Why did the Gemara teach all six names for lions?

Maharsha #1: This helps us to explain verses.

Maharsha #2: This is relevant for sales, like we say about the seven kinds of cedars (Bava Basra 80b).

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Kovetz Chizuk 7 p.251: It is so unlikely that one would sell a lion, especially because one may not sell to a Nochri, or to a Jew who would sell to a Nochri. Who wants to accept the awesome danger and responsibility of guarding it? And what is the chance that the buyer and seller will disagree about what is called a lion? Even so, the Torah resolved such a question - it teaches about everything! (NOTE: Nowadays, zoos and circuses buy lions! I heard that via Hashgachah, there is a source in the Gemara for every question in Halachah that will occur. Some Poskim learn how astronauts count days of the week from the Sugya of one who is lost in the Midbar and does not know what day it is (Shabbos 69b. We learn about a fetus transferred to a different woman's womb from Chulin 70a, which discusses two animals' wombs stuck together, and a fetus went from one to the other, and later left the latter. - PF)

Why does it say 'that day there was a remnant of the sin of Nov'?

Rashi: Hash-m fixed a time for Yisrael's punishment for the killing of the Kohanim of Nov; it was the last day. Had Sancheriv attacked Yerushalayim that day, he would have conquered it.

Maharal: They killed Kohanei Nov, and ceased Avodas Beis Hash-m. This showed that Yisrael did not cling so much to Beis Elokeinu. Due to this, Yerushalayim and the Beis ha'Mikdash were almost destroyed.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): The sin was attributed to Sha'ul, Do'eg and David, and they were already punished for it. Why should Yerushalayim and the Mikdash be stricken? Perhaps Yisrael were liable for not protesting against Sha'ul, and due to this, the Mishkan in Nov became desolate.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 7 citing Aruch l'Ner: They were liable for not protesting, for Sha'ul would have heeded them, like we find "Yareisi Es ha'Am va'Eshma b'Kolam." (NOTE: There, the nation wanted to do so. Here, Sha'ul commanded Do'eg to kill the Kohanim. How many people knew about this? We find that Sha'ul threw a spear at his son Yonason for advocating for David! - PF)

Maharsha: The 10 tribes were exiled due to "uv'Yom Pakdi u'Fakadti Aleihem Chatasam" for the Egel and the golden calves [that Yaravam made]. Yehudah and Binyamin had no share in those calves, but they had the sin of Bitul Avodah due to killing Kohanei Nov. It was via their two kingships (of Sha'ul and David). The Bayis would have been destroyed due to this, if not for the Torah of Chizkiyah and his entourage.

Iyun Yakov: 'Remnant' implies that the primary sin was already atoned for, via Aslayah eradicating [almost all of] David's seed. A remnant of the sin remained until that day, due to Sha'ul, and his generation, who did not protest.

What is the meaning of Tamhisu?

Rashi #1: It is a Temah (astounding) to begin today, due to fatigue from the journey.

Rashi #2: You are weary from the journey.

When did Hash-m wipe out Sancheriv's camp?

Toras Chayim, cited in Etz Yosef and Medinas ha'Yam 11: It was on Pesach night. It says "ba'Laylah ha'Hu" (and not ba'Laylah Stam), similarly to "ba'Laylah ha'Zeh" said about Achilas Pesach and Makas Bechoros. And so it says in the Piyut (va'Yhi ba'Chetzi ha'Laylah, at the end of the Pesach Seder). Targum Yonason of "ba'Laylah ha'Hu Nadedah Shenas ha'Melech" explains, a night of salvation for Yisrael - Hash-m saved Sarah from Avimelech, He killed the Bechoros... This is due to "ba'Laylah ha'Hu." We similarly expound "va'Yivku ha'Am ba'Laylah ha'Hu" regarding the Meraglim - a night fixed for crying.

Margoliyos ha'Yam citing Aruch l'Ner: The sin remained that day, for it was Erev Pesach, when many Kohanim are needed to offer Korbanos Pesach.

What is the meaning of Bas Dina Batel Dina?

Rashi: If judgment is left for the morrow, the feud will cease. Since he did not conquer Yerushalayim that day, he did not succeed the next day.

Maharsha: This is like "Tzedek Yalin Bah" (Yeshayahu 1:21) - [via postponing the verdict until the morrow,] perhaps an advocate will be found. Also here, Midas ha'Din and the sin of Nov were prosecuting. Afterwards they had advocates to be saved. They are explicit in Chizkiyah's Tefilah and Yeshayahu's words to him.

What is the source to expound "va'Yishbi b'Nov"?

Maharsha: Regarding "Saf Asher bi'Ylidei Harafah" (Shmuel II, 21:18) and Galyus, it says b'Gov, and here it says b'Nov.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 12 citing Zohar Chadash Rus 1:4: Nov is near Yerushalayim. It is not in Eretz Pelishtim!

