Skip to Content
Nach YomiII Samuel ยท ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ืณChapter 12

II Samuel 12

ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ืณ ืคืจืง ื™ืดื‘

Section: ื ื‘ื™ืื™ื ยท ื ื‘ื™ืื™ื ืจืืฉื•ื ื™ื | Book: II Samuel | Chapter: 12 of 24 | Day: 88 of 742

Date: May 10, 2026

ืงืœืื•ื“ ืขืœ ื”ื ืดืš

II Samuel 12 is the moral hinge of the David narrative and one of the most theologically charged chapters in all of Tanakh. After the long descending arc of chapter 11 โ€” the rooftop sighting, the summons, the failed cover-up, and the engineered death of Uriah โ€” chapter 12 opens with three terse Hebrew words that reverse the gravity of the entire book: ื•ื™ืฉืœื— ื”โ€™ ืืช ื ืชืŸ ืืœ ื“ื•ื“, โ€œand the Lord sent Nathan to David.โ€ The sword that David has wielded against another manโ€™s husband is now turned, in the form of the prophetโ€™s voice, against David himself. What follows is the most famous parable in the Hebrew Bible, the most devastating two-word indictment in scripture (ืืชื” ื”ืื™ืฉ), and a confession of three syllables (ื—ื˜ืืชื™ ืœื”โ€™) whose brevity has been read by the rabbis as the very measure of authentic teshuvah.

The literary architecture of the chapter is precise and audacious. Nathan does not denounce David; he traps him. He tells a small, vivid story about a rich man with vast flocks, a poor man with one beloved ewe-lamb, and a traveler whose arrival provokes the rich man to take what is not his. The parable is so finely calibrated that David, the shepherd-king and lifelong adjudicator of disputes, walks straight into the verdict it requires of him โ€” โ€œthe man deserves death, and he must pay fourfold.โ€ Only then does Nathan deliver the blade: โ€œYou are the man.โ€ Rashi, drawing on the Tosefta, reads the parableโ€™s three guests โ€” ื”ืœืš, ืื•ืจื—, ืื™ืฉ โ€” as a graded portrait of the yetzer ha-ra, which arrives first as a passing traveler, then settles in as a guest, and finally takes possession as master of the house. The chapter thus performs in narrative form a teaching about how sin captures a soul in stages, and the narrative voice does it without ever lecturing. The fourfold payment David imposes on himself is read by the midrash as fulfilled with exact precision in the ensuing chapters: the unnamed infant of this chapter, then Amnon, Tamar, and Absalom โ€” each death drawn from Davidโ€™s own house, each a measured installment on the verdict David himself pronounced.

Nathanโ€™s prophecy that follows the indictment establishes the dual-axis punishment that organizes the rest of II Samuel. โ€œThe sword shall not depart from your house foreverโ€ becomes the structural principle of chapters 13 through 20: the rape of Tamar, the murder of Amnon, Absalomโ€™s revolt, the death of Absalom, the rebellion of Sheva ben Bichri. The second prophecy โ€” โ€œI will take your wives before your eyesโ€ โ€” is fulfilled when Absalom enters the rooftop tent with his fatherโ€™s concubines in chapter 16, in a deliberate inversion of the rooftop where the chain of sin began. Radak grapples with the theological problem this poses: how can God decree that Absalom will sin? His answer, drawing on Saadia Gaon, is that God did not compel Absalomโ€™s transgression but foresaw it; the decree was that God would not shield Davidโ€™s wives from a rebellion that Absalom would freely choose. The chapter stages, in compact form, the classical rabbinic balance between divine providence and human agency.

Davidโ€™s response to Nathan โ€” ื—ื˜ืืชื™ ืœื”โ€™ โ€” has been the subject of immense rabbinic admiration. The two words appear without elaboration, without self-justification, without negotiation. Where Saul, faced with prophetic rebuke a generation earlier, had argued, hedged, and bargained, David simply confesses. Nathan answers immediately: ื’ื ื”โ€™ ื”ืขื‘ื™ืจ ื—ื˜ืืชืš, โ€œthe Lord has remitted your sin.โ€ The Talmud (Yoma 22b) and Radak both note that the punishment is not lifted but reshaped โ€” the death penalty David himself had pronounced is commuted, but the consequences will play out across his lifetime in the deaths of his own children. The chapterโ€™s theology of teshuvah is therefore neither sentimental nor cheap: repentance reaches the soul, but it does not undo the worldly damage that sin has set in motion. The next seven days are spent on the ground, fasting, in a posture of intercession that is also Israelโ€™s earliest extended portrait of a parent grieving for a dying child.

The closing movement of the chapter pivots in two directions at once. From the death of the unnamed infant emerges the birth of Solomon โ€” ื•ื”โ€™ ืื”ื‘ื•, โ€œand the Lord loved himโ€ โ€” the only place in scripture where Godโ€™s love for a specific individual is announced before that person has done anything at all. Nathan returns, this time bearing a name: Yedidyah, โ€œbeloved of the Lord.โ€ The same prophet who pronounced the indictment now pronounces the blessing on the heir. Then, abruptly, the narrative shifts to the Ammonite battlefield, where Joab has captured the water-city of Rabbah and summons David to receive the credit. David takes the city, places the kingโ€™s crown on his head, and returns to Jerusalem. The chapter ends with David restored to military glory, but only after the deepest crisis of his reign has been resolved through prophetic confrontation, confession, and the slow consequences of a forgiven sin. The juxtaposition is deliberate: the king who could not be reached by the sword of his enemies has been brought to his knees by a parable about a lamb, and from that brokenness a new heir has emerged who will build the Temple. Few chapters in Tanakh accomplish so much theological work in so little space.

ืคืจืง ื™ืดื‘ ยท Chapter 12

ืคืกื•ืง ืืณ ยท Verse 1

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึดืฉืึฐืœึทึงื— ื™ึฐื”ึนื•ึธึ›ื” ืึถืชึพื ึธืชึธึ–ืŸ ืึถืœึพื“ึผึธื•ึดึ‘ื“ ื•ึทื™ึผึธื‘ึนึฃื ืึตืœึธึ—ื™ื• ื•ึทื™ึผึนึคืืžึถืจ ืœื•ึนึ™ ืฉืึฐื ึตึฃื™ ืึฒื ึธืฉืึดึ—ื™ื ื”ึธื™ื•ึผึ™ ื‘ึผึฐืขึดึฃื™ืจ ืึถื—ึธึ”ืช ืึถื—ึธึฅื“ ืขึธืฉืึดึ–ื™ืจ ื•ึฐืึถื—ึธึฅื“ ืจึธึฝืืฉืืƒ

English:

and GOD sent Nathan to David. He came to him and said, โ€œThere were two men in the same city, one rich and one poor.

The verse opens chapter 12 with God Himself dispatching the prophet -- the Hebrew construction ื•ื™ืฉืœื— ื”' announces that this is a divine initiative, not Nathan's own moral instinct. Metzudat David explains why Nathan begins with a parable rather than a direct accusation: he wants David to pronounce judgment on himself before he realizes the case is his own, so the king's mouth will not have time to defend or excuse.

