What is the significance of the closed Mem in the middle of the word?

Rashi #1: It represents the closure of Hash-m's intention; it was not fulfilled.

Maharsha: Most of these matters were expounded from this Parshah - "Ki Yeled Yulad Lanu...; l'Marbeh ha'Misrah..." (Yeshayah 9:5-6). It was said about Chizkiyah. Hash-m initially intended to make him Mashi'ach - "va'Tehi ha'Misrah Al Shichmo va'Yikra Shmo El Gibor Pele Yo'etz Avi Ad Sar Shalom" (ibid.) These names are proper for Mashi'ach. After the prosecution of Midas ha'Din, these attributes that will be in Mashi'ach in the future were not fulfilled, only "l'Marbeh ha'Misrah ul'Shalom" - he will have Shalom (protection) from Sancheriv. "Ul'Shalom Ein Ketz Al Kisei David v'Al Mamlachto... v'Ad Olam" is the prosecution of Midas ha'Din. How will he sit on David's throne forever? David sang so much... [Chizkiyah did not sing - will You make him Mashi'ach?!] "Kin'as Hash-m Tzevakos Ta'aseh Zos" teaches that Hash-m agreed to the prosecution. The Mem at the beginning of the prosecution is closed, to teach that Ketz ha'Ge'ulah was closed.

Iyun Yakov: "Ul'Shalom Ein Ketz" - for a complete Ge'ulah, there is no end to the length of our Galus, until plunderers and plunderers of plunderers will come. The final Ge'ulah will resemble the first - the harshness of servitude in Egypt completed our Galus. So in the future, after plunderers of plunderers, will be the complete, eternal Ge'ulah.

Rashi #2: Hash-m wanted to cease Yisrael's afflictions, and make Chizkiyah Mashi'ach.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): The Mem is in the word ha'MiSRaH, for the afflictions were not sealed, due to not singing ShiRaH.

Margoliyos ha'Yam (3): The Mem in "Chomas Yerushalayim Asher Hem Perutzim" (Nechemyah 2:13) is open, even though it ends the word. Midrash l'Perushim explains that as long as the wall of Yerushalayim is breached and open, it is closed to l'Marbeh ha'Misrah (Mashi'ach).

Rashi citing his Rebbi: It is because Chizkiyah's mouth was closed, and did not sing Shirah.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Even though Chizkiyah said 'I lack strength to kill, pursue or sing Shirah - I will sleep, and You will do!', and Hash-m agreed (Eichah Rabah Pesichah 30), he should have sang after the miracle. Alternatively, he should have sung when Hash-m cured him.

Daf Al ha'Daf (94b citing Or Torah 13): The world is like a house without a wall in the north (Bava Basra 25b). In the north (Tzafon) is the Yetzer ha'Ra, called Tzefuni; it seeks a Pesach (opening) and breach to make man stumble. The Torah begins with the letter Beis, which is breached in the north (left), for via Torah, we close breaches. Chizkiyah stood in the breach and raised the flag of Torah - he stuck a sword at Pesach Beis ha'Midrash... (94b) The final sealing of the breach will be in the days of Mashi'ach, when Hash-m will remove Ru'ach ha'Tum'ah.

What miracles did Hash-m do for Chizkiyah?

Rashi: He wiped out Sancheriv's great army overnight, and cured Chizkiyah.

Is not singing Shirah a reason not to become Mashi'ach?

Maharal: Sancheriv mixed up the nations, and came for war against Chizkiyah. So Gog will do in the end of days, and come against Mashi'ach! Because Chizkiyah was pursued, it was proper that Hash-m aggrandize him; He always seeks to help the Nirdaf. Everything said about Gog applied to Sancheriv. Just like Gog will come "Al Hash-m v'Al Meshicho" (Tehilim 2:2), Sancheriv did (he also blasphemed). All physical beings are in potential, but not in Pa'al (deed). Non-physical beings are in Pa'al. The miracle for Chizkiyah was not natural; he should have sung Shirah, to show that it was done in Pa'al, and not merely in potential. It is not that he did not want to sing Shirah - rather, they (NOTE: he and his entourage - PF) knew that his level is not proper for it.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 5, citing Shochar Tov (18:6): Anyone who sings Shirah over a miracle, it is known that his sins were forgiven. After Shiras ha'Yam, "va'Yasa Moshe Es Yisrael mi'Yam Suf" - he removed them from their sins at Yam Suf. After Shiras Devorah, it says "va'Ya'asu Bnei Yisrael Es ha'Ra" - their prior sins were pardoned when they sang Shirah. (NOTE: Even though only Devorah and Barak sang, this atoned for all of Yisrael! - PF) Had Chizkiyah sang, the sins of Achaz and his generation would have been pardoned.

Why did Chizkiyah not sing Shirah?

Maharal: He wanted to sing, but they (NOTE: he and his entourage - PF) knew that his level is not proper for it.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 6, citing Tzafnas Pane'ach (b'Sof Sefer Hafla'ah of Rambam): The Yerushalmi (Berachos Reish Perek 9) brings two opinions about whether one must bless on a miracle for a Shevet (but not for all of Yisrael). The 10 tribes were already exiled.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 7, citing Ein Eliyahu: He thought that Ashur's measure [for sin] was not yet full, so Hash-m does not rejoice over their fall. He thought that the time of Ge'ulah did not yet come, so he cannot be Mashi'ach.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Sefas Emes citing Chidushei ha'Rim: Chizkiyah's Emunah was so clear that all of nature was a hidden miracle to him. He did not sing Shirah, for wonder and nature were the same for him. However, when Hash-m shows His strength, Bnei Yisrael must thank and praise, to refute Resha'im who deny Hashgachah. Bnei Yisrael merited to sing Shirah, for they clung to Moshe - "va'Ya'aminu ba'Shem uv'Moshe Avdo; Az Yashir Moshe u'Vnei Yisrael..." Due to the Chisaron of the generation, Chizkiyah was not able to draw them [to the level of Shirah], therefore he did not become Mashi'ach.

