We are opening one of the most complex chapters in Sefer Shmuel, and perhaps in all of the Nevi'im. Not complex in terms of the storyline, which is simple and clear, but in terms of understanding it: the incident of David and Bat Sheva. How can we understand that David HaMelech came to such an act, and how can we understand that afterward we see explicitly that the Holy One, blessed be He, forgives him. All of these matters require explanation, and therefore we will study this passage with the Malbim, whose way is to be precise in the language of the pesukim and to draw out from them the true picture.
Someone once said that a person who studies the Abarbanel on erev Shabbat can come to heresy. Why? Because the way of the Abarbanel is to bring twenty or thirty questions on the passage, and only afterward to give a single resolution that answers all of them. A person begins on erev Shabbat, reaches the twentieth question and falls asleep. The following Shabbat he reaches the fifteenth question and falls asleep. After half a year his whole Torah is full of difficulties, and he never managed to reach the answers. Therefore here we will see the difficulties in the passage, but we will go all the way to the end and also see the understanding, how the matters settle and how Chazal view the entire subject. And I will say at the outset: even what we will explain along the way through the pesukim is still a partial explanation, for the more comprehensive explanation, as Rav Dessler explains and as the matters are understood according to the Zohar, will be understood only at the end of the passage.
וַיְהִי לִתְשׁוּבַת הַשָּׁנָה לְעֵת צֵאת הַמְּלָאכִים וַיִּשְׁלַח דָּוִד אֶת־יוֹאָב וְאֶת־עֲבָדָיו עִמּוֹ וְאֶת־כָּל־יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיַּשְׁחִתוּ אֶת־בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן וַיָּצֻרוּ עַל־רַבָּה וְדָוִד יוֹשֵׁב בִּירוּשָׁלָיִם׃ - And it came to pass, at the return of the year, at the time when kings go out to battle, that David sent Yoav, and his servants with him, and all of Yisrael, and they ravaged the children of Ammon and besieged Rabbah, but David remained in Yerushalayim.
The Malbim explains: this entire introduction, which ostensibly has no bearing on the matter, comes to tell us what the cause of the whole story was. The cause was that David HaMelech sat in his home and did not go out to wage the wars of Hashem, and this is what brought all the trouble upon him. And to every possible answer the verse responds in advance. You might say that David was weary from the previous war? The verse says "לִתְשׁוּבַת הַשָּׁנָה", a full year had passed since then. You might say the weather did not allow it, rain and cold? The verse says "לְעֵת צֵאת הַמְּלָאכִים", and Chazal say that this was in the month of Sivan, the time when kings go out to battle. For in winter it is difficult for kings to go out to fight, and as is well known, what broke Germany in its attempt to conquer Russia was "General Winter," and so too Napoleon. Here that problem did not exist.
You might say it was a small war, and a king does not go out to resolve every local dispute? The verse emphasizes that David sent Yoav the commander of the army, "וְאֶת־עֲבָדָיו עִמּוֹ" - all the officers of the host and all the mighty men - "וְאֶת־כָּל־יִשְׂרָאֵל." In such a situation it was fitting that their king go out at their head. And you might say it was a short time? The verse says "וַיַּשְׁחִתוּ אֶת־בְּנֵי עַמּוֹן וַיָּצֻרוּ עַל־רַבָּה," a long period: from the seventh of Sivan until the twenty-fourth of Elul, whole months they were in battle. David saw that the battle was not being concluded quickly, and he should have gone out and taken part with them. After all, David was the one who went out and fought the wars of Yisrael. The three words "וְדָוִד יוֹשֵׁב בִּירוּשָׁלָיִם" are the essence of the matter and the introduction to all that will follow.
This is not like today, where there is no problem at all for a prime minister to make decisions, since he sits in a fortified bunker, protected even from an atomic bomb, while others go out to fight. In their times, a king who made a decision was himself inside. If the decision was mistaken, the king paid with his head. There are no trial runs and no second chance, you take responsibility, and this is very important, because then the decision is a true decision.
This is one of the reasons that the gedolei Yisrael always opposed deciding on matters of battle and war. Rav Shach always opposed this. He said: we are not going out to fight, so should we say yes or no in order that someone else go to battle? My students sit and engage in Torah, and I do not send them to war, so how can I advise others what to do? Therefore they always instructed Agudas Yisrael generally not to get involved in the question of going out to war: we are not partners in it, and therefore we will also not speak about it. When the king is a partner in the battle, his decisions are the decisions of a man who has entered the battlefield himself. And David HaMelech did not go out to battle.
וַיְהִי לְעֵת הָעֶרֶב וַיָּקָם דָּוִד מֵעַל מִשְׁכָּבוֹ וַיִּתְהַלֵּךְ עַל־גַּג בֵּית־הַמֶּלֶךְ וַיַּרְא אִשָּׁה רֹחֶצֶת מֵעַל הַגָּג וְהָאִשָּׁה טוֹבַת מַרְאֶה מְאֹד׃ - And it came to pass at eventide that David arose from off his bed, and walked upon the roof of the king's house, and from the roof he saw a woman bathing, and the woman was very beautiful to look upon.
