Midrasz do Diwrej ha-jamim I 8:78

Regarding that which the verse states: “Shaḥarayim begot children in the field of Moav [after he had sent them away, Ḥushim and Baara his wives]” (I Chronicles 8:8), Elijah, of blessed memory, asked Rabbi Nehorai, he said to him: ‘What is this that is written: “Shaḥarayim begot in the field of Moav”?’ [Rabbi Nehorai] said to him: ‘A great man begot in the field of Moav.’ “After he had sent them away” (I Chronicles 8:8) – as they were from the tribe of Benjamin, as it is written: “The tribes of Israel sent men through all the tribe of Benjamin, saying” (Judges 20:12).¹⁴³Just as the term “sent” appears in Judges regarding the tribe of Benjamin, the verse in Chronicles is hinting to the fact that the man’s wives were from the tribe of Benjamin.
Another interpretation, “Shaḥarayim,” this is Boaz. Why was his name called Shaḥarayim? It is because he was free [meshuḥrar] of iniquities. “Begot in the field of Moav,” as he begot from Ruth the Moavite. “After he had sent them away,” as he was from the tribe of Judah, as it is stated: “And he sent Judah before him to Joseph” (Genesis 46:28). “Ḥushim and Baara his wives,” does a man beget his wives? Rather, he was swift like a leopard and articulated the halakha:¹⁴⁴He expounded the verse: “An Amonite and a Moavite shall not enter the congregation of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 23:4). An Amonite but not an Amonite woman, a Moavite but not a Moavite woman. “He begot from Ḥodesh his wife” (I Chronicles 8:9) – it should have stated only, “from Baara his wife.” Rather, in his days, the halakha of an Amonite but not an Amonite woman, a Moavite and not a Moavite woman, was introduced [nitḥadsha].
One verse says: “Yitra the Ishmaelite” (see I Chronicles 2:17), and one verse says: “Yitra the Israelite” (II Samuel 17:25). Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: He is Yitra the Ishmaelite, he is Yitra the Israelite.¹⁴⁵Both verses refer to the same person. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman and the Rabbis: Rabbi Shmuel said: He was an Ishmaelite, and you say Israelite? Rather, he was an Ishmaelite. He entered the study hall and found Yishai sitting and expounding thus: “Look to Me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth…” (Isaiah 45:22).¹⁴⁶Anyone from all the ends of the earth can look to God and be saved. He converted, and [Yishai] gave him his daughter. The Rabbis say: He was an Israelite, and you say Ishmaelite? Rather, he was an Israelite and he girded his sword like an Ishmaelite. He stuck his sword in the middle of the study hall and said: I will either kill or be killed until I establish the halakha for the multitudes, so that anyone who abrogates this halakha, I will behead him with this sword: An Amonite but not an Amonite woman, a Moavite and not a Moavite woman.

Regarding that which the verse states: “Shaḥarayim begot children in the field of Moav [after he had sent them away, Ḥushim and Baara his wives]” (I Chronicles 8:8), Elijah, of blessed memory, asked Rabbi Nehorai, he said to him: ‘What is this that is written: “Shaḥarayim begot in the field of Moav”?’ [Rabbi Nehorai] said to him: ‘A great man begot in the field of Moav.’ “After he had sent them away” (I Chronicles 8:8) – as they were from the tribe of Benjamin, as it is written: “The tribes of Israel sent men through all the tribe of Benjamin, saying” (Judges 20:12).¹⁴³Just as the term “sent” appears in Judges regarding the tribe of Benjamin, the verse in Chronicles is hinting to the fact that the man’s wives were from the tribe of Benjamin.
Another interpretation, “Shaḥarayim,” this is Boaz. Why was his name called Shaḥarayim? It is because he was free [meshuḥrar] of iniquities. “Begot in the field of Moav,” as he begot from Ruth the Moavite. “After he had sent them away,” as he was from the tribe of Judah, as it is stated: “And he sent Judah before him to Joseph” (Genesis 46:28). “Ḥushim and Baara his wives,” does a man beget his wives? Rather, he was swift like a leopard and articulated the halakha:¹⁴⁴He expounded the verse: “An Amonite and a Moavite shall not enter the congregation of the Lord” (Deuteronomy 23:4). An Amonite but not an Amonite woman, a Moavite but not a Moavite woman. “He begot from Ḥodesh his wife” (I Chronicles 8:9) – it should have stated only, “from Baara his wife.” Rather, in his days, the halakha of an Amonite but not an Amonite woman, a Moavite and not a Moavite woman, was introduced [nitḥadsha].
One verse says: “Yitra the Ishmaelite” (see I Chronicles 2:17), and one verse says: “Yitra the Israelite” (II Samuel 17:25). Rabbi Yehoshua ben Levi said: He is Yitra the Ishmaelite, he is Yitra the Israelite.¹⁴⁵Both verses refer to the same person. Rabbi Shmuel bar Naḥman and the Rabbis: Rabbi Shmuel said: He was an Ishmaelite, and you say Israelite? Rather, he was an Ishmaelite. He entered the study hall and found Yishai sitting and expounding thus: “Look to Me, and be saved, all the ends of the earth…” (Isaiah 45:22).¹⁴⁶Anyone from all the ends of the earth can look to God and be saved. He converted, and [Yishai] gave him his daughter. The Rabbis say: He was an Israelite, and you say Ishmaelite? Rather, he was an Israelite and he girded his sword like an Ishmaelite. He stuck his sword in the middle of the study hall and said: I will either kill or be killed until I establish the halakha for the multitudes, so that anyone who abrogates this halakha, I will behead him with this sword: An Amonite but not an Amonite woman, a Moavite and not a Moavite woman.

