Why did Achiyah ha'Shiloni err about Yaravam?

Ramah (101b): He signed to do whatever Yaravam will command. He did not specify 'except for an Aveirah.' Yehu thought that it is even to serve idolatry.' (NOTE: Surely Yehu new that Eliyahu, who anointed him, vehemently opposed idolatry and killed Kohanei ha'Ba'al, and Hash-m did great miracles for him. Eliyahu departed, but Yehu should have asked Elisha, who was appointed in place of Eliyahu! - PF)

Margoliyos ha'Yam 3: This was just after the Mikdash was fixed in Yerushalayim and Korbanos were forbidden elsewhere. Even in Yehudah, when there were virtuous kings, it says "ha'Bamos Lo Saru." Achiyah appointed Yaravam to be king over Malchus Yisrael - there was room to think that they could designate a place for Avodas Hash-m in Malchus Yisrael.

Anaf Yosef citing Ya'aros Devash: Yaravam's whole intent was lest people ascend for the Regel. Many Chasidim in Chutz la'Aretz wanted to do so, even though they are exempt, like Tosfos said in Pesachim (3b). Therefore, he intended that they live in Chutz la'Aretz; one who does so, it is as if he serves idolatry. Achiyah thought that 'even if I will tell you to serve idolatry' means that he will command them to dwell in Chutz la'Aretz, to exempt them from Aliyah l'Regel; he consented, for it is a Mitzvah to heed the king; his honor is equated to Hash-m's honor. In order to make Shalom and they will not ascend for the Regel and rebel against their king Yaravam, who Hash-m commanded Achiyah to appoint! (NOTE: We do not heed a king if he commands against Torah law. One may leave Eretz Yisrael only for needs of income, learning Torah or to get married! Also, Achiyah should not have signed consent to serve idolatry without clarifying that he means only to live in Chutz la'Aretz! - PF)

Margoliyos ha'Yam 2 citing Ein Eliyahu: He accepted even to do an Avodah Zarah to him (work that he is not used to).

What do we learn from "v'Shachatah Setim Hemiku va'Ani Musar l'Chulam"?

Rashi #1: Setim are those who stray after idolatry, to slaughter to it. (NOTE: In this version, Rashi implies that they would kill one who did not come to the idolatrous festivals. It seems that this is unlike our text. - PF)

Rashi #2: Those who veered from Me, in their folly, were stringent to the point of Shechitah. They would execute one who ascends for the Regel and refrains from serving the calves.

Maharsha: Yaravam had a deep counsel to make people trust him. He rebuked Shlomo about spiritual matters. I (Hash-m) know that his intent was evil. (NOTE: What is the source that he did not intend l'Shem Shamayim initially? The Gemara implies that he soured only after he became king, and worried lest people consider him inferior to Rechavam! - PF) Had they not made such a harsh punishment (death) for one who ascends for the Regel, Tzadikim would have fulfilled the Mitzvah.

What do we learn from "uv'Yom Pakdi u'Fakadti Aleihem Chatasam"?

Rashi: The Meraglim returned on Tish'ah b'Av [and the nation believed their evil report]. The 40 years in the Midbar, it was a day of punishment (NOTE: people in their 60th year died), and Bayis Rishon and Bayis Sheni were destroyed on Tish'ah b'Av.

Maharsha: The verse is written regarding ha'Egel!

Maharsha: This refers to the 17th of Tamuz, the day of ha'Egel. We say (Ta'anis 26a) that five tragedies occurred that day - the Luchos were broken, the Tamid ceased, the city wall was breached, the Torah was burned [and an idol was erected in the Heichal].

What punishment came from "ba'Es ha'Hi va'Yered Yehudah"?

Rashi: His first two sons died, and Tamar was sentenced to die.

What is the significance of a time destined for good?

Maharsha: Hash-m brings good and bad to the world close to nature. When He brings good for reward, it is at the time prepared for good based on Mazal, and conversely for bad. The same applies to a place prepared [for punishments].