What is Harafah?

Rashi: It is Orpah (Kilyon's wife).

What is the meaning of 'Do'eg was Nitrad'?

Rashi: He spoke Leshon ha'Ra about David so Sha'ul would envy him. Since Achimelech received David, Sha'ul told Do'eg to kill the Kohanim. And due to this sin, Sha'ul and his three sons were killed in the war against Pelishtim.

Why is David liable for what Do'eg and Sha'ul did?

Margoliyos ha'Yam 13, citing an edition of Sefer Chasidim (1440): It is because David requested vengeance from Sha'ul "u'Nekameni Hash-m Mimeka" (Shmuel I, 24:12), and Sha'ul was punished via him.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 13, citing an edition of Sefer Chasidim (1106): Even though David was in danger due to hunger, he should not have endangered the Kohanim via requesting food in front of Do'eg.

Chashukei Chemed: In a death camp in the Holocaust, for every Jew that fled, they would kill 10 remaining Jews. Nit'ei Eisan (3:13) learns from David that one may not flee. He was punished for saving himself, since it endangered others. This is unlike Mahariyo (125), who says that David did not sin, but even so, he was punished because others suffered due to him. Chesed Yehoshua (20) permits even helping others to flee, for in any case all are destined to be killed. This requires investigation.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 13, Daf Al ha'Daf: Be'er Sheva infers that if one hires a Jew to do a Shelichus outside the city, and he was killed, he needs Kaparah. Tzemach Tzedek (5-6) disagrees. A worker endangers himself for his wage! Rather, it is because David told Achimelech that Sha'ul sent him, and endangered him. Had Achimelech known that David is fleeing, perhaps he would not have helped him.

Why did Hash-m say that David's descendants will be eradicated, or he will be captured by the enemy?

Maharsha: This is like the Kohanim were eradicated via David saving himself and not being handed over to his enemy Sha'ul.

Why did David choose to be taken by the enemy?

Iyun Yakov: This is like Hash-m's Midah. "Va'Esa Eschem Al Kanfei Nesharim" - just like a Nesher [carries its chicks on its back, for it fears only a hunter's arrow; it] prefers that the arrow strike it, and not its children. (So Hash-m put His cloud between the Egyptians and Yisrael, to absorb the arrows and catapult rocks, and shield Yisrael.)

What is the significance of the Satan appearing like a deer, and shooting an arrow at it?

Maharal: We can explain the entire episode simply (it truly occurred). It is better to explain that it is an intellectual matter. Orpah kissed Na'ami and separated from her. She and Rus were from Mo'av. David came to Eretz Pelishtim via Ma'ase Satan; this is like one who desires - he is drawn to lack. Yishbi could have killed David; he preferred to rule over him. This is why he put him under a sheet, and sat on it! Orpah clung a little [to Na'ami and Kedushah], and separated. One who [learned Torah and] separated has more [hatred of Chachamim] than all others (Pesachim 49b). She is called Orpah, like Oref - she turned the back of her neck. Therefore, she wanted to destroy Yisrael. In the end, it was opposite - the children of the one who kissed (Orpah) fell to the children of the one who clung (Rus).

Margoliyos ha'Yam 15: One may not hunt (without benefit) - OC 316:2. Noda bi'Yhudah (2 YD 10) does not forbid due to Tzar Ba'alei Chayim or Bal Tashchis. However, the only hunters we find are Nimrod and Esav; it is not the way of Yisrael. Mahariyo says that we do not say Tevaleh u'Sechadesh on leather garments, for an animal is killed to make them. The Gemara mentions Rav Yosef Rishba (the hunter); perhaps his income was from hides. Some texts say Reisha, and not Rishba (he was not a hunter).

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Pnei Menachem (Devarim 5755): Surely David did not pursue Chayos! Rather, 'Tzvi' hints to Kedushah and good desires. David wanted to extract sparks of Kedushah from shells and the Satan; he pursued it until Eretz Pelishtim. Rashi (Melachim II, 22:4) brings a Midrash that Tzidkiyahu fled from Kasdim via a tunnel, and they saw and chased a deer, and through this they found and caught him. i.e. when Nebuchadnetzar came to Eretz Yisrael, Tum'ah came, and the Kedushah (that a deer hints to) left. We find that Eretz Yisrael is called Eretz ha'Tzvi.

How did Avishai deduce that David was in trouble?

Ramah: Yisrael is compared to a Yonah. Because Yisrael is not in trouble, it must be that David, their king, is in trouble.

Maharal: He saw drops of blood, because he was the flesh and blood (relative) of David, and David was close to death. Even though Avishai did not see this, his Mazal saw it.

