Difference between revisions of "David and Batsheva/2"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
This topic has not yet undergone editorial review
| Line 22: | Line 22: | ||
</category> | </category> | ||
<category>Not Guilty of Adultery or Murder | <category>Not Guilty of Adultery or Murder | ||
| − | <p><multilink><a href="BavliShabbat56a-56b" data-aht="source">Bavli Shabbat</a><a href="BavliShabbat56a-56b" data-aht="source">Shabbat 56a-56b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RidShemuelII12-4" data-aht="source">Rid</a><a href="RidShemuelII12-4" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 12:4</a><a href="R. Yeshayah of Trani (Rid)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yeshayah of Trani</a></multilink>, R. Yaakov Fidanque, <multilink><a href="MalbimShemuelII11" data-aht="source">Malbim</a><a href="MalbimShemuelII11" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 11</a><a href="MalbimShemuelII12" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 12</a><a href="R. Meir Leibush Weiser (Malbim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Meir Leibush Weiser</a></multilink>, | + | <p><multilink><a href="BavliShabbat56a-56b" data-aht="source">Bavli Shabbat</a><a href="BavliShabbat56a-56b" data-aht="source">Shabbat 56a-56b</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RidShemuelII12-4" data-aht="source">Rid</a><a href="RidShemuelII12-4" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 12:4</a><a href="R. Yeshayah of Trani (Rid)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yeshayah of Trani</a></multilink>, R. Yaakov Fidanque, <multilink><a href="MalbimShemuelII11" data-aht="source">Malbim</a><a href="MalbimShemuelII11" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 11</a><a href="MalbimShemuelII12" data-aht="source">Shemuel II 12</a><a href="R. Meir Leibush Weiser (Malbim)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Meir Leibush Weiser</a></multilink>,</p> |
<mekorot>Though David's actions deserved a measure of censure, he did not violate the Biblical prohibitions of adultery or murder.</mekorot> | <mekorot>Though David's actions deserved a measure of censure, he did not violate the Biblical prohibitions of adultery or murder.</mekorot> | ||
| − | <point><b> | + | <point><b>Batsheva was not legally married</b> – This position asserts that David did not commit adultery since Batsheva did not have marital status when he slept with her.  The approach has two variations: |
<ul> | <ul> | ||
| − | <li><b>Full divorce</b> – According to <a href="TosafotKetubot9b" data-aht="source">R. Tam</a> and R. Yaakov Fidanque, marriages were dissolved as soon as the husband left to war.  If so, when David approached Batsheva she was no longer a married woman and there was no possible issue of adultery.</li> | + | <li><b> Divorced</b> – According to R. Yonatan in the Bavli and the rest of these sources, in David's era anyone who went to battle divorced their wives so as to prevent them from becoming a "chained woman" (עגונה) if the soldier were not to return from war.  The sources disagree regarding the nature of the divorce and when that status was conferred:</li> |
| − | <li><b>Conditional</b> –  According to Rashi and the Rid, in contrast, the divorces were conditional on the husband not returning home.  As such, when David slept with Batsheva her status was unknown, and it was only after Uriah's death that she was retroactively considered divorced.  </li> | + | </ul> |
| + | <ul> | ||
| + | <ul> | ||
| + | <li><b>Full divorce</b> – According to <a href="TosafotKetubot9b" data-aht="source">R. Tam</a> and R. Yaakov Fidanque, marriages were dissolved as soon as the husband left to war.  If so, when David approached Batsheva she was no longer a married woman and there was no possible issue of adultery.  The sin lay in the fact that David knew that the divorce was given only for technical reasons and that under other circumstances the couple would have stayed married. </li> | ||
| + | <li><b>Conditional</b> –  According to Rashi and the Rid, in contrast, the divorces were conditional on the husband not returning home.  As such, when David slept with Batsheva her status was unknown, and it was only after Uriah's death that she was retroactively considered divorced. This understanding absolves David of technical guilt, but leaves his actions as still very problematic from a moral perspective.</li> | ||
| + | </ul> | ||
| + | <li><b>Illegitimate marriage</b> – Alternatively, this approach could posit that Uriah was not Jewish as his epithet  "the Hittite" implies. If so, Batsheva was never legally married to him and in taking her David was not committing adultery.</li> | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
| − | <point><b>"וַיִּשְׁלַח דָּוִד וַיִּדְרֹשׁ לָאִשָּׁה"</b> – Malbim suggests that the phrase "וַיִּדְרֹשׁ לָאִשָּׁה" means that David was seeking to know not the identity of | + | <point><b>Rebuke via parable</b> – The Rid questions why Natan would bring a parable to rebuke David rather than simply accuse him of adultery if that was the sin.  R. Medan points out that the very method chosen to chastise the king proves that the crime was not self-evident.</point> |
| + | <point><b>"וַיִּקַּח אֶת כִּבְשַׂת הָאִישׁ הָרָאשׁ"</b> – Natan's parable does not contain an explicit parallel to adultery, focusing instead on the taking advantage of a poor man, by taking his lamb.  R. Medan points to this as further evidence that David's sin lay in taking advantage of another, rather than sleeping with a married woman.</point> | ||
