Why did Shlomo make 10 Menoros?

Iyun Yakov: This was corresponding to Aseres ha'Dibros, which include all the Mitzvos. In all they have 70 branches, corresponding to the 70 nations; each must fulfill the seven Mitzvos of Bnei Noach. Just like the gold was refined 1000 times, so one who fulfills Mitzvos properly [must refine his deeds]. "Matzref la'Kesef v'Chur la'Zahav v'Ish l'Fi Mahalalo", and so is man - "Echad me'Elef Matzasi." For people, the Kor (refining furnace) is poverty, like it says "Tzerafticha... b'Chur Oni" (Yeshayah 48:10). Therefore, poverty is proper for Yisrael (Chagigah 9b); it makes them repent.

What is Zahav Sagur?

Rashi: It is [choice] gold, that when they sell it, all stores selling [other] gold are closed.

Maharsha: Yoma 44b lists seven kinds of gold. One of them is Zahav Tahor. Tosfos says that the Yerushalmi says that when it is refined, nothing is lost. This is Zahav Michlos here. After being refined 1000 times, it is totally refined, and there is no reduction if it is refined again. Here it implies that they did so from Zahav Sagur; Shlomo finished it via refining it so much, to fulfill "Zahav Tahor." I find this difficult. It says "Zahav Tahor" also regarding the Aron and Shulchan. It does not say that they refined gold so much for them! Perhaps they needed to refine gold for the Menorah so much, for it must be Mikshah. The Menorah and its seven branches hint to Chochmas ha'Torah, which is seven Seforim (Bamidbar is three Seforim - "va'Yhi bi' Nso'a ha'Aron...", what is before it, and what is after it) - "Chatzvah Amudeha Shiv'ah." Torah is compared to gold - "ha'Nechemadim mi'Zahav." Just like there are seven kinds of gold, so Torah is composed of all seven Chochmos. Via much refining, gold becomes good, without dross. Also Torah, "Amoros Tehoros... Mezukak Shiv'asayim."

Iyun Yakov: [In Shemoneh Esre, one faces the Mikdash;] one who wants to become wise, he tilts slightly south. A Siman for this - the Menorah was in the south.

How much did the gold diminish via refining?

Rashi: It diminished from 1000 Kikarim to one Kikar via 1000 refinements, i.e. 1 Kikar each time.

Maharsha: Just like the amount of gold remaining decreased each time, so the amount lost should decrease each time! (NOTE: We could say that as it gets more refined, less is lost each time! However, it is unreasonable that the 1000th time, a Kikar was lost, and the next 80 times, only a tiny amount was lost. - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf: Sefas Emes and Rashash asked, did they [initially] use a Pasul Menorah (it weighed too much)? Likutei Halachos (Chafetz Chaim) says that Kikar is only l'Chatchilah, for it was written only once. (NOTE: In Kodshim, only what is repeated is Me'akev. - PF) Perhaps Sefas Emes still asked, how did they use something Pasul l'Chatchilah?! I ask, since Shlomo refined the gold until it was a Kikar, how was this Menorah a Dinar more? (NOTE: Do not ask from "Kikar Zahav Tahor Ya'aseh Osah Es Kol ha'Kelim ha'Eleh" (Shemos 25:39), that the Menorah together with its Kelim weighed a Kikar, and so implies Rashi. Only what is Mikshah (connected and made from the same mass) with the Menorah is from one Kikar. Meforshim explain that Rashi teaches like R. Yehudah (88b), and includes only the Neros. R. Nechemyah holds that the Neros were separate, and not from the Kikar. Presumably, it says that it was more than 'Menorah Shel Moshe', and not 'Kikar', for Moshe's Menorah was the best testimony of how much is a Kikar! - PF)

Maharsha: This is like the 10th of Rebbi (each daughter who gets married takes a 10th of the remaining estate). Also here, each refining diminishes the remaining gold according to a fixed percentage. (NOTE: If so, each refining diminished it 10-.003, i.e. about .7%. Every 100 refinements [virtually] halved the quantity. However, if so, an additional 80 refinements should reduce it about 43%, and not a mere Kordikani Dinar, which is a tiny fraction of a Kikar (6000 Dinarim)! - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Merafsin Igra (Terumah) #1: The Yerushalmi (Yoma 4:4) says that Zahav Tahor is what does not decrease at all when it is returned to the fire. How did this Menorah decrease? We must say that other metals were mixed in.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Merafsin Igra #2: Perhaps this episode was when they made a new Menorah for the Mikdash (perhaps in the days of the Chashmona'im). The Gemara tells how they brought it to the exact weight as Moshe's Menorah.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Merafsin Igra #3: It must be exactly a Kikar only when it is of gold (28a). Maharam Lublin says that if it is not Zahav Tahor, it is like other metals, and need not be exactly a Kikar. We can say that this Menorah was of gold that is not Tahor, therefore it reduced when returned to the fire. Initially it was Kosher, for it was not Zahav Tahor.

What was the question from "v'Chol Klei Mashke... Ein Kesef Nechshav bi'Ymei Shlomo li'Me'umah"?

Rashi: This shows that he was rich. Did he not have any gold left?!