NOTE: If Chizkiyah's Emunah was so clear, why did he cut the doors of the Heichal to bribe Sancheriv? (PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Lechem l'Fi ha'Taf (p.150): Yefe To'ar (Shemos 25) says that Yisrael did not sing Shirah on the manna, for it was in the merit of others. Keri'as Yam Suf was in their merit, so they sang for it. Rabanei Ashkenaz explain, Hash-m Himself does a miracle for one who deserves it. When it is in the merit of others, it is via an angel; one should not sing Shirah, lest it look like he sings to the angel. Hash-m saved Chizkiyah from Sancheriv and from his illness in David's merit.

How can the land sing Shirah in place of Chizkiyah?

Maharal: "Veha'Aretz Nasan li'Vnei Adam" - it was given to Tzadikim. When the miracle was in the world, the world was complete from the aspect of the Tzadik for whom it was done. Therefore, the land sang. Sar ha'Olam said that Chizkiyah should be Mashi'ach, because the world was perfected. His perfection was not enough to be Mashi'ach. The land is from lower beings; the salvation in the land was total perfection.

Maharsha: It says "ha'Aretz" - the known land, Eretz Yisrael. As long as Yisrael are in Galus, "Tirtzeh ha'Aretz Es Shabesoseha" (Vayikra 26:34) - it is as if it is mourning. Therefore, it sang Shirah in place of him, lest it be destroyed, and Chizkiyah will be Mashi'ach and the 10 tribes will return.

Iyun Yakov: It says "mi'Knaf ha'Aretz Zemiros" due to the gathering of exiles which should have been in his days - "Lekabetz Nidachenu me'Arba Kanfos ha'Aretz." 'They did not say Shirah until the land began' implies that afterwards, they said Shirah - "Michtav l'Chizkiyah..." (Yeshayahu 38:9). Likewise, after Yisro said Baruch Hash-m, we learn that one who sees a place where miracles were done for Yisrael, he must bless (Berachos 54a).

Anaf Yosef citing Toras Chayim: Can one say Shma or pray on behalf of his friend?! Also regarding Moshe and Yisrael, the Gemara implies that after Yisro, they said Baruch! We find that if others blessed on Ploni's salvation, and he answers Amen, he is Yotzei l'Chatchilah. Surely Moshe and Yisrael answered Amen to Yisro's Berachah; it is as if they themselves blessed. Likewise, Chizkiyah and his entourage answered Amen to the land's Shirah, so it is as if they sang. The land intended for this. (NOTE: We hold that one is Yotzei via answering Amen only if the Mevarech was obligated and intended to exempt him. Yisro blessed before he converted, and surely the land was not obligated! - PF)

Who is Sar ha'Olam?

Rashi: He is the angel appointed over the world.

Maharsha: In Chulin (60a), Tosfos said that it is Metatron.

What is the significance of Aseh Tzivyono Shel Tzadik?

Maharsha: Eretz Yisrael is called Eretz Tzvi, for it does Hash-m's Tzivyon (desire), to sing Shirah in place of the Tzadik. We say similarly in Kesuvos (111a) "v'Nasati Tzvi b'Eretz ha'Chayim" - the land in which is Tzivyoni (My desire).

What is a Bas Kol?

Ramah: Any voice that we do not see who makes it, it is called a Bas Kol.

What is the meaning of 'Razi Li Razi Li'?

Rashi: They are My hidden matters. I know what prevents [Chizkiyah from being Mashi'ach].

Ramah: Woe to Me, that Midas ha'Din blocks [Chizkiyah from being Mashi'ach].

Maharal: The time of Mashi'ach is My secret; now is not the time.

Maharsha #1: I have two secrets - My initial intent to make Chizkiyah Mashi'ach, and why I did not do so.

Maharsha #2: This hints to the two Churbanos that will be if Chizkiyah will not be Mashi'ach.

What is the question 'until when?!'

Rashi: When will Mashi'ach come?

Maharsha: That generation was totally worthy - they checked all of Eretz Yisrael and did not find an ignoramus (Amud B). If this generation will not merit Mashi'ach, when will there be a generation more worthy?!

What is the significance of several waves of plunderers?

Ramah: Plunderers will come against Eretz Yisrael, and latter plunderers will plunder what the first ones left over.

Maharal: It is when they will rule over the kingdoms. Malchus Bavel will rule, and Malchus Paras will plunder them. Malchus Paras will rule, and Malchus Yavan will plunder them. Malchus Yavan will rule, and Malchus Edom will plunder them.

Maharsha: Plunderers will come against Eretz Yisrael, and other plunderers will plunder the first plunderers and Yisrael with them.

What is the source that Dumah is the angel appointed over Ruchos?

Maharsha: The simple meaning is that Dumah is a nation. However, Dumah was a son of Yishmael (Bereishis 25:14). Why does it say "Korei mi'Se'ir"? Therefore, we expound that when Chizkiyah did not become Mashi'ach, and two Churbanos were decreed, the Neshamos and those who descended to Gehinom request their revival, to rise from Gehinom at the time of Ge'ulah. They come to Dumah, the angel appointed over them. A hint to this is "v'Lo Kol Yoredei Dumah", "Kim'at Shachnah Dumah Nafshi."

Iyun Yakov: Perhaps "Korei mi'Se'ir" refers to Ruchos of Shedim - "u'Se'irim Yirkedu Sham." The Melachah of [creating] Shedim was not completed, like the Midrash on "Totzei ha'Aretz Nefesh Chayah." They were made on Erev Shabbos, Bein ha'Shemashos, close to Shabbos. Therefore, they are Ruchos without a body. The creation will not be finished until the future, when Hash-m will make Ru'ach ha'Tum'ah depart, and they will receive bodies that are revived. Therefore, they anticipate our Ge'ulah, which is Ge'ulah also for them!

What is the significance of the Ruchos gathering and asking about the night?

Maharal: Galus and night are the same. They are a lack of light, which is like death. The Sar appointed over dead Ruchos is appointed also over night.