| + | <point><b>How can David stay married to Batsheva?</b> This question is one of the main motivations behind this position's reading of the story.  Had David committed adultery, Batsheva should have been prohibited to him.  It would be illogical for him to repent while staying married to her.  Moreover, it would mean that Shelomo, the next king, was illegitimate.</point> | ||
| + | <point><b>"וַיִּשְׁלַח דָּוִד וַיִּדְרֹשׁ לָאִשָּׁה"</b> – Malbim suggests that the phrase "וַיִּדְרֹשׁ לָאִשָּׁה" means that David was seeking to know not the identity of Batsheva, but her marital status, (whether she was someone who had been given a divorce from her husband).</point> | ||
<point><b>Batsheva's role</b></point> | <point><b>Batsheva's role</b></point> | ||
| + | <point><b>"וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד לְאוּרִיָּה רֵד לְבֵיתְךָ"</b> – This approach must explain why David deemed this necessary or wise. If Batsheva had no married status, then David should not have felt the need to cover anything up. If her status was in doubt due to the conditional nature of the divorce, then would not inviting Uriah to sleep with his wife ensure that she was in fact married retroactively?<fn>Malbim suggests that when David discovered that Batsheva was pregnant, he realized that despite his not having technically done anything wrong, his actions would be viewed negatively and might even cause rebellion in the nation. To prevent this he invited Uriah home to hide the deed, knowing that this was at the expense of his transgressing the prohibition of adultery.</fn></point> | ||
| + | <point><b>Uriah's death</b><ul> | ||
| + | <li>Rebellious</li> | ||
| + | <li>Legitimate war casualty</li> | ||
| + | <li>No messenger for transgressions</li> | ||
| + | </ul></point> | ||
</category> | </category> | ||
<category>Guilty of Murder but not Adultery | <category>Guilty of Murder but not Adultery | ||
Version as of 13:49, 19 March 2017
David and Batsheva
Exegetical Approaches
Guilty of Adultery and Murder
David sinned egregiously, committing both adultery and murder.
"וַיִּשְׁלַח דָּוִד וַיִּדְרֹשׁ לָאִשָּׁה"
Batsheva's role
וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד לְאוּרִיָּה רֵד לְבֵיתְךָ
וַאדֹנִי יוֹאָב
Natan's parable
Punishment
חָטָאתִי לַי"י
רַק בִּדְבַר אוּרִיָּה הַחִתִּי
How can David stay married to Batsheva?
Why did he merit dynastic rule?
Not Guilty of Adultery or Murder
Bavli Shabbat, Rid, R. Yaakov Fidanque, Malbim,
Sources:Though David's actions deserved a measure of censure, he did not violate the Biblical prohibitions of adultery or murder.
Batsheva was not legally married – This position asserts that David did not commit adultery since Batsheva did not have marital status when he slept with her. The approach has two variations:
- Divorced – According to R. Yonatan in the Bavli and the rest of these sources, in David's era anyone who went to battle divorced their wives so as to prevent them from becoming a "chained woman" (עגונה) if the soldier were not to return from war. The sources disagree regarding the nature of the divorce and when that status was conferred:
- Full divorce – According to R. Tam and R. Yaakov Fidanque, marriages were dissolved as soon as the husband left to war. If so, when David approached Batsheva she was no longer a married woman and there was no possible issue of adultery. The sin lay in the fact that David knew that the divorce was given only for technical reasons and that under other circumstances the couple would have stayed married.
- Conditional – According to Rashi and the Rid, in contrast, the divorces were conditional on the husband not returning home. As such, when David slept with Batsheva her status was unknown, and it was only after Uriah's death that she was retroactively considered divorced. This understanding absolves David of technical guilt, but leaves his actions as still very problematic from a moral perspective.
- Illegitimate marriage – Alternatively, this approach could posit that Uriah was not Jewish as his epithet "the Hittite" implies. If so, Batsheva was never legally married to him and in taking her David was not committing adultery.
Rebuke via parable – The Rid questions why Natan would bring a parable to rebuke David rather than simply accuse him of adultery if that was the sin. R. Medan points out that the very method chosen to chastise the king proves that the crime was not self-evident.
"וַיִּקַּח אֶת כִּבְשַׂת הָאִישׁ הָרָאשׁ" – Natan's parable does not contain an explicit parallel to adultery, focusing instead on the taking advantage of a poor man, by taking his lamb. R. Medan points to this as further evidence that David's sin lay in taking advantage of another, rather than sleeping with a married woman.
How can David stay married to Batsheva? This question is one of the main motivations behind this position's reading of the story. Had David committed adultery, Batsheva should have been prohibited to him. It would be illogical for him to repent while staying married to her. Moreover, it would mean that Shelomo, the next king, was illegitimate.
"וַיִּשְׁלַח דָּוִד וַיִּדְרֹשׁ לָאִשָּׁה" – Malbim suggests that the phrase "וַיִּדְרֹשׁ לָאִשָּׁה" means that David was seeking to know not the identity of Batsheva, but her marital status, (whether she was someone who had been given a divorce from her husband).
Batsheva's role
"וַיֹּאמֶר דָּוִד לְאוּרִיָּה רֵד לְבֵיתְךָ" – This approach must explain why David deemed this necessary or wise. If Batsheva had no married status, then David should not have felt the need to cover anything up. If her status was in doubt due to the conditional nature of the divorce, then would not inviting Uriah to sleep with his wife ensure that she was in fact married retroactively?1
Uriah's death
- Rebellious
- Legitimate war casualty
- No messenger for transgressions
Guilty of Murder but not Adultery
Ralbag
