Midrash sobre II Samuel 13:40

He (the king) must not marry more than eighteen wives. Whence is it deduced? From (II Sam. 3, 2-5) And unto David were born sons in Hebron; and his first-born was Ammon, of Achinoam the Zezreelitess; and his second, Chileab, of Abigail, the wife of Nebal the Carmelite; and the third, Abshalom, the son of Maachah, the daughter of Thalmai the king of Geshur; and the fourth, Adonijah, the son of Chaggith; and the fifth, Shepliatiah, the son of Abital: and the sixth, Ithream by Eglah, David's wife. These were born to David in Hebron. And the prophet said (Ib., ib. 12, 8) And if that were too little, then would I add unto thee so much more like these, and like these. Now let us see! The number of the wives mentioned in the Scriptures is six. Like this, is six more; and again, like this, is again six more, of which the total is eighteen. But Michal was also his wife, [and why was she not mentioned]. Rab said: "Eglah is the same as Michal. And why was she named Eglah? Because she was beloved to him just as a calf is beloved to its mother." And so also reads the passage (Judges 14, 18) And he said unto them, if he had not ploughed with my calf, etc. But had, then, Michal children? Is it not written (II Sam. 6, 23) And Michal the daughter of Saul had no child until the day of her death? Said R. Chisda: "Prior to that incident she did have a child, but after that incident she did not have a child." But is it not written (Ib. 5, 13) And David took yet more concubines and wives out of Jerusalem. Hence it is to be supposed that he married more? This was to fulfill the number of eighteen. What are wives, and what are concubines? R. Juda said: "Wives are married by betrothal and marriage contract; concubines are wihtout both of these." R. Juda said in the name of Rab: "Four hundred children were born to David by the handsome captives. They had long locks and sat in golden coaches. They were placed with the chief officers of the military, and were the men of power of the house of David." R. Juda said again: "Thamar was a daughter of one of the [above-mentioned] handsome women, as it is said (II Sam. 13, 13) But now, O speak, I pray thee, unto the king; for he will not withhold me from thee. And if she were really his daughter, how could she say that the king would allow a sister to marry her brother? Infer from this, that she was one of the children born of one of the [above-mentioned] handsome women." (Ib. 13, 3) But Annon had a friend … and Jonadab was a very shrewd man. Said R. Juda in the name of Rab: "A shrewd man to do evil."

“Anger is better than laughter, as with a cross countenance the heart will be bettered” (Ecclesiastes 7:3).
“Anger is better than laughter.” Solomon said: Had [my] father been a little angry at Adoniya, it would have been better for him than the laughter with which the attribute of justice mocked him. Why? It is because “with a cross countenance the heart will be bettered.” Had he shown him a cross countenance, he would have caused him to better his ways. Instead, “his father had never aggrieved him” (I Kings 1:6).³⁸Ultimately, this lead to Adoniya’s attempt to sieze power, and his eventual death. See I Kings chapters 1–2. Likewise regarding Amnon, had David his father been a little angry with him, it would have been better for him than the laughter which which the attribute of justice mocked him. Why? It is because “with a cross countenance the heart will be bettered.” Instead, “Amnon alone is dead” (II Samuel 13:32).
Another matter, “anger is better than laughter” – had the Holy One blessed be He been angry at the generation of the Flood, it would have been better than the laughter with which the attribute of justice mocked them, as it is stated: “Their offspring are established before them” (Job 21:8).³⁹Had the Holy One blessed be He shown them anger, they would have improved their ways, and died in peace with their offspring surrounding them. Another matter, “anger is better than laughter” – had the Holy One blessed be He been angry at the Sodomites, it would have been better than the laughter with which the attribute of justice mocked them, as it is stated: “Their houses are safe, without fear” (Job 21:9).⁴⁰That would have been their plight.