Iyun Yakov: Even though Ein Mazal l'Yisrael (Shabbos 152a), this is if Yisrael do not sin. When they sin, the Satan prosecutes at a time of danger.

Did Yosef's brothers sell him in Shechem? He found them in Dosan!

Rashi #1: Dosan is a village near Shechem. It is called on Shechem's name.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 7: In Makos 10a, we ask that Chevron was in Ir Miklat. How was it given to Kalev? We answer that he received the surrounding villages; they are called on its name.

Rashi #2: It says Dosan for a Drashah - they were Dan (judged) him to die.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 6: Yosef was a Shali'ach Mitzvah of Yakov. Why was he harmed? Shechem is a place of punishment. Where damage is common, even a Shali'ach Mitzvah can be harmed (see Chulin 142a).

What is 'mi'Piteka of Yerushalayim'?

Rashi: It is the Klal of Yerushalayim. He would never return to it, nor take a share in the Avodah.

Maharsha: We expound these matters, for there was no need to write from where he left, or that he was wearing a new garment. It needed to say only that Achiyah ha'Shiloni found him and grabbed him via the garment.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 8 citing Gilyonei ha'Shas: Yaravam was from Yosef. Only Kohanim and Leviyim have a share in the Avodah! Perhaps the text should say 'no share in Kevodah (its honor).'

Maharal: It is from Hash-m in Yerushalayim - the city that Hash-m chose to serve on the Mizbe'ach. Yaravam left, not to serve on the Mizbe'ach in Yerushalayim.

Maharsha citing the Aruch: It is the inscription of Tzadikim who will live in the future and rejoice in Yerushalayim.

Iyun Yakov: It says "Kol ha'Kasuv l'Chayim bi'Yerushalayim"; Yaravam left this.

What is the significance that he was wearing a new Salmah?

Maharsha: A Chacham's Torah is compared to his Salmah - "Simlah Lechah Katzin Tihyeh Lanu." This is because he is recognized via his Salmah; it is unlike others'. When Achiyah appointed him, he was Kosher; there was no impurity in his Torah.

Why did Rav Yehudah say that compared to them, all other Chachamim were like grass of the field?

Maharsha: Chachamim are compared to cedars of Levanon. Grass is very low compared to them.

What is the meaning of 'you give Sheluchim to his sons'?

Rashi: You abandon Malchus Beis David and pick new kings.

What do we learn from "Batei Achziv l'Achzav l'Malchei Yisrael"?

Rashi: You were false to Malchei Beis David, and went after Malchei Yisrael. Therefore, you will fall to l'Achzav - Nochrim, who are steeped in deceit.

Why does it say "Gozel Aviv v'Imo v'Omer Ein Pesha"?

Maharsha: He considers rebellion a light Aveirah, like one who steals from his parents. He thinks that it is not theft, for they will pardon him. Also, later it will be his (he will inherit them)! The verse refutes this. It is a great sin. He is a colleague of Ish Mashchis. Just like Yaravam ruined and separated Yisrael from their Father in Heaven, that they will not ascend for the festival to the place where the Shechinah dwells to bless Yisrael, so one who does not bless for Hana'ah, he withholds Berachah from Yisrael.

How can one steal from Hash-m and Keneses Yisrael?

Rashi: This is the only way - he refrains from blessing Keneses Yisrael. Chacham obligated to bless on everything; one who tastes without blessing is called a Gazlan, for it says "la'Shem ha'Aretz u'Melo'ah" (Berachos 35a).

Iyun Yakov: He steals from Yisrael the opportunity to answer Amen. Answering Amen is great - if one answers Amen with all his Ko'ach, they tear [harsh] decrees against him, even if he has idolatry (Shabbos 119b). (NOTE: The Gemara said so about 'Amen Yehei Shmei Raba'! - PF) Therefore, it is considered that he sins and causes others to sin, i.e. they are punished for idolatry (he blocked their chance to be pardoned). He is compared to Yaravam, who stopped people from the Mitzvah of Aliyah l'Regel; he sinned and caused others to sin.

