What is the significance of being between two Tzadikim?

Maharal: He is not separate from Klal Yisrael, who have a share in the world to come. If he was not between them, he would be separated.

Why is shame a reason not to be listed among those who have no share in the world to come?

Maharal: This is the primary sign of being a Yisrael. Yisrael have shame (Yevamos 79a). Therefore, he should not be rejected from the world to come, which all of Yisrael have a share in it.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 7, citing Akeidas Yitzchak, Reish Sha'ar 40: Sin due to desire is not so severe - his Yetzer ha'Ra overpowered him. Therefore, he was ashamed, and has a share in the world to come. Sin amidst Da'as is much more severe.

Why does Yishmael need to be saved? He repented!

Etz Yosef: His seed needs to be saved. The Vilna Gaon explained (Mishlei 17:6) "Ateres Zekenim Bnei Banim" - children protect their father, and even their grandfather, up to Avraham. "V'Siferes Banim Avosam" - fathers are not a crown for their children, to protect them; they are merely Tiferes (glory) for them. All the more so one does not protect his grandchildren!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 10 citing R"M Strassen (Bava Basra 16b): Our Gemara holds that he did not repent. Bereishis Rabah (Sof 62) calls him a Rasha.

What is a Kli of launderers?

Rashi: It has holes, via which they sprinkle water on clothes.

Why do we expound "[Sede] Choves"?

Maharsha: People do not launder in a field. This opinion does not want to say like Rashi explained in Yeshayah, that laundry was hung to dry in the field.

Why does a son bring merit to his father, but a father does not bring merit to his son?

Maharsha: Some Resha'im want their children to be Tzadikim, and rebuke them to go in a good path. Therefore, the father is rewarded for his son's virtue. An evil son is not rewarded for his father's virtue - he had from whom to learn, and he did not learn!

Iyun Yakov #1: If a father brought merit to his son, one whose father was a Tzadik, he would rely on this, and not do good. Normally, a father dies before his sons; he cannot rely on his sons to be Tzadikim their entire lives - 'do not trust in yourself [until the day of your death' - Avos 2:4].

Iyun Yakov #2: The son's power is like his father's; a father's power is not due to his son.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Rav Hutner: 'A son is the leg of his father' (Eruvin 70b), for a living person is called Mehalech (he goes). He increases merits via Torah and Mitzvos. After death, he is free from Mitzvos, and he is called Omed (standing, stationary), like angels - "v'Nasati Lecha Mehalchim Bein ha'Omedim ha'Eleh." He can be a Holech via his sons, who bring merit to him via their Mitzvos.

Iyun Yakov #3: It is normal for a father to rebuke his son, but not vice-versa.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 9 citing Sefer Chasidim 1171: Chazal said that Eglah Arufah is proper to atone for those who left Egypt. How can a deed atone for one who did not do it in his lifetime? If one separated a Korban Chatas and died, it dies (we cannot offer it), for there is no Kaparah after death. Rather, Hash-m said that a son brings merit to his father, e.g. if a father who sins sets his son to learn Torah and do good deeds.

Daf Al ha'Daf: The Chasam Sofer says, when a person fulfilled his purpose in this world, it is best that he leave the world, for if he remains, he can mess up. However, if he has children or Talmidim that he can guide them in the path of Torah and fear, it is good to remain in the world. "V'Hosircha Hash-m v'Tovah bi'Fri Vitnecha" (Devarim 28:11) - even though you completed your purpose in this world, Hash-m will leave you in the world to train your children. Ha'Ben Yakir Li Efrayim explains, "v'Avraham Zaken Ba ba'Yamim va'Shem Berach Es Avraham ba'Kol" - he came with his days, for he fulfilled everything that he needed to fix. He should have died earlier! However, Hash-m blessed him ba'Kol, i.e. with a son, therefore he remained in the world to train him. In this way, a son brings merit to his father, and causes him to remain in the world. There is a Segulah for long life to say this verse after Hallel on Rosh Chodesh. This should remind one to train his children in the good path! (Ul'Levi Amar)

Here it says that a father does not bring merit to his son. A Midrash says that angels complained about Achaz, and Hash-m said 'he is Yosam's son (this is a merit for him)!' Also, we say that Rasha v'Tov Lo is a Rasha ben Tzadik (Berachos 7a)!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): In this world, a father brings merits to his son - "v'Oseh Chesed la'Alafim", but not in the world to come. Margoliyos ha'Yam 9 - also Vayikra Rabah 4:2 expounds "Kol Amal Adam l'Fihu" - man's Torah and Mitzvos are for himself, and not for his son. However, his Tefilah for his son helps for this world. Yoma 87a says that Tzadikim merit also for their descendants in all generations, i.e. in this world.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Rashba (Teshuvah 5:59): We mention Zechus Avos in Tefilah, for it helps in this world, for the son's body is from his father. It does not help in Olam ha'Neshamos, for his Nefesh is not from his father.

