[The crown] was placed on David’s head. [Interpreters] ask (e.g., Pseudo-Rashi): How could he have withstood it, when it weighed a talent of gold? So they say that it was suspended above his head: he would sit under it on the throne, with it directly over his head. In a rabbinic source [we find] (b. Avodah Zarah 44a) that the precious stone in it was a drawing stone, which would keep it in the air. The Sages also suggest (ibid*.*) that a talent of gold is what the precious stone in it was worth. But possibly, one can explain that it was not always on his head. Rather, it was on his head once or twice, and he was able to withstand it for that brief period.

Vayyasar with a saw.[David] crushed [the people of Rabbah] with a saw. Vayyasar (וישר) is similar to: “Or a massor (=saw) magnify itself” (Isa 10:15), and [the sin] should in principle have been geminated.

Elhanan son of Jair [killed] et Laḥmi the brother of Goliath the Gittite. But in the book of Samuel [it says], “Elhanan son of Jaare-oregim (Oregim [=weavers]) the Bethlehemite (Bet ha-Laḥmi) [killed] Goliath the Gittite” (2 Sam 21:19). Now Goliath the Gittite is the same as Goliath the Philistine—after all, the text says there that “his name was Goliath, the Philistine of Gath” (1 Sam 17:23)—and it was not Elhanan who killed him, but David (1 Sam 17:49–50)! So there remains something elusive about the verse in [2] Samuel. “The Bethlehemite” who “killed Goliath the Gittite,” however, indeed refers to David. Here also, in fact, when the text says et Laḥmi, it means: with the Lehemite, that is, David. Still, it was Elhanan who killed [Goliath’s] brother: perhaps the reason it mentions David also is that he assisted in the killing. So there it reports the death of Goliath, whom David killed, whereas here it reports the death of his brother, whom Elhanan killed. But Targum Jonathan renders the verse in [2] Samuel as follows: “David son of Jesse of Bethlehem, weaver of the curtains of the Holy Temple.”

A man of size (middah). This means great size, as in “men of middot” (Num 13:32). In the book of Samuel, though, it says “a man of madon (מדון)” (2 Sam 21:20): the nun functions in place of the doubling [of the letter], akin to the nuns in ma‘uzneha (=its strongholds; Isa 23:11) and ki lo tamnu (=have not ended; Lam 3:22). Alternatively, the nun is like the nun of zikkaron (זכרון; =reminder; Exod 17:14), and whereas the dalet should in principle have been geminated because it is not doubled, the vowel-letter compensates for this.

Six and six—twenty-four. Our Sages, of blessed memory (b. Bekhorot 45b), say: “Why did the text have to say ‘twenty-four’? Because had it not said twenty-four, I might have understood: six on his two hands and six on his two feet. Thus it says ‘twenty-four.’ And had it said ‘twenty-four’ but not ‘six and six,’ I might have understood that one hand had five and the other seven. Thus it says ‘six and six.’”

Le-ha-rafa (להרפא). My master, my father, of blessed memory (Sefer Ha-Galuy entry רף), writes that this noun refers not to a female but to a male: it is akin to Refa’im—[a people] consisting of giants (Deut 2:11)—the singular of which is Rafa. When the text says le-ha-rafa, it is as though it had said la-‘anaq (=to the giant), with the hei functioning to make it definite. In two places in this context, rafa is spelled with an alef (vv. 6, 8), whereas in the book of Samuel it is spelled with a hei (2 Samuel 21:20); for the letters alef, hei, vav, and yod interchange.

Nulledu (נוּלּדו; =were descended). This is the equivalent of noledu, with the gemination displacing [the lengthening suggested by] the vowel-letter. Even though the vav is present, because the lamed is geminated here, the vav is ignored in pronunciation.