Chapter 17 of I Chronicles appears almost verbatim in II Samuel chapter 7. The Malbim, as is his approach throughout the book, does not come to interpret the chapter from beginning to end, but rather to highlight the differences between Ezra's wording here and the text in Samuel. We will do the same: we will not study the entire chapter here according to all the commentators as we did when studying the Book of Samuel, but rather focus on the variations and their significance.
Why did Ezra bother to transcribe this passage a second time at all? The Malbim explains: because contained within this story is the future promise concerning the dynasty of the House of David. The primary focus of Divrei HaYamim was written in honor of David, and here lies the promise that the dynasty of the House of David will endure forever from his descendants - therefore, this narrative was so precious in Ezra's eyes that he transcribed it again, with variations that serve to clarify, explain, or abridge.
וַיְהִי כַּאֲשֶׁר יָשַׁב דָּוִיד בְּבֵיתוֹ, וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִיד אֶל־נָתָן הַנָּבִיא: הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי יוֹשֵׁב בְּבֵית הָאֲרָזִים, וַאֲרוֹן בְּרִית־יְהֹוָה תַּחַת יְרִיעוֹת. - And it came to pass, as David dwelt in his house, that David said to Nathan the prophet: "Behold, I dwell in a house of cedars, but the Ark of the Covenant of Hashem is under curtains."
In Samuel it says, 'and Hashem had given him rest round about,' meaning that David had rest from his enemies, 'while the Ark of God dwells within curtains' - inside the tent that David had pitched for it, as we saw above. David said: The Holy One, blessed be He, fulfilled for us the promise, 'And He will give you rest from all your enemies round about' - He gave us rest. If so, what does this demand of me? It is incumbent upon me to fulfill what is written right next to that promise: 'Then it shall be that the place which Hashem your God will choose to cause His Name to dwell there' - to build a dwelling place for Hashem. Hashem, as it were, fulfilled His part; now the time has come for me to fulfill mine.
'David dwelt in his house' - the Metzudat David explains that the verse comes to say that he dwelt in a house fitting for his lofty stature, namely 'a house of cedars,' a house paneled with a cedar ceiling, which was considered an exalted palace. In contrast, where was the Ark? Under curtains. Is this the house befitting the Ark - that it should be under curtains while I dwell in a house of cedar?
Here the Malbim notes the variations: In our text it says 'in his house,' whereas there it says 'and Hashem had given him rest round about from all his enemies.' In our text it says 'in the house of the cedars' (beit ha'arazim) with the definite article, whereas there it is 'in a house of cedar' (beit arazim). The difference: 'The' well-known cedars are the very cedars sent by Hiram king of Tyre, a personal import from Lebanon - which was the source of the famous cedars of Lebanon - and this was a grand structure, a royal palace. Therefore David says, 'I dwell in the house of the cedars.' And 'under curtains' is an explanation of what was said there, 'within curtains': meaning beneath the curtains that cover over the Ark.
וַיֹּאמֶר נָתָן אֶל־דָּוִיד: כֹּל אֲשֶׁר בִּלְבָבְךָ עֲשֵׂה, כִּי הָאֱלֹהִים עִמָּךְ. - And Nathan said to David: "Do all that is in your heart, for God is with you."
When Nathan heard the idea, he responded of his own accord and not through prophecy: someone wants to build a house for Hashem - how wonderful! He said to him: Do all that is in your heart, for in all that you do, Hashem is with you.
Here the Malbim points out a difference: In Samuel it is written 'Go, do,' whereas here Ezra writes simply 'Do.' The distinction: 'Go, do' implies a command, as though Nathan were instructing him with prophetic authority to go and do it; whereas 'do' means you have the ability to do so. Therefore Ezra clarified the wording: 'Do all that is in your heart' - you have permission, not that you were commanded to do so.
וַיְהִי בַּלַּיְלָה הַהוּא, וַיְהִי דְּבַר־אֱלֹהִים אֶל־נָתָן לֵאמֹר. - And it came to pass that night, that the word of God came to Natan, saying.