This still takes place during the day, toward evening, not at night. And what is the meaning of "a woman bathing from the roof"? Did the woman go up to bathe on the roof? The Radak explains that the words "from the roof" refer back to "he saw": David stood upon the roof, and from there he saw a woman bathing. It was not that the woman bathed on the roof, but rather that the one who saw was upon the roof.
Here we must bring the Gemara in Tractate Sanhedrin (107a). Rav Yehuda said in the name of Rav: A person should never bring himself to a test, for David king of Israel brought himself to a test and failed. He said before Him: Master of the Universe, why do we say the God of Avraham, the God of Yitzchak, and the God of Yaakov, but we do not say the God of David? He said to him: They withstood a test before Me, but you have not been tested before Me, meaning not by a test strong enough. He said before Him: Master of the Universe, examine me, O Lord, and test me. The Holy One, blessed be He, said to him: I will test you, and I will do with you something I did not do with the forefathers. To them I did not make known what their test would be, but to you I will make it known. I inform you that I will test you in a matter of forbidden relations. Immediately, "And it came to pass at eventide that David arose from off his bed." Rav Yehuda said: He turned his nighttime lying into daytime lying, and a halacha was hidden from him: there is a small organ in a person, if he satisfies it, it is hungry, if he starves it, it is sated.
Here there is something tremendous. What is "he arose from off his bed"? That David had earlier been lying down, and lying down means marital relations. And why suddenly during the day? Rather, David knew what God had told him, that he would be tested in a matter of forbidden relations, and he said: I will satisfy myself through what is permitted so that I will not be drawn to what is forbidden. On the face of it there is logic in this. But our Sages teach us that desire works in exactly the opposite way: the more a person fills his desire, even through what is permitted, it does not satisfy him but makes him hungry. "There is a small organ in a person, if he satisfies it, it is hungry, if he starves it, it is sated." In its simple meaning this refers to the organ of relations, but the idea applies to all desires. A person who suppresses his desire and overcomes it causes the desire to stop clinging to him. Consider a person who ate: after a short time he is hungry again. In contrast, one who has not eaten for a long time, at a certain point his hunger diminishes. People who observe a taanit hafsakah, from the conclusion of Shabbat until Friday, six days without eating or drinking even at night, say that the main difficulty is in the first two days, and afterward it becomes much easier. By the same principle: starve it and it is sated.
This is also the reason that today we hear of all sorts of perversions, may God have mercy, that once did not exist. All the abominations and vermin come out of the closet, along with all sorts of evil afflictions we had never heard of. What happened? After all, there were deranged people in every generation, so what happened that today the quantity is so great and the madness so extreme? The point is that once, in order to commit a transgression, a person had to exert great effort. Today all the transgressions lie in his phone, and all the forbidden things are inside the home with all the cables and troubles. Such a person, when a matter of desire comes to him, it no longer speaks to him, because he is so steeped in lewdness that he needs something much stronger to titillate him, and thus he deteriorates little by little. It is like a drug: one who has never smoked does not crave it. But from the first cigarettes, or the first doses, he will need more. "Only two cigarettes a day" turns into two packs. And so with drugs: one begins with "light drugs, nothing serious," and afterward another dose and another dose, and harder drugs, until he dies of an overdose. Once they would write about this in the newspaper, today no longer, because it is too common. And what is an overdose? This is exactly the point: the desire grows and he must satisfy it more, but the body can no longer bear it.
A certain Torah scholar related that he boarded a bus, and there was a woman there, and he did not want to sit next to her and stood. A secular man sitting there said to him: You religious people, your minds think only about these things all the time. What would happen if you sat next to her? It does not bother me at all, I even go to the beach and it does nothing to me. The rabbi said to him: A blind man too is not dazzled by the sun. The man did not understand. He said to him: Let me explain. The natural way in which the Creator fashioned man is that if he sees a forbidden thing, it affects him. Such a person is healthy. One who says "it does not affect me at all" has a problem, and there are certain doctors who know how to treat it. You are like a blind man: because you are so sunk in lewdness, it no longer affects you, because you are deep, deep in the mud. I, who am affected, am in good condition, and therefore I guard myself. Do you think your condition is better because you are not affected? On the contrary, it shows how far you have deteriorated, how much guarding one's eyes is an unfamiliar concept to you. A blind man looks at the sun and says "it does not bother me", he is the sick one, not I. And so it is in all matters: a person who confines himself and blocks himself will find that he has the strength to overcome, while a person who tries to satisfy himself will only deteriorate further.
