We continue in Chapter 119, with the letter Vav, beginning from verse 41. The three verses before us are built around three concepts that the Malbim places at their center: chesed (lovingkindness), davar (word/promise), and mishpat (justice). David HaMelech stands here facing his taunters, asking that the divine promise granted to him out of pure kindness be fulfilled for him even after he erred, and that his lips always be accustomed to truth.
וִיבֹאֻנִי חֲסָדֶךָ יְהֹוָה תְּשׁוּעָתְךָ כְּאִמְרָתֶךָ׃ (מ"א) - May Your kindnesses come to me, Hashem, Your salvation according to Your word. (41)
The Radak notes in his concise style: "The yud of the plural is missing from the text." That is, while it is written chasadecha with a segol under the dalet, a letter yud would normally follow the dalet, for the reference is not to a single kindness but to kindnesses in the plural - chasadecha as if written with a yud. And David's request is: May salvation and kindnesses come to me just as You promised me, "according to Your word" - exactly as You spoke and promised that kindness would be with me.
The Malbim places the word imrah (word/promise) at the center here. We have already seen that David's throne was built, in the Malbim's phrasing, upon the foundations (mechonot) of kindness and faith - not in the modern sense of a machine, but from the root of machon leshivtecha, established foundations. The very fact that the Holy One, Blessed be He, established an enduring house for David and gave him the monarchy was itself pure kindness. However, once the Holy One, Blessed be He, sealed a covenant with him, it entered the realm of truth (emet): from the moment a covenant is struck, He is, as it were, bound to fulfill His promise.
From this stems the distinction drawn by the Malbim. There is a promise that comes by virtue of merit, and this is conditional: if sin is found in you, you forfeit that merit, and with it, goodness departs from your house and the kindness ceases. But when kindness is bestowed from the outset without regard to merit, as pure kindness stemming solely from Hashem's will, then even if you currently lack merit, and even if you committed an improper deed, the Holy One, Blessed be He, may punish and chastise for it, yet the kindness itself will never depart. Since that kindness was never dependent on merit but solely on His will, and since His will is to extend kindness, the kindness continues.
This is David's plea: Master of the Universe, regarding the covenant You sealed with me out of kindness - "Your salvation according to Your word" - keep that promise even though I have sinned, since its origin was rooted in kindness. And if I have acted improperly, let chastisements come: his son Avshalom pursues him, David is driven from his kingdom, troubles beset him. But do not remove the kindness from me, "May Your kindnesses come to me, Hashem" - those very kindnesses regarding which You made a covenant with me out of pure kindness.
וְאֶעֱנֶה חֹרְפִי דָבָר כִּי בָטַחְתִּי בִּדְבָרֶךָ׃ (מ"ב) - Then I shall have an answer for the one who taunts me, for I have trusted in Your word. (42)
"The one who taunts me" refers to his reviler. Those taunters would say of David, "There is no salvation for him in God forever" - meaning that Hashem will no longer save him. David says: I trust in Hashem that He will fulfill His promises, "Your salvation according to Your word," and through this I will have an answer to reply to my detractors: You say there is no salvation for him in God - come and see how the Holy One, Blessed be He, continues to save me.
The Malbim places the word davar ("word") at the center here. To those who taunt me and say that kingship will be removed from me, that I stumbled in the sin of Batsheva and am no longer worthy of being king - to them I will answer that I have trusted in Your word. It is impossible that the promise would be rescinded, for its origin was strictly an act of kindness (chesed); and when the Holy One, blessed be He, gives out of kindness rather than merit, even if I have acted improperly and receive a rebuke for it - the kindness continues.
The Tehillot Maharith explains: "So shall I answer the one who taunts me" - those who revile me over the incident of Batsheva. Chazal teach that David was not fit for that deed, except to teach the path of repentance (teshuvah) to the individual. When a person stumbles in sin, we say to him: Go to David, see that he too stumbled, and see that Hashem said to him, "I have pardoned according to your word." And they also said: Whoever says that David sinned is entirely mistaken, as it says, "And David was successful in all his ways, and Hashem was with him" - is it possible that sin came to his hand and the Shechinah remained with him? From here, the Rav explains, davar alludes to teshuvah, as in the verse, "Take words (devarim) with you, and return to Hashem." This is David's definitive answer to those taunters: I did teshuvah, and this entire episode of sin was intended so that I could teach the path of teshuvah to the individual.
And the proof is: "For I have trusted in Your word" - how could it be that David sinned and the Shechinah was with him, that David sinned yet the Holy One, blessed be He, still desires him and continues to speak with him? This proves that the sin is not to be understood according to its simple meaning. People falsely attributed to David the sin of a married woman (eshet ish), but there was no married woman here, for anyone who went out to war for the House of David wrote a bill of divorce (get) for his wife. Had there been the sin of a married woman on my hands, divine communication would not have continued to address me. Thus, both answers are hinted at in the verse: one - "So shall I answer the one who taunts me a word (davar)," for I repented and the entire matter was meant to teach the path of repentance; and the second - "for I have trusted in Your word (devarecha)," the very fact that the Holy One, blessed be He, continues to speak with me proves that He is with me.
