Bible Commentaries

Whilst Saul had gone against the Philistines, David left this dangerousplace, and went to the mountain heights of Engedi, i.e., the present Ain-jidy (goat-fountain), in the middle of the western coats of the Dead Sea(see at Joshua 15:62), which he could reach from Maon in six or seven hours. The soil of the neighbourhood consists entirely of limestone; but the rockscontain a considerable admixture of chalk and flint. Round about there risebare conical mountains, and even ridges of from two to four hundred feetin height, which mostly run down to the sea. The steep mountains areintersected by wadys running down in deep ravines to the sea. “On allsides the country is full of caverns, which might then serve as lurking-places for David and his men, as they do for outlaws at the present day”(Rob. Pal. p. 203)

1 Samuel 24:1-2

When Saul had returned from his march against the Philistines,and was informed of this, he set out thither with three thousand pickedmen to search for David and his men in the wild-goat rocks. Theexpression “rocks of the wild goats” is probably not a proper name forsome particular rocks, but a general term applied to the rocks of thatlocality on account of the number of wild goats and chamois that were tobe found in all that region, as mountain goats are still (Rob. Pal. ii. p. 204).

1 Samuel 24:3

When Saul came to the sheep-folds by the way, where there wasa cave, he entered it to cover his feet, whilst David and his men sat behindin the cave. V. de Velde (R. ii. p. 74) supposes the place, where the sheep-folds by the roadside were, to have been the Wady Chareitun, on thesouth-west of the Frank mountain, and to the north-east of Tekoah, a verydesolate and inaccessible valley. “Rocky, precipitous walls, which rise upone above another for many hundred feet, form the sides of this defile. Stone upon stone, and cliff above cliff, without any sign of being habitable,or of being capable of affording even a halting-place to anything but wildgoats.” Near the ruins of the village of Chareitun, hardly five minutes' walkto the east, there is a large cave or chamber in the rock, with a very narrowentrance entirely concealed by stones, and with many side vaults in whichthe deepest darkness reigns, at least to any one who has just entered thelimestone vaults from the dazzling light of day. It may be argued in favour of the conjecture that this is the cave whichSaul entered, and at the back of which David and his men were concealed,that this cave is on the road from Bethlehem to Ain-jidy, and one of thelargest caves in that district, if not the largest of all, and that, according toPococke (Beschr. des Morgenl. ii. p. 61), the Franks call it a labyrinth, theArabs Elmaama, i.e., hiding-place, whilst the latter relate how at one timethirty thousand people hid themselves in it “to escape an evil wind,” in allprobability the simoom. The only difficulty connected with thissupposition is the distance from Ain-jidy, namely about four or fiveGerman miles (fifteen or twenty English), and the nearness of Tekoah,according to which it belongs to the desert of Tekoah rather than to that ofEngedi. “To cover his feet” is a euphemism according to most of theancient versions, as in Judges 3:24, for performing the necessities of nature,as it is a custom in the East to cover the feet. It does not mean “to sleep,”as it is rendered in this passage in the Peschito, and also by Michaelis andothers; for although what follows may seem to favour this, there isapparently no reason why any such euphemistic expression should havebeen chosen for sleep. “The sides of the cave:” i.e., the outermost orfarthest sides.

1 Samuel 24:4

Then David's men said to him, “See, this is the day of whichJehovah hath said to thee, Behold, I give thine enemy into thy hand, anddo to him what seemeth good to thee.” Although these words might referto some divine oracle which David had received through a prophet, Gadfor example, what follows clearly shows that David had received no suchoracle; and the meaning of his men was simply this, “Behold, to-day is theday when God is saying to thee:” that is to say, the speakers regarded theleadings of providence by which Saul had been brought into David's poweras a divine intimation to David himself to take this opportunity of slayinghis deadly enemy, and called this intimation a word of Jehovah. Davidthen rose, up, and cut off the edge of Saul's cloak privily. Saul hadprobably laid the meil on one side, which rendered it possible for David tocut off a piece of it unobserved.

1 Samuel 24:5

But his heart smote him after he had done it; i.e., his consciencereproached him, because he regarded this as an injury done to the kinghimself.

1 Samuel 24:6

With all the greater firmness, therefore, did he repel thesuggestions of his men: “Far be it to me from Jehovah (on Jehovah'saccount: see at Joshua 22:29), that (אם, a particle denoting an oath) Ishould do such a thing to my lord, the anointed of Jehovah, to stretch outmy hand against him.” These words of David show clearly enough that noword of Jehovah had come to him to do as he liked with Saul.

