What are Osiyos?

Rashi #1: I heard that they are letters of Hash-m's name.

Rashi #2: All Hash-m's names are called Osiyos.

What is the significance of Da'as being between two Osiyos?

Rashba (Berachos 33a): Elokim is Midas ha'Din; Shem Yud Kei is Midas ha'Rachamim. The world could not exist with only one of them. Therefore, these names do not appear together in creation until Shamayim and Aretz were completed - "b'Yom Asos Hash-m Elokim Eretz v'Shamayim" (Bereishis 2:4). One who has Da'as understands what human intellect can grasp of His Emes and Midos, and knows to go in the ways of Avodah and Mitzvos - "Ki Im b'Zos Yis'halel ha'Mis'halel Haskel v'Yode'a Osi Ki Ani Hash-m Oseh Chesed..." (Yirmeyah 9:23). He understands that I do Chesed; he engages in Avodah and Mitzvos because I desire them.

Etz Yosef (Berachos 33a, citing Iyei ha'Yam): [The verse says Kel;] the Rashba holds that also this is Midas ha'Din, unlike Acharonim who learn from "Chesed Kel Kol ha'Yom" (Tehilim 52:3) that Kel is Midas ha'Chesed. If Hash-m gave Da'as to someone, he understands that also Dinim that come from Hash-m bring Chesed and mercy to the world. One without Da'as does not understand this - "va'Ani Yisarti Chizakti Zero'osam v'Elai Yechashvu Ra" (Hoshe'a 7:15).

Iyun Yakov: When three are on the road, the most esteemed is in the middle. It says "Kel De'os Hash-m", for if Midas ha'Din came upon a person, and he remains in his virtue with settled Da'as, and he has Da'as of his Maker, in the end Hash-m will conduct with him with Midas ha'Rachamim.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov, Berachos 33a): Amidst Da'as, i.e. knowing his Creator, like it says "Da Es Elokei Avicha v'Avdehu" (Divrei ha'Yamim I, 28:9), he causes Kel (Midas ha'Din - "v'Kel Zo'em b'Chol Yom" (Tehilim 7:12)) to become mercy (Shem Havayah). This is like Chazal said, that Tzadikim turn Midas ha'Din to Midas ha'Rachamim. One who has no Da'as, the name of mercy does not rest on him, only pure Din. Da'as removes the Din and anger. Since he is Ish De'os and Binos, Shem Havayah (pure mercy) rests on him.

Rav Elyashiv (Berachos 33a): Most Poskim hold that Kel is Midas ha'Rachamim. The 13 Midos of mercy begin "Hash-m Hash-m Kel Rachum..."! (The other opinion holds that the 13 Midos are after Kel.) Da'as is between two names of mercy, to hint that one needs much mercy to merit Da'as.

Maharsha: It is the highest of three Midos - Chochmah, Binah and Da'as, like Rashi explained in Shemos (31:3). It is Ru'ach ha'Kodesh. Hash-m's names are unlike other words composed of letters to show a certain matter. One who knows combinations of [letters of] Hash-m's names, this is Da'as and Ru'ach ha'Kodesh itself! We say that Betzalel knew how to combine the letters used to create Shamayim and Aretz (below, 55a)!

Iyun Yakov (Berachos 33a): It is listed last among Betzalel's attributes ("va'Amalei Oso Ru'ach Elokim b'Chochmah uvi'Svunah uv'Da'as" - Shemos 31:3), for it is greatest. We request it first in Shemoneh Esre (De'ah Binah v'Haskel) - we request Da'as, and if not, at least Binah or Haskel. This is unlike those who changed the order (NOTE: In Nusach Sefard and Sefardi, we request Chochmah, Binah and Da'as, just like the verse! - PF) The Siman is Devash - De'ah, Binah and Sechel.

Anaf Yosef (Berachos 33a, citing Semichas Zekenim): Da'as is between two Osiyos (Sefiros) - Chochmah and Binah, which are the two Osiyos of Shem Yud Kei. (Perhaps Rashi here said 'two letters of Shem' to hint to this.) Da'as is the intermediary between them. We bring the verse "Ki Kel De'os Hash-m", for the two names (Kel and Hash-m) hint to Chochmah and Binah.

What is the question from Nekamah?

Maharsha (Berachos 33a): Why is it between mercy and Gevurah? It is purely Midas ha'Din and Gevurah!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov, Berachos 33a): Does vengeance switch Din to mercy?! Where there is vengeance, there is no mercy!

What is Nekamah for good?

Rashi: Nekamah can mean reward. He took Shechinah from the Nochrim and put it on Yisrael. It is called Nekamah, for it is a reward for Yisrael for saying Na'aseh v'Nishma.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 9, citing AMaTZ: Rashi explains that the Nekamah for bad is against the Nochrim on Yom ha'Din. This is much later than the Nekamah for good!

Rashi (Berachos 33a): This is like it says in Bava Kama (38a), "Hofi'a me'Har Paran" - Hofi'a from Paran, and He was Mafkir their money to Yisrael. If a Yisrael's ox gored a Nochri's ox, he is exempt. Hofi'a means that He revealed and made Hefker, when they did not accept the Torah.

Etz Yosef (Berachos 33a, citing Semichas Zekenim): It is like a Gezeirah Shavah "Hofi'a me'Har Paran" and "Kel Nekamos Hofi'a" to teach that the reason that He was Mafkir their money is because they did not accept the Torah.

Ha'Kosev (Berachos 33a): After the Churban, one can merit as if he served in the Mikdash via Kin'ah and vengeance against Resha'im, for vengeance is between two Osiyos, just like the Mikdash. Perfection is acquired via investigation and deed - each of these has two parts. Investigation - in Torah, and in worldly matters. Deed - doing every proper deed for His Avodah, when possible, and conducting cruelty to take vengeance against evil.

Maharsha Berachos 33a, Rif (on the Ein Yakov) #1: Amidst vengeance against idolaters, mercy will come to Yisrael.

Vilna Gaon (OC 695:2): One must get drunk on Purim until he cannot distinguish between Arur Haman (the vengeance against him) and Baruch (the aggrandizing of) Mordechai. Vengeance is great - it was put between two Osiyos. When one is drunk, he loses his Da'as, and cannot distinguish them. Rav Elyashiv - i.e. vengeance is between two Osiyos, like Da'as; without Da'as, he does not know which is greater. Surely vengeance for evil is better. The primary vengeance is wiping out Amalek; Hash-m's Kisei is not complete until they are wiped out!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov, Berachos 33a) #2: Amidst vengeance against idolaters, who did not accept the Torah, they will be merciful to Yisrael, who accepted the Torah. "Kel Nekamos Hofi'a" is vengeance for evil - if Yisrael do not guard the Torah, vengeance against the Nochrim will bring evil to Yisrael.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Drashos Chasam Sofer 172:3: The Nekamah against Nochrim is the same as Da'as. It is not via swords. Rather, "u'Mal'ah ha'Aretz De'ah" - the Goyim will pull out their hair and clap amidst grief - why did we interfere with Yisrael's Avodas Hash-m?!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 9, citing AMaTZ: Both Nekamos will be when Mashi'ach comes. We find that punishments will accompany Mashi'ach - "Hinei ha'Choshech Yechaseh Eretz va'Arafel l'Umim v'Alayich Yizrach Hash-m..." (99a). just like only two out of 600,000 (counted in the Midbar) entered Eretz Yisrael, also only two out of every 600,000 left Mitzrayim, and similarly in Yemos Mashi'ach - "uch'Yom Alosah me'Eretz Mitzrayim" (111a).

Does Da'as bring wealth? "Lo la'Chachamim Lechem v'Gam Lo la'Nevonim Osher" (Koheles 9:11)!

Maharal #1: Da'as is unlike Tevunah. Da'as is knowing the Emes of matters in the world. This is called wealth. It is proper to come with Da'as, for it is Hashpa'ah from above - "uv'Da'as Chadarim Yimal'u." Just like one who has many acquisitions is called rich, also one who acquires Yedi'ah. Zaken is one who acquired Chochmah (Kidushin 32b). He is prepared to acquire Torah.

Maharal #2: Da'as is between two Osiyos of Hash-m; it clings to Hash-m, therefore he gets Hashpa'ah from above.

Maharsha: It says in Nidah (70b) that to become wealthy, one should increase business. Many did so, and did not become wealthy! Rather, he must request wealth from its Owner. One who has Da'as, initially he increases business. When his Da'as sees that it did not help, he requests wealth from its Owner.

Iyun Yakov: If Midas ha'Din came upon a person, and he remains in his virtue with settled Da'as, in the end Hash-m will conduct with him with Midas ha'Rachamim (he will become rich).

