David's Deathbed Instructions to Shelomo/2

David's Deathbed Instructions to Shelomo

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Changing Circumstances

David asked Shelomo to deal with his opponents because he realized that with the change of monarch, there was to be an accompanying change in the strength of the kingdom which would necessitate different policies towards internal foes.  This approach subdivides regarding the direction of this change in power and whether it views David or Shelomo as the stronger king:

From Weakness to Strength

As much of David's reign was marked by turmoil and attempted rebellions, he never found himself in the position of strength needed to assassinate his opponents.  Shelomo, in contrast, was a powerful monarch who could easily eliminate enemies.

Why didn't David kill Yoav and Shimi? Throughout his reign, David found himself dealing with one crisis after another, leaving him no opportunity to eliminate his enemies:

• Civil war – Yoav killed Avner right as David was attempting to unite Israel under his leadership after the civil war with Ishboshet.  David had not yet consolidated his power or proven himself to the nation, making him hesitant to retaliate, as he says: "‎‎‏וְאָנֹכִי הַיּוֹם רַךְ וּמָשׁוּחַ מֶלֶךְ וְהָאֲנָשִׁים הָאֵלֶּה בְּנֵי צְרוּיָה קָשִׁים מִמֶּנִּי".‎¹
• Internationals wars – The middle of David's reign was marked by both defensive and offensive wars,² and thus also not an opportune time in which to eliminate a general-in-chief.
• Sin and punishment – After David's sin with Batsheva, and Yoav's role in the cover-up, it became increasingly difficult to kill Yoav. The family troubles that plagued David in the aftermath of the sin likely distracted David from thoughts of revenge, as had more pressing issues to deal with.
• Rebellions – The end of David's reign was filled with attempted coups. As such, after Avshalom's rebellion, when Shimi hinted that if David forgave him for his curse he would ensure that the tribes of Yosef re-pledge their allegiance to him, David did not feel like he had any other choice but to agree not to kill him.³ Similarly, after Sheva. b. Bichri's coup, David was again in no position to eliminate Yoav.⁴

"וְלֹא תוֹרֵד שֵׂיבָתוֹ בְּשָׁלֹם שְׁאֹל" / "וְהוֹרַדְתָּ אֶת שֵׂיבָתוֹ בְּדָם שְׁאוֹל" – This position does not differentiate between these two formulations, assuming that both refer to killing. Each of Yoav and Shimi were culpable of death, so David requested that Shelomo give them the capital punishment that they deserved but had not received at his own hands..

"אַתָּה יָדַעְתָּ אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לִי יוֹאָב" – David might have emphasized "אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לִי " to ensure that Shelomo viewed Yoav's assassinations as personal affronts to David, thereby encouraging him to avenge his father's honor.  [Alternatively, David really was referring to a crime of Yoav that actually did affect David personally, his killing of Avshalom (see RadakMelakhim I 2:5-9About R. David Kimchi).]

"וְעָשִׂיתָ כְּחׇכְמָתֶךָ" – It is not clear why David suggested that Shelomo's killing of Yoav and Shimi be done "with wisdom," as if deceit was necessary and the killings would not otherwise be perceived as justified.  This position could suggest either of the following:

• Regarding Shimi, David knew that due to his oath, Shelomo would not be able to simply kill Shimi for his cursing of David since that would constitute a reneging on the oath.  Thus, David told Shelomo to act with wile and convict him of a different capital crime. Similarly, once David had ignored Yoav's crimes for so long it would not be possible to suddenly punish him for them, so David advised his son to use his cunning to accomplish the goal. 
• Alternatively, it is possible that David recognized that even if Shelomo's kingdom was stable and powerful, these opponents were nonetheless formidable threats and would require Shelomo's wisdom and guile to overpower.