Iyun Yakov: One who steals may not bless on what he stole. If he does, he reviles Hash-m - "u'Votze'a Berech Ni'etz Hash-m" (6b). If one benefits without blessing, he acts like one who stole!

What is the comparison to two sticks that strew each other?

Rashi: He holds one stick, and hits another and casts it far away. So Yaravam enticed Yisrael away from Hash-m Bal Korcham (against their will).

Maharal: The Shechinah dwelled amidst Yisrael in the Mikdash. After Yaravam set up calves in Beis Kel and Dan, Hash-m's honor was cast off.

Maharsha: The two calves, in Beis Kel and Dan, are like two sticks - each strews the other from its place. So Yisrael were separated from their place to Dan and Beis Kel, two places far from each other.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 13 citing Sefer ha'Mesilos p.190: The source of this metaphor is Zecharyah 11:7, which discusses two sticks called No'am and Chovelim.

How did giving gold and silver to Yisrael cause them to make idols of gold?

Maharal: It caused them to be haughty, and they cast off Ol Malchus Shamayim, and veered from following Hash-m.

Maharsha: It mentions also silver due to "v'Chesef Hirbeisi Kah v'Zahav Asu la'Ba'al." Much silver would have sufficed for them. Due to the added gold, they made the Egel amidst great good.

What is the meaning of 'before Yaravam, Yisrael nursed from one calf, and now, two or three calves'?

Rashi: They were punished for the sin of one calf that they made in the Midbar, and from now and onwards, also for the two of Yaravam.

Maharal: Do not say that Yaravam's calves were like the first one. No - he had a different intent. If he wanted that there will be calves available to serve, he should have made many! Rather, his intent itself for two was idolatry; it is improper to elaborate about his intent.

Maharsha: A calf is not proper to nurse from it. Just the contrary, it wants to nurse [from its mother]! So Yisrael were not proper to sin with the Egel, like it says in Avodah Zarah 4b, Now they nursed from two or three - also Yaravam's generation was not worthy for that deed, just Yaravam forced them.

Iyun Yakov: They switched Something that has reality for [idolatry], which has no reality. This is called nursing from a calf. Just the contrary, a calf nurses from others! It says 'now, two or three calves', for once one is tripled in sin, Hash-m does not show favoritism to him.

How much is one part in 24 of the Hechra of a Litra?

Rashi: This is not precise; it means a very small amount - the amount that one pan on a balance scale leans to one side more than the other. (NOTE: Rava cites Bava Basra 88b. There it says that the Hechra of a Litra is one part in 100 for liquids, and one part in 200 or 400 for dry measures. - PF)

Maharal: Chat ha'Egel was when they left Egypt and became Yisrael. Just like Adam ha'Rishon's sin decreed death on all his generations forever, so Yisrael's sin of ha'Egel is on all of Yisrael. When the Hechra is one part in 24, it is visible.

Maharsha: The punishment is according to the sin, like it says in Avos (5:10) 'seven kinds of punishments come for seven kinds of Aveiros.' And so we say in Shabbos (32b-33b). It discusses a Hechra, because the verse discusses merits and sins as if they were on a scale. "Nosei Avon" - if the merits are greater, they are Machri'a for Tov (that side outweighs). If the sins are greater, they are Machri'a for bad (Rosh Hashanah 17a). Chet ha'Egel was the first sin of Yisrael - "Chata ha'Am ha'Zeh Chata'ah Gedolah." It is Machri'a the scale. Even if merits and sins are equal, in that generation, that sin is Machri'a that sins will be greater.

How was the punishment completed 24 generations later?

Rashi: It was via the Churban in the days of Tzidkiyahu, who was the 24th generation from Nachshon; the Egel was in Nachshon's days.