Margoliyos ha'Yam (11): Through growing wise, he will grow rich - "Orech Yamim bi'Yminah bi'Semolah Osher v'Chavod" (Bava Basra 25b). Poverty is only in Da'as (Nedarim 41a); if he would have Da'as, he would become rich, like it says here (Gilyonei ha'Shas ibid.)!

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Ben Yehoyada: Someone asked to buy from a merchant, on condition to pay an additional 50% in six months; he refused to sell to him. Another offered to pay an additional 10% in six months; he sold to him. He explained, surely the first intends to consume; he will not be able to pay. The latter buys in order to profit; he will be able to pay. The seller had Da'as, not to be confounded at an offer for great profit and cast his merchandise on thorns.

What is the significance of the Mikdash being between two Osiyos?

Rashba (Berachos 33a): The Mikdash is the place of His dwelling. It is built for honor and glory.

Maharsha (Berachos 33a): It was built via Betzalel, who had Da'as and Ru'ach ha'Kodesh to combine the letters used to create Shamayim and Aretz, i.e. mercy and Din.

Rav Elyashiv (Berachos 33a): It is between two names of mercy, to hint that one needs much mercy to merit Binyan of the future Beis ha'Mikdash, like we said about Da'as. Ha'Kosev - do not say that one who serves in the Mikdash, it is as if he is a Ba'al Da'as. Even one who serves must strive to have proper Emunos and Kavanos.

If one has Da'as, why is it as if the Beis ha'Mikdash was built in his day?

Rashba (Berachos 33a): Its Kelim and matters hint to deep truths - "u'Re'eh va'Ase b'Savnisam Asher Atah Mar'eh ba'Har" (Shemos 25:40). From there people draw Ru'ach ha'Kodesh. One who has Da'as understands from the forms of the Mikdash. Therefore, it is as if it was built in his days.

Maharsha (Berachos 33a): One who has Da'as, like Betzalel, it is proper for the Mikdash to be built in his days, via Da'as.

Iyun Yakov (Berachos 33a): The Mikdash below corresponds to the Mikdash above; influence flows down from above.

Anaf Yosef Berachos 33a, citing Toras ha'Olah: One who engages in Torah of Korbanos, it is as if he offered Korbanos. Surely it is not for merely reading the Parshiyos or learning the laws, rather, for one who looks into their reasons. One must seek to understand what he can of the Korbanos and the Mikdash, to know how he gets Kaparah. His primary intent must be to be pleasing to Hash-m. Since he obtains the purpose of the Mikdash, it is as if it was built in his day. Ha'Kosev - we learn this, for it is between two Osiyos, just like Da'as.

Margoliyos ha'Yam: One who engages in the laws of Avodah, it is as if the Mikdash was built in his days (Menachos 110a). Pesachim 87a says so about male youths of Yisrael who never sinned, and Benos Yisrael who have relations only with their husbands.

What is 'one has no Da'as', on whom one may not have mercy?

Maharsha: It is one who nullified the form in which he was created. Man was created with Da'as and intellect. If he has no Da'as, he loses his form. He is not included in "Kol Ma'asav", on whom Hash-m has mercy; Hash-m made him Yashar, with Da'as!

Chashukei Chemed and Daf Al ha'Daf, citing Birkas Peretz (Beshalach): It is one who does not show gratitude; one may not have mercy on him in matters beyond the letter of the law. 'Afflictions will come on one who has mercy on him' - he will pay back evil in place of good. Mishnas R. Eliezer says that Adam ha'Rishon was banished from Gan Eden due to Kefiyas ha'Tovah. Hash-m was angry with our fathers in the Midbar for this Midah, and when they came to Eretz Yisrael, most of their sins were due to it. The Torah is so stringent about this, for it is like denying Hash-m. One who denies the good that his friend did for him, in the end he will deny the good that his Maker did for him (Shemos Rabah 1:8 applies this to Pharaoh); such a person cannot accept Ol Malchus Shamayim.

Why may one not have mercy on one without Da'as? "V'Rachamav Al Kol Ma'asav" (Tehilim 145:9)!

Maharal: Mercy is due to connection with the one upon whom he has mercy, e.g. a parent with his child. Yisrael are brothers, so one should have mercy on another. One who has no Da'as has no connection. He is physical; people are separated via physicality. They are connected via Da'as. If he has no Da'as, he has no connection. One may not have mercy on one who is not proper for this Midah.

Maharsha: Man was made with Da'as and Sechel. If he has no Da'as, he lost his form. He is no longer included in "Kol Ma'asav." Hash-m made man with straight Da'as.

Rav Elyashiv (Berachos 33a): If one will have mercy on him, he will continue to sin. This is not mercy - rather, it shows that he desires the ways of the one without Da'as! Not having mercy on him is the true mercy.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Chidushei ha'Rim: One should teach to him Da'as, so it will be permitted to have mercy on him (Mayanah Shel Torah, Haftoras Shemos)!

Chashukei Chemed (Berachos 33a): We discuss one who could learn Da'as, but does not, due to slackening, pride and following his Yetzer ha'Ra. Here we do not discuss delving into deep investigations - expounding is not primary, rather, deed (Avos 1:17)! One must know how to act straightly according to Torah, in the eyes of Hash-m and people, as a Jew should. He should be straight with all people, be happy and good-hearted with people and in his portion, and conduct with Derech Eretz. One sins only if a Ru'ach of lunacy enters him! The most essential Da'as is to recognize that he does not have [enough] Da'as, and to seek to learn Da'as from every person, and all the more so from someone greater than himself in Chochmah, or from Seforim. If his Da'as is unlike theirs, he nullifies his Da'as due to theirs. He has full Emunah that if it is empty (he does not see Chochmah in the law), it is empty from him (he is not wise enough to grasp it).

Margoliyos ha'Yam (12): If Reuven requests from Shimon, and Shimon understands that Reuven does not know that it will be bad for him, one may not fulfill the request. Sefer Chasidim (234) brings an episode in which a doctor said that drinking water will endanger Ploni. Ploni told his son, I am thirsty - if you do not bring to me water, I will not pardon you in this world and not in the world to come. He may not have mercy and fulfill the request. "Ki Lo Am Binos Hu Al Ken Lo Yerachamenu" - He does not have mercy (fulfill their request), for they do not know what to request! ("Tachin Libam" to request what is good for them, and then "Takshiv Aznecha.") We must emulate His Midos! We conclude a Tefilah for needs 'do what is good in Your eyes' (Berachos 29b).

Daf Al ha'Daf citing the Lev Simchah: Fulfilling his requests is bad for him; he loses via this.

Why should afflictions come on one who gives bread to someone without Da'as?

Maharal: Afflictions are Din, the opposite of mercy. When there is no mercy, Din overpowers.

Maharsha: When Hash-m told Adam "v'Kotz v'Dardar Tatzmi'ach Lach," he cried profusely - 'will I eat from the same trough (i.e. the same food) as a donkey?!' When Hash-m said "b'Ze'as Apecha Tochal Lechem," he was assuaged (Pesachim 118a). Initially, Adam thought that if his food will be like a donkey's, also his Da'as will be similar, for physical food leads to physical nature. He was assuaged when he heard that he will eat bread, for bread has the taste of wheat, which brings Da'as, like I explained above (70b). One who gives bread to someone without Da'as, and he is proper for donkey food, for he is like a donkey, the giver should be punished for this sin.

Margoliyos ha'Yam (14): Giving Tzedakah to such a person is not a Mitzvah - 'even when they want to do Tzedakah, make them stumble with people who are not worthy, so they will not receive reward' (Bava Kama 16b).

Why will someone without Da'as be exiled?

Maharal: He is very physical. Physical things move; they do not have a fixed place. One who has Da'as (intellect), motion does not apply to him; Hash-m, the place of the world, in his place. "Ha'Adam Etz ha'Sadeh" - especially a Chacham is called a tree, but it is reversed. A tree's root is in the ground, and that is its place. Man's root turns to Shamayim - his place is above, i.e. Hash-m. If man's root (intellect), in his head, is not connected to his place and planted there, he is uprooted from his place and exiled. Etz ha'Da'as connects the world and unifies it. One who is not connected to it, he separates and is exiled.

NOTE: It is called "Eitz ha'Da'as Tov v'Ra" - eating from it entered the Yetzer ha'Ra into man. Before eating from it, Adam had great intellect. He knew what name is proper for all animals, he had Chibur with Chavah! (PF)

Maharsha: He increases business [to become rich], but it does not help. He lacks Da'as to request mercy, so he becomes poor. In the end he is exiled from his place (house or field), for he needs to sell it amidst his poverty.

Iyun Yakov: It says about the future Ge'ulah "u'Mal'ah ha'Aretz De'ah" - therefore there will not be a Galus afterwards.

What do we learn from "Kol Choshech Tamun li'Tzpunav Te'achlehu Esh..."?