R. Juda in the name of Samuel said: "Whoever visits a sick person will be saved from the ffiudgment of Gehenna, as it is said (Pa. 41, 2) Happy is he that careth for the poor (Dal). On the day of evil [ra'a] will the Lord deliver him. Dal. (poor), refers to a sick person, as it is said (Is. 38, 12) From pining sickness (midalla) will He snatch me away; or from the following passage (II Sam. 13, 4) Why O son of the king, art thou thus becoming leaner from day to day? And again ra'ah refers to Gehenna, as it is said (Prov. 16, 4) Everything hath the Lord wrought for its destined end: Yea even the wicked for the day of unhappiness (ra'ah). But if one does visit [a sick person] what will be his reward? Why his reward will be as we said before; he will be saved from Gehenna? We must therefore explain it thus: What will be his reward in this world? Everything mentioned in the following passage (Ps. 41, 3) The Lord will preserve him and keep him alive; he shall be made happy on the earth; and Thou wilt not deliver him unto the revengeful desire of his enemies; i.e., the Lord will preserve him from the evil inclination and keep him alive from agonies; he shall be happy on the earth, that all will honor him; and Thou wilt not deliver him unto the revengeful desires of his enemies. He will happen to meet associates like those of Na'amon, who advised him how to he cured of his leprosy, but he will not chance to meet friends like those who happened to associate with Rehobo'am, who caused the division of the latter's kingdom. We are taught in a Baraitha, R. Simon b. Elazar said: "If the elders tell you to destroy, and the young tell you to build, rather destroy according to the advice of the elders and do not build, because the destruction of the elders equals to building, while the building of the young equals to destruction. An example of this may be brought from the case of Rehabo'am, son of Solomon."

(Bamidbar 5:18) "And the Cohein shall stand the woman before the L-rd": Where he stood her before (viz. Ibid. 16), he stands her afterwards, (after she had been moved away from her original position [They would walk her from place to place to "weary" her into confession]). "And he shall uncover the head of the woman": The Cohein moves behind her and uncovers her hair to fulfill the mitzvah to do so. R. Yishmael said: From here (i.e., from the fact that he is to uncover her hair) we derive an exhortation for the daughters of Israel to cover their hair. And though there is no proof for this, there is an intimation of it in (II Samuel 13:19) "And Tamar put earth upon her head … and she put her hand on her head." R. Yehudah says: If her top-knot were beautiful, he did not expose it, and if her hair were beautiful, he did not dishevel it. If she were dressed in white, she is dressed in black. If black were becoming to her, she is divested of it and clothed in ungainly garments. If there were golden ornaments upon her — necklaces, nose-rings, and rings — they are taken from her to render her unattractive. R. Yochanan b. Beroka says: The daughters of Israel are not made more unattractive than the Torah prescribes, viz. — "… before the L-rd and he shall uncover the head of the woman." They would spread a sheet of linen between him and the people. The Cohein would walk around her in order to fulfill the mitzvah of disheveling her hair. They say to him: Just as she was not solicitous of the honor of the L-rd, so, we are not solicitous of her honor — wherefore she is demeaned in this manner. And all who wish to look at her may do so except her man-servants and her maid-servants, for she is callous in their presence. Both men and women, kin and non-kin, may look at her, as it is written (Ezekiel 23:48) "and all the women will be chastised and not act according to your lewdness." (Devarim, Ibid.) "and he shall place into her hands the offering of memorial" Abba Channan says in the name of R. Eliezer: So that she is "wearied" into confession. Now does this not follow a fortiori, viz.: If the L-rd is so solicitous of the transgressors of His will, how much more so, of the doers of His will! "and in the hand of the Cohein will be the bitter waters": Scripture herby apprises us that the waters turn bitter only in the hand of the Cohein. Variantly: They are called "bitter" because of their effect — they impart bitterness to the body and convulse the eye.

Rabbi José said: Isaac observed mourning during three years || for his mother. After three years he married Rebecca, and forgot the mourning for his mother. Hence thou mayest learn that until a man marries a wife his love centres in his parents. When he marries a wife his love is bestowed upon his wife, as it is said, "Therefore shall a man leave his father and his mother, and he shall cleave unto his wife" (Gen. 2:24). Does a man then leave his father and mother with reference to the precept, "Honour"? But the love of his soul cleaves unto his wife, as it is said, "And his soul clave (unto Dinah)" (Gen. 34:3); and it says, "And he shall cleave unto his wife" (Gen. 2:24).

“And when his brothers saw that their father loved him more than all his brothers, they hated him, and could not speak peaceably to him.” [Gen 37:4] Rabbi Ahva ben Zeira said: From the very disgrace of the tribal ancestors you learn their virtues. Elsewhere it says, “And Avshalom did not speak to Amnon for good or bad,” [Shmuel II 13:22] keeping in his heart what he felt in his heart. Whereas here, “And could not speak peaceably to him” – what was in their heart was on their tongues.