Exegetical and Hermeneutical Commentary of 2 Samuel 14:6
And thy handmaid had two sons, and they two strove together in the field, and [there was] none to part them, but the one smote the other, and slew him.
There was none to part them; and therefore there is no witness, either that he killed him, or how he killed him, whether from some sudden passion and great provocation, or in his own necessary defence, or otherwise.
Slew him; as the avengers of blood report.
Fuente: English Annotations on the Holy Bible by Matthew Poole
And thy handmaid had two sons,…. Two are observed, that her case might suit with Amnon and Absalom:
and they two strove together in the field; they quarrelled, and fought in the field, where there were no witnesses of what they did to each other; whereby she would suggest that Ammon was killed in the field, of which there were no witnesses, and therefore Absalom ought not to die; whereas it was in Absalom’s house, at his table, and where the rest of the king’s sons were present, and witnesses of it:
and [there was] none to part them; which, had there been, might have prevented the sad disaster; this, as Abarbinel thinks, is pointed at David, who when Amnon forced Tamar, did not correct him for it, nor seek to make peace between the brethren, and hence followed what had happened:
but the one smote the other, and slew him; as say the accusers of him that is living; for the fable supposes there was none with them; however, she suggests, as the above writer observes, that one gave the first blow, and so was the aggressor; and that he that was smitten rose up in his own defence, and in his passion slew him that smote him; which is observed to lessen the crime, and to intimate that Amnon was the aggressor, who first began the sin and quarrel, in ravishing Tamar, and so reproaching Absalom; and therefore his blood was upon his own head.
Fuente: John Gill’s Exposition of the Entire Bible
(6) They two strove together.The woman represents the fratricide as unpremeditated and without malice. This really made the case essentially different from that of Absalom; but at this point of the story the object is to dispose the king favourably towards the culprit, while by the time the application is reached, this point will have passed out of mind.
Fuente: Ellicott’s Commentary for English Readers (Old and New Testaments)
2Sa 14:6 And thy handmaid had two sons, and they two strove together in the field, and [there was] none to part them, but the one smote the other, and slew him.
Ver. 6. And they two strove together in the field. ] Upon some sudden and perhaps slight occasion; such as was that recorded by Camerarius, who telleth a story of two brethren walking out in a starlit night: said one of the brethren, Would I had a pasture as large as this element. And said the other, Would I had as many oxen as there be stars. Says the other again, Where would you feed those oxen? In your pasture, replied he. What, whether I would or no? Yea, said he, whether you would or no. What, in spite of me? Yes, said he. And thus it went on from words, till at length the one killed the other.
Fuente: John Trapp’s Complete Commentary (Old and New Testaments)
and they two: Gen 4:8, Exo 2:13, Deu 22:26, Deu 22:27
none to part: Heb. no deliverer between
Reciprocal: Gen 27:45 – why Exo 21:18 – men Jdg 18:28 – And there 1Ki 11:29 – and they two Psa 7:2 – while Ecc 4:10 – but
Fuente: The Treasury of Scripture Knowledge
14:6 And thy handmaid had two {c} sons, and they two strove together in the field, and [there was] none to part them, but the one smote the other, and slew him.
(c) Under this parable she describes the death of Amnon by Absalom.