Shitah Mekubetzes: The text of the Gemara should not say "v'Chol Klei Mashke ha'Melech Shlomo Zahav v'Chol Klei Beis Ya'ar ha'Levanon Zahav Sagur." We cite and ask only from "Ein Kesef Nechshav bi'Ymei Shlomo li'Me'umah." (NOTE: Why do we not ask from the Reisha, which says that he had gold, and even Zahav Sagur? I similarly question the 'Rashba' brought after this. Perhaps we could say that he acquired more gold afterwards. However, "Ein Kesef Nechshav bi'Ymei Shlomo li'Me'umah" implies that all his days, it had no importance. - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf: Chidushei 'ha'Rashba' here asks, the verse teaches only that he had much silver! He answers, if he had no gold left, it would not say "Ein Kesef Nechshav bi'Ymei Shlomo li'M'umah"! We must say that he had great storehouses of gold! (NOTE: Kovetz Ha'aros, citing the Chafetz Chaim, says that perhaps the 'Rashba' in Menachos is Tosfos Rid. I disagree. Whenever the 'Rashba' cites Rashi, he writes after it Lamed"Hei. This could stand for 'Leshon ha'Moreh', but Tosfos Rid always writes 'ha'Moreh' before citing Rashi! The introduction to Chidushei 'ha'Rashba' in the Oz v'Hadar edition brings opinions that the author was R. Shmuel bar Avraham Min ha'Har (R. Yonah's Rebbi) or Rabbeinu Peretz. - PF)

When did they smelt the gold that was slightly more than a Kikar?

Rashi: It was already smelted 1000 times in the days of Shlomo. (NOTE: Rashash infers that this episode was in Bayis Sheni. I infer oppositely. 'More than the Menorah of the Mishkan' implies that they still had that Menorah. Only in Bayis Rishon, there were (and some say, they used - 99a) multiple Menoros! However, perhaps they wanted to have an extra Menorah, lest the one that they used become lost or Tamei. - PF)

What is the meaning of 'Ma'aseha descended from a Tahor place'?

Rashi (according to Shitah Mekubetzes): Shamayim showed a Menorah to Moshe, and he made corresponding to it.

Maharsha: Additionally, Shamayim showed to Moshe how to make it.

Why cannot "Al ha'Shulchan ha'Tahor" teach that Ma'aseha descended from a Tahor place?

Maharsha #1: The Makshan holds unlike R. Yosi b'Ribi Yehudah, who expounds below that Hash-m showed also an Aron and Shulchan to Moshe.

Maharsha #2: The Makshan holds like R. Yosi b'Ribi Yehudah. However, the Aron and Shulchan, only Tavnisam descended. The Menorah, also Ma'aseha (how to make it) descended.

Why is wooden Kli made to be stationary not Mekabel Tum'ah?

Rashi: The Torah equates "Kli Etz... Oh Sak" - just like Sak is moved empty and full, so Kli Etz that receive Tum'ah.

Why did Hash-m do a miracle with Lechem ha'Panim?

Maharal: It was not honorable that the bread was seven days old. Ben ha'Yisraelis mocked [and blasphemed] about this (Rashi Vayikra 24:10, from Toras Kohanim and Vayikra Rabah 32). Therefore, a great miracle was done with it.

Iyun Yakov: Lechem ha'Panim hints to Matan Torah. It had two faces, to hint to "Panim El Panim Diber Hash-m Imachem." It is arranged on Shabbos, for all agree that the Torah was given on Shabbos. To show Yisrael's dearness, it was hot [when taken off the Shulchan] like it was when placed on it, to show that we are still dear to Hash-m like the day of Kabalas ha'Torah.

One opinion holds that the oven is not Mekadesh Lechem ha'Panim, so baking it is not Docheh Shabbos. It was baked on Erev Shabbos. If so, there is no source to say that it was hot when placed on the Shulchan!

Tosfos: That opinion holds that it was soft [when taken off the Shulchan like it was when placed on it, the day after it was baked].

Why does R. Yosi b'Ribi Yehudah expound that forms of the Aron, Shulchan and Menorah descended? The verse discusses only the Menorah!

Maharsha: "K'Savnisam" (plural) implies that it refers also to the Aron and Shulchan mentioned above.

Why did fiery forms of the Aron, Shulchan and Menorah descend from Shamayim?

Maharal: These three Kelim are totally Kadosh. It was not proper that Moshe make them. Therefore, R. Yosi b'Ribi Yehudah said that Moshe did a physical act, and the design, which is intellectual, came from above. Gavriel made them. He showed to Moshe an Aron, Shulchan and Menorah of fire. Even though Moshe could have made them if he said to him 'do such and such', it was proper that they be done via help from Hash-m, i.e. showing the form to him.

Why can we not expound "va'Hakemosa Es ha'Mishkan [k'Mishpato Asher Hareisa..." similarly [that Hash-m showed this to Moshe]?

Iyun Yakov: The Zohar says that the Mishkan above was not erected until the Mishkan below was erected.

What was the answer 'regarding the Mishkan it says "k'Mishpato"; regarding the Kelim it says "b'Savnisam"'?

Rashi: "K'Mishpato" connotes that Moshe received its Halachos. "B'Savnisam" connotes that he saw its form.

Tosfos: Also regarding the Mishkan, it says "Tavnis ha'Mishkan v'Es Tavnis Kol Kelav"! There, it does not say ba'Har. Regarding the Kelim, it says ba'Har, which implies that [the form] descended to Moshe on the mountain.

What is the source that it was Gavriel who showed a Menorah to Moshe?

Daf Al ha'Daf citing R. Betzalel ha'Kohen (in Kerem Shlomo 22:3 p.22): Gavriel has the same Gematriya as Mar'eh. Also, perhaps it is like a Gezeirah Shavah. It says here "ka'Mar'eh Asher Her'ah Es Moshe", and it says in Daniel "l'Negdi k'Mar'eh Gaver; ... va'Yomer Gavriel Haven Lehalez Es ha'Mar'eh." We can learn that he was wrapped with a sash from "k'Mar'eh Gaver", like it says in Berachos (60b, upon tying his belt, one blesses 'Ozer Yisrael bi'Gvurah.' Gavriel was girded like a Gibor - "Chagor Charbecha Al Yarech Gibor."

Why was Gavri'el the angel to show Moshe?