ืคืกื•ืง ื‘ืณ ยท Verse 2

Hebrew:

ืœึฐืขึธืฉืึดึ—ื™ืจ ื”ึธื™ึธึ›ื” ืฆึนึฅืืŸ ื•ึผื‘ึธืงึธึ–ืจ ื”ึทืจึฐื‘ึผึตึฅื” ืžึฐืึนึฝื“ืƒ

English:

The rich one had very large flocks and herds,

ืคืกื•ืง ื’ืณ ยท Verse 3

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐืœึธืจึธึฃืฉื ืึตึฝื™ืŸึพื›ึผึนึ—ืœ ื›ึผึดื™ึฉ ืึดืึพื›ึผึดื‘ึฐืฉื‚ึธึจื” ืึทื—ึทึคืช ืงึฐื˜ึทื ึผึธื”ึ™ ืึฒืฉืึถึฃืจ ืงึธื ึธึ”ื” ื•ึทื™ึฐื—ึทื™ึผึถึ•ื”ึธ ื•ึทืชึผึดื’ึฐื“ึผึทึฅืœ ืขึดืžึผึ›ื•ึน ื•ึฐืขึดืึพื‘ึผึธื ึธึ–ื™ื• ื™ึทื—ึฐื“ึผึธึ‘ื• ืžึดืคึผึดืชึผึจื•ึน ืชึนืื›ึทึœืœ ื•ึผืžึดื›ึผึนืกึคื•ึน ืชึดืฉืึฐืชึผึถื”ึ™ ื•ึผื‘ึฐื—ึตื™ืงึฃื•ึน ืชึดืฉืึฐื›ึผึธึ”ื‘ ื•ึทืชึผึฐื”ึดื™ึพืœึ–ื•ึน ื›ึผึฐื‘ึทึฝืชืƒ

English:

but the poor one had only one little ewe lamb that he had bought. He tended it and it grew up together with him and his children: it used to share his morsel of bread, drink from his cup, and nestle in his bosom; it was like a daughter to him.

The poor man's lamb is described in language deliberately echoing a beloved daughter -- eating from his plate, drinking from his cup, sleeping in his bosom. Metzudat David notes that the imagery is poetic exaggeration designed to maximize the emotional charge of the parable, ensuring David will react with full moral outrage when the rich man takes her.

ืคืกื•ืง ื“ืณ ยท Verse 4

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึธึฃื‘ึนื ื”ึตึ˜ืœึถืšึฐึฎ ืœึฐืึดึฃื™ืฉื ื”ึถืขึธืฉืึดื™ืจึ’ ื•ึทื™ึผึทื—ึฐืžึนึ—ืœ ืœึธืงึทึคื—ึทืช ืžึดืฆึผึนืื ื•ึนึ™ ื•ึผืžึดื‘ึผึฐืงึธืจึ”ื•ึน ืœึทืขึฒืฉื‚ึ•ื•ึนืช ืœึธืึนืจึตึ–ื—ึท ื”ึทื‘ึผึธืึพืœึ‘ื•ึน ื•ึทื™ึผึดืงึผึทึ—ื— ืึถืชึพื›ึผึดื‘ึฐืฉื‚ึทืชึ™ ื”ึธืึดึฃื™ืฉื ื”ึธืจึธึ”ืืฉื ื•ึทึฝื™ึผึทืขึฒืฉื‚ึถึ”ื”ึธ ืœึธืึดึ–ื™ืฉื ื”ึทื‘ึผึธึฅื ืึตืœึธึฝื™ื•ืƒ

English:

One day, a traveler came to the rich man, but he was loath to take anything from his own flocks or herds to prepare a meal for the guest who had come to him; so he took the poor manโ€™s lamb and prepared it for the man who had come to him.โ€

The parable's most arresting detail is the rich man's three-stage progression in describing the visitor -- first ื”ืœืš (a passer-by), then ืื•ืจื— (a guest), and finally ืื™ืฉ (a man). Rashi, drawing on the Tosefta, reads this as Nathan's portrait of the yetzer ha-ra: the evil inclination first arrives as a stranger merely passing through, settles in as a lodger, and finally takes possession as the master of the house. The lamb's slaughter for a casual traveler stands in for David's destruction of Uriah's household for a passing impulse.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื•ึทื™ึธึผื‘ึนื ื”ึตืœึถืšึฐ. ื“ึดึผืžึธึผื” ืึถืช ื™ึตืฆึถืจ ื”ึธืจึธืข ืชึฐึผื—ึดืœึธึผื” ืœึฐื”ึตืœึถืšึฐ, ืฉึถืืขื•ึนื‘ึตืจ ืœึฐื“ึทืจึฐื›ึผื•ึน, ื•ึฐืึทื—ึทืจ ื›ึธึผืšึฐ ืœึฐืื•ึนืจึตื—ึท, ืฉึถืื ึทึผืขึฒืฉึธื‚ื” ืึทื›ึฐืกึฐื ึทืื™, ื•ึฐืึทื—ึทืจ ื›ึธึผืšึฐ ืœึฐืึดื™ืฉื, ืฉึถืื”ื•ึผื ื‘ึทึผืขึทืœ ื”ึทื‘ึทึผื™ึดืช:
A traveler came. [Noson] compared the evil inclination at first to a sojourner that is [quickly] going on his way. Afterwords he is compared to a guest that has become a resident and afterwords he is compared to a man who is the owner of the house.1This verse is Noson's parable alluding to the evil inclination. The visiton is first referred to as ื”ึตืœึถืšึฐ, then ืื‚ืจึตื—ึท and finally as an ืึดื™ืฉื, representing the evil inclination's ability to take more and more control over its victim's life.

ืคืกื•ืง ื”ืณ ยท Verse 5

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึดื—ึทืจึพืึทึฅืฃ ื“ึผึธื•ึดึ›ื“ ื‘ึผึธืึดึ–ื™ืฉื ืžึฐืึนึ‘ื“ ื•ึทื™ึผึนึ™ืืžึถืจึ™ ืึถืœึพื ึธืชึธึ”ืŸ ื—ึทื™ึพื™ึฐื”ึนื•ึธึ•ื” ื›ึผึดึฃื™ ื‘ึถืŸึพืžึธึ”ื•ึถืช ื”ึธืึดึ–ื™ืฉื ื”ึธืขึนืฉื‚ึถึฅื” ื–ึนึฝืืชืƒ

English:

David flew into a rage against the man, and said to Nathan, โ€œAs GOD lives, the man who did thisathe man who did this Or โ€œany man who has done this.โ€ deserves to die!

David's outrage is total -- ื—ื™ ื”' is the most solemn oath he can swear, and he immediately pronounces capital judgment on a thief who is not technically liable to death under Torah law. Rashi explains the verdict's severity by citing the principle that one who robs the poor is as if he takes their life (Bava Kamma 119a, drawing on Proverbs 1:19). Metzudat David adds that David genuinely believed the case was real, which is precisely the trap Nathan needed: a king pronouncing sentence on himself in the abstract.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื›ึดึผื™ ื‘ึถืŸ ืžึธื•ึถืช. ื”ึทื’ึผื•ึนื–ึตืœ ืึถืช ื”ึถืขึธื ึดื™, ื›ึฐึผืึดืœึผื•ึผ ื ื•ึนื˜ึตืœ ืึถืช ื ึทืคึฐืฉืื•ึน, ืฉึถืื ึถึผืึฑืžึทืจ (ืžืฉืœื™ ื:ื™ื˜): ืดืึถืช ื ึถืคึถืฉื ื‘ึฐึผืขึธืœึธื™ื• ื™ึดืงึธึผื—ืด:
Is worthy of death. Someone who steals from a poor person is tantamount to taking his life2See Baba Kama 119a. Stealing a pruta from anyone is tantamount to killing him. as it is said, "He has taken it's owner's life."3Mishlei 1:19.

ืคืกื•ืง ื•ืณ ยท Verse 6

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐืึถืชึพื”ึทื›ึผึดื‘ึฐืฉื‚ึธึ–ื” ื™ึฐืฉืึทืœึผึตึฃื ืึทืจึฐื‘ึผึทืขึฐืชึผึธึ‘ื™ึดื ืขึตึ—ืงึถื‘ ืึฒืฉืึถึคืจ ืขึธืฉื‚ึธื”ึ™ ืึถืชึพื”ึทื“ึผึธื‘ึธึฃืจ ื”ึทื–ึผึถึ”ื” ื•ึฐืขึทึ–ืœ ืึฒืฉืึถึฅืจ ืœึนืึพื—ึธืžึธึฝืœืƒย {ืก}ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย 

English:

He must pay for the lamb four times over, because he did such a thing and showed no pity.โ€

David imposes the fourfold restitution mandated in Exodus 21:37 for stealing a sheep, plus capital punishment under royal jurisdiction for the cruelty involved. Rashi reads David's self-imposed penalty as prophetic: it will be exacted from him through four of his own children -- the unnamed infant later in this chapter, then Amnon, Tamar, and Absalom in the chapters that follow. The king has unwittingly written the budget of his own household's suffering.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื™ึฐืฉึทืืœึตึผื ืึทืจึฐื‘ึทึผืขึฐืชึธึผื™ึดื. ื›ึธึผืšึฐ ืึตืจึทืข ืœื•ึน, ืฉึถืืœึธึผืงึธื” ื‘ึฐึผืึทืจึฐื‘ึธึผืขึธื” ื‘ึธึผื ึดื™ื, ื”ึทื™ึถึผืœึถื“ ื•ึฐืึทืžึฐื ื•ึนืŸ ืชึธึผืžึธืจ ื•ึฐืึทื‘ึฐืฉึธืืœื•ึนื:
Pay fourfold. This is what [eventually] happened, he was punished with [problems concerning] four children the child4Related further on in verse 15. and Amnon Tomor and Avsholom.5The events with Amnon, Tomor and Avsholom start in chapter 13.