Iyun Yakov: Perhaps it says "uv'Yom Pakdi", for just like a day has 24 hours, the punishment was carried out 24 generation later.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Ul'Levi Amar: It says about ha'Egel "va'Ekos Oso Tachon Ad Asher Dak l'Afar" - the punishment was ground finely like earth, and every generation gets some grains of it.

Why does it say "Karvu Pekudos ha'Ir"?

Maharsha: There were payments for two sins. (a) Chet ha'Egel, for which Yisrael would have been eradicated "va'Achalem v'E'eseh Osecha l'Goy Gadol", if not for Moshe's Tefilah. (b) The sin of that generation.

What do we learn from "v'Ish Kli Mashcheso b'Yado"?

Maharsha: Moshe canceled the first decree. Now, man's Kli of destruction is in his own hand. The decree is ready to come; nothing blocks at the time of Churban.

What is the question from "Acher ha'Davar ha'Zeh Yaravam Lo Shav"?

Maharsha: Before this did not discuss Yaravam, rather, the Navi that a lion ate. "Lo Shav" implies that there was a reason why he should have repented. We answer that Hash-m grabbed him by his garment and said 'repent...', and when he heard that he will be Achar (in back), he did not repent.

Iyun Yakov: The Klal is, one who sins and makes others sin, Shamayim does not give him opportunity to repent! Yaravam was different, for he was great in Torah. It says that He grabbed him by his garment to hint to this, like we said about "Salmah Chadashah." Margoliyos ha'Yam 17 - Metudas David on "v'Hu Miskaseh b'Salmah Chadashah..." says that He hinted, will a Chacham like you do so?!

Why did Hash-m first mention Yaravam first, but after Yaravam asked, He said that David will be in front?

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): David was the head of Ba'alei Teshuvah. He was not proper to sin with Bas Sheva. Hash-m induced him to sin, to teach that Teshuvah is possible. We cannot learn from him to one who sinned and caused others to sin. Had Yaravam repented, he would have taught this, and been the head of such Ba'alei Teshuvah. He thought that he should be in front, for his Teshuvah teaches for more people. Hash-m answered that David is in front, for he was first to show the power of Teshuvah.

Iyun Yakov #1: One opinion says that a Ba'al Teshuvah is at a higher level than a Tzadik who never sinned (99a). However, if Teshuvah does only half (Yerushalmi Yoma 8:7 says that afflictions atone for the other half), or if Mezid sins turn into Shogeg sins, surely a Tzadik is better, and the Ba'al Teshuvah will need to return as a Gilgul (reincarnation) to fix his sin. This is a much greater pain than Gehinom! This is the Perush of Tzar Gilgul Mechilos of those who die in Chutz la'Aretz - he must come as a Gilgul. (NOTE: Kesuvos 111a says that those who die in Chutz la'Aretz, their bones roll to Eretz Yisrael, and come to life there. Mechilos (tunnels) are made for Tzadikim, lest they endure such pain. Perhaps Iyun Yakov explains that everyone gets Mechilos, just for Tzadikim they are not painful. - PF) In Nidah (70b), we ask a contradiction between "Ki Lo Echpatz b'Mos ha'Mes" and "Ki Chafetz Hash-m Lahamisam", and answer that He desires to kill sinners who are not repenting, but not those who are repenting. Hash-m suggested that Yaravam repent and be in Gan Eden. When Yaravam heard that David will be in front, for a Tzadik is greater, for a Ba'al Teshuvah must come as a Gilgul, he said that he does not want. He would rather be punished in Gehinom, which is less painful.

Anaf Yosef citing Zichron Yitzchak, Bereishis: R. Avahu says that a Ba'al Teshuvah is at a higher level than a Tzadik, because the Yetzer ha'Ra tempted him more. David wanted to sin, but he did not - he is greater than Yaravam, who actually sinned.