Maharsha: He is the angel of fire, like it says in Yoma 21b, so he showed a Menorah of fire.

Why was Gavri'el wrapped with a sash?

Rashi: Craftsmen who want to do good work, they do so, lest their clothes drag.

Since Hash-m showed the Menorah to Moshe, why did the Torah need to write an entire Parshah of how to make it with buttons...?

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Griz: This teaches that even if a Menorah of fire descends from Shamayim, one must check if it conforms to all Halachos in Shulchan Aruch.

In the end, the Menorah was made (came out of the fire) by itself. Why did Shamayim need to show the Menorah to Moshe?

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Sefas Emes: Hash-m showed to Moshe, so he would have a great desire will all his heart and Nefesh to make it (just it was above his ability). Then, Hash-m completes his desire, and considers it as if Moshe made it.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Likutei Sichos (1 p.174): The Menorah is testimony to the world that the Shechinah dwells in Yisrael (Shabbos 22b). Moshe did not understand how this could come from something physical, especially gold. Hash-m confirmed that this is true. Man must throw gold in the fire (abandon the most coveted physical matter); when he does so, Hash-m makes from this a Menorah that illuminates to the entire world.

What did Hash-m need to show Moshe about Rosh Chodesh?

Rashi: At the time of the Molad, only a little of the moon is seen, and it is not recognized. (He showed how much must be seen to declare Rosh Chodesh.)

What did Hash-m need to show Moshe about Sheratzim?

Rashi: Moshe did not know which species are Tamei and which are Tahor.

What is the significance of the three things that were difficult for Moshe?

Maharal: They are far from the world. The Menorah is a great secret; its level is above the world. It was Mikshah (made from one mass; it was not composed of multiple pieces), for it is from the world of total unity. "Mikshah" hints that it was Kasheh (difficult) for Moshe; he could not understand it via Nevu'ah. Hash-m needed to show him with a finger and help him. Also Sheratzim are very far from the world. Man is primary in the world, and animals are close to him. Sheratzim are very far, therefore it was hard to understand in prophetic visions. Moshe saw what pertains to the world and is tied to it. (NOTE: Also animals, Hash-m showed to him which are Tahor and which are Tamei (Chulin 42a)! - PF) Chidush of the moon is far from the world. Renewal of something after its absence does not connect to the continuity of existence. Some say also Shechitah. It brings existence to absence.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Minhag Yisrael Torah (OC 134:2): When [they lift the Torah and] say "v'Zos ha'Torah", people point with a finger. I did not find a source for this. Perhaps it is from here - v'Zeh applies to something shown with a finger.

Here it says that Hash-m needed to show three things to Moshe. In Chulin (42a), it says that h/e showed to him also which animals may be eaten. Why was this omitted here?

Tosfos: Here it lists only those matters about which it says 'Zeh'. However, why does it omit Machatzis ha'Shekel? It says "Zeh Yitenu", and we say that Hash-m showed to Moshe a coin of fire (Shekalim 6a)! There, we cannot say that Moshe had difficulty understanding. He would not have known at all if Hash-m did not show to him!

Maharsha: The Mizrachi (Shemos 30:13, Vayikra 11:2) says that "Zeh" teaches that something was shown to him. "Ha'Chodesh ha'Zeh" implies that Hash-m showed the new moon to him. It is seen only at night, and Hash-m spoke to Moshe only during the day! Really, Hash-m spoke to him close to dark and showed the Molad to him, like Rashi explained (Shemos 12:2, from Mechilta). Mizrachi asked why Teivas Noach was omitted - "v'Zeh Asher Ta'aseh Osah..." I say that wherever the matter was mentioned shortly beforehand, 'v'Zeh' applies (so we need not say that Hash-m showed to him); this is how you will make it. The same applies to "v'Zeh Asher Ta'aseh Lahem Lekadesh..." It said above that Bigdei Kehunah will be Mekadesh Aharon and his sons. No matters of Kidush Chodesh preceded "ha'Chodesh ha'Zeh", therefore we expound that Hash-m showed to him. The same applies to Sheratzim. The Torah discussed lighting before "v'Zeh Ma'aseh ha'Menorah", but the Menorah itself was discussed far earlier, in Parshas Terumah.

Which laws of Shechitah did He show to him?

Rashi: Moshe did not understand where is Hagramah (if the knife left a ring of the windpipe, the Shechitah is invalid).

Iyun Yakov: Maharsha explained why other matters were difficult for Moshe, but not this. Perhaps checking the knife and indentations in it were difficult - they need much time and a settled mind (Beis Yosef YD 18).

How do we learn from "v'Zeh Asher Ta'aseh Al ha'Mizbe'ach"?

Rashi (according to Bach): Shechitah is the first part of Asiyah (Hakravah).

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Meshech Chochmah (R. Yishmael holds that in the Midbar, Chulin required Shechitah. He cannot explain that "v'Zeh" teaches about Shechitas Kodshim - it is the same as Shechitas Chulin! Yesh Omerim holds like R. Akiva, that in the Midbar, Nechirah (killing an animal via the Simanim, without Shechitah) sufficed for Chulin. Shechitah was only for Kodshim, so we can say that v'Zeh teaches about it.

Why did he request a child who is not sharp and not foolish?