"שְׁלֹמֹה בְנִי נַעַר וָרָךְ" – One might question why David thought that Shelomo would be in a better position than he to assassinate enemies, considering that Shelomo's reign also began on the backdrop of an attempted rebellion. Moreover, David himself refers to him as "נַעַר וָרָךְ" (Divrei HaYamim I 22:5)! 

• It is possible that David was not expecting Shelomo to act immediately, but rather to wait until he was established on the throne.  David likely felt that he had ushered in an era of stability on the international front, so that within a few years Shelomo would be a powerful monarch capable of overcoming any internal enemies.
• David might have also recognized his son's extraordinary wisdom,⁵ and assumed that it would compensate for lack of experience or power.

"וְחָזַקְתָּ וְהָיִיתָ לְאִישׁ" – This approach might suggest that in these words David did not mean to imply that Shelomo was weak, but only to encourage him to be willing to take tough stances and act harshly when needed. Alternatively, as Radak suggests, David was speaking of spiritual strength, exhorting Shelomo to control his impulses and desires.  If so, these words connect to the Torah messages David imparted in his opening words rather than the political missions given afterwards..⁶

When did the assassinations take place? Though many assume that the elimination of Yoav and Shimi took place right after Shelomo took the throne, it is possible that the events of the chapter took place over several years,⁷ by which point Shelomo had consolidated more power.  If so, the events of the chapter overlap with those of coming chapters and are simply written here to finish the story of the establishment of Shelomo's reign.  Thus, the chapter ends: "וְהַמַּמְלָכָ֥ה נָכ֖וֹנָה בְּיַד־שְׁלֹמֹֽה".

Shelomo's explanation of the killing – When Shelomo eliminates Yoav and Shimi, he declares that he is doing so in retaliation for their crimes against David (rather than those committed against him),⁸ supporting the idea that Shelomo was, in fact, acting on David's behalf, completing what his father could not do in his lifetime.

From Strength to Weakness

As David was a strong king, he had no need to kill his opponents and could keep them in check without bloodshed.  Shelomo, though, was a young boy who would need to rid himself of any threats to his kingdom.

"שְׁלֹמֹה בְנִי נַעַר וָרָךְ" – This position finds support in David's description of Shelomo as a "young and tender boy". It might agree with Seder Olam Rabbah 14 that Shelomo was only twelve years old when taking the throne,⁹ not capable of holding opponents in check by his authority alone.  Shelomo's totally passive role during the rebellion of Adoniyahu further strengthens this portrait of a weak, inept king, not able to stand up to his enemies on his own.

"וְחָזַקְתָּ וְהָיִיתָ לְאִישׁ" – David feels the need to tells his son to "be strong," and "man-like" because he is as of yet neither.

David's strength – David, in contrast, became king at the age of 30, after having fought many battles and escaped numerous attempts on his life by Shaul.  He ascended the throne having had much experience in dealing with deceit, enemies, and power-plays. Moreover, as his reign progressed, he successfully defeated many external foes, giving him significant power.  Thus, he could afford to be merciful if he pleased, knowing that he was capable of taking care of whatever threats his opponents posed, even if he did not exterminate them.

"וְאָנֹכִי הַיּוֹם רַךְ וּמָשׁוּחַ מֶלֶךְ וְהָאֲנָשִׁים הָאֵלֶּה בְּנֵי צְרוּיָה קָשִׁים מִמֶּנִּי" – These words of David after Yoav's assassination of Avner are difficult for this position as they attest to the fact that David did not view himself as powerful enough to act against Yoav.  This approach might respond that this might have been true right after David became king, but as the years passed he gained significant power and could easily have put down whomever he wanted. David, however, never felt the need to do so, believing that his authority would suffice to keep foes in check.

Evidence of David's trust in Yoav – The fact that David asked Yoav to aid him in his killing of Uriah after his sin with Batsheva supports the idea that David was confident that Yoav was not to turn on him.