ืคืกื•ืง ื–ืณ ยท Verse 7

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึนึงืืžึถืจ ื ึธืชึธึ›ืŸ ืึถืœึพื“ึผึธื•ึดึ–ื“ ืึทืชึผึธึฃื” ื”ึธืึดึ‘ื™ืฉืย {ืก}ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ื›ึผึนื”ึพืึธืžึทึจืจ ื™ึฐื”ึนื•ึธึœื” ืึฑืœึนื”ึตึฃื™ ื™ึดืฉื‚ึฐืจึธืึตึ—ืœ ืึธื ึนื›ึดึžื™ ืžึฐืฉืึทื—ึฐืชึผึดึคื™ืšึธึฝ ืœึฐืžึถึ™ืœึถืšึฐึ™ ืขึทืœึพื™ึดืฉื‚ึฐืจึธืึตึ”ืœ ื•ึฐืึธื ึนื›ึดึฅื™ ื”ึดืฆึผึทืœึฐืชึผึดึ–ื™ืšึธ ืžึดื™ึผึทึฅื“ ืฉืึธืึฝื•ึผืœืƒ

English:

And Nathan said to David, โ€œThat man is you! Thus said the ETERNAL, the God of Israel: โ€˜It was I who anointed you king over Israel and it was I who rescued you from the hand of Saul.

The two-word indictment ืืชื” ื”ืื™ืฉ -- 'You are the man' -- has become the most famous prophetic confrontation in scripture. Nathan immediately pivots into the divine speech, opening with God's prior favors to David: anointing him king over Israel and rescuing him from Saul's pursuit. The structure is a classic covenant lawsuit, where the prosecutor recounts the benefactor's gifts before listing the defendant's betrayals.

ืคืกื•ืง ื—ืณ ยท Verse 8

Hebrew:

ื•ึธืึถืชึผึฐื ึธึจื” ืœึฐืšึธึœ ืึถืชึพื‘ึผึตึฃื™ืช ืึฒื“ึนื ึถึ—ื™ืšึธ ื•ึฐืึถืชึพื ึฐืฉืึตึคื™ ืึฒื“ึนื ึถึ™ื™ืšึธึ™ ื‘ึผึฐื—ึตื™ืงึถึ”ืšึธ ื•ึธืึถืชึผึฐื ึธึฃื” ืœึฐืšึธึ” ืึถืชึพื‘ึผึตึฅื™ืช ื™ึดืฉื‚ึฐืจึธืึตึ–ืœ ื•ึดื™ื”ื•ึผื“ึธึ‘ื” ื•ึฐืึดึจืึพืžึฐืขึธึ”ื˜ ื•ึฐืึนืกึดึฅืคึธื” ืœึผึฐืšึธึ– ื›ึผึธื”ึตึฅื ึผึธื” ื•ึฐื›ึธื”ึตึฝื ึผึธื”ืƒ

English:

I gave you your masterโ€™s house and possession of your masterโ€™s wives; and I gave you the House of Israel and Judah; and if that were not enough, I would give you twice as much more.

God's catalogue of gifts to David sharpens the indictment: 'I gave you your master's house and your master's wives, the kingdom of Israel and Judah -- and had that been too little, I would have added more.' Rashi identifies 'your master's wives' as Michal daughter of Saul, and Metzudat David adds the midrashic tradition that Rizpah was also taken into David's house. The point is that David needed only to ask, and God would have given him more -- the appetite that drove him to Bathsheba was therefore not necessity but contempt.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื•ึฐืึถืช ื ึฐืฉึตืื™ ืึฒื“ึนื ึถื™ืšึธ. ืžึดื™ื›ึทืœ ื‘ึทึผืช ืฉึธืืื•ึผืœ: ื•ึฐืึนืกึดืคึธื”. ื•ึฐื”ึธื™ึดื™ืชึดื™ ืžื•ึนืกึดื™ืฃ ืœึฐืšึธ:
Your master's woman. Michal, the daughter of Shaul. I will add on. I would add on for you.

ืคืกื•ืง ื˜ืณ ยท Verse 9

Hebrew:

ืžึทื“ึผึœื•ึผืขึท ื‘ึผึธื–ึดึฃื™ืชึธโ€‰ื€ ืึถืชึพื“ึผึฐื‘ึทึฃืจ ื™ึฐื”ึนื•ึธึ—ื” ืœึทืขึฒืฉื‚ึฃื•ึนืช ื”ึธืจึทืขึฎ (ื‘ืขื™ื ื•) [ื‘ึผึฐืขึตื™ื ึทื™ึ’] ืึตึฃืช ืื•ึผืจึดื™ึผึธึคื” ื”ึทื—ึดืชึผึดื™ึ™ ื”ึดื›ึผึดึฃื™ืชึธ ื‘ึทื—ึถึ”ืจึถื‘ ื•ึฐืึถึจืชึพืึดืฉืึฐืชึผึ”ื•ึน ืœึธืงึทึฅื—ึฐืชึผึธ ืœึผึฐืšึธึ– ืœึฐืึดืฉืึผึธึ‘ื” ื•ึฐืึนืชึฃื•ึน ื”ึธืจึทึ”ื’ึฐืชึผึธ ื‘ึผึฐื—ึถึ–ืจึถื‘ ื‘ึผึฐื ึตึฅื™ ืขึทืžึผึฝื•ึนืŸืƒ

English:

Why then have you flouted GODโ€™s commandโ€”and done what displeases Me?bMe So qere; kethib โ€œHim.โ€ You have put Uriah the Hittite to the sword; you took his wife and made her your wife and had him killed by the sword of the Ammonites.

The verse names David's two crimes plainly: he killed Uriah by the sword and took his wife. Radak addresses the legal puzzle that Uriah was technically killed by Ammonite weapons rather than David's hand, observing that the verse calls David the killer because royal command renders the king liable as the principal actor -- a rare exception to the general principle that the agent, not the sender, bears guilt for sin. Saul's command to slaughter the priests of Nov is invoked as a parallel: a king cannot hide behind the soldier who carries out his decree.

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืด ยท Verse 10

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐืขึทืชึผึธึ—ื” ืœึนืึพืชึธืกึฅื•ึผืจ ื—ึถึ›ืจึถื‘ ืžึดื‘ึผึตื™ืชึฐืšึธึ– ืขึทื“ึพืขื•ึนืœึธึ‘ื ืขึตึšืงึถื‘ ื›ึผึดึฃื™ ื‘ึฐื–ึดืชึธึ”ื ึดื™ ื•ึทืชึผึดืงึผึทึ—ื— ืึถืชึพืึตึ™ืฉืึถืชึ™ ืื•ึผืจึดื™ึผึธึฃื” ื”ึทื—ึดืชึผึดึ”ื™ ืœึดื”ึฐื™ึฅื•ึนืช ืœึฐืšึธึ– ืœึฐืึดืฉืึผึธึฝื”ืƒย {ืก}ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย 

English:

Therefore the sword shall never depart from your Houseโ€”because you spurned Me by taking the wife of Uriah the Hittite and making her your wife.โ€˜

The first axis of punishment is announced: 'the sword shall not depart from your house forever.' This becomes the structural curse organizing chapters 13-20 -- Amnon murdered by Absalom, Absalom killed by Joab, Sheva ben Bichri executed -- and continues into Solomon's reign with the deaths of Adoniyah and Joab. Metzudat David explains the gravity of ื‘ื–ื™ืชื ื™: David's sin caused chillul Hashem, public desecration of the divine name, which always exacts a heavier price than private transgression.