And how did David come to this situation? The Gemara says: Bat Sheva was washing her hair "beneath a screen", beneath a sort of hive of reeds that served as a partition. The Satan came and appeared to David as a bird. David shot an arrow at the bird, and the arrow cut through that mat of reeds, and Bat Sheva was revealed before him and he saw her. And it is known that the evil inclination acts only through what a person's eyes see. No sight, no evil inclination.
From here a question arises: it is written "And you shall not go astray after your heart and after your eyes", but surely the eye sees and the heart covets, so it should have said first "after your eyes" and afterward "after your heart"? Rather, we are taught: the eye does not see unless the heart wants. When the heart wants, the eye sees, and had the heart not wanted, the eye too would not have seen. Indeed the eye sees and the heart covets, but how did the eye see? Because the heart wanted.
וַיִּשְׁלַח דָּוִד וַיִּדְרֹשׁ לָאִשָּׁה וַיֹּאמֶר הֲלוֹא־זֹאת בַּת־שֶׁבַע בַּת־אֱלִיעָם אֵשֶׁת אוּרִיָּה הַחִתִּי׃ - David sent and inquired about the woman, and someone said: Is this not Bat Sheva daughter of Eliam, the wife of Uriah the Chittite?
David sent to inquire whether the woman was single or married. The Malbim says: before we explain, know that the Abarbanel heaped much blame upon David, and counted for him five sins. Let us list them, and then see how the Malbim proves the opposite from the very verses themselves. The first sin: she was a married woman. Our Sages explain that she was divorced, but the Abarbanel did not accept this interpretation. The second sin: after Bat Sheva said "I am pregnant," David tried to send Uriah to his wife so that he would think the pregnancy was his, thereby covering up the matter. This is terrible and dreadful, for then David's son would grow up in Uriah's house, and Uriah would be certain the child was his own. Besides the fact that he is a mamzer, there is here the matter of "the land became full of depravity," for when it is not known who the father is, a brother might marry his sister. The third sin: that he ordered Uriah to be stationed at the front of the fiercest fighting in order to have him killed, though there was no wrong in his hands. It would have been better to keep Uriah in Jerusalem, arrange for Bat Sheva to give birth in secret, and then return him to his home knowing nothing. The fourth sin: that he did not kill him himself but by the sword of the Ammonites, and by this caused the death of still more warriors of Israel, for one must wage a battle in which he would die, and in such a battle others too would fall, when he could have killed him privately. The fifth sin: that he hurried to marry her immediately at the end of the days of mourning, and by this it appeared as though he was still chasing after desire. And the Abarbanel's view is that David indeed increased iniquity and guilt, but Hashem forgave him because he repented with complete repentance, accepted his punishment, and was healed.
The Malbim says: with the correct outlook, the view of our Sages of blessed memory is compelling. A married woman who lay with another man and whose husband died is forbidden forever to both her husband and the man with whom she lay. If so, how could it be possible, according to your approach, that David married her? And not only that, but the matter continued even after Natan the prophet's rebuke, and even the Abarbanel admits that David repented. Is it possible that a person repents while a creeping thing is in his hand, that is, while he is married to a woman forbidden to him? Certainly not.
Furthermore: if she is a married woman, the child is a mamzer. And if the child is a mamzer, how could David plead that the son should live? For as long as the mamzer lives there is no atonement for the one who fathered him, and he is like a reminder of sin, and atonement is possible only upon his death. If so, the son was sick, and you should have said: thank God he will go, and the sin will be erased. What place is there to pray that he should live, if he came from a forbidden union?
Furthermore: how could it be that the leader chosen to lead Israel, Shlomo son of David, came from Bat Sheva, who according to your approach was forbidden to David? For he was also called "Yedidyah," because Hashem loved him, beloved of Hashem. A beloved of Hashem coming from a married woman? And not only that, but the monarchy continued from him! From all this it is clear that Bat Sheva was not forbidden to David.
And why was she not a married woman? Because everyone who went out to the war of the House of David would give his wife a bill of divorce. And the reason for this enactment: in their times, one who died in battle was not brought back in a coffin, but rather he had the status of a meit mitzvah, his place was acquired, and they would bury him on the spot. Thus it could happen that a hundred thousand men went out to battle and ninety thousand returned, with ten thousand buried somewhere in the fields. Who are they and what are they? Who are the witnesses who saw each one's burial? "He went out with me to fight, I do not recognize him, they told me he died, we dug and buried him." His wife would remain an agunah until the end of her days, since there are no witnesses to testify that her husband died.
What did they do? They enacted that everyone going out to the war of the House of David would write a bill of divorce for his wife. And in truth the matter began already in the days of Shaul. Where do we see this? When David's father sent him to see the welfare of his brothers at the war with Goliath, he said to him "And take their pledge," and our Sages say: bring from them the bill of divorce that they must give their wives. Thus, if he dies in war, the woman becomes divorced rather than a widow, and two things are gained: first, even if it is not known with certainty whether he died, since he did not return from the war the divorce takes effect, and the woman is permitted immediately at the end of the war. Second, she does not require yibum if she has no children, for only a widow requires yibum and not a divorcee. And there is a dispute among our Sages whether they would write a fully complete bill of divorce or a conditional bill of divorce: if I have not returned by the end of the war you shall be divorced from now.
