[Avodah] Freedom of exegesive interpretation

[Yitzhak Grossman]

On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 19:42:08 +0100
Arie Folger <afolger at aishdas.org> wrote:

[snip]

> For example, did David haMelekh commit adultery, or was she
divorced at the 
> time? According to the gemara that say that kol ha'omer shedavid chatah eino 
> elah to'eh, David was technically saved from adultery. However, according to 
> this TYT, you could disagree.

The Abarbanel [0] does indeed vigorously reject Hazal's interpretation,
insisting that the narrative means exactly what it says.  He
painstakingly explicates (his view of) the enormity of David's various
sins, then cites Hazal's comments on the affair [1], and then proceeds
to sharply rebut them:

--- Begin Quote ---

These comments of our sages z"l are in the way of 'drash' and I have
nothing to say against them.  It is sufficient what they have said
"Rabbi who descends from David is "m'ha'peich b'zchusei", for this was
to them the way of 'drash', and Rabbi was "m'hapeich b'davar" because of
his connection and his descent from the house of David, but not
according to the truth.

And how can we say that David wanted to act but did not act?  And the
scripture explicitly testifies about the entire evil affair, and if
David did not sin, how did he say "I have sinned to God"? ...

And so I cannot tolerate a lenient approach to David's sin, and I will
not deny the simple truth, ...

Ultimately, if scripture calls him a sinner and he confessed his sin,
how shall someone err [2] by believing him?  I prefer to say that he
sinned greatly and confessed greatly and repented a complete repentance
and accepted [3] his punishment and thereby atoned for his sins.

--- End Quote ---

[0] Sh'muel 2:11
[1] Shabbos 56a
[2] a retort to Hazal's comment cited above by RAF
[3] or received, "v'kibbel"


> Arie Folger

Yitzhak
--
Bein Din Ledin - bdl.freehostia.com
An advanced discussion of Hoshen Mishpat