What is reading a verse of Shir ha'Shirim as if it were a song?

Rashi: It is unlike the proper notes for reading it.

Ramah #1: This is even if he sings to Hash-m. One may read it only according to the notes.

Maharsha: He thinks that this is fine, for it is called Shir ha'Shirim, and it speaks in metaphors.

Ramah #2: It is forbidden only when done in jest. It is fine to sing to praise Hash-m.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Magen Avraham (560:10, citing Maharil) condemns those who sing "Odecha KI Anisani" in the pub. Orchos Chayim proves from Rishonim that if it is to praise Hash-m, it is permitted.

Iyun Yakov: Perhaps it mentions Shir ha'Shirim, for one opinion holds that it was not said with Ru'ach ha'Kodesh (Megilah 7a).

Margoliyos ha'Yam 2: It mentions Shir ha'Shirim, for it is Kodesh Kodoshim (Yadayim 3:5).

What is reading a verse in the pub not in its time?

Rashi: When he drinks, he sings aloud for pleasure.

Maharsha: This refers to Mishta'os (drinking parties) of Reshus (not a Mitzvah). The entire year is the wrong time. They are forbidden! This excludes Mishta'os of Mitzvah, e.g. during Pesach...

Why does this bring evil to the world?

Maharal: This is a loss for Torah. Therefore, it girds itself in sackcloth and says 'Your children treat me like a harp...' This is a great change, for a harp is the opposite of this. The Torah is primarily thought and intellect; song is in the mouth. One who reads a verse in this way, he makes it seem that Torah is a song without deep Chochmah. This is Bitul Torah! When one thinks deeply, he closes his mouth and does not talk.

Maharsha: This is like we said, that Simchah of Reshus is forbidden the entire year. The Gemara did not bring a proof, but we infer from 'one who reads a verse in the proper time, he brings good to the world.'

Etz Yosef: We infer the negative from the positive. People who gather to hear a Chazan sing verses, they do improperly, especially if they drink wine then - "b'Shir Lo Yishtu Yayin." Even worse, sometimes they sing Tefilos, and say Hash-m's name l'Vatalah!

Iyun Yakov: Surely he sings because Hash-m gave to him great good. He does not recognize this, rather, he returns evil. Midah k'Neged Midah, he brings evil on himself.

Why did Hash-m ask 'when Yisrael eat and drink, in what should they engage'?

Maharal: Simchah and Sheleimus is carrying out his potential to deed. If one is silent and does not speak Torah, he is not a Ba'al Torah at all.

Iyun Yakov: What should they do, so it will be considered a Seudas Mitzvah?

What is reading verses in the right time?

Rashi: E.g. on Yom Tov, and he says Agada over it relevant to the day.

Maharal: Torah connects lower beings to upper beings, and brings on them a good influence from above, but only if it is in the right time.

It says that Ba'alei Talmud should learn laws of Pesach on Pesach... What should an Am ha'Aretz learn?

Margoliyos ha'Yam 4: The Rif's text says that a Chacham should engage in Torah, Mishnah, Talmud, Halachos and Agados. An Am ha'Aretz should learn laws of Pesach on Pesach... Also a Beraisa in Maseches Kalah, Perek 1 says so.

The Mishnah said just 'one who whispers on a wound.' Why did R. Yochanan say that it is when he spits?

Rashi: People who whisper, they normally spit before whispering. One may not say a verse right after spitting (NOTE: We fixed Rashi's text like a Hagahah in the Oz v'Hadar edition. - PF) Some Lachasim are in La'az (another language), and they mention Hash-m's name in La'az, and spit afterwards. My Rebbi says that we forbid only in Leshon ha'Kodesh, and only when he spits beforehand.

Why are reading external Seforim and whispering on a wound specified, among all Aveiros?