Iyun Yakov #2: Hash-m said 'Ben Yishai' is in front. Even though a Ba'al Teshuvah is greater than a Tzadik, David will be in front, for his father is one [of the four who died only due to the Nachash (he never sinned - Bava Basra 17a). Yaravam was ben Nevat - the son of Michah and Sheva ben Bichri (101b).

Anaf Yosef citing Sama d'Chayei, Aruch l'Ner, Lev Eliyahu: Hash-m suggested that Yaravam repent amidst love. Then, sins are transformed to merits. If so, his merits would exceed David's, and he would be in front! Yaravam was eager to receive this honor, and wanted to enjoy hearing it explicitly. Hash-m answered, if you repent for this reason, this is not amidst love. You will be in Gan Eden, but your sins will not become merits, so David will be in front .

Anaf Yosef: Yaravam was astute. Is it not better to be in back of David in Gan Eden than to be in Gehinom?! Also, how could Yaravam's Teshuvah help - he caused many to sin! He would have to bring merit to Rabim, by showing the way of Teshuvah. David already did so! David sinned only twice; Yaravam transgressed the entire Torah - he could show that Teshuvah helps even in such a case. However, below (107a) we say that David wanted to serve idolatry, which is like denial of the entire Torah. Therefore, David teaches also about one who transgressed everything! This was Hash-m's answer 'Ben Yishai b'Rosh.' Hash-m knows that David never intended to serve idolatry, just he wanted to avoid Chilul Hash-m if people will see that he was a Chasid, and his son killed him. (NOTE: i.e. so David does not show that one who transgressed [idolatry, which is like] the entire Torah, his Teshuvah is accepted. I ask, since people thought that he wanted to serve, they will learn from him that even an idolater's Teshuvah is accepted! - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf citing R. Chayim Shmuelevitz: Yaravam understood that he will be in front . He avidly sought honor and authority, and wanted to hear it again, explicitly. Anyone who pursues honor, honor flees from him (Eruvin 13b), therefore Hash-m answered that David will be in front.

Anaf Yosef citing Nachalas Yakov: Often, the cause is called on the name of the one who was behind it. E.g. if Reuven caused someone else to kill Shimon, we say that Reuven killed him, even if he himself did not do so. Hash-m is the cause of all causes. When the Yetzer Tov arouses a person to repent, we can say that Hash-m aroused him. Our Gemara means that once, Yaravam had a great arousal to repent via the Yetzer Tov or the Torah. He thought that in Gan Eden will be Hash-m, him and David. Then he thought, if I repent, I will need to go to Yerushalayim on the Regel, and kingship will return to David - 'Ben Yishai b'Rosh.'

Anaf Yosef: Hash-m's words could mean that He is in front, and after Him Yaravam, and after him David, or He is in back, and in front of Him Yaravam, and in front of him David. Hash-m answered that the latter is correct. We find that Hash-m put Tzadikim in front of Himself in the introduction to Eichah Rabasi, 24. "Es'halech Lifnei Hash-m b'Artzos ha'Chayim" - in Gan Eden.

Why did Yaravam not want to repent after he heard that David will be in front?

Maharal: Yaravam sinned because he was from Shevet Efrayim, which did not want to be under Malchus Yehudah. Therefore, when he heard that David will be in front, he did not want.

Anaf Yosef citing Zichron Yitzchak, Vayelech: The Zohar says that one who merits, the Shechinah goes in front of him, and he enjoys its radiance. If he does not merit, he goes in front of the Shechinah, and does not enjoy its radiance. Yaravam did not want to repent because he will be in front of the Shechinah; it was not due to where David will be. (NOTE: How can he explain that David will be in front, and not merit to enjoy the Shechinah's radiance?! - PF)

What was the answer 'they did not retract - should I retract?!'

Rashi: They did not cease their evil. Should I cease expounding about them?!

