Our Gemara discusses one of the fundamental laws of preemptive self-defense, as described in Shemos 22:1-2. In certain situations where there is a reasonable presumption that an intruder intends to use deadly force—such as a home invasion, where the thief is prepared to encounter an adversary and therefore ready to kill if necessary—one does not have to wait to be attacked and may strike preemptively. (An obvious and nearly universal legal principle, yet somehow suspended in the court of public opinion when Israel asserts its right to self-defense against terrorist enemies like Hamas.)

In Shmuel I (24), King David has an opportunity to ambush King Shaul. While his men urge him to take advantage of the element of surprise, Dovid Hamelech is reluctant to initiate violence against Hashem’s anointed. Instead, he stages a precise military operation in which they stealthily approach and cut off a corner of King Shaul’s cloak. Dovid then uses this as a warning, essentially telling Shaul, “I could have killed you, but I chose not to—so stand down.” Yet, despite the fact that he restrained himself from harming Shaul, the pasuk describes how Dovid felt pangs of guilt in his heart for even this small act of insubordination against God’s chosen king.

Dovid Hamelech seems to be grappling with an internal conflict: On the one hand, he knows he must protect himself from Shaul’s murderous intentions. On the other hand, he still feels bound by the sanctity of the divinely ordained monarchy. The Arvei Nachal (Shlach 2:42) expands on this theme with a insight into temptation and self-awareness.

He explains that Dovid Hamelech had an ethical dilemma. While self-defense is both permissible and, in some cases, obligatory, perhaps a king is different—perhaps his authority and divine appointment grant Shaul special immunity, even from defensive force. How did Dovid resolve this?

The Arvei Nachal offers an insightful psychological explanation. He states that the yetzer hara blinds us in the moment of desire, distorting our judgment. However, this distortion is temporary; once the deed is done and the passion is satisfied, clarity returns, often accompanied by regret or remorse. Dovid Hamelech understood this mechanism and decided to put it to the test.

Instead of outright attacking Shaul, he committed a minor act of defiance—cutting a piece of his cloak—to see how he would feel afterward. If, after the initial surge of adrenaline had passed, he still felt justified and at peace with his actions, that would indicate he was acting out of sound moral reasoning. However, if he felt tainted, guilty, or empty, that would reveal that his judgment had been clouded by passion. This, he reasoned, would be his litmus test—and indeed, as the pesukim describe, he immediately felt regret. Even though Shaul was trying to kill him, Dovid realized that his act of disrespect toward the king was unjustified, because Shaul was still God’s anointed ruler.

This insight from the Arvei Nachal serves as a powerful guide for self-reflection. Often, our passions blind us to the true nature of our actions. One way to gain clarity is to take a small step forward and then assess how we feel. Once our emotions settle and our judgment is no longer clouded, do we still feel that our actions were right? If so, perhaps our decision was truly sound. If not, we may finally be seeing the truth with clear eyes.

Translations Courtesy of Sefaria, except when, sometimes, I disagree with the translation

If you liked this, you might enjoy my Relationship Communications Guide. Click on the link above.

Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, Rabbi Simcha Feuerman, LCSW-R, DHL is a psychotherapist who works with high conflict couples and families as well male sexual health. He can be reached via email at simchafeuerman@gmail.com