1 Samuel 24:7

Thus he kept back his people with words (שׁסּע, verbis dilacere),and did not allow them to rise up against Saul, sc., to slay him.

But when Saul had gone out of the cave, David went out, and called, “Mylord king,” that when the king looked round he might expostulate with him,with the deepest reverence, but yet with earnest words, that shouldsharpen his conscience as to the unfounded nature of his suspicion and theinjustice of his persecution. “Why dost thou hearken to words of men,who say, Behold, David seeketh thy hurt? Behold, this day thine eyeshave been that Jehovah hath given thee to-day into my hand in the cave,and they said (אמר, thought) to kill thee, and I spared thee:” lit. it(mine eye) spared thee (cf. Genesis 45:20; Deuteronomy 7:16, etc., which show thatעיני is to be supplied).

To confirm what he said, he then showed him the lappet of his coat whichhe had cut off, and said, “My father, see.” In these words there is anexpression of the childlike reverence and affection which David cherishedtowards the anointed of the Lord. “For that I cut off the lappet and did notkill thee, learn and see (from this) that (there is) not evil in my hand (i.e.,that I do not go about for the purpose of injury and crime), and that I havenot sinned against thee, as thou nevertheless layest wait for my soul todestroy it.”

After he had proved to the king in this conclusive manner that he had noreason whatever for seeking his life, he invoked the Lord as judge betweenhim and his adversary: “Jehovah will avenge me upon thee, but my handwill not be against thee. As the proverb of the ancients (הקּדמוני is used collectively) says, Evil proceedeth from the evil, but myhand shall not be upon thee.” The meaning is this: Only a wicked mancould wish to avenge himself; I do not.

And even if he should wish to attack the king, he did not possess thepower. This thought introduces 1 Samuel 24:14: “After whom is the king of Israelgone out? After whom dost thou pursue? A dead dog, a single flea.” Bythese similes David meant to describe himself as a perfectly harmless andinsignificant man, of whom Saul had no occasion to be afraid, and whomthe king of Israel ought to think it beneath his dignity to pursue. A deaddog cannot bite or hurt, and is an object about which a king ought not totrouble himself (cf. 2 Samuel 9:8 and 2 Samuel 16:9, where the idea of somethingcontemptible is included). The point of comparison with a flea is theinsignificance of such an animal (cf. 1 Samuel 26:20).

As Saul had therefore no good ground for persecuting David, the lattercould very calmly commit his cause to the Lord God, that He might decideit as judge, and deliver him out of the hand of Saul: “Let Him look at it, andconduct my cause,” etc.

These words made an impression upon Saul. David's conduct went to hisheart, so that he wept aloud, and confessed to him: “Thou art morerighteous than I, for thou hast shown me good, and I (have shown) theeevil; and thou hast given me a proof of this to-day.”

“If a man meet with his enemy, will he send him (let him go) in peace?”This sentence is to be regarded as a question, which requires a negativereply, and expresses the thought: When a man meets with an enemy, hedoes not generally let him escape without injury. But thou hast acted verydifferently towards me. This thought is easily supplied from the context,and what follows attaches itself to this: “The Lord repay thee good forwhat thou hast done to me this day.”

This wish was expressed in perfect sincerity. David's behaviour towardshim had conquered for the moment the evil demon of his heart, andcompletely altered his feelings. In this better state of mind he felt impelledeven to give utterance to these words, “I know that thou wilt be king, andthe sovereignty will have perpetuity in thy hand.” Saul could not preventthis conviction from forcing itself upon him, after his own rejection andthe failure of all that he attempted against David; and it was this whichdrove him to persecute David whenever the evil spirit had the upper handin his soul. But now that better feelings had arisen in his mind, he utteredit without envy, and merely asked David to promise on oath that he wouldnot cut off his descendants after his death, and seek to exterminate hisname from his father's house. A name is exterminated when the whole ofthe descendants are destroyed, - a thing of frequent occurrence in the East inconnection with a change of dynasties, and one which occurred again andagain even in the kingdom of the ten tribes (vid., 1 Kings 15:28., 1 Samuel 16:11.; 2 Kings 10).

When David had sworn this, Saul returned home. But David remainedupon the mountain heights, because he did not regard the passing change inSaul's feelings as likely to continue. המּצוּדה (translated “thehold”) is used here to denote the mountainous part of the desert of Judah. It is different in 1 Samuel 22:5.