David's clemency to Shimi – David pardoned Shimi because he felt that after the unrest caused by Avshalom's rebellion, the nation would be better served if there were no more assassinations.  Had he been worried that Shimi would cause him any more trouble, he would have killed him regardless, but because he was confident that there was no need, he spared his life.

Yoav's participation in Adonyahu's rebellion – Yoav's participation in Adonyahu's rebellion would appear to prove that David was not, in fact, able to keep Yoav in check.  This position could respond that Yoav was only capable of threatening David at this stage because of David's frailty in his old age.  Moreover, this might have been exactly what alerted David to the fact that the weak Shelomo would surely need to exterminate his opponents.

"וְלֹא תוֹרֵד שֵׂיבָתוֹ בְּשָׁלֹם שְׁאֹל" / "וְהוֹרַדְתָּ אֶת שֵׂיבָתוֹ בְּדָם שְׁאוֹל" – This position, as above, does not differentiate between these terms, assuming that David was directing his son to kill both enemies.  David felt that only their deaths would give Shelomo the security he needed to reign unopposed.

"וְעָשִׂיתָ כְּחׇכְמָתֶךָ" – David told Shelomo to use his wisdom and cunning since he feared that in a pure power play, Shelomo might not be the victor. Shelomo's advantage lay in his wisdom.

"וַיָּשֶׂם דְּמֵי מִלְחָמָה בְּשָׁלֹם וַיִּתֵּן דְּמֵי מִלְחָמָה בַּחֲגֹרָתוֹ אֲשֶׁר בְּמׇתְנָיו" – This approach might agree with RashiMelakhim I 2:5-9About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki that these words betray the trickery used by Yoav in killing his enemies:

• "וַיָּשֶׂם דְּמֵי מִלְחָמָה בְּשָׁלֹם"  – Yoav allowed Avner and Amasa to think that he was at peace with them, so they were not wary around him.
• "בַּחֲגֹרָתוֹ אֲשֶׁר בְּמׇתְנָיו" – When killing Amasa, Yoav placed his sword in his belt in a manner which would allow it to fall so he could pick it up and use it without arousing suspicion.¹⁰
• "וּבְנַעֲלוֹ אֲשֶׁר בְּרַגְלָיו" – Yoav pretended to ask Avner a halakhic question regarding "חליצת הנעל" so that when Avner demonstrated the process, Yoav could easily attack.

David shares these details since he wants the inexperienced Shelomo to know what he is up against, and that he will need to pit his wiles against Yoav's deceit.

Why didn't David help his son? This position must explain why, if David thought that Yoav and Shimi were potential dangers to Shelomo, did he not take care of eliminating them himself, before he died?¹¹ It is possible that David would have liked to but practically could not:

• Regarding Shimi, David was hampered by his oath, which precluded him from killing him. 
• Regarding Yoav, David likely felt that after Yoav's backing of Adoniyahu, it would have been impossible to punish Yoav with death while still sparing Adoniyahu.¹²  As he was not ready to kill Adoniyahu, he needed to spare Yoav as well.

Change of Heart

During most of his reign, David intentionally maintained a policy of clemency towards his enemies, refusing to kill them. The stresses of the end of his life, however, hardened him, making him rethink this policy and instruct Shelomo to act differently.

Sources:Hoil MosheMelakhim I 2About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi

Why didn't David kill Yoav and Shimi? David's lenient attitude was part of a larger policy of forgiving or being merciful to his enemies. For example, despite Shaul's continuous attempts on his life, David refused to allow his men to kill Shaul.  Though Avner had backed Ishboshet, David willingly made peace with him. Similarly, though Amasa served as Avshalom's general-in-chief, David not only forgave him, but even appointed him as his own general.  Thus, the fact that he did not originally desire the deaths of Yoav and Shimi was not out of character.

Why be merciful? Hoil Moshe suggests that David's merciful attitude was purely altruistic, but one could also suggest that David's goals were practical.  He felt that a policy of co-opting his enemies by rewarding them served him better.