Maharal: When Chachamim pondered the level of the world to come, they listed those who have no share in the world to come. It is via three things. (a) The Cause - nothing exists automatically. (b) The world to come itself. (c) From the side of the recipient. One who denies Techiyas ha'Mesim, or Torah from Shamayim, he opposes the world to come, which is a world separated from physicality. Even one who does not deny these, but he disgraces a Chacham or disgraces someone in front of a Chacham, he is an Apikoros (Hefker) - he does not bear Hash-m's yoke, so he is removed from the world to come. One who bears His yoke is submissive to Him and His Chachamim. We can say also that the world to come is man returning to life, and Hash-m influencing life on people. One who denies either will not receive it, nor an Apikoros, who denies that there is One who will give this influence. R. Akiva adds two that are not totally removed from the separated world, just they lean from it to the right or left. External Seforim are the opposite of Torah, which teaches the straight way of Emes. These Seforim teach ways that depart from Emes! Also one who whispers on a wound uses Torah for something opposite to Torah, as if the Torah is a cure for the body. This uproots the level of Torah - it is intellectual, and it is the world to come!

Maharsha: One who whispers on a wound uses Torah to cure illness. Torah is a higher level - it protects man from coming to illness! One may use words of Torah for protection (Shevu'os 15b), like we bring "Kol ha'Machalah... Lo Asim Alecha."

What is the Chidush of "Nega Tzara'as..."?

Rashi: It does not include Hash-m's name. Even so, he has no share in the world to come.

Iyun Yakov: It seems that the latter two opinions, who mentioned verses without Hash-m's name, argue with Shmuel, who forbids due to saying Hash-m's name after spitting. The Gemara implies that they do not argue! The entire Torah is names of Hash-m, like Midrashim and Meforshim say. This is why the Asmachta for Birkas ha'Torah is "Ki Shem Hash-m Ekra Havu Godel lEi'lokeinu."

What is the Chidush of "va'Yikra El Moshe..."?

Rashi: It does not discuss illness or Nega. It is not proper to whisper on a wound. He hopes that the merit of learning Torah will cure him - even so, it is forbidden.

One may not use Divrei Torah to heal (Shevu'os 15b explicitly says so). In Shabbos (67a), we say that for an intense fever, on the first day, he should say "Va'Yera Mal'ach Hash-m Elav..."!

Tosfos (Shevu'os 15b): There it is permitted due to danger.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 8: The custom is to put a Sefer Torah on a woman having a difficult labor, or to say verses. This is because birth is more dangerous than an intense fever. We are Mechalel Shabbos for all her needs!

What do we learn from "Kol ha'Machalah... Lo Asim Alecha Ki Ani Hash-m Rof'echa"?

Maharsha: Yonason translates 'if you will transgress words of Torah, [illnesses] will be sent on you. If you will repent, I will remove them..." However, why does it say "Ki (because) Ani Hash-m Rof'echa"? Rashi on Chumash explained, even if I put them on you, it is as if they were not put, for "Ani Hash-m Rof'echa." This is unlike human doctors; even after they cure, it is recognized that the patient was ill.

Etz Yosef: It says "Ki", for if you will heed My voice, you will not need a cure.

Etz Yosef: Do not say that I will strike you in the way of vengeance, and the illness will not cure the Nefesh. Rather, I cure the Nefesh via the afflictions.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 21 citing Ohr ha'Chayim on the verse: Hash-m will heal illnesses not bi'Ydei Shamayim. Chills and overheating are bi'Ydei Adam (Kesuvos 30b).

What was the question 'if He will not send sicknesses, what Refu'ah is needed?' Hash-m does not strike Yisrael unless He creates the cure first (Megilah 13b). Perhaps Hash-m created the cure, so that the illness will not come!

Iyun Yakov left this difficult. (NOTE: I do not understand his question. If Hash-m will not send the illness, there is no need for the cure! - PF)

What was the fierce anger in the world?

Rashi: Hash-m was angry at him, and made his illness harsher.