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืดื ยท Verse 11

Hebrew:

ื›ึผึนึฃื”โ€‰ื€ ืึธืžึทึฃืจ ื™ึฐื”ึนื•ึธึ—ื” ื”ึดื ึฐื ึดื™ึฉ ืžึตืงึดึจื™ื ืขึธืœึถึคื™ืšึธ ืจึธืขึธื”ึ™ ืžึดื‘ึผึตื™ืชึถึ”ืšึธ ื•ึฐืœึธืงึทื—ึฐืชึผึดึคื™ ืึถืชึพื ึธืฉื๏ฟฝ๏ฟฝึ™ื™ืšึธึ™ ืœึฐืขึตื™ื ึถึ”ื™ืšึธ ื•ึฐื ึธืชึทืชึผึดึ–ื™ ืœึฐืจึตืขึถึ‘ื™ืšึธ ื•ึฐืฉืึธื›ึทื‘ึ™ ืขึดืึพื ึธืฉืึถึ”ื™ืšึธ ืœึฐืขึตื™ื ึตึ–ื™ ื”ึทืฉืึผึถึฅืžึถืฉื ื”ึทื–ึผึนึฝืืชืƒ

English:

Thus said GOD: โ€˜I will make a calamity rise against you from within your own house; I will take your wives and give them to another man before your very eyes and he shall sleep with your wives under this very sun.

The second prophecy is more searing: 'I will take your wives before your eyes and give them to your neighbor.' Radak grapples with the theological problem this creates -- if God decreed that Absalom would sin, how is Absalom's free will preserved? Following Saadia Gaon, he distinguishes two layers in Nathan's prophecy: God's decree concerned the public humiliation of David's house through Absalom's revolt, while Absalom's specific transgression with the concubines was his own free choice that God foresaw but did not compel. The literal fulfillment occurs in 16:22 when Absalom enters the rooftop tent.

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืดื‘ ยท Verse 12

Hebrew:

ื›ึผึดึฅื™ ืึทืชึผึธึ–ื” ืขึธืฉื‚ึดึฃื™ืชึธ ื‘ึทืกึผึธึ‘ืชึถืจ ื•ึทืึฒื ึดึ—ื™ ืึถึฝืขึฑืฉื‚ึถื”ึ™ ืึถืชึพื”ึทื“ึผึธื‘ึธึฃืจ ื”ึทื–ึผึถึ”ื” ื ึถึฅื’ึถื“ ื›ึผื‡ืœึพื™ึดืฉื‚ึฐืจึธืึตึ–ืœ ื•ึฐื ึถึฅื’ึถื“ ื”ึทืฉืึผึธึฝืžึถืฉืืƒย {ืก}ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย 

English:

You acted in secret, but I will make this happen in the sight of all Israel and in broad daylight.โ€™โ€

The verse establishes the principle of midah keneged midah -- measure for measure -- as the structure of the punishment. David sinned ื‘ืกืชืจ, in private, believing his act was hidden; the consequences will unfold ื ื’ื“ ื”ืฉืžืฉ, before all Israel and in broad daylight. Metzudat David adds a sharp homiletical point: the world will read the punishment as a public commentary on the hidden sin, so the very concealment David sought will be undone by the visibility of his suffering.

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืดื’ ยท Verse 13

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึนึคืืžึถืจ ื“ึผึธื•ึดื“ึ™ ืึถืœึพื ึธืชึธึ”ืŸ ื—ึธื˜ึธึ–ืืชึดื™ ืœึทื™ื”ึนื•ึธึ‘ื”ย {ืก}ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ื•ึทื™ึผึนึจืืžึถืจ ื ึธืชึธึœืŸ ืึถืœึพื“ึผึธื•ึดึ—ื“ ื’ึผึทืึพื™ึฐื”ึนื•ึธึ›ื” ื”ึถืขึฑื‘ึดึฅื™ืจ ื—ึทื˜ึผึธืืชึฐืšึธึ– ืœึนึฅื ืชึธืžึฝื•ึผืชืƒ

English:

David said to Nathan, โ€œI stand guilty before GOD!โ€ And Nathan replied to David, โ€œGOD has remitted your sin; you shall not die.

David's response is the shortest confession in scripture: ื—ื˜ืืชื™ ืœื”' -- 'I have sinned against the Lord.' No defense, no negotiation, no claim that Uriah deserved death for refusing the king's orders. The Talmud (Yoma 22b) holds this brevity up as the model of authentic teshuvah, contrasting it with Saul's long-winded self-justifications a generation earlier. Radak explains that Nathan's reply -- ื”ืขื‘ื™ืจ ื—ื˜ืืชืš -- means David will not die the death of the wicked who descend to Gehinnom, but the worldly consequences of the sin still play out: the sword in his house, the rebellion, and the death of the infant about to be announced.

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืดื“ ยท Verse 14

Hebrew:

ืึถึ—ืคึถืก ื›ึผึดึฝื™ึพื ึดืึตึคืฅ ื ึดืึทึ™ืฆึฐืชึผึธึ™ ืึถืชึพืึนื™ึฐื‘ึตึฃื™ ื™ึฐื”ึนื•ึธึ”ื” ื‘ึผึทื“ึผึธื‘ึธึ–ืจ ื”ึทื–ึผึถึ‘ื” ื’ึผึทึ—ื ื”ึทื‘ึผึตึ›ืŸ ื”ึทื™ึผึดืœึผึฅื•ึนื“ ืœึฐืšึธึ– ืžึฅื•ึนืช ื™ึธืžึฝื•ึผืชืƒ

English:

However, since you have spurned the enemies ofcthe enemies of The phrase is intended to avoid saying โ€œspurned GODโ€; cf. first note at 1 Sam. 25.22. GOD by this deed, even the child about to be born to you shall die.โ€

The phrase 'the enemies of the Lord' is a classical scribal euphemism (kinui) -- the verse cannot bring itself to write that David caused contempt for God Himself, so it inserts 'the enemies of' as a buffer. Rashi cites Targum Yonatan's gloss: David gave the enemies of Israel a pretext to mock God's people. The death of the infant is announced here as the immediate fourfold installment, satisfying the principle that chillul Hashem demands a public consequence.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื›ึดึผื™ ื ึดืึตืฅ ื ึดืึทืฆึฐืชึธึผ ืึถืช ืื•ึนื™ึฐื‘ึตื™. ื›ึดึผื ึผื•ึผื™ ื”ื•ึผื ื–ึถื”, ื“ึถึผืจึถืšึฐ ื›ึธึผื‘ื•ึนื“ ืœึฐืžึทืขึฐืœึธื” ื•ึฐื™ื•ึนื ึธืชึธืŸ ืชึดึผืจึฐื’ึตึผื: ืดืึฒืจึตื™ ืžึตื™ืคึฐืชึทึผื— ืคึฐึผืชึทื—ึฐืชึธึผื ืคึผื•ึผืžึธื ื“ึฐึผืกึธื ึฐืึตื™ ืขึทืžึธึผื ื“ึทื”ืณืด:
Because you have angered the enemies of Adonoy. This is a euphimism a way [to be] respectable to on High.6Using "enemies of God" to stand in for God in order for the word "angered" not to have to be applied to Him in a direct way. Yonasan translated, Because you have opened up you have opened the mouth of [those] who hate the people of God.

