Chapter 2 of Melachim A is the chapter of transition: King David is in his final days, and his son Shlomo ascends to his throne. In the previous chapter we saw how Adoniah son of Chaggit tried to seize the kingship, and how, once word reached David, he decided to act and to crown Shlomo in his own lifetime. Now, with Shlomo reigning, David gives him the "operating instructions": how to conduct himself, how the kingship should look, and which debts remained open from David's days that need to be settled. This chapter is a king's last will.
וַיִּקְרְבוּ יְמֵי־דָוִד לָמוּת וַיְצַו אֶת־שְׁלֹמֹה בְנוֹ לֵאמֹר׃ אָנֹכִי הֹלֵךְ בְּדֶרֶךְ כׇּל־הָאָרֶץ וְחָזַקְתָּ וְהָיִיתָ לְאִישׁ׃ - And the days of David drew near that he should die, and he charged Shlomo his son, saying: I am going the way of all the earth; be strong and be a man.
Chazal say that Shlomo at that time was twelve years old, as it is said of him, "Shlomo my son is young and tender." A twelve year old boy who is beginning to reign needs instructions, and therefore the first instruction is "be strong and be a man." It is far from simple for a person of such an age to lead a great kingdom, and so David opens with this: be great, the kingship is in your hands, be strong, do not fear and do not be dismayed by any man.
This is the leadership of a nation, and it must be conducted with firmness. "Be a man" - a man who rules, who rules with authority. For if he does not rule this way, the kingship will not endure. So we find with Moshe Rabbeinu, who charged Yehoshua: take a staff and strike upon their heads. A leader must lead in a way of strength - not, God forbid, tyranny over the people, which is certainly not the way, but he must display firmness. If the leader shows that he is weak, they rise up against him, rebel against him, and remove him from his leadership.
וְשָׁמַרְתָּ אֶת־מִשְׁמֶרֶת יְהֹוָה אֱלֹהֶיךָ לָלֶכֶת בִּדְרָכָיו לִשְׁמֹר חֻקֹּתָיו מִצְוֺתָיו וּמִשְׁפָּטָיו וְעֵדְוֺתָיו כַּכָּתוּב בְּתוֹרַת מֹשֶׁה לְמַעַן תַּשְׂכִּיל אֵת כׇּל־אֲשֶׁר תַּעֲשֶׂה וְאֵת כׇּל־אֲשֶׁר תִּפְנֶה שָּׁם׃ - And keep the charge of Hashem your God, to walk in His ways, to keep His statutes, His commandments, His ordinances, and His testimonies, as it is written in the Torah of Moshe, so that you may prosper in all that you do and wherever you turn.
Opposite the firmness required in matters between man and his fellow and in the leadership of the people, in matters between man and God exactly the opposite is required. David himself said: "Surely I have stilled and quieted my soul like a weaned child with its mother" - like an infant whom its mother guides. This he bequeaths to Shlomo: do not rely on your own understanding, but do as is written in the Torah. And he does not leave these matters open, but details them one by one.
"To walk in His ways" - these are matters of character traits: just as He is merciful so too you be merciful, just as He is gracious so too you be gracious, just as He is slow to anger so too you be slow to anger. "To keep His statutes" - statutes are commandments without a reason, like the red heifer, shaatnez, and kilayim. "His commandments" - these are the commandments that have a reason. "And His ordinances" - as in the language "And these are the ordinances that you shall set before them," matters between man and his fellow, which the ordinances always symbolize. "And His testimonies" - from the term testimony, the commandments that testify to the renewal of the world: the Exodus from Egypt, Sabbaths and festivals. And after all this detailing he warns: "as it is written in the Torah of Moshe" - do not turn from the commandment right or left, exactly as it is written.