Iyun Yakov: It suffices that also his father does not obligate him; a Rasha ben Rasha is punished also for his father's sins, since he continues in them. A Tzadik helps his virtuous son, but he does not save an evil son.

Here it says that a father does not bring merit to his son. In Sotah 10b, we say that David's Tefilah brought Avshalom to the world to come, [and Moshe prayed for Bnei Korach and brought them to the world to come]!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): They were liable due to David and Moshe, and it is not good for a Tzadik that others are punished due to him. Their Tefilos removed their liability, and Avshalom and Bnei Korach merited on their own.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Midrash Talpiyos: A son brings merit to his father because it is as if he is the leg of his father. It is as if they are one body. Therefore, if the son does Mitzvah here, it is as if his father did them. If the father died, he cannot bring merit to his live son. If he was a Tzadik and his son sins, just the contrary, it is as if his father sins! If the son died and his father is alive, the son ceased to sin. The father is considered one body with his son. When he does Teshuvah and good deeds, it is as if his son does them, for they are like one body. So David saved Avshalom. (NOTE: How can David's Teshuvah help for Avshalom, especially if Avshalom never regretted his sins?! - PF)

What is the meaning of 'now that we say so, we should say that Achaz was not listed due to his son Chizkiyah'?

Rashi: We need not say that he was ashamed in front of Yeshayah. (NOTE: Maharsha explained that a father is rewarded for his son's virtue if he encouraged him to go in a good path. Is there a source that Achaz did so to Chizkiyah? Perhaps Maharsha explains like Iyun Yakov (the coming answer). - PF)

Iyun Yakov, Margoliyos ha'Yam 11 citing Metzudas David: Do not say that Achaz was not listed because he is between two Tzadikim. Rather, it is only due to his son Chizkiyah.

How does R. Chiya b'Ribi Avuyah's teaching explain why Yehoyakim was not listed among those who have no share?

Rashi: He got atonement via not being buried.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 12 citing Ein Eliyahu: Hash-m was ready to return the world to Tohu va'Vohu due to Yehoyakim; He did not, due to his generation (103a). This shows that he did not corrupt his generation. Due to this, he was punished [via not being buried, and being burned] and he has a share in the world to come, unlike the kings who corrupted their generation.

What is the meaning of 'this and one other'?

Rashi: One vengeance was already taken on him, and another will be taken on him.

Why could he not be buried?

Maharsha: It is because he disgraced his body to write the name of idolatry on his Ever.

Iyun Yakov: A Midrash says that he had Bi'ah with his mother - the place from where he came. It says about burial "Ki Afar Atah v'El Afar Tashuv." Since he transgressed to return to his origin, he will not return to his earth.

Why was he burned?

Maharsha: It is because he said 'we do not need His light.'

Iyun Yakov: It is because he burned the Megilah (Eichah). Also, he engraved [the name of idolatry] on his Ever, to make himself idolatry, and it says "Pesilei Eloheihem Tisrefun b'Esh."

Why was this written on his skull?

Maharsha: This is Midah k'Neged Midah, for he engraved the name of idolatry on his Ever (103b).

What is the meaning of due to "ha'Tov" came "Mah Os"?

Rashi: Because Chizkiyah praised himself, and said "veha'Tov b'Einecha Asisi", he came to say "Mah Os" (he requested a sign. This showed a lack of faith in what the Navi told him.) One sin leads to another!

Maharal #1: Chizkiyah considered himself to be a Tzadik, and did not feel that everything that Hash-m does for him is Chesed. Therefore, he requested a sign.

Maharal #2: Anyone who increases words, he brings sin (Avos 1:17). Because he said extra words "veha'Tov b'Einecha Asisi", he came to say "Mah Os."

Maharsha: One who requests in his own merit, [even if he gets it] it will be attributed to [another's, e.g.] his fathers' merit - "Lema'ani u'Lema'an David Avdi" (Berachos 10b). Chizkiyah was concerned lest this arouse the sins of his father Achaz! Therefore, he requested a sign. (NOTE: He assumes that if one received in the merit of even one of his ancestors, also deeds of his father are reckoned. - PF) The sign was that the 10 levels that the sun descended in the days of his father Achaz due to Achaz' sins, they will be returned. Due to this, Merudach Bal'adan sent messengers, like Rashi explained in Sefer Yeshayah, and he fed them on his table.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Chizkiyah did what was good in Hash-m's eyes - he hid Sefer ha'Refu'os. If he still had it, he would have used it to heal himself, and would not have requested a sign. Iyun Yakov - they are natural cures, so no sign is needed.