What is the significance of Avishai shampooing his hair in four Grivai of water?

Maharal: Foreign thoughts were removed from him. He thought good thoughts for Yisrael. This is called shampooing his hair. Four Grivai of water represent intellect, which is attributed to four; four extends to every side.

Why are Yisrael compared to a Yonah?

Maharsha: A Yonah is intimate only with its mate. "Kanfei Yonah Nechpah ba'Kesef" - Yisrael's deeds are covered with Mitzvos and good deeds. Therefore, it flapped its wings.

How could Avishai act based on the Yonah? If a raven calls to him [and he acts based on this], this is forbidden due to Nichush (65b)!

Nimukei Yosef (16b): Avishai did not totally rely on the Yonah; it was a mere Siman. If one knows bird language, like Ilish (Gitin 45a), this is not Nichush. It is Chochmah!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 18, citing Ramak: A Yonah is unlike a raven. One who pursues birds for Nichush is unlike one who saw via chance.

What is the significance of not riding on a king's horse, nor sitting on his throne, nor using his scepter?

Maharal: There are three matters of a king. He conducts the nation via his kingship, he is elevated over them to arrange the nation in the proper order, and he rules over them. Riding is conducting; he conducts them alone. Therefore, no one may ride on his mule (our text - horse). Sitting on his throne is the kingship. Kingship is always called Kisei. The scepter is ruling over the nation.

Why did he ride specifically on a mule?

Margoliyos ha'Yam 20, citing Aruch l'Ner: It goes faster than a horse. One may not ride on a normal mule due to Kil'ayim; the king had a mule from the six days of creation (Yerushalmi Kil'ayim 8:2; it was not a crossbreed). Surely there was such a mule, for "v'Ein Kol Chadash Tachas ha'Shamesh" (Pesachim 54a). (NOTE: Perhaps this is like the opinion that the flood did not affect Eretz Yisrael, so it did not die then. - PF)

Why did Orpah slip the spindle off the thread and fling it towards Avishai?

Rashi: She hoped to kill him, but she missed. (She pretended that it fell accidentally.)

Why did Yishbi throw David in the air? He could have overtly killed him!

Ramah: He wanted to show his strength, that he can frolic with David like a bird.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 23 citing Ein Eliyahu: He wanted to exempt himself from liability for murder. He threw him before inserting the sword; after, he inserted the sword. This is only Gerama, like we say about one who threw a Kli off the roof (there were pillows on the ground), and he removed the pillows before it reached the ground (Bava Kama 26b). He erred; a Goy is liable even for Gerama, like the Rambam says.

NOTE: Beforehand, he sat on him in order to kill him. Surely that is overt murder! (PF)

Margoliyos ha'Yam 23 citing Divrei Rav Meshulam: When Yishbi sat on David, David was saved. Yishbi thought that it was via witchcraft. He threw David in the air, for a witch's power is only when he is on the ground.

Why can a prisoner not take himself out of jail?

Rashi: His mind is not settled to say Hash-m's name.

Margoliyos ha'Yam citing Be'er Sheva: This is unlike Berachos 5b, which says that R. Yochanan could not heal himself because a prisoner cannot free himself. There, Rashi said that it is because his Mazal worsened, and Midas ha'Din is over him!

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Alei Veradim Berachos 5b: When R. Chanina ben Dosa was close to death, his colleagues prayed for him, for 'ha'Sha'ah Tzerichah Lo' (Eruvin 29b). Maharsha explains that he used to pray for others; here his request for himself was not answered, for a prisoner cannot free himself. Also Chizkuni explained that a Tzadik's power to nullify an evil decree is only for others, but not for himself. We find Tzadikim that the entire world is fed in their merit, and they are not fed even in their own merits (Berachos 17b). This explains why an angel was needed to heal Avraham after his Bris - a gem hanging from his neck immediately healed one who looked at it! It was only for others, but not for himself.

How did Avishai help David in Tefilah?

Rashi: He helped him to switch the punishment (the enemy should not capture him; rather, his seed will be eradicated).

Maharsha: David could not do so himself, for a prisoner cannot free himself.

Iyun Yakov: Even though David accepted the punishment on himself, like Hash-m's Midah, he should retract, lest Malchus Beis David be extinguished. Alternatively, he said 'let your son's son sell wax...', for even though one's mercy extends until his grandchildren - "Im Tishkor Li ul'Nini", the primary mercy is on his son - "k'Rachem Av Al Banim", and not on grandchildren. Let your seed after many generations be eradicated! (NOTE: David already had children. Even if he would be killed, Malchus Beis David could continue via his children! Also, Hash-m did not say when his seed would be eradicated - perhaps even his sons would die! - PF)

Ramah: He counseled him what to pray for.