(Fol. 62 b) R. Simlai came before R. Jochanan, and said to him: "Teach me the Book of Records (Chronicles)." "Whence art thou?" asked R. Jochanan. "From Lydia," he answered. "And where dost thou reside? "I reside in Nechardea." Whereupon R. Jochanan said to him: "It is prohibited to teach to inhabitants of either Lydia or Nehardea the contents of the Book of Chronicles, and so much the more to thee who art both a native of Lydia and resideth at Nehardea." R. Simlai, however, compelled R. Jochanan to give him the instruction. "I wish that the master would teach me all the contents within three months," said R. Simlai. Whereupon R. Jochanan replied: "Behold! If Beruria, the wife of R. Meier, the daughter of R. Chanan b. Teradion, who could learn three hundred traditions [of law) in one winter day from three hundred great men, was unable to master the contents of the Book of Chronicles after she had studied it for three years, how couldst thou ask me to teach it all to thee in three months? " R. Jochanan then took a clod of earth and threw it at him. While R. Simlai was running away, he said: "Rabbi, can you explain to me what the difference is between him who slays the paschal lamb for its actual purpose, and him who slays it not for its actual purpose [upon which the Mishnah declares the latter act to be invalid]; and that between one who slays the paschal lamb for those who will partake of it, and him who slays it for those who may not partake of it [both of which the Mishnah declares are valid]?" "So! Then thou art a young scholar," remarked R. Jochanan. "Come, and I shall teach thee."Rami b. Abin, in the name of Rab, said: "From the day when the Book of Genealogy was forgotten, the power of the sages diminished and the light of their eyes became dim; for the master said between the passages (I Chr. 8, 38) From one Azel unto the other Azel, the sages had four hundred camel-loads of critical researches."