Maharsha: 'Yesh b'Olam' implies unlike this.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Perhaps there was anger on R. Eliezer due to sins of the generation. He said, 'is there any Mitzvah that I did not fulfill?' to prove that his suffering is not due to himself. R. Akiva answered, "Ein Tzadik..." - perhaps it is for himself, so he will receive his reward only in the world to come.

Maharsha: There is anger at his Talmidim, like he said (68a) 'I will be astounded if you die naturally.'

Did R. Eliezer teach the verse "Adam Ein Tzadik..." to his Talmidim?

Maharsha: No. This is the way one asks his Rebbi.

Vilna Gaon (YD 242:59): One who says a teaching in front of his Rebbi attributes it to his Rebbi, even if he did not learn it from him.

In Shabbos (55b), the opinion that there is no death without sin was refuted. We should support that opinion from R. Akiva!

Maharsha: Tosfos explained there that "Ein Tzadik ba'Aretz..." refers to most people (but there can be exceptions). With difficulty, we can say that R. Akiva told R. Eliezer 'perhaps you are from the majority of people, who sin.'

What is the significance of 'you are better for Yisrael than a drop of rain, the sun, or parents'?

Maharal #1: Rain prepares land to produce fruits. So you teach Yisrael and rebuke them, so they will do good deeds, which are called fruits. R. Yehoshua said that Chachamim are not considered like a drop of rain, which is merely preparation, rather, like the sun itself, which carries out the eye's potential to deed. So a Chacham, via his teaching and rebuke, carries out man's potential to deed, and completes the generation. R. Elazar ben Azaryah says, he does not merely complete the generation - it is as if he gave birth to it, like parents.

Maharal #2: There are three levels - Chochmah, Binah and Da'as. A small preparation suffices for Chochmah; this is like rain. Da'as is a higher level. It is like the sun, which illuminates to the point that he can see; so a Chacham illuminates the eyes of intellect. This is not mere preparation! R. Elazar ben Azaryah said that via a Chacham teaching man, the man acquires extra Binah - Divine intellect that is totally separated. He derives a matter from a matter - this is like birth of a son. This is better than parents, who beget a physical son. My first Perush is primary.

Maharsha: Each Chacham mentioned one benefit and conduct from the three worlds. Visible rain benefits [also] from below - for every drop of rain from above, twice as much comes from below (Ta'anis 25b). We see that the sun benefits us from the middle world. Parents help via their words and the power of the Neshamah, from the upper world, to raise, conduct and benefit their children. However, that is only in this world; a Rebbi benefits his Talmid in both worlds.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): A day of rain is like a day of Din. Even so, it helps Yisrael, Rebbi's afflictions atone for Yisrael and protect them, even in the world to come. Also, from them people will learn a Kal v'Chomer - if a flame struck cedars (all the more so it can struck simple people), and they will repent.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 28 citing SH"K: Each Chacham added a Chidush. R. Tarfon discussed rain - there are times when it is not needed, and it is difficult for travelers. R. Yehoshua mentioned the sun, which is every day, and it heals - but it is not at night. R. Elazar ben Azaryah mentioned parents - their benefit is constant, day and night.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Drashos Chasam Sofer (3:119a): There are three reasons why a Tzadik is afflicted. (a) To atone for the generation. This is like rain, which descends Bal Korchan (against their will) and gives life to the world. (b) He rebukes the generation too much, like Eliyahu, who was removed because he said "Avru Brisecha Yisrael" (Yalkut Shimoni Melachim 218), and Elisha, who became sick because he incited bears against youths (Sotah 47a). This is like the sun, which does not want to go out because people worship it. (c) Because he refrains from rebuking. This is like parents, who have [mistaken] mercy on their children and do not guide them in the straight path, therefore they are punished for their sins.

Will the sun not be in the world to come?

Rashi: Hash-m will make new luminaries.

Why did R. Akiva says that afflictions are precious?