The Midrash asks: Why specifically on that night, immediately? The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Natan the prophet: This man to whom I am sending you is accustomed to making vows. Go and tell him before he takes an oath to build it. For King David is the one who said, "I have sworn and I will fulfill it" - a person who makes vows and takes oaths. If he vows and swears to build a house for Hashem, it will be difficult to release him from it. Therefore immediately, on that very night: go and speak to David.
Another explanation offered by Chazal: The man to whom I am sending you is zealous and swift in action - go tell him before he hires laborers. For if he hires laborers, he will suffer a financial loss, and Hashem says: I do not want him to incur a loss; therefore, go and tell him before he hires any workers.
לֵךְ וְאָמַרְתָּ אֶל־דָּוִיד עַבְדִּי, כֹּה אָמַר יְהֹוָה: לֹא אַתָּה תִּבְנֶה־לִּי הַבַּיִת לָשָׁבֶת. - Go and say to My servant David, Thus says Hashem: You shall not build Me the house to dwell in.
The emphasis is on "not you": it is not that the Temple will not be built at all, but rather that you will not build it, but rather your son. It will be an offspring of yours - but not you yourself.
כִּי לֹא יָשַׁבְתִּי בְּבַיִת מִן־הַיּוֹם אֲשֶׁר הֶעֱלֵיתִי אֶת־יִשְׂרָאֵל עַד הַיּוֹם הַזֶּה, וָאֶהְיֶה מֵאֹהֶל אֶל־אֹהֶל וּמִמִּשְׁכָּן. - For I have not dwelt in a house since the day I brought up Israel until this day, but I have moved from tent to tent, and from one tabernacle.
The phrasing here seems elliptical: "and from tabernacle" - and what else? The commentary attributed to Rashi explains: I was moving from tent to tent and from Tabernacle to Tabernacle, and the text abridged the expression. The meaning is from Gilgal to Shiloh, from Shiloh to Nov, and from Nov to Giv'on. And even though I was wandering from tent to tent and from Tabernacle to Tabernacle, I never spoke or requested of anyone to build Me a house - and this is the theme of the next verse.
Radak likewise explains that "and from a tabernacle" means "and from Tabernacle to Tabernacle"; since the verse had already said "from tent to tent", it relied upon the perceptive reader to infer the rest on his own. In all these locations - Gilgal, Shiloh, Nov, and Giv'on - the Ark was under curtains. Furthermore, during all the years the Ark was in Kiryat Ye'arim, the Altar was in Nov and Giv'on, meaning that throughout that entire period they remained under tent curtains.
The Malbim notes: In our text it reads, "from the day that I brought up Israel until this day," whereas there (in Shmuel) it says "since the day of My bringing up" - both expressing the same idea: from the day I brought Israel up from Egypt. Furthermore, "from tent to tent" is an elucidation of what is written there, "and I went about in a tent and in a tabernacle." Lest one interpret "in a tent and in a tabernacle" literally as a single structure, Ezra comes and clarifies: from tent to tent and from Tabernacle to Tabernacle. For the Mishkan of Shiloh was a stone structure below and a tent of curtains above, without a solid roof - which is why it was called "the tent of the tabernacle." And when Hashem moved from the tent in the wilderness to the Mishkan of Shiloh, He dwelt there in a tent and in a tabernacle together.
בְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר־הִתְהַלַּכְתִּי בְּכָל־יִשְׂרָאֵל, הֲדָבָר דִּבַּרְתִּי אֶת־אַחַד שֹׁפְטֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתִי לִרְעוֹת אֶת־עַמִּי לֵאמֹר: לָמָּה לֹא־בְנִיתֶם לִי בֵּית אֲרָזִים. - Wherever I have moved about among all Israel, did I ever speak a word to any of the judges of Israel whom I commanded to shepherd My people, saying: Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?
Rashi explains: Did I ever turn to one of the judges of Israel, whom I appointed to shepherd My people, and ask in complaint, 'Why have you not built Me a house of cedar?' I never asked for this. Nor did it ever enter their minds on their own initiative to build Me a house, as it entered your thoughts.