Maharal: Due to Yishbi's great power, two were needed to overcome him through Tefilah.

What is the significance of 'let your son's son sell wax'?

Margoliyos ha'Yam 27 citing Ein Eliyahu: It says in Sotah (49a), if not for David's Tefilah, all of Yisrael would sell Revav (fat or wax).

What is the significance of mentioning Orpah's name?

Maharal: All Yishbi's power was due to his mother. David and Avishai were also from Mo'av, so they were able to remove her power.

Maharsha: Due to four tears that she shed [amidst compassion] for her mother-in-law, she merited to give birth to four Giborim (Sotah 42b).

Daf Al ha'Daf citing R. N. Lubart: First he uprooted Yishbi's source, and afterwards he killed him himself. Similarly, before Yakov encountered Esav, he defeated Esav's Sar (angel) and humbled him. Via this, Esav was humbled in front of Yakov.

Maharsha: Why does it not say that they said that she died? Her name Orpah is disgrace; it hints to 'everyone was Oref (had Bi'ah with) her' (Sotah 42b).

Why does it say "v'Lo Sechaveh Es Ner Yisrael"?

Maharsha: It is better that the enemy not capture David, and the lamp of Yisrael be extinguished, due to the kingship, or his Torah and Mitzvos - "Ki Ner Mitzvah v'Sorah Or." Rather, his seed will be eradicated.

Why did these three have Kefitzas ha'Derech?

Maharal: Motion is physical. These three were Divine matters. Eliezer was Avraham's Shali'ach; all matters of the Avos were Divine. Pirkei d'R. Eliezer (16) says that he had Kefitzas ha'Derech also when returning - this was due to Yitzchak (he was bringing Yitzchak's wife). Avishai went to save David; the Malchus of Yisrael depends on him. Also, David is compared to the Avos - "v'Asisi Lecha Shem Gadol k'Shem ha'Gedolim" - Yisrael will say 'Magen David' (similar to Elokei Avraham, Elokei Yitzchak and Elokei Yakov (Pesachim 117b). Also, just like the Avos are Kolel (encompass) all of Yisrael, David is Kolel all of Malchus Beis David, from which is all Malchus. Therefore, the road was Kolel (traversed at once) for his sake, and not part after part, like all motion.

How does "va'Avo ha'Yom El ha'Ayin" imply that he arrived the same day that he left?

Maharsha: Rashi on Chumash says that "ha'Yom" is extra, to teach this.

Etz Yosef citing Ramas Shmuel: Had Eliezer not seen that Hash-m did a miracle for him, it would have been improper to ask [that Yitzchak's Zivug will say 'drink...'], like the Gemara says.

How does "Ki Va ha'Shemesh" teach that the sun set immediately?

Etz Yosef: It is extra. It said "va'Yalen Sham" - normally, travelers lodge only when the sun sets.

Why did the Gemara omit the Meraglim? Bamidbar Rabah 16:11 says that also they had Kefitzas ha'Derech!

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Pane'ach Raza (Shlach): Our Gemara does not discuss Resha'im. (NOTE: Also Yehoshua and Kalev had Kefitzas ha'Derech! - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf citing the Imrei Emes: Eretz Yisrael widens and constricts; Kefitzas ha'Derech does not apply to it. This is why Rashi wrote 'the Derech was short in front of them.'

Why were David's descendants not killed off until the time of Asalyah?

Margoliyos ha'Yam (95b) 5: As long as David's seed were Tzadikim, they were not punished for their father's sin. It was only after they went in the ways of Achav. David's merit did not protect them due to that sin. They were not punished in the days of Yehoram, for then there was no one who would merit to remain at a time of anger. The punishment came in the days of Achazyah - then was Yeho'ash ha'Tzadik.

What is the significance of the numbers of the distinguished parts of his camp?

Maharal: There were three divisions. (a) Princes, for honor and glory proper for a king. (b) Giborim - 80,000 soldiers in armor; this shows their own strength. (c) There were 60,000 sword-bearing soldiers running in front of him - they are zealous in war and know how to fight with swords. It is proper that they be 60 - "Shishim Giborim Saviv Lah mi'Giborei Yisrael." We find also 80 - "in [His] anger, He cut down the horn of Yisrael" - 80,000 horn-blowing troop leaders entered Beitar [when they conquered it - Gitin 57a]. This number is proper for strength and the horn. The number 45 is proper for honor and glory of a king - it is 40 and four and one. Honor of a king is like the Merkavah above - four Chayos bear His Kisei ha'Kavod, and He is over them. Riding is based on four, just like there were four Degalim in the four directions and the Mishkan in the middle. Also the Leviyim who camped in front of the Mishkan were in four divisions (NOTE: Bnei Gershon in the west, Bnei Kehas in the south, Bnei Merari in the north, and Moshe, Aharon u'Vanav in the east - Bamidbar 3:23, 29, 35, 38. For some reason, one of the fours is elevated to 40. - PF) Additionally, there is one who rides on them.