And here the Malbim examines the wording of the verse closely: "David sent and inquired about the woman" - his first question was whether she was a married woman or single. And when they answered him "Is this not Bat Sheva daughter of Eliam, the wife of Uriah the Chittite," from this itself he knew that she was single. For Uriah was one of David's warriors, as is explicit in the verses, and he went out to battle, so it is clear that he left her a bill of divorce, as was customary then that everyone would leave a bill of divorce. And if you say, who says the matter was done with certainty? She is "daughter of Eliam," and Eliam was the son of Achitofel the Gilonite, David's advisor, and he, says the Malbim, is the one who advised this counsel and instituted the enactment that the woman would receive a bill of divorce before her husband went out to battle. And if he is the initiator, surely he saw to it that it was applied in the case of his granddaughter.
And what was David's plan? The rule was that the divorce takes effect if he did not return with all the men of war. If so, David would occupy Uriah near the end of the war with some mission, and all the men of war would return on a certain day while he would return only two weeks later, and then the divorce takes effect and the woman becomes divorced. And when he returned, he would betroth her anew. And in what way divorced? Retroactively, already from the moment the bill of divorce was given. And why must we say this? Because if we say she is divorced only from the moment he did not return, it is possible that he had already died at the end of Sivan, and how could a divorce take effect after the woman is already a widow? Rather, of necessity the divorce takes effect retroactively from the moment it was given, and then she is both exempt from yibum and considered a divorcee. And this was David's plan: that she should be single retroactively.
וַיִּשְׁלַח דָּוִד מַלְאָכִים וַיִּקָּחֶהָ וַתָּבוֹא אֵלָיו וַיִּשְׁכַּב עִמָּהּ וְהִיא מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת מִטֻּמְאָתָהּ וַתָּשָׁב אֶל־בֵּיתָהּ׃ - And David sent messengers, and took her, and she came to him, and he lay with her, and she had purified herself from her uncleanness, and she returned to her house.
David sends messengers, and he wanted them to investigate the matter, so that it would be clear that this woman had indeed been divorced. And the verse adds this so that you should not think that David was not careful about the prohibition of a married woman: for you see that he was careful even about the prohibition of a menstruant. Her husband was on the battlefield and she had no natural need to purify herself (even though in their days women would purify themselves also for the sake of eating tahoros), and at that very time she was "מִתְקַדֶּשֶׁת מִטֻּמְאָתָהּ" - she immersed for her niddah. If so, there was here neither the prohibition of a married woman nor the prohibition of a menstruant, and this transgression too does not attach to David.
וַתַּהַר הָאִשָּׁה וַתִּשְׁלַח וַתַּגֵּד לְדָוִד וַתֹּאמֶר הָרָה אָנֹכִי׃ - And the woman conceived, and she sent and told David, and said: I am with child.
The Zohar says: Uriah went out and left her a get on the seventh of Sivan, and the incident took place on the twenty fourth of Elul. And why is it important to know the dates? Because there need to be three months of distinction. A woman is forbidden to marry another man within three months, for should she give birth, we would not know whether the child is nine months from the first or seven months from the second, since a woman may give birth prematurely, either at seven months or at nine. And here three months had passed since Uriah had been absent from the home, and therefore she could say to David clearly, "הָרָה אָנֹכִי," when it was clear that the pregnancy was from him.
And how did she already know then that she had conceived? The Ralbag says: she felt her pregnancy immediately in that the ways of women ceased from her, meaning she stopped seeing menstrual flows, and from this she knew. For otherwise, she would have had to wait another three months until her pregnancy became visible.
וַיִּשְׁלַח דָּוִד אֶל־יוֹאָב שְׁלַח אֵלַי אֶת־אוּרִיָּה הַחִתִּי וַיִּשְׁלַח יוֹאָב אֶת־אוּרִיָּה אֶל־דָּוִד׃ - And David sent to Yoav: Send me Uriah the Hittite. And Yoav sent Uriah to David.
Yoav was on the battlefield, and Uriah was with him, and David sends word that Uriah should be sent to Jerusalem. Here is the Abarbanel's second accusation: that David wanted Uriah to lie with his wife, and thereby the name of the true father would be erased from the newborn son and he would be considered the son of Uriah, a thing that may not be done according to the Torah. The Malbim answers this: David knew that he was the king and that everything was in his hands, and he said in his heart that at a certain stage he would see to it that the son be informed of his situation and of whose son he was, and thereby there would be no concern that he might marry someone unfit for him.
וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד לְאוּרִיָּה רֵד לְבֵיתְךָ וּרְחַץ רַגְלֶיךָ וַיֵּצֵא אוּרִיָּה מִבֵּית הַמֶּלֶךְ וַתֵּצֵא אַחֲרָיו מַשְׂאַת הַמֶּלֶךְ׃ - And David said to Uriah: Go down to your house and wash your feet. And Uriah went out of the king's house, and there followed him a gift from the king.
"רֵד לְבֵיתְךָ וּרְחַץ רַגְלֶיךָ" - in plain words: go down to your house and be with your wife. "מַשְׂאַת הַמֶּלֶךְ" means an honor, a large gift and a distinguished meal that was sent after him.
וַיִּשְׁכַּב אוּרִיָּה פֶּתַח בֵּית הַמֶּלֶךְ אֵת כָּל־עַבְדֵי אֲדֹנָיו וְלֹא יָרַד אֶל־בֵּיתוֹ׃ - And Uriah slept at the entrance of the king's house with all the servants of his master, and he did not go down to his own house.
The plan goes awry. Here, says the Malbim, we will examine the pesukim closely and see that at this point Uriah accumulated three transgressions. The first: he violated the king's command. The king told him "Go down to your house," meaning that he should stay in his home, and he slept "at the entrance of the king's house," not literally on the threshold but in the same courtyard where the king's servants slept. Why? Because he wanted to return to the battlefield, and he slept there as one who says: I am only here temporarily, I will immediately take my equipment and go back up to war. But there is no place for loving the king against the king's command. The moment the king commanded, do not make calculations as to why it is worthwhile to disobey his word, for you are then called a rebel against the throne. The second: he scorned the king's gift. The king honored you and sent after you a great gift, and you did not go down to your house to receive this honor and eat the king's meal with your wife.
וַיַּגִּדוּ לְדָוִד לֵאמֹר לֹא־יָרַד אוּרִיָּה אֶל־בֵּיתוֹ וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד אֶל־אוּרִיָּה הֲלוֹא מִדֶּרֶךְ אַתָּה בָא מַדּוּעַ לֹא־יָרַדְתָּ אֶל־בֵּיתֶךָ׃ - And they told David, saying: Uriah did not go down to his house. And David said to Uriah: Have you not come from a journey? Why did you not go down to your house?
David did not want to show him that he was angry, for if so Uriah would begin to suspect: why does the king want so much for me to return to my house? Therefore he asked him as an innocent question: after all, you have come from a journey, and Chazal said that a person is obligated to be with his wife when he comes from a journey, and this is your duty.
וַיֹּאמֶר אוּרִיָּה אֶל־דָּוִד הָאָרוֹן וְיִשְׂרָאֵל וִיהוּדָה יֹשְׁבִים בַּסֻּכּוֹת וַאדֹנִי יוֹאָב וְעַבְדֵי אֲדֹנִי עַל־פְּנֵי הַשָּׂדֶה חֹנִים וַאֲנִי אָבוֹא אֶל־בֵּיתִי לֶאֱכֹל וְלִשְׁתּוֹת וְלִשְׁכַּב עִם־אִשְׁתִּי חַיֶּךָ וְחֵי נַפְשֶׁךָ אִם־אֶעֱשֶׂה אֶת־הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה׃ - And Uriah said to David: The Ark, and Israel, and Judah dwell in booths, and my lord Yoav and the servants of my lord are camped in the open field, and shall I go to my house to eat and drink and lie with my wife? By your life and by the life of your soul, I will not do this thing.
In his answer he said three things: the Ark, and Israel and Judah dwell in booths, without shelter over their heads; Yoav and the servants of my lord are camped in the open field, who do not even have booths; and in the midst of his words, "my lord Yoav." Here is the third transgression: is Yoav your lord? The king is your lord! You have no other lord while you stand before the king. And as we will see further on, the woman of Tekoa whom Yoav sent said to the king "your servant Yoav," for one does not say "my lord" to the king about another person. This was the third rebellion, and for it Uriah became liable to death by the throne.
וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד אֶל־אוּרִיָּה שֵׁב בָּזֶה גַּם־הַיּוֹם וּמָחָר אֲשַׁלְּחֶךָּ וַיֵּשֶׁב אוּרִיָּה בִירוּשָׁלַיִם בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא וּמִמָּחֳרָת׃ - And David said to Uriah: Stay here today also, and tomorrow I will send you off. And Uriah stayed in Jerusalem that day and the next.
David understands that Uriah is troubled and wants to return to the battle, for he was one of the thirty seven mighty men and could not allow himself to sit in his house while his comrades in arms were in the field. Therefore he told him: do not worry, stay here today, tomorrow I will send you off to the battle. The main thing, go down to your house.