R. Samuel b. Nachmeini in the name of R. Jonathan said again: "Whoever says that David committed a sin, errs, because it is said (I Sam. 18, 14.) And David was successful in all his ways; and the Lord was with him. Is it possible that he committed a crime, and the Schechina should rest with him? But how should the passage (II Sam. 12, 9.) Wherefore hast thou despised the words of the Lord to do what is evil in His eyes be explained? He wanted to, but did not do it." Bab said: "Rabbi, who is a descendant of David, endeavors to interpret the passage in favor of David: Wherefore hast thou despised the words of the Lord to do what is evil in His eyes. Rabbi says: 'This evil is different [in spelling and meaning] from all other evil mentioned in Scriptures. In all other instances it says Vaya'as (and he has done), while here it says La'asoth (to do). This implies that he only wanted to, but did not do it.' " Uriah the Hittite. hast thou smitten with the sword, (Ib.) i.e., You should have had him tried by Sanhedrin, which you did not; And his wife hast thou taken unto thee, (Ib.) i.e., Thou hadst a right to her; for R. Samuel b. Nachmeini, in the name of R. Jonathan, said: "Whoever went to war with David's army first divorced his wife, as it is said (I Sam. 17, 18.) And these ten cheeses shalt thou bring unto the captain of the thousand, and inquire of thy brothers how they fare, and take away their pledge. What is meant by And take away their pledge? R. Joseph explained: It means that their marriage vows to one another [shalt thou take away — through a divorce].'" And him (Uriah) hast thou slain with the sword of Amon, i.e., just as you will not be punished on account of Amon, so also will you not be punished for the death of Uriah. Why? Because he was a rebel, for he said (Ib.) And my Lord Joab, and the servants of my lord, are encamped in the open field. Rab said: "After examining carefully the conduct of David, thou wilt find no fault in his conduct except that of Uriah, as it is written (I Kings 15, 5.) Save only in the matter of Uriah the Hittite. Abaye, the senior, offered the following contradiction: "Did Rab indeed say this? Behold Rab said that 'David listened to slander.' " The contradiction is sustained. This is the substance of that which is mentioned above: Rab said: "David lent an ear to slander, for it is written (II Sam. 9, 4.) And the King said unto him, Where is He? And Ziba said unto the King, Behold, he is in the house of Machir. the son of Ammi'el, from Lo-debar, and immediately following this, it is written And the King David sent and had him taken out of this house of Machir, the son of Ammi'el, from Lo-debar. Thus, when David found that Ziba was lying, regarding his statement, why then did David give heed to Ziba's second accusation? For it is written (Ib. 16, 3.) And the King said (unto Ziba) And where is thy master's son? And Ziba said to the King, Behold he remained at Jerusalem, etc. And whence do we know that David lent an ear to this slander? From this passage (Ib.) Then said the King to Ziba, Behold, thine shall be all that belongeth unto Mephibosheth. And Ziba said, I prostrate myself; let me but find grace in thy eyes, my Lord, O King." But Samuel said: "David did not lend an ear to slander. He himself noticed that about the conduct of Mephibosheth which corroborated and affirmed Ziba's accusation; as it is written (Ib. 19, 25.) And Mephibosheth, the grandson of Saul came down to meet the King, and he had not dressed his feet, nor trimmed his beard, nor washed his clothes, etc., and further in the same chapter is written, And it came to pass, when he was come to Jerusalem to meet the King, that the King said unto him, Wherefore didst thou not go with me, Mephibosheth? And he answered, My Lord, O King, my servant deceives me, for thy servant said, 'I will saddle for me the ass. that I may ride thereon, and o with the King; because thy servant is lame.' (Ib. b) And he slandered thy servant unto my Lord, the King, but my lord, the King is like an angel of God; do then what is good in thy eyes, etc. And the King said unto him, for what purpose speakest thou yet thy words? I have said Thou and Ziba shall divide the field. And Mephibosheth said unto the King, Yea, let him take the whole, since that my Lord, the King, is come (back) in peace unto his own house. He (Mephibosheth) thus said to him, I have anticipated your safe arrival home with anxiety, and since thou acteth toward me in such a (strange) manner, I have nothing to complain of to you, but to Him who brought you safely back." And thus it corresponds to what is written (I Chr. 8, 34.) And the son of Jonathan was Merib-ba'al. Was then his name Merib-ba'al? Behold, it was Mephibosheth? But it is intended to mean that just because he had a strife with his master (David), a Bath-Kol (heavenly voice) went forth saying, "Thou quarreler, the son of a quarreler. 'Quarreler' as we mentioned above, 'The son of a quarreler,' as it is written (I Sam 15, 5.) And Saul came to the city of Amalek, and he quarrelled in the valley; R. Mani explains this to mean that he had a quarrel concerning the valley. R. Juda, in the name of Rab, said: "At the moment when David said unto Mephibosheth: Thou and Ziba shall divide the field, a Bath-Kol went forth saying, Rechaban and Jerobom will divide thy kingdom." R. Juda in the name of Rab said: "Had not David listened to slander, the Kingdom of the house of David would never have been divided, neither would Israel have practiced idolatry, nor would we have been exiled from our land.

Whosoever offereth the sacrifice of thanksgiving honoreth Me; and to him that ordereth his way aright will I show the salvation of God (ibid. 50:23). R. Menahem the son of Yosé said: This verse alludes to those who light lamps in dark alleys for the benefit of the public. R. Simeon the son of Lakish declared: Saul was worthy of kingship because his grandfather lit lamps in dark alleys for the sake of the public. One verse tells us: And Ner (“light”) begot Kish (I Chron. 8:33), and another verse says: Kish was the father of Saul, and Ner the father of Abner was the son of Abiel (I Sam. 14:51). In this verse he was called Abiel, but because he lit lamps in dark alleys for the public good he was also called Ner (“light”). The Holy One, blessed be He, declared: In this world you require a light, but in the future, Nations shall walk at thy light, and kings at the brightness of thy horizon (Isa: 60:30).

Elijah was called by four names in the Book of Chronicles: And Jaareshiah, and Elijah, and Zichri, were the sons of Jeroham (I Chron. 8:27). Elijah was called Jaareshiah because at the time that the Holy One, blessed be He, became angry and shook (mar’ish, “quake”) His world, Elijah arose and reminded (mazkir) Him of the merit of the fathers. He then showed mercy (merahem). Hence it is written: Jaareshiah, Elijah, and Zichri were the sons of Jeroham. Hence he had four names.

Another explanation. “See, I have called by name Bezalel the son of Uri …” (Shemot 31:2) This is one of the seven people called by multiple names. There are those that were called by four names, which is Eliyahu, Bezalel had six, Yehoshua six, Moshe seven, Mordecai two, Daniel five, Hananiah, Mishael and Azariah had four. Eliyahu had four: R’ Elazar ben Padat said ‘Eliyahu was from Jerusalem and was among those who sat in the Court of Hewn Stones. He was from the city of Yehudah and his portion was in two tribal lands – five in Benyamin, as it says “And Zelah, Eleph, and the Jebusite, which is Jerusalem…” (Yehoshua 18:28) and three in Yehudah, as it says “Zenan, and Hadashah, and Migdal-gad.”