When did such an army come against Avraham?

Rashi: It was when he fought the four kings.

Maharal: Hash-m divided Yisrael from the nations. Divided matters oppose each other. Even though the nations were separate, there was no division until Avraham. Therefore, they came against him with all strength to destroy him, with the same numbers, for the reasons I explained above. In the days of Chizkiyah, the nations wanted to destroy Yisrael, so they came with Sancheriv. The final opposition will be in the days of Gog and Magog, for Yisrael will rule over the nations in the days of Mashi'ach and nullify them.

Maharsha: The four kings did not come against Avraham. They came against Melech Sedom [and his allies], and when they left, Avraham chased them. Perhaps afterwards they came to take vengeance against him, like it says below (108b) 'when the kings of the east and west came against you (Eliezer, who was in Avraham's army)...' The Gemara mentions these three wars, for they are similar. Avraham had few men with him - 318, and they said that it was only Eliezer; this is the Gematriya of his name. He overcame a great army via miracles - Hash-m put Avraham on His right. We threw earth [and it turned into swords...] (ibid.) Also Chizkiyah, a great army opposed him, and he was saved miraculously via an angel. And so it will be in the war of Gog. Yisrael will be at the ultimate lowliness. A great army will oppose them, like it says in Yechezkel, and they will be redeemed miraculously.

Margoliyos ha'Yam: Targum Yonason on Yeshayahu there says that it was when they threw him in the fire. (NOTE: We do not find that Avraham had any followers at the time; Hash-m had not yet done any miracles for him. Why would such an army be necessary?! - PF)

What is the significance of the length of the army (400 Parsa'os), and the width of the horses' necks (40 Parsa'os)?

Maharal: Normally, a great nation going together, the length exceeds the width. The width of the horses' necks alone was 40 Parsa'os; surely the total width was more.

Why does it mention that one was lacking from the number?

Maharal: Had the number been complete, something complete is far from loss. Hash-m did not want to give to them Sheleimus; also, Sancheriv was not proper for it. Do not say that [a lack of] one is not significant; something Shalem cannot have any Chisaron.

Why does it say that the first soldiers swam across the Yarden, the middle ones walked through, and it was totally dry when the last ones came?

Maharal: The world was full of water when it was created, until Hash-m told the water to gather to enable man to settle the land. Via this, man conquers the land. Sancheriv had so many people that he conquered the water and make it settled (dry land). He is called "Mei ha'Nahar ha'Atzumim veha'Rabim" - a river in place of the river that he dried up. All of these are intellectual matters. The multitude is what was possible in the physical world.

Maharsha: The three stages correspond to the three groups mentioned - 45,000 princes, 80,000 soldiers in armor, and 60,000 sword-bearing soldiers.

What was the question? "Va'Yach b'Machaneh Ashur..." implies that he struck only part of the camp?

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Indeed, this is why Rashi says that the text says "va'Yetzei Mal'ach Hash-m...", i.e. it does not say 'veha'Kesiv', for it is not a question. R. Avahu merely comes to explain the verse.

What is the source to say that the 185,000 were the troop leaders?

Rashi: It is the total of 45,000 princes, 80,000 soldiers in armor, and 60,000 sword-bearing soldiers.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 14 citing SH"K: Only the 185,000 died; the rest of them went home after the Giborim were killed. The verses brought support this - the verse discusses only the fat (important) ones, or only the officers. The number that remained (10, 9, 14 or five) is among the Giborim. (NOTE: We said (94b) that Yeshayah told Yisrael to take the booty (of the dead invaders). Why didn't the soldiers who left take it? Perhaps they were frenzied to leave, just like Machaneh Aram left their horses and rations when they were frenzied to flee Shomron. - PF)

NOTE: Perhaps a support is Yadayim 4:4 - 'all the nations are not in their places, for Sancheriv relocated them.' If Ashur's entire army was killed, every dislocated nation could have returned to its homeland! However, perhaps people had adjusted to their new land. They feared to return to their homeland, for presumably, others were now occupying it, and who says that they will agree to leave without fighting? (PF)

The Yalkut says that every troop had at least 2,000 soldiers. If 370 million died, this was a great portion of the world population. Why is this recorded only in Chazal, but not in any secular chronicles? Is this merely an exaggeration?

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Derech Sichah, Vaeschanan: We may say that it is an exaggeration only if Chazal or early sages said so. It is not difficult to explain literally. (NOTE: The questioner could have asked better - the Gemara says that there were 2.6 billion in the army! - PF)

Margoliyos ha'Yam 14 citing SH"K: Only the 185,000 died; the rest went home. (NOTE: Still, this is unlike demographers, who say that the world did not reach a billion people until 1870. Surely, they do not know what was 2500 years ago; they assume that population growth has been roughly consistent, without any proof. - PF)

Why does it say "Yekad Yekod ki'Ykod Esh"?