What is "so that you may prosper" (taskil)? What is the difference between "taskil" and "tatzliach" (succeed)? The Malbim says: success depends on mazal. A person succeeded, why? Because his mazal indicates success. And this does not mean what people say in the street today by "mazal," by which they mean luck, God forbid; mazal is from the expression of that which descends and flows and streams down from the upper worlds. But this success is not necessarily according to your wisdom and according to your deeds performed with insight; rather, so it was decreed upon you from Heaven. That is "you shall succeed."
By contrast, "you shall prosper" (taskil) means to act and to succeed according to wisdom, according to insight. David does not bless Shlomo that he should succeed - but that he should be wise: that he should always be able, by his intellect, to choose the best means that will lead him to the right deed.
So what is added by the phrase "in all that you do and wherever you turn"? Here the Malbim offers a beautiful explanation. There is a person who is wise "in all that he does": he knows how to choose the right means to bring his plan to fruition. If there are six ways to accomplish something, he will know to choose the fourth among them, the one in which he will succeed. That is wisdom, but it is limited: in that way he will succeed, in the other ways he will not.
But being "wise in all that he turns to" is an entirely different level: a person who, in every one of the paths he chooses, will succeed. Even if you send him along the path that appears remote, in the end he will arrive at the hoped for goal. In everything he does and in any case, he will attain his purpose. And this is an additional blessing: not only "you will be wise in all that you do," but also "wherever you turn," that in the end everything will lead to the goal you desire.
לְמַעַן יָקִים יְהֹוָה אֶת־דְּבָרוֹ אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר עָלַי לֵאמֹר אִם־יִשְׁמְרוּ בָנֶיךָ אֶת־דַּרְכָּם לָלֶכֶת לְפָנַי בֶּאֱמֶת בְּכׇל־לְבָבָם וּבְכׇל־נַפְשָׁם לֵאמֹר לֹא־יִכָּרֵת לְךָ אִישׁ מֵעַל כִּסֵּא יִשְׂרָאֵל׃ - That Hashem may fulfill His word which He spoke concerning me, saying: If your sons take heed to their way, to walk before Me in truth with all their heart and with all their soul, there shall not fail you a man on the throne of Israel.
David says to Shlomo: through keeping the mitzvot you will gain two things. The first is from the mitzvah itself, as stated. And the second, that the promise depends upon it. Hashem promised me an enduring kingship for all generations, but on condition: "if your sons take heed to their way, to walk before Me in truth with all their heart and with all their soul." Through this I will fulfill My words and build for you a throne that will endure for all generations.
Here the Malbim raises a question. We have a well known principle: a good measure that has issued from the mouth of Hashem, even conditionally, the Holy One does not retract. If so, here is a promise that a king of David's line will sit upon his throne for all generations, and even if it is conditional, He will not retract it! The Malbim answers: here it is not so. For the principle is stated when the promise precedes the condition; but when the condition precedes the promise, that is, when Hashem says from the outset "only if such and such will be, do I promise," this is not an absolute promise, and if the condition is not met, there is no promise.
And this is the meaning of the "saying" in the verse: "which He spoke concerning me, saying: if your sons take heed." This tells you that the condition "if your sons take heed" preceded the promise, and therefore the promise is conditional. One cannot say "but Hashem does not retract a good promise," for only if you truly do what Hashem commands, only if your sons walk in the right way, will you merit all the promises regarding the endurance of the kingship.
On this matter of the promise of the kingship there are verses that seemingly contradict one another, and both the Griz (Rav Soloveitchik) and the Malbim deal with them. On one hand it is implied that there is an absolute promise to David, that no matter what happens his sons will continue to reign after him; and on the other hand it is implied that the promise is conditional, only if they keep the way of Hashem.
Let us lay out the verses. In our passage it is stated explicitly with a condition: only if they keep My mitzvot. And so too in Tehillim: "Hashem has sworn to David a truth from which He will not turn back, of the fruit of your body I will set upon your throne; if your sons keep My covenant and My testimony which I shall teach them, their sons too, forever, shall sit upon your throne" - once again "if," implying that the oath depends on a condition. But on the other hand it is stated in Tehillim: "I have made a covenant with My chosen one, I have sworn to David My servant, forever I will establish your seed and build your throne for all generations, selah" - here there is no condition at all. "Forever I will establish," with no mention of "keep" or "do not keep."