Maharal: They are dearer than the levels mentioned above, for they cleanse and purify the Nefesh, until it becomes totally separate and non-physical. One who is afflicted is separated from physicality to the point that that he is a Ben Olam ha'Ba. Three gifts were given to Yisrael; all were via afflictions (Berachos 5a).

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): The other Chachamim held that his afflictions are to atone for others; they are not dear for R. Eliezer himself. R. Akiva said that they are dear, for they atone for R. Eliezer himself.

What is the source that Chizkiyah taught the entire world?

Maharsha: He [and his entourage] arranged Sefer Mishlei, which discusses conduct and Derech according to Torah, and also conforms to etiquette. Therefore, it is considered that he taught the entire world.

Why would we think that Chizkiyah did not teach Torah to Menasheh?

Iyun Yakov: Menasheh's primary sin was Megaleh Panim ba'Torah. Had he learned properly, he would not have done so.

What is the source that they threw Menasheh in a copper pot and put fire under it?

Maharsha: "Bi'Nchushtayim" is like Nechoses. It is also an expression of the bottom, like 'Nechushtah Mechamemah' (the bottom of a special kettle heats it - Shabbos 41a) and 'Nechushto Shel Tanur' (Kelim 8:3). They afflicted him with the bottom of the pot via a fire under it.

What is the source that he called to the great ones...?

Maharsha: "Va'Yeda Menasheh Ki Hash-m Hu ha'Elokim" implies that first he called to other gods.

What are Alilos?

Rashi: They are irrefutable claims.

Maharsha: Always, Alilos are false claims, e.g. "v'Sam Lah Alilos Devarim"! Surely Rashi means that their claims were Alilos, and not true claims. There were refutations! They thought that there is no rebuttal of their claims. Their claims were granted, lest they have complaints against Hash-m's Midos, even though their claims were false. (NOTE: Hash-m spoke with Kayin - He could have answered his claim! - PF)

Maharal: They said, if You will not do [my request], I will say... Kayin said, if You will not bear my sin, I will say that it is too great for You to bear. Esav said, if you will not bless me, I will say that you can give only one Berachah.

Why did he say 'is my sin greater than 600,000 that will later sin against You'?

Maharsha #1: The sin of the Rabim (600,000) is greater than an individual's sin.

Etz Yosef: Sin creates a prosecuting angel. It is far from Hash-m. It is as if it is against His will, and hard for Him to bear.

Maharsha #2: Is my sin of murder, Bein Adam l'Chavero, greater than the sin of 600,000 who made the Egel, which is Bein Adam l'Makom? This is why he said 'Lefanecha' (in front of You).

Margoliyos ha'Yam 2 citing Ikarim 4:21: He claimed, is my sin too great for You to bear? This cannot be - Your power has no limits! The Gemara mentions 600,000, for also Chet ha'Egel is called great - "Chata ha'Am ha'Zeh Chata'ah Gedolah."

Who revealed to Kayin the Rasha that 600,000 will later sin?

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: He saw the Sefer of Adam ha'Rishon, in which was written every generation and Dorshav... [and its sinners - Avos d'R. Nasan 31].

What is the significance of "ha'Vrachah Achas Lecha Avi"?

Maharsha: If he will not bless him, this suggests that there are two Powers, and Hash-m does not have all the Berachos. Rather, some are in the hands of another god. He asked, do you have only one Berachah from Hash-m?!

What was Menasheh's claim?

Rashi: He prayed to Hash-m only at the end [after praying to every idolatry]. He said, if You will not save me, You did not help me more than the other gods! "Va'Yikana Me'od mi'Lifnei Elokei Avosav" implies that until now, he was humble in front of other gods.

Why does one who pronounces Hash-m's name with its letters have no share in the world to come?

