After David is crowned king of all Israel in Hebron, the first thing he does is try to move to Jerusalem:
We’ll leave the blind and the lame for now; just assume it’s a taunt by the Jebusites. I want to focus on Jerusalem. Why move? It’s important to note that David does two things: he moves his political capital from Hebron to Jerusalem, and he starts to move the religious capital from the Mishkan in Givon to Jerusalem. And they are two different things, but intimately linked. We’ll spend a lot of time on that.
But first, a little diversion into the הלכות of ברכות. How many ברכות are in שמונה עשרה? Trick question, but it appears that the ancient Israeli custom was different from the Babylonian one we use today:
In out davening, we have two separate ברכות,בונה ירושלים and את צמח דוד…מצמיח קרן ישועה. They combined them. But that’s a problem:
Rav Bick explains that David’s kingship and the religious rebuilding of Jerusalem have to be linked:
First, we will will deal with the political side. What is is about Jerusalem? Note the contrast with his move to Hebron:
Here, there is apparently no וישאל דוד בה׳ . He just makes the decision and goes. This makes the question even more acute: Why Jerusalem?
Let’s go back and look at the history of Jerusalem. The name appears in ancient Egyptian documents as a Canaanite stronghold, but the first time it’s mentioned in תנ״ך is in יהושוע:
Jerusalem is defeated but not conquered. The next time we see Jerusalem is in the division of the tribal territories: Jerusalem is on the border of Judah but actually belongs to Benjamin:
But it doesn’t seem to matter, since Jerusalem is left unconquered:
Or is it conquered?
And one further ironic mention of Jerusalem: it’s a non-Jewish city, so the Jews avoid it. But that turns out badly:
So is Jerusalem conquered by the time of the Judges or not? Does it belong to Judah or Benjamin? Yes.
יְרוּשָׁלַיִם is in the dual: there are two cities:
דעת מקרא on יהושע says that the תרי ירושלים refers to the two parts of the city. It’s always in two. Part Yehudah and part Binyamin:
And relevant to our story, part Jebusite and part Israelite:
So why was the fortress, מצודת ציון, never taken? The simplest answer is that it was impregnable, and the Jews were unable to take it. But that would be hard to understand how that could continue if they were surrounded for 400 years. The midrash explains that they weren’t allowed to:
As we’ve discussed before, the פלישתים of Moshe’s time (and David’s) were not the aboriginal inhabitants of “ארץ פלשת”. In the times of the Avot, it was inhabited by the Canaanite nation of the עיווים/חיווים. The “modern” פלישתים came from the Mediterranean islands. So when אברהם signed a treaty with אבימלך, it was not with the פלישתים that David was fighting. But the Midrash says the treaty still applied:
(We will have to deal with David’s apparent violation of that treaty)
The Radak’s solution, היתה סבה מאת ה׳ שלא תלכד…עד מלוך דוד is elegant, and Rav Bin Nun goes through the geography explaining the importance of Jerusalem and the fact that it was unconquered until now:
Jerusalem was uniquely situated to be the capital of a united Israel.