Radak explains the variation between the accounts: in Shmuel it is written, 'one of the tribes [shivtei] of Israel,' whereas here it is 'one of the judges [shoftei] of Israel.' Malbim also addresses this, and both make the same point (and Radak certainly preceded Malbim): a judge is termed a shevet, scepter or staff, denoting the head or leader. This is like 'The scepter [shevet] shall not depart from Yehudah' - meaning a ruler from Yehudah; and similarly, 'a scepter of equity is the scepter of Your kingdom' - the judge of the kingdom.
וְעַתָּה כֹּה־תֹאמַר לְעַבְדִּי לְדָוִיד: כֹּה אָמַר יְהֹוָה צְבָאוֹת, אֲנִי לְקַחְתִּיךָ מִן־הַנָּוֶה מִן־אַחֲרֵי הַצֹּאן לִהְיוֹת נָגִיד עַל עַמִּי יִשְׂרָאֵל. - Now therefore, thus shall you say to My servant David: Thus says the Lord of Hosts: I took you from the pasture, from following the flock, to be a ruler over My people Israel.
Why was there a need for a renewed declaration of 'Thus says the Lord of Hosts'? Pseudo-Rashi explains: The Holy One, blessed be He, wanted to tell him that for what arose in his thoughts, he deserved a fine reward. For we see that none of the judges of Israel ever sought to build a house for Hashem - neither did I request it, nor did they propose it. The very fact that you sought to do so is a virtue, and therefore you deserve a fine reward for this intention.
'From the pasture' [min hanaveh] - the shepherds' dwellings, from the sheepfolds. Before his reign, David was a shepherd; his father sent him out to the sheep, and when Shmuel came to anoint a king, there remained yet one more, the youngest, who was shepherding the flock. As has been explained elsewhere, he was cast out to the flock because he was suspected of being illegitimate, and they thought it was better for him to be out there, perhaps a lion or a bear would come and strike David down, thereby removing the disgrace from the house of Yishai - as discussed at length in the teachings for Shavuot. Returning to our subject: Hashem told him, behold, you were in the lowly station of a shepherd, and I took you from there to be a ruler over My people Israel.
וָאֶהְיֶה עִמְּךָ בְּכֹל אֲשֶׁר הָלַכְתָּ, וָאַכְרִית אֶת־כָּל־אוֹיְבֶיךָ מִפָּנֶיךָ, וְעָשִׂיתִי לְךָ שֵׁם כְּשֵׁם הַגְּדוֹלִים אֲשֶׁר בָּאָרֶץ. - And I have been with you wherever you have gone, and I have cut off all your enemies from before you, and I have made for you a name like the name of the great ones who are on the earth.
'And I have been with you' - scripture records that Hashem was with David: 'And Hashem was with David, and he prospered' in all that he did. With Shaul, wherever he turned he incurred guilt, whereas with David, wherever he turned he was successful. Even Shaul said to him: I know that you will surely reign, and I have seen that Hashem is with you. The Holy One, blessed be He, accompanied David throughout his journey and saved him time and again - from the hand of Shaul who pursued him, when at times there was but a step between him and death, yet at the very last moment he was delivered.
'And I have cut off all your enemies from before you' - all those who pursued you, including Shaul, whose kingdom was ultimately brought to an end. 'And I have made for you a name like the name of the great ones' - as it was written earlier, 'And the fame of David went out into all the lands, and Hashem brought the fear of him upon all the nations.' Metzudat David cites the homiletic teaching of Chazal that this is the basis of what we say, 'Magen David' [Shield of David]: Who are the great ones? Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov. Concerning Avraham we say 'Magen Avraham' [Shield of Abraham], and concerning David we say 'Magen David' - I have made for you a name like the name of the great ones.
The Malbim further notes: in Shmuel it is written va'achritah ('וָאַכְרִתָה'), while here it says va'achrit ('וָאַכְרִית'). To clarify his intent: ehyeh and achrit are future tense, but when one says va'ehyeh or va'achrit, the vav functions as the conversive vav (vav hahipuch), turning the verb into the past tense. The letter vav serves several grammatical functions: its primary role is the conjunctive vav ("and") - "Moshe and Aharon"; at times it serves as a disjunctive vav, meaning "or", as in "Shabbat and Yom Tov", where both need not coincide; and at times it is the conversive vav, which is ubiquitous in Biblical Hebrew. Hayah is past, whereas vehayah ki tavo el ha'aretz is future; ehyeh is future, whereas va'ehyeh immacha is past.