"וְאָנֹכִי הַיּוֹם רַךְ וּמָשׁוּחַ מֶלֶךְ" – Hoil Moshe claims that in these words David is not suggesting that he was too young or inexperienced to kill Yoav, since after all he was already 37.¹³  Rather, David was saying that he was too soft-hearted [רַךְ] to do so.

"הַיּוֹם יוּמַת אִישׁ בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל כִּי הֲלוֹא יָדַעְתִּי כִּי הַיּוֹם אֲנִי מֶלֶךְ" – This retort of David to Avishai (who preferred Shimi to be killed) expresses David's merciful bent. Once David was re-instated as king, he held no grudge against Shimi, and was willing to spare his life.

What changed? Hoil Moshe suggests that the stresses that David faced at the end of his life changed and hardened him. He does not specify which hardships affected David in this manner, but is likely referring to the continuous rebellions that plagued the kingdom in its final years.¹⁴  These might have made David question how lenient one can afford to be to your enemies.

"וְחָזַקְתָּ וְהָיִיתָ לְאִישׁ" – With these words, David tells Shelomo to act as had not - to be strong and harsh when called for.

Why not deal with Yoav and Shimi himself? It is possible that David's change of heart came when he was already on his death-bed, and no longer capable of dealing with his opponents.

"שְׁלֹמֹה בְנִי נַעַר וָרָךְ" – Hoil Moshe assumes that Shelomo was relatively young, but no longer a teenager, and thus fully capable of punishing his opponents. Moreover, his authority did not come from age but rather from his position as king. David, thus, had no reason to think that Shelomo would not be up to the job.

Evaluating David's command – The Hoil Moshe views David's change of heart and directive negatively, even suggesting that David's decision and its record in Tanakh is evidence that Tanakh does not hide the foibles of Biblical heroes from its readers. One might, however, suggest the exact opposite. Perhaps the new, harsh policy was the better one, and from the beginning David should not have had mercy on his opponents but rather punished them immediately.

No Change

David's instructions to Shelomo were not a request to exterminate his enemies, and did not reflect a reversal of the policies of his own reign. He was simply warning his son to be wary of potential political opponents.

Sources:AbarbanelMelakhim I 2About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel, MalbimMelakhim I 2:5-6Melakhim I 2:8-8About R. Meir Leibush Weiser

No double standards – Abarbanel brings two arguments to prove that David could not have been asking Shelomo to kill his old opponents for their crimes against him:

• Shelomo's inexperience – He points out that since Shelomo was still an inexperienced king,¹⁵ in the same position that David himself had been when Yoav killed Avner, it does not make sense that David would have instructed him to do what he himself had been loathe to do under the same circumstances.
• Oath to Shimi still binding – He further points out that asking Shelomo to kill Shimi would be reneging on his oath.  The fact that the death would be by proxy would not absolve David of guilt.

"אֵת אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה לִי יוֹאָב" – David tells Shelomo to remember what Yoav "had done to him" not so that Shelomo would feel a need to avenge his father's honor, but purely to alert him to Yoav's past misdeeds and the need to tread carefully around him.

"...וַיָּשֶׂם דְּמֵי מִלְחָמָה בְּשָׁלֹם וַיִּתֵּן דְּמֵי מִלְחָמָה בַּחֲגֹרָתוֹ" – In these words, David warns Shelomo about what type of person Yoav really is:

• "וַיָּשֶׂם דְּמֵי מִלְחָמָה בְּשָׁלֹם" – Yoav is a trickster who pretends to be at peace, when his intention is really to kill. The phrase "וַיָּשֶׂם דְּמֵי מִלְחָמָה בְּשָׁלֹם" means that Yoav's spilling of blood was an action worthy of doing only in wartime, against an enemy, yet he did so against those with whom he was supposedly at peace.  David, thus, warns Shelomo to be careful in his interactions with Yoav, and to be fully cognizant of his potential for deceit .
• "וַיִּתֵּן דְּמֵי מִלְחָמָה בַּחֲגֹרָתוֹ" – David shares that Yoav had put the blood of Avner and Amsa on his belt and shoe for all to see to teach Shelomo that Yoav is someone who gloats over his evil deeds, as if they were worthy of emulation.

