Skip to Content
Nach YomiII Samuel ยท ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ืณChapter 3

II Samuel 3

ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ืณ ืคืจืง ื’ืณ

Section: ื ื‘ื™ืื™ื ยท ื ื‘ื™ืื™ื ืจืืฉื•ื ื™ื | Book: II Samuel | Chapter: 3 of 24 | Day: 79 of 742

Date: May 1, 2026

ืงืœืื•ื“ ืขืœ ื”ื ืดืš

Chapter 3 spans the long arc from civil war to attempted reconciliation, and from reconciliation to murder. It opens with a single summary verse โ€” โ€œthe war between the House of Shaul and the House of David was long-drawn-out; David kept growing stronger, while the House of Shaul grew weakerโ€ โ€” and closes with David weeping at the gate of Hebron over the corpse of Avner ben Ner. Between those two endpoints lies the chapterโ€™s whole emotional and political journey: a kingdom that should have come together by negotiation has instead been baptized in fratricidal blood for a second time, and David, newly poised to inherit all of Israel, finds himself once again forced to dissociate publicly from a killing he did not order. The narratorโ€™s framing in verses 1 and 39 โ€” the kingdom growing in strength, the king confessing weakness โ€” is one of the chapterโ€™s many studied ironies.

The list of Davidโ€™s six sons born at Hebron (verses 2-5) is placed where it is, Radak suggests, because the narrative is about to turn toward Avnerโ€™s defection and Davidโ€™s ascent; the catalogue marks the foundation of Davidโ€™s house at the moment the larger House of Israel is about to come to him. Each name carries narrative weight: Amnon, the firstborn, will violate Tamar; Avshalom, the third, will rebel and die; Adoniyah, the fourth, will attempt to seize the throne in Davidโ€™s old age. The narrator is naming the dramatis personae of every domestic catastrophe to come. Rashi and Radak preserve the rabbinic reading that โ€œKilโ€™avโ€ (verse 3) is so called because his face was made to resemble Davidโ€™s exactly, in order to silence those who whispered that Avigail was already pregnant by Naval when David married her. Metzudat Davidโ€™s gloss on Eglah as โ€œwife of Davidโ€ โ€” emphasized in the Hebrew construct โ€” supports the midrashic identification of Eglah with Michal, the cherished wife. The list quietly reminds the reader that David, while ruling only Yehudah, is already establishing a dynasty.

The break between Avner and Ish-Boshet (verses 6-11) is the political pivot of the chapter. Ish-Boshet accuses Avner of taking Ritzpah, Shaulโ€™s concubine, and the accusation is loaded: as Rashi and Radak both explain, the widow or concubine of a king is forbidden to a commoner because to take her is to lay claim to the throne. (The same logic will later govern the story of Avshalom and Davidโ€™s concubines, and the story of Adoniyahโ€™s request for Avishag.) Whether or not Avner actually slept with Ritzpah is not the narratorโ€™s concern; what matters is that Ish-Boshet has finally found the courage to challenge his general, and Avner explodes. His outburst โ€” โ€œAm I a dogโ€™s head, of all things, who belongs to Yehudah?โ€ โ€” mocks Ish-Boshetโ€™s ingratitude with bitter sarcasm, and concludes with an oath that flips the entire political map: as God swore to David, so shall I now do for him, transferring the kingdom from the House of Shaul and establishing Davidโ€™s throne over Israel and Yehudah from Dan to Beโ€™er Sheva. Ish-Boshet, the text says with devastating brevity, could not say a word in reply, โ€œbecause he feared him.โ€ The puppet has finally tried to pull on his strings, and the puppeteer has cut them.

Avnerโ€™s negotiation with David proceeds through three carefully orchestrated stages. First the messengers, with the cryptic oath formula โ€œto whom does the land belong?โ€ (verse 12) โ€” a phrase Rashi and Metzudat David read as an oath by the One to whom the earth belongs. Then Davidโ€™s precondition: the return of Michal bat Shaul, his wife, taken from him during Shaulโ€™s lifetime and given to Paltiel ben Layish (verses 13-16). The brief image of Paltiel walking weeping behind Michal as far as Bachurim, until Avner curtly orders him to turn back, is one of Tanakhโ€™s most piercing minor portraits; Rashi, citing Sanhedrin, explains his tears as mourning for the mitzvah he had observed for years โ€” placing a sword in the bed between himself and Michal so as never to touch another manโ€™s wife. Then Avnerโ€™s diplomatic mission to the elders of Israel and to Binyamin (verses 17-19), where he retroactively reframes their long-standing desire for Davidโ€™s kingship as the divine plan they had recognized all along. Radak observes the political subtlety here: Avner himself had been the obstacle, but he now presents himself as the agent of a consensus that had already formed beneath his feet. The feast at Hebron (verse 20), the dismissal โ€œin peaceโ€ repeated three times in verses 21-23, and Avnerโ€™s parting promise to gather all Israel to David, all signal that the long civil war is about to end without further bloodshed.

Yoavโ€™s return from a raid breaks the moment open. His confrontation with David (verses 24-25) is insubordinate in a way no commander should be permitted โ€” โ€œWhat have you done? Avner came to deceive you, to spy out your every moveโ€ โ€” and his subsequent action is worse. Without Davidโ€™s knowledge (โ€œve-David lo yadaโ€), Yoav sends messengers to recall Avner from Bor ha-Sirah and assassinates him at the gate of Hebron, striking him in the stomach in cold imitation of Avnerโ€™s own killing of Asael. Rashi (citing Sanhedrin 49a) reads โ€œel tokh ha-shaโ€™arโ€ as a courtroom โ€” Yoav summoned Avner under pretense of a legal proceeding for the blood of Asael โ€” but the narratorโ€™s verdict is unambiguous: the killing is โ€œfor the blood of Asael his brotherโ€ combined with the political fact that Avner was now Yoavโ€™s rival as Davidโ€™s chief commander. Radak preserves the rabbinic give-and-take: Avner had pleaded with Asael and struck him only with the butt of the spear, and Yoavโ€™s response was that Avner could have aimed for a non-vital limb. The legal status of the killing is contested โ€” there were no witnesses, no warning โ€” and as the chapterโ€™s last verse will admit, that very technicality is what shields Yoav. Davidโ€™s elaborate public dissociation (verses 28-39) is the longest single sequence in the chapter and bears the weight of his political survival. He pronounces a curse on Yoavโ€™s house โ€” a curse Radak says was fulfilled in five generations of Davidic descendants who suffered in those exact ways. He orders Yoav and the troops to rend their clothes and lead the funeral procession in sackcloth. He himself walks behind the bier. He weeps aloud at the grave. He chants a kinah whose opening line, โ€œShould Avner have died as a naval dies?โ€ โ€” a churlโ€™s death, Rashi says, a death by sword without battle โ€” announces with poetic precision that this was murder, not justice. He fasts publicly until sunset. The narrator twice records the peopleโ€™s perception (verses 36-37): they recognized that the killing was not of Davidโ€™s making, that โ€œit was not the kingโ€™s will to kill Avner ben Ner.โ€ Davidโ€™s closing line is one of the great political confessions of Tanakh: โ€œAnokhi ha-yom rakh u-mashuโ€™ach melekh, ve-ha-anashim ha-eleh bnei Tzeruyah kashim mimeniโ€ โ€” I am still tender today, though anointed king, and these men, the sons of Tzeruyah, are too hard for me. Targum Yonatan glosses โ€œrakhโ€ as hedyot, a commoner who has only just been elevated; Metzudat David explains that since the killing lacked witnesses and warning, no court could execute Yoav, and David was forced to consign the matter to heaven. The line foreshadows the rest of Davidโ€™s reign. The sons of Tzeruyah will repeatedly do what David cannot bring himself to forbid, and the unfinished business of Avnerโ€™s blood will still be on Davidโ€™s lips in his deathbed instructions to Shlomo a generation later.

ืคืจืง ื’ืณ ยท Chapter 3

ืคืกื•ืง ืืณ ยท Verse 1

Hebrew:

ื•ึทืชึผึฐื”ึดึคื™ ื”ึทืžึผึดืœึฐื—ึธืžึธื”ึ™ ืึฒืจึปื›ึผึธึ”ื” ื‘ึผึตึšื™ืŸ ื‘ึผึตึฃื™ืช ืฉืึธืึ”ื•ึผืœ ื•ึผื‘ึตึ–ื™ืŸ ื‘ึผึตึฃื™ืช ื“ึผึธื•ึดึ‘ื“ ื•ึฐื“ึธื•ึดื“ึ™ ื”ึนืœึตึฃืšึฐ ื•ึฐื—ึธื–ึตึ”ืง ื•ึผื‘ึตึฅื™ืช ืฉืึธืึ–ื•ึผืœ ื”ึนืœึฐื›ึดึฅื™ื ื•ึฐื“ึทืœึผึดึฝื™ืืƒย {ืก}ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย 

English:

The war between the House of Saul and the House of David was long-drawn-out; but David kept growing stronger, while the House of Saul grew weaker.

The chapter opens with a single thesis verse summarizing the long civil war between the two royal houses. Metzudat David glosses 'arukah' as a long stretch of time, and reads the contrast plainly: at every juncture David grew stronger while the House of Shaul grew weaker and more diminished. The verse frames everything that follows -- Avner's defection, Michal's return, the negotiation with Israel's elders -- as the inevitable resolution of a balance of power that had already tilted decisively.

ืคืกื•ืง ื‘ืณ ยท Verse 2

Hebrew:

(ื•ื™ืœื“ื•) [ื•ึทื™ึผึดื•ึผึธืœึฐื“ึงื•ึผ] ืœึฐื“ึธื•ึดึ›ื“ ื‘ึผึธื ึดึ–ื™ื ื‘ึผึฐื—ึถื‘ึฐืจึ‘ื•ึนืŸ ื•ึทื™ึฐื”ึดึคื™ ื‘ึฐื›ื•ึนืจื•ึนึ™ ืึทืžึฐื ึ”ื•ึนืŸ ืœึทืึฒื—ึดื™ื ึนึ–ืขึทื ื”ึทื™ึผึดื–ึฐืจึฐืขึตืืœึดึฝืชืƒ

English:

aThe list of Davidโ€™s wives and sons in vv. 2โ€“5 differs somewhat from the parallel list in 1 Chron. 3.1โ€“3. The narrative in v. 1 is resumed in v. 6. Sons were born to David in Hebron: His first-born was Amnon, by Ahinoam of Jezreel;

ืคืกื•ืง ื’ืณ ยท Verse 3

Hebrew:

ื•ึผืžึดืฉืึฐื ึตึฃื”ื•ึผ ื›ึดืœึฐืึธึ”ื‘ (ืœืื‘ื™ื’ืœ) [ืœึทืึฒื‘ึดื™ื’ึทึ•ื™ึดืœ] ืึตึ–ืฉืึถืช ื ึธื‘ึธึฃืœ ื”ึทึฝื›ึผึทืจึฐืžึฐืœึดึ‘ื™ ื•ึฐื”ึทืฉืึผึฐืœึดืฉืึดื™ึ™ ืึทื‘ึฐืฉืึธืœึฃื•ึนื ื‘ึผึถึฝืŸึพืžึทืขึฒื›ึธึ”ื” ื‘ึผึทืชึพืชึผึทืœึฐืžึทึ–ื™ ืžึถึฅืœึถืšึฐ ื’ึผึฐืฉืึฝื•ึผืจืƒ

English:

his second was Chileab, by Abigail wife of Nabal the Carmelite; the third was Absalom son of Maacah, daughter of King Talmai of Geshur;

