שופטים, פרק י״ד, פסוק ט״ו

As frustration mounts at the wedding feast, the unresolved riddle brings out the true character of Samson's companions. Despairing of finding the answer fairly, they abandon the agreed-upon rules of the wager and resort to extortion and forceful threats, laying bare their inherently violent nature [שטיינזלץ].

There are differing views on the exact timing of this confrontation. The primary approach among commentators is that the threat did not occur on the final day of the feast, but rather on the Sabbath, which was the fourth day of the wedding celebrations. Samson deliberately avoided eating with the Philistines to prevent desecrating the holy Sabbath meals. His temporary absence provided the perfect opportunity for the companions to approach his wife unhindered and issue their threats [מצודת דוד, אלשיך]. Terrified by their warnings, she began to weep and badger Samson continuously from the Sabbath until the feast concluded [רד"ק, אלשיך].

Conversely, another perspective places this confrontation literally on the seventh and final day of the feast. According to this view, the companions tried to solve the riddle for three days, failed, and remained silent until the very last day when they finally cornered the wife. She had been crying of her own accord throughout the festivities, but Samson only surrendered and revealed the answer on the final day because of the immense pressure now placed upon her [רד"ק]. Yet another approach suggests the timing marks exactly a week since the riddle was first posed, signifying the transition from the bachelor's feast to the actual days of marriage [מלבי"ם].

The companions demand that the solution be revealed for their benefit. The primary approach among commentators explains their intent was for Samson to tell his wife the answer, who would then secretly pass the information to them. However, a different view suggests they demanded the wife convince Samson to reveal the answer directly to the companions, which would effectively cancel the original agreement and the wager [מלבי"ם].

To enforce their demand, the Philistines threaten to burn the woman and her father's house to the ground. They hurl a harsh accusation at her, asking if she invited them simply to impoverish them and steal their wealth. They question whether they were truly brought to rejoice at a wedding feast, or if the entire invitation was nothing more than a malicious plot to rob them of their money through an impossible riddle [מצודת דוד, רד"ק]. Concluding their threat, the primary approach among commentators understands their final, emphatic question to mean: "Did you invite us here just to impoverish us?" [רש"י, רד"ק, שטיינזלץ]. Alternatively, this closing remark is seen simply as a harsh rhetorical question pressing the accusation: "Is this not the case?" [מצודת דוד].