ืคืกื•ืง ื˜ืดื• ยท Verse 15

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึตึฅืœึถืšึฐ ื ึธืชึธึ–ืŸ ืึถืœึพื‘ึผึตื™ืชึ‘ื•ึน ื•ึทื™ึผึดื’ึผึนึฃืฃ ื™ึฐื”ึนื•ึธึ—ื” ืึถืชึพื”ึทื™ึผึถึœืœึถื“ ืึฒืฉืึถึจืจ ื™ึธืœึฐื“ึธึงื” ืึตืฉืึถืชึพืื•ึผืจึดื™ึผึธึ›ื” ืœึฐื“ึธื•ึดึ–ื“ ื•ึทื™ึผึตืึธื ึทึฝืฉืืƒ

English:

Nathan went home, and GOD afflicted the child that Uriahโ€™s wife had borne to David, and it became critically ill.

Nathan returns home immediately after delivering the prophecy -- Radak notes that he does not linger to extend honor to David, signaling the breach in the relationship between prophet and king. The verse describes the infant simply as 'the child whom Uriah's wife bore to David,' a deliberate echo of the original phrasing in chapter 11 that refuses to call Bathsheba David's wife. The word ื•ื™ืื ืฉ denotes a grave illness, marking the immediate onset of the fourfold installment.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื•ึทื™ึตึผืึธื ึทืฉื. ืœึฐืฉืื•ึนืŸ ื—ึนืœึดื™:
[He became sick.] [This word] denotes sickness.

ืคืกื•ืง ื˜ืดื– ยท Verse 16

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึฐื‘ึทืงึผึตึฅืฉื ื“ึผึธื•ึด๏ฟฝ๏ฟฝื“ ืึถืชึพื”ึธืึฑืœึนื”ึดึ–ื™ื ื‘ึผึฐืขึทึฃื“ ื”ึทื ึผึธึ‘ืขึทืจ ื•ึทื™ึผึธึคืฆื‡ื ื“ึผึธื•ึดื“ึ™ ืฆึ”ื•ึนื ื•ึผื‘ึธึฅื ื•ึฐืœึธึ–ืŸ ื•ึฐืฉืึธื›ึทึฅื‘ ืึธึฝืจึฐืฆึธื”ืƒ

English:

David entreated God for the boy; David fasted, and he went in and spent the night lyingdlying Some Septuagint mss. and 4QSamแตƒ add โ€œin sackclothโ€; cf. 1 Kings 21.27. on the ground.

Despite Nathan's explicit prophecy that the child will die, David enters seven days of intercessory fasting -- spending the day in the house of God and the night lying on the ground. Radak addresses the apparent contradiction: how can David pray against an explicit divine decree? His answer is that David hopes God may relent, modeling the principle later articulated in verse 22 -- 'who knows? Perhaps the Lord will be gracious.' This is one of the earliest portraits in scripture of a parent's bedside vigil for a dying child, and it complicates the rabbinic picture of David's repentance: confession does not extinguish a parent's instinct to plead.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื•ึผื‘ึธื ื•ึฐืœึธืŸ ื•ึฐืฉึธืื›ึทื‘ ืึธืจึฐืฆึธื”. ื•ึผื‘ึธื ื”ึทื‘ึทึผื™ืช, ื•ึฐืœึธืŸ ื‘ึทึผืœึทึผื™ึฐืœึธื” ืฉืื•ึนื›ึตื‘ ืœึธืึธืจึถืฅ:
And came to repose and lied on the ground. And came [back] to the house and reposed at night lying on the ground.

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืดื– ยท Verse 17

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึธืงึปึœืžื•ึผ ื–ึดืงึฐื ึตึคื™ ื‘ึตื™ืชื•ึนึ™ ืขึธืœึธึ”ื™ื• ืœึทื”ึฒืงึดื™ืžึ–ื•ึน ืžึดืŸึพื”ึธืึธึ‘ืจึถืฅ ื•ึฐืœึนึฃื ืึธื‘ึธึ”ื” ื•ึฐืœึนืึพื‘ึธืจึธึฅื ืึดืชึผึธึ–ื ืœึธึฝื—ึถืืƒ

English:

The senior servants of his household tried to induce him to get up from the ground; but he refused, nor would he partake of food with them.

The senior household servants -- the elders entrusted with the king's well-being -- try and fail to lift David from the ground. Rashi explains the rare verb ื‘ืจื” as denoting even minimal eating; David refuses not just a meal but even the small portion offered to a fasting mourner. The verse establishes that what follows is not standard avelut, since the child has not yet died -- this is the more anguished posture of a father pleading for a life still hanging in the balance.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื•ึฐืœึนื ื‘ึธืจึธื”. ืœึฐืฉืื•ึนืŸ ืึฒื›ึดื™ืœึธื”, ื›ึฐึผืžื•ึน (ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื™ื’:ื•): ืดื•ึฐืึถื‘ึฐืจึถื” ืžึดื™ึธึผื“ึธื”ึผืด:
And he did not eat. [A word] denoting eating like [we find], "I will eat from her hand."7Later, 13:6.

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืดื— ยท Verse 18

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึฐื”ึดึ›ื™ ื‘ึผึทื™ึผึฅื•ึนื ื”ึทืฉืึผึฐื‘ึดื™ืขึดึ–ื™ ื•ึทื™ึผึธึฃืžื‡ืช ื”ึทื™ึผึธึ‘ืœึถื“ ื•ึทื™ึผึดึฝืจึฐืื•ึผึฉ ืขึทื‘ึฐื“ึตึจื™ ื“ึธื•ึดึœื“ ืœึฐื”ึทื’ึผึดึฅื™ื“ ืœึฃื•ึนโ€‰ื€ ื›ึผึดื™ึพืžึตึฃืช ื”ึทื™ึผึถึ—ืœึถื“ ื›ึผึดึคื™ ืึธึฝืžึฐืจื•ึผึ™ ื”ึดื ึผึตื”ึฉ ื‘ึดึฝื”ึฐื™ึจื•ึนืช ื”ึทื™ึผึถึœืœึถื“ ื—ึทึ—ื™ ื“ึผึดื‘ึผึทึคืจึฐื ื•ึผ ืึตืœึธื™ื•ึ™ ื•ึฐืœึนืึพืฉืึธืžึทึฃืข ื‘ึผึฐืงื•ึนืœึตึ”ื ื•ึผ ื•ึฐืึตึจื™ืšึฐ ื ึนืืžึทึฅืจ ืึตืœึธึ›ื™ื• ืžึตึฅืช ื”ึทื™ึผึถึ–ืœึถื“ ื•ึฐืขึธืฉื‚ึธึฅื” ืจึธืขึธึฝื”ืƒ

English:

On the seventh day the child died. Davidโ€™s servants were afraid to tell David that the child was dead; for they said, โ€œWe spoke to him when the child was alive and he wouldnโ€™t listen to us; how can we tell him that the child is dead? He might do something terrible.โ€

The child dies on the seventh day. The servants are afraid to bring David the news because they fear he will harm himself in his grief -- the verb ื•ืขืฉื” ืจืขื” carries, per Radak, the specific sense of self-injury. The seven-day timing is significant: Radak suggests the count is from the child's birth rather than from the onset of illness, which would mean the child died before the eighth day on which a circumcision would have publicly named him as David's son.