According to this: up to "ve'asiti", the verse speaks in the future converted to the past, which is why the vav carries a kamatz - va'ehyeh, va'achrit. But from "ve'asiti" onward, it speaks of the actual future; thus the vav here has a sheva, serving as a conjunctive vav: "ve'asiti lecha shem" - and I will make for you a name like the name of the great ones. Therefore, the form va'achrit is fitting here rather than va'achritah, for an additional heh appended to a verb conveys intent and desire rather than an absolute past event, as the Malbim explains in several places. There it addresses what has already transpired, whereas here it addresses what is yet to be.
וְשַׂמְתִּי מָקוֹם לְעַמִּי יִשְׂרָאֵל וּנְטַעְתִּיהוּ וְשָׁכַן תַּחְתָּיו וְלֹא יִרְגַּז עוֹד, וְלֹא־יוֹסִיפוּ בְנֵי־עַוְלָה לְבַלֹּתוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר בָּרִאשׁוֹנָה. - And I will appoint a place for My people Israel, and will plant them, that they may dwell in their own place and be disturbed no more; neither shall the children of wickedness wear them down any more, as at the first.
Rashi explains: not as occurred in the days of Shaul, where when Shaul was killed Israel fled before the Pelishtim, and the Pelishtim settled in the very places where Israel had dwelt. Here Hashem says: I will appoint a place for My people Israel and plant them, and they will dwell in their place - not a place from which they will be driven, but they will dwell in their place and be disturbed no more. Yirgaz is akin to "hamargiz mamlachot" ("who makes kingdoms tremble"), which refers to uprooting them from their place and exiling them elsewhere; thus, "be disturbed no more" means they will no longer be exiled.
Levalloto means similar to le'annoto ("to afflict him"), and in Shmuel the text indeed reads le'annoto. Chazal already addressed this variation and observed: initially "to afflict him," but ultimately "to wear him down." That is, after they sinned, the promise changed: they were indeed afflicted by wicked nations, but those nations would not consume them entirely - beliyah denotes crushing and destroying them completely. Therefore Ezra comes and says, "neither shall the children of wickedness wear them down any more" - this is the promise that remains with us. For the promise regarding affliction had already passed from us, since the people of Israel rebelled against Hashem's command and brought about their own affliction at the hands of their enemies. The promise of freedom from affliction was not sustained, but that of not being consumed was preserved - they never met with absolute destruction.
וּלְמִיָּמִים אֲשֶׁר צִוִּיתִי שֹׁפְטִים עַל־עַמִּי יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְהִכְנַעְתִּי אֶת־כָּל־אוֹיְבֶיךָ, וָאַגִּד לָךְ וּבַיִת יִבְנֶה־לְּךָ יְהֹוָה. - And since the time that I commanded judges to be over My people Israel; and I will subdue all your enemies. Furthermore I tell you that Hashem will build you a house.
Rashi explains: since the days of the Judges, they never experienced tranquility such as you have, for I have subdued all your enemies before you. Even during the period of the Judges, the rest was only temporary - "and the land was tranquil for forty years," and then the cycle repeated itself. Radak explains that from the days when judges were appointed over them, enemies likewise afflicted them; and although the judges brought them salvation, it was not a complete rest, but merely temporary.
"Furthermore I tell you" - what your reward will be. For that which you desired and freely offered with the devotion of your heart to build a House for Hashem, I will build you a house: you contemplated building a House for My Name, and measure for measure your reward shall be given; the Holy One, blessed be He, informs him that Hashem will make a house for him. And what is a "house"? That He will give you a son who will reign in your place and sit upon the throne of Israel after you. Anything that endures through a person's offspring after him is called a "house," which is the meaning of "I will set up your seed after you." This is similar to the verse "and He made them houses" - dynasties of Kehunah and Leviyah, which endured for their descendants after them. For the term "house," in the sense of establishing a home, signifies marriage and bearing children, denoting lasting continuity. The promise, then, is that his offspring would continue his dynasty - a privilege Shaul did not merit, but David would.