And more than this: "If his sons forsake My Torah and do not walk in My ordinances, if they profane My statutes and do not keep My commandments, then I will punish their transgression with the rod and their iniquity with plagues; but My kindness I will not remove from him, and I will not betray My faithfulness, and I will not profane My covenant, and what has gone out of My lips I will not change." That is: no matter what he does, punishment there will be, but a king he will remain. And likewise "Once I have sworn by My holiness, I will not lie to David, his seed shall be forever" - implying that even if they do not keep the way of the Torah, the kingship is not cut off. So too in Sefer Shmuel: "And I will raise up your seed after you and establish the throne of his kingdom forever... whom, when he sins, I will chastise with the rod of men and with the plagues of the children of man; but My kindness shall not depart from him, as I removed it from Shaul... your house and your kingdom shall be faithful forever before you, your throne shall be established forever." In short: sometimes conditional and sometimes unconditional.
The Griz explains that the oath was that the kingship would never depart from the house of David, but how much kingship, that was not sworn. In other words: if you walk in the way of Hashem, then just as David's kingship was absolute rule over all of Israel, so too I promise that your offspring and future generations will have absolute rule over all of Israel. But if they do not walk in the way of Hashem, the kingship will remain, yet it will be a partial kingship, a truncated kingship, a kingship that is not complete.
And indeed so it was. Shlomo began to deviate from the path and received blows: Rezon ben Elyada and other adversaries whom Hashem raised up against Shlomo. He brought Pharaoh's daughter here and built her a house in Yerushalayim, and he did not protest his wives who burned incense to idolatry. What did this cause? That his son would receive a divided kingship, Rechavam ben Shlomo ruling only over Yerushalayim and over Binyamin. Had he walked in the way of Hashem, he would have merited that his son rule over all of Israel, and Yeravam would not have received rule over the ten tribes.
To summarize the Griz's approach: the promise that in any case there would be kingship is true. Its magnitude He made dependent on their conduct, but its very existence He made conditional on nothing. Kingship will belong to David's descendants in any situation; if they are righteous, a complete kingship, and if not, a partial kingship.
He found a hint of this in our pasuk: why is "leimor" repeated? "Which He spoke concerning me, saying, if your sons keep their way...", "saying, there shall not be cut off from you a man upon the throne of Israel." Says the Griz: there are two promises here. The first "leimor": if your sons keep their way to walk before Me in truth, then Hashem will fulfill His word, absolute rule over all of Israel. And the second "leimor": even if your sons do not keep the mitzvot of Hashem properly, "there shall not be cut off from you a man upon the throne of Israel": you will have someone ruling on the throne of Israel, but not absolute rule and not a complete kingship. Therefore "leimor" appears twice, to tell you that there are two different promises here, and they will choose whether they want the comprehensive kingship or will make do with the limited kingship over Yerushalayim alone, because they did not keep the way of Hashem.
An additional explanation is that of the Malbim. In truth it is not found here but in other places, but since the Griz explains his approach here, we will mention his words as well. Says the Malbim: if we pay attention, it is precise in the language of the verses that there are two types of promises, a promise given to David himself, and a promise given to his offspring after him. The promise given to David is not conditional at all: David is righteous, David does the will of Hashem, and therefore Hashem promises him absolutely that his son will reign after him, no matter what. And if he is wicked? He will suffer blows, "whom, when he sins, I will chastise him." But this was said only about the son. In contrast, the grandson, this is already conditional: if the grandsons do the will of Hashem, they will continue and reign, and if not, they will not.