Rashi: If he is sharp, he would know that it cannot be 'Yehareg Hashem' - that is like blasphemy. (NOTE: i.e. a sharp child knows from context what the word must be. Tosfos brings a case in which a Dalet in a Get (in k'Das Moshe) was small, like a Yud. Based on our Gemara, R. Eliyahu brought a boy who is not sharp and not foolish to read it. Could they not bring a sharp boy and cover the surrounding words?! Perhaps we decree not to do so, lest they forget to cover them. One could have explained that a sharp boy knows that there is no such word in Tefilin, or the Torah, or a Get...! - PF) A foolish child can read only a complete letter.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Kolan Shel Soferim (mi'Pi Olelim p.163): The Gemara says that we see if he reads it va'Yaharog or Yehareg. This implies that we show to him the entire word, and not just the letter. Also Tosfos says that the child read the word k'Das, unlike the custom to show him just the letter in Safek. Rav Ben Tziyon Aba Sha'ul said that the inference from the Gemara is proper, but not from Tosfos; a Get is more lenient. I say that Beis Yosef (OC 32) learned Tefilin from Tosfos' case of a Get! The Rema (YD 272:4, from the Tur) says that in order to finish a Sefer Torah at the bottom of a column, we make giant letters. If so, a Vav or Zayin will look like a final Nun! If we show to a child the entire word, this is not difficult; he would recognize from the rest of the word that it is a giant Vav or Zayin. I say that the Rambam (Hilchos Tefilin 1:19) wrote 'any letter that a child who is not sharp and not foolish cannot read it, it is Pasul. Therefore... the Yud must not resemble a Vav, or vice-versa... everyone who reads them should be able to run.' I infer that we show to the child all that is written (not only the letter in Safek). In Hilchos Sefer Torah (Perek 10), he wrote 'a child cannot read it at all', i.e. even if we do not cover anything.

What crowns was Hash-m tying on the letters?

Rashi: They are the Tagim on certain letters in a Sefer Torah.

Why are there crowns and Tagim on letters?

Maharal: Just like the words of the Torah teach about Divrei Torah, also the Tagim on the letters teach about fine Hasagos (understandings) that are like mountains hanging from threads of Torah itself. Also the Tag is fine! These fine Hasagos are separate from Torah itself. Just like Hash-m (His Chochmah) obligated the order of the Torah, He obligated what we learn from the Tagim. They are called crowns, for just like a crown is separate from the one who wears it, so these Hasagos are separate from Hasagos ha'Torah.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing ul'Levi Amar: Tiferes Shlomo (Yisro) says that the 600,000 Neshamos of Yisrael correspond to the 600,000 letters in Torah. Via expounding mounds of Halachos from the Tagim, R. Akiva added Neshamos to Yisrael. The Tagim were needed to give to these Neshamos a foothold in Torah. I say that Hash-m arranged that R. Akiva, a convert, expound the Tagim, via which converts will have a foothold in Torah. Tiferes Shlomo (Likutim) says that R. Akiva's assignment was to fix the sin of Adam ha'Rishon, who was cursed "Kotz v'Dardar Tatzmi'ach Lecha." Via the mounds of Halachos that he expounded from every Kotz (Tag), the Kotzim (thorns) that surround the supreme rose were nullified, and were fixed.

Daf Al ha'Daf: In Sotah (49a), it says that when R. Akiva died, honor of the Torah ceased. Rashi explained, he put to his heart to expound every Tag, extra word and extra letter. This is honor of the Torah, that nothing in it is l'Vatalah. Pnei Menachem (Sukos 5753) said, this is why before Kol Nidrei, we take out the Sifrei Torah and say "Ohr Zaru'a la'Tzadik ul'Yishrei Lev Simchah." The final letters spell R. Akiva (NOTE: sometimes we find his name with a Hei at the end - PF). Seforim Kedoshim say that we request pardon for disgrace of Torah. R. Akiva was killed on Yom Kipur or Erev Yom Kipur.

Maharsha: A crown is a reminder, lest something be forgotten, like Tzitzis are to remember the Mitzvos. The crowns hint to inner matters, like we say about the Choter of the Ches and the leg of the Hei. Moshe thought that human intellect cannot understand Hash-m's intent. Therefore, he said 'who can stop You?!'

What is the meaning of 'who can stop You?!'

Rashi: No one can block what You wrote. Why do You need to add crowns?!

Tzon Kodoshim: i.e. You can explicitly write what You want. You need not use Tagim to hint to laws! Hash-m answered, a Chacham will expound mounds of Halachos from each one. Most of Torah must be oral - there is too much to write (like R. Yochanan, Gitin 60b)!

Maharal: The Hasagos learned from these Tagim are elevated above man. Moshe understood Torah itself, but he did not fully understand the Hasagos learned from the Tagim.

Maharsha: You do not need crowns (to aid understanding, and surely, only You understand their meaning)!

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Teshuvas Chasam Sofer (YD 265): Moshe thought that they are merely for beauty. He did not know that they can be expounded. We infer that extra Tagim do not disqualify. Surely, l'Chatchilah one may not make extra Tagim!

Iyun Yakov: Hash-m was sitting and tying crowns on the letters. It says in Megilah (21a) that Moshe learned gentle matters while standing, and hard matters while sitting. Since Hash-m was sitting, Moshe inferred that the crowns are hard. He asked, everything is revealed to You - nothing is hard for You! Hash-m showed to him R. Akiva expounding the letters; it was difficult for Moshe - he did not understand it.

What is the significance of sitting in the eighth (some texts - 18th) row in R. Akiva's class?

Maharal: Moshe asked to see his level. Hash-m gave to him an intellectual understanding [of R. Akiva's level]. Eighteen rows [of Talmidim] shows the highest level. We say that there are 18,000 rows of Tzadikim in front of Hash-m (Sukah 45b). Moshe could not sit closer, for he had no connection to R. Akiva, nor to the Tagim and the Hasagos learned from them. Surely Moshe was at a higher level than R. Akiva. Moshe understood the Torah via Nevu'ah, but not what is on the Torah. R. Akiva understood the Torah not via Nevu'ah, rather, via Chochmah, and also what is learned from the Tagim. Moshe asked why Hash-m did not give Torah via R. Akiva - then, he would have reached a higher level than Moshe (Torah via Nevu'ah, and also Hasagos from the Tagim).