Maharal (101a): Hash-m's name should be hidden - "Zeh Shmi l'Olam" is written Le'alem (to hide - Pesachim 50a). Hash-m's special name has a hidden level. One who pronounces it with its letters removes it from its hidden level. Therefore, he has no world to come, which is a hidden level - "Mah Rav Tuvecha Asher Tzafanta li'Yre'echa." It is wine guarded for Tzadikim in the future. I cannot explain more; a Chacham will understand. All these sins are not physical, rather, intellectual. For such sins, he loses the world to come, which is not physical. This is why the Mishnah did not mention sins like idolatry.

Why is the punishment for pronouncing Hash-m's name with its letters only outside the Mikdash?

Rashi: In the Mikdash, [Kohanim] bless with His name.

What is Leshon Agah?

Rashi citing his Rebbi: It is a language other than Leshon ha'Kodesh. Agah is like "b'La'agei Safah" (Yeshayah 28:11).

Rashi: Agah is like Ugah - a place where a group of people gather and talk secular talk. One may not say Hash-m's 42-letter name in Leshon Agah outside the Mikdash. If he did so, he has no share in the world to come. He is not punished so severely for saying it in Leshon ha'Kodesh. In the Mikdash he is not punished [at all], since they normally say it.

Ramah: This is wrong. If so, it should have said b'Makom Ugah!

Ramah: It is with Nekudos unlike our tradition.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 3: Chamra v'Chayei, citing the Me'iri, says that he pronounces the four-letter name with different Nekudos. It is forbidden also with the proper Nekudos, but one does not lose the world to come for this.

Ramah: Some say that it is in Leshon La'ag (mockery and jesting). This is wrong. If so, it should have said b'Derech Ugah! Also, this would be forbidden also in the Mikdash!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 3: The Yerushalmi says that the Kusim are not careful, and pronounce it with the proper Nekudos. Someone in the days of Rav Sadya Gaon called the Shomronim 'Ba'alei Leshon Agah' because they pronounce it properly.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 4: Tosfos holds that 'Hogeh Hash-m's name with its letters' is saying Yud Kei... Devash l'Fi says that this is more severe than pronouncing it with the proper Nekudos.

Why did our Mishnah mention seven individuals? (Surely also many others have no share in the world to come!)

Ha'Kosev: One might have thought that due to their level of Chochmah, in the merit of their Torah they have a share. Really, the foundations of their Emunah were ruined, and they doubted some of them, therefore they were rejected from the world to come. It mentions Bil'am, for Chasidei Umos ha'Olam have a share; he was from Rish'ei Umos ha'Olam.

What is the meaning of Riba Am?

Rashi: Ribetz (he made Yisrael crouch) and lowered them.

Maharsha: This is like we say in Shabbos (56b), the day that Yaravam set up golden calves in Beis Kel and Dan, a small hut was built; it was the start of Italya of Yavan.

Maharal: He 'sodomized' (forced) them to be Mezaneh after idolatry. We expound the names of these kings because their evil was due to themselves. They are unlike those who happen to sin.

Maharsha: Via this, he became the Ba'al of the nation. This is like we say in Ta'anis (6b), that rainfall is called Revi'ah, for it is Rove'a the land; it becomes the Ba'al of the land.

Iyun Yakov: He had relatives with men.

What quarrels did he make among Yisrael?

Rashi: They argued about serving idolatry. This one serves, and this one protests against him, and they quarrel.

Maharsha: He caused the nation to become two kingdoms that quarreled with each other. (NOTE: Even though Hash-m decreed to split Yisrael into two kingdoms, had Yaravam not persuaded his subjects to serve idolatry, there could have been Shalom between the kingdoms. - PF)

What is the meaning of 'she'Nibat, but did not see'?

Rashi: He thought that he saw well and understood, but he did not; he erred, like we say below.

Maharsha: He merely glanced; he did not truly see, for he erred.

Is there a support that Nevat is Michah and Sheva ben Bichri?

Ramah: It is astounding that a Rasha lived so long, from Yetzi'as Mitzrayim until the end of David's days!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 5 citing Ein Eliyahu, introduction to Ein Yakov: Often Chazal said 'Hu Ploni Hu Almoni' to teach that their natures or actions were the same, for good or evil; what was said about one applies also to the other.