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืดื˜ ยท Verse 19

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึทึฃืจึฐื ื“ึผึธื•ึดึ—ื“ ื›ึผึดึคื™ ืขึฒื‘ึธื“ึธื™ื•ึ™ ืžึดึฝืชึฐืœึทื—ึฒืฉืึดึ”ื™ื ื•ึทื™ึผึธึฅื‘ึถืŸ ื“ึผึธื•ึดึ–ื“ ื›ึผึดึฃื™ ืžึตึฃืช ื”ึทื™ึผึธึ‘ืœึถื“ ื•ึทื™ึผึนึจืืžึถืจ ื“ึผึธื•ึดึงื“ ืึถืœึพืขึฒื‘ึธื“ึธึ›ื™ื• ื”ึฒืžึตึฅืช ื”ึทื™ึผึถึ–ืœึถื“ ื•ึทื™ึผึนึฅืืžึฐืจื•ึผ ืžึตึฝืชืƒ

English:

When David saw his servants talking in whispers, David understood that the child was dead; David asked his servants, โ€œIs the child dead?โ€ โ€œYes,โ€ they replied.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืณ ยท Verse 20

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึธึฉืงื‡ืึฉ ื“ึผึธื•ึดึจื“ ืžึตื”ึธืึธึœืจึถืฅ ื•ึทื™ึผึดืจึฐื—ึทึฃืฅ ื•ึทื™ึผึธึ—ืกึถืšึฐ ื•ึทื™ึฐื—ึทืœึผึตืฃึ™ ืฉื‚ึดืžึฐืœึนืชึธึ”ื• ื•ึทื™ึผึธื‘ึนึฅื ื‘ึตื™ืชึพื™ึฐื”ึนื•ึธึ–ื” ื•ึทื™ึผึดืฉืึฐืชึผึธึ‘ื—ื•ึผ ื•ึทื™ึผึธื‘ึนืึ™ ืึถืœึพื‘ึผึตื™ืชึ”ื•ึน ื•ึทื™ึผึดืฉืึฐืึทึ•ืœ ื•ึทื™ึผึธืฉื‚ึดึฅื™ืžื•ึผ ืœึ›ื•ึน ืœึถึ–ื—ึถื ื•ึทื™ึผึนืื›ึทึฝืœืƒ

English:

Thereupon David rose from the ground; he bathed and anointed himself, and he changed his clothes. He went into the House of GOD and prostrated himself. Then he went home and asked for food, which they set before him, and he ate.

David's reaction inverts every cultural expectation. He rises, washes, anoints himself, changes clothes, prostrates in the house of God, and eats. Radak unpacks the halachic puzzle this poses, since washing and anointing are forbidden during avelut: he proposes that David acted before the burial, when biblical mourning had not yet attached, and entered the sanctuary specifically to bless God on the bad as a Jew is required to bless on the good (citing Berachot 60b). Metzudat David adds that the prostration was the formal act of accepting the divine decree.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื ยท Verse 21

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึนืืžึฐืจึคื•ึผ ืขึฒื‘ึธื“ึธื™ื•ึ™ ืึตืœึธึ”ื™ื• ืžึธื”ึพื”ึทื“ึผึธื‘ึธึฅืจ ื”ึทื–ึผึถึ–ื” ืึฒืฉืึถึฃืจ ืขึธืฉื‚ึดึ‘ื™ืชึธื” ื‘ึผึทืขึฒื‘ึžื•ึผืจ ื”ึทื™ึผึถึคืœึถื“ ื—ึทื™ึ™ ืฆึทึฃืžึฐืชึผึธ ื•ึทืชึผึตึ”ื‘ึฐืšึผึฐ ื•ึฐื›ึทึฝืึฒืฉืึถืจึ™ ืžึตึฃืช ื”ึทื™ึผึถึ”ืœึถื“ ืงึทึ–ืžึฐืชึผึธ ื•ึทืชึผึนึฅืื›ึทืœ ืœึธึฝื—ึถืืƒ

English:

His courtiers asked him, โ€œWhy have you acted in this manner? While the child was alive, you fasted and wept; but now that the child is dead, you rise and take food!โ€

The servants pose the question that has puzzled every reader of the chapter: why fast and weep while the child was alive but rise and eat the moment he dies? It is the inverse of normal mourning, where grief intensifies after the death. The question creates the literary opening for David's classical articulation of the theology of intercessory prayer and acceptance, which follows in the next two verses.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื‘ ยท Verse 22

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึนึ•ืืžึถืจ ื‘ึผึฐืขื•ึนื“ึ™ ื”ึทื™ึผึถึฃืœึถื“ ื—ึทึ”ื™ ืฆึทึ–ืžึฐืชึผึดื™ ื•ึธืึถื‘ึฐื›ึผึถึ‘ื” ื›ึผึดึคื™ ืึธืžึทึ™ืจึฐืชึผึดื™ึ™ ืžึดึฃื™ ื™ื•ึนื“ึตึ”ืขึท (ื™ื—ื ื ื™) [ื•ึฐื—ึทื ึผึทึฅื ึดื™] ื™ึฐื”ึนื•ึธึ–ื” ื•ึฐื—ึทึฅื™ ื”ึทื™ึผึธึฝืœึถื“ืƒ

English:

He replied, โ€œWhile the child was still alive, I fasted and wept because I thought: โ€˜Who knows? GOD may have pity on me, and the child may live.โ€˜

David's answer articulates one of the foundational doctrines of biblical prayer: 'who knows? Perhaps the Lord will be gracious and the child will live.' The phrase ืžื™ ื™ื•ื“ืข recurs at decisive moments of Tanakh -- in Yonah's Nineveh and in Esther's Shushan -- whenever a decree seems fixed but human teshuvah and tefillah may yet move it. Radak draws the broader principle: prayer is meaningful only while the outcome is open; once death has occurred, prayer for restoration has no place.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื’ ยท Verse 23

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐืขึทืชึผึธึฃื”โ€‰ื€ ืžึตึ—ืช ืœึธึคืžึผึธื” ื–ึผึถื”ึ™ ืึฒื ึดึฃื™ ืฆึธึ”ื ื”ึทืื•ึผื›ึทึฅืœ ืœึทื”ึฒืฉืึดื™ื‘ึ–ื•ึน ืขึ‘ื•ึนื“ ืึฒื ึดื™ึ™ ื”ึนืœึตึฃืšึฐ ืึตืœึธึ”ื™ื• ื•ึฐื”ึ–ื•ึผื ืœึนืึพื™ึธืฉืึฅื•ึผื‘ ืึตืœึธึฝื™ืƒ

English:

But now that he is dead, why should I fast? Can I bring him back again? I shall go to him, but he will never come back to me.โ€

David's closing line -- 'I shall go to him, but he will not return to me' -- is one of the earliest and most quoted biblical statements of the soul's persistence beyond death and the irreversibility of the grave. Metzudat David offers the simple reading that David refers to his own eventual death and joining of the child in Sheol. The verse has long served as a Jewish source-text for the consolation that the bereaved travels toward the lost rather than backward in vain pleading.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื“ ยท Verse 24

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึฐื ึทื—ึตึฃื ื“ึผึธื•ึดึ—ื“ ืึตึšืช ื‘ึผึทืชึพืฉืึถึฃื‘ึทืข ืึดืฉืึฐืชึผึ”ื•ึน ื•ึทื™ึผึธื‘ึนึฅื ืึตืœึถึ–ื™ื”ึธ ื•ึทื™ึผึดืฉืึฐื›ึผึทึฃื‘ ืขึดืžึผึธึ‘ื”ึผ ื•ึทืชึผึตึฃืœึถื“ ื‘ึผึตึ—ืŸ (ื•ื™ืงืจื) [ื•ึทืชึผึดืงึฐืจึธึคื] ืึถืชึพืฉืึฐืžื•ึนึ™ ืฉืึฐืœึนืžึนึ”ื” ื•ึทื™ื”ึนื•ึธึ–ื” ืึฒื”ึตื‘ึฝื•ึนืƒ

English:

David consoled his wife Bathsheba; he went to her and lay with her. She bore a son and she named him Solomon. GOD favored him,

The verse pivots from death to birth in a single beat. David comforts Bathsheba -- now called for the first time ืืฉืชื•, his wife, since Uriah has died and the union has been formalized -- and from that consolation comes Solomon. The Hebrew name ืฉืœืžื” evokes shalom, peace, signaling the new era his reign will inaugurate. The line ื•ื”' ืื”ื‘ื• is one of the rarest formulas in Tanakh: God Himself loved this child. Radak preserves a striking midrashic exchange where Bathsheba, fearing that another son will be cursed for the original sin, is reassured by David that Nathan has prophesied this child will be the heir.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื” ยท Verse 25

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึดืฉืึฐืœึทึ—ื— ื‘ึผึฐื™ึทื“ึ™ ื ึธืชึธึฃืŸ ื”ึทื ึผึธื‘ึดึ”ื™ื ื•ึทื™ึผึดืงึฐืจึธึฅื ืึถืชึพืฉืึฐืžึ–ื•ึน ื™ึฐื“ึดึฃื™ื“ึฐื™ึธึ‘ื”ึผ ื‘ึผึทืขึฒื‘ึ–ื•ึผืจ ื™ึฐื”ึนื•ึธึฝื”ืƒย {ืค}

English:

sending a message through the prophet Nathan; and he was named JedidiaheJedidiah I.e., โ€œBeloved of GOD.โ€ at GODโ€™s behest.