And this is precise in the language of the verses. "I have sworn to David My servant, forever I will establish your offspring and build your throne for all generations, selah. If his sons forsake My Torah and do not walk in My laws... then I will punish their transgression with a rod": "his sons," who are they? Shlomo, the son who comes forth from him; and therefore there it is only blows, not cessation of kingship. In contrast: "Hashem has sworn to David in truth, He will not turn back from it, of the fruit of your body I will set upon your throne. If your sons keep My covenant and My testimony that I shall teach them, their sons too, forever, shall sit upon your throne": "your sons" is Shlomo, "their sons too" is Rechavam. It emerges that it is Rechavam's kingship that is conditional, not Shlomo's kingship. Shlomo will reign in any situation, this Hashem announced clearly and absolutely in the merit of David, no matter what sins he commits; but if Shlomo causes problems, the grandson is no longer guaranteed. The grandson's kingship depends on the deeds of the son: if the son walks in the way of Hashem, the grandsons too will merit kingship, and if not, they will not.
וְגַם אַתָּה יָדַעְתָּ אֵת אֲשֶׁר־עָשָׂה לִי יוֹאָב בֶּן־צְרוּיָה אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לִשְׁנֵי־שָׂרֵי צִבְאוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְאַבְנֵר בֶּן־נֵר וְלַעֲמָשָׂא בֶן־יֶתֶר וַיַּהַרְגֵם וַיָּשֶׂם דְּמֵי־מִלְחָמָה בְּשָׁלֹם וַיִּתֵּן דְּמֵי מִלְחָמָה בַּחֲגֹרָתוֹ אֲשֶׁר בְּמׇתְנָיו וּבְנַעֲלוֹ אֲשֶׁר בְּרַגְלָיו׃ - And you too know what Yoav ben Tzeruyah did to me, what he did to the two commanders of the armies of Israel, to Avner ben Ner and to Amasa ben Yeter, that he killed them and placed the blood of war in peacetime, and put the blood of war on his belt that was on his waist and on his sandal that was on his foot.
From here David gives Shlomo instructions on how to settle all sorts of open files that remained from his era. And what is "and you too know"? Such language indicates something secret, that was not known to everyone. And there is a doubling in the pasuk: "you know" is one thing, "what he did to the two commanders of the armies of Israel" is another. Say Chazal: "you know" refers to the matter of the letter that David gave him. King David sent a sefer, that is, a letter, by the hand of Uriah the Hittite, to deliver to Yoav ben Tzeruyah, and in it was written: place Uriah the Hittite opposite the fiercest fighting and withdraw from behind him, so that he is struck down and dies. And so it was. The purpose was that Uriah the Hittite was liable to death, since he insulted the king, and his sentence was to be killed, and David killed him by the sword of the children of Ammon. But Yoav, who understood that this was an incriminating and condemning letter, took it and revealed it to all the soldiers. Understand what a terrible disgrace this was to the king and what an affront to the king, to take a personal letter of the king that was sent to you, and show everyone "here, the king is sending me to kill Uriah the Hittite."
And why did he do this? Because Yoav did not reckon much with David. He was the son of David's sister, and for this reason he felt like a partner in the kingship, and also for this reason David could not do much against him. And this is what David said: the sons of Tzeruyah are too hard for me, and therefore he could not settle accounts with them then.
And the second matter: Amasa ben Yeter. Amasa was sent by David to gather the people for war, and he delayed three days. And why did he delay? Say Chazal that he saw them beginning a tractate, and it was impossible to interrupt their study in the middle, and therefore he was delayed. Yoav ben Tzeruyah came and killed him. For just as Avner ben Ner was meant to replace Yoav, so Yoav knew that Amasa ben Yeter too was meant to replace him, and therefore he took care to clear the field, anyone who was meant to replace him, he simply eliminated.
And how did he kill him? This is "with the sword that was on his loins." It says there "and upon it was a sword fastened," and he had set the sword upside down, and when he came toward him he took hold of his beard to kiss him and said "Are you at peace, my brother?" And while he was seemingly bending over to bow to him, the sword fell. When it fell, he picked it up as if to return it to its sheath, and at that moment, when Amasa was not paying attention, he stabbed him to death. Here too it was through cunning: he came to him supposedly in a manner of peace, and therefore Amasa did not defend himself.