Maharsha: Moshe wanted Hash-m to reveal to him the secrets of the Tagim. Hash-m said, go back. This is like in Shabbos (104a). The Gemara expounded the order of the Aleph Beis, and then expounded in reverse, from Tav to Aleph. Hash-m told Moshe, before he will learn the secrets of the Tagim, he must learn the order of the Aleph Beis, also backwards. It says eight rows, for there are eight Nekudos. There are different hints based on each of them. (NOTE: The Gemara there did expound At Bash, i.e. pairing letters from the beginning to the end of the Aleph Beis - Aleph Tov, Beis Shin... It did not expound Tav Shin Reish... The eight basic vowels are Kamatz, Patach, Chirik, Tzeirei, Segol, Cholem, Kubutz and Shva. Sometimes Cholem and Kubutz are written with a Vav (and they are called Melafum or Shuruk), and sometimes Shva is together with Kamatz, Patach or Segol, and it is called Chataf (Kamatz, Patach or Segol), but these are not counted separately. I do not understand why the order of the Aleph Beis teaches different matters based on the vowels. - PF)

Moshe was shown all Torah that will be said until Mashi'ach. How could R. Akiva teach things that Moshe did not know?

Ohr ha'Chayim (Vayikra 13:37): Moshe received all the Halachos, but not how they are derived from the written Torah. This is Avodas ha'Torah; it was revealed to R. Akiva and his colleagues.

Etz Yosef: Our primary Avodah in learning Gemara and secrets is to show a source in written Torah for the Halachos, Derashos and secrets. Tana'im composed Toras Kohanim and Sifri. Moshe did not need the sources, since he heard from Hash-m! We need the sources.

When R. Akiva said about Devar Echad 'we know this from a tradition from Moshe from Sinai', why was Moshe assuaged?

Maharal: Moshe weakened when he saw that R. Akiva's level was higher than his own regarding secrets of the Tagim. When Moshe saw that R. Akiva does not understand traditions from Sinai, only via Moshe, he was assuaged. Those are a higher level than Hasagos via the Tagim; they are so difficult that they are known only via Nevu'ah.

Maharsha: Devar Echad is from the end of the letters to the head, why one (Aleph) is at the beginning of the letters, to teach about unity, and not another letter. R. Akiva said that it is known only from a tradition from Moshe. Moshe was assuaged that secrets of Torah depend on himself.

Etz Yosef: This showed that the primary Halachah is from Moshe, just R. Akiva shows sources in written Torah. Moshe was assuaged, for he was the first recipient of Torah, just amidst humility, he asked why Hash-m did not give Torah via R. Akiva.

When Moshe asked 'why did You choose to give the Torah through me?!', what was the answer 'be silent! So was My intent'?

Maharal #1: Moshe did not understand what is learned from the Tagim, for they do not pertain to this world. Moshe had this world - it was created only for Moshe (Sanhedrin 98a)! "Bereishis Bara Elokim" - for the sake of Moshe, who is called Reishis - "va'Yar Reishis Lo" (Bereishis Rabah 1:4). He completed the world, via the Torah given through him. He ruled over the world - he conquered the great kings Sichon and Og. Therefore, he had no connection to the Tagim. R. Akiva's level was not in this world, so he totally pertains to the Hasagos from the Tagim. Hash-m answered, it was My intent not to give Torah via R. Akiva, for he has no portion in this world; he was separate from it.

Maharal: Bamidbar Rabah (19:6) says that matters not revealed to Moshe on Sinai were revealed to R. Akiva and his colleagues, i.e. Harugei Malchus. This discusses what was attained via Nevu'ah; we can say that also Moshe understood it via Chochmah. One could say that they were not revealed to Moshe even on Sinai; my first Perush is primary.

Maharal #2: Moshe understood the Klal of Torah. The Tagim are individual Hasagos that come out of Torah, just like Tagim come out of letters. Moshe was equated to Klal Yisrael and is considered like the Klal. R. Akiva understood the Tagim, for he was an individual. Moshe thought that Hash-m should have given Torah via R. Akiva, and he would understand the Klal and the Prat. Hash-m answered that this world is not proper for such a level.

Maharsha: Indeed, I considered giving Torah via R. Akiva. However, your thoughts are unlike Mine (you cannot understand why I decided not to).

Iyun Yakov, Daf Al ha'Daf: "Lo Kam Navi k'Moshe Od", but there was a Chacham like him - R. Akiva. Moshe asked, why did You not give everything through me (I would be able to expound Tagim like he does), or everything through him? Hash-m offered the Torah to all nations. In order that His intent not be totally Batel, oral Torah was made anew via R. Akiva, who descended from converts. Bamidbar Rabah (14:10) expounds "v'Chol Yakar Ra'asah Eino" - matters not revealed to Moshe were revealed to R. Akiva. Bi'Ydei Moshe explains that "[la'Yhudim Haysah Orah v'Simchah v'Sason] vi'Ykar" is Tefilin; Moshe saw the knot of Hash-m's Tefilin ("v'Ra'isa Es Achorai"), and R. Akiva saw the Tefilin itself. I say that at the Sneh, Hash-m wanted to reveal His Panim to Moshe, but Moshe hid his face (Berachos 7. Had Moshe looked, he would have been able to expound like R. Akiva.)