Nathan returns -- the same prophet who delivered the indictment now delivers a name. Yedidyah, 'beloved of the Lord,' is a divine endorsement on the heir who emerged from David's repentance. Rashi notes the etymology: ื™ื“ื™ื“ (beloved) joined to ื™ื” (God). The narrative symmetry is precise: the prophet who pronounced the death sentence on the first child pronounces a name of love on the second, marking the closure of the cycle of sin and confession.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื‘ึทึผืขึฒื‘ื•ึผืจ ื”ืณ. ืึฒืฉึถืืจ ืึฒื”ึตื‘ื•ึน:
Because of God. That loved him [Shlomo].8ื™ึฝื“ึดื™ื“ึฐื™ึธื” is a concatanation of ื™ึฝื“ึดื™ื“, beloved one and ื™ึธื”, God.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื• ยท Verse 26

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึดืœึผึธึฃื—ึถื ื™ื•ึนืึธึ”ื‘ ื‘ึผึฐืจึทื‘ึผึทึ–ืช ื‘ึผึฐื ึตึฃื™ ืขึทืžึผึ‘ื•ึนืŸ ื•ึทื™ึผึดืœึฐื›ึผึนึ–ื“ ืึถืชึพืขึดึฅื™ืจ ื”ึทืžึผึฐืœื•ึผื›ึธึฝื”ืƒ

English:

fVv. 26โ€“29 are abridged in 1 Chron. 20.1b. Joab attacked Rabbah of Ammon and captured the royal city.

The narrative abruptly shifts back to the Ammonite campaign at Rabbah, picking up the thread suspended at the end of chapter 11. Rashi explains the geography: Rabbah had two concentric walls, an outer royal city and an inner fortress. Joab has captured the outer ring -- 'the royal city' -- but deliberately leaves the inner stronghold for the king himself to conquer, an act of military deference designed to credit David with the decisive victory.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ืึถืช ืขึดื™ืจ ื”ึทืžึฐึผืœื•ึผื›ึธื”. ืฉึฐืื ึตื™ ื—ึดื–ึผื•ึผืงึตื™ ื—ื•ึนืžึธื” ื”ึธื™ื•ึผ ื‘ึธึผื”ึผ, ื—ึดื™ืฆื•ึนื ึธื” ื•ึผืคึฐื ึดื™ืžึดื™ืช, ืขึดื™ืจ ื”ึทื—ึดื™ืฆื•ึนื ึธื”, ืขึดื™ืจ ืžึฐืœื•ึผื›ึธื”, ื•ึฐื”ึทืคึฐึผื ึดื™ืžึดื™ืช, ืœึฐืžึดื‘ึฐืฆึธืจ ื•ึผืœึฐื—ื•ึนื–ึถืง:
The royal city. There were two enforced walls [of cities] in it, an outside one and an inside one. The outside city was [called] the royal city, and the inside [city] was a fortress and stronghold.9Yoav left this one for Dovid to conquer as is stated in verse 29.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื– ยท Verse 27

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึดืฉืึฐืœึทึฅื— ื™ื•ึนืึธึ›ื‘ ืžึทืœึฐืึธื›ึดึ–ื™ื ืึถืœึพื“ึผึธื•ึดึ‘ื“ ื•ึทื™ึผึนึ™ืืžึถืจึ™ ื ึดืœึฐื—ึทึฃืžึฐืชึผึดื™ ื‘ึฐืจึทื‘ึผึธึ”ื” ื’ึผึทืึพืœึธื›ึทึ–ื“ึฐืชึผึดื™ ืึถืชึพืขึดึฅื™ืจ ื”ึทืžึผึธึฝื™ึดืืƒ

English:

Joab sent messengers to David and said, โ€œI have attacked Rabbah and I have already captured the water city.gthe water city Meaning of Heb. uncertain; perhaps the source of the water supply.

Joab dispatches messengers to David announcing the capture of ืขื™ืจ ื”ืžื™ื, the water city. Metzudat David identifies this as the same outer royal city, so named because it controlled Rabbah's water supply. In ancient siege warfare, capturing the water source effectively decided the campaign -- Joab is signaling that the strategic outcome is sealed and only the symbolic conquest of the inner citadel remains.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื— ยท Verse 28

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐืขึทืชึผึธึ—ื” ืึฑืกึนืฃึ™ ืึถืชึพื™ึถึฃืชึถืจ ื”ึธืขึธึ”ื ื•ึทื—ึฒื ึตึฅื” ืขึทืœึพื”ึธืขึดึ–ื™ืจ ื•ึฐืœื‡ื›ึฐื“ึธึ‘ื”ึผ ืคึผึถืŸึพืึถืœึฐื›ึผึนึคื“ ืึฒื ึดื™ึ™ ืึถืชึพื”ึธืขึดึ”ื™ืจ ื•ึฐื ึดืงึฐืจึธึฅื ืฉืึฐืžึดึ–ื™ ืขึธืœึถึฝื™ื”ึธืƒ

English:

Now muster the rest of the troops and besiege the city and capture it; otherwise I will capture the city myself, and my name will be connected with it.โ€

Joab's message is a careful piece of court etiquette: 'Come quickly, lest I capture the city myself and my name be called over it.' Metzudat David explains the political delicacy -- Joab is offering David the public honor of the conquest while quietly signaling that the heavy military work is already done. The verse offers a rare glimpse of Joab as a courtier as well as a general, a man who knows how to surrender glory to the king while reserving real power for himself.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื˜ ยท Verse 29

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึถืึฑืกึนึฅืฃ ื“ึผึธื•ึดึ›ื“ ืึถืชึพื›ึผื‡ืœึพื”ึธืขึธึ–ื ื•ึทื™ึผึตึฃืœึถืšึฐ ืจึทื‘ึผึธึ‘ืชึธื” ื•ึทื™ึผึดืœึผึธึฅื—ึถื ื‘ึผึธึ–ื”ึผ ื•ึทึฝื™ึผึดืœึฐื›ึผึฐื“ึธึฝื”ึผืƒ

English:

David mustered all the troops and marched on Rabbah, and he attacked it and captured it.

ืคืกื•ืง ืœืณ ยท Verse 30

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึดืงึผึทึฃื— ืึถืชึพืขึฒื˜ึถึฝืจึถืชึพ๏ฟฝ๏ฟฝึทืœึฐื›ึผึธืึฉ ืžึตืขึทึจืœ ืจึนืืฉืึœื•ึน ื•ึผืžึดืฉืึฐืงึธืœึธึจื”ึผ ื›ึผึดื›ึผึทึคืจ ื–ึธื”ึธื‘ึ™ ื•ึฐืึถึฃื‘ึถืŸ ื™ึฐืงึธืจึธึ”ื” ื•ึทืชึผึฐื”ึดึ–ื™ ืขึทืœึพืจึนึฃืืฉื ื“ึผึธื•ึดึ‘ื“ ื•ึผืฉืึฐืœึทึฅืœ ื”ึธืขึดึ›ื™ืจ ื”ื•ึนืฆึดึ–ื™ื ื”ึทืจึฐื‘ึผึตึฅื” ืžึฐืึนึฝื“ืƒ

English:

hVv. 30โ€“31 are found also in 1 Chron. 20.2โ€“3. The crown was taken from the head of their kingitheir king Heb. malkam, perhaps equivalent to โ€œMilcom,โ€ the Ammonite deity; cf. 1 Kings 11.5. and it was placed on Davidโ€™s headโ€”it weighed a talent of gold, and [on it]j[on it] So Targum and 1 Chron. 20.2. were precious stones. He also carried off a vast amount of booty from the city.