Maharsha: Nevat was from Efrayim. Also Michah and Sheva ben Bichri were "me'Har Efrayim" (Shofetim 17:1, Shmuel II, 20:21). Sheva ben Bichri is called "Ish Beliya'al" (ibid. 1) because previously he did idolatry (Pesel Michah); it says about idolaters "Yatz'u Anashim Bnei Beliya'al", "Im Levavecha Beliya'al." Yaravam's mother was "Ishah Almanah", because her husband Nevat (Sheva ben Bichri) was killed. He was called Michah because he was crushed in the building, and Nevat due to what he saw. However, Sheva ben Bichri was "Ish Yemini", i.e. from Binyamin (just he lived in Har Efrayim)! We can say that he was from Efrayim; he is called Yemini because he sided with Binyamin, who contested David's kingship.

How was he crushed in the building?

Rashi #1: In Egypt, he was put in the building in place of a brick. Moshe said "Lamah Hare'osa la'Am ha'Zeh" - if they lack bricks, they put Jewish children in the building! Hash-m said, they eradicate thorns. I know that if they would live, they would be utter Resha'im. If you want, take one of them! Moshe took out Michah.

Rashi #2: He engaged in building until he became Mach (poor) - anyone who engages in building becomes poor (Sotah 11a).

Maharal: Due to the toil and burden of building, he did not come to the world. Even though Egypt intended to subjugate Yisrael and diminish them, it was good for them. Those who were diminished, had they come to the world, they would have been Resha'im. Michah should not have come to the world. We need not say that he lived from Egypt until then (the time of Yaravam). Rather, he bequeathed the Se'or (sourdough, i.e. evil) in him to his seed, until it was actualized in Nevat.

What is the significance of fire coming out of his Ever?

Maharal: Via the Ever, man carries out his potential to deed. Nothing is stronger than fire. He thought that he will be king, for no one has more power than the king. Really, it showed that the son that he begets will be king.

Maharsha: It hinted to the fire of feud that will come from his seed to eradicate Malchus Beis David.

Iyun Yakov: The [primary] letters of Amaso, Aleph Mem Tov, are an acronym for Atah Melech Tihyeh (you will be king). Really, every dream has Batel matters (NOTE: he saw this in a dream - PF).

What was the consequence of Nevat thinking that he will be king?

Rashi: He (Sheva ben Bichri) gathered all of Yisrael to himself and wanted to be king, like verses say.

What is the significance of Tzara'as on his Ever?

Maharal: It is a sign of kingship. "... the king was a Metzora... he sat in the house of freedom" implies that before this, he was a slave (Horayos 10a)! Even though a leader is like a slave, he is freer than others, who are subjugated to the king. Also, the king is separated from everyone, like a Metzora. He is not included in the Klal due to his attribute; the Metzora is excluded due to his inferiority. Every supreme attribute is called Tzara'as before it is carried out in deed. We find that Mashi'ach had Tzara'as (98a).

Maharsha: This hint that kingship will sprout from his seed via Tzara'as; David became a Metzora for six months due to the episode of Bas Sheva (107b).

What was the consequence of Achitofel thinking that he will be king?

Rashi: He became an advisor to Avshalom in order that kingship will pass from David to Avshalom, with intent that afterwards it will pass to himself. (NOTE: Achitofel counseled Avshalom to kill David, with intent to later execute Avshalom for raping his father's wives, and he himself would become king (Yalkut Shimoni Shmuel II, 151). - PF)

How was Moshe stricken via Mei Merivah?

Rashi: Because he said "Shim'u Na ha'Morim", he was punished and did not enter Eretz Yisrael.

What is the source that Yaravam rebuked Shlomo in public?

Maharsha: If not that it was in public, it would not be called Mered (rebellion).