וַיִּקְרָא־לוֹ דָוִד וַיֹּאכַל לְפָנָיו וַיֵּשְׁתְּ וַיְשַׁכְּרֵהוּ וַיֵּצֵא בָעֶרֶב לִשְׁכַּב בְּמִשְׁכָּבוֹ עִם־עַבְדֵי אֲדֹנָיו וְאֶל־בֵּיתוֹ לֹא יָרָד׃ - And David called him, and he ate before him and drank, and he made him drunk. And in the evening he went out to lie on his bed with the servants of his master, and to his house he did not go down.
David calls him, feeds him and gives him drink and makes him drunk, thinking that if he is merry he might return to his house. This too does not help. "On his bed" - the bed on which he had lain the night before, for he already had a bed prepared there. Let us note the difference: in verse 9 it says "with all the servants of his master" using "et," and here "with the servants of his master" using "im." We explained according to the Vilna Gaon that "im" means in complete equivalence and for the same purpose, whereas "et" can be merely an incidental partnership, where each one's concern is different. At first he lay "et" the servants of his master, a one time partnership. But after they had bonded and become friends, on the following night he lies "im" the servants of his master, this is already his second home.
וַיְהִי בַבֹּקֶר וַיִּכְתֹּב דָּוִד סֵפֶר אֶל־יוֹאָב וַיִּשְׁלַח בְּיַד אוּרִיָּה׃ - And it came to pass in the morning that David wrote a letter to Yoav, and sent it by the hand of Uriah.
In the morning David realizes that the plan will not succeed, and he pulls out a backup plan, an emergency plan, which is his only remaining option. "סֵפֶר" in the language of Scripture and of Chazal means a letter, as in "come, let us send letters by the hand of the runners," and it comes from the term for telling over matters (sippur devarim): whatever a person wished to relate he would write in a letter.
וַיִּכְתֹּב בַּסֵּפֶר לֵאמֹר הָבוּ אֶת־אוּרִיָּה אֶל־מוּל פְּנֵי הַמִּלְחָמָה הַחֲזָקָה וְשַׁבְתֶּם מֵאַחֲרָיו וְנִכָּה וָמֵת׃ - And he wrote in the letter, saying: Set Uriah in the forefront of the fiercest battle, and withdraw from behind him, that he may be struck down and die.
Once Uriah dies, the whole story will not come to light: everyone will be certain that, since Uriah returned from the battlefield, he surely stopped by his house, and from there his wife became pregnant. There was a further part to the plan, that David would marry her immediately after his death, and then, while she is in the early stages of her pregnancy, when she reaches the advanced months everyone will be certain that the pregnancy is from him. And this is indeed what David did afterward.
Here David is cleared of the fourth accusation of the Abarbanel, that by sending Uriah into battle the deaths of many in Israel were caused, since one would need to create a dangerous battle in which he would die, and one cannot ensure that specifically he would die and not some other warrior. The Malbim says: examine the wording of the verse carefully, and this accusation too falls away. "הָבוּ אֶת אוּרִיָּה אֶל מוּל פְּנֵי הַמִּלְחָמָה הַחֲזָקָה" - there is a place where the fierce battle is already standing, and only to there shall you bring him, "וְשַׁבְתֶּם מֵאַחֲרָיו." He did not tell him to initiate a battle nor to endanger soldiers, but rather in a place where there is already a fierce battle going on, so that no situation would arise in which others would be endangered. And why bring about his death? We have already seen that he was liable to death on three grounds.
If Uriah was liable to death, why not put him to death by the ruling of a court? The Malbim says: had David killed him, he would have been prevented from marrying Bat Sheva, for people would have said that David killed her husband in order to take his wife.
And by the way: the commentators cite one of the reasons that a Kohen Gadol is forbidden to marry a widow or a divorcee, "וְהוּא אִשָּׁה בִבְתוּלֶיהָ יִקָּח" - lest on Yom Kippur, on the holiest day, in the Holy of Holies, the Kohen set his eyes upon a woman and pray, "Master of the Universe, take her husband close to You," so that his wife would be close to him. Therefore they tell him: no, only "a woman in her virginity." And this itself shows us what a person is: even a Kohen Gadol, on Yom Kippur, in the Holy of Holies, a person's nature and character traits can in the end sway him toward such things.
וַיְהִי בִּשְׁמוֹר יוֹאָב אֶל־הָעִיר וַיִּתֵּן אֶת־אוּרִיָּה אֶל־הַמָּקוֹם אֲשֶׁר יָדַע כִּי אַנְשֵׁי־חַיִל שָׁם׃ - And it came to pass, as Yoav besieged the city, that he assigned Uriah to the place where he knew that valiant men were.
"בִּשְׁמוֹר יוֹאָב אֶל הָעִיר" - during the siege. The Malbim explains that it was the way of the people of a besieged city to sally forth from time to time and strike at the army besieging them, and therefore they would station warriors on the outside opposite the place where the warriors inside were positioned. Yoav knew where the enemy's valiant men were, and there he stationed Uriah, who was himself one of the valiant men, one of David's thirty seven mighty warriors.