What is meant by "he put the blood of war in a time of peace"? These men had indeed fought at first against David, but after they had made peace it was no longer the way of uprightness to kill them and harm them. On the contrary, says the Malbim, this is the kind of thing that ruins relations between nations. Imagine that Anwar Sadat comes to visit here in the land, and they set up an ambush and kill him. Such a thing is not even comprehensible: a man who comes with the aim of making peace, and suddenly they kill him in an ambush; even a terror organization would not do such a thing.
And especially since it seemed as though the matter came from David. In this Yoav caused great damage: the people said to themselves, it is not worthwhile to make peace with David, for behold, whoever makes peace with him, he goes and takes revenge on those who opposed him. And whoever remembers, David was forced to go and eulogize Avner, "how you have fallen," "should Avner die as a fool dies," in order to demonstrate to everyone that the matter did not come from him. For if they had thought it came from him, those men who had been with Shaul's son would not have come to join David; they would have said: what, shall we join him and he will kill us?
And why in truth did David not punish Yoav himself? First, David only knew after the deed was done. Furthermore, it says "and David did justice and righteousness to all his people, and Yoav son of Tzeruyah was over the army," and Chazal say: when was David able to do justice and righteousness to all his people? Because Yoav was over the army. The very fact that Yoav was over the army is what allowed David to sit in peace and do justice and righteousness. But in the time of Shlomo, as we shall see later, there were no wars; Hashem gave him rest from all his enemies round about, and consequently you do not need Yoav over the army, and now you can exact payment from him. This is the depth of the wording: "he put the blood of war in a time of peace" - he waged the wars on my behalf, and I had peace, and consequently I was able to sit and administer justice and law; but now that he is not needed by us, you may kill him. And indeed David, while he was still alive, wanted to be rid of Yoav, which is why he wanted to accept Avner and Amasa son of Yeter, and this is the reason Yoav killed them: because he saw in them a threat to his position.
וְעָשִׂיתָ כְּחׇכְמָתֶךָ וְלֹא־תוֹרֵד שֵׂיבָתוֹ בְּשָׁלֹם שְׁאֹל׃ - And you shall act according to your wisdom, and do not let his gray head go down to the grave in peace.
The Griz explains the repetition, "what Yoav did to me... what he did to the two commanders of the armies of Israel," and "and you shall act according to your wisdom." There were two possibilities here: on one hand he is liable to death as a murderer, for having killed Avner and Amasa. On the other hand he rebelled against David, in that he revealed the letter that David sent, in that he killed Avshalom, and the Griz adds: in that he inclined after Adoniyahu, which is a truly current rebellion - you incline after Adoniyahu while David is still alive? For all these reasons he has the status of one who rebels against the kingdom.
And what is the difference between one who rebels against the kingdom and one liable to death as a murderer? The Gemara says: those executed by the king, their property goes to the king; whereas one who is killed as a murderer, his property goes to his heirs. Therefore "what he did" is said twice: he has two types of death liability, as a murderer and as one executed by the king. And "you shall act according to your wisdom" means to kill him with the more fitting death, as one executed by the king, and as Chazal say that this is indeed how they killed him, and consequently his property goes to the king.
The Radak explains "and you shall act according to your wisdom" - that you should not kill him until you find in him some wrongdoing. He is indeed liable to death, having killed those commanders unlawfully, but bring him and find a reason to kill him. In any case, "do not let his gray head go down to the grave in peace" - that he should not die a natural death, but rather, just as he killed the others, so too his sentence is to be killed. And there is a further meaning in this wording: if you let his gray head go down in peace, he will reach Sheol; but if you exact payment from him here, he will not reach Sheol, since he received his sentence in this world.