"וְהִנֵּה עִמְּךָ שִׁמְעִי בֶן גֵּרָא... וָאֶשָּׁבַע לוֹ בַי"י" – As above, David tells Shelomo about his oath to Shimi to ensure that he understood Shimi's true character and would thus be cautious when dealing with him.  When Shimi returned as "the first of the house of Yosef" after Avshalom's rebellion, he was ostensibly expressing his remorse for his earlier curse. In reality, though, he was blackmailing David, intimating that if David did not forgive him, he would ensure that Israel not resume their allegiance.

"וְלֹא תוֹרֵד שֵׂיבָתוֹ בְּשָׁלֹם שְׁאֹל" – Abarbanel reinterprets this phrase, claiming that it does not mean that Shelomo should kill Yoav but that the two should not sit in peace with each other. In other words, David tells Shelomo to exile (rather than kill) Yoav, and thereby eliminate any threat he might represent.

"אַל תְּנַקֵּהוּ.. וְהוֹרַדְתָּ אֶת שֵׂיבָתוֹ בְּדָם שְׁאוֹל" – These words are difficult for this approach as they imply that David was, in fact, requesting that Shelomo kill Shimi for his previous treason.  Abarbanel and Malbim, thus, explain that David is not speaking of the past, but only warning Shelomo that if Shimi acts similarly under Shelomo's reign, then "do not hold him guiltless..." but kill him if necessary.¹⁶

Shelomo's explanation of his actions – When killing both Yoav and Shimi, Shelomo alludes to their crimes against David,¹⁷ suggesting that, contrary to the claims of this approach, he was indeed punishing them for those sins and not for their actions against him personally. 

• Excuse for Benayahu – Abarbanel addresses the issue only by Yoav and suggests that Shelomo's words were addressed specifically to Benayahu who was uncomfortable killing Yoav by the altar.  Shelomo, thus, comforted him pointing out that Yoav was culpable on multiple fronts, not just for backing Adoniyahu, but also for having intentionally killed innocents regarding which the Torah itself states "וְכִי יָזִד אִישׁ עַל רֵעֵהוּ לְהׇרְגוֹ בְעׇרְמָה מֵעִם מִזְבְּחִי תִּקָּחֶנּוּ לָמוּת" (Shemot 24:14).
• Shelomo deviated from David's will – This position could also respond that despite David not requesting their deaths, Shelomo, on his own, felt a need to avenge his father's honor.  Thus, he went beyond his father's exhortations and when the opportunity arose, he made sure to kill his opponents¹⁸ and declare that he was punishing them not only for their disloyalty to him but also for their prior deeds.

¹ See Shemuel II 3:39.

² See Shemuel II Chapters 5, 8, and 10.

³ See Abarbanel below who posits that Shimi was effectively blackmailing David into forgiving him and David recognized that if he wanted the backing of Beit Yosef he would need to forgive Shimi.

⁴ The same was true after Avshalom's rebellion. Though David was upset about Yoav's having killed Avshalom, he could not afford to punish Yoav for the act.

⁵ Even though Hashem only granted Shelomo his great wisdom afterwards, David's double reference to "acting in your wisdom" (Melakhim II 2:6 and 9) suggests that even beforehand Shelomo was gifted.

⁶ As these words precede David's warning regarding Torah observance, it is logical that they too refer to the spiritual content of David's testament.

⁷ By Shimi it is explicit that at least three years had passed before he violated Shelomo's command (Melakhim I 2:39).

⁸ See Melakhim I 2:31-33 and Melakhim I 2:44.