David's second son is named Kil'av here but Daniel in Divrei ha-Yamim. Rashi and Radak preserve the famous midrash that the cynics of the generation whispered Avigail had conceived from Naval before David married her, and so Hashem made the child's face exactly resemble David's -- 'kulo av,' wholly the father -- to silence the slander. Avshalom, the third son, is born of Ma'akhah, a captive princess of Geshur; Metzudat David identifies her as a yefat to'ar taken in war, and Radak draws the rabbinic moral that a son born of such a marriage can become a sorer u-moreh, a foreshadowing of Avshalom's later rebellion.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื•ึผืžึดืฉึฐืื ึตื”ื•ึผ ื›ึดืœึฐืึธื‘. ื•ึผื‘ึฐืžึธืงื•ึนื ืึทื—ึตืจ ื”ื•ึผื ืงื•ึนืจึตื ืื•ึนืชื•ึน ื•ึผืžึดืฉึฐืื ึตื”ื•ึผ ื“ึธึผื ึดื™ืึตืœ, ื•ึฐืœึธืžึธึผื” ื ึดืงึฐืจึธื ืฉึฐืืžื•ึน ื›ึดึผืœึฐืึธื‘, ืึธืžึทืจ ืจึทื‘ึดึผื™ ื™ึดืฆึฐื—ึธืง: ืฉึถืื”ึธื™ื•ึผ ืœึตื™ืฆึธื ึตื™ ื”ึทื“ึผื•ึนืจ ืื•ึนืžึฐืจึดื™ื, ืžึดื ึธึผื‘ึธืœ ื”ึธื™ึฐืชึธื” ืึฒื‘ึดื™ื’ึทื™ึดืœ ืžึฐืขึปื‘ึถึผืจึถืช, ื ึถื”ึฐืคึทึผืšึฐ ืงึฐืœึทืกึฐืชึตึผืจื•ึน ื•ึฐื ึดื“ึฐืžึธื” ืœึฐืึธื‘ึดื™ื•. ื•ึฐืจึทื‘ึผื•ึนืชึตื™ื ื•ึผ ืึธืžึฐืจื•ึผ (ื‘ืจื›ื•ืช ื“ ื): ืฉึถืื”ึธื™ึธื” ืžึทื›ึฐืœึดื™ื ืคึฐึผื ึตื™ ืžึฐืคึดื™ื‘ึนืฉึถืืช ื‘ึทึผื”ึฒืœึธื›ึธื”:
His second [son] was Kilov. [But] in another place1Divrei Hayomim I, 3,1. [Scriptures] calls him, "and his second [son] was Doniel".2i.e., refers to the second son of Dovid not as Kilov but as Doniel, his true name. So why is his called [here] by the name of Kilov? Rebbe Yitzchok said [to answer this question] : Because the generation's cynics were saying that Avigail was pregnant from Novol,3That Doniel was the son of Novol and not Dovid. [consequently Hashem caused] his facial features to change and resemble his father.4His resemblance to Dovid earned him the name of ื›ึดืœึฐืึธื‘ a play on ื›ึผื•ึผืœื•ึน ืึธื‘, "completely his father." And our Rabbis said5Berochos 4a. that [this name of Kilov was due to the fact that] he embarrassed Mephiboshes through Halacha.6Doniel's superior knowledge became evident during the course of his halachic debates with Mipiboshes. According to this Derosho, the letters ื›ืœ of ื›ึดืœึฐืึธื‘ stand for ืžึทื›ึฐืœื…ื™ื.

ืคืกื•ืง ื“ืณ ยท Verse 4

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐื”ึธืจึฐื‘ึดื™ืขึดึ–ื™ ืึฒื“ึนื ึดื™ึผึธึฃื” ื‘ึถืŸึพื—ึทื’ึผึดึ‘ื™ืช ื•ึฐื”ึทื—ึฒืžึดื™ืฉืึดึ–ื™ ืฉืึฐืคึทื˜ึฐื™ึธึฅื” ื‘ึถืŸึพืึฒื‘ึดื™ื˜ึธึฝืœืƒ

English:

the fourth was Adonijah son of Haggith; the fifth was Shephatiah son of Abital;

ืคืกื•ืง ื”ืณ ยท Verse 5

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐื”ึทืฉืึผึดืฉืึผึดึฃื™ ื™ึดืชึฐืจึฐืขึธึ”ื ืœึฐืขึถื’ึฐืœึธึ–ื” ืึตึฃืฉืึถืช ื“ึผึธื•ึดึ‘ื“ ืึตึ›ืœึผึถื” ื™ึปืœึผึฐื“ึฅื•ึผ ืœึฐื“ึธื•ึดึ–ื“ ื‘ึผึฐื—ึถื‘ึฐืจึฝื•ึนืŸืƒย {ืค}

English:

and the sixth was Ithream, by Davidโ€™s wife Eglah. These were born to David in Hebron.

The catalogue closes with the sixth son, Yitre'am, born to Eglah, who is uniquely called 'eshet David,' David's wife. Rashi and Radak preserve the rabbinic identification of Eglah with Michal bat Shaul -- 'cherished as a calf' (eglah) by her owner, just as the verse in Shoftim 14 calls a beloved wife 'my heifer.' Metzudat David reads 'eshet David' as referring to all six women, emphasizing that each was a full wife and not a concubine; Radak preserves the alternative pshat that Eglah was a different woman, and that Michal is omitted because she bore David no son.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ืœึฐืขึถื’ึฐืœึธื”. ื–ื•ึน ืžึดื™ื›ึทืœ, ืฉึถืื”ึธื™ึฐืชึธื” ื—ึฒื‘ึดื™ื‘ึธื” ืขึธืœึธื™ื•, ื•ึฐื›ึตืŸ ื”ื•ึผื ืื•ึนืžึตืจ (ืฉื•ืคื˜ื™ื ื™ื“:ื™ื—): ืดืœื•ึผืœึตื ื—ึฒืจึทืฉึฐืืชึถึผื ื‘ึฐึผืขึถื’ึฐืœึธืชึดื™ืด. ื•ึฐื”ึทื›ึฐึผืชึดื™ื‘ (ืฉืžื•ืืœ ื‘ ื•:ื›ื’): ืดื•ึผืœึฐืžึดื™ื›ึทืœ ื‘ึทึผืช ืฉึธืืื•ึผืœ ืœึนื ื”ึธื™ึธื” ืœึธื”ึผ ื•ึธืœึธื“ ืขึทื“ ื™ื•ึนื ืžื•ึนืชึธื”ึผืด, ืขึทื“ ื™ื•ึนื ืžื•ึนืชึธื”ึผ ืœึนื ื”ึธื™ึธื” ืœึธื”ึผ ืžึตืื•ึนืชื•ึน ืžึทืขึฒืฉึถื‚ื” ื•ึฐืึตื™ืœึทืšึฐ, ืงื•ึนื“ึถื ืื•ึนืชื•ึน ืžึทืขึฒืฉึถื‚ื” ื”ึฒื•ึตื™ ืœึธื”ึผ:
By Egloh This refers to Michal7The daughter of Shaul. who was cherished by him. Similarly it says "If you had not plowed with my calf" (Shoftim 14, 18).8ืขื’ืœื”, "calf" is used in reference to a cherished wife just as a calf is cherished by it's owner (See Sanhedrin 21a). [But] it is written, "And Michal, the daughter of Shaul had no child until the day of her death" (Below, 6, 23) she didn't have one until the day of her death9At which time she died in childbirth (ibid).?10That verse implies that Michal had no children up to the time of her death, but our verse states that Egloh, i.e. Michal gave birth to Yisrom. From that incident11Dovid rejoiced excessively when the Ark was returned from captivity. Michal rebuked Dovid for what seemed to her to be behavior beneath his dignity. This was not the case and she was punished for the unwarranted shaming of Dovid. (ibid). and on [she had no children], but prior to that incident she did have [children].

ืคืกื•ืง ื•ืณ ยท Verse 6

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึฐื”ึดึ—ื™ ื‘ึผึดึฝื”ึฐื™ื•ึนืชึ™ ื”ึทืžึผึดืœึฐื—ึธืžึธึ”ื” ื‘ึผึตึšื™ืŸ ื‘ึผึตึฃื™ืช ืฉืึธืึ”ื•ึผืœ ื•ึผื‘ึตึ–ื™ืŸ ื‘ึผึตึฃื™ืช ื“ึผึธื•ึดึ‘ื“ ื•ึฐืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ›ืจ ื”ึธื™ึธึฅื” ืžึดืชึฐื—ึทื–ึผึตึ–ืง ื‘ึผึฐื‘ึตึฅื™ืช ืฉืึธืึฝื•ึผืœืƒ

English:

During the war between the House of Saul and the House of David, Abner supported the House of Saul.

The narrative resumes from verse 1 after the interlude of David's sons. The narrator emphasizes that Avner was the one 'mitchazek' -- making himself strong, propping up -- the House of Shaul. Rashi reads this as Avner using all his might to sustain Shaul's dynasty, and Metzudat David specifies that the kingship he was upholding was specifically that of Ish-Boshet. The verb implies that without Avner's exertion, the House of Shaul would have already collapsed.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื”ึธื™ึธื” ืžึดืชึฐื—ึทื–ึตึผืง. ื‘ึฐึผื›ึธืœ ื›ึนึผื—ึท ืขึทืœ ื‘ึตึผื™ืช ืฉึธืืื•ึผืœ ืœึฐื”ึทืขึฒืžึดื™ื“ ืžึทืœึฐื›ื•ึผืชื•ึน:
Was strengthening. With all his might over the house of Shaul, to establish its monarchy.

ืคืกื•ืง ื–ืณ ยท Verse 7

Hebrew:

ื•ึผืœึฐืฉืึธืึฃื•ึผืœ ืคึผึดืœึถึ”ื’ึถืฉื ื•ึผืฉืึฐืžึธึ–ื”ึผ ืจึดืฆึฐืคึผึธึฃื” ื‘ึทืชึพืึทื™ึผึธึ‘ื” ื•ึทื™ึผึนึ™ืืžึถืจึ™ ืึถืœึพืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ”ืจ ืžึทื“ึผึฅื•ึผืขึท ื‘ึผึธึ–ืืชึธื” ืึถืœึพืคึผึดื™ืœึถึฅื’ึถืฉื ืึธื‘ึดึฝื™ืƒ

English:

Now Saul had a concubine named Rizpah, daughter of Aiah; and [Ish-bosheth] said to Abner, โ€œWhy have you lain with my fatherโ€™s concubine?โ€

Ish-Boshet finally summons the courage to confront Avner over an explosive accusation: that Avner has lain with Ritzpah, Shaul's concubine. Metzudat David and Radak both note that the speaker is identified only by 'va-yomer,' but the context makes clear it is Ish-Boshet. Both commentators stress the political-halakhic weight of the charge: a king's widow or concubine is forbidden to a commoner (Sanhedrin 18a), so to take her is to make a claim on the throne itself -- the same logic that will later make Avshalom's seizure of David's concubines a public claim to the kingship.