Daf Al ha'Daf citing R. Mendel of Rimanov: The Piyut 'Az Rov Nisim' (said at the end of the Seder) says that they were burned like the burning of Pesach. Pesach is roasted; it is not burned! Rather, Sancheriv besieged Yerushalayim on Erev Pesach. Amidst great anxiety, people were not careful, and the roasting Korbanos Pesach burned. Yisrael asked Hash-m 'just like Sancheriv caused Pesachim to be burned, so he and his camp should be burned!', and Hash-m acceded.

NOTE: Perhaps Chasidim fasted due to the danger, just like the fast that Esther decreed included the first day of Pesach, and therefore Pesachim became Nosar, which is burned! (PF)

Above (94a-b), we said that Paro himself blasphemed, so Hash-m Himself punished him. Sancheriv blasphemed through a messenger, so Hash-m punished him through a messenger - "Malach Hash-m va'Yach b'Machaneh Ashur..." Here it implies that the same one struck both of them!

Maharal: Even though it says "Malach Hash-m", he holds that Hash-m's hand was with the angel. Do not explain that the angel struck with is hand. The verse teaches that Hash-m's hand did this! R. Eliezer holds that the Makah was with Yad ha'Chazakah, so they will know His great strength, that He rules over Resha'im. Yad is strength - "v'Yad'u Mitzrayim Ki Ani Hash-m bi'Ntosi Yadi Al Mitzrayim." R. Yehoshua holds that He struck them with Zero'a Netuyah. (NOTE: The Gemara says only Etzba, and so Maharal explains after this! Perhaps he means that His arm was stationary; His hand did not move, only His finger. This is a mere anthropomorphism to convey that the Makah was via a small part of His strength. - PF) Therefore, he said that He struck them with the finger, He showed that via a light striking He killed them - what would be the entire hand?! Both of these were in Egypt. The Makos came with the finger to show that He does not need His great strength. If they receive a Makah via something light, it is due to the receiver's lack. At the sea, He struck them with His great strength - "ha'Yad ha'Gedolah." Yad always refers to the left hand; however, Etzba (e.g. "v'Lalach ha'Kohen Min ha'Dam b'Etzba'o") is always the right [index] finger (Zevachim 24b). R. Eliezer ben R. Yosi ha'Galili holds that Gavriel struck them. If His Shali'ach can strike them, how much more Hash-m Himself could do to them!

Why did Hash-m told Gavri'el to sharpen his scythe, and why did he answer that it has been sharpened from the six days of creation?

Maharal: This explains why it is proper that he strike them. He is appointed over punishing Resha'im. He replied that it has been sharpened from the six days of creation - he was appointed over this from then.

Maharsha: Hash-m stipulated with Ma'ase Bereishis about open miracles that will change Ma'ase Bereishis and the nature of the creation.

Why did R. Shimon say that it was the time when fruits ripen?

Maharal: This shows that it was not a mission unto itself to kill the Resha'im. Rather, while going to ripen the grain he struck them. This is like one who tells his friend, in any case you are going to do act Ploni - also do this other matter with it. He learns from "va'Yetzei Malach Hash-m" - one who normally goes out. R. Eliezer ben R. Yosi ha'Galili explained why Gavriel struck them, because he is appointed over punishing Resha'im. R. Shimon gave a different reason - he is appointed over ripening Peros.

Maharsha: Gavriel is the angel of fire (Pesachim 118a); based on nature, he ripens Peros. This shows Hash-m's grandeur - one of His Sheluchim, by the way, wiped out such an awesome army.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing She'eris Nasan: Gavriel said that he, the angel of fire, should save Chananyah, Misha'el and Azaryah from the fire, to increase the miracle; Hash-m agreed. We say that Nebuchadnetzar recognized an angel with them, for he saw him when he stuck Sancheriv's camp. (NOTE: Even if it were not the same angel, would he not realize that it is an angel? When Mano'achs wife saw an angel, she said "his appearance was awesome, like an angel" (Shofetim 13:6)!

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: It should have said va'Yach Mal'ach Hash-m b'Machaneh Ashur... Why does it say "va'Yetzei Mal'ach Hash-m..."? He went out [for another reason i.e.] to ripen the fruits, and by the way, he struck them.

Why should you make your enemy hear you?

Rashi: It is to frighten him.

What is the significance of blowing into their nostrils or clapping His hands in front of them?