Rashi: Every night is hidden from Divrei Torah - they are not heard in the house. "Esh Lo Nupach" is the fire of Gehinom, which need not be fanned. "Yera Sarid b'Ohalo" is one that it is bad in his eyes that there is Sarid (a Chacham) in his tent.

Margoliyos ha'Yam (17): What is the connection of Divrei Torah being heard at night and not wanting a Chacham in his tent? It seems that there is an omission; it should say before this 'one who does not host a Chacham in his house, fire will consume it.'

Why is the adamancy about Divrei Torah being heard at night?

Maharsha: We discuss a working man. He cannot learn in his house during the day, due to his job. At night, he is free. He could learn! Or, during the day Divrei Torah are not heard due to the clamor. At night, if they are not heard, this shows that he does not want to learn in his house. Therefore, the fire of Gehinom rules over it. Divrei Torah are compared to fire of Hash-m - "Cho Devarai ka'Esh." If they were heard, it would overcome the fire of Gehinom.

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: At night, the fire of Gehinom rules in the world. Night comes from the element of fire. The Ramban (Reish Bereishis) says that fire is called darkness because the element of fire is dark. The Ra'avad (introduction to Sefer Yetzirah) says that the element of fire is Gehinom. The Neshamos of Resha'im after death cling to the element of fire, which surrounds the Galgal like Kaf ha'Kela - "v'Es Nefesh Oyvecha Yekale'enah b'Soch Kaf ha'Kala." It says Esh Lo Nupach because it constantly burns around the fire itself; it need not be fanned. Since night is the time of the fire of Gehinom, one must engage in Torah then. The light of Torah nullifies the darkness of the fire of Gehinom. This is like we say, that the fire of Gehinom does not rule over Chachamim (Chagigah 27a). If he does not engage in Torah, the fire of Gehinom consumes him.

Margoliyos ha'Yam (16): Most people are distracted the entire day with income. At night, the father should learn with his son, and their voice will be heard. If the father learns alone, fire will consume the son - 'anyone who separates from Torah, fire consumes him' (Bava Basra 79a).

Why is the house punished? The Ba'al ha'Bayis should be punished! Also, fire of Gehinom applies to people, but not to houses!

Hagahos ha'Bach (on the Rif): The text should say 'any man that Divrei Torah are not heard in his house at night, he will be burned.'

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): The fire rules over the Ba'al ha'Bayis; via him, it consumes the house.

Why will one who does not benefit Chachamim from his property never see a sign of Brachah?

Maharsha: If he is not a Chacham, he should support Divrei Torah - "Etz Chayim Hi la'Machazikim Bah" - it does not say to those who engage in it, rather, to those who strengthen! He is not worthy to see a sign of Brachah, for Torah gives life and Berachah to those who learn it and support it.

Iyun Yakov, Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: "Tov Ayin Hu Yevurach." Brachah comes immediately after a Chacham - "va'Yevarcheni Hash-m Biglalecha", "va'Yevarech Hash-m Es Beis ha'Mitzri Biglal Yosef" (Brachos 42a). Also leaving bread on the table is due to "Tov Ayin"; one may not give bread to an Am ha'Aretz (so he leaves it for Chachamim).

Why must one leave bread on the table?

Rashi: This is like it says "Achol v'Hoser" (Melachim II, 4:43).

Etz Yosef: Anything minimal without excess is not blessed. Elisha said "Achol v'Hoser", and not 'eat and be satiated', for Hash-m's Brachah was in the bread.

Why is leaving crumbs on the table like serving idolatry?

Rashi: They leave a table set with food and drink for the sake of the idolatry Gad.

Why does it depend on whether or not there is a full loaf with the crumbs?

Rashi: If there are crumbs and he brings a full loaf, it looks like he does so for idolatry. If there is not a full loaf with the crumbs, it is proper, for they are for poor people.

Margoliyos ha'Yam (22): Be'er Sheva says that one must remove whole loaves from the table before Birkas ha'Mazon, due to "ha'Orchim la'Gad Shulchan"; also, Berachah does not rest on something whole, like Mahariyo said. This is difficult. If the bread was already there, he does not do anything for idolatry! This is why Rashi said 'he brings a full loaf.' Also, if Berachah does not rest on something whole, why is it best to bless ha'Motzi on a full loaf?!

What is switching one's words?

Rashi: He changes his words so he is not recognized (NOTE: like Rivkah commanded Yakov to do - PF).

Margoliyos ha'Yam (23): The Rema (YD 157:2) forbids saying 'I am a Nochri.' However, one may say something ambiguous, and the Nochri will misunderstand.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 23, citing Sefer Chasidim 47: It is saying Sheker.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Pnei Menachem (Rosh Hashanah 5753): It is speaking unlike his heart, even if it is not Sheker.

Why is switching one's words like serving idolatry?

Maharsha: We learn from the prefix Kaf in "ki'Mesate'a". He is like one who serves idolatry, which is called Tatu'im. Emes is a big Klal for Kiyum Torah; Sheker is the opposite. The Akeidah tells of a bandit who came to a Chacham to repent, but he could not accept many Mitzvos. The Chacham told him to accept one matter - to always tell the truth. He was heading to rob, and a man asked him where he is going; he told him. Also another man asked him, and he told him. He reasoned, these two men can testify about me to kill me! He refrained from his evil deeds.

Iyun Yakov: He lies about Hash-m's signet (Emes); He is Elokim Emes and Melech Olam.

What is 'looking at Ervah'?

Rashi: He ponders the Ervah of an Eshes Ish.

Maharsha: Rashi infers from the singular (he looks at Ervah; it did not say Arayos) that it discusses a particular Ervah that is common. Even though gazing is a great sin, Rashi mentions pondering, for one who does so causes himself to have Kishuy. Therefore, Midah k'Neged Midah, his Kishuy departs.

Iyun Yakov: Perhaps it is even looking at a man's Ervah. One opinion says that "va'Yar... Es Ervas Aviv", and Cham castrated Noach (Sanhedrin 70a).

What is the meaning of Kashto Nin'eres?

Rashi #1: The strength of his Kishuy (erection) is Nin'ar (emptied); he loses the ability to have an erection that can lead to children.

Rashi #2: 'His strength wanes. Nin'eres is like 'if one found a garment, he is Mena'er (shakes it out) once every 30 days' (Bava Metzi'a 29b), or "va'Yna'er Hash-m" (Shemos 14:27).

What is Kabel?

Rashi: It is humble. It is an expression of Ofel - make yourself dark and humble.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Imrei Pinchas: Via humility, he lasts. He is not broken via being lowered. Rav Hanich explained, "Kasis la'Me'or" - he cuts (lowers) himself so that his deeds will illuminate in Torah and Mitzvos; v'Ein Kasis la'Menachos - he should not cut himself in a way that will cause him to slacken and be sad in Avodas Hash-m. (NOTE: Menachos is like Menuchah - he rests. - PF) Daf Al ha'Daf - this is the only place in Shas where we learn Midos from Halachah!

Maharsha: This is always the Targum of darkness. He acts like one who goes in darkness, and does not show himself in front of people, and they do not envy him. He endures, for there is not envy and Ayin ha'Ra. This is like a dark house - its darkness causes it to endure!

Daf Al ha'Daf: If Tzara'as were seen in it, perhaps it would need to be destroyed! The law is not clear if Tzara'as was seen via bringing a lamp or opening a window.

What is the source that we do not open windows in a dark house to enable a Kohen to inspect its Tzara'as?

Rashi #1: "K'Nega Nir'ah Li ba'Bayis" (Vayikra 14:35) implies that it is seen automatically (without any action to enable seeing it).

Margoliyos ha'Yam citing Malbim: 'Ra'isi' implies that he intends to see; he lights a lamp or opens windows in order to see. "Nir'ah Li" is automatically, without preparation.

Rashi #1: We expound "Li", and not via my fire. (NOTE: What is the source that we do not open windows? Perhaps the verse excludes only bringing a lamp to see Tzara'as! - PF) Its darkness saved it - as long as a Kohen does not see Tzara'as, it is Tahor.

How are these matters not satiated?

Rashi: The grave is not satiated with Mesim; the womb is not satiated with Bi'ah; the land is not satiated with water.

Why must the womb be connected to the grave? The verse lists three matters that are not satiated!

Maharsha: The Gemara asks, for regarding the third (land), the verse says that it is not satiated with water. It did not teach what does not satiate the womb and the grave (Bi'ah and Mesim, respectively). Therefore, they were taught due to their similarity. Just like the womb is a place of entry and exit... this is the Mashal of Kaiser's daughter (91a. It is harder to make Kelim out of water than out of clay. If Hash-m can make people out of a drop of semen, and all the more so He can make out of earth!) There is formation from water in the womb, in this world, and formation from mud in the grave, in the future, based on a Kal v'Chomer from formation in the womb, in this world.

Margoliyos ha'Yam: The womb is where life begins, and the grave is opposite. Therefore, we say that also the grave is a reason for life.