ืคืกื•ืง ื—ืณ ยท Verse 8

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึดึฉื—ึทืจึฉ ืœึฐืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึจืจ ืžึฐืึนึœื“ ืขึทืœึพื“ึผึดื‘ึฐืจึตึฃื™ ืึดึฝื™ืฉืึพื‘ึผึนึ—ืฉืึถืช ื•ึทื™ึผึนึ™ืืžึถืจึ™ ื”ึฒืจึนึจืืฉื ื›ึผึถึฅืœึถื‘ ืึธื ึนึ˜ื›ึดื™ึฎ ืึฒืฉืึถึฃืจ ืœึดึฝื™ื”ื•ึผื“ึธื”ึ’ ื”ึทื™ึผึจื•ึนื ืึถืขึฑืฉื‚ึถื”ึพื—ึถึœืกึถื“ ืขึดืึพื‘ึผึตึฃื™ืชโ€‰ื€ ืฉืึธืึฃื•ึผืœ ืึธื‘ึดึ—ื™ืšึธ ืึถืœึพืึถื—ึธื™ื•ึ™ ื•ึฐืึถืœึพืžึตึฃืจึตืขึตึ”ื”ื•ึผ ื•ึฐืœึนึฅื ื”ึดืžึฐืฆึดื™ืชึดึ–ืšึธ ื‘ึผึฐื™ึทื“ึพื“ึผึธื•ึดึ‘ื“ ื•ึทืชึผึดืคึฐืงึนึฅื“ ืขึธืœึทึ›ื™ ืขึฒื•ึบึฅืŸ ื”ึธืึดืฉืึผึธึ–ื” ื”ึทื™ึผึฝื•ึนืืƒย {ืก}ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย 

English:

Abner was very upset by what Ish-bosheth said, and he replied, โ€œAm I a dogโ€™s head from Judah?bfrom Judah Meaning of Heb. uncertain. Here I have been loyally serving the House of your father Saul and his kin and friends, and I have not betrayed you into the hands of David; yet this dayโ€”over this womanโ€”you reproach me!

Avner explodes in fury at Ish-Boshet's accusation. Rashi offers two readings of 'rosh kelev': either 'am I as low as a chief dog-keeper for Yehudah?' or, following Targum Yonatan and the cantillation, 'do I want to be a chief? Better to be a commoner in David's house.' Metzudat David captures the bitter logic: until now I have been the pillar holding up your father's House, refusing to deliver you into David's hand, and you repay me with a baseless accusation about a woman. Radak adds that Avner's outburst is the rhetorical hinge of the chapter -- the moment he stops defending Shaul's House and begins dismantling it.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื”ึฒืจึนืืฉื ื›ึถึผืœึถื‘ ืึธื ึนื›ึดื™ ืึฒืฉึถืืจ ืœึดื™ื”ื•ึผื“ึธื”. ื›ึฐึผืœื•ึผื ืึฒื ึดื™ ื—ึธืฉืื•ึผื‘ ืึฒืคึดืœึผื•ึผ ื›ึฐึผืจึนืืฉื ืฉืื•ึนืžึตืจ ื”ึทื›ึฐึผืœึธื‘ึดื™ื ืึฒืฉึถืืจ ืœึฐื“ึธื•ึดื“, ืึทืšึฐ ืœึฐืคึดื™ ื”ึทื ึดึผืงึผื•ึผื“, ืฉึถืื”ึทื˜ึทึผืขึทื ืชึทึผื—ึทืช ืณื”ึฒืจึนืืฉืืณ, ื•ึฐืณื›ึถืœึถื‘ ืึธื ึนื›ึดื™ืณ ืžึปืงึธึผืฃ ื‘ึฐึผืžึทืงึธึผืฃ, ื›ึธึผืšึฐ ืคึตึผืจื•ึผืฉืื•ึน: ื”ึฒืจึนืืฉื, ื•ึฐื›ึดื™ ืึถื—ึฐืคึนึผืฅ ืœึดื”ึฐื™ื•ึนืช ืจึนืืฉื ื‘ึฐึผื‘ึตื™ืชึถืšึธ, ื˜ื•ึนื‘ ืœึดื™ ืœึดื”ึฐื™ื•ึนืช ื›ึถึผืœึถื‘ ื•ึฐื”ึถื“ึฐื™ื•ึนื˜ ื‘ึฐึผื‘ึตื™ืช ื“ึธึผื•ึดื“, ื•ึฐื›ึตืŸ ืชึดึผืจึฐื’ึตึผื ื™ื•ึนื ึธืชึธืŸ: ื”ึทื™ึผื•ึนื ืึถืขึฑืฉึถื‚ื” ื—ึถืกึถื“. ืžึตืขึทืชึธึผื” ื ึธืึถื” ืœึดื™ ืœึทืขึฒืฉื‚ื•ึนืช ื—ึถืกึถื“ ืขึดื ื‘ึตึผื™ืช ืฉึธืืื•ึผืœ ื•ึฐืขึดื ื›ึธึผืœ ืื•ึนื”ึฒื‘ึธื™ื•, ื›ึทึผืึฒืฉึถืืจ ืขึธืฉึดื‚ื™ืชึดื™ ืขึทื“ ื”ึตื ึธึผื” ื•ึฐืœึนื ื”ึดืžึฐืฆึตื™ืชึดื™ืšึธ ื‘ึฐึผื™ึทื“ ื“ึธึผื•ึดื“:
Am I the chief dog [watcher] for [the kingdom of] Yehudah? Am I at least as important as the chief dog watcher for Dovid. However, according to the cantillation which has the accent under [the word] ืจืืืฉื and [the word] ื›ึผึถืœึถื‘ ืึธื ื‚ื›ื…ื™ coralled [together],12Rashi's first explanation is assumming that the words ืจืืฉ and ื›ืœื‘ are connected. However, the cantillation indicates that they are separate. Instead, the words ื›ืœื‘ ืื ื›ื™ belong together. This compels Rashi to offer an alternative explanation. then this is the explanation: The chief? Do I want to be a chief in your house? It is better for me to be a dog and an ordinary person in the house of Dovid. This is also Yonasan's translation. From this day on should I [continue to] be kind. From now on [is it] proper for me to be kind to the house of Shaul and with all those who love him as I have done until now and I have not delivered you into the hand of Dovid?

ืคืกื•ืง ื˜ืณ ยท Verse 9

Hebrew:

ื›ึผึนึฝื”ึพื™ึทืขึฒืฉื‚ึถึคื” ืึฑืœึนื”ึดื™ืึ™ ืœึฐืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ”ืจ ื•ึฐื›ึนึ–ื” ื™ึนืกึดึฃื™ืฃ ืœึ‘ื•ึน ื›ึผึดึ—ื™ ื›ึผึทืึฒืฉืึถึจืจ ื ึดืฉืึฐื‘ึผึทึคืข ื™ึฐื”ึนื•ึธื”ึ™ ืœึฐื“ึธื•ึดึ”ื“ ื›ึผึดื™ึพื›ึตึ–ืŸ ืึถืขึฑืฉื‚ึถื”ึพืœึผึฝื•ึนืƒ

English:

May God do thus and more to Abner if I do not do for David as GOD swore to himโ€”

Avner pivots from rage to oath, swearing by his own life that he will now accomplish what Hashem swore to David. Metzudat David identifies 'koh ya'aseh' as the standard biblical formula of self-imprecation. Radak reflects on what divine oath Avner refers to: either Hashem's later word to David, 'I have sworn to David my servant,' or the implicit oath in Shmuel's twice-repeated statement to Shaul that the kingdom would be torn from him and given to one better than him. Avner's invocation of the divine promise reveals that he had known all along where the kingship was meant to go.

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืด ยท Verse 10

Hebrew:

ืœึฐื”ึทืขึฒื‘ึดึฅื™ืจ ื”ึทืžึผึทืžึฐืœึธื›ึธึ–ื” ืžึดื‘ึผึตึฃื™ืช ืฉืึธืึ‘ื•ึผืœ ื•ึผืœึฐื”ึธืงึดึžื™ื ืึถืชึพื›ึผึดืกึผึตึฃื ื“ึธื•ึดึ—ื“ ืขึทืœึพื™ึดืฉื‚ึฐืจึธืึตืœึ™ ื•ึฐืขึทืœึพื™ึฐื”ื•ึผื“ึธึ”ื” ืžึดื“ึผึธึ–ืŸ ื•ึฐืขึทื“ึพื‘ึผึฐืึตึฅืจ ืฉืึธึฝื‘ึทืขืƒ

English:

to transfer the kingship from the House of Saul, and to establish the throne of David over Israel and Judah from Dan to Beer-sheba.โ€

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืดื ยท Verse 11

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐืœึนืึพื™ึธื›ึนึฃืœ ืขึ”ื•ึนื“ ืœึฐื”ึธืฉืึดึฅื™ื‘ ืึถืชึพืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ–ืจ ื“ึผึธื‘ึธึ‘ืจ ืžึดื™ึผึดืจึฐืึธืชึ–ื•ึน ืึนืชึฝื•ึนืƒย {ืก}ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย 

English:

[Ish-bosheth] could say nothing more in reply to Abner, because he was afraid of him.

The verse delivers its political verdict in eight Hebrew words: Ish-Boshet could not answer Avner a word, out of fear of him. Metzudat David notes simply that the subject is Ish-Boshet. The puppet king who finally tried to assert himself has been silenced; Avner has openly threatened to transfer the kingdom, and Ish-Boshet -- the king of Israel by name -- has nothing to say. The narrative's quiet diagnosis is that the House of Shaul has already lost its sovereignty in fact, even before it loses it in form.

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืดื‘ ยท Verse 12

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึดืฉืึฐืœึทื—ึฉ ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึจืจ ืžึทืœึฐืึธื›ึดึงื™ืโ€‰ื€โ€‰ืึถืœึพื“ึผึธื•ึดึ›ื“ ๏ฟฝ๏ฟฝึผึทื—ึฐืชึผึธึฅื• ืœึตืืžึนึ–ืจ ืœึฐืžึดื™ึพืึธึ‘ืจึถืฅ ืœึตืืžึนึ—ืจ ื›ึผื‡ืจึฐืชึธึคื” ื‘ึฐืจึดึฝื™ืชึฐืšึธึ™ ืึดืชึผึดึ”ื™ ื•ึฐื”ึดื ึผึตื”ึ™ ื™ึธื“ึดึฃื™ ืขึดืžึผึธึ”ืšึฐ ืœึฐื”ึธืกึตึฅื‘ ืึตืœึถึ–ื™ืšึธ ืึถืชึพื›ึผื‡ืœึพื™ึดืฉื‚ึฐืจึธืึตึฝืœืƒ

English:

Abner immediatelycimmediately Meaning of Heb. uncertain. sent messengers to David, saying, โ€œTo whom shall the land belong?โ€ and to say [further],dโ€To whom shall the land belong?โ€ and to say [further] Meaning of Heb. uncertain. โ€œMake a pact with me, and I will help you and bring all Israel over to your side.โ€