So too in the heavenly court: a person performed many mitzvot, they say to him - yes, but you committed one transgression. "But I have so many mitzvot!" - that is unrelated. For the transgression one must pay, and for the mitzvot one is rewarded separately; each thing has its own payment. And with Yoav it was not a one-time stumble, but throughout, and very grave deeds. He killed a commander of the army, and not one but two, ones who had been sent by David - this is complete rebellion against the kingdom, and it cannot be passed over in silence. And especially since one must remember: as long as such a man is alive, it is a constant threat to the kingdom. After all, he went to crown Adoniyahu, and it is clear he would not be Shlomo's commander of the army, and consequently he would seek all sorts of ways to interfere with him, perhaps even to kill the commander of the army that Shlomo would choose. Therefore this man must be removed, and he must also pay for his deeds.
וְלִבְנֵי בַרְזִלַּי הַגִּלְעָדִי תַּעֲשֶׂה־חֶסֶד וְהָיוּ בְּאֹכְלֵי שֻׁלְחָנֶךָ כִּי־כֵן קָרְבוּ אֵלַי בְּבׇרְחִי מִפְּנֵי אַבְשָׁלוֹם אָחִיךָ׃ - And to the sons of Barzilai the Gileadite you shall show kindness, and let them be among those who eat at your table, for so did they draw near to me when I fled from before Avshalom your brother.
Just as David commands to settle accounts with those from whom retribution must be exacted, so too he commands to settle accounts with those to whom good must be repaid. As we recall, when David fled from his son Avshalom, Barzilai the Gileadite came out to meet him, drew close to him, cared for him, brought him food and supported him. Therefore David says to him: bring his sons near to your table, that they be among those who eat at your table. And to be among those who eat at the king's table is a lofty and immense rank; only the closest attendants regularly eat at the king's table.
The Chafetz Chaim asks: if David had commanded to give the sons of Barzilai gifts, we would understand it - measure for measure, I fled and he brought me gifts, so bring him gifts. But that they should all their days be among those who eat at the king's table, where is the measure for measure here? They did something very good and very wonderful, but to such an extent?
The Chafetz Chaim answers: if you look closely at the wording of the verse you will understand the answer. It says "for so did they draw near to me when I fled from before Avshalom your brother." Seemingly it should have said "they drew me near to them" - for he was the pursued one and they were the protectors! Rather, the sons of Barzilai did not feel that they were bringing the king to them, but rather that it was a privilege for them to draw near to the king. Therefore "they drew near to me." Had they come and said "the king is fleeing, poor thing, come draw close to us and we will help you" - then you are honoring me and giving me gifts, and I too will give you gifts. But they came to the king with the feeling: my master, you are still king, and we have the privilege to come to you and give you something. Like the privilege a person feels when he gives something to a great man. The privilege is ours; we are not patrons upon whose table you depend. For such a privilege, gifts are not enough. Here they must be among those who eat at the king's table: you honored the king and glorified the king, you shall sit at the king's table, for you accepted his kingship even in the lowest moment. And this is measure for measure.
And according to this, says Rav Shalom Schwadron, author of "Lev Shalom," you will also understand what is said about the Hebrew midwives: "And the midwives feared God... and He made them houses," and Chazal said: houses of priesthood, houses of Leviyah and houses of royalty. And seemingly, why is it written "And it was because the midwives feared God"? It should have said "And it was because they saved the children that He made them houses" - for they kept people alive and saved the children! Rather, had it been only a matter of saving the children, they would have deserved earthly reward, physical reward; saving a life earns you reward here in this world. But when I see that Hashem gives them immense spiritual reward, houses of priesthood, houses of Leviyah and houses of royalty, reward for all eternity that cannot be measured or described, there must have been something spiritual here. And what is it? "Because the midwives feared God": here is a king who issues a command, and they say no - I crown over myself the Creator of the world, and what the Creator of the world says I do, and not what this temporary, passing king commands me; what the King of kings commands, I do. When you accept so absolutely His kingship, blessed be He, you are worthy of endless reward. Exactly like the sons of Barzilai: they accepted David's kingship at a time when he was, as it were, at his lowest, and therefore they are worthy to draw near to the king's table; and the midwives accepted the kingship of the Creator of the world at a time when a king of flesh and blood threatened their lives, and therefore they are worthy to draw near to the table of the kingship for all eternity, of priesthood and of Leviyah.