Do we find that Techiyas ha'Mesim will be noisy?

Rashi: Yes - "YItaka b'Shofar Gadol."

What is the Chidush that revived Tzadikim will not die again?

Rashi: They will not die, Bein in the days of Mashi'ach, u'Vein in the world to come.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov) #1: Rashi discusses the time between the days of Mashi'ach, and the world to come. Even though they die, they do not return to earth. Rashi holds that the Techiyah then is only for Tzadikim. For others, it is in Asid Lavo, and then death will cease forever. This is why Tana d'Vei Eliyahu said 'when Hash-m revives Tzadikim in the future...' The day of Techiyas ha'Mesim is for all dead Yisraelim.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov) #2: Rashi holds that there are two times of Techiyas ha'Mesim for everyone, one in the days of Mashi'ach, and one in Asid Lavo. After the first, Tzadikim die but are not buried; others die and are buried. Above (91b) Ula asked a contradiction between "Bilah ha'Maves la'Netzach" and "ha'Na'ar Ben Me'ah Shanah Yamus." He answered that death will cease from Yisrael, but not from Nochrim. It seems that Tana d'Vei Eliyahu disagrees. He could answer that death will cease in Asid Lavo, but not in the days of Mashi'ach! This is like Shmuel taught (99a), that the only difference between this world and Yemos ha'Mashi'ach is that the kingdoms will cease to rule over Yisrael. Even after the [first] Techiyah, in which dead Yisraelim will live to see the coming of Mashi'ach, they will die at old ages (100 is considered young). In between will be 1000 years during which Hash-m remakes His world. Tzadikim will not be buried then; Hash-m will make wings for them, and they will fly over the water. The prophecies describe Asid Lavo.)

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): It seems, unlike Rashi, that Tana d'Vei Eliyahu discusses all Yisraelim. They will live after Bi'as ha'Mashi'ach in the sixth millennia, before the world is desolate. All who are revived will not die again. During the seventh millennia they will fly over the water. However, "Yechayenu mi'Yomayim ba'Yom ha'Shelishi Yekimenu v'Nichyeh" implies that the Techiyah will be after the 1000 (NOTE: It seems that this should say '2000' - PF) years of desolation, when Hash-m will renew His world (below, 97a)!

What do we learn from "Kadosh Ye'amar Lo Kol ha'Kasuv la'Chayim bi'Yrushalayim"?

Maharsha: Also Resha'im will stand at the time of Techiyas ha'Mesim; Tzadikim are written for life in the world to come, but Resha'im stand only for eternal shame, like it says in Rosh Hashanah (17a).

What is the source that Kadosh is eternal?

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Meshech Chochmah (Devarim 14:21): A Nazir's hair is Asur b'Hana'ah, for it says "Kadosh Yihyeh Gadel Pera" - just like Hekdesh forbids its [redemption] money, also Sa'ar Nazir. We do not read Kodesh, rather, Kadosh (Kidushin 57b). This shows that Kadosh is permanent; it cannot be switched, and also here "Kadosh Ye'amar Lo."

How does "v'Nisgav Levado ba'Yom ha'Hu" hint to the [1000] years when Hash-m will renew His world?

Maharsha: Hash-m's day is 1000 years - "Ki Elef Shanim b'Einecha k'Yom..."

We already said that Hash-m will make wings for them like Nesharim. Why is this repeated?

Maharsha: A Nesher's wings fall off after 10 years and are renewed, like is brought in the name of Rav Sadya Gaon (refer to Yeshayah 40:31:3:2). "V'Koyei Hash-m Yachalifu Ko'ach..." - their strength will not cease. They will always have wings, like Nesharim after they are renewed - "Yarutzu v'Lo Yiga'u Yelchu v'Lo Yi'afu" (they will not tire).

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: The Nesher in this verse is a bird called Chol, which did not eat from Eitz ha'Da'as and never dies. It lives for 1000 years, it shrivels to an egg and its feathers fall off, and it grows back again (Bereishis Rabah 19:5). Normal wings tire after an hour or less. Hash-m will make for Tzadikim wings like a Chol that are renewed and never tire or need to rest. It says "v'Koyei Hash-m", for they are Tzadikim who hoped for Hash-m. Those who denierd Techiyas ha'Mesim, and said "Yavshu Atzmoseinu v'Avdah Sikvaseinu", will not be revived.

Why did Hash-m not create man with wings?

Margoliyos ha'Yam 2, citing Hilchos Ketanos 1:223: It is lest he fly quickly to sin. While walking, his legs can stop him. Also, it is to give reward for each step to a Mitzvah.

Daf Al ha'Daf: If man had wings, he would fly further for Mitzvos, and receive reward for flying! R. Yerucham of Mir explained that we request Kelim to serve Hash-m, but only that are normal among people.

What do we learn from "Lo Nira b'Hamir Aretz"?

Rashi: When Hash-m remakes the land, we will not fear, for we will be over the sea.

What should we learn from the dead that Yechezkeil revived?

Rashi: just like they died again, so will revived Tzadikim die again.

Iyun Yakov: Also the one who learns from a Kal v'Chomer (what never was, it lives, and all the more so what already lived), if we say Dayo (a Kal v'Chomer cannot teach more than its sources), those who were revived will return to be earth!

Maharsha: We should learn from it Techiyas ha'Mesim from the Torah, unlike the Kofrim, who say that it cannot be.

Iyun Yakov: He overlooked the Gemara above (90b),which wanted to learn Techiyas ha'Mesim from "Yichyu Mezecha", and rejected, perhaps it refers to those whom Yechezkel revived! Rather, surely the Gemara holds that we cannot learn from them, for they were bones; this does not show that earth can live.

Why does it say that they stood up and sang Shirah?

Iyun Yakov: Perhaps we learn from here that one must stand to sing Shirah. (NOTE: Even though we sing Hallel sitting at the Seder, some say that that is a different kind of Shirah. - PF)

What is the significance of "Hash-m Memis b'Tzedek u'Mechayeh b'Rachamim"?

Maharsha: According to the opinion that these are those who denied Techiyas ha'Mesim, they did not deserve Techiyah; Hash-m revived them to show to them their mistake. Man dies due to his sin - in what merit will he be revived? They sang, 'man is revived amidst His mercy, and not man's merit. '

Iyun Yakov: This is like the opinion that there is no death without sin (Shabbos 55a). R. Yehoshua, who said that they sang "Hash-m Memis u'Mechayeh Morid She'ol va'Ya'al", holds that there is death without sin; it is due only to [the punishment for the sin that came via] the snake.

Why did R. Yehoshua say that they said "Hash-m Memis u'Mechayeh Morid She'ol va'Ya'al"?

Maharsha: He holds like the Amora'im who say that they died prematurely due to their sin. Hash-m revived them in this world, they married, and died normally. They will live in the future, like R. Yehudah ben Beseira holds; he descended from them. They do not explain like Ralbag, that "Hash-m Memis u'Mechayeh Morid She'ol va'Ya'al" repeats the matter in different words. Rather, Hash-m killed them prematurely, and revived them now. Later they will descend to the grave in their [proper] time, and they will ascend in Asid Lavo.

Margoliyos ha'Yam and Daf Al ha'Daf: Tosfos (Pesachim 3b) says that R. Yehudah ben Beseira did not ascend for the Regel because he did not own land in Eretz Yisrael. Every Yisrael has four Amos in Eretz Yisrael! The Vilna Gaon brings from Ge'onim that he descended from Bnei Efrayim who did not enter the land with Yehoshua, therefore he has no share.

R. Yehudah should have said simply 'it was only a parable.' Why did he say 'it was Emes. It was only a parable'?

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: Whenever it says 'Emes', the Halachah follows that opinion (Bava Metzi'a 60a).

What was the parable of Yechezkel's Techiyas ha'Mesim?

Rashi: Just like a Mes returns to live, so Yisrael will return from Galus.

What is the significance that they married women and fathered children?

Iyun Yakov: This shows that it was unlike the future Techiyah, in which there is no eating, drinking or reproduction.

Indeed, the verse proves that Anshei Gas killed people from Efrayim. What is the source that Yechezkel revived them?

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: It says about those whom Yechezkel revived "ba'Harugim ha'Eleh" (37:9), i.e. they were killed - "va'Haragum Anshei Gas." Below, the text should not say "va'Yis'abel Efrayim Avihem..." - we already know that they are from Efrayim! Rather, it says "u'Fechi ba'Harugim ha'Eleh."

How did they count the Ketz and err?

Rashi: They should have counted the 400 years of Galus from the birth of Yitzchak, for it says "Ger Yihyeh Zar'acha." They counted from Bris Bein ha'Besarim. Seder Olam says that Avraham was 70 years old then; Yitzchak was born 30 years later. We know that they were from Efrayim, for it says "v'Shuselach Bno... va'Haragum Anshei Gas" (Divrei ha'Yamim I, 7:21).