Avner sends emissaries to David with a cryptic oath formula: 'le-mi aretz' -- to whom does the land belong? Rashi and Metzudat David read it as a solemn oath sworn by the One who made the earth, a way of binding the proposal that follows. Rashi preserves a striking midrashic reading of 'tachtav' (in his stead): Avner placed his own name first in the letter and David's second, and was punished for that arrogance. Radak gives the plain sense: Avner is signaling secretly that the land truly belongs to David alone, and proposing a pact by which he will bring all Israel over to him.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ืชึทึผื—ึฐืชึธึผื™ื• ืœึตืืžึนืจ. (ืชืจื’ื•ื:) ืดืžึตืึทืชึฐืจึตื™ื”ึผ ืœึฐืžึตื™ืžึทืจ ืžึฐืงึทื™ึฐึผืžึฐื ึธื ื‘ึฐึผืžึธืืŸ ื“ึทึผืขึฒื‘ึทื“ ืึทืจึฐืขึธืืด: ืœึฐืžึดื™ ืึธืจึถืฅ. ืœึฐืฉืื•ึนืŸ ืฉึฐืื‘ื•ึผืขึธื”, ื‘ึฐึผืžึดื™ ืฉึถืื”ึธืึธืจึถืฅ ืฉึถืืœึผื•ึน. ื“ึธึผื‘ึธืจ ืึทื—ึตืจ: ืชึทึผื—ึฐืชึธึผื™ื•, ืฉึฐืืžื•ึน ื”ึดื–ึฐื›ึดึผื™ืจ ืชึฐึผื—ึดืœึธึผื” ื‘ึธึผืึดื’ึถึผืจึถืช, ื•ึฐืึทื—ึทืจ ื›ึธึผืšึฐ ื”ึดื–ึฐื›ึดึผื™ืจ ืฉึตืื ื“ึธึผื•ึดื“, ื•ึผืœึฐื›ึธืšึฐ ื ึถืขึฑื ึทืฉื, ื›ึธึผืชึทื‘: ืžึดืžึถึผื ึดึผื™ ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตืจ ืฉึทื‚ืจ ืฆึฐื‘ึธื ื™ึดืฉึฐื‚ืจึธืึตืœ, ืœึฐื“ึธื•ึดื“ ืžึถืœึถืšึฐ ื™ึดืฉึฐื‚ืจึธืึตืœ, ืฉึธืืœื•ึนื: ืœึฐืžึดื™ ืึธืจึถืฅ. ืœึฐืžึดื™ ืฉึถืื”ึทืžึทึผืœึฐื›ื•ึผืช ื”ึธื’ื•ึผืŸ ืœื•ึน, ืึฒื ึดื™ ืฉืื•ึนืœึตื—ึท ืœื•ึน ืœึตืืžึนืจ: ื›ึธึผืจึฐืชึธื” ื‘ึฐืจึดื™ืชึฐืšึธ ื•ึฐื’ื•ึนืณ:
In his behalf saying. From his place to say, We shall keep this [oath] by the One Who made the world. By He Who [posseses] the land. [This is] language [used for] an oath, By He Who [posseses] the land. Another interpretation: "Below him," [Avner] mentioned his name first in the message letter and afterwords he mentioned Dovid's name and that is why he was punished. [This is what] he wrote: From me, Avner, the general of Yisroel to Dovid, the king of Yisroel, peace salutation. To He who [deserves] the land. To whom the kingdom is proper for him, I am sending to him "saying, Enact a convenant, etc."

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืดื’ ยท Verse 13

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึนึฃืืžึถืจ ื˜ึ”ื•ึนื‘ ืึฒื ึดึ•ื™ ืึถื›ึฐืจึนึฅืช ืึดืชึผึฐืšึธึ– ื‘ึผึฐืจึดึ‘ื™ืช ืึทึฃืšึฐ ื“ึผึธื‘ึธึฃืจ ืึถื—ึธึกื“ ืึธื ึนื›ึดื™ึฉ ืฉืึนืึตึจืœ ืžึตืึดืชึผึฐืšึธึค ืœึตืืžึนืจึ™ ืœึนืึพืชึดืจึฐืึถึฃื” ืึถืชึพืคึผึธื ึทึ”ื™ ื›ึผึดึฃื™โ€‰ื€ ืึดืึพืœึดืคึฐื ึตึฃื™ ื”ึฑื‘ึดื™ืึฒืšึธึ— ืึตึšืช ืžึดื™ื›ึทึฃืœ ื‘ึผึทืชึพืฉืึธืึ”ื•ึผืœ ื‘ึผึฐื‘ึนืึฒืšึธึ– ืœึดืจึฐืึฅื•ึนืช ืึถืชึพืคึผึธื ึธึฝื™ืƒย {ืก}ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย 

English:

He replied, โ€œGood; I will make a pact with you. But I make one demand upon you: Do not appear before me unless you bring Michal daughter of Saul when you come before me.โ€

David accepts the pact in principle but attaches a single non-negotiable precondition: do not see my face until you bring Michal bat Shaul. Rashi, Metzudat David, and Radak agree that 'lifnei haviakha' means 'before anything else, bring Michal.' The demand is at once personal and political: Michal is David's wife by full kiddushin, and her return is a public reclamation of his standing within the House of Shaul -- a marriage tie that will help legitimize his claim over Israel.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ืœึดืคึฐื ึตื™ ื”ึฒื‘ึดื™ืึฒืšึธ. ืœึดืคึฐื ึตื™ ืจึฐืื•ึนืชึฐืšึธ ืคึธื ึทื™, ื”ึฒื‘ึดื™ืึฒืšึธ ืึถืช ืžึดื™ื›ึทืœ:
You first bring. Before you see my face, bring me Michal.

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืดื“ ยท Verse 14

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึดืฉืึฐืœึทึคื— ื“ึผึธื•ึดื“ึ™ ืžึทืœึฐืึธื›ึดึ”ื™ื ืึถืœึพืึดึฝื™ืฉืึพื‘ึผึนึฅืฉืึถืช ื‘ึผึถืŸึพืฉืึธืึ–ื•ึผืœ ืœึตืืžึนึ‘ืจ ืชึผึฐื ึธึคื” ืึถืชึพืึดืฉืึฐืชึผึดื™ึ™ ืึถืชึพืžึดื™ื›ึทึ”ืœ ืึฒืฉืึถืจึ™ ืึตืจึทึฃืฉื‚ึฐืชึผึดื™ ืœึดึ”ื™ ื‘ึผึฐืžึตืึธึ–ื” ืขื‡ืจึฐืœึฅื•ึนืช ืคึผึฐืœึดืฉืึฐืชึผึดึฝื™ืืƒ

English:

David also sent messengers to Ish-bosheth son of Saul, to say, โ€œGive me my wife Michal, for whom I paid the bride-priceebride-price Cf. Exod. 22.15; Deut. 20.7; 22.23โ€“29. of one hundred Philistine foreskins.โ€fone hundred Philistine foreskins Cf. 1 Sam. 18.27 (where the number is given as โ€œtwo hundredโ€).

David, now confident that Avner will deliver, also writes directly to Ish-Boshet -- not bypassing the king but, as Radak notes, honoring his nominal authority by requesting Michal through proper channels. He grounds his claim with the bride-price he paid: one hundred Plishti foreskins (the original condition Shaul had set, even though David had brought back two hundred). Metzudat David and Radak read the demand as a halakhic argument that the kiddushin was valid -- David staked his life for her, and she is therefore his wife by right.

ืคืกื•ืง ื˜ืดื• ยท Verse 15

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึดืฉืึฐืœึทื—ึ™ ืึดึฃื™ืฉื ื‘ึผึนึ”ืฉืึถืช ื•ึทื™ึผึดืงึผึธื—ึถึ–ื”ึธ ืžึตึฃืขึดึฝื ืึดึ‘ื™ืฉื ืžึตืขึดึ–ื ืคึผึทืœึฐื˜ึดื™ืึตึฅืœ ื‘ึผึถืŸึพ[ืœึธึฝื™ึดืฉื] (ืœื•ืฉ)ืƒ

English:

So Ish-bosheth sent and had her taken away from [her] husband,g[her] husband As in the Septuagint, Vulgate, and Targum. Or โ€œthe other man involved.โ€ Cf. 1 Sam. 25.44. Paltiel son of Laish.

Ish-Boshet complies and has Michal taken from Paltiel ben Layish, identified by Rashi (citing Targum Yonatan) as 'her husband's company' and by Metzudat David and Radak as the same Palti to whom Shaul had given her after expelling David from court. Radak preserves the rabbinic play on the name Palti'el -- 'God preserved him,' meaning he resisted his desire and never approached Michal because she was halakhically still David's wife.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ืžึตืขึดื ืึดื™ืฉื. ืชึดึผืจึฐื’ึตึผื ื™ื•ึนื ึธืชึธืŸ: ืดืžึดืœึฐึผื•ึทืช ื‘ึทึผืขึฐืœึธื”ึผืด:
From [her] man. Yonasan translated "from the company of her husband."

ืคืกื•ืง ื˜ืดื– ยท Verse 16

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึตึจืœึถืšึฐ ืึดืชึผึธึœื”ึผ ืึดื™ืฉืึธึ—ื”ึผ ื”ึธืœึงื•ึนืšึฐ ื•ึผื‘ึธื›ึนึ›ื” ืึทื—ึฒืจึถึ–ื™ื”ึธ ืขึทื“ึพื‘ึผึทื—ึปืจึดึ‘ื™ื ื•ึทื™ึผึนึจืืžึถืจ ืึตืœึธึฅื™ื• ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ›ืจ ืœึตึฅืšึฐ ืฉืึ–ื•ึผื‘ ื•ึทื™ึผึธืฉืึนึฝื‘ืƒ

English:

Her husband walked with her as far as Bahurim, weeping as he followed her; then Abner ordered him to turn back, and he went back.

Paltiel walks behind Michal as far as the Binyaminite town of Bachurim, weeping the entire way, until Avner curtly orders him to turn back. Rashi cites Sanhedrin: he wept for the mitzvah departing from him, because for all those years he had placed a sword in the bed between himself and Michal so as never to touch another man's wife. Metzudat David reads the action plainly as 'le-lavotah,' escorting her, and Radak situates Bachurim as a town in the territory of Binyamin (associated with Almon and connected to Shimi ben Gera). The image is one of Tanakh's most piercing minor portraits.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื”ึธืœื•ึนืšึฐ ื•ึผื‘ึธื›ึนื”. ืขึทืœ ืžึดืฆึฐื•ึธื” ื”ึทื”ื•ึนืœึถื›ึถืช ืžึดืžึถึผื ึผื•ึผ, ืฉึถืื›ึธึผืœ ืื•ึนืชึธืŸ ื”ึทืฉึธึผืื ึดื™ื ื ึธืขึทืฅ ื—ึถืจึถื‘ ื‘ึตึผื™ื ื•ึน ืœึฐื‘ึตื™ื ึธื”ึผ ื‘ึทึผืžึดึผื˜ึธึผื”, ื•ึฐืœึนื ื ึดื›ึฐืฉึทืืœ ื‘ึธึผื”ึผ:
Following and crying. Over the good deed [about to be] leaving him because all those years he thrust a sword into the bed [separating] between him and her and he did not stumble [into sinful intimacy] with her.13Shaul did not consider her married to Dovid because he considered Dovid's Kiddushin having been done using a loan which is an invalid Kiddushin. However, in fact, Dovid had used regular material wealth as his means for Kiddushin which made Dovid halachically married to Michal. This meant that Paltiel Ben Loyish was living in the same house with another man's wife. For all those years Paltiel made sure never to touch her and thus was spiritually elevated by subduing his lustful inclination. Now that she was leaving, he was saddenned to no longer have the opportunity for this type of spiritual greatness. (Sanhedrin, ibid).

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืดื– ยท Verse 17

Hebrew:

ื•ึผื“ึฐื‘ึทืจึพืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึฃืจ ื”ึธื™ึธึ”ื” ืขึดืึพื–ึดืงึฐื ึตึฅื™ ื™ึดืฉื‚ึฐืจึธืึตึ–ืœ ืœึตืืžึนึ‘ืจ ื’ึผึทืึพืชึผึฐืžื•ึนืœึ™ ื’ึผึทืึพืฉืึดืœึฐืฉืึนึ”ื ื”ึฑื™ึดื™ืชึถึžื ืžึฐื‘ึทืงึฐืฉืึดึงื™ื ืึถืชึพื“ึผึธื•ึดึ›ื“ ืœึฐืžึถึ–ืœึถืšึฐ ืขึฒืœึตื™ื›ึถึฝืืƒ

English:

Abner had conferred with the elders of Israel, saying, โ€œYou have wanted David to be king over you all along.