What do we learn from the repetition "Shomer Mah mi'Laylah Shomer Mah mi'Leil"?

Maharsha: This refers to the two Galuyos - one from Bavel, and one from Se'ir. It mentions "Korei mi'Se'ir", for they will be redeemed from it after a long Galus. They ask, how long will these Galuyos, which resemble night, last?

What is the question 'what does the Shomer say about the night?'

Rashi: What does Hash-m, the Shomer, say about the Galus, which is like night? When will it end?

What is the meaning of "morning is coming, but also night"?

Rashi #1: Hash-m says, the redemption is coming, but after there is still much Galus first.

Rashi #2: They will be redeemed and build Mikdash Sheni, but they will be exiled again.

Rashi #3: [There is reward for Tzadikim,] and also [punishment] for Resha'im. The Targum of the verse is like this.

Maharal: There will be a Ge'ulah like in the days of Chizkiyah. Many times there was Ge'ulah, and they returned to Galus.

Maharsha: Our text says Lo Asa Voker - will morning and Ge'ulah not come?! i.e. will there not be a Ge'ulah between the two Churbanos, i.e. Bayis Sheni, which stood 420 years?

What do we learn from "Im Tiv'ayun Be'ayu Shuvu Esayu"?

Rashi: if you will pray for redemption and do Teshuvah, it will come.

Maharsha: The night after Churban Sheni (Galus Se'ir), its deadline was not revealed. It depends on Tefilah for mercy and Teshuvah.

Why did Moshe and Yisrael not bless Hash-m?

Maharal: They were within a count of 600,000. (NOTE: Berachah applies to what is not counted. - PF) Had they said Baruch, there would have been increase and they would have numbered more than 600,000. Yisro was a convert, not among the count, so he was proper to say Baruch. Moshe and the 600,000 were redeemed - this was not considered Berachah, for it was in the merit of the Avos and the Bris; it is as if it was based on Din. Even though they had enough perfection to sing Shirah, they did not cling to increase of Berachah, which is a higher level.

Maharsha: We find "Baruch Hash-m" in earlier verses, e.g. "Baruch Hash-m Elokei Shem", "Baruch Hash-m Elokei Avraham." It is detriment for Moshe and Yisrael that they did not say Baruch Hash-m for the miracle done for them, until Yisro said it. One may bless on a miracle done for the Rabim (even if it was not done for him - Berachos 54a).

Anaf Yosef citing Toras Chayim: Was it not enough that they sang Shiras ha'Yam? One for whom a miracle was done, he must bless (Berachos 54a). For a miracle for a Rabim, one must additionally sing Shirah (Pesachim 117a; they enacted to say Hallel for every Tzarah, that it not come upon them, and after they are redeemed from it). It says in Shiras Devorah "b'Hisnadev Am Barachu Hash-m; ... ha'Misnadevim ba'Am Barachu Hash-m" (Shofetim 5:2, 9). The Shirah must mention Baruch Hash-m, therefore Shiras ha'Yam did not suffice.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Da'as Sofer (Yisro): Moshe and Yisrael sang Shirah only after Hash-m did miracles and wonders for them - arousal from above. Yisro blessed Hash-m upon hearing what He did for Yisrael, without any miracles done for him, i.e. without arousal from above.

Why do we connect Chizkiyah not singing Shirah and Moshe not blessing Hash-m?

Anaf Yosef citing Ya'aros Devash (1:4): On the night of Keri'as Yam Suf, the angels wanted to sing, but Hash-m did not let them. The Midrash says that during the day they say Kadosh, and at night, Baruch. Since they omitted saying Baruch that night, it was proper for Moshe and Yisrael, for whom the miracle was done, to say it for them. Similarly, Chizkiyah should have sang in place of the sun (NOTE: when the sun went back for a sign that Hash-m will save Chizkiyah - PF). Tanchuma says that when Yehoshua told the sun to stand still, it asked 'who will sing Shirah in place of me?', and Yehoshua agreed to do so.

Why did Yisro pass a sharp sword over his flesh?

Rashi: He circumcised himself and converted.

Maharsha: Why was Yisro not already circumcised? Midyan is one of Bnei Keturah. They are obligated to do Bris Milah (above, 59b), and so rules the Rambam! We can say that he took a knife to cut strands that invalidate the Mitzvah. Avraham was not commanded about Peri'ah (Yevamos 71a, but after Matan Torah we are commanded).

Etz Yosef: Perhaps Yisro was Kohen Midyan, i.e. its great noble, but he did not descend from Midyan. We find that he was a noble of Egypt, and Pharaoh counseled with him about what to do to Yisrael! (NOTE: Zimri took a Midyanis in front of Moshe, and said, if you say that she is forbidden, who permitted you to marry Yisro's daughter?! (Rashi Bereishis 49:6, from Midrash ha'Gadol Bamidbar 25:6) Even if Zimri implied that she descended from Midyan, perhaps he erred. Moshe did not correct him, just like he did not answer that she converted. - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Panim Yafos (Reish Yisro): How could he circumcise himself? The north wind did not blow in the Midbar, so it was mortal danger to circumcise (Yevamos 71b)! He answers [regarding the converts that Moshe accepted] that a Goy is not commanded "va'Chai Bahem", so he may endanger himself for a Mitzvah. Merafsin Igra (Yisro) asked, Oneg Yom Tov (OC 51) says that if one endangered himself to do a Mitzvah that he was not obligated, he did not fulfill the Mitzvah. How could Yisro endanger himself to circumcise? R. Michal Feinstein answered, his conversion was valid, even if it is not considered a Mitzvah. R. C. Kanievsky answered, Yisro circumcised and returned to his place, where the north wind blew. (NOTE: It is dangerous to travel within three days of Bris Milah (Nedarim 31b)! - PF) Or, Oneg Yom Tov discussed one who is ill. Yisro was not yet ill when he circumcised. Or, the north wind ceased to blow after Chet ha'Meraglim; Yisro circumcised before this.

Maharal: He removed himself from the lowliness of the nations, i.e. Orlah, unlike other converts, who remove the Orlah but remain lowly.