What is the significance that Anshei Gas killed them?

Maharsha: They were not Chayav Misah bi'Ydei Shamayim for erring about the Ketz. However, there was a Shevu'ah between Avraham and Yitzchak and the Pelishtim. Bnei Efrayim transgressed the Shevu'ah. They came to take the flocks of Anshei Gas who were born in the land, i.e. the Shevu'ah of Avraham and Yitzchak applied to them. According to the opinion that they denied Techiyas ha'Mesim, they were [revived] only for a sign for others.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Rashi (Shemos 13:17) explains "Hash-m did not lead [Yisrael] Derech Eretz Pelishtim... lest they retract when they see war", i.e. Amaleki and Kena'ani. He should have explained simply, war with Pelishtim! Pardes Yosef (Shemos 13:17) explains that they were not concerned for Pelishtim , for Avraham had a Bris with them. Bnei Efrayim already annulled the Bris! Perhaps since they were a minority, it is not considered that Yisrael transgressed the Bris.

Shmuel said that they denied Techiyas ha'Mesim. Such people are not revived, Midah k'Neged Midah (90a)!

Rashi: They did not deserve to be revived. They were revived only for a Siman.

What is the significance of 'people who lack any moisture of a Mitzvah'?

Maharsha: They did not deny Techiyas ha'Mesim, just they thought that they are not worthy of it, for they have no moisture of a Mitzvah. They were revived for a sign that even they will live in the future, after they are judged in Gehinom, like we say in Rosh Hashanah (17a).

Why did they cover the Heichal with pictures of Shekatzim u'Rmashim?

Maharsha: Insects are short-lived, because they have no bones - they cannot live more than a year. Animals have bones - they can live longer. Man is greater than animals - he has a bone that lasts forever. He will be created from it in the future. They covered the Heichal with pictures of Shekatzim u'Rmashim, which have the least life, to show that our bones dried and there is no hope for us. The eternal bone in us does not help, for we totally dried.

Why did Hash-m revive such Resha'im [who covered the Heichal with pictures of Shekatzim u'Rmashim?

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Parshas Derachim (Drush 22): Yisrael told Yechezkel 'we are not at the level of Banim to Hash-m, rather, slaves. A master who sold his slave (Hash-m exiled us) has no claim against him! Hash-m showed that even such sinners are Banim to Hash-m; a son cannot uproot himself from his father.

Did they truly disgrace the sun with their beauty?

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: Yes! This is not a mere exaggeration, for we find that R. Yochanan exposed his arm and it radiated (Berachos 5b). Light reflecting off a new silver Kli is a semblance of his beauty (Bava Metzi'a 84a). Avigayil revealed her thigh, and David went three Parsa'os in its light (Megilah 14b).

Why did Bavli women spurt with blood?

Rashi: It was due to lust [for the young exiles].

Why did the women still spurt after the youths were killed?

Rashi: The youths still radiated.

Why did Hash-m told Yechezkeil to revive the dead when Nebuchadnetzar threw Chananyah, Misha'el and Azaryah in the furnace?

Iyun Yakov: He wanted to show that Hash-m can kill and revive, but a mortal king cannot even kill without Hash-m's will.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 13, citing Ein Eliyahu: Shamayim does not give half (Yoma 69b). When the conduit is opened, many may drink from it. We find that when the river opened for R. Pinchas ben Ya'ir, it opened again for a Jew going with him, and again for a Goy going with them (Chulin 7a).

What did the bones do after they hit Nebuchadnetzar?

Rashi: They went away.

Rashi: Nebuchadnetzar had made Kelim from some of the bones (NOTE: of the youths that he killed). When Yechezkeil revived the dead, the bone Kelim hit Nebuchadnetzar on his face when he wanted to drink from them.

Why did Nebuchadnetzar say u'Smohohi Kamah Tekifin?

Maharsha: This refers to Techiyas ha'Mesim. He is astounded at Hash-m's Gevurah to revive the dead. This is like we say Atah Gibor... Mechayeh Mesim

Why did R. Yitzchak say that molten gold should be poured into his mouth?

due to Nebuchadnetzar's praise (he praised Hash-m beautifully).

Etz Yosef citing Ma'arich ha'Ma'arachos: He would have said boiling excrement. He used a nicer expression because we discussed his praise, or due to his honor; he was a king.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 15: Gold represents DInim; silver is mercy.

How would Nebuchadnetzar degrade David's Tehilim?

Rashi: He would have sung better praises. Hash-m would have preferred them to David's! Therefore, an angel slapped him to stop him.

Maharsha: It is improper that the one who destroyed the Beis ha'Mikdash add Shiros over David, who built it. (NOTE: It is considered as if David built it, for he yearned to do so and prepared to do so, just Hash-m did not let him. - PF) Here it seems that the angel understood his song, even though it was in Arame'ic. We say (Shabbos 12b) that angels do not understand Arame'ic, therefore we say Kaddish in Arame'ic! We can say that angels that prosecute against Yisrael do not understand it, but those who advocate for Yisrael surely understand all languages.

Iyun Yakov: Maharsha overlooked Sotah 34, which implies that also advocating angels do not understand Arame'ic! The question is not difficult. Gavriel, who taught to Yosef the 70 languages, is different. He saved Chananyah, Misha'el and Azaryah!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 14, citing Keruv mi'Meshach: The angels understand Tanach, even the verses in Arame'ic, but not other matters in Arame'ic.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): David said "Malchusecha Malchus Kol Olamim" - it is over all worlds, but Nebuchadnetzar said "Malchus Alam" (Daniel 3:33; forever).

Daf Al ha'Daf: David said "Malchusecha Malchus Kol Olamim" - Malchus is when the subjects accept his authority (Vilna Gaon). "U'Memshaltecha b'Chol Dor va'Dor" - He rules by force in every generation, even at a time of Churban, when His Malchus is not actualized. Nebuchadnetzar said "Malchus Alam" - even at a time of Churban.

How could the angel slap Nebuchadnetzar while he was praising Hash-m?

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Perhaps it is because he said "it is like Bar Elakin" (Daniel 3:25) - Heaven forbid to say that He has a son! If not for this, his praises were better than David's.

Iyun Yakov #1: Even though he intended for good, for Nochrim, good intent is not considered like deed.

Iyun Yakov #2: This is like we say in Brachos 33b, that one should not add praises to Hash-m [lest it seem that those are all His praises.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing She'eris Menachem: David sang to Hash-m even when he was mortally pursued. You (Nebuchadnetzar) sing with your crown on your head. Let is see you sing after you are slapped!

Daf Al ha'Daf: Nebuchadnetzar said "Malchus Alam" - he [said that he] recognized Hash-m's Malchus even at a time of Churban. The angel slapped him, for really, he did not reach this level.

Why did the furnace float?

Rashi: The furnace was sunk in the ground, like a plaster furnace. It floated above the ground, so everyone would see it.

Why were the walls breached?

Rashi: Some of the walls fell, allowing everyone to see inside.

What is the meaning of Humak Suro?

Rashi: Its grandeur was lowered. This is like Suro Ra (Kidushin 82a).

Rashi citing R. Yakov bar Yakar: Its foundation lowered.

Rashi citing his Rebbi: The text says Sido (its plaster) melted, due to the great heat.

How was the image reversed?

Rashi: It fell on its face.

What four kingdoms were burned?

Rashi: The four kings (and their retinues) who helped throw him in were burned.

Maharsha: The verse (Daniel 3:22) says that sparks of the fire killed them.

Why should one not change from his authority, even at a time of danger?

Rashi: He should not appear panicky.

Maharsha: He should not appear to be pained over Hash-m's judgment. He should accept it with love, honorably.

What is the claim of the body and Neshamah to be exempt from judgment?

Maharal: There should not be full Din against them, for neither would sin without the other. Hash-m joins them and judges them, for man is a composite of them.

Etz Yosef: Each could not do the full act by itself. We find that two who did a Melachah on Shabbos are exempt from the severe punishment (stoning and Kares). The body says 'I did not sin', i.e. alone; the Neshamah helped me. The Neshamah says similarly. Hash-m answers, since they can do the Aveirah only together, and each did as much as it could, they are liable. This is like a load that one cannot carry it alone; if two were Motzi it from Reshus to Reshus, they are liable.

Does the Neshamah fly in the air?

Maharsha: The Neshamah of a Rasha has no rest in the world to come. It flies in the air like a roaming bird. The Neshamah of a Tzadik merits a place of rest in the Yeshivah above - "v'Nefesh Adoni Tzerurah bi'Tzror ha'Chayim."

Why did the Neshamah say only that after leaving the body, it did not sin? Also before entering the body, it did not sin!

Iyun Yakov #1: Perhaps the Neshamah sinned in a previous Gilgul.