Margoliyos ha'Yam 10: The Perush on Avos 4:5 attributed to R. David, the Rambam's grandson, says that when Shlomo married Bas Pharaoh and slept until four hours and the Tamid was not offered in the proper time, Yaravam gathered Shevet Efrayim in front of Sha'ar ha'Melech to rebuke him.

Did Yaravam merit to become king for rebuking Shlomo, and he was also punished for this?

Maharal: Yes. Because he rebuked him in public, which was an Aveirah, his kingship was of sin.

Iyun Yakov: We asked what was his merit to be king, for his father was Michah and Sheva ben Bichri - surely it was not in the merit of his father! Normally, a good person does not become bad; we answer that here is different, for even his good deed was not totally good.

Why must we say that he was punished for rebuking Shlomo in public? Verses explicitly say that he was punished for making Yisrael sin with idolatry!

Maharsha: A sin leads to a sin. Had he not been haughty to rebel against Malchus Beis David, he would not have caused Yisrael to sin with idolatry.

Had David not breached the wall, would Yisrael not be able to enter Yerushalayim via gates?!

Rashi: The breaches made it easier to enter.

What is 'to make Angariya for Bas Paro'?

Rashi citing his Rebbi: They will enter via gates, to enable knowing who entered in order to collect taxes for Bas Pharaoh.

Ramah: Yaravam said so; it was not true. Shlomo was a total Tzadik! Also, he did not need the money - "Ein Kesef Nechshav bi'Ymei Shlomo li'Me'umah"!

Rashi #1: He closed the gates and made a tower for her on one of the gates, so all will pass by to honor her and serve her. All service of the king is called Angariya.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 12, citing Tzafnas Pane'ach (Hashmatos ha'Rambam, Ta'anis 5:16): The addition to Yerushalayim did not have full Kedushah, therefore a Ger Toshav was allowed to dwell there. Bas Pharaoh was not a full convert. (NOTE: Perhaps this is because a converted Mitzris, she and her children may not marry into Klal Yisrael. - PF) However, we hold (Pesachim 85b) that the gates of Yerushalayim did not receive Kedushah. Therefore, he made her house in the gate. "V'Gerecha Asher bi'Sh'arecha" is a Ger Toshav (NOTE: who may not dwell in Yerushalayim itself. - PF)

Rashi #2: Shlomo used to close the gates of the Azarah and hold the keys in his hand. A king normally sleeps until the third hour of the day, and Yisrael stand by the Azarah until the king rises. Yaravam said, you want to give Angariya to Bas Pharaoh, that she will give to them the keys!

What is the significance of removing his Tefilin Lefanav?

Rashi #1: He should have turned to the side to remove them, amidst fear of the king. One should not bare his head in front of him. This began his rebellion, to show that he does not conduct like a king.

Rashi #2: It was in order to come against him forcefully.

Maharal: One who wears Tefilin has fear of Malchus Shamayim on him. Removing it in front of his Rebbi removes fear from himself. If the king is wearing Tefilin, this is raising his hand against the king.

Maharsha: A Talmid does for his Rebbi all tasks that a slave does for his master, except for untying his shoe (lest people think that the Talmid is a slave). This is only if the Talmid is not wearing Tefilin (slaves do not wear Tefilin - Kesuvos 96a). Removing his Tefilin showed that he does not want to do for Shlomo all tasks that a slave does for his master.