Anaf Yosef: Just like the first sin did not have a prior cause, perhaps also the second and third! Rather, Hash-m could have cured him without prior notice. Rather, because he said "veha'Tov b'Einecha Asisi", Hash-m told him via a Navi that He will cure him on the third day, to test if he will request a sign; the reward of a sin is a sin.

Which Nochrim ate on Chizkiyah's table?

Rashi: Merudach Bal'adan's messengers, who brought letters and gifts to Chizkiyah.

How did saying "Mah Os" lead to Nochrim eating on his table?

Maharal: Because he said "Mah Os", and did not believe [Hash-m's promise without a sign], Nochrim did not believe the Os, and came to ask about it. This (Os) was his honor, therefore he came to honor them.

Iyun Yakov: Hash-m could have given another sign, which would not lead to hosting Nochrim. Rather, because he sinned to request a sign, Hash-m gave a sign that caused Merudach Bal'adan to send letters and gifts to Chizkiyah, to the entire him if he will host them on his table.

What is the source that Chizkiyah's sons were exiled because he fed Nochrim?

Maharsha: "Umi'Banecha Asher Yetze'u Mimcha" implies that they will leave their land (be exiled) due to your sin.

Did Chizkiyah serve the Nochrim?

Rashi: His wife served them, like it says below. (One's wife is like himself - Berachos 24a.)

How does the verse show that if one invites a Nochri and serves him, his children will be exiled?

Rashi: It says "Va'Yismach Aleihem Chizkiyah va'Yar'em Es Beis Nechoso", and afterwards "umi'Banecha... Yihyu Sarisim b'Heichal Melech Bavel."

What is the source that "Beis Nechoso" refers to his wife?

Rashi: Nechoso is an expression of Menacheh (deduct) - the Tzela was reduced from man, and from it woman was created.

Maharsha: This is difficult.

Maharsha: It is an expression of a storehouse. A woman is normally modest, and in the house, like a storehouse - "Kol Kevudah Vas Melech Penimah." Chizkiyah did not do so. Rather, his wife, who is called Beiso (Shabbos 118b), who should have been hidden, he showed her at the party.

What is the source that "Beis Nechoso" refers to his treasure house?

Rashi: Its Targum is Beis Genizohi. Menachem explained that it is spices. This is like "Nechos u'Tzeri va'Lot."

Margoliyos ha'Yam 13 citing Aspaklariya ha'Me'irah: Initially, Chizkiyah did not marry, for he saw through Ru'ach ha'Kodesh that unworthy children would result. Yeshayah rebuked him - in these hidden matters of Hash-m, Lamah Lecha?! i.e. why did you show to them your storehouse? Due to this, you will be punished with unworthy children [who will be exiled]!

Bil'am was stricken in his leg and eye) What is the source that "Beis Nechoso" refers to iron that can shatter iron?

Maharsha #1: It is an expression of Heka'ah (striking). One iron strikes another.

Maharsha #2: It is an expression of Neshichah (biting) - one bites another.

What is the source that Yisrael suffered the afflictions in Eichah for transgressing the 36 Kerisus?

Rashi: The Gematri'a of Eichah is 36. (NOTE: There are also 36 Misos Beis Din! Perhaps we prefer to say that it is for transgressing the Kerisus, for their punishment is always purely bi'Ydei Shamayim. - PF)

Maharal: As long as Yisrael clung to Hash-m, they could not be exiled. Because they were Nichresu (cut off) from the source (Hash-m), they were exiled due to the sin.

Why do we expound the word "Eichah"?

Maharsha: In all three Perakim that are according to the order of the Aleph Beis (i.e. excluding Perek 3, which was added after Yehoyakim burned the Megilah), the verse for Aleph begins with Eichah. We do not find so for any other letter.

Iyun Yakov: It should have said Eich. A Hei was added to expound the Gematriya.

Were only they stricken with the Aleph-Beis? Every punishment in Tanach is in the Aleph Beis! (Also the answer 'they transgressed the Torah, written in the letters of the Aleph-Beis' applies to every sin!)

Rashi: They suffered the afflictions in Eichah, whose verses are ordered according to the Aleph-Beis.