The narrative now shifts to Avner's diplomatic groundwork with the elders of Israel, which Rashi notes occurred 'before this' -- prior to the actual delivery of Michal. Metzudat David puts Avner's argument in his mouth: 'You yourselves have wanted David as king all along; only I was the one propping up the House of Shaul.' By recasting the elders' long-standing preference as the rationale for the transition, Avner reframes his own defection as a return to the consensus.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื•ึผื“ึฐื‘ึทืจ ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตืจ ื”ึธื™ึธื”. ืงื“ึถื ืœึธื›ึตืŸ:
And the word of Avner was [sent] Before this [incident with Paltiel]

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืดื— ยท Verse 18

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐืขึทืชึผึธึ–ื” ืขึฒืฉื‚ึ‘ื•ึผ ื›ึผึดึฃื™ ื™ึฐื”๏ฟฝ๏ฟฝื•ึธึ—ื” ืึธืžึทึคืจ ืึถืœึพื“ึผึธื•ึดื“ึ™ ืœึตืืžึนึ”ืจ ื‘ึผึฐื™ึทึฃื“โ€‰ื€ ื“ึผึธื•ึดึฃื“ ืขึทื‘ึฐื“ึผึดึ—ื™ ื”ื•ึนืฉืึดึœื™ืขึท ืึถืชึพืขึทืžึผึดึคื™ ื™ึดืฉื‚ึฐืจึธืึตืœึ™ ืžึดื™ึผึทึฃื“ ืคึผึฐืœึดืฉืึฐืชึผึดึ”ื™ื ื•ึผืžึดื™ึผึทึ–ื“ ื›ึผื‡ืœึพืึนื™ึฐื‘ึตื™ื”ึถึฝืืƒ

English:

Now act! For GOD has said concerning David: I will deliverhI will deliver So many mss. and versions; most mss. and editions have โ€œ[God] has delivered.โ€ My people Israel from the hands of the Philistines and all its other enemies through My servant David.โ€

Avner urges the elders to act now, invoking divine speech: Hashem said of David that through his hand He would save Israel from the Plishtim and from all their enemies. Rashi clarifies that 'amar el David' here means 'about David,' not 'to David.' Metzudat David reads Avner's logic as building consensus through the marriage tie just established -- since David is now bound by Michal to the House of Shaul, the elders can shift to him without disloyalty. Radak treats 'hoshia' as an infinitive standing for the future ('I will save'), the formula of divine promise.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ืึธืžึทืจ ืึถืœ ื“ึธึผื•ึดื“. ืขึทืœ ื“ึธึผื•ึดื“, ื•ึฐืึตื™ื ื•ึน ื–ึธื– ืžึดืžึทึผืฉึฐืืžึธืขื•ึผืช ืึถืœ:
Said about Dovid. About Dovid, and this is not [an instance of the usual] meaning of the word, ืืœ, "to".

ืคืกื•ืง ื™ืดื˜ ยท Verse 19

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึฐื“ึทื‘ึผึตึฅืจ ื’ึผึทืึพืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ–ืจ ื‘ึผึฐืื‡ื–ึฐื ึตึฃื™ ื‘ึดื ึฐื™ึธืžึดึ‘ื™ืŸ ื•ึทื™ึผึตึฃืœึถืšึฐ ื’ึผึทืึพืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ—ืจ ืœึฐื“ึทื‘ึผึตึžืจ ื‘ึผึฐืื‡ื–ึฐื ึตึคื™ ื“ึธื•ึดื“ึ™ ื‘ึผึฐื—ึถื‘ึฐืจึ”ื•ึนืŸ ืึตึคืช ื›ึผื‡ืœึพืึฒืฉืึถืจึพื˜ื•ึนื‘ึ™ ื‘ึผึฐืขึตื™ื ึตึฃื™ ื™ึดืฉื‚ึฐืจึธืึตึ”ืœ ื•ึผื‘ึฐืขึตื™ื ึตึ–ื™ ื›ึผื‡ืœึพื‘ึผึตึฅื™ืช ื‘ึผึดื ึฐื™ึธืžึดึฝืŸืƒ

English:

Abner also talked with the Benjaminites; then Abner went and informed David in Hebron of all the wishes of Israel and of the whole House of Benjamin.

Avner makes a separate trip to address Binyamin -- Shaul's own tribe and Ish-Boshet's natural base -- and only then comes to Hebron to report the consensus to David. Metzudat David reads 'asher tov' as 'what was right in everyone's eyes -- that David should rule.' Radak observes the political shrewdness: although Binyamin was tied by blood to the House of Shaul, they had seen David's continual success and Shaul's House dwindling, and Avner's persuasion sealed their willingness to switch. The verse marks the practical end of the civil war -- all that remains is the formal pact at Hebron.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืณ ยท Verse 20

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึธื‘ึนึจื ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึคืจ ืึถืœึพื“ึผึธื•ึดื“ึ™ ื—ึถื‘ึฐืจึ”ื•ึนืŸ ื•ึฐืึดืชึผึ–ื•ึน ืขึถืฉื‚ึฐืจึดึฃื™ื ืึฒื ึธืฉืึดึ‘ื™ื ื•ึทื™ึผึทึจืขึทืฉื‚ ื“ึผึธื•ึดึงื“ ืœึฐืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ›ืจ ื•ึฐืœึทืึฒื ึธืฉืึดึฅื™ื ืึฒืฉืึถืจึพืึดืชึผึ–ื•ึน ืžึดืฉืึฐืชึผึถึฝื”ืƒ

English:

When Abner came to David in Hebron, accompanied by twenty men, David made a feast for Abner and the men with him.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื ยท Verse 21

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึนึฃืืžึถืจ ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึฃืจ ืึถืœึพื“ึผึธื•ึดึกื“ ืึธืงึฃื•ึผืžึธื”โ€‰ื€โ€‰ื•ึฐึฝืึตืœึตึกื›ึธื” ื•ึฐืึถืงึฐื‘ึผึฐืฆึธื”ึฉ ืึถืœึพืึฒื“ึนื ึดึจื™ ื”ึทืžึผึถึœืœึถืšึฐ ืึถืชึพื›ึผื‡ืœึพื™ึดืฉื‚ึฐืจึธืึตึ—ืœ ื•ึฐื™ึดื›ึฐืจึฐืชึคื•ึผ ืึดืชึผึฐืšึธึ™ ื‘ึผึฐืจึดึ”ื™ืช ื•ึผืžึธึฃืœึทื›ึฐืชึผึธึ” ื‘ึผึฐื›ึนึฅืœ ืึฒืฉืึถืจึพืชึผึฐืึทื•ึผึถึ–ื” ื ึทืคึฐืฉืึถึ‘ืšึธ ื•ึทื™ึฐืฉืึทืœึผึทึฅื— ื“ึผึธื•ึดึ›ื“ ืึถืชึพืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ–ืจ ื•ึทื™ึผึตึฅืœึถืšึฐ ื‘ึผึฐืฉืึธืœึฝื•ึนืืƒ

English:

Abner said to David, โ€œNow I will go and rally all Israel to Your Majesty. They will make a pact with you, and you can reign over all that your heart desires.โ€ And David dismissed Abner, who went away unharmed.

Avner takes leave with a final pledge: he will go now and gather all Israel to make a covenant with David, so that David will rule over everything his heart desires. Metzudat David glosses 've-yikhretu' as 'to be servants to you' and 'be-khol asher te'aveh' as 'you will be sovereign over everything.' The narrator's repeated 've-yelekh be-shalom' -- he went away in peace -- is loaded irony, foreshadowing what is about to happen as soon as Yoav returns.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื‘ ยท Verse 22

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐื”ึดื ึผึตื”ึฉ ืขึทื‘ึฐื“ึตึจื™ ื“ึธื•ึดึคื“ ื•ึฐื™ื•ึนืึธื‘ึ™ ื‘ึผึธึฃื ืžึตึฝื”ึทื’ึผึฐื“ึ”ื•ึผื“ ื•ึฐืฉืึธืœึธึฅืœ ืจึธึ–ื‘ ืขึดืžึผึธึฃื ื”ึตื‘ึดึ‘ื™ืื•ึผ ื•ึฐืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ—ืจ ืึตื™ื ึถึคื ึผื•ึผ ืขึดืึพื“ึผึธื•ึดื“ึ™ ื‘ึผึฐื—ึถื‘ึฐืจึ”ื•ึนืŸ ื›ึผึดึฅื™ ืฉืึดืœึผึฐื—ึ–ื•ึน ื•ึทื™ึผึตึฅืœึถืšึฐ ื‘ึผึฐืฉืึธืœึฝื•ึนืืƒ

English:

Just then Davidโ€™s soldiers and Joab returned from a raid, bringing much plunder with them; Abner was no longer with David in Hebron, for he had been dismissed and had gone away unharmed.

At precisely this moment Yoav returns with David's troops from a raid, bringing back much spoil. Rashi reads 'me-ha-gedud' as 'they raided as a raiding party.' Radak speculates that the raid was likely against the Plishtim, who had probably sent out their own gedud against Israel and were repelled. The narrator pointedly notes that Avner was 'no longer' with David, having been dismissed in peace -- the framing makes Yoav's furious arrival at the news all the more dramatic, and sets up his confrontation.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ืžึตื”ึทื’ึฐึผื“ื•ึผื“. ืคึธึผืฉึฐืื˜ื•ึผ ื‘ึทึผื’ึฐึผื“ื•ึผื“, ืœึดืฉึฐืืœื•ึนืœ ืขึทืœ ื”ึธืื•ึนื™ึตื‘:
From an attack. They sprung, attacking to take spoils from the enemy.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื’ ยท Verse 23

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐื™ื•ึนืึธึ›ื‘ ื•ึฐื›ื‡ืœึพื”ึทืฆึผึธื‘ึธึฅื ืึฒืฉืึถืจึพืึดืชึผึ–ื•ึน ื‘ึผึธึ‘ืื•ึผ ื•ึทื™ึผึทื’ึผึดึคื“ื•ึผ ืœึฐื™ื•ึนืึธื‘ึ™ ืœึตืืžึนึ”ืจ ื‘ึผึธึฝืึพืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึคืจ ื‘ึผึถืŸึพื ึตืจึ™ ืึถืœึพื”ึทืžึผึถึ”ืœึถืšึฐ ื•ึทึฝื™ึฐืฉืึทืœึผึฐื—ึตึ–ื”ื•ึผ ื•ึทื™ึผึตึฅืœึถืšึฐ ื‘ึผึฐืฉืึธืœึฝื•ึนืืƒ

English:

When Joab and the whole force with him arrived, Joab was told that Abner son of Ner had come to the king, had been dismissed by him, and had gone away unharmed.