Why was Yisro's flesh covered with wrinkles?

Rashi: He was pained at the downfall of Egypt.

Maharal: It was due to the good and the great level that Yisrael acquired.

Anaf Yosef citing Ya'aros Devash: Yisro merited that setting up judges was said via him. Was he pained at the punishment of Yisrael's afflicters?! "Mesan'echa Hash-m Esna" (Tehilim 139:21)! It says "va'Yichad Yisro due to all the good that Hash-m did for Yisrael", and not due to what He did to Egypt! A convert who abandoned idolatry to cling to Emunah in Elokim Chayim - is he pained to hear the shame of an idolater?! Rather, the Rambam praises one who converts when Nochrim have wealth and honor, and Yisrael are poor. It is not as praiseworthy if he converts when Yisrael have wealth and honor, and Nochrim are lowly. We did not accept converts in the days of David and Shlomo, lest they convert due to the king's table (wealth - Yevamos 76a)! Our Gemara teaches that for 10 generations, do not tell a convert that Nochrim are disgraced, for this belittles his choice to convert. Yisro assumed that Yisrael left Egypt impoverished and were struggling to exist in the Midbar. Leaving the comforts of Midyan to cling to them was a great merit. When he heard how Hash-m benefited them, with Egypt's wealth, manna, their clothes did not wear out... he was pained that his decision to convert was not so esteemed! Egypt's punishment did not upset him.

NOTE: Hash-m knows what he thought when he decided to cling to Yisrael, and will reward him accordingly! Perhaps he initially expected to go, see their poverty, and even so decide to convert - this would be an awesome merit. Or, he hoped to be Mekadesh Hash-m, when people will hear how he abandoned comforts to cling to Yisrael. Now he saw that converting will not be a great merit or Kidush Hash-m. (PF)

Since the Gemara teaches what Rav and Shmuel expounded, why does it first say 'Rav and Shmuel...'?

Iyun Yakov: This teaches that they do not argue; both of their Drashos are true. If he only circumcised himself, it should have written "va'Yamal"! Rather, Rav agrees that his flesh was covered with wrinkles due to the Egypt's fall. If the verse taught only the latter, why does it say "Al Kol ha'Tovah"? Rather, Shmuel agrees that he circumcised.

Rav said, one should not disgrace a Nochri in front of a convert - does he support Shmuel?

Maharsha: When this happens, the Gemara says 'Rav explained on behalf of Shmuel'! Girsas ha'Yalkut is better. It says that Rav Papa supported Shmuel.

Iyun Yakov: Yes. He agrees with Shmuel's Drashah, and conversely.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Ya'aros Devash 1:16: Rav said this in astonishment. Since a convert would be pained to hear of Egypt's downfall, surely Moshe did not tell him; he already knew. If so, va'Yichad must teach that he circumcised.

Why does it say not to disgrace a Nochri in front of a convert for 10 generations?

Rashi: This is a Mashal; people say so. Yisro was not the 10th generation.

Chizkuni (Shemos 18:9): Yishmael ben Nesanyah was the 10th generation from a converted Egyptian, and he took vengeance against Yisrael (killed Gedalyah ben Achikam).

Maharsha: See R. Bechayei [on Shemos 18:9. He and R. Chaim Palti'el say that Avraham was the ninth generation from Shem, so his son Midyan was the 10th from Shem and his brother Cham; Yisro, from Bnei Midyan, was the 10th generation from Mitzrayim ben Cham. Mitzrayim and Midyan were relatives. Even though Yisro converted, he still felt the pain after 10 generations.]

NOTE: How can we learn 10 generations after conversion from nations that descend from brothers 10 generations ago? Would Yisro not feel more connected to Mitzrayim due to his grandmother Keturah, i.e. Hagar (Bereishis Rabah 61:4), who was a Mitzris? Further, what is the source that Yisro was Midyan's son? Midyan was born in Avraham's lifetime, when Yitzchak was at most 75 years old, 325 years before Yetzi'as Mitzrayim! It seems that all seven Yisro's seven daughters were still single when Moshe arrived, and his daughter bore a son (R. Eliezer) a year before Yetzi'as Mitzrayim! Some say that Yisro was Ben Re'uel (Rashi Shemos 18:1, from Sechel Tov Shemos 3:1); if so, he was not Ben Midyan!

Iyun Yakov: Only 10 generations are remembered, like we say 'there were 10 generations from Adam until Noach' (Avos 5:2).

NOTE: What is the proof from there? Perhaps it teaches about Hash-m's mercy, that He endured their sins for 10 generations before bringing the flood!

Margoliyos ha'Yam: A convert may marry a Mamzeres for 10 generations (Kidushin 75a). (NOTE: After this, it is forgotten that he comes from Goyim, and people will think that a Yisrael married a Mamzeres. Similarly, we can say that until 10 generations, a convert identifies himself with his Nochri ancestors! - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf citing ha'Ma'or ha'Gadol (p.369, in the name of the Vilna Gaon or R. Leivush Charif): The convert's child is half from his father, and half from his mother. The grandson is 1/4 from the convert, the great grandson is 1/8 from the convert... the 10th generation is 1/1024 from the convert. The Yerushalmi says that a creation is Batel in 960 parts. The part from the convert is Batel. (NOTE: He assumes that the convert and his descendants married native Jews. If they did not, the Isur extends longer! - PF) The Torah forbids a Mamzer "Gam Dor Asiri", for one might have thought that after 10 generations, the reason to forbid is Batel.

Why do Chizkiyah's eight names make him proper to defeat Sancheriv, who has eight names?

Maharal: Chizkiyah was proper to be Mashi'ach, who has an eighth attribute; the harp in the future will have eight strings. The days of Mashi'ach will be a higher level than what was created in the six days of creation. However, Chizkiyah did not have total perfection in this level to the point of singing Shirah. Opposite this was Sancheriv, the eighth level of evil - the power of Gog and Magog. Therefore, Chizkiyah was proper [to defeat Sancheriv].