Maharal: Blowing is a light matter, but it acts on their bodies. Clapping does not act on their bodies at all. Resha'im are easily pushed off - "ha'Resha'im... k'Motz Asher Tidfenu Ru'ach."

Maharsha: Hash-m's two hands are the Midos of right and left - mercy and Din. He created the world with them - He joined mercy to Din. After Midas ha'Din overpowered due to the sins of Malchei Yehudah and Achaz, Chizkiyah's father, and the virtue of Chizkiyah and his entourage, Hash-m joined His right hand to His left and struck Sancheriv and his entourage. "Va'Hanichosi Chamasi" - I abandoned My anger from Malchei Yehudah in the merit of Chizkiyah.

Why did they die via hearing Shirah of the Chayos?

Maharal: The nations cannot hear Shirah of the Chayos, which tells His honor and elevation. A screen separates Hash-m and man. Hash-m removed this distinction and they connected to the Shirah so they would be pushed off. They are not important at all; when they heard the Shirah, their existence was Batel and like nothing. Hash-m did not do anything to them, even to clap His hands! The seven opinions (Yad, Etzba, Shali'ach...) are in decreasing order [of how much of His strength He inflicted on them].

Maharsha: Sancheriv raised his voice to blaspheme, and put his eyes against Kedosh Yisrael, so he and his army fell via that Kedushah and the Chayos' Shirah.

Why do we say that a child can write 10?

Rashi: The letter Yud is a mere drop of ink.

What is the significance of the number that remained?

Maharal: The first opinion holds that when Hash-m does Din against the nations, e.g. Sancheriv, 10 remain. Less than this there is not a number of a Klal; Hash-m did not want to totally nullify them. The one who says that nine remained, Hash-m wanted that an Edah will not remain. Once they lost their name - an Edah did not remain, the Makah ceased (the last nine did not die). The one who says that 14 remained, they were scattered - two, three, four and five in different places. They ceased to be a nation, for only these numbers of units remained. The one who says that five remained, they are kings and sons of kings, and they are not included with the rest. When the Makah came on the Klal, they were not included. (NOTE: There were 45,000 Bnei Melachim. Why did the others die? - PF)

Maharsha: The one who says that five remained, Sancheriv remained because he blasphemed; he should see that his entire camp was wiped out. His sons remained for his disgrace - his own seed will kill him. Nebuchadnetzar and Nevuzaradan remained, for they destroyed the Bayis and exiled Yisrael.

Etz Yosef citing Kli Yakar: The one who says that nine remained, he holds that the verse said four and five, for five were esteemed - Sancheriv, his two sons, Nebuchadnetzar and Nevuzaradan. They are divided, for Sancheriv and his sons had kingship; Nebuchadnetzar and Nevuzaradan did not have kingship yet. The four were from the nation.

What would be forbidden to say if not for the verse?

Rashi: That Hash-m Himself shaved Sancheriv.

Maharal: It says that Hash-m appeared to him as an old man, for it was a human counsel to change his honor; counsel is attributed to the old.

Maharsha: How do we explain "v'Sa'ar ha'Raglayim"? It is an expression of Regilus (common). The hair via which people used to recognize him, was shaved from him.

Ramah: Hash-m prompted an old man to come in front of Sancheriv. (NOTE: Why would it be forbidden to say so, if not for the verse? Perhaps it seems below His dignity to disgrace him like this. - PF)

Anaf Yosef #3: 'Idmi Lei' is Po'el Yotzei (acts on another); Hash-m made an angel appear to him. Perhaps it was Eliyahu; Stam 'Gavra Saba' in Chazal is Eliyahu. If not for the verse, it would be forbidden to say so, for Eliyahu appears only to great Chasidim with pure Neshamos, but not to Resha'im. (NOTE: Even if there is such a tradition about Eliyahu (Kalah Rabasi 4:31 implies like this), would it be forbidden to say that Hash-m told him to deviate from his normal conduct, if not for the verse?! We find that he appeared to Goyim (109b, Avodah Zarah 17b, 18b) - however, that was always to save Yisraelim. - PF)

Anaf Yosef #1: It cannot be that Hash-m took a human form to disgrace Sancheriv! I see five possible ways to explain this. (a) The entire matter was in a dream, like Hash-m came to Avimelech and Lavan in dreams. So He came to Sancheriv. Moreh ha'Nevuchim (2:41) says that Avimelech and Lavan were not Nevi'im, just they had Giluy Shechinah; the same applies here. Even so, if not for the verse, it would be forbidden to say so, for Sancheriv was not proper like them. Also, `if not for the verse' teaches that we should not explain the matter simply.