Iyun Yakov #2: If it will sin [when it is in a body], this is like regretting its previous virtue; it should be punished as if it sinned before! However, after it left the body, even if it sinned in thought, it should not be punished for this, for it cannot come to deed.

What is the significance of the lame man and the blind man?

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Pnei Menachem (Balak 5755) citing the Imrei Emes: The blind man hints to Yitzchak, who became blind. The lame man hints to Yakov, who limped on his thigh. In the merit of Yisrael and Yakov, who were born to Avraham after he circumcised, they guard the orchard, and enable all generations to guard Derech Hash-m. Bil'am opposed them, therefore he became lame and blind.

How does "Yikra El ha'Shamayim me'Al" hint to the Neshamah?

Margoliyos ha'Yam: The Chida says that ha'Shamayim has the same Gematriya as Neshamah. Midrash ha'Nelam says that Hash-m took the Tahor Neshamah from Kisei ha'Kavod.

Granted, "Yikra El ha'Shamayim me'Al" refers to the Neshamah, and "v'El ha'Aretz la'Din Amo" refers to the body. What is the source that Hash-m will judge them together?

Maharsha: We read "Amo" like Imo (with it).

Why does it say that Hash-m will throw the Neshamah into the body?

Anaf Yosef citing Sefer ha'Bris 3:36a: Here, body is not literally the body. Rather, it is the lower Nefesh - physical strength. It is somewhat physical. A Yisrael has a lower Nefesh and an upper Nefesh. If punishments and afflictions were decreed on the upper Nefesh due to its sins, it is clothed in the lower Nefesh, like it was in its lifetime. Via this, it feels the pain that damaging angels inflict, like it would feel pain that people inflict.

What is the question 'why does it set in the west?

Rashi: Why doesn't it make a full circle and set in the place that it rose?

Maharsha: This is difficult. Where would it go after setting? (What is difficult? It would return to where it was before it rose! - PF)

Maharsha: It says in Bava Basra (25a) that the seven Kochevei Lechet (the sun, moon and five closest plants), they themselves go from west to east, just the Galgal brings them from east to west. Antoninus asked why the sun sets in the place where it begins its own movement. He did not explain his question; Rebbi thought that he asks Stam why it sets in the west. After Rebbi's response, he clarified his question.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 4, citing Radal's introduction to Pirkei d'R. Eliezer, citing Ramchal: Some of Chazal's words about the sun and stars that is unlike what we see, e.g. the opinion that at night, the sun goes above the Raki'a. Chazal refer to their essence, but not necessarily to the physical bodies that we see.

Why does it say that the sun goes to give Shalom to its Maker?

Rashi: The Shechinah is in the west. When it reaches the west, it bows and sets bent in front of Him.

Maharsha: We learn from the sun that the Shechinah is in the west. This teaches about which direction to face when praying.

What is the significance of giving Shalom to its Maker?

Maharal: When it gives Shalom, it clings to Him. The sun and all Heavenly legions seek the west, to cling to Him, for the Shechinah is in the west (Bava Basra 25b). Even though Hash-m is not physical and is not in a place, to say that the Shechinah is in the west, His honor is received more in some places than in others. When part of a [Heavenly] sphere reaches the west, it is pushed aside by other parts that yearn to be there. They are not forced; they desire to do their Maker's will. It says about a river, a lower matter, 'you go to do your Maker's will.' Antoninus thought that it would be better if the sun never sets. Rebbi answered that it is proper that it be Batel to the first Cause. If it never set, it would seem like a god!

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Yismach Moshe (Beha'alosecha): Meforshim ask, why does the Torah call sunset 'Bi'ah' - "u'Va ha'Shemesh v'Taher"? It goes away then! Our Gemara answers this.It comes to the King to bow to Him!

Antoninus asked about the sun. Why did Rashi answer with a verse discussing all of Tzva ha'Shamayim?

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): There are reasons why the sun bows and sets in the west; all of Tzva ha'Shamayim does so, lest we distinguish bowing. (If other Heavenly bodies bowed elsewhere, it would looks like there are more than one Power. - PF)

How can we answer for the opinion that Shechinah is everywhere?

Anaf Yosef citing Ramas Shmuel: Even though it is everywhere, when it limits itself, its honor is in the west.

Why did he say that it should go to the middle of the sky, bow and set there?

Rashi: It is normal to bow to the king from a distance.

What was the answer 'it is due to workers and travelers'?

Rashi: If it went to the middle of the sky and set there, people would not know when to stop working or traveling; it would suddenly set, and it would be dark.

What are the times of Yetzirah and Pekidah?

Rashi: Yetzirah is when the fetus has flesh, sinews and bones. Pekidah is when an angel brings the drop [of semen] in front of Hash-m, and He decrees the nature of the person that will result from it.

Maharsha: Yetzirah is 40 days after Pekidah. The comparison to unsalted meat shows that a drop of semen without a Neshamah cannot stand for three days. Once a drop of semen rots, it cannot form a child. We say (Avos 3:1) that man comes from a putrid drop. i.e. it will putrefy if there is not Pekidah.

Iyun Yakov: Surely man is formed from a spoiled drop. The Gemara means that without a Neshamah, the flesh, before it is completed with sinews and bones, would rot.

Ramah: Pekidah is conception.

Did Rebbi not realize that without a Neshamah, it would rot?

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): He thought that the mother's Neshamah would prevent it from rotting. "V'Yotzer Ru'ach Adam b'Kirbo" implies that after man has flesh, sinews and bones, Hash-m forms the Ru'ach.

Here we say that the Yetzer ha'Ra begin to rule over a person from birth - "la'Pesach Chatas Rovetz." Once, a pregnant woman smelled food on Yom Kipur [and had a great craving for it]. They whispered in her ear [today is Yom Kipur]; it did not help [and she needed to eat]. R. Chanina applied to the fetus "Zoru Resha'im me'Rachem" Yoma (82b)!

Maharsha: The Yetzer ha'Ra can rule over the mother while the fetus is in the womb, but it does not rule over the fetus itself. If it did, it would kick and leave [prematurely]! However, we expound "va'Yisrotzetzu ha'Banim b'Kirbah" - when Rivkah passed the entrance of idolatry, Esav strived to come out! This is difficult.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Gur Aryeh on the verse explains, he did not strive to come out due to the Yetzer ha'Ra. If so, he would have kicked and left! Pesikta d'Rav Kahana (26) says that when he left, he tore her womb lest she give birth again! Rather, everything's nature is to seek to be like its source. (NOTE: This also explains why Yakov strived to come out when Rivkah passed by Yeshivas Shem v'Ever. It was not due to his Yetzer Tov, which does not come until Bar Mitzvah! - PF) Lechem l'Fi ha'Taf (p.183) - a sly Rasha is one who tries to persuade the judge before his opponent comes (Sotah 21b). This is why the Yetzer ha'Ra is called Rasha - "Tzofeh Rasha la'Tzadik", for he persuades a person to follow him 13 years before the Yetzer Tov comes!

Iyun Yakov: Really, Antoninus' question was not difficult. The Yetzer ha'Ra is inside from the beginning, but the fetus learns Torah, which is spice [to fix] the Yetzer ha'Ra. When it is time to leave, an angel slaps the fetus and it forgets the Torah, and then it kicks to leave. Esav strived to leave earlier, for he cast off the yoke in the womb. (NOTE: Rebbi accepted Antoninus' question, and supported him from a verse! - PF)

Etz Yosef: Perhaps "la'Pesach Chatas Rovetz" applies from when it is proper for the fetus to leave, i.e. the beginning of the seventh month.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Nachalas Yakov Yehoshua: We find that Tamar gave birth during the seventh month, and Moshe was born then (and also Yitzchak, at least according to the opinion that the angels visted Avraham in Tishrei). Why did Rivkah give birth after nine full months? It was to delay the Yetzer ha'Ra's rule over Esav. The Yetzer ha'Ra did not rule over Yakov; he should have left at the start of the seventh month, and been the Bechor. He started striving to come out then when Rivkah passed by the Yeshivah. The Yetzer ha'Ra came to both of them then, just it did not rule over Yakov. This is why Esav started striving to come out then, when she passed by idolatry! (NOTE: We said that if it came before birth, the fetus would kick and come out immediately! Also, if the Yetzer already ruled over Esav, why was the birth delayed? Perhaps the Yetzer ha'Ra had only a small rule over Esav, until after birth. - PF)

Margoliyos ha'Yam 8: Rashi (Bereishis 8:21) expounded "Yetzer Lev ha'Adam Ra mi'Ne'urav" - from when the fetus is Nin'ar (starts moving). Sefer Chasidim (1137) says that those who have a Yetzer ha'Ra in the womb, they were created from 974 generations [before the world was created]. They are brazen and rebel against their parents. (NOTE: "Kumetu v'Lo Es" (Iyov 22:16) are 974 generations before creation that were cut off and not created. Hash-m planted some in every generation; they are the brazen of the generation (Chagigah 13b). - PF)

We asked when the Neshamah is put in a person. Why did we ask when the Yetzer ha'Ra begins to rule over a person?