Maharsha: We expound this, for no other Sefer of Tanach is entirely in the order of the Aleph Beis (NOTE: i.e. mostly; the last Perek of Eichah is not in the order of the Aleph Beis. - PF)

Iyun Yakov: They were cursed [in Bechukosai] only with eight letters, from Vov ("v'Im b'Chukosai Tim'asu...") until Mem ("Ga'alah Nafsham" - Bava Basra 88b). And even though the curses in Ki Savo are with all the letters (from Vov - "v'Hayah Im Lo Sishma...") until Hei ("v'Ein Koneh"), they are not in order. Why was the punishment from Aleph to Tov? We answer that they transgressed the Torah, which was given in order - [Aseres ha'Dibros] begin with "Anochi". (NOTE: This is a Chidush, that starting with Aleph suffices to be called in order. - PF)

Etz Yosef citing R"M Alamoshninu: Yirmeyah elaborated about the afflictions, to emphasize their cause - "Naflah Ateres Roshenu Oy Na Lanu Ki Chatanu." He saw that they transgressed Chok ha'Torah, and annulled Bris Mitzvos, which are included in the Aleph Beis, so he cried over them with the Aleph Beis. Also, he lamented with all that the mouth can speak (the entire Aleph Beis), for they transgressed all that the mouth can speak.

NOTE: R. Moshe Shapiro explained, we ask why they were stricken with Megilas Eichah, which has a deviation in the Aleph Beis - Pei is before Ayin. We answer, because they sinned with the Seder of Aleph Beis - the Meraglim put their Peh (mouth) before their Ayin (eye); they decided to give a bad report before they saw the land (Amud B). Yisrael cried over their report; this caused the Churban. (PF)

What was Hash-m's intent "va'Yishkon Yisrael Betach" [but due to their sins, their dwelling is Badad]?

Rashi: They will dwell alone and need not fear Nochrim nor evil Chayos (they need not band together for security).

Maharsha: He intended "k'Lavi Shachen" (Devarim 33:20) - others fear them, and separate from them. Now, others despise them and distance from them, so they are isolated, like "Badad Yeshev mi'Chutz [la'Machaneh...]"

Iyun Yakov: Hash-m intended that He Himself will help them. They will not need help from another kingdom. They did not trust in Him, rather, in Malchus Mitzrayim and other kings. This was like one who leans on a rickety stick, like the Navi rebuked them (Yeshayah 36:6). Therefore, they remained alone.

How do we learn from "Rabasi Am"?

Rashi: They increase more than other nations.

Iyun Yakov: Normally, a big nation wins in war. Hash-m caused that they did not. Hash-m can bring salvation with many or few, and also to be defeated even if they are many.

Maharsha: The entire nation (every couple) has increase - the husband or wife was old. They did not marry one youth to another. (NOTE: Yevamos 44a expounds "v'Dibru Elav" - Chachamim give him proper counsel to a Yavam. If he is young and the Yevamah is old, or vice-versa, they discourage Yibum - 'marry someone your own age, and do not invite quarrels into your home.' Perhaps later Chachamim expounded so due to Yeridos ha'Doros, but in Bayis Rishon, where there was not Sin'as Chinam, youths married elders and they did not quarrel. Alternatively, they would marry a girl or boy of 13 to someone about 10 years older; we discourage Yibum when there is a bigger age difference, e.g. 20 or 30 years. - PF)

How does marrying young women to older men and vice-versa produce more children?

Rashi: If either is older, the seed is quick to be absorbed and cause pregnancy, but not if both are young.

What is the comparison to a widow?

Maharsha: It says about Nochrim "ha'Omerah bi'Lvavah... Lo Eshev Almanah; v'Savonah Lach... Shechol v'Alman" (Yeshayah 47:8-9). When they fall, first their power and Mazal falls from Shamayim. They are widowed from their savior and god; their strength died. Yisrael are different. Even when they are afflicted, their Power and Shade does not depart - He lives forever. They are like a widow, that her husband is not here - he went overseas because his wife sinned; he intends to return to her when she will return to him.

Iyun Yakov: If a husband goes overseas, he must give to his wife food and all her needs and redemption (EH 70, 75).

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Taima di'Kra: We do not allot food to a woman whose husband is away, since a man does not leave his house empty (Kesuvos 107a). Also in the Churban, Hash-m did not leave His house, i.e. Klal Yisrael, empty. Nebuchadnetzar left (did not kill) ha'Cheresh veha'Masger, i.e. the Chachamim that he exiled to Bavel (Gitin 88a). Also in Churban Bayis Sheni, they left Yavneh and its Chachamim. Also in every generation there were Tana'im, Amora'im, Chachmei ha'Torah... In this way, Yisrael is like a widow.