Why do we expound "b'Mishmanav Razon" to teach about Chizkiyah defeating Sancheriv?

Maharsha: The angel killed his camp. There is no reason to say that they were Shemenim (fat). This opinion is unlike we expound below, that 185,000 is the number of Shemenav (troop leaders) that the angel killed. Rather, Mishmanav is an expression of Shemonah - Sancheriv had eight names, but they did not last for him, like Chizkiyah's names lasted for him. (NOTE: Above, Maharsha said that Chizkiyah's names (attributes) that will be in Mashi'ach were not fulfilled! - PF)

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): He expounds that it did not say bi'Shmanav, rather, "b'Mishmanav" (like mi'Shmanav) - from Chizkiyah, who has eight names, He will pay up Sancheriv, who has eight.

What is the difference between expounding Chizko Kah (Hash-m strengthened him), or because Chizek Es Yisrael to their Father in Heaven?

Maharal: The first version holds that Hash-m was with Chizkiyah (He strengthened him). The second version holds that he strengthened Yisrael - he was with Hash-m. Sancheriv has two names opposite these. (a) From Hash-m's side, Sichaso Riv (He spoke quarrels with him). (b) From his side, Sach v'Nicher (he blasphemed Hash-m).

Maharsha: Hash-m strengthened him against Sancheriv, who had a great army, or He strengthened him from his illness.

What is the source that all of these names apply to Sancheriv?

Maharsha: Perhaps Chazal had a tradition.

NOTE: Hagahos ha'Gra omits Raba and v'Yakira from this list, and adds (Tiglas) Peleser and (Tiglas) Pilneser.

What is the meaning of Sichaso Riv?

Maharal: Hash-m spoke quarrels with him.

Maharsha: He spoke [via his Shali'ach] with Yisrael in the Jewish language [even though Chizkiyah's servants told him not to], so they will quarrel with Chizkiyah. He said, do not rely on Chizkiyah...

What is the meaning of Sach v'Nicher?

Rashi: He spoke and reviled Hash-m [via a Shali'ach].

Why does it say that he did not speak bad about Eretz Yisrael?

Rashi: He said "El Eretz k'Artzechem" - he did not say that he would exile them to a place better than Eretz Yisrael.

Maharal: From the side of his grandeur, he was close to the side of Kedushah. This is why he was called Osnapar Raba v'Yakira! Yisrael denigrated Eretz Yisrael. This shows that they lacked this Midah they were not totally close to Kedushas ha'Aretz. Had they been close to it, they would not have been exiled from it! Therefore, he exiled them from it and rules over the land, just he could not rule over Yerushalayim. He merited his eighth name, Yakira, for not denigrating the land. Also Chizkiyah's last name was due to the land, so when he did not sing Shirah, it sang for him - "mi'Knaf ha'Aretz Zemiros." Kenaf is the corner and end.

What is the significance of arguing about whether he was a wise king or foolish?

Iyun Yakov: One teaches the greatness of Hash-m's deeds - He saved even from a wise king. The other teaches that when Yisrael do not do His will, He hands them over even to a foolish king, and they cannot save themselves with their Chochmah. Rav and Shmuel argued similarly about Achashverosh (Megilah 12a).

Margoliyos ha'Yam: In Megilah 12b, Rav applied "a fool spreads folly" to Achashverosh. This is like he holds, that one who praises Nochrim transgresses "Lo Sechanem." (NOTE: If so, we should resolve that here and in Megilah 12a, Rav holds that he was foolish, and Shmuel holds that he was wise! - PF)

Why does it ask 'to where did he exile them?' The verse explicitly says "ba'Chelach uv'Chavor..." (Melachim II, 18:11)!

Rashi: We ask where these places are.

What is the significance of Africa?

Maharal: It is after the dark mountains (Tamid 32a). He holds that the primary Galus is that they are separated from Yisrael and cannot reach them. The one who says that he exiled them to Harei Selug (snowy mountains), they are very far from civilization, therefore the cold rules there. There are two aspects of Galus - they are separated from their place, and far from their place. The latter opinion holds that distance is primary. The former opinion holds that separation is primary, therefore he exiled them to Africa, after the dark mountains. This was from the left; separation is from the left. The former opinion holds that it was from the right.

How does Shosh hint to saying 'this is Shaveh to Eretz Yisrael'?

Maharsha: It is good like Eretz Yisrael, which is "Yefe Nof Mesos Kol ha'Aretz" (Tehilim 48:3).

What is the meaning of 'this is twice'?

Rashi: It is twice as good as Eretz Yisrael.

Why does it say 'under their Kavod was burned, but not Kevodo Mamash'?

Rashi: Kevodo Mamash is the bodies; if so, under their Kavod is the Neshamah in the body. R. Yochanan teaches that this was not so. Rather, Kevodo refers to the garments, like R. Yochanan taught elsewhere, and under Kevodo (the bodies) were burned.

Redak (Yeshayahu 10:18): "Mi'Nefesh v'Ad Basar Yichleh" supports the opinion that the bodies and Neshamos were burned; "Kulam Pegarim Mesim" (ibid. 37:36) supports the opinion that only the clothes were burned. We can resolve the verses - part of the bodies was burned.

Maharsha: If part of the bodies was burned, what do the opinions argue about? I answer, the one who says that bodies did not burn, "mi'Nefesh v'Ad Basar" is Ad v'Lo Ad bi'Chlal (Basar is not included). The one who says that the bodies burned, the skeleton remained, so it properly says "Kulam Pegarim Mesim."

What is 'under their true Kavod'?

Rashi: The bodies were intact, and the Neshamos were burned.

What is the significance of blaspheming through a messenger?

Rashi: This is a bigger disgrace. Hash-m punished him through a messenger - it is a greater shame to be disgraced by someone small than from someone great.