One may also suggest here that davar alludes to a royal matter, as in the phrase, "a royal decree (devar malchut) went forth from him." I will answer those who taunt me: if there were indeed a transgression here according to your view, it would be inconceivable that the child born of a forbidden woman would become king. And this is one of the clearest proofs that David did not sin. For if he had sinned, Batsheva would have been forbidden to him, so how could he possibly have retained a woman forbidden to him under the laws of a married woman, when according to Halachah he would have been obligated to divorce her immediately? That would be one sin. Furthermore, a son was born from her who became king of Israel. And furthermore, he was called "Yedidyah" - and Hashem loved him. Perforce, she was not forbidden to him, for she was a divorcee at that time. This is davar - a royal decree: see that specifically this son ascended the throne, which is conclusive proof that there was no sin here.
Even so, one should not be mistaken: the deed was not pure, and there was conduct here that was not fitting. A person who sends his fellow to battle in order to take his wife - one who goes out to war and writes a bill of divorce to his wife does not do so in order that someone else should take her in the meantime. Not only that, but he subsequently had Uriah sent to die by the sword of the children of Ammon. It is true that Uriah incurred the death penalty as a rebel against the king (mored bemalchut), but first of all, his entire death penalty came about because of that episode - without it, he would not have incurred death at all. And secondly, if he was liable to death, you should have executed him yourself, not sent him to die at the hands of the gentiles. For this there was a claim against him, which is why Natan the prophet was sent to him, why the parable of the ewe lamb was told and "he shall restore the lamb fourfold," and why he was punished with "Behold, I will raise up evil against you from your own house." A prophet is not sent to someone because he performed a mitzvah. There was sin here, but the overt sin - adultery and murder - did not take place. Therefore Chazal said: Whoever says David sinned is entirely mistaken. It is a sharp expression, but accurate: the act was improper and unworthy, and therefore Hashem rebuked him. This topic is elaborated upon in the teachings on reincarnations (gilgulim), and whoever wishes may study it there - regarding the soul-root of Uriah and the soul-root of David, and how this relates to Cain and Abel and the extra twin; the Kabbalists offer an entire approach to this. And the holy Zohar states that Uriah never had marital relations with her at all.
וְאַל תַּצֵּל מִפִּי דְבַר אֱמֶת עַד מְאֹד כִּי לְמִשְׁפָּטֶךָ יִחָלְתִּי׃ (מ"ג) - And do not remove the word of truth utterly from my mouth, for I have hoped for Your judgments. (43)
"Do not remove" (al tatzel) means do not separate, as in the phrase, "and God separated (vayatzel) the livestock of your father" - He separated your father's livestock and gave it to me. That is to say: do not distance or create a separation between my mouth and the word of truth, but rather let there always be a word of truth in everything I say. Rashi explains: in all my halachic rulings and all my judgments let there be a word of truth, so that I will not stumble in them.
In this regard - about whom was it said that "the halachah is in accordance with him everywhere"? About King David. When Shaul asked, "Whose son is this youth?", Doeg began enumerating his virtues: he has fine appearance, is skilled in playing music, and listed a series of virtues. For each and every virtue, Shaul answered him: My son Yonatan is also like that, my son Yonatan is also like that. But when he told him, "and the halachah is in accordance with him everywhere" - here Shaul fell silent. Why did he fall silent? Because it is impossible to say about two people that the halachah follows both of them everywhere; if they disagree with one another, how could the halachah follow both? In this, David had a unique virtue over Yonatan. And to our point: "And do not remove the word of truth utterly from my mouth" - that in all my halachic rulings and in all my judgments I should not stumble, but rather speak the matter and hit the mark of truth, "for I have hoped for Your judgments" - I hope and yearn for Hashem's judgments.
The Radak also cites, "And God took away (vayatzel) the livestock of your father," "which God has taken away (hitzil) from our father," and likewise "and they despoiled (vayenatzlu) Egypt" - which is not in the modern Hebrew sense of exploitation, but in the sense of rescue and removal, transferring from their hands to ours. From here comes the request: Do not take away or separate the word of truth from my mouth, but rather accustom my mouth always to speak truth. The Radak raises a question: Why are you asking this of Hashem? Watch yourself not to speak lies! He answers: "For it is in Your hand to help me and to open my mouth for good."
This is always the true nature of prayer for spiritual matters: to ask for Heavenly assistance, that Hashem help me. One does not ask that He make the choice instead of him, for free choice always rests in the hands of man, but one can certainly ask for divine assistance - such as, "O Lord, open my lips, that my mouth may declare Your praise": help me open my lips and focus with proper intent when I pray. A person can ask for this, for divine help in his good deeds. But for Hashem to perform the good deeds in your place - and even receive the reward in your place - where is man's struggle? Where is the test? That must belong to man himself; yet divine assistance can certainly be granted to him.
The Radak continues with the end of the verse: "For I have hoped for Your ordinances" - Your ordinances are truth, and I hope that You will make them known to me and teach them to me. "Do not take the word of truth completely out of my mouth" - do not distance from me anything that contains truth, but rather bring it close to me, for it is in Your hand to help me and to open my mouth for good toward those true ordinances for which I hope.
