1 Samuel 20 26

1 Samuel 20:26 kjv

Nevertheless Saul spake not any thing that day: for he thought, Something hath befallen him, he is not clean; surely he is not clean.

1 Samuel 20:26 nkjv

Nevertheless Saul did not say anything that day, for he thought, "Something has happened to him; he is unclean, surely he is unclean."

1 Samuel 20:26 niv

Saul said nothing that day, for he thought, "Something must have happened to David to make him ceremonially unclean?surely he is unclean."

1 Samuel 20:26 esv

Yet Saul did not say anything that day, for he thought, "Something has happened to him. He is not clean; surely he is not clean."

1 Samuel 20:26 nlt

Saul didn't say anything about it that day, for he said to himself, "Something must have made David ceremonially unclean."

1 Samuel 20 verses

1 Samuel 20 26 Meaning

King Saul, observing David's absence from the new moon feast, initially attributed it to David being in a state of ritual uncleanness, which would prevent him from participating in the sacred meal. This reveals Saul's first internal reasoning for David's noticeable absence before his anger fully manifested.

1 Samuel 20 26 Context

The verse is situated during a pivotal moment in the deepening conflict between King Saul and David. Jonathan, Saul's son and David's loyal friend, has arranged a secret sign with David to ascertain Saul's true intentions regarding David's life. David is supposed to be absent from the significant three-day New Moon feast, a religious and communal gathering attended by the king and his court. David's designated place at the king's table would thus be conspicuously empty. Saul's initial reaction, as described in this verse, is one of internal rationalization for David's absence rather than an immediate, public outburst of rage. He relies on a common, legitimate reason for missing a holy meal – ritual impurity – to explain David's unexpected non-attendance on the first day. This quiet, inward thought process precedes his furious eruption on the second day when David's absence persists. Historically and culturally, adherence to ritual purity laws (like those detailed in Leviticus) was essential for participation in communal religious observances such as feasts, ensuring one was "clean" to approach God and partake in sacred meals.

1 Samuel 20 26 Word analysis

• But Saul: Establishes the subject, King Saul, highlighting his perspective and internal state. This sets up a contrast with earlier assumed immediate action or rage.
• said nothing: Hebrew: lo'-diber davar (לֹא־דִּבֶּר דָּבָר). Emphasizes Saul's silence and restraint, which is uncharacteristic of his later fits of rage. This silence suggests internal processing, contemplation, or perhaps an attempt at self-control before reacting publicly. It is an ominous quiet.
• that day: Specifies the precise timing – the first day of the New Moon feast. This detail marks the initial reaction and sets the stage for the unfolding events over multiple days.
• for he thought: Indicates Saul's internal deliberation or reasoning. Hebrew: ki amar (כִּי אָמַר), often translated as "for he said (to himself)" or "for he thought." This highlights his subjective interpretation of events.
• 'Something has happened to him: An assumption born of uncertainty or a reluctance to confront the immediate suspicion. Hebrew: miqre hu lo’ (מִקְרֶה הוּא לֹוֹ). Implies an unforeseen circumstance, an incident or an accident has occurred. It's a speculative explanation for David's absence.
• he is unclean: Hebrew: ṭāmē' (טָמֵא). This is a crucial term referring to a state of ritual impurity according to the Mosaic Law. Many things could render a person ṭāmē', such as contact with a dead body, certain bodily discharges, or specific illnesses. A ṭāmē' person was temporarily excluded from religious gatherings and participation in holy meals (e.g., Lev 7:20-21; 15:31; Num 9:6-7; 19:13). Saul's thought leverages a religiously permissible excuse for David's absence.
• surely he is not clean: Hebrew: kī lo’ ṭāhōr hū’ (כִּי לֹא טָהוֹר הוּא). This is a rhetorical reinforcement, an emphatic declaration of the perceived state of uncleanness. ṭāhōr (טָהוֹר) means ritually pure. The repetition emphasizes Saul's conviction in this rationale. It is an internal statement of certainty regarding his own mistaken assumption. This rephrasing suggests a double assurance to himself about David's state.

Words-Group Analysis:

• "But Saul said nothing that day": This phrase contrasts Saul's typical explosive anger. His silence here is foreboding; he is not calm but rather internally strategizing or processing his deep-seated suspicions about David, masked by an outward lack of reaction.
• "for he thought, 'Something has happened to him'": This highlights Saul's attempt at rationalization. He seeks a logical, even religious, explanation for David's absence before immediately jumping to the conclusion of outright defiance or flight, suggesting a subtle self-deception at play or a desire to maintain appearances for a short time.
• "he is unclean, surely he is not clean": This is Saul's primary rationalization. By appealing to the well-known and respected laws of ritual purity, Saul finds a plausible (albeit false) religious justification for David's absence that averts direct suspicion or immediate confrontation. It reveals his mind grasping at an acceptable reason for an unusual event. This shows Saul using his knowledge of the Law not necessarily for piety but as a means to understand and manage a suspicious situation, even if falsely.

1 Samuel 20 26 Bonus section

Saul's internal thought about David's uncleanness could also be seen as a temporary intellectual refuge. Admitting that David had intentionally defied him or fled would force Saul to confront the reality of his own tyrannical rule and God's displeasure, a truth he continually evaded. By attributing it to ritual impurity, Saul could momentarily defer the painful reality of David's deliberate non-appearance, which ultimately threatened his throne. This subtle maneuver reflects the deceitfulness of the human heart, capable of rationalizing painful truths for temporary comfort or to prepare for a greater confrontation. The emphasis on "unclean" and "not clean" signifies the degree of Saul's internal conviction about this (mistaken) reason, highlighting his stubborn self-delusion.

1 Samuel 20 26 Commentary

1 Samuel 20:26 reveals Saul's initial, calculating response to David's conspicuous absence from the New Moon feast. His unusual silence on the first day signifies not a lack of concern, but an internal attempt to process and rationalize a deeply suspicious situation. Instead of confronting Jonathan or immediately giving vent to his rage, Saul employs a socially and religiously acceptable excuse: David must be ritually unclean. This rationalization is significant for several reasons. It demonstrates Saul's diminishing trust in David and his growing paranoia, forcing him to devise explanations for anything out of the ordinary concerning David. Furthermore, it subtly highlights how Saul's distorted perception of reality allows him to twist religious tenets (like the laws of purity) to fit his suspicions, rather than seeking the truth or exhibiting faith. This quiet, speculative reasoning contrasts sharply with his explosive rage the following day, showcasing the turbulent and dangerous mental state of a king increasingly ruled by fear and jealousy.