The narrator emphasizes that Yoav and 'the whole army with him' arrived intact -- Metzudat David reads 'kol ha-tzava' as a hint that none of them had been lost. Bolstered by the scale of his force and the prestige of fresh plunder, Yoav has the confidence to challenge the king's judgment, as the next verses will show. The phrase 'va-yelekh be-shalom' is repeated for the third time, hammering home the peaceful character of Avner's departure that Yoav is about to violate.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื“ ยท Verse 24

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึธื‘ึนึคื ื™ื•ึนืึธื‘ึ™ ืึถืœึพื”ึทืžึผึถึ”ืœึถืšึฐ ื•ึทื™ึผึนึ–ืืžึถืจ ืžึถึฃื” ืขึธืฉื‚ึดึ‘ื™ืชึธื” ื”ึดื ึผึตื”ึพื‘ึธึคื ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตืจึ™ ืึตืœึถึ”ื™ืšึธ ืœึธืžึผึธื”ึพื–ึผึถึฅื” ืฉืึดืœึผึทื—ึฐืชึผึ–ื•ึน ื•ึทื™ึผึตึฅืœึถืšึฐ ื”ึธืœึฝื•ึนืšึฐืƒ

English:

Joab went to the king and said, โ€œWhat have you done? Here Abner came to you; why did you let him go? Now he has gotten away!

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื” ยท Verse 25

Hebrew:

ื™ึธื“ึทึ™ืขึฐืชึผึธึ™ ืึถืชึพืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึฃืจ ื‘ึผึถืŸึพื ึตึ”ืจ ื›ึผึดึฅื™ ืœึฐืคึทืชึผึนืชึฐืšึธึ– ื‘ึผึธึ‘ื ื•ึฐืœึธื“ึทึœืขึทืช ืึถืชึพืžื•ึนืฆึธึฝืึฒืšึธึ™ ื•ึฐืึถืชึพ[ืžึฃื•ึนื‘ึธืึถึ”ืšึธ] (ืžื‘ื•ืืš) ื•ึฐืœึธื“ึทึ•ืขึทืช ืึตึ›๏ฟฝ๏ฟฝ ื›ึผื‡ืœึพืึฒืฉืึถึฅืจ ืึทืชึผึธึ–ื” ืขึนืฉื‚ึถึฝื”ืƒ

English:

Donโ€™t you know that Abner son of Ner came only to deceive you, to learn your comings and goings and to find out all that you are planning?โ€

Yoav presses his accusation: Avner is your sworn enemy and came only to seduce you, to learn your military movements and your domestic activities, and to spy out everything you do. Metzudat David glosses 'mo'tzakha u-mova'akha' as 'what you do in war and what you do in your house.' The accusation is rhetorically forceful but transparently a cover: Yoav's true motive, the narrator will reveal in verse 27, is the blood of his brother Asael, and his political concern is the loss of his unique position as David's chief commander.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื• ยท Verse 26

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึตืฆึตึคื ื™ื•ึนืึธื‘ึ™ ืžึตืขึดึฃื ื“ึผึธื•ึดึ”ื“ ื•ึทื™ึผึดืฉืึฐืœึทึคื— ืžึทืœึฐืึธื›ึดื™ืึ™ ืึทื—ึฒืจึตึฃื™ ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ”ืจ ื•ึทื™ึผึธืฉืึดึฅื‘ื•ึผ ืึนืชึ–ื•ึน ืžึดื‘ึผึฃื•ึนืจ ื”ึทืกึผึดืจึธึ‘ื” ื•ึฐื“ึธื•ึดึ–ื“ ืœึนึฅื ื™ึธื“ึธึฝืขืƒ

English:

Joab left David and sent messengers after Abner, and they brought him back from the cistern of Sirah; but David knew nothing about it.

Yoav storms out from David's presence and dispatches messengers to overtake Avner. They bring him back from the cistern of Sirah, summoning him in the king's name as if David had remembered something he forgot to discuss (Metzudat David). Rashi cites Sanhedrin 49a's wordplay: 'bor ve-sirah' (well and thorn) caused Avner's death -- a reference to the two times Avner failed to defend David's honor against Shaul (the water jug taken from Shaul's headrest, and the corner of Shaul's robe Avner dismissed as having been caught on a thorn). The narrator's flat clause 've-David lo yada' -- David did not know -- is the chapter's most important legal disclaimer.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ืžึดื‘ึผื•ึนืจ ื”ึทืกึดึผืจึธื”. ืฉึตืื ืžึธืงื•ึนื ื•ึฐืจึทื‘ึผื•ึนืชึตื™ื ื•ึผ ืึธืžึฐืจื•ึผ (ืกื ื”ื“ืจื™ืŸ ืžื˜ ื): ื‘ึผื•ึนืจ ื•ึฐืกึดื™ืจึธื” ื’ึธึผืจึฐืžื•ึผ ืœื•ึน ืœึฐืึทื‘ึฐื ึตืจ ืฉึถืื™ึตึผื”ึธืจึตื’, ืขึทืœ ืฉึถืืœึนึผื ื”ึถื—ึฑื–ึดื™ืง ื“ึดึผื‘ึฐืจึตื™ ื“ึธื•ึดื“ ื‘ึฐึผืฆึทืคึทึผื—ึทืช ื”ึทืžึทึผื™ึดื ืึฒืฉึถืืจ ืœึธืงึทื— ืžึฐืจึทืึฒืฉืื•ึนืชึธื™ื• ืฉึถืืœ ืฉึธืืื•ึผืœ, ื•ึฐื’ึทื ืขึทืœ ื›ึฐึผื ึทืฃ ื”ึทืžึฐึผืขึดื™ืœ ืฉึถืืœ ืฉึธืืื•ึผืœ ืึธืžึทืจ ืฉึถืืžึธึผื ืึถื—ึธื“ ืžึดืŸ ื”ึทืกึดึผื™ืจึดื™ื ื ึถืึฑื—ึทื– ื‘ึผื•ึน ื•ึผืงึฐืจึธืขื•ึน:
From Bor HaSiroh. The name of a place [But] the Rabbis said: A well and a thorn caused Avner to be killed, by not grasping unto the deeds of Dovid, by [ignoring] the jug of water that [Dovid] took from [under] the head of Shaul14This is reference to Shmuel I, 26,12 where Dovid was being pursued by Shaul and Avner. Dovid found them sleeping and hence vulnerable. Not wanting to harm them but wanting to show Shaul he had been there, Dovid took the spear and the jug of water that was underneath Shaul's head. and also [by ignoring] the corner of Shaul's garment15This is a reference to Shmuel I, 24,5 where Shaul, in pursuit of Dovid, stopped temporarily inside the cave where Dovid was hiding with his men. Dovid did not kill him but surreptitiously caught off the corner of Shaul's garment. [Avner dismissed this and] he said "Perhaps one of the thorns caught upon [the garment] and tore it.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื– ยท Verse 27

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึธึคืฉืื‡ื‘ ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตืจึ™ ื—ึถื‘ึฐืจึ”ื•ึนืŸ ื•ึทื™ึผึทื˜ึผึตึคื”ื•ึผ ื™ื•ึนืึธื‘ึ™ ืึถืœึพืชึผึฃื•ึนืšึฐ ื”ึทืฉืึผึทึ”ืขึทืจ ืœึฐื“ึทื‘ึผึตึฅืจ ืึดืชึผึ–ื•ึน ื‘ึผึทืฉืึผึถึ‘ืœึดื™ ื•ึทื™ึผึทื›ึผึตึคื”ื•ึผ ืฉืึธืึ™ ื”ึทื—ึนึ”ืžึถืฉื ื•ึทื™ึผึธึ•ืžื‡ืช ื‘ึผึฐื“ึทึ–ื ืขึฒืฉื‚ึธื”ืึตึฅืœ ืึธื—ึดึฝื™ื•ืƒ

English:

When Abner returned to Hebron, Joab took him aside within the gate to talk to him privately;iprivately Meaning of Heb. uncertain. there he struck him in the belly. Thus [Abner] died for shedding the blood of Asahel, Joabโ€™sjJoabโ€™s Heb. โ€œhis.โ€ brother.

Yoav lures Avner into the gateway under pretense of private conversation and stabs him in the chomesh -- the same fifth rib (Rashi citing Sanhedrin 49a) where Avner had struck Asael. Rashi reads 'el tokh ha-sha'ar' as 'before the Sanhedrin,' meaning Yoav summoned Avner under pretext of a legal proceeding for the blood of Asael; 'ba-sheli' he glosses as 'in deception,' so Avner would not realize Yoav meant to kill him. Radak preserves the rabbinic give-and-take of that mock trial: Yoav demanded why Avner had killed Asael and rejected every defense, ruling that Avner could have aimed for a non-vital limb -- and so Yoav now strikes him precisely as Avner had once struck. The narrator concludes with the verdict: 'in the blood of Asael his brother' -- this is vengeance, not justice.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ืึถืœ ืชึผื•ึนืšึฐ ื”ึทืฉึทึผืืขึทืจ. ืœึดืคึฐื ึตื™ ืกึทื ึฐื”ึถื“ึฐืจึดื™ืŸ, ืœึฐื”ึดืฉึธึผืืคึตื˜ ืขึทืœ ื“ึทึผื ืขึฒืฉึธื‚ื”ืึตืœ ืึธื—ึดื™ื•: ื‘ึทึผืฉึถึผืืœึดื™. ื‘ึดึผืฉึฐืื’ึธื’ึธื”, ืฉึถืืœึนึผื ื”ึตื‘ึดื™ืŸ ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตืจ ืฉึถืื‘ึฐึผืœึดื‘ึผื•ึน ืœึฐื”ึธืจึฐื’ื•ึน, ื•ึฐืกึธืจึตืก ื”ึทืžึดึผืงึฐืจึธื, ื•ึทื™ึทึผื˜ึตึผื”ื•ึผ ื™ื•ึนืึธื‘ ื‘ึทึผืฉึถึผืืœึดื™, ืึถืœ ืชึผื•ึนืšึฐ ื”ึทืฉึทึผืืขึทืจ ืœึฐื“ึทื‘ึตึผืจ ืึดืชึผื•ึน:
Within the gate. [Yoav brought Avner] before a sanhedrin to be judged16The word ืฉึทืืขึทืจ often refers to judges who usually hold court at the gate of the city, cf. Devorim 22,15. for the [spilling of] blood of his brother, Asoel. Deceptively. In a mistake provoking [way] so that Avner would not realize that it is in [Yoav's] heart to kill him. Cut up the verse [to rearrange it's words as follows] "and Yoav steered him deceptively to go within the gate to talk to him."

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื— ยท Verse 28

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึดืฉืึฐืžึทึคืข ื“ึผึธื•ึดื“ึ™ ืžึตืึทึฃื—ึฒืจึตื™ ื›ึตึ”ืŸ ื•ึทื™ึผึนึ—ืืžึถืจ ื ึธืงึดึจื™ ืึธื ึนื›ึดึงื™ ื•ึผืžึทืžึฐืœึทื›ึฐืชึผึดึ›ื™ ืžึตืขึดึฅื ื™ึฐื”ึนื•ึธึ–ื” ืขึทื“ึพืขื•ึนืœึธึ‘ื ืžึดื“ึผึฐืžึตึ–ื™ ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึฅืจ ื‘ึผึถืŸึพื ึตึฝืจืƒ

English:

Afterward, when David heard of it, he said, โ€œBoth I and my kingdom are forever innocent before GOD of shedding the blood of Abner son of Ner.

When David hears the news he immediately distances himself in the most public terms possible: 'I am innocent, I and my kingdom, before Hashem forever, of the blood of Avner ben Ner.' Metzudat David captures the dual stake: David is declaring himself free of guilt before heaven and free of consequence in the political realm, lest the killing be seen as a royal act and provoke a backlash from the tribes Avner had just won over. The denial is not merely theological -- it is the indispensable political move that will allow Israel to continue toward David.