וְהִנֵּה עִמְּךָ שִׁמְעִי בֶן־גֵּרָא בֶן־הַיְמִינִי מִבַּחֻרִים וְהוּא קִלְלַנִי קְלָלָה נִמְרֶצֶת בְּיוֹם לֶכְתִּי מַחֲנָיִם וְהוּא־יָרַד לִקְרָאתִי הַיַּרְדֵּן וָאֶשָּׁבַע לוֹ בַיהֹוָה לֵאמֹר אִם־אֲמִיתְךָ בֶּחָרֶב׃ - And behold, with you is Shimi ben Gera the Benjaminite from Bachurim, and he cursed me with a grievous curse on the day I went to Machanaim, but he came down to meet me at the Jordan, and I swore to him by Hashem, saying, I will not put you to death by the sword.
What is meant by "and behold, with you is Shimi ben Gera" - were the others not with him? Rather, Chazal say, and so the Abarbanel explains: "with you" - among the men of your counsel, for he was Shlomo's teacher. David said to him: behold, you are taking him as your teacher, know that this man is a man of evil deeds, and he did terrible things. First, "he cursed me with a grievous curse," and "nimretzet" (grievous) is an acronym: adulterer, Moabite, murderer, oppressor, abomination. And he covered him with dust. And when? At the time when David was lowly, running and fleeing for his life from his son who was pursuing him. Is that what he needed then? Is that the encouragement and strengthening he needed - that this wicked man, Shimi ben Gera, who was not a simple man but the head of the Sanhedrin, should come and cover him with dust and curse him with a grievous curse? For such a thing there is already reason to exact harsh retribution from him.
But there is another reason, for he carried out an ugly and cunning scheme. When David returned as king and Avshalom was killed, Shimi began to fear for his life and for the wholeness of his throat. What did he do? He ran before David and said: forgive me, I ask pardon for all that I did. And he calculated David's position: if you accept me, everyone will come after me to make peace with you; and if you take vengeance on me, they will say that whoever comes to make peace with the king, the king kills him, he is a vengeful king. David had no choice. And this is what David says to Shlomo: he backed me into a corner and forced me to swear to him, and I was compelled to swear "I will not put you to death by the sword." And the oath was that I would not kill him by the sword, and all my days I am limited by this - but you are not limited by this.
וְעַתָּה אַל־תְּנַקֵּהוּ כִּי אִישׁ חָכָם אָתָּה וְיָדַעְתָּ אֵת אֲשֶׁר תַּעֲשֶׂה־לּוֹ וְהוֹרַדְתָּ אֶת־שֵׂיבָתוֹ בְּדָם שְׁאוֹל׃ - And now, do not hold him guiltless, for you are a wise man and you will know what to do to him, and you shall bring his gray head down to the grave in blood.
And notice what he commands: do not exact retribution from him for that deed, because for that deed there is an oath. True, the oath was given under coercion and should not rightly have been uttered, but nonetheless I am limited by it. However, for the deed that he did he owes an account, and therefore - do not take vengeance on him for that deed, but rather, in our terms, open a new file for him: find him another cause, a cause that did not exist before, in order to exact retribution from him. And here wisdom is required, hence the description "for you are a wise man." And later we will see how much wisdom was required to exact retribution from him, and indeed Shlomo's wisdom was needed in order to bring his gray head down to the grave in blood and not come to pardon.
And one must understand the situation: on the one hand David was not then king in an absolute sense, since he was pursued and his son had rebelled against him and removed him from his kingship. And on the other hand he also could not forgo the honor of the kingship - for if you say "a king who forgoes his honor, his honor is not forgone," why then did David swear at all? Because this honor is not yours at all; the kingship belongs to all of Israel, and if someone disgraces you it is not personal, he disgraced all of Israel, and you are obligated to exact retribution from him. Since David's kingship at that time was not absolute, but he also did not have the power to forgo, the solution he found was: I will not do it, since I also swore, but rather Shlomo my son will. And how? Not for the earlier sin, but he will find him a new sin and for that they will put him to death.