⁹ See also RashiMelakhim I 3:7About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, R. Yosef KaraMelakhim I 3:7About R. Yosef Kara and RadakMelakhim I 3:7About R. David Kimchi who follow Seder Olam Rabbah.

¹⁰ Rashi points to Shemuel II 20:8 which says that when Yoav greeted Amasa "וְעָלָו חֲגוֹר חֶרֶב מְצֻמֶּדֶת עַל מׇתְנָיו בְּתַעְרָהּ וְהוּא יָצָא וַתִּפֹּל".  He understands that "וַתִּפֹּל" refers to the sword which intentionally "fell".

¹¹ See how David prepares blueprints for the Beit HaMIkdash before his death, assuming that Shelomo is too young to do so on his own. See Divrei HaYamim I 22:5: וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִיד שְׁלֹמֹה בְנִי נַעַר וָרָךְ וְהַבַּיִת לִבְנוֹת לַי"י לְהַגְדִּיל לְמַעְלָה לְשֵׁם וּלְתִפְאֶרֶת לְכׇל הָאֲרָצוֹת אָכִינָה נָּא לוֹ וַיָּכֶן דָּוִיד לָרֹב לִפְנֵי מוֹתוֹ.

¹² As Adoniyahu was the one usurping the throne it would be hypocritical to spare him, while killing Yoav.

¹³ From Shemuel II 5:4-5 we know that David was 30 when he began to reign and that he was king in Chevron for seven years before making the treaty with Avner.

¹⁴ It is not clear exactly when Avshalom rebelled since the verse which dates the event states only, "וַיְהִי מִקֵּץ אַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה" without explaining from what the forty years are being counted.  Nonetheless it would seem to be towards the end of David's reign.  If so, in the last few years of David's life he had to deal with the attempted coups of Avshalom, Sheva b. Bichri and Adoniyahu.  The three events might have easily convinced someone that political opponents need to be eliminated.

¹⁵ Abarbanel does not maintain that Shelomo was particularly young, only that he was still new to the throne. He suggests that Shelomo's being "נַעַר וָרָךְ" is equivalent to David's being "רַךְ וּמָשׁוּחַ מֶלֶךְ".  Though both were adults when they began to reign, neither had yet reached a position of strength.

¹⁶ This, though is not explicit in the verse, and necessitates adding in several words to the verse, as is evident from Malbim's paraphrase: "ועתה אם יחטא לך אל תנקהו, כי איש חכם אתה וידעת את אשר תעשה לו לנסותו אם פי מלך ישמור כראוי ואם רעה תמצא בו והורדת את שיבתו בדם שאול".

¹⁷ See his speech to Benayahu when killing Yoav:  "וְהֵשִׁיב י"י אֶת דָּמוֹ עַל רֹאשׁוֹ אֲשֶׁר פָּגַע בִּשְׁנֵי אֲנָשִׁים צַדִּקִים וְטֹבִים מִמֶּנּוּ וַיַּהַרְגֵם בַּחֶרֶב וְאָבִי דָוִד לֹא יָדָע אֶת אַבְנֵר בֶּן נֵר שַׂר צְבָא יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאֶת עֲמָשָׂא בֶן יֶתֶר" (Melakhim I 2:32) and his words to Shimi himself upon killing him:  "אַתָּה יָדַעְתָּ אֵת כׇּל הָרָעָה אֲשֶׁר יָדַע לְבָבְךָ אֲשֶׁר עָשִׂיתָ לְדָוִד אָבִי וְהֵשִׁיב י"י אֶת רָעָתְךָ בְּרֹאשֶׁךָ" (Melakhim I 2:44)

¹⁸ See Chaim Gevaryahu, "ברית דוד ואבנר וגורלו של שר הצבא יואב" in ספר שמואל ייבין; מחקרים במקרא, ארכיאולוגיה, לשון ותולדות ישראל  (Jerusalem, 1970): 140-156, who makes this point.