The crown taken from the head of malkam -- which Rashi identifies not as the Ammonite king but as the Ammonite idol Milkom (a form of Molech) -- weighed a kikar of gold and bore precious stones. Rashi cites the Talmud (Avodah Zarah 44a): since the crown was an instrument of idolatry forbidden to a Jew, Itai the Gittite (a non-Jew at that point) had to perform bittul on it before David could wear it. Metzudat David and Radak address the practical impossibility of supporting a kikar of gold on the head, suggesting it was suspended above David's throne rather than physically worn.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ืึถืช ืขึฒื˜ึถืจึถืช ืžึทืœึฐื›ึธึผื. ืชึผื•ึนืขึฒื‘ึทืช ื‘ึฐึผื ึตื™ ืขึทืžึผื•ึนืŸ ืณืžึดืœึฐื›ึผึนืืณ ืฉึฐืืžื•ึน, ืœึฐืฉืื•ึนืŸ ืžึนืœึถืšึฐ: ื•ึทืชึฐึผื”ึดื™ ืขึทืœ ืจึนืืฉื ื“ึธึผื•ึดื“. ืึดืชึทึผื™ ื”ึทื’ึดึผืชึดึผื™ ื‘ึดึผื˜ึฐึผืœึธื”ึผ (ืขื‘ื•ื“ื” ื–ืจื” ืžื“ ื):
The crown of Malkom. The abomination [idol] of the people of Ammon's name was Malkom. Denoting [the word] Moleich.10ืžื•ึนืœึถืšึฐ is an idol to whom children were sacrificed. It was [hung over] Dovid's head. Itai the Gitite annulled it.11This explanation of the verse is stated in Avodah Zoroh 24. It is prohibited for Jews to derive any pleasure from the idols of gentiles. They must be anulled by a gentile, i.e., taken out of the service of idol worship, after which they are permitted to Jews. Itai the Gitite, a gentile, did this to Malkom for Dovid's sake.
ืžืฆื•ื“ืช ื“ื•ื“Metzudat David
ื•ืื‘ืŸ ื™ืงืจื”. ื•ื‘ื” ืื‘ืŸ ื™ืงืจื”: ื•ืชื”ื™ ืขืœ ืจืืฉ ื“ื•ื“. ืœืžืขืœื” ืžืจืืฉื• ื”ื™ืชื” ืชืœื•ื™ื” ื›ืฉื”ื•ื ื™ื•ืฉื‘ ืขืœ ื”ื›ืกื, ื›ื™ ืื™ืš ืกื‘ืœ ืขืœ ืจืืฉื• ืžืฉื ืฉืœ ื›ื›ืจ:
And a precious stone: and on it was a precious stone. And it was on the head of David: it was hung above his head when he was sitting on his throne, for how would he bear on his head the weight of a kikar.

ืคืกื•ืง ืœืดื ยท Verse 31

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐืึถืชึพื”ึธืขึธึจื ืึฒืฉืึถืจึพื‘ึผึธึœื”ึผ ื”ื•ึนืฆึดึ—ื™ื ื•ึทื™ึผึธึฃืฉื‚ึถื ื‘ึผึทึ ืžึผึฐื’ึตืจึธึ ื” ื•ึผื‘ึทื—ึฒืจึดืฆึตึจื™ ื”ึทื‘ึผึทืจึฐื–ึถึœืœ ื•ึผึฝื‘ึฐืžึทื’ึฐื–ึฐืจึนึฃืช ื”ึทื‘ึผึทืจึฐื–ึถึ—ืœ ื•ึฐื”ึถืขึฑื‘ึดึคื™ืจ ืื•ึนืชึธืึ™ (ื‘ืžืœื›ืŸ) [ื‘ึผึทืžึผึทืœึฐื‘ึผึตึ”ืŸ] ื•ึฐื›ึตึฃืŸ ื™ึทืขึฒืฉื‚ึถึ”ื” ืœึฐื›ึนึ–ืœ ืขึธืจึตึฃื™ ื‘ึฐื ึตึฝื™ึพืขึทืžึผึ‘ื•ึนืŸ ื•ึทื™ึผึธึงืฉืื‡ื‘ ื“ึผึธื•ึดึ›ื“ ื•ึฐื›ื‡ืœึพื”ึธืขึธึ–ื ื™ึฐืจึฝื•ึผืฉืึธืœึธึฝอึดืืƒย {ืค}

English:

He led out the people who lived there and set them to work with saws, iron threshing boards, and iron axes, or assigned them to brickmaking; David did this to all the towns of Ammon. Then David and all the troops returned to Jerusalem.

The closing verse describes the imposition of forced labor on the Ammonite population: saws, iron threshing-boards, iron axes, and brick-making. The Hebrew is grammatically ambiguous, and the commentators split. Rashi reads ื•ื™ืขื‘ืจ ืื•ืชื ื‘ืžืœื‘ืŸ literally as setting them to work in brick kilns, while Radak and Targum Yonatan read it more darkly as a punitive instrument -- 'he made them pass through' the kiln, possibly an inversion of the Ammonite practice of passing children through fire to Molech (cited by Radak: ืžืœื›ืŸ is read as a variant of ื”ืžืœืš). Either way, the chapter that began with prophetic indictment of cruelty closes with David exercising the harsh prerogatives of imperial conquest -- a deliberate juxtaposition that the narrative leaves to the reader to weigh.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ืžึฐื’ึตืจึธื” ื•ึทื—ึฒืจึดืฆึดื™ื ื•ึผืžึทื’ึฐื–ึฐืจื•ึนืช. ื›ึฐึผืžึดื™ืŸ ืคึฐึผืฆึดื™ืจึธื” ืคึดึผื™ื ืฉึถืืงึผื•ึนืจึดื™ืŸ ืœื™ืžืดื, ืžึดื™ื ึตื™ ื™ึดืกึผื•ึผืจึดื™ื ื”ึตื: ืžึฐื’ึตืจึธื”. ืกึทื›ึดึผื™ืŸ ืคึธึผื’ื•ึผื ืคึฐึผื’ึดื™ืžื•ึนืช ื”ึทืจึฐื‘ึตึผื” ืชึฐึผื›ื•ึผืคื•ึนืช ื–ื•ึน ืœึธื–ื•ึน: ื—ึฒืจึดืฆึดื™ื. ื”ื•ึผื ืžื•ึนืจึทื’ ื—ึธืจื•ึผืฅ ืžึธืœึตื ื—ึฒืจึดื™ืฆึดื™ื, ื›ึฐึผืžึดื™ืŸ ืคึฐึผืฆึดื™ืจึธื” ืคึดึผื™ื ืฉึถืืงึผื•ึนืจึดื™ืŸ ืœื™ืžืดื: ื‘ึทึผืžึทึผืœึฐื‘ึตึผืŸ. ื‘ึฐึผื˜ึดื™ื˜ ื—ื•ึผืฆื•ึนืช, ื•ึฐื›ึตืŸ ืชึดึผืจึฐื’ึตึผื ื™ื•ึนื ึธืชึธืŸ: ืดื•ึผื’ึฐืจึทืจ ื™ึธืชึฐื”ื•ึนืŸ ื‘ึฐึผืฉืื•ึผืงึทื™ึธึผืืด:
Saw-like utensils, iron threshing utensils and iron axes. They are types of tortures. Saw-like utensils. A knife serrated with many [sharp] edges bent towards each other. Threshing utensils. This is a hacked saw full of cuts like "many sharp edges"12Shmuel I, 13:21. that is called laime (O.F.). The streets. In the mud of the streets and so Yonason [also] translated: "He dragged them in the streets."

โ† II Samuel 11 | II Samuel 13 โ†’

Back to II Samuel | Back to Nach Yomi

Last updated on
Chapter 11Chapter 13