Incidentally, in that very episode, when David remained silent and said "Let him be, let him curse, for Hashem told him to curse" - through this he merited to become the fourth leg of the Divine Chariot.
וַיִּשְׁכַּב דָּוִד עִם־אֲבֹתָיו וַיִּקָּבֵר בְּעִיר דָּוִד׃ - And David lay with his fathers, and was buried in the City of David.
"And David lay with his fathers" - this teaches that his fathers were righteous as he was. "And was buried in the City of David" - that he was buried together with them in Zion, which is the place called the City of David.
וְהַיָּמִים אֲשֶׁר מָלַךְ דָּוִד עַל־יִשְׂרָאֵל אַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה בְּחֶבְרוֹן מָלַךְ שֶׁבַע שָׁנִים וּבִירוּשָׁלַיִם מָלַךְ שְׁלֹשִׁים וְשָׁלֹשׁ שָׁנִים׃ - And the days that David reigned over Israel were forty years: in Hebron he reigned seven years, and in Jerusalem he reigned thirty three years.
In Shmuel Bet it is written that he reigned in Hebron seven years and six months, so why does he not count those six months here? The Metzudat David offers an interesting explanation: since David was pursued by Avshalom for six months, it turns out that in the middle he had six months less of actual reign. Therefore, when he counts the time, he says only seven years and does not add the six months, for in the total sum he did not truly reign during those six months in which he was pursued.
וּשְׁלֹמֹה יָשַׁב עַל־כִּסֵּא דָּוִד אָבִיו וַתִּכֹּן מַלְכֻתוֹ מְאֹד׃ - And Shlomo sat upon the throne of David his father, and his kingdom was firmly established.
What is meant by "and his kingdom was firmly established"? The Malbim explains: Shlomo's kingdom was an absolute kingdom, unlike his father's kingdom, in which he was at times pursued. It was a kingdom that Hashem established over those above and those below, a kingdom unlike the previous one, unlike David's kingdom which always had those who contested it and in which he was always pursued. Shlomo had no one contesting his kingdom, and he ruled in an absolute manner.
The chapter opens with David's charge to Shlomo, containing two foundations: "Be strong, and show yourself a man" - firmness in leading the people, for "a leader who shows weakness, people rise up against him"; and on the other hand "and keep the charge of Hashem your God" - nullifying one's own mind before the Torah, like an infant with its mother, and through this "that you may prosper" - not success that is a matter of fortune, but insight in all that you do and even in all to which you turn. From there we moved to the promise of the kingdom and the apparent contradiction between the verses, and to the two resolutions: the Griz - that the kingdom itself is guaranteed and only its greatness depends on one's deeds; and the Malbim - that the son's kingdom is guaranteed in David's merit, while the grandson's kingdom is conditional upon the son's deeds. Afterward we turned to the accounts David bequeaths to Shlomo: Yoav ben Tzeruyah, who killed Avner and Amasa through cunning, shedding the blood of war in a time of peace, as revealed by the king's letter, and concerning whom it is said "act according to your wisdom" following the law of those executed by the king; Shimi ben Gera, who cursed a grievous curse at the time of David's lowliness and compelled him to swear, and concerning whom it is said "do not hold him guiltless, for you are a wise man"; and in contrast to them, the sons of Barzilai the Giladite, who merited the distinction of eating at the king's table, because they accepted David's kingdom at a time when he was pursued and felt that the merit was theirs - like the midwives who feared God and merited the houses of priesthood, Levitehood and kingship. And in conclusion: David lay with his righteous fathers and was buried in the City of David, and Shlomo sits upon his throne - "and his kingdom was firmly established," an absolute kingdom that no one contests.