Maharsha: They did not repent, even though events occurred to inspire them to repent. Yaravam's hand dried, and he had to ask the Navi to ask Hash-m to return it. Also, his son fell ill. Achav heard [what will be his end], tore his clothes and wore sackcloth [and they did not retract]. Should I retract due to the event that happened to me, that I became weak?!

Why did R. Avahu expounding about them after he resolved not to? One who vowed at a time of affliction, we permit his vow only for the need of a Mitzvah (YD 228:45)!

Iyun Yakov: Perhaps also this is a Mitzvah, to expound the verses. Also, it is a Mitzvah to debase Resha'im so people will do like them, since they did not retract. (NOTE: It says that he accepted not to expound about them. Must we say that he vowed about this? - PF)

Margoliyos ha'Yam 1 citing Mar'is ha'Ayin: He did so to fix their Nefashos. Just like for merit, a Chacham's lips move [in the grave when people say his teachings], a Rasha is pained when people tell his evil, and this atones for him. This is why Chazal taught that three kings have no share in the world to come! (NOTE: If their Kaparah was already completed, we pain them without benefit! Perhaps in such a case they do not feel pain. - PF)

Why did he say 'we will discuss our colleagues'?

Maharal (101b): He said so sarcastically. He thought that the Yetzer ha'Ra for idolatry did not overpower, just they were not Chachamim, so they erred. Menasheh refuted this. They were Chachamim, just the Yetzer ha'Ra overpowered intellect.

Maharsha: R. Yehudah holds that Menasheh has a share in the world to come, because he repented. Rav Ashi would not call Achav 'our colleague' - "Chaver Hu l'Ish Mashchis"! However, he said 'colleagues' (plural), which includes Yaravam and Achav, who have no share in the world to come. Menasheh said, we are not your colleagues in this world, nor your [dead] father's colleague in the world to come, for the other two kings have no share in the world to come.

Iyun Yakov: Even though Menasheh was great in Torah - he expounded in 55 facets, like we say (103b) - Rav Ashi holds that action is greater than learning. It is the purpose, like it says in Kidushin (40b). Menasheh refuted this from Birkas ha'Motzi. We bless where it is baked first, for "Tov Reishis me'Acharis ha'Davar" - Talmud, the beginning of action, is primary.

Why did Menasheh ask him about the Berachah on bread?

Maharal: Rav Ashi thought that they erred to say that the first Cause could not have been one, for multiplicity cannot come from one, just like fire cannot influence something and its opposite. Fire heats and water cools. We believe that Hash-m, who is one, made the beginning of the creation. What comes afterwards connects and joins to the start; it is primary. What comes from the first creation are different and numerous due to the recipients. Menasheh asked about Birkas ha'Motzi, for we cut the bread from its beginning (where it baked first). This shows that the rest merely joins to the first.

Maharsha: On other foods, the Berachah is Borei. This is because the land was cursed via Adam's sin; "b'Ze'as Apecha Tochal Lechem." Ten Melachos are needed to make bread. Via Adam's Teshuvah, Chesed Elokim takes bread out of the ground with Divine power. Birkas ha'Motzi hints to this power, which is against nature. Menasheh asked about this, to hint that also he is a Ba'al Teshuvah to receive Chesed Elokim in the world to come. He should not be included with Yaravam and Achav, who have no share. He asked where to cut ha'Motzi, to show this intent. Menasheh said that it is where the Melachah of bread was finished - the first place where Chesed Elokim was fulfilled via Teshuvah.

Maharal: The world was created for Yisrael, who are called "Reishis". The rest of the world is secondary to them.

What is Karim Bishula?

Rashi #1: It is where the bread first forms a crust - above, or on the sides, or on bottom, but not in the middle. This Perush is primary.