וַיֵּצְאוּ אַנְשֵׁי הָעִיר וַיִּלָּחֲמוּ אֶת־יוֹאָב וַיִּפֹּל מִן־הָעָם מֵעַבְדֵי דָוִד וַיָּמָת גַּם אוּרִיָּה הַחִתִּי׃ - And the men of the city came out and fought against Yoav, and some of the people, of the servants of David, fell, and Uriah the Hittite died as well.
Note carefully: the men of the city came out and fought against Yoav, and men fell from the army in the natural course of battle, not in a deliberate manner, God forbid, and among them Uriah the Hittite also died.
וַיִּשְׁלַח יוֹאָב וַיַּגֵּד לְדָוִד אֵת כָּל־דִּבְרֵי הַמִּלְחָמָה׃ וַיְצַו אֶת־הַמַּלְאָךְ לֵאמֹר כְּכַלּוֹתְךָ אֵת כָּל־דִּבְרֵי הַמִּלְחָמָה לְדַבֵּר אֶל־הַמֶּלֶךְ׃ - And Yoav sent and told David all the matters of the war. And he commanded the messenger, saying: When you have finished telling all the matters of the war to the king.
Yoav sends word to inform David, in other words telling him: your request has been carried out. "הַמַּלְאָךְ" is the messenger.
וְהָיָה אִם־תַּעֲלֶה חֲמַת הַמֶּלֶךְ וְאָמַר לְךָ מַדּוּעַ נִגַּשְׁתֶּם אֶל־הָעִיר לְהִלָּחֵם הֲלוֹא יְדַעְתֶּם אֵת אֲשֶׁר־יֹרוּ מֵעַל הַחוֹמָה׃ מִי־הִכָּה אֶת־אֲבִימֶלֶךְ בֶּן־יְרֻבֶּשֶׁת הֲלוֹא־אִשָּׁה הִשְׁלִיכָה עָלָיו פֶּלַח רֶכֶב מֵעַל הַחוֹמָה וַיָּמָת בְּתֵבֵץ לָמָּה נִגַּשְׁתֶּם אֶל־הַחוֹמָה וְאָמַרְתָּ גַּם עַבְדְּךָ אוּרִיָּה הַחִתִּי מֵת׃ - And it shall be, if the king's anger arises and he says to you: Why did you draw near to the city to fight? Did you not know that they would shoot from the wall? Who struck Avimelech son of Yerubeshet? Did not a woman throw an upper millstone upon him from the wall, so that he died in Tevetz? Why did you draw near to the wall? Then you shall say: Your servant Uriah the Hittite is also dead.
"בֶּן יְרֻבֶּשֶׁת" means the son of Yerubaal, and "פֶּלַח רֶכֶב" is part of a millstone used for grinding: the "rechev" is the upper part, a very heavy stone, and a woman threw it upon him and killed him in the city of Tevetz. The Malbim explains that Yoav tells the messenger: when you finish reporting the matters of the war, it is possible that the king will be angry and say why did you draw near to the wall. This complaint contains two claims: first, that they should not have drawn near the wall at all, within shooting range, since the one standing on the wall has the advantage; and second, all the more so that they should not have been directly beneath the wall, for even a woman can throw an upper millstone and kill the great hero, as happened to Avimelech.
Let us be precise: he asked "לָמָּה" and not "מַדּוּעַ". "Maddua" refers to the past, what the prior reason was; "lamah" refers to the future, to what purpose and goal. That is: for what purpose did you draw near to the wall, what did you hope to achieve? And then "וְאָמַרְתָּ גַּם עַבְדְּךָ אוּרִיָּה הַחִתִּי מֵת". Seemingly this is no answer at all: what connection is there between the question of why you drew near to the wall and the death of Uriah?
Rather, Yoav in his wisdom said something that could be understood in two ways, for he did not want the messenger to understand that there was a secret message here between himself and David. The messenger would understand one thing, and David would understand another. The messenger would understand and say: you should realize that Yoav's hand was not treacherous, but rather Uriah the Hittite, who was one of David's mightiest warriors, risked his life and drew near to the wall in order to attack, and the fighters were drawn after him and thus he died. In other words, the blame lies with Uriah who initiated the approach, and not with Yoav. On the other hand, Yoav's intention was that when David heard that Uriah too had died, he would be calmed that his will had been carried out and would not be angry with them.
וַיֵּלֶךְ הַמַּלְאָךְ וַיָּבֹא וַיַּגֵּד לְדָוִד אֵת כָּל־אֲשֶׁר שְׁלָחוֹ יוֹאָב׃ - And the messenger went, and he came and told David all that Yoav had sent him to say.
Note carefully: "אֵת כָּל אֲשֶׁר שְׁלָחוֹ יוֹאָב". The messenger did not understand the division that Yoav had made, that only if the king became angry should he answer him. Instead he said everything at once, so that the king would not become angry in the first place.