Daf Al ha'Daf citing ul'Levi Amar: Meshech Chochmah (Devarim 17:11) says that enactments of Chachamim in every generation, according to the Dor, are Hash-m's desire. The Torah commands to guard them - "Lo Sasur Min ha'Davar..." Hash-m's Chochmah decreed that they be revealed only at a certain time. E.g. the Asmachta "v'Ishah Gerushah me'Ishah Lo Yikachu" to include (forbid to a Kohen) a Chalutzah, it was revealed only after many Doros, when there was a need, for Arayos were rampant. Had it been revealed earlier, this would mandate the reason (rampant Arayos) and nullify choice; R. Akiva expounded decrees from Tagim. Moshe did not understand, for it was not yet time for them to be revealed. Hash-m said, they are in My intent [now, but will be revealed only later]. Hash-m's intent does not nullify choice. (NOTE: Why does revelation of a decree mandate that the reason applies immediately? Rabah holds that even after people in Chutz La'aretz learned that Gitin must be Lishmah, and there is no need for a Shali'ach to say 'it was written and signed in front of me', we decreed that he say it, lest people forget the law again (Gitin 5a). We forbid Chadash on Nisan 16, lest Beis ha'Mikdash be built and people think that Chadash is permitted from` dawn (Sukah 3:12). Netilas Yadayim was enacted so when Taharah returns, people will be used to guarding Taharah [for the sake of Terumah - see Sha'ar ha'Tziyun 158:1]! - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf: The Rambam (Hilchos Yesodei ha'Torah 4:13) says to fill one's stomach with Shas and Poskim, and afterwards stroll in the Pardes (secrets). I say that Hash-m commanded Moshe to teach Yisrael simply, without hints and secrets. Moshe, amidst his humility, thought that he is not proper to engage in hints and secrets. When Moshe saw R. Akiva, he considered him much greater than himself. He asked to give Torah via R. Akiva, so people would see the hints and secrets hidden in Torah, and their hearts will be drawn to learn and fulfill Torah. Hash-m said, My intent was that people learn simply, and when they toil much, they will understand it. When their stomachs will be full of revealed Torah, R. Akiva and afterwards R. Shimon will reveal secrets of Torah.

Why was R. Akiva's flesh being sold in the meat market?

Rashi: It was torn from him with iron combs (Berachos 61b).

When Moshe asked 'is this the reward for such Torah?!', what was the answer 'be silent! So was My intent'?

Maharal: Even though it is not proper that this happen to R. Akiva from the aspect of Torah, so decreed Hash-m's order. Since he was separate from this sensory world, and could expound crowns on letters, the nations, whose portion is only in this sensory world, ruled over him.

Maharsha: Shabbos 104a expounded At Bash, i.e. Aleph Tov, Beis Shin, both for Resha'im and Tzadikim, that Tzadikim receive their punishment in this world, to increase their reward in the world to come. (NOTE: Indeed, we expound there about their reward in the world to come, but it does not mention their punishment in this world! - PF) Moshe asked, should Torah hint to the reward Tzadikim get for bearing punishments in this world?! Hash-m said, so crossed My mind (but I decided unlike this).

Iyun Yakov: Hash-m wanted to create the world solely with Midas ha'Din. He saw that the world could not survive, so he joined to it Midas ha'Rachamim. Tzadikim are judged with Din alone, to fulfill His intent.

Etz Yosef: A person can think and later retract. This does not apply to Hash-m! Be'er Mayim Chayim on the Torah answered, both the intent to create with Din, and the deed in the end, in which He joined mercy, both were needed to create the world, and it was created via both. The Neshamos of total Tzadikim crossed His mind before creation. He consulted with them about creating the world, like a Midrash says. They are still judged with absolute Din, like His initial intent. Hash-m is so exacting with them, to raise them to great levels.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Siduro Shel Shabbos (2:2): R. Akiva always intended to be Moser Nefesh for Hash-m, to fulfill "uv'Chol Nafshecha" - even if He takes your life. One might ask, how do we know that this is so? Hash-m caused that he was able to fulfill this. Hash-m answered Moshe, his intent was [revealed] in front of Me, so I enabled him to fulfill it.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Arvei Nachal (Mas'ei): One who accepts Ol Malchus Shamayim and intends for Kidush Hash-m, he has great pleasure, thinking that he is being burned for Hash-m's honor. One who is actually burned has great pain. However, Tashbatz (415) brings from Maharam a tradition that one who is Moser Nefesh for Hash-m does not feel afflictions. They saw people bearing awesome afflictions, and never said a word of pain. His Mesiras Nefesh elevates all his senses to the world of thought; he is stripped of physicality. Hash-m answered, R. Akiva rose in thought, and feels only pleasure. (NOTE: This would answer why he was afflicted with irons combs tearing his flesh (Berachos 61b). Moshe asked why his flesh was sold in the market. Would there not be spiritual pain that his flesh is not buried? When they removed the skin of R. Yishmael's face, he screamed [only] when they reached the place of Tefilin, due to loss of the Mitzvah (Otzar ha'Midrashim, Asarah Harugei Ma'amaros p.441, brought in Piyut Eleh Ezkerah, Musaf Yom Kipur).

What is 'Choter the roof of a Ches'?

Rashi: He makes a shoot (protrusion) on the [left end of] the roof (like in the picture in Rashi).

Tosfos: He makes a hump in the middle of it, like a camel's hump (like the picture in Tosfos). A support is Shabbos 104a, which says 'he removed the roof of a Ches, and thereby made two letters Zayin.' (NOTE: Tosfos explains that he removed the hump. According to Rashi, it implies that he removed the entire roof. If so, the remaining legs look more like Vav's than Zayin's! - PF)

Maharsha: Why did our Gemara not mention why the leg of Kuf is disconnected? We say there that also this hints that if he will repent, there is an opening for him to enter! I say that here Rav Ashi mentioned the forms of Hei and Ches, for they are similar. We said there that one should not write Hei like Ches, nor vice-versa. Both have walls on three sides, and one side is open, like an Achsadra. The Choter in the roof of a Ches hint that Hash-m is Chai at the top of this world, which is like an Achsadra. When saying the Ches in Echad (in Shma Yisrael), one should intend that Hash-m is one in the seven Reki'im and the land (Berachos 13b; this is eight in all, like Ches' Gematriya), which is the Klal of this world. The form of Hei was changed, to make an opening for Ba'alei Teshuvah.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Maharik (Shoresh 71) inferred, since the Gemara taught together being Choter the roof of a Ches and suspending the leg of a Hei, just like the former is not essential (the custom is not to be Choter the roof of a Ches in Gitin), also the latter. If so, what distinguishes Hei from Ches? Teshuvas Chasam Sofer (YD 267) says that they must do one of them, to distinguish the letters. Rav Ashi taught that meticulous scribes do both.

