Komentaryong Sumisipi para sa 1 Samuel 17:28

ולבש הכהן מדו בד ומכנסי בד, “the priest is to don his linen tunic and his linen trousers.” The Torah mentions the tunic and trousers in connection with the procedure of removing the ashes, although according to Nachmanides, [alluded to here by the author not by name but uncharacteristically as “ה'הג” הרב הגאון, Ed.] needs to wear all four of his priestly garments as there is no kind of Temple service that may be performed with fewer than four garments. The reason why only two of these garments were mentioned here is, that they both have a feature we did not hear about previously. The Torah, by writing מדו, indicates that these garments were not of standard measure but were fitted according to the size of the individual priest who would wear them, both the tunic and the trousers. It was important that nothing should separate the garments from the skin of the wearer. Nachmanides refers to Onkelos who translates מדו, as לבישין, writes: it appears that he understood the word as the name of a comprehensive garment, something we would refer to nowadays as the “uniform” worn by liveried people, for instance. The expression מדיו, in Samuel I 17,28 where Saul gave David his uniform also refers to a uniform tailored for him especially, [which because David was much shorter would have been a hindrance rather than a help to David in his fight against Goliath. Ed.] In Samuel I 4,12 we read about ומדיו קרועים ואדמה על ראשו, “the torn uniform and the earth on his head described the state of mourning of its wearer who brought news of the capture of the Holy Ark by the Philistines”, not to mention the thirty thousand men who had fallen in that battle.

For I have rejected him. Because he is a quick tempered person, as it is stated, 'And Eliov became angry with Dovid.'⁴ Below 17:28. Also, see Maseches Pesachim 66b, that Eliov actually possessed the qualities of a king but ‘ה rejected him because he had a bad temper.

והיה הנערה אשר אומר אליה הטי נא כדך, “let it be that the maiden to whom I shall say: ‘please lower your jug so that I may drink,’ etc.” We have learned in Taanit 4 that there were three people who did not phrase a request to G-d in an appropriate manner. The three were: Eliezer, the servant of Avraham, Saul, son of Kish; and Yiftach from Gilead. Concerning Eliezer the Torah writes: (quoting our verses) “the criteria Eliezer listed to enable him to choose a bride for Yitzchak could have been met by a blind or lame girl.” [Eliezer surely did not mean for a girl with either one of such a handicap to become the bride of Yitzchak. Ed.]. Nonetheless, G-d arranged for the girl whom Eliezer met to be Rivkah, i.e. an eminently suitable choice. Saul, son of Kish requested victory over Goliath the Philistine blasphemer, promising the man who would kill Goliath his daughter as well as material wealth (Samuel I 17,28). If a slave or a bastard had taken up the challenge and succeeded, Saul would have been bound by a promise so carelessly formulated. G-d was kind enough to send him David who took up the challenge. In the case of Yiftach, we are told (Judges 11,31) that he foolishly vowed to offer as a sacrifice to G-d the first living creature which would come to meet him when he returned victoriously from battle. As it happened, his only daughter came out to welcome him. He had laid himself open to having to sacrifice any animal that was not even permitted to be offered as a sacrifice. G-d arranged that his daughter should meet him instead of what he had had in mind. This was the mystical dimension of Jeremiah 8,22 הצרי אין בגלעד אם רופא אין שם? “is there no balm in Gilead, no physician either?” The prophet points out that Yiftach could have had his vow annulled by the High Priest Pinchas or even by someone else had he not been too proud to do so. This thought [that there is not the slightest reason to honour a vow when it involves human sacrifice. Ed.] is underlined by the same prophet in Jeremiah 19,5 אשר לא ציויתי ולא דברתי, ולא עלתה על לבי, “which I have not commanded, nor spoken about, nor even thought about.” In other words, it was not G-d’s fault, or the fault of G-d’s legislation about honouring one’s vows which led to the death of Yiftach’s daughter.