The Malbim explains: "U-lemiyamim" ("and since the days") is an elucidation of what is written there, "and since the day that I commanded judges over My people Israel" - from the time I commanded judges. "Ve-hichnati" ("and I will subdue") corresponds to what is written there, "ve-hanichoti" ("and I gave you rest"). After the sin, absolute tranquility was no longer possible; therefore, Scripture could not say "and I gave you rest," but rather that the enemies were subdued under him. Indeed, toward the end of Shlomo's life, Hashem raised up adversaries against him; although they remained subdued, complete rest was gone. For this reason, Ezra writes here "and I will subdue" rather than "and I gave rest."
Another variation: there it is stated, "and Hashem tells you that Hashem will make you a house," whereas here it says, "and I tell you." There the Malbim explained that the meaning is that Hashem would inform him of this in another prophecy. For the actual reason why David was prevented from building the Temple was not disclosed to him here, nor is it stated explicitly at that juncture in Shmuel; it is clarified only later, and also in our book in chapter 28, verse 3, where the reason given is "for you have shed much blood." As explained previously, this is not to be understood superficially at face value, but rather in accordance with the Malbim's explanation, which will be examined, with Hashem's help, in due course.
Ezra explains that at that time, this prophecy had not yet been delivered, for David had not yet shed blood in abundance - the bulk of the wars occurred at a later stage, and only later did Hashem say to him, "You have shed much blood." Therefore, he does not write "and He told you" in the past tense, but "and I will tell you" (va'aggid lach) - I will tell you in the future, because at that point it could not yet be said.
וְהָיָה כִּי־מָלְאוּ יָמֶיךָ לָלֶכֶת עִם־אֲבֹתֶיךָ, וַהֲקִימוֹתִי אֶת־זַרְעֲךָ אַחֲרֶיךָ אֲשֶׁר יִהְיֶה מִבָּנֶיךָ, וַהֲכִינוֹתִי אֶת־מַלְכוּתוֹ. הוּא יִבְנֶה־לִּי בָּיִת, וְכֹנַנְתִּי אֶת־כִּסְאוֹ עַד־עוֹלָם. - "And it shall be, when your days are fulfilled to go with your fathers, that I will raise up your offspring after you, who shall be of your sons, and I will establish his kingdom. He shall build Me a house, and I will establish his throne forever."
The commentary attributed to Rashi explains: ostensibly, there is a promise here that might cause David distress, for the Holy One, blessed be He, is telling him that his son after him will build the Temple, which could imply that this is imminent - as if David should prepare to depart this world. Therefore He tells him: "And it shall be, when your days are fulfilled to go with your fathers" - do not fear that I am rushing this. A full seventy years will be completed, and only after your days are fulfilled will I raise up your seed after you, "and I will establish his kingdom," just as it is said of Shlomo, "and his kingdom was firmly established."
The Malbim notes the variation: here it says "to go with your fathers" (lalechet im avotecha), whereas in Shmuel it says "and you shall sleep with your fathers" (ve-shachavta et avotecha). Ezra is hinting that the righteous have no rest, neither in this world nor in the World to Come, as it is written, "They go from strength to strength," and likewise, "and I will grant you free access among these who stand by." Therefore, do not interpret "you shall sleep" as lying down in repose; rather, "to go with your fathers" means that you are constantly moving and ascending, for the righteous in the Next World continually advance in the service of Hashem, as discussed at length in the teachings of Michtav Me-Eliyahu regarding the exact nature of the progress made by the righteous in the World of Truth.
This does not mean that this advancement would come to him through the merit of his children; rather, the intent is simply that he would experience spiritual advancement there. On the contrary, we have already noted the observation of Abarbanel, who writes that King David was not entirely successful in educating his children. Some of them were deeply troubled - one murdered his brother, another rose up to reign, rebelled against his father, and lay with his father's concubines; in short, it was total turmoil. He explains that this stemmed from their being raised as princes, not subjected to demanding discipline, but rather living as royal sons who could indulge in anything - and indeed, that approach did not succeed.