ืคืกื•ืง ื›ืดื˜ ยท Verse 29

Hebrew:

ื™ึธื—ึปึ™ืœื•ึผึ™ ืขึทืœึพืจึนึฃืืฉื ื™ื•ึนืึธึ”ื‘ ื•ึฐืึถึ–ืœ ื›ึผื‡ืœึพื‘ึผึตึฃื™ืช ืึธื‘ึดึ‘ื™ื• ื•ึฐึฝืึทืœึพื™ึดื›ึผึธืจึตึฃืช ืžึดื‘ึผึตึฃื™ืช ื™ื•ึนืึธึกื‘ ื–ึธึ ื‘ ื•ึผืžึฐืฆึนืจึธึžืข ื•ึผืžึทื—ึฒื–ึดึฅื™ืง ื‘ึผึทืคึผึถึ›ืœึถืšึฐ ื•ึฐื ึนืคึตึฅืœ ื‘ึผึทื—ึถึ–ืจึถื‘ ื•ึทื—ึฒืกึทืจึพืœึธึฝื—ึถืืƒ

English:

May [the guilt] fall upon the head of Joab and all his fatherโ€™s house. May the house of Joab never be without someone suffering from a discharge or an eruption, or a male who handles the spindle,ka male who handles the spindle I.e., doing only what would have been viewed as womenโ€™s work. or one slain by the sword, or one lacking bread.โ€โ€”

David hurls a five-fold curse on Yoav and his father's house: that they never lack a zav, a metzora, one who leans on a crutch, one who falls by the sword, or one who lacks bread. Rashi explains 'machazik ba-pelekh' as one who needs a cane because of a foot ailment. Radak preserves the striking rabbinic teaching that these five curses were ultimately fulfilled in five later kings of David's own line -- Rechav'am (zav), Uziah (metzora), Asa (pelekh), Yoshiyahu (sword), Yehoyakhin (lacking bread) -- because David's curse, even if just, was unwarranted in its scope, since Yoav alone was guilty. The five curses correspond, midrashically, to the five gifts (beauty, strength, wealth, wisdom, length of days) that righteousness merits.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื™ึธื—ื•ึผืœื•ึผ. ื™ึธื ื•ึผื—ื•ึผ, ื™ึธื—ื•ึผืœื•ึผ ื“ึฐึผืžึตื™ ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตืจ ืขึทืœ ืžึดืงึฐืจึธื ืฉึถืืœึฐึผืคึธื ึธื™ื• ื”ื•ึผื ืžื•ึผืกึธื‘, ืฉึถืืึธืžึทืจ ืณื ึธืงึดื™ ืึธื ึดื™ ื•ึผืžึทืžึฐืœึทื›ึฐืชึดึผื™ ืžึดื“ึฐึผืžึตื™ ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตืจืณ, ื™ึธื—ื•ึผืœื•ึผ ื“ึธึผืžึธื™ื• ืขึทืœ ืจึนืืฉื ื™ื•ึนืึธื‘, ืณื“ึฐึผืžึตื™ืณ ื”ึทื ึดึผื–ึฐื›ึธึผืจึดื™ื ื‘ึทึผืžึดึผืงึฐืจึธื ืฉึถืืœึฐึผืคึธื ึธื™ื•: ื•ึผืžึทื—ึฒื–ึดื™ืง ื‘ึทึผืคึถึผืœึถืšึฐ. ื ึดืฉึฐืืขึธืŸ ืขึทืœ ืžึทืงึฐืœื•ึน ืžึตื—ึฒืžึทืช ื—ื•ึนืœึดื™ ื”ึธืจึทื’ึฐืœึทื™ึดื:
[The guilt] should fall. The [guilt of the] blood of Avner should rest, should fall. [This verse is] referring back to the preceding verse that stated, I and my kingdom are innocent from [the guilt of] the blood of Avner [The guilt of] his blood should fall on the head of Yoav. The blood [of Avner] that was mentioned in the previous verse. [A lame person] who leans on a cane. Who leans on his cane because of diseased feet.

ืคืกื•ืง ืœืณ ยท Verse 30

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐื™ื•ึนืึธื‘ึ™ ื•ึทืึฒื‘ึดื™ืฉืึทึฃื™ ืึธื—ึดึ”ื™ื• ื”ึธืจึฐื’ึ–ื•ึผ ืœึฐืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ‘ืจ ืขึทืœึฉ ืึฒืฉืึถึจืจ ื”ึตืžึดึœื™ืช ืึถืชึพืขึฒืฉื‚ึธื”ืึตึงืœ ืึฒื—ึดื™ื”ึถึ›ื ื‘ึผึฐื’ึดื‘ึฐืขึ–ื•ึนืŸ ื‘ึผึทืžึผึดืœึฐื—ึธืžึธึฝื”ืƒย {ืก}ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย 

English:

Now Joab and his brother Abishai had killed Abner because he had killed their brother Asahel during the battle at Gibeon.โ€”

The narrator gives a parenthetical summary, naming both Yoav and Avishai as Avner's killers. Metzudat David and Radak explain that although Yoav alone struck the blow, Avishai accompanied him into the gate as backup and shared in the plan, and so Scripture treats him as a co-killer. The verse also draws the chapter's most damning contrast in the closing word 'be-milchamah' -- Avner had killed Asael in the heat of war, but Yoav and Avishai killed Avner in peace, the same point David will make in his deathbed charge to Shlomo: 'va-yasem dmei milchamah be-shalom.'
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื”ึธืจึฐื’ื•ึผ ืœึฐืึทื‘ึฐื ึตืจ. ื›ึฐึผืžื•ึน ืึถืช ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตืจ, ื•ึฐื“ื•ึนืžึถื” ืœื•ึน (ื™ืฉืขื™ื”ื• ืœื—:ื™ื“): ืดืขึธืฉึฐืืงึธื” ืœึดื™ ืขึธืจึฐื‘ึตื ึดื™ืด, ืขึธืฉึฐืืงึธื” ืื•ึนืชึดื™; ื•ึฐื›ึตืŸ (ื‘ืžื“ื‘ืจ ื™ื‘:ื™ื’): ืดืจึฐืคึธื ื ึธื ืœึธื”ึผืด, ืจึฐืคึธื ืื•ึนืชึธื”ึผ; ื•ึผื›ึฐืžื•ึนื”ื•ึผ (ื“ื‘ืจื™ ื”ื™ืžื™ื ื‘ ื™ื–:ื–): ืดืฉึธืืœึทื— ืœึฐืฉึธื‚ืจึธื™ื• ืœึฐื‘ึถืŸ ื—ึทื™ึดืœ ืœึฐืขื•ึนื‘ึทื“ึฐื™ึธื” ื•ึฐื’ื•ึนืณ ืœึฐืœึทืžึตึผื“ ื‘ึฐึผืขึธืจึตื™ ื™ึฐื”ื•ึผื“ึธื”ืด, ื•ึผืคึดืชึฐืจื•ึนื ื•ึน, ืฉึธืืœึทื— ืึถืช ืฉึธื‚ืจึธื™ื• ืึถืช ื‘ึถึผืŸ ื—ึทื™ึดืœ:
Killed Avner. [As if to say] Avner17Without the ืœ because it is the object of the verse's verb "killed." Whereas Avner with the prefix ืœ would usually mean "to Avner." and similar to it [we find] "Snatch me, be my surety" (Yeshaiya 38, 14), Snatch me18Not "to me" despite the verse using the word ืœื™. and also similarly (Bamidbar 12,13), "Please heal her" Heal her19Not "to her" despite the verse using the word ืœึธื”ึผ. and similarly to this (Divrei Hayomin II, 17, 7) "He sent his officers, Ben Chayil, and Ovadiahโ€ฆ to teach in the cities of Yehudah and it's meaning is: He sent his officers, Ben Chayil.20Not "to his officers, to Ben Chayil" despite the verse using the prefix ืœ.

ืคืกื•ืง ืœืดื ยท Verse 31

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึนึฉืืžึถืจึฉ ื“ึผึธื•ึดึจื“ ืึถืœึพื™ื•ึนืึธึœื‘ ื•ึฐืึถืœึพื›ึผื‡ืœึพื”ึธืขึธึฃื ืึฒืฉืึถืจึพืึดืชึผึ—ื•ึน ืงึดืจึฐืขึคื•ึผ ื‘ึดื’ึฐื“ึตื™ื›ึถืึ™ ื•ึฐื—ึดื’ึฐืจึฃื•ึผ ืฉื‚ึทืงึผึดึ”ื™ื ื•ึฐืกึดืคึฐื“ึ–ื•ึผ ืœึดืคึฐื ึตึฃื™ ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ‘ืจ ื•ึฐื”ึทืžึผึถึฃืœึถืšึฐ ื“ึผึธื•ึดึ”ื“ ื”ึนืœึตึ–ืšึฐ ืึทื—ึฒืจึตึฅื™ ื”ึทืžึผึดื˜ึผึธึฝื”ืƒ

English:

David then ordered Joab and all the troops with him to rend their clothes, gird on sackcloth, and make lament before Abner;lbefore Abner I.e., in the procession for Abner. and King David himself walked behind the bier.

David orders Yoav himself, together with all the troops, to rend their garments, gird sackcloth, and lead the lamentation -- and then walks behind the bier as a private mourner. Metzudat David explains that Yoav must publicly act the part of one grieved and remorseful for what he did. Radak observes the legal exception David made of himself: although a king does not normally walk behind a corpse and is forbidden even to leave his palace gate at the death of relatives, David broke this norm specifically so that all Israel would see and know that the killing was not by his command.

ืคืกื•ืง ืœืดื‘ ยท Verse 32

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึดืงึฐื‘ึผึฐืจึฅื•ึผ ืึถืชึพืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ–ืจ ื‘ึผึฐื—ึถื‘ึฐืจึ‘ื•ึนืŸ ื•ึทื™ึผึดืฉื‚ึผึธึงื ื”ึทืžึผึถึฃืœึถืšึฐ ืึถืชึพืงื•ึนืœึ—ื•ึน ื•ึทื™ึผึตื‘ึฐืšึผึฐึ™ ืึถืœึพืงึถึฃื‘ึถืจ ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ”ืจ ื•ึทื™ึผึดื‘ึฐื›ึผึ–ื•ึผ ื›ึผื‡ืœึพื”ึธืขึธึฝืืƒย {ืก}ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย 

English:

And so they buried Abner at Hebron; the king wept aloud by Abnerโ€™s grave, and all the troops wept.

They bury Avner in Hebron, and David lifts his voice and weeps at the grave, and all the people weep with him. Radak notes the unusual preposition 'el kever' rather than the expected 'al kever,' parallel to 'va-yekonen ha-melekh el Avner' (verse 33) where 'el' similarly stands for 'al.' The royal weeping is both genuine grief for a great commander and a deliberate public spectacle that draws the people's tears with it -- the narrator's repeated 'va-yivku kol ha-am' makes clear that David's mourning has become Israel's mourning.

ืคืกื•ืง ืœืดื’ ยท Verse 33

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึฐืงึนื ึตึฅืŸ ื”ึทืžึผึถึ›ืœึถืšึฐ ืึถืœึพืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึ–ืจ ื•ึทื™ึผึนืืžึทึ‘ืจ ื”ึทื›ึผึฐืžึฅื•ึนืช ื ึธื‘ึธึ–ืœ ื™ึธืžึฅื•ึผืช ืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึฝืจืƒ

English:

And the king intoned this dirge over Abner,โ€œShould Abner have died the death of a churl?

