachim) explains that their intentions were not Lshaym shamayim, rather it was a way of separating from Hashem, as it says “Ki lo oscha ma’asi, osi ma’asi.” The Kli Yakar explains that they did not want a king who would rule them, but rather they wanted someone they could control and who would follow them. The king is supposed to be a leader guiding the people in the path of the Torah.

This explanation is still difficult to understand because of the principle L’olam ya’ask adam b’Torah ubmitzvot, shemitoch shelo lisma, bah lismah (Pesachim 50b). How is this mitzvah of appointing a king different than any other mitzvah? In truth, there is a contradiction in the Talmud itself even with regard to other mitzvot. The Talmud (Brachot 17) states, “Ha’ose shelo lismah noach lo shlo nivra.” How can we reconcile these conflicting directives? Rav Hershel Schacter explains (Ikvei Hatzon 22) in the name of the Netziv (Meishiv Davar Cheilek 8 Siman 46) that the principle of shelo lishma is only valid if the person is just fulfilling an act which has been done previously. However, if one is saying a novelty in Torah, establishing a new minhag, or building a new project, then the only legitimate way to do it is with pure intentions and no personal interest. The Netziv applied this to a case of a rabbi who wanted to start his own minyan because he was not getting enough respect in his shul, which he felt to be a bizayon HaTorah. The Netziv wrote to this rabbi that it would be wrong to start a minyan for such a reason.

From the perspective of the torah, there is a great deal of innovative potential attached to the kingship. The political leadership of the Jews is responsible for both spiritual and physical growth. Such an institution would certainly fit into what the Netziv called chiddush. Therefore, it must be completely leshaym shamayim, more than any other endeavor, as the Rambam writes, “In everything his actions should be l’shaym shamayim, and his direction and his thoughts should be to raise the true religion (Melachim 4:10). Similarly, the Rambam writes that anyone involved with communal needs has to do everything leshaym shamayim.What we learn from the story of Shmuel HaNavi is that even the motivation for establishing a king must also be done leshaym shamayim. The leader has to be fighting for the cause he represents, without any of his personal interests standing in the way.

From the above analysis, it is clear that the king and the judge share similar responsibilities, i.e. to be fair, just, and impartial. Perhaps the same is true as well of the third institution of priesthood. The kohen is responsible for the spiritual well being of the other Jews. In the laws of kodshim we find many requirements of lishma. Thus, all three areas of Jewish leadership share in the common theme of acting purely le’shem shamayim.

Shaul HaMelech lost his kingship because of his mistakes while destroying Amalek and by not waiting for Shmuel. But Dovid also made mistakes, and yet he did not lose his kingship. Why? Even though both men made mistakes and both admitted their mistakes, Dovid, however, admitted his faults publicly, as we see similarly with Yehudah and Tamar. Likewise, Dovid was not ashamed to dance in front of the aron, and his wife Michal was wrong for reprimanding him. Dovid was able to have two roles. On the one hand he was king of the people, and on the other hand he was a servant of Hashem. He was the ideal model of what a true king, according to the Torah, should be. His life was full of travails in which he had to demonstrate his complete devotion to Hashem. This explains why the Melech HaMoshiach has to be a descendent of Dovid. The melech hamoshiach has to reflect the ultimate kingship of Hashem, which in essence is purely lishma.