וַיֹּאמֶר הַמַּלְאָךְ אֶל־דָּוִד כִּי־גָבְרוּ עָלֵינוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים וַיֵּצְאוּ אֵלֵינוּ הַשָּׂדֶה וַנִּהְיֶה עֲלֵיהֶם עַד־פֶּתַח הַשָּׁעַר׃ וַיֹּרְאוּ הַמּוֹרִאים אֶל־עֲבָדֶיךָ מֵעַל הַחוֹמָה וַיָּמוּתוּ מֵעַבְדֵי הַמֶּלֶךְ וְגַם עַבְדְּךָ אוּרִיָּה הַחִתִּי מֵת׃ - And the messenger said to David: The men prevailed against us and came out to us into the field, and we were upon them up to the entrance of the gate. And the shooters shot at your servants from the wall, and some of the king's servants died, and your servant Uriah the Hittite is also dead.
He puts the initial cause first: they came out toward us in order to attack, and when someone comes to attack you the best defense is an offense, and therefore we turned and attacked them, and they began to flee, and thus they drew us toward the wall, and from there the shooters shot at us and some of the king's servants died, and Uriah among them.
וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד אֶל־הַמַּלְאָךְ כֹּה־תֹאמַר אֶל־יוֹאָב אַל־יֵרַע בְּעֵינֶיךָ אֶת־הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה כִּי־כָזֹה וְכָזֶה תֹּאכַל הֶחָרֶב הַחֲזֵק מִלְחַמְתְּךָ אֶל־הָעִיר וְהָרְסָהּ וְחַזְּקֵהוּ׃ - David said to the messenger: Thus shall you say to Yoav, do not let this matter be evil in your eyes, for the sword devours this one and that one alike; press your battle harder against the city and destroy it, and encourage him.
David tells him: what you think, that drawing close to the wall was a bad thing, know that it was actually the right thing to do. It is better to draw close to the wall and fight with self sacrifice until it is destroyed than to prolong the days of the siege. For if you prolong the siege, the men inside do not sit quietly, but keep coming out and harassing us each time, and you find yourself in a war of attrition. No nation wants a war of attrition. It is better to have one swift battle, harsh in terms of casualties but swift, than a war of attrition, which in the end costs more dead, because you keep paying more and more casualties each time. And this is "כִּי כָזֹה וְכָזֶה תֹּאכַל הֶחָרֶב": had you not drawn close to attack all at once, the sword of the men on the wall would have devoured twice as many of you.
וַתִּשְׁמַע אֵשֶׁת אוּרִיָּה כִּי־מֵת אוּרִיָּה אִישָׁהּ וַתִּסְפֹּד עַל־בַּעְלָהּ׃ וַיַּעֲבֹר הָאֵבֶל וַיִּשְׁלַח דָּוִד וַיַּאַסְפָהּ אֶל־בֵּיתוֹ וַתְּהִי־לוֹ לְאִשָּׁה וַתֵּלֶד לוֹ בֵּן וַיֵּרַע הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר־עָשָׂה דָוִד בְּעֵינֵי ה'׃ - The wife of Uriah heard that Uriah her husband had died, and she mourned for her husband. When the mourning passed, David sent and gathered her into his house, and she became his wife and bore him a son. But the thing that David had done was evil in the eyes of Hashem.
The next chapter, with Hashem's help, deals with the rebuke: Hashem sends Natan the prophet to rebuke David with the parable of the poor man's lamb, and David, as soon as he is rebuked, repents at once and says "I have sinned," and then the prophet tells him "Hashem has also removed your sin."
This chapter opens with three words that are the root of everything: "וְדָוִד יוֹשֵׁב בִּירוּשָׁלָיִם" - the king who did not go out to the wars of Hashem at a time when all of Israel was in the field. From there on we learned from the Gemara that a person should not bring himself to a test, and that desire works in the opposite way to how it seems to a person: satisfy it and it is hungry, starve it and it is satisfied. And we saw that the Malbim, through careful attention to the language of the verses, dismantles one by one the accusations raised by the Abarbanel: Bat Sheva was not a married woman, for everyone who went out to the wars of the house of David would give a bill of divorce, and it was Achitofel, her grandfather, who established this ordinance; David was careful even about the prohibition of niddah; Uriah was liable to death by the monarchy for three acts of rebellion; and the command was to place him where the fierce fighting was already taking place, so as not to endanger others. And with all of this, the verse concludes "וַיֵּרַע הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה דָוִד בְּעֵינֵי ה'", to teach us that even when everything was done within the bounds of the law, the king of Israel is not measured by the standards of ordinary people. And with Hashem's help, the comprehensive explanation of this entire episode, as Rav Dessler explains and as the matter is understood according to the Zohar, we will see later in the parashah.