Another difference: in Shmuel it says "who shall come forth from your innards" (asher yetzei mime'echa), whereas here it says "who shall be of your sons" (asher yihyeh mibanecha). Why? In order to emphasize that this offspring would not descend through his daughters. For had it said "who shall come forth from your innards," daughters also come forth from him, leaving room to think this referred to a grandson born to a daughter. Ezra therefore emphasizes "of your sons" - specifically from the male line. This exemplifies Ezra's overall method in retelling the history: he introduces precise textual nuances to elucidate or add meaning. Indeed, that is the Malbim's entire focus here - to highlight Ezra's variations and analyze why he made each change, revealing the underlying purpose in his writing.
Furthermore, here the text reads "and I will establish his kingdom" (malchuto) and "and I will establish his throne" (kiso), whereas in Shmuel it says "his realm" (mamlachto) and "the throne of his realm" (kisei mamlachto). The Malbim explains that mamlachah denotes the entire nation over which a king rules. That ultimate unity did not endure, as the realm was eventually split in two, and David's descendants retained only the smaller portion, roughly two tribes: Yehudah and Binyamin. Thus, a comprehensive mamlachah was not sustained, but kingship (malchut) certainly was. Therefore, Ezra alters the phrasing, omitting mamlachah and using malchuto instead, and writing "his throne" rather than "the throne of his realm." His throne and his reign remained intact, but an undivided realm comprising the entire nation was not to be, since the kingdom split and remained predominantly with the tribe of Yehudah.
אֲנִי אֶהְיֶה־לּוֹ לְאָב וְהוּא יִהְיֶה־לִּי לְבֵן, וְחַסְדִּי לֹא־אָסִיר מֵעִמּוֹ כַּאֲשֶׁר הֲסִירוֹתִי מֵאֲשֶׁר הָיָה לְפָנֶיךָ. - "I will be a father to him, and he shall be a son to Me; and I will not remove My lovingkindness from him, as I removed it from him who was before you."
In Shmuel, the passage includes: "whom, when he commits iniquity, I will chasten with the rod of men" - meaning that if he perverts his way, I will discipline him as a father disciplines his son. "The rod of men" refers to afflictions brought through people: Hashem raised adversaries against him, such as Rezon and Hadad, whom Hashem positioned to harass him. As explained there, this is actually a comforting promise: even if he strays, I will not cast him aside, but rather discipline him. When a father slaps his child, it signifies that the child is still his, still residing in his home; if he had driven him out, he would not chase after him to slap him, for the child is no longer under his roof. The promise is that if there is a deviation from the path, chastisements will follow, but he will always remain attached to Hashem.
This is the meaning of "and I will not remove My lovingkindness from him, as I removed it from him who was before you." In the case of Shaul, when he transgressed, Hashem removed the monarchy from him and from his descendants, leaving him with nothing. With Shlomo, however, Hashem did not strip the kingship from him; he received blows of discipline, but remained king.
And why is there no mention here of "when he commits iniquity" (beha'avoto)? The commentary attributed to Rashi explains: out of respect for David. This entire book was written solely for the honor of David, and therefore he did not wish to record anything here that might demean the House of David. The Malbim explains a different reason: because later on, sins caused the monarchy to cease entirely, as it is written, "and he blinded the eyes of Tzidkiyahu." In other words, regarding Shlomo it was promised that under all circumstances he would remain king, and this promise was fulfilled - even if he corrupted his ways, he would be struck with blows but remain king. In subsequent generations, however, although the Holy One, blessed be He, desired to continue the dynasty unless they committed actions that prevented it from them - at that point, "when he commits iniquity... My lovingkindness I will not remove from him" with mere afflictions was no longer fulfilled, for we saw that the lovingkindness departed and the kingdom ceased, Tzidkiyahu's eyes were blinded, and the Davidic monarchy was suspended. Granted, it was not nullified forever, and we await Melech HaMashiach from the Davidic line, but in that historical reality, there was a cessation. Therefore, Ezra omits the matter, because the subsequent generations did not uphold the task Hashem placed upon them, and then Hashem likewise did not fulfill "My lovingkindness I will not remove from him" for the future generations, but only for Shlomo.