How do they suspend the leg of a Hei?

Rashi: They do not connect the inner (left) leg to the roof.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Beis Yosef (OC 36, citing Rivash 120) infers that if the leg reaches the roof, it is Kosher, for only meticulous scribes were careful about this.

How does the verse teach that Hash-m is a fortress in this world and the world to come for all who trust in Him?

Maharsha: It says in Eruvin (18b) that after the Churban, it suffices for the world to use two letters [of Hash-m's name], i.e. Yud Kei in this world, and Yud Kei Vav Kei in the world to come. In any case, the prefix Beis in b'Kah is extra.

Etz Yosef: Maharsha holds that "Tzur" is an expression of strength and a fortress, and not Yetzirah (formation), like the conclusion. This is difficult.

Iyun Yakov: This is for one who does not engage in income to sustain his family, only in Torah and Chesed (Tzedakah) and puts his trust in Him to provide all his needs. Since he engages in Torah and Chesed, he eats the Peros in this world, and the principal is intact for the world to come. Therefore, Hash-m is a fortress for him in both worlds.

Etz Yosef: From the beginning, we knew that "Tzur" is an expression of Yetzirah. We learn from "Adei Ad", i.e. for all worlds - this world and the world to come. However, why is there the prefix Beis? Therefore, we expound that He created two worlds with the letters Yud Kei. Due to this, it is proper to trust in Him for both of them.

How Hash-m create worlds with the letters Yud and Hei?

Rashi (citing Sefer Yetzirah): He split His name (Yud-Kei), and made three drops from each letter. The drops became water, fire, air [Shitah Mekubetzes - and earth], and the entire world.

Etz Yosef citing Yefe To'ar: I do not engage in hidden matters. Hash-m did not create the world like a worker does with Kelim. He created it with speech! Rather, Hash-m's names show particular Midos or influences. Creating with a letter means that its power and influences were used to influence three powers - water, fire, air...

Why was there a Safek about which letter was used to create each world?

Etz Yosef: It would be more proper to say that the first letter (Yud) created this world, which was first. Or, because the world to come is a higher level, it was created via Yud, which is first.

What is the meaning of 'whoever wants to leave'?

Rashi: Whoever wants to do evil, he is able to.

Why do we say that there is another opening above the left leg for those who will do Teshuvah? If the leg would extend to the roof, it would be a Ches!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Precise scribes are Choter the roof of a Ches, so even if Hei's leg extended to the roof, it would not be a Ches.

Iyun Yakov: This is why the Gemara taught about the roof of a Ches before Hei, even though Hei is earlier in the Aleph Beis, in order to justify that the extra opening in Hei is for Ba'alei Teshuvah, and not to distinguish it from a Ches.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing ha'Ben Yakir Li Efrayim (Sukos): The Beis Yisrael said that it is easy to reach Teshuvah on Sukos. A Sukah requires two full walls; the third can be just over a Tefach, within three Tefachim of one of the walls. This is like the letter Hei, which hints to Teshuvah. If two walls are k'Hilchasam - if Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kipur were proper, and one strived to engage in Teshuvah and good deeds - then on Sukos, even a Tefach suffices. i.e. he is already drawn after good conduct, and need not work hard to complete his Teshuvah. 'Open for Me an opening of Teshuvah like a needle point, and I will open for you openings like of the Ulam' (Shir ha'Shirim Rabah 5:3).

Why can't he succeed to enter from the same opening that he left from?

Maharal: Surely, the opening to leave the world leans towards lack. Therefore, this opening is below, for the world is close to the grave and perishing. To enter is via the attribute of the world close to existence and Torah. [Shamayim] helps him to repent, and not receive total absence (permanent death).

Maharsha: This is like the Rambam wrote in Shemoneh Perakim, that to repent, a sinner must distance greatly from what he sinned in. Therefore, the opening to return must be far from the one from which he left to sin.

What is the support from Reish Lakish?

Rashi: He taught that one who wants to purify himself, Hash-m helps him, i.e. for he needs help.

Maharsha: He needs help, to show to him to where to turn to find the small opening to return. One who wants to sin does not need help - the opening to sin (at the bottom of the Hei) is totally open.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Ba'al ha'Tanya: It does not say 'Ba Litaher' (to purify himself), rather, 'Ba Letaher' - he comes to purify others. Then, Shamayim helps him.

How do we learn from "Im la'Letzim Hu Yalitz vela'Anavim Yiten Chen"?

Rashi: "Hu Yalitz" means that Hash-m gives opportunity for him to scoff.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): I would explain that "Hu" is extra, to teach that the person himself is Yalitz. Rashi explains that "Hu" refers to Hash-m; He gives to him the opportunity. He explained so, for the verse began in the plural (la'Letzim) and switched to the singular.

Maharsha: For Letzim [one who wants to be Metamei himself], "Hu Yalitz" - the person himself scoffs; Hash-m only gives opportunity for him to do so. For Anavim (one who wants to purify himself), Hash-m is Nosen Chen (helps him, for he needs help).