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: Hash-m puts the Tahor Neshamah in a person. Its actions are the Yetzer Tov; Hash-m helps to purify the person. The Yetzer ha'Ra is the source of Tum'ah. It is not put in a person. Rather, Hash-m created it; whoever wants to follow it, he may. "Im la'Letzim Hu Yalitz vala'Anavim Yiten Chen" - one who wants to be Metamei himself, Hash-m opens for him (gives to him the opportunity). One who wants to be Metaher himself, Hash-m helps him (Shabbos 104a). It says 'opens' like "la'Pesach Chatas Rovetz."

What is the contradiction between "Bam Iver u'Pise'ach" and "Az Yedaleg ka'Ayal Pise'ach"?

Rashi: The former implies that the revived live with their blemishes. The latter implies that they are healed.

Why will people be revived with their blemishes, and healed afterwards?

Maharsha: They are healed due to the attribute of the world to come.

Etz Yosef citing Tanchuma: It is lest Resha'im say 'these are not the same people that Hash-m killed.' (NOTE: At the time of Techiyas ha'Mesim. Will there be Resha'im who seek to deny Techiyas ha'Mesim?! - PF)

Why did we ask only a contradiction about lameness? We could have asked also about blindness, mentioned just before this - "Bam Iver u'Pise'ach", and it says "Az Tipakachnah Einei Ivrim"!

Maharsha: The miracle is recognized more regarding lameness. There are many blind people that it is not recognized that they are blind.

What is the contradiction between "Bilah ha'Maves la'Netzach" and "ha'Na'ar Ben Me'ah Shanah Yamus"?

Rashi: The former implies that those who are revived will not die again. The latter implies that they will die, just at old ages (100 will be considered young).

Maharsha: The Midrash says that a 100-year old is called a Na'ar to teach that then he will become liable for punishment, just like a 20 year is liable in this world. (NOTE: An Agadah (Shabbos 89b) says that Shamayim does not punish below the age of 20. Noda bi'Yehudah (2 YD 164) says that this in this world, but after death one will be punished for everything he did once he knew that it is an Aveirah, even before Bar Mitzvah. Chasam Sofer (YD 155) says that from Bar Mitzvah, one is liable for all punishments. Midrashim exempt below 20 for new matters, e.g. the punishment of Dor ha'Midbar. Pischei Teshuvah (YD 185:9) says that Shabbos 89b connotes otherwise. - PF) According to the answer that Nochrim will die, we can say that a 100-year old is called a Na'ar to teach that he will be strong like a youth to serve Yisrael.

Margoliyos ha'Yam citing Toras Chayim: Initially, one was liable for punishment only from the age of 100. In the future, this conduct will return.

Why did the Gemara cite the verse out of order? It says "Lo Yihyeh mi'Sham Od Ul Yamim... ha'Na'ar Ben Me'ah Shanah Yamus"!

Maharsha: The two parts of the verse are independent proofs that people will die. First we cite the Seifa "ha'Na'ar Ben Me'ah Shanah Yamus", which is a stronger proof. Then we cite "Lo Yihyeh mi'Sham Od Ul Yamim [v'Zaken Asher Yo Yimalei Es Yamav]."

Why will death cease from Yisrael, but not from Nochrim?

Maharal: Yisrael cling to life - "v'Atem ha'Devekim ba'Shem Elokeichem [Chayim Kulchem ha'Yom]." This does not apply to Nochrim - if it did, how are Yisrael better than them?!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 10 citing Sefer Chasidim 368: How can we say that Nochrim will die? The verse says that death will cease, and Hash-m will remove tears "me'Al Kol Panim"? This is from all faces of Yisrael.

What do we learn from "v'Chofrah ha'Levanah u'Voshah ha'Chamah"?

Rashi: Their light will be dim.

Maharsha: We should have brought the verse "Lo Yihyeh Lach Od ha'Shemesh l'Or Yom ul'Nogah ha'Yare'ach Lo Ya'ir Lach v'Hayah Lecha Hash-m l'Or Olam...", which is more explicit that they will not use the light of the sun and moon at all! The verse that we brought teaches that in the future, the moon's light will be like the sun, and even so it will be shamed. The sun's light will be many times greater. Or, the sun's light will be like the light that Hash-m created on the first day and hid it for Tzadikim in the future.

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: Rashi (Pesachim 68a) says that "Shiv'asayim" is 49; "Shiv'asayim k'Or Shiv'as ha'Yamim" is 49 times as much as the light of seven days, i.e. 343 times as bright as nowadays. And so says Targum Yonason on "v'Ohavav k'Tzeis ha'Shemesh bi'Gevuraso." (Margoliyos ha'Yam 12 - he says so also on "v'Hayah Ohr ha'Levanah k'Or haChamah... Shiv'asayim" and "uch'Or Boker Yizrach Shemesh" (Shmuel II, 23:4.) Alternatively, sunlight nowadays is only one seventh of the light of the seven days of Bereishis, like Sefer ha'Bahir and the Zohar say.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 11, 13 citing Bnei Tziyon 6: Bereishis Rabah 10:4 says that before Adam ha'Rishon sinned, the Mazalos went on a short path, quickly. After he sinned, they go on a long path, slowly. i.e. before they were seven times closer, in length, width and depth, so the light was greater, seven times seven. (NOTE: According to physics, if it is seven times closer, it receives 49 (seven times seven) times as much light. Margoliyos ha'Yam implies that because there are three dimensions, it receives 343 times as much. - PF) Ein Eliyahu explains "ul'Nogah ha'Yare'ach Lo Ya'ir Lach" - in this world, the moon does not have its own light, only Nogah (it reflects light it received from the sun). In the future, when everything is fixed, it will receive light from Hash-m "k'Or ha'Chamah."

What is the answer 'this is in Yemos ha'Mashi'ach, and this is in the world to come'?

Rashi: In Yemos ha'Mashi'ach, when subjugation of the kingdoms will cease, moonlight will be [bright] like sunlight. In the world to come they will be ashamed (appear dim) due to the great radiance of Tzadikim.

Iyun Yakov: This answers also the previous contradictions, especially according to the Rambam, who holds that the world of Techiyas ha'Mesim and the world to come are different!

What is the answer 'this is in the place of Tzadikim, and this is in the place of the Shechinah'?

Rashi: In the place of the Shechinah they will appear dim. (In the place of Tzadikim they will be bright.)

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): "V'Chofrah ha'Levanah u'Voshah haChamah" in the place of the Shechinah. The verse continues "Ki Malach Hash-m Tzevakos." They will be bright in the place of Tzadikim - the Seifa says "v'Neged Zekenav Kavod" - "v'Hayah Ohr ha'Levanah..."

Maharal: When Tzadikim come to Machaneh Shechinah, the sun and moon will be ashamed, for Tzadikim will receive the light of the Shechinah - "Ki Malach Hash-m."

What is the contradiction between "Ani Amis va'Achayeh" and "Machatzti va'Ani Erpa"?

Rashi: The former implies that Hash-m will revive people like He killed them - if they were blemished, they will be revived blemished. The latter implies that He will heal the blow, and the person will be healed.

Maharal: The former implies that Hash-m revives people. The latter implies that He only heals.

Maharsha: "Amis" is present tense and "Machatzti" is past tense. We answer that what I struck before death, after death and revival with the blemish, I will heal it.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 15: This is why in Birkas Mechaye Mesim, after 'Mechaye Mesim b'Rachamim Rabim', we say 'Rofei Cholim.'

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): It does not say Ani regarding Machatzti, for Hash-m does not put His name on evil. If so, why does it say "Ani Amis", which is worse? We answer, "Ani" applies to "va'Achayeh" - one who died blemished, so I will revive him.

What is 'death in one and life in another'?

Rashi: He kills one, and brings someone else (a newborn baby) to life.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): If so, it should mention Achayeh before Amis, for Hash-m brought the person to life before He killed him!

Iyun Yakov: The Havah Amina was that it teaches like "v'Zarach ha'Shemesh u'Va ha'Shemesh" - before a Tzadik dies, a Tzadik like him is born (Kidushin 72b).

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): This refers to cases like Miryam the child-raiser - life was taken from her, and [the additional years that she should have lived] were given to another (Chagigah 5a). (NOTE: Above, the Rif said that Hash-m does not put His name on evil. Here He put His name on a mistake of the angel of death's Shali'ach! Perhaps it is because he gives the additional years to a Chacham with good Midos. - PF)

What do we learn from 'it says Yashir, and not Sar'?