Margoliyos ha'Yam: One whom the king executed is superior to one whom the executioner killed (Shabbos 108a). Hash-m punishes for everything through a Shali'ach, except for affliction - "uv'Yado Anach" (Bava Metzi'a 59a). This implies that punishment via a Shali'ach is lighter! Rashi (Vayikra 20:3) brings from Toras Kohanim that Hash-m turns from His affairs to punish one who serves Molech. R. Elazar must say that even so, He punishes through a Shali'ach.

Maharsha: It is worse that Pharaoh himself blasphemed - his punishment was via Hash-m Himself, to show His great anger. For this, the Shali'ach is not like the Sender.

Iyun Yakov: Hash-m will revive Nochrim in the world to come, and they will serve us - "v'Amdu Zarim v'Ra'u Tzonchem..." (91b). Those that He Himself punished will not be revived.

NOTE: I do not see a source for this distinction. The Gemara there says "Ani Amis va'Achayeh" - He will bring to life the same people that He killed. Does this refer only to those whom He killed via a Shali'ach?! (PF)

Why did the Gemara bring "va'Yna'er Hash-m" about Keri'as Yam Suf, and not the earlier verse of "Ani Yotzei b'Soch Mitzrayim"?

Etz Yosef #1 citing Toras Chayim: Only the Bechoros died in Makas Bechoros.

Etz Yosef #2 citing Toras Chayim: There was a different reason why Hash-m Himself killed the Bechoros - at the same time, He saved Bechoros of Yisrael. An angel does not do two missions. (NOTE: Also at Keri'as Yam Suf, He saved Yisrael. However, there the Egyptians were not in the same place. - PF)

Etz Yosef #3 citing Toras Chayim: Hash-m needed to distinguish between a drop of [semen that produced] a Bechor and a drop not of a Bechor; in Sancheriv's camp, all died. (NOTE: Hash-m could make a sign on the Bechoros (e.g. their faces turn yellow) so the angel will know whom to kill! Perhaps an angel could not select and strike only them in one moment (midnight), and spare millions of Egyptians and animals that were not Bechoros. - PF)

Why did the Gemara bring the verse from Nevi'im "Darachta va'Yam Susecha"? It already brought the Torah verse "va'Yna'er Hash-m Es Mitzrayim b'Soch ha'Yam"!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov) #1: "Darachta..." teaches that Hash-m Himself punished not only Pharaoh, rather, also his chariot and horses.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov) #2: If we had only the Torah verse, we would not know that Hash-m Himself punished Pharaoh himself.

What is the difference between "Merom Kitzo" and "Malon Kitzo"?

Rashi: "Merom Kitzo" is Hash-m's lower dwelling place; "Malon Kitzo" is His place above.

Maharsha: "Merom Kitzo" is Hash-m's dwelling place above - the ultimate Marom (elevation); "Malon Kitzo" is His place above - the Kodesh ha'Kodoshim, where the Shechinah dwelled - "Bein Shadai Yalin."

Why did Sancheriv plan to destroy His dwelling below, and later His dwelling above?

Iyun Yakov: The Beis ha'Mikdash below is opposite the Beis ha'Mikdash above.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Nefesh ha'Chayim 1:4: Nochrim's deeds cannot reach higher worlds. Only Yisrael, via their sins, it is as if they were Metamei the Mikdash above. Due to this, Nebuchadnetzar and Titus were able to destroy the Mikdash below, which is parallel to it - 'you grinded ground flour.' David prayed that it should be considered as if they destroyed above, like they wanted to. Really, they did not destroy above, but for Nochrim, Hash-m considers their bad intent like deed.

How did Sancheriv hear "Ki Ma'as ha'Am ha'Zeh Es Mei ha'Shilu'ach ha'Holechim Le'at u'Mesos Es Retzin u'Ven Remalyahu; [... Hash-m Ma'aleh Aleihem... Melech Ashur]"?

Maharsha: He heard from his Shali'ach Ravshake, who was a Yisrael Mumar. Rashi on this verse (in Yeshayahu) explained, it refers to Shevna and his entourage. They despised Chizkiyah, who ate frugally, and preferred Pekach, who gorged himself on Shulchan Melachim. Hash-m said, you desire eaters? I will bring against you many eaters!

How does "Me'eras Hash-m b'Veis Rasha" hint to Pekach ben Remalyah?

Rashi: He was not satiated from the enormous amount that he ate.

How does "u'Nve Tzadikim Yevarech" refer to Chizkiyah?

Maharsha: This is like it says, "va'Achaltem Lachmechem l'Sova" - he eats little, and it is blessed in his innards.

Iyun Yakov: The verse calls his Tzadik, for "Tzadik Ochel l'Sova Nafsho."

Why do we bring this Drashah about Pekach ben Remalyah and Chizkiyah?

Maharal: Above it said that Chachamim conducted the nation like Mei ha'Shilu'ach, which goes gently. He did not seek extra authority over people. Pekach Ben Remalyah was the opposite - his entire intent was to rule over people and pursue lust of eating and drinking. Had the people trusted in Chizkiyah, who conducted them gently, with serenity, they would have remained serene. Since they despised Chizkiyah and trusted in Pekach, who pursued authority, this caused Sancheriv, a awesome river, to come against them.

What is the question 'why was he punished'? He blasphemed!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 8: His punishment for blasphemy was to return in shame to his land, Midah k'Neged Midah. Here we ask why his camp was killed.

How can we say that the prophecy was only that he will conquer the 10 tribes? It says "v'Chalaf bi'Yhudah"!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): It says so because they trusted in Retzin and Ben Remalyah. However, the curse "Hash-m Ma'aleh Aleihem..." was said only about the 10 tribes and their king Ben Remalyah. Sancheriv thought that it was also for Yehudah.

Iyun Yakov: He relied also on the astrologers, like it says below.

Why will a nation that wearies itself in Torah not fall to its oppressor?

Maharal: When they have the yoke of Torah, they cling to an intellectual level. It is proper that a miracle unlike nature be done for them, like those who crossed the sea and the Yarden.

Maharsha: Since they weary themselves in Torah, and lack strength to fight their enemy, they should not be handed over to the afflicter, who distracts them from Torah.