Anaf Yosef #2: Sancheriv imagined this while he was awake. He was an idolater, and he thought that Hash-m is physical. He found an old man, esteemed in his generation, and thought that he is G-d. Do not be astounded at his folly - he served and bowed to Beis Nisrach, his god! Nebuchadnetzar served Daniel! If not for the verse "Masgi la'Goyim va'Yabdem", it would be forbidden to say that Hash-m led to him err. Due to the verse, we say that one who wants to be Metamei himself, Hash-m gives to him the opportunity (Shabbos 104a). (NOTE: The Gemara did not bring that verse. It implies that if not for our verse "ba'Yom ha'Hu Yegalach Hash-m...", we could not say so! - PF)

Anaf Yosef #4: "U'Mitzrayim Nose'a Achareihem" refer to the Sar (advocating angel) of Mitzrayim; it is called on their name. Here, 'Sancheriv' refers to his Sar. The Zohar explains "Hash-m mi'Sinai Ba v'Zarach mi'Se'ir Lamo Hofi'a me'Har Paran..." that Hash-m appeared to the Sarim of these nations. Hash-m appeared like an old man to Sancheriv's Sar, to judge him. A nation does not fall until its Sar above falls - "Yifkod Hash-m Al Tzeva ha'Marom" (Tanchuma Beshalach 13). 'Shaving him' refers to removing his power above, like we find regarding Shimshon. Mekubalim say that man's hairs hint to supreme power. Grinding refers to being submissive to Yisrael's angels; until now, they are grinding (submissive to him). (NOTE: Even though Yisrael are not under a Sar, rather, directly under Hash-m, we find "Micha'el Sarchem" (Daniel 10:21), and Gavriel often advocates for Yisrael... - PF)

Anaf Yosef #5: Here, 'ha'Kadosh Baruch Hu' refers to acquired intellect, or intellect that acts; Chachamim sometimes call it on Hash-m's name, like Moreh ha'Nevuchim 2:30 (NOTE: I did not find this - PF) and the Akeidah say. Sancheriv wanted to grow wise. His intellect, called ha'Kadosh Baruch Hu, appeared to him like an old man. He recognized via the miracle that Hash-m is G-d, and regretted exiling His 10 tribes. He sought a way to save himself from punishment. He decided to convert. The custom was for converts to shave. To atone for those whom he killed, he would grind, i.e. bear a harsh yoke in Galus and in Teshuvah. Fire of Gehinom burned him before he was able to do so. Due to his intent to convert, he had descendants who taught Torah b'Rabim (Gitin 57b).

Why does it say that Hash-m shaved Sancheriv?

Maharal: He was the [primary] sinner - why did he survive? Granted, Nebuchadnetzar and Nevuzaradan survived, for Hash-m wanted to give to them kingship, like Nevi'im prophesized. However, Sancheriv did not continue in his kingship - he was killed afterwards! Rather, he blasphemed and insulted Hash-m; it was proper that Midah k'Neged Midah he be disgraced, and 'shaved' of all his grandeur. It would have been better for him had he died with his camp! Hash-m left his two sons alive to kill him, for others did not recognize him, for he disguised himself. He used to be a world ruler, and now he had no soldiers left. He feared the other kings (whom he used to exile to different places) so much that he had to disguise himself and remove himself from kingship. It says that He shaved him, for via shaving one makes himself unknown. He shaved "ha'Rosh" - He made him remove himself from kingship (the head). "B'Sa'ar ha'Sechirah" - amidst great fear, he strove greatly [to disguise himself], like one who rents something and pursues it greatly. It is called shaving the head, for this is a great disgrace among people; an Eshes Yefas To'ar shaves her head. (NOTE: I did not find others say so for men. Abarvenel (Bamidbar 6:1) says that it is beauty, like it says about Yosef "va'Ygalach va'Ychalef Simlosav." And so Rashi and Tosfos (Mo'ed Katan 13b, 14a) explain; we decree to forbid shaving during Chol ha'Mo'ed, lest one not shave before, and he will enter the Regel unkempt. - PF) It adds that he was a great mockery, that one who was so honored become disgraced. Eradicating the beard hints to this; the beard is Hadras Panim.

What did he call 'the great god that saved Noach'?

Rashi: He worshipped the plank.

Ramah: He recognized that it was Hash-m.

Iyun Yakov: Noach's generation said, if we see him enter the ark, we will break it and kill him. Noach was saved from them. Sancheriv said, if He will save also me (from the kings of the east and west, whose sons I caused to die), I will offer my two sons to Him.

Maharsha: It was the plank's Mazel above. Idolaters worshipped lower beings, and intended for their Mazal above.

How does the verse support that his sons killed him because they heard his intent to sacrifice them?

Rashi: It implies that they killed him because he bowed.

Etz Yosef citing Kli Yakar: It should have said Banav Hikuhu v'Hu Mishtachaveh... Why does it say first "Hu Mishtachaveh..."? Rather, his service of idolatry is the reason why they killed him.