Maharal: The Shirah is not only now - it will be also in the future, in Techiyas ha'Mesim. When there is perfection, amidst Simchah, man comes to Shirah. This will be in the world to come. Also "Az Yivneh Yehoshua Mizbe'ach" refers to the first Mizbe'ach in the land. It is to thank Hash-m. The primary thanks will be in the future. This is why it says Yehalelucha. Shirah is a semblance of the world to come, which will be without Chisaron.

Etz Yosef citing the Zohar: Moshe said "Azi v'Zimras Kah" - in the future, His Kisei and name will be complete. Even according to the opinion that we will not mention Yetzi'as Mitzrayim in the future, the Shirah will be said, for it is praise of Hash-m.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Mayanah Shel Torah (Beshalach): Just before this, it says "va'Ya'aminu ba'Shem." What Emunah was needed? At the sea, even a Shifchah saw more than Yechezkel saw! Rather, it was Emunah in Techiyas ha'Mesim.

Maharsha: Rashi on Chumash said that even though verses sometimes use future for present, e.g. "Kachah Ya'aseh Iyov", "Al Pi Hash-m Yachanu", that is for something constantly done.

After bringing "Az Yashir Moshe", why did we bring also "Az Yivneh Yehoshua"?

Iyun Yakov: The proof from Moshe can be rejected. An opinion in Sotah 13b says that he did not die.

Why does the Torah consider it as if Shlomo built a Bamah?

Maharsha: He did not protest against his wives' idolatry. So we conclude in Shabbos (56b); initially, we wanted to say that he wanted to build, but did not. We can say that also in the conclusion, he wanted to build, but did not. If it came to teach only that it is as if he built, it should have said Banah, and Yivneh!

Does "Ashrei Yoshvei Veisecha..." discuss only the future?

Maharsha: No. "Od Yehalelucha" implies in addition [to praise in this world].

Why will anyone who sings Shirah in this world merit to sing in the world to come?

Maharal: The primary Shirah will be in the world to come, when there is perfection. This is why it says Yehalelucha (future).

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): The world is like a corridor to the world to come, which is the Bayis; it says "Veisecha".

Iyun Yakov: This is like the Midrash, which says that anyone who enters Batei Kenesiyos and Batei Midrash in this world, he merits to enter them in the world to come.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 17: Anyone who says "Tehilah l'David" three times each day is guaranteed to be a Ben Olam ha'Ba. Before it, we say "Ashrei Yoshvei Veisecha", which teaches that anyone who sings Shirah in this world will sing in the world to come.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Rav Yeivi (Tehilim 42): All Tefilos do not pertain to the world to come, which is totally spiritual. However, Shirah and thanks pertain to the world to come.

Why must we infer from "Yeranenu" (future tense)? The Seifa explicitly says "Ki Ayin b'Ayin Yir'u b'Shiv Hash-m Tziyon"!

Maharsha: One might have thought that the verse teaches that now, Nevi'im prophesize that at the time of the Ge'ulah, Yisrael will sing. "Yeranenu" teaches unlike this. Rather, the Nevi'im will be revived, and will sing.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): The Zohar infers that the same Nevi'im will sing in the future, for it says "Nas'u", and not Yis'u.

What is the significance that in the future, all the Nevi'im will sing Shirah together as one?

Maharal: Even now, all Nevu'ah was from one Kol, just each Navi received a part. In the future, they will be united.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 18: Two Nevi'im do not have prophecy in the same words (89a). However, Shirah is different - "Az Yashir Moshe u'Vnei Yisrael..."

Maharsha: Normally, if two or more people talk simultaneously, they are not heard. However, if they say something dear to people, they concentrate and can hear (Megilah 21b). The Shirah in the future will be dear, and people will hear it.

What is considered withholding a Halachah from a Talmid?

Maharsha: He does not teach it to him until it is fluent in his mouth. E.g. R. Freida needed to teach a certain Talmid 400 times until it would be fluent in his mouth (Eruvin 54b).

Why is Torah called an inheritance to all of Yisrael from the six days of creation?

Rashi: It says "Bereishis Bara" - for the sake of Torah, which is Reishis, and Yisrael, who are called "Reishis Tevu'asah", Hash-m created Shamayim and Eretz.

Maharsha: Based on their creation and nature, all of Yisrael are prepared to learn Torah! If the Rebbi denies this, he robs him of his inheritance!

Above (59a), one opinion says that a Nochri who learns Torah is Chayav Misah, as if he had Bi'ah with another's Na'arah Me'urasah. We read "Morashah", like Me'urasah. Why do we not say so here?

Iyun Yakov: The Rebbi who did not teach him, the Torah is betrothed also to him, just he stole the betrothed of the Talmid.

Why do fetuses curse one who withholds a Halachah from a Talmid?

Maharal: One who does so is worthy to be cursed, for Chisaron in Torah is absolute lack. It is no Chidush that one who entered the world and his existence was completed, he curses the one who does so. Rather, even fetuses, who are not finished, curse him.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Many verses show that Kavah is a curse. We bring "Mah Ekov Lo Kabo Kel" to show that also Hash-m curses him. This is why it says "Yikvuhu (plural) l'Om (singular)."

Maharsha: The Rebbi does not teach it to him, for he says that the Talmid's mouth is not proper to arrange it. Why should I toil for nothing? A fetus' mouth is totally closed, and an angel teaches to it the entire Torah (Nidah 30b) - this Rebbi would say that all the more so, it is improper to teach the fetus!

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: Even fetuses, who do not need to learn from the Rebbi, for [an angel] teaches to them the entire Torah, they curse him.

Margoliyos ha'Yam citing Ein Eliyahu: A Halachah that one knows is like a fetus. If he teaches it to others, it is like birth. If he does not teach it, his fetuses do not enter the world.

How does "Mone'a Bar..." teach about one who withholds a Halachah from a Talmid?

Rashi: Bar is Torah.

Maharsha: It is called Bar, for he does not teach him Al Borav Shel Halachah (until it is clear).

Why should he be punctured like a sieve?

Maharal: The curse for one who causes lack in intellectual Torah is totally clarified, like a sieve, which is totally punctured. Physical things can be divided; something intellectual cannot be divided. He conducts with Torah as if it can be divided.

Iyun Yakov: Every day, one's Yetzer ha'Ra seeks to kill him. Torah is the spice for the Yetzer ha'Ra (to make it better). Therefore, one must save the victim, even if he must kill the Rodef. One who sees Reuven chasing Shimon, we tell him 'you are chasing a Yisrael. He is a Ben Bris. It says "Shofech Dam ha'Adam ba'Adam Damo Yishafech" (72b), and we expound (57b) "Shofech Dam ha'Adam ba'Adam Damo Yishafech" - the case of a person in a person is a fetus. One who withholds a Halachah from a Talmid, he must expound "Shofech Dam ha'Adam ba'Adam" to discuss one who kills a fetus. (NOTE: Iyun Yakov holds that the Drashos argue with each other. One who does not teach the Talmid, even though the Yetzer ha'Ra pursues him, we must say that he does not expound "Shofech Dam ha'Adam ba'Adam" to obligate killing the Rodef. Rather, he must expound it to obligate one who kills a fetus. - PF) Even so, fetuses curse him! Since he does not save the Nirdaf from the Yetzer ha'Ra, he should be punctured like a sieve. Also, since he did not want to benefit another from sparks of the light of Torah, so drops of blood are strewn from him. Or, since he expounds "Shofech Dam ha'Adam ba'Adam" to teach about a fetus - "Demei Achicha Tzo'akim Elai" is the blood of Hevel and the descendants he would have had, we puncture him like a sieve, to show that Kayin made many wounds in Hevel (for he did not know how to kill him).

Why did Abaye add 'he will be punctured like a launderer's bucket'?

Maharal: The holes in a sieve are not seen from one side to the other. Each hole in a launderer's bucket is recognized and clarified.

Why does one who teaches him the Halachah merit blessings like Yosef - "u'Vrachah l'Rosh Mashbir"?

Maharal: This is for one who is Mashpi'a (bestows) on another. Yosef's Berachah was because he was Mashpi'a on all of Yisrael; his brothers and their children were all of Yisrael. The Targum of "mi'Sham Ro'eh Even Yisrael" is d'Zan Avahan u'Vnin. One who is Mashpi'a Torah, also this is the highest level, like Yosef's Hashpa'ah to all of Yisrael, for the Hashpa'ah of Torah is on everything.

Why does one who teaches Torah in this world merit to teach it in the world to come?

Maharal: This is like Nevi'im in this world will merit to sing together in the world to come. One who is Mashpi'a Torah to another in this world, will do so also in the world to come, when he is perfected. Total perfection is impossible in this world. Similarly, we say below (92a) that any leader who leads the Tzibur b'Nachas, merits to lead them in the world to come, i.e. the world that is totally Nachas (serenity) and contentment.