Why is the miracle compared to Keri'as Yam Suf and crossing the Yarden?

Maharsha: It was famous like those miracles - therefore, also it was on Pesach night. (NOTE: Keri'as Yam Suf was on Shevi'i Shel Pesach, and crossing the Yarden was on Nisan 10, the day of the miracle of Shabbos ha'Gadol. Also those days were connected to Yetzi'as Mitzrayim, which Pesach commemorates. - PF)

Iyun Yakov: All were in the merit of Torah. The Yarden opened in the merit of Yehoshua - "Lo Yamush mi'Toch ha'Ohel." Also Keri'as Yam Suf was in the merit of Torah, even though it was not given yet - b'Hotzi'acha Es ha'Am mi'Mitzrayim Ta'avdun Es ha'Elokim Al ha'Har ha'Zeh." We said (20a) "Sheker ha'Chen" is the generation of Moshe. "V'Hevel ha'Yofi" is the generation of Yehoshua. "Ishah Yir'as Hash-m Hi Sis'halal" is the generation of Chizkiyah (it had more Zechus Torah than the Doros of Moshe and Yehoshua).

What is the meaning of 'is this Rishna proper for this Pardashna'?

Rashi: Do we bring a gift like this to a man like this?!

Aruch, cited in Maharsha: The text is Dishna - a great man, like Kol Ish Shamen (NOTE: he refers to "Ish Kol Shamen - Shofetim 3:29. Deshen is fatness - PF) Pardashna is a gift. It would be good if the text said 'is this Pardashna proper for this Dishna?' Maharsha - it is proven in Megilah 13a and Bava Metzi'a 71a that Pardashna is a gift.

Margoliyos ha'Yam citing Teshuvas ha'Ge'onim 300: Is this the payment for this deed?!

What is Galil ha'Goyim?

Rashi: It is the scorn of the nations.

Rashi citing his Rebbi: Galil is an expression of Galal (excrement).

Why do we expound from "Emes" that Hash-m swore?

Rashi: His seal and Shevu'ah is Emes.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 10, citing Teshuvas Radvaz 1:220: Some omit the Vav in Shalom when writing a letter, for it is Hash-m's name, and it might be thrown out. If so, they should be careful also about Emes! (NOTE: Every Shevu'ah is based on Hash-m's name. If one swears in the name of anything else, e.g. Chayei Roshi or Chai Pharaoh, it is not a Shevu'ah! - PF) It seems that one must be careful about Shalom only if he intends to give Shalom from Ba'al ha'Shalom (Hash-m). If not, it has no Kedushah.

Maharsha: We learn from "ha'Eleh" - this is like "l'Alah veli'Shvu'ah" (Bamidbar 5:21).

Margoliyos ha'Yam 10, citing R. Yehonason in Shitah Mekubetzes (Bava Metzi'a 60a): Whenever it says "b'Emes Amru", since the Tana swore, he teaches that the Halachah follows this; do not have any doubt about it.

How will Sancheriv and his camp be an Avus for Chizkiyah and his followers?

Rashi: The former will come and die, and the latter will feed their animals from the bones of the bodies.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 12, citing HTZ"A: R. Yochanan taught this. He says that the bodies were burned! Also, why does it say 'Sancheriv and his entourage'? He himself survived, and returned to his house! It seems that initially it was decreed that they be an Avus. Due to the blasphemy, their decree was made harsher, from death via the sword to burning, and he will not die in war like a Gibor, rather, disgracefully in his house. (NOTE: All agree that Sereifah of Beis Din is more severe than the sword, but here is different. In war, some die immediately via the sword (e.g. they cut off the head or stab the heart), and others die slowly (e.g. a limb was severed and he bleeds to death). Beis Din burns via pouring molten lead down the throat. Presumably, the angel burned the bodies in a moment! Perhaps this burning was severe because nothing remained to be buried; R. Yochanan holds that "v'Sachas Kevodo", i.e. the bodies (which are under their Kavod, i.e. garments), were burned. Burial is important even for evil Nochrim who have no share in the world to come. Gog's army will be buried in the merit of their ancestor Yefes, who covered his father's Ervah (Bereishis Rabah 36:6)! - PF)

Margoliyos ha'Yam 12, citing Ein Eliyahu: We infer from Rashi that one may benefit from a dead Nochri's body. Mishneh l'Melech (Hilchos Evel 14:21) was unsure about this.

Maharsha: This is a Mashal - just like a donkey finds its food in a trough, so Chizkiyah and his entourage, who neglected their work in order to engage in Torah - they will find their food plentifully, from the booty of Sancheriv and his camp.

What is the significance of 'Ol (the yoke of) Sancheriv was broken due to Chizkiyah's oil'?

Maharsha: One who accepts on himself Ol Torah, they remove Ol Malchus from him (Avos 3:5). Chizkiyah's generation was not concerned for their vines, which lead to sin and Bitul Torah, but they were concerned for their oil, to illuminate Batei Kenesiyos and Batei Midrash. Etz Yosef - much oil is needed to learn. Chananyah brought 300 barrels of oil to his attic to enable Chachamim to learn and resolve the difficulties in Sefer Yechezkel (Shabbos 13b).

Iyun Yakov: When the voice of Yakov is heard [in Torah and Tefilah] the hands of Esav do not rule.

Why did he stick a sword at the entrance of the Beis Midrash?

Maharsha: A Nochri who engages in Torah is Chayav Misah (above, 59a). One who does not learn, he acts like a Nochri, whose execution is via the sword.

Iyun Yakov: The sword and Sefer descended wrapped together (Vayikra Rabah 35:6. One who does not fulfill what is written in the Sefer, the sword will kill him.)

One who does not learn, does he deserve to be stabbed?!

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Birkas Pesach: In the merit of Torah, our feet stand in war (Makos 10a). If one does not learn, Sancheriv's sword will stab him! There is no other way to defeat his great camp! (NOTE: 'With this sword' implies that he will be stabbed with the sword at the opening of the Beis Midrash! - PF)

What do we learn from 'they checked from Dan to Be'er Sheva and did not find an ignoramus. They checked from Gavas to Antifaras and did not find a boy, girl, man or woman who was not fluent in the laws of Tum'ah and Taharah'?

