Parashat Hashavua: Rachel, Leah, and King David – What Happened? – part III | Rabbi Yossef Carmel | Beit Midrash

Beit Midrash

Sections
Chemdat Yamim
Parashat Hashavua

קטגוריה משנית

Torah Portion and Tanach
Shmot
Yitro

Female Lesson Parashat Hashavua Series'Library Piskei Din (Hebrew)Test Yourself

We continue to focus on the importance of unity between the offspring of Rachel and of Leah and continue with David’s attempts at helping create it. We saw that there was hope of unity in the leadership with Yonatan and with his wife Michal, both children of Shaul, but that neither worked, for very different reasons.
Going back to the aftermath of the death of Shaul and Yonatan on Mt. Gilboa, Avner, Shaul’s cousin, and Ish Boshet, Shaul’s weak son, were both killed. What was left of the family was Yonatan’s son M’fiboshet. M’fiboshet could have represented the children of Rachel in a supportive role for David, the descendant of Leah.
Let us remember who M’fiboshet was. When word came back that Shaul and Yonatan had fallen in battle, M’fiboshet’s nanny fled in panic with him, and in the process M’fiboshet fell and was crippled (Shmuel II, 4:4). M’fiboshet was hidden east of the Jordan to protect him from the Plishtim and perhaps, unnecessarily, from David. Actually, when David removed the threat of the Plishtim and entered Yerushalayim, he tried to ascertain what happened to the remnants of Yonatan’s family, and he looked to return the favor of Yonatan’s kindness (ibid. 9:1).
With this in mind, David met with Tziva, the custodian of Shaul’s estate. David asked him who from the family was left to whom David could be kind (ibid. 3). However, Tziva wanted to maintain control of the estate and therefore used two pieces of negative characterization to keep M’fiboshet from getting close to David. He stressed that M’fiboshet was crippled, implying that he was incapable of being a partner in David’s leadership, as the cornerstone of a leader is to be able to lead men into battle. (We note that even in 20th century America, President Roosevelt went to great lengths to hide his physical disability.)
The second thing is that Tziva said that M’fiboshet was in "Lo Davar." The gemara (Shabbat 56a) says that Tziva was playing a word game to convince David that there was nothing redeeming about M’fiboshet. Tziva continued with various lies about M’fiboshet’s alleged disloyalty, until finally David concluded that M’fiboshet and Tziva would split the estate (ibid. 19:30). Hashem saw this acceptance of lashon hara about M’fiboshet as a betrayal on the part of David. The gemara tells that at the moment that David decreed that Shaul’s estate would be divided, a heavenly voice announced that Rachavam (David’s grandson) and Yeravam would split the Kingdom of Israel. This lashon hara, thus concluded the gemara, caused a diminished kingdom and eventually our exile from the Land.
Indeed, the result of disunity is exile and destruction. We should remember that!

Yitro

Parashat Hashavua