What Tag does a Hei have?

Rashi: It has a small crown (protrusion) on the [left] end of the roof.

Tosfos: R. Tam says, it is a protrusion at the start (right side of the roof), like the Tag of a Dalet (Eruvin 13a). Rashi's Perush is better; it seems that the Tag is near the opening for Teshuvah.

Maharal: Hei hints to Teshuvah; this is why it has an opening [for Ba'alei Teshuvah to enter]. Every Ba'al Teshuvah is separated from physicality, for he separates from [desires of] the body. Hash-m says, if he repents, I will tie a crown to him, for a crown is separate. A king has a crown; he is separate from the nation. Also, Hash-m created this world with the letter Hei. One who repents, he returns from the physical world to Hash-m, who is separate. The crown on Hei hints to this.

What is the meaning of 'the world to come was created with Yud, for the Tzadikim there are Mu'atim'?

'Rashba' #1: There are more Resha'im than Tzadikim, therefore there are few Tzadikim in the world to come, even though it is bigger than this world.

'Rashba' #2: The world to come resembles those for whom it was created, i.e. Tzadikim, who are Mu'atim (small, i.e. are humble), like we say 'the top of the Yud is bent, for every Tzadik there bends his head.'

Maharsha: #2: This is like we say (Chulin 89a) "Ki Atem ha'M'at" - even when I give to you greatness, you humble yourselves. Avraham said "I am earth and ashes." This is like Yud, which is small in size.

Maharsha #1: They are few in number. This is like 'I saw Bnei Aliyah, and they are Mu'atim' (Sukah 45b).

Maharsha: This is difficult. Indeed, Yud is the smallest letter, but it is not the smallest in number. Nine are smaller than it! However, Mu'atim implies few in number.

Etz Yosef citing Nezer ha'Kodesh: This is not difficult. Tzadikim are considered like many, like we say that Ya'ir ben Menasheh was equal to the majority of a Sanhedrin, and Moshe was equal to 600,000. Each of them, according to his level, encompasses sparks of many Neshamos.

Iyun Yakov: They are not less than 10 who protect their generation. We find that Avraham prayed "do not destroy, due to the 10." He did not ask for less, for less cannot save their Dor. (NOTE: The Gemara said that the world to come was created with Yud, for its Tzadikim are few! This requires investigation. I ask, even if Bnei Aliyah are few, all of Yisrael have a share in the world to come (Sanhedrin 89a)! Surely there are a multitude of Tzadikim there from all the generations! - PF)

How does 'each one's deeds are unlike his colleague's' explain why each Tzadik there bends his head?

Rashi: Each is embarrassed, for his colleague has honor (due to his deeds) that he himself lacks.

Maharal: Tzadikim are not equal. Avraham's Midah was Chesed. He is bent due to Yitzchak, whose Midah was Din, and vice-versa. I explained this in Bava Basra (75b), regarding 'everyone is singed due to his colleague's Chupah.'

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Agra d'Pirka (314): Here and in Bava Basra, we say that Tzadikim are at different levels. In Ta'anis (31a), it says that in the future, Hash-m will make a circular dance for Tzadikim; early Chachamim said that all will be equal! There, in front of the Shechinah, all are equal.

When does one complete Daf save the entire Sefer?

Tosfos: This is if it was in the Sefer from the beginning. If one may add it afterwards, there would never be a need to put a Sefer in Genizah. One could add a good Daf and correct the Sefer!

Ha'Boneh: Hei hints to acceptance of Ba'alei Teshuvah, and Yud hints to Tzadikim. It seems that a Sefer with mistakes hints to a person with Aveiros. How much is easy to fix? If there is one complete, smooth page with pure Mitzvos, they save him from all Aveiros, whether called Chaseros or Yeseros.

What is considered most of the Sefer?

Rashi (on Rif Hilchos Sefer Torah 4a, and as cited in 'Rashba'): The majority of each Daf has no error, i.e. there are at most five or six errors on every Daf. (NOTE: Shitah Mekubetzes 20 cites Rashi to say 'eight or six errors.' Surely the Shitah wrote 'Hei Oh Vav', and a scribe mistook the Hei for a Ches. Shitah Mekubetzes for this Amud is not in the Oz v'Hadar edition. - PF) Then, one complete Daf saves the entire Sefer.

'Rashba': What is the Chidush [that a complete Daf saves the entire Sefer only when the majority is proper]? We discuss this case - if there are four [errors on every Daf], Yiganez! It seems that one might have thought that since it would have needed Genizah due to four errors on every Daf, but the complete Daf saves it, the same applies to if there are many errors on every Daf. The latter Beraisa refutes this. However, what is Rashi's source that it saves even if there are five or six errors on every Daf? It seems that it is because it did not say 'this is only if there are only four errors on every Daf.' However, what is R. Yitzchak's source to say so? I answer, if it only saved four errors on each Daf, we already know this from 'if there are four [on every Daf], Yiganez.' This implies that if even one Daf has less than four, it saves the Sefer. Surely R. Yitzchak teaches that the Daf saves even if there are more than four on every Daf.

Kesef Mishneh (Hilchos Sefer Torah 7:12): It is the majority of letters in the Sefer. (NOTE: This is astounding, that 49% of the letters may be fixed, but if there are four mistakes on every page, the Sefer may not be fixed. - PF)

Tzon Kodoshim: It is the majority of words on every Daf.

Why do missing letters cause the Sefer to look spotted?

Rashi: They must be inserted between the lines.

Why do extra letters not disqualify?

Rashi: They can be erased.

Tosfos: Some err, and think that our Gemara means that we are not concerned for extra letters, so if they have a Safek whether a letter should be written, they write it. This is wrong. Our Gemara is Machshir extra letters that were erased!