Maharsha: They did not find a man or woman ignorant of Isur v'Heter; so Rashi implies in Sefer Yeshayah. Regarding children, it says Tum'ah and Taharah, for they applied constantly; they used to eat even Chulin in Taharah.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 17-19: They did not find an ignoramus in all of Eretz Yisrael, i.e. Yehudah and Malchus Yisrael. Only in Yehudah they did not find anyone not fluent in the laws of Tum'ah and Taharah. Chizkiyah fixed what his father ruined (Achaz stopped children from learning, so there will not be learned adults, Talmidim, Chachamim or Torah). Even though one who teaches his daughter Torah, it is as if he teaches to her Tiflus (cunning, to conceal her Zenus; alternatively, folly - Sotah 21b), that refers to deep investigations, reasons for Mitzvos and secrets. One must teach to her how to fulfill Mitzvos! (Sefer Chasidim 313)

NOTE: This was after Sancheriv exiled Malchus Yisrael and settled Kusim in place of them. Chizkiyah did not rule there! Did the Kusim voluntarily learn diligently for a merit for Yehudah? Surely R. Meir, who disqualifies their conversion because they did not abandon their idolatry, would not say so! Presumably, they all learned to save themselves. "Lions were killing them, because they did not know Mishpat Elokei ha'Aretz; Melech Ashur commanded to bring a Kohen... to teach them...; they feared Hash-m and served their gods" (Melachim II, 17:26-27, 33). (PF)

What do we learn from "...Elef Gefen b'Elef Kesef la'Shamir vela'Shayis Yihyeh"?

Rashi: Very valuable property will be left uncultivated, for everyone pursues learning.

Maharsha: They did not engage in wine, for one who drank wine may not rule about Isur v'Heter or Tum'ah and Taharah.

What is the question Livzoz or Lachlok?

Rashi #1: Does everyone take for himself, or do we divide it equally?

Maharsha: There is no Bitul Torah if everyone takes for himself; if they divide it, there is Bitul Torah.

Margoliyos ha'Yam (20): Why was this question aroused now, but not in previous wars? Above (72a, 12-14) I explained Rav's teaching that one who tunneled into a house and took Kelim is exempt, for Mesiras Nefesh acquires. This war was miraculous, without Mesiras Nefesh. Avraham refused to take the spoils of Sedom, for he won miraculously; he threw earth, and it became swords, he threw straw, and it became arrows (Ta'anis 21a). Yehoshua made a Cherem not to benefit from Yericho; this was not causing a loss to Yisrael, since they did not acquire it. (NOTE: Shomron benefited from the food that Machaneh Ashur left when they miraculously fled! Perhaps Elisha's Nevu'ah "Machar Se'ah Soles b'Shekel... b'Sha'ar Shomron" (Melachim II, 7:1) was like a Hora'as Sha'ah to permit it. - PF)

Rashi #2: May we benefit from it, or must we give it away, for some of it was stolen from the 10 tribes?

Maharsha: The Havah Amina was they must return it to the 10 tribes.

They should have asked first 'some of it was stolen from the 10 tribes!' Why did they ask first Livzoz or Lachlok?

Margoliyos ha'Yam 21 citing Aruch l'Ner: Sancheriv's spoils were from many nations that he conquered before the 10 tribes. If they will gather the spoils and then divide, everyone may apply 'whatever separated, it was from the majority.' However, if everyone takes for himself, this is like from Kavu'a (the Isur is fixed in its place). It is like an even Safek. It should be forbidden!

NOTE: It seems that Rashi's second answer, it answers this. They initially asked whether they must be concerned for money of the 10 tribes. When he answered leniently, they asked why. (PF)

If money of Yisrael falls to Nochrim, why is it permitted to one who gets it from them?

Maharsha: The owner despaired. This is like one who saves from a [flooding] river or troop - he need not return it to the owner.

Iyun Yakov: We say similarly in Chulin (60b) - Amon and Mo'av were purified via Sichon (after he conquered their lands, they were no longer considered Amon and Mo'av, and Yisrael was permitted to conquer them). Here we teach that even Yisrael's property become permitted! However, this is only for money, but not for land. The law of Sikrikon (one who buys land from an extortionist who took it from a Yisrael, he keeps it, for the owner despaired, just he pays the Yisrael a quarter, for the Sikrikon sells for less than the true value) did not apply in Yehudah (Gitin 55b).

What is the significance of Sancheriv's 10 journeys on the day that he came against Yerushalayim?

Maharal: He came to destroy Yerushalayim with force. Therefore, Midas ha'Din was against him with force. These 10 journeys should have required 10 days. It is not normal that so many people travel so quickly. This shows his great arousal to destroy Yerushalayim!

Maharsha: His astrologers told him "Od ha'Yom b'Nov" - if you will fight it today, you will conquer it. Therefore, he exerted so much to arrive that day. When he saw that it was small, he was not concerned [to fight that day].

What is the meaning of 'raise your voice, Bas Galim'?

Iyun Yakov: If your voice will be heard in Batei Kenesiyos and Batei Midrashos, you need not fear.

How are the Avos' Mitzvos like Galei ha'Yam?

Maharal: They were clarified and recognized like waves. The Avos were special due to Mitzvos. Every step they took was with Hash-m's Mitzvah and Hashgachah. They are the foundation of the world!

Maharsha: Zechus Avos had not ceased yet; their merit sufficed to save their descendants.

What is the significance of "Hakshivi Layshah"?

Maharal: Put Nebuchadnetzar to your hearts. He is called a Layish (lion) due to his great strength, and he will destroy the Beis ha'Mikdash in [Chodesh Av, which has] the Mazal Aryeh. It is due to the name!

Maharsha: When the Layish (Nebuchadnetzar) will come, Zechus Avos will have ceased. It will depend on you, to heed Torah and Yirmeyah's Nevu'ah.