Rashi #2: The text says Kadim Bishula - where it cooks first. This is the same as where it first forms a crust.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Ya'aros Devash 1:11: Before the sin of Eitz ha'Da'as, all foods were prepared by themselves. Also in the future, buns and silk garments will grow in Eretz Yisrael (Kesuvos 111b). Via the sin, the Nachash injected its venom in all vegetation. Fire can nullify its venom. We are not concerned for Giluy (lest a snake put venom in something exposed) for roasted meat. A snake's power is in the element of earth, which is opposite to the element of fire; fire overpowers it. Therefore, we bless where fire first expelled the Satan's power. Menasheh hinted that all Neshamos were under the Satan's Reshus. Those that left early were great Neshamos - something sunk in excrement a short time is better than something sunk in excrement a long time - but one who is greater has a greater Yetzer ha'Ra. Therefore, the desire for idolatry was great.

Rashi #3: It is where it finishes baking first, where it is baked nicely.

Why did Rav Ashi say 'since you were so wise...'?

Maharal: Since you understand that everything developed from the first, why did you serve idolatry?

Toras Chayim: Just like one must separate the first of grain, wine and oil, and of a dough, Menasheh knew that one must separate the first from the bread and bless on it. The Berachah is primarily on it, but also includes all the bread. On Shabbos and Yom Tov we must bless on whole loaves, so he marks the Reishis via a knife beforehand. On weekdays, it is best to bless on a whole loaf (NOTE: and separate the Reishis first, and bless on it). Because Hash-m is Reishis, and there is no Reishis like His, it is always proper to separate the first for Him.

What is the significance of taking the bottom of his garment?

Rashi: He would have lifted it from between his legs to enable him to run quickly to serve, due to the tremendous Yetzer ha'Ra for it.

Maharal: A Chacham who sins knows that he sins, just he cannot rule over his Yetzer. He wants something to stop him. If the intellect sins, if an obstacle comes, he removes it, for he does not know the severity of his sin. You (Rav Ashi) would have been like the latter; you would have lifted your garment, lest it hinder you.

Maharsha: This is like "Tum'asah b'Shuleha." Dam Nidah due to desire is always in the bottom of her garment. So you would have constantly desired Tum'as Avodah Zarah, and grabbed the bottom of my garment, on in which is Tum'as Avodah Zarah, and run after me to idolatry. The Yetzer ha'Ra for idolatry was not nullified until the time of Anshei Keneses ha'Gedolah (at the beginning of Bayis Sheni).

How was Achav an Ach to Shamayim?

Rashi: He was evil to Shamayim. So we expound Achashverosh - Ach and Rosh (Megilah 11a). (NOTE: I did not find this there, only Achiv Shel Rosh, and [one who remembers him says] Ach l'Rosho. - PF)

Margoliyos ha'Yam 6: It says in Yechezkel (6:11) "Hakeh b'Chapecha... ve'Emar Ach El Kol ha'To'avos..."; Rashi there explains that it is screaming in agony.

Maharal: Brothers are normally equal; one does not lower himself in front of the other. So Achav was not submissive to serve Hash-m.

Maharsha: When he was in affliction and Ach (pain), he turned his eye to Shamayim - "ha'Ra'isa Ki Nichna Achav."

Iyun Yakov: He benefited Chachamim from his property; it is as if he clings to Shechinah.

What do we learn from "Ach l'Tzarah Yivaled"?

Rashi: Woe to the affliction! This shows that Ach is an expression of evil, woe.

Maharal: He opposed Hash-m more than the other kings. The nature of brothers is to oppose each other - from "Ach l'Tzarah Yivaled." They are connected only because they have one father.

How was he an Av to idolatry?

Rashi: He loved it exceedingly. There was no need to bring these verses.

Iyun Yakov: A father loves his children. Even if he knows that they are not proper, he has mercy on them and protects them. Achav knew that idolatry is futile, and even so he served it.

Maharal: He fathered and begat idolatry that was not in the world beforehand.

Maharsha: When matters were good for him, he attributed this to idolatry. Idolaters say "Elcha Acharei Me'ahavai Nosenei Lachmi u'Meimai..."

How were Achav's lightest transgressions like Yaravam's most severe ones?