Another change: there it says explicitly, "as I removed it from Shaul, whom I removed from before you," whereas here Shaul is not mentioned at all: "as I removed it from him who was before you." The Malbim explains: the phrasing "whom I removed from before you" implies as though He removed lovingkindness from Shaul because He saw David as more worthy - that is, he was removed because someone better was present. But Ezra, as we already saw above in chapter 10, verse 13, comes to teach that Shaul was unworthy of kingship in his own right - not because a better alternative existed, but because Hashem rejected him on his own account. Therefore, Ezra adjusts the wording here and does not say "from before you": I did not remove him on your account, but rather I removed him because he deserved to be removed. Lovingkindness departed from Shaul because Shaul sinned and defied the word of Hashem, both regarding the destruction of Amalek and regarding the offering of the olah, and for that reason it was fitting that the monarchy be taken from him.
וְהַעֲמַדְתִּיהוּ בְּבֵיתִי וּבְמַלְכוּתִי עַד־הָעוֹלָם, וְכִסְאוֹ יִהְיֶה נָכוֹן עַד־עוֹלָם. - "And I will settle him in My house and in My kingdom forever, and his throne shall be established forever."
There it says, "And your house and your kingdom shall be established forever before you; your throne shall be established forever," whereas here it says, "and his throne." Ezra adds that the promise is also directed toward Shlomo; therefore, he does not say "your throne" (kis'acha), but "his throne" (kis'o) in the third person, referring back to the son who will arise after you: that the monarchy would likewise be preserved for his descendants forever. Furthermore, there is an indication here that this privilege would not be granted to the rest of the Davidic lineage - for David had many sons - rather, "his throne shall be established," meaning the royal dynasty would continue specifically through Shlomo.
כְּכֹל הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וּכְכֹל הֶחָזוֹן הַזֶּה, כֵּן דִּבֶּר נָתָן אֶל־דָּוִיד. - "According to all these words and according to all this vision, so did Natan speak to David."
We saw that Hashem sent Natan urgently, before David could begin building the Temple or hire laborers; and indeed, according to all these words, as we have seen so far, so did Natan speak to David. The Metzudat David explains: Scripture comes to teach that even though he had initially agreed with him and told him, "Do all that is in your heart," he was not ashamed to retract and protest against him by the word of Hashem. Seemingly, this is not a great novelty, for a prophet who suppresses his prophecy is liable to death, so how could it enter one's mind that he would do such a thing? Nevertheless, Scripture comes to emphasize that he felt no shame in reversing his position.
Chapter 17 recounts the narrative of Natan the prophet and the building of the Temple from II Samuel 7, which Ezra transcribed because it contains the promise of the eternity of the Davidic dynasty - the primary theme of the Book of Divrei HaYamim. David seeks to build a house for the Ark dwelling under curtains while he resides in a house of cedars; Natan initially approves on his own accord, but that very night is sent urgently - so that David would neither make a vow nor hire laborers - to tell him that not he, but his son, would build it. In contrast comes the promise: "and Hashem will build you a house" - continuity and kingship for his descendants. Throughout the chapter, the Malbim demonstrates how every textual nuance in Ezra is remarkably precise: "do" rather than "go, do" (permission rather than a command), "from tent to tent" as an interpretation, "judges of" instead of "tribes of", "I cut off" (va'achrit) rather than va'achritah, "to wear them out" (levaloto) instead of "to afflict them" (le'anoto), "and I will subdue" instead of "and I will give rest", "and I tell you" looking to the future, "to go with your fathers" rather than "and you shall sleep", "from your sons" rather than "from your innards", "his kingdom" (malchuto) rather than mamlachto, and the omission of "when he commits iniquity" alongside the omission of Shaul's name. From all of these emerges a portrait wherein the promises are measured against what was fulfilled in practice after the sins occurred, all while consistently preserving the honor of David and the House of David.