David chants a kinah whose opening line cuts to the moral heart of the matter: should Avner have died the death of a naval, a churl? Rashi reads 'naval' as a wicked person killed by the sword. Metzudat David asks the question rhetorically: was it fitting that Avner should die by the sword outside of battle, like an ignoble man? Radak adds another layer: 'naval' connotes one who falls -- a fallen, unresisting man -- and the lament wonders how such a great warrior could have allowed his hand not to rise against his striker. The line announces, in a single biting word, that this was murder, not justice.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื”ึทื›ึฐึผืžื•ึนืช ื ึธื‘ึธืœ. ื”ึทื›ึฐึผืžื•ึนืช ืจึธืฉึธืืข ื‘ึฐึผื—ึถืจึถื‘:
The death of someone wicked. Like the death by sword of a wicked person.

ืคืกื•ืง ืœืดื“ ยท Verse 34

Hebrew:

ื™ึธื“ึถึฃืšึธ ืœึนืึพืึฒืกึปืจึ—ื•ึนืช ื•ึฐืจึทื’ึฐืœึถึ™ื™ืšึธึ™ ืœึนืึพืœึดื ึฐื—ึปืฉืึฐืชึผึทึฃื™ึดื ื”ึปื’ึผึธึ”ืฉืื•ึผ ื›ึผึดื ึฐืคึ›ื•ึนืœ ืœึดืคึฐื ึตึฅื™ ื‘ึฐื ึตึฝื™ึพืขึทื•ึฐืœึธึ–ื” ื ึธืคึธึ‘ืœึฐืชึผึธ ื•ึทื™ึผึนืกึดึฅืคื•ึผ ื›ื‡ืœึพื”ึธืขึธึ–ื ืœึดื‘ึฐื›ึผึฅื•ึนืช ืขึธืœึธึฝื™ื•ืƒ

English:

Your hands were not bound,Your feet were not put in fetters;But you fell as one fallsBefore treacherous men!โ€And all the troops continued to weep over him.

The kinah continues with paired images: your hands were not bound, your feet were not in fetters of bronze -- you were not a captive being led to execution, and yet you fell. Rashi supplies the ellipsis: how did a warrior like you fall before treacherous men? Metzudat David explains that captured generals are sometimes bound and later killed, but Avner was free, in peace, struck down outside of battle -- and the only way such a thing happens is at the hands of bnei avlah, sons of treachery. He pointedly identifies the bnei Tzeruyah as the bnei avlah of the lament. The troops weep again, this time over the kinah's verdict.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื™ึธื“ึถื™ืšึธ ืœึนื ืึฒืกื•ึผืจื•ึนืช. ื”ึธื™ื•ึผ ื•ึฐืึตื™ืšึฐ ื ึธืคึทืœ ื’ึดึผื‘ึผื•ึนืจ ื›ึฐึผืžื•ึนืชึฐืšึธ ืœึดืคึฐื ึตื™ ื‘ึฐึผื ึตื™ ืขึทื•ึฐืœึธื”:
Your hands were not bound.21This word belong with the three hebrew words in the headline, Rashi is filling the word that's missing from the verse, the verb "were." How could a mighty soldier such as you fall before treacherous men.

ืคืกื•ืง ืœืดื” ยท Verse 35

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึธื‘ึนึฃื ื›ื‡ืœึพื”ึธืขึธึ—ื ืœึฐื”ึทื‘ึฐืจึงื•ึนืช ืึถืชึพื“ึผึธื•ึดึ›ื“ ืœึถึ–ื—ึถื ื‘ึผึฐืขึฃื•ึนื“ ื”ึทื™ึผึ‘ื•ึนื ื•ึทื™ึผึดืฉืึผึธื‘ึทึจืข ื“ึผึธื•ึดึœื“ ืœึตืืžึนึ—ืจ ื›ึผึนึฃื” ื™ึทึฝืขึฒืฉื‚ึถื”ึพืœึผึดึคื™ ืึฑืœึนื”ึดื™ืึ™ ื•ึฐื›ึนึฃื” ื™ึนืกึดึ”ื™ืฃ ื›ึผึดึฃื™ ืึดืึพืœึดืคึฐื ึตึงื™ ื‘ื•ึนืึพื”ึทืฉืึผึถึ›ืžึถืฉื ืึถื˜ึฐืขึทืึพืœึถึ–ื—ึถื ืึฅื•ึน ื›ื‡ืœึพืžึฐืึฝื•ึผืžึธื”ืƒ

English:

All the troops came to urge David to eat something while it was still day; but David swore, โ€œMay God do thus to me and more if I eat bread or anything else before sundown.โ€

The people come to urge David -- 'le-havrot,' a term Rashi glosses as a meal -- to eat the customary mourner's fare while it is still day, but David swears he will not taste bread or anything else until sunset. Metzudat David notes the standard biblical oath formula 'koh ya'aseh.' Radak preserves the rabbinic discussion of the alternative reading 'le-hakhrot' (with a kaph) -- 'first to destroy him, and only afterwards to feed him' -- but rejects it on textual grounds. David's public fast is the climax of his demonstrative dissociation, an act of mourning so visible that no Israelite could mistake his innocence.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ืœึฐื”ึทื‘ึฐืจื•ึนืช. ืœึฐืฉืื•ึนืŸ ืกึฐืขื•ึผื“ึธื”:
To feed. [This is] language [denoting] a meal.

ืคืกื•ืง ืœืดื• ยท Verse 36

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐื›ื‡ืœึพื”ึธืขึธึฃื ื”ึดื›ึผึดึ”ื™ืจื•ึผ ื•ึทื™ึผึดื™ื˜ึทึ–ื‘ ื‘ึผึฐืขึตื™ื ึตื™ื”ึถึ‘ื ื›ึผึฐื›ึนืœึ™ ืึฒืฉืึถึฃืจ ืขึธืฉื‚ึธึฃื” ื”ึทืžึผึถึ”ืœึถืšึฐ ื‘ึผึฐืขึตื™ื ึตึฅื™ ื›ื‡ืœึพื”ึธืขึธึ–ื ื˜ึฝื•ึนื‘ืƒ

English:

All the troops took note of itmtook note of it Meaning of Heb. uncertain. and approved, just as all the troops approved everything else the king did.njust as โ€ฆ king did Meaning of Heb. uncertain.

The people 'recognized' (hikiru) -- they understood, Metzudat David explains, that the killing was not done with David's knowledge -- and the king's whole performance of grief was right in their eyes: walking behind the bier, weeping, the kinah, the fast. The verse marks the political success of the dissociation: the same population Avner had just been gathering to David is now persuaded that David is a man of integrity, not a king who orders assassinations.

ืคืกื•ืง ืœืดื– ยท Verse 37

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึตื“ึฐืขึงื•ึผ ื›ื‡ืœึพื”ึธืขึธึ›ื ื•ึฐื›ื‡ืœึพื™ึดืฉื‚ึฐืจึธืึตึ–ืœ ื‘ึผึทื™ึผึฃื•ึนื ื”ึทื”ึ‘ื•ึผื ื›ึผึดึฃื™ ืœึนึคื ื”ึธึฝื™ึฐืชึธื”ึ™ ืžึตึฝื”ึทืžึผึถึ”ืœึถืšึฐ ืœึฐื”ึธืžึดึ–ื™ืช ืึถืชึพืึทื‘ึฐื ึตึฅืจ ื‘ึผึถืŸึพื ึตึฝืจืƒย {ืก}ย ย ย ย ย ย ย ย 

English:

That day all the troops and all Israel knew that it was not by the kingโ€™s will that Abner son of Ner was killed.

ืคืกื•ืง ืœืดื— ยท Verse 38

Hebrew:

ื•ึทื™ึผึนึฅืืžึถืจ ื”ึทืžึผึถึ–ืœึถืšึฐ ืึถืœึพืขึฒื‘ึธื“ึธึ‘ื™ื• ื”ึฒืœึฃื•ึนื ืชึตึฝื“ึฐืขึ”ื•ึผ ื›ึผึดึฝื™ึพืฉื‚ึทึฃืจ ื•ึฐื’ึธื“ึ—ื•ึนืœ ื ึธืคึทึ›ืœ ื”ึทื™ึผึฅื•ึนื ื”ึทื–ึผึถึ–ื” ื‘ึผึฐื™ึดืฉื‚ึฐืจึธืึตึฝืœืƒ

English:

And the king said to his soldiers, โ€œYou well know that a prince, a great man in Israel, has fallen this day.

David turns to his servants with a final, intimate vindication of Avner: surely you know that a prince and a great man has fallen this day in Israel. Metzudat David explains that David anticipated his men might wonder at the sheer scale of his mourning for someone he had not killed, and so he answers preemptively: this man's stature alone justifies the magnitude of the grief. The verse is also David's quiet rebuke to Yoav -- the dead man was not a private enemy but a 'sar ve-gadol' for all Israel, whose loss is a national one.

ืคืกื•ืง ืœืดื˜ ยท Verse 39

Hebrew:

ื•ึฐืึธื ึนื›ึดึจื™ ื”ึทื™ึผึฅื•ึนื ืจึทืšึฐึ™ ื•ึผืžึธืฉืึฃื•ึผื—ึท ืžึถึ”ืœึถืšึฐ ื•ึฐื”ึธืึฒื ึธืฉืึดึฅื™ื ื”ึธืึตึ›ืœึผึถื” ื‘ึผึฐื ึตึฅื™ ืฆึฐืจื•ึผื™ึธึ–ื” ืงึธืฉืึดึฃื™ื ืžึดืžึผึถึ‘ื ึผึดื™ ื™ึฐืฉืึทืœึผึตึงื ื™ึฐื”ึนื•ึธึ›ื” ืœึฐืขึนืฉื‚ึตึฅื” ื”ึธืจึธืขึธึ–ื” ื›ึผึฐืจึธืขึธืชึฝื•ึนืƒย {ืค}

English:

And today I am weak, even though anointed king; those involved, the sons of Zeruiah, are too savage for me. May GOD requite the wicked for their wickedness!โ€

The chapter closes on one of David's most candid political confessions. Rashi cites Targum Yonatan: 'rakh' means 'hedyot' -- still a commoner, freshly anointed. Metzudat David offers the full apologetic: even today, when I have been anointed king over all Israel and my reign is fully sovereign, I am soft-hearted before the bnei Tzeruyah, who are harder than I am, and I cannot rise against them; furthermore, since the killing lacked witnesses and warning, no court can condemn Yoav, so I consign judgment to heaven. Radak adds the linguistic gloss that 'rakh' itself can mean 'kingship' (citing 'lo rakhah ve-lo bar rakhah'), so 'rakh u-mashu'ach melekh' means 'a king newly anointed.' The line foreshadows the unfinished business of Avner's blood that David will still place in Shlomo's hands a generation later.
ืจืฉืดื™Rashi
ื•ึฐืึธื ึนื›ึดื™ ื”ึทื™ึผื•ึนื ืจึทืšึฐ. (ืชืจื’ื•ื:) ืดื•ึทืึฒื ึธื ื™ื•ึนืžึธื ื“ึตื™ืŸ ื”ึถื“ึฐื™ื•ึนื˜ ื•ึผืžึฐืจึทื‘ึตึผื™ ืœึฐืžึทืœึฐื›ึธึผืืด:
I am today weak [as a commoner] And I am, on this day, a commoner and a young king.

โ† II Samuel 2 | II Samuel 4 โ†’

Back to II Samuel | Back to Nach Yomi

Last updated on
Chapter 2Chapter 4