The Malbim places the word mishpatim (judgments or ordinances) at the center here. As is well known, mishpatim are the laws in the Torah that are readily understood by human intellect - Parashat Mishpatim, an ox that gores must pay, and the like. The verse is a continuation of the preceding one: I have trusted in Your word exceedingly. The addition here, "And do not take the word of truth out of my mouth," is a kind of parenthetical remark: so that I will not deny the sin but confess it, and despite all this I will answer those who taunt me - because I have trusted in Your word, "for I have hoped for Your judgments," that Hashem will execute justice. That is: All the persecution I suffered at the hands of Avshalom was in justice; it serves as atonement for iniquities, and I deserved it. As it says regarding David out of His love: "I will chasten him with the rod of men" - if King David does something improper, he immediately receives his punishment.
This is a direct continuation of what the Malbim explained earlier: When it comes to Hashem's lovingkindness, if you stray, you will receive a slap, but you do not forfeit the promise, since it was never granted on the basis of personal merit but out of pure lovingkindness, and that lovingkindness endures. Did you do something improper? Here, I was pursued by Avshalom; I received the slap for it. Thus, divine lovingkindness remains with me and the divine promise still stands. Those who taunt me have no basis to claim against me that I am unworthy: Look, lovingkindness accompanies me, and I trust in the word of Hashem Who promised me the kingdom in every circumstance; and if I stray from the path, I have already received my punishment.
The book Otzrot HaAggadah offers a homiletic insight on "And do not take the word of truth completely (ad me'od) out of my mouth." There are people who observe Torah and mitzvot - until it comes to money. When money must be spent, it is no longer for him: no tzedakah, no assistance for any cause, no building of a synagogue. "Religious until it comes to money" - when it touches finances, that is where he forgets his Judaism. For example, a person who has a din Torah with his fellow, and the rabbinic judge rules against him: he cannot bring himself to accept that his fellow gained and he lost. Both things are difficult for him - that he lost, and no less so that his fellow gained - and therefore he is unwilling to pay.
In truth, however, when a person leaves the rabbinic court having lost the case, the Gemara says he should sing: "One who leaves the beit din having had his cloak taken from him should sing a song and go on his way." Why? Because they saved him from robbery! Thank Hashem, blessed be He, that the judge took the money from me and gave it to so-and-so, for otherwise I would have stumbled into sin - and I will not even have to return in a reincarnation on account of it.
This is the meaning of "And do not take the word of truth out of my mouth ad me'od": do not remove from me the word of truth even when it comes to "me'od," so that I will not be like those people whose fear of Heaven stops at their wallet. For "me'od" alludes to wealth, as in "And you shall love Hashem your God... with all your might (me'odecha)" - which Chazal expound as: with all your wealth. I follow the truth of the Torah ad me'od, all the way into financial matters. Not like those who halt precisely there: "Leave the money to me; what the judge said is irrelevant; what needs to be donated and given is irrelevant." "Ad me'od" - everything is truth, even in matters pertaining to one's wealth: remain God-fearing even when it comes to money.
A story is told of the Brisker Rav, that once a man who had visited the marketplace came to him. Someone had conned the man in a deeply humiliating way - making a fool of him, as they say - and swindled him out of his money. The man came to the Beis Din weeping and shouting, claiming that he had nothing to eat and that all his money had just been stolen from him. Seeing his plight, the members of the court told him they would organize a charitable collection on his behalf, urging him to calm down because they would help him. Feeling somewhat self-conscious about having raised such an uproar over mere money, the man said, "No, it is not the loss of money that bothers me; rather, it hurts me that I was made out to be a fool - how could he deceive me like that, pulling off such a scheme at my expense?" They said to him, "Wait, if that is truly the issue, why did we rush to organize a collection? Do not worry, we will readily convince you that you are no fool at all; everything is fine, no harm done." Immediately he protested, "No, no, but what about the money?" Suddenly it became abundantly clear that the real issue was not "I was made a fool," but "I was left without money." When it comes down to money - everything is revealed. Money is the real crux. And this is the lesson one must take from here: a person should never be God-fearing only until it touches his wallet.
These three verses form a single continuous progression. "May Your kindnesses come to me" - David asks that the promise granted to him out of pure lovingkindness (chesed), and not based on merit, be fulfilled even after he stumbled, for kindness that does not depend on merit is not revoked by sin, even though the sinner still receives his punishment. "And I will answer those who taunt me with a word" - through this, he has a response to his detractors: I have done teshuvah, and this entire episode occurred only to teach a path of repentance for the individual. Furthermore, the very fact that the Divine word continues with me, and that kings descend from me, proves that this was not an ordinary sin in its literal sense - even though the deed itself was neither pure nor fitting, and for that he was punished. "And do not snatch the word of truth utterly from my mouth" - a plea for Heavenly assistance (siyata d'Shemaya) that he should not stumble in his rulings and judgments, for it is in Hashem's power to help and open our mouths for good; and that same truth must extend "utterly" - reaching even into financial matters, so that a person is not God-fearing only until money is involved.