Iyun Yakov: People used to wear Tefilin the entire day. They removed them only in a place of filth, e.g. a privy. Therefore, it is disgraceful to remove them in front of one's Rebbi or the king!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 15-16: Be'er Sheva says that Shimusha Rabah says that 'Lefanav' means before Shlomo. Mahari says that this is like removing the yoke of Shamayim in front of him. Also, it is like ruling in front of one Rebbi, that the time came to remove Tefilin. I question this - one must fear the king, but we do not find that one may not rule in front of him! We do not find that Shlomo was Yaravam's Rebbi! Yad ha'Melech (Hilchos Talmud Torah 5:6) says that Shlomo and his Beis Din enacted Eruvin and Netilas Yadayim. He was Rosh Sanhedrin and a Navi, so Yaravam needed to conduct with all laws that apply to one's Rebbi.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 17, citing Magen Giborim 29:3: The Magen Avraham says that according to the opinion that one must don the hand Tefilin while sitting, he must also remove it while sitting; removal must be like donning. The Rambam (Hilchos Melachim 2) says that everyone must stand in front of the king.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 17 and Daf Al ha'Daf, citing Meir Einei Chachamim 3, Shabbos 56b: The head Tefilin represents thought, and the hand Tefilin represents action. Shlomo said, I can increase [wives] and not veer my heart. This is like saying, intent is primary, and not fulfilling the law of the Mitzvah. Yaravam rebuked him - one must remove head Tefilin first, for one may not have for a moment intellectual investigation without Pashut Kiyum ha'Mitzvah. This was his rebuke of Shlomo!

What is the source that Yaravam feared lest people see Rechav'am sitting and him standing?

Maharsha: The verse is repetitive. It says "v'Shav Lev ha'Am ha'Zeh... El Rechavam... v'Shavu El Rechavam." Therefore, Chazal expounded Shav to be an expression of sitting; they will see Rechavam sitting. Amidst pride, he was not concerned for the Isur to sit, only lest they kill him for Mored b'Malchus in the kingdom of Rechavam.

Iyun Yakov: Yaravam feared lest people say that he stands because he is a slave to Rechavam. They do not know that only Malchei Yehudah may sit in the Azarah. They will think that if I was king, I would be permitted to sit!

Etz Yosef citing Kli Yakar: Indeed, one must be careful about danger. However, since Achiyah ha'Shiloni promised him [in the name of Hash-m] kingship over the 10 tribes, he should have gone and stood without concern. It was not certain that he and Rechavam will be there together! His pride caused him to worry about this.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Ramasayim Tzufim: Yaravam was great in Torah. The entire Torah was clear to him. How did he fall so terribly? He thought that he must guard the kingship that Hash-m gave to him. Rather, all authority is from Hash-m; man need not guard it. Pride is like idolatry, for it is the source of idolatry. It led him to think that guarding his kingship overrides Aliyah l'Regel. So is the way of the Yetzer ha'Ra - today it says 'do so... [until it tells him to serve idolatry]'

What is the source of the tradition that only kings of Yehudah may sit in the Mikdash?

Rashi: It is a tradition from Moshe from Sinai. It is not learned from a verse.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 20-21 citing Mishneh l'Melech (Hilchos Beis ha'Bechirah 7:6): In Yoma (25a, 69a), Rashi wrote that we learn from "La'amod Le'shares" (Divrei ha'Yamim II, 5:14) that one may not sit. Rav Chanoch Ehrentrai answered that the Heter for Malchei Beis David to sit is a tradition. (NOTE: Surely, the tradition was for Malchei Yehudah. If it was for Malchei Beis David, Sha'ul would have known from the beginning that David will be king! - PF) Kehilas Yakov said that the Isur began with David. Before, even a Kohen Gadol like Eli could sit. This is astounding, that a tradition from Sinai began at a later time! Be'er Sheva says that it is not truly a tradition from Sinai. Rashi (Shmuel I, 1:9) says that Eli sat on Kisei Gadol, i.e. he was appointed judge. Before there was a king, the Shofet ruled.)

Why did Yaravam want to get the Tzadik to say that he consents to all that Yaravam will say, even to serve idolatry? Surely the Tzadik will not consent in practice!

Rashi: They all signed that they will consent to all that Yaravam will say, and then they could not retract.

Why is there no concern lest a man like Yaravam serve idolatry?

Maharsha: He rebuked Shlomo about matters of Shamayim, and Achiyah ha'Shiloni considered him to be a Tzadik and signed approval of him, like it says after this (102a).

Iyun Yakov: A good person does not become bad!