This is good, to be like a widow, that her husband will return. Why does the first verse of Eichah (Megilas Kinos) refer to this?

Rif (on the Ein Yakov) #1: Really, it is bad in two ways. She cannot do as she wants - he will punish her if she sins against him. He does not have mercy on her, like an abandoned wife.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): The Drashah asks, if she were truly a widow, it would not be astounding [that she is alone]. However, Yisrael is not widowed from their G-d - how did Yisrael remain alone!?

How did they become Sarim over their masters?

Iyun Yakov: Even if Yisrael are in Galus, and Hash-m left them, "Lo Me'astim v'Lo Ge'altim Lechalosam." In every generation, Hash-m gave to them people who will guard over them who are close to the king, like the Midrash says.

What is the significance of the episode with two captives?

Iyun Yakov: Even though 'people do not normally pay attention to the road', amidst their great Chochmah, they understand (who is in front of them).

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Chochmas ha'Matzpon: It teaches that the best way to make Nochrim cease their hatred of Yisrael is via modest conduct and good Midos. The captives' Chochmah and the modesty of the Jew in front of them transformed the captor's hatred to love. He captured them to afflict them with hunger. He did not intend to let them approach his door. After hearing their Chochmah, he loved them, bowed to them and blessed Hash-m for choosing Avraham's seed. All the more so, a Ben Torah must acquire good Midos and conduct of Musar, to the point that those who see him are aroused to love. This is Kidush Hash-m! (NOTE: Granted, he was moved by their Chochmah. What is the source that the modesty of the Jew in front impressed him? And what is the source that initially, he intended to afflict them with hunger? - PF)

Why did the captor say 'you are a stiff-necked nation'?

Maharsha: Normally, exile makes one forget his Chochmah. You are not humble in your exile. You considered yourselves Chachamim or Nevi'im - how do you know all this, if not via Nevu'ah or awesome Chochmah?! When he saw that he was correct, he recognized that Hash-m gave from His Chochmah to Avraham's seed. Therefore, it is forever; it is not forgotten even in Galus.

Why does the Yisrael relieve himself on the side?

Rashi: It is more modest.

Why was the verb doubled in a different tense "Bacho Sivkeh"?

Iyun Yakov: "Sivkeh" hints to more crying. The latter crying [over Bayis Sheni] will be greater - "Gadol Yihyeh Kevod ha'Bayis ha'Zeh ha'Acharon Min ha'Rishon" (Bava Basra 3a), and no limit was given for the length of Galus after Churban Sheni. They cried double due to the Meraglim - it was at night, and those who hear, they cry. (NOTE: All of Yisrael heard the Meraglim. Who else heard them? Perhaps it was the Erev Rav. - PF)

Why do we expound "ba'Laylah"?

Maharsha: The primary Churban was during the day. Therefore, we expound it to teach that the Churban resulted from what happened at night.

Iyun Yakov: The primary crying is when one sees the Churban, during the day. Therefore, we expound it to teach that it is due to what happened at night.

Anaf Yosef citing Toras Chayim: The Ramban asked, what is the source that Galus was decreed due to their crying? The Torah should have said [that they cried] ba'Laylah ha'Zeh, like "v'Achlu Es ha'Basar ba'Laylah ha'Zeh", "v'Avarti b'Eretz Mitzrayim ba'Laylah ha'Zeh." Rather, "ba'Laylah ha'Hu" teaches that they cried on the night special for crying - Tish'ah b'Av.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 5 citing Pesikta Zutresa on "va'Ymalei Kevod Hash-m Es Kol ha'Aretz": This refers to Yisrael, who are called Kevod Hash-m - "Kol ha'Nikra vi'Shmi veli'Chvodi Berasiv." Also David said "Lehapil Osam ba'Midbar... v'Lizrosam ba'Aratzos", i.e. Yisrael will be scattered in all the lands.

Anaf Yosef: Why does it say in Eichah "ba'Laylah"? What is the difference when she cries? Rather, it teaches that it is due to the needless crying of that night.

Why did Hash-m establish crying for all generations on that day, because they cried for no reason?

Maharal #1: Hash-m took them out of Egypt in order to give to them Eretz Yisrael. Had those who left Egypt come to the land, they would have stayed there forever. Yetzi'as Mitzrayim was eternal. Due to it we are to Hash-m. Had Yetzi'as Mitzrayim and entering Eretz Yisrael been one deed, i.e. the same people would have entered, also the entry would have been permanent. Since they cried and did not want to enter, a different generation entered, and the entry was not permanent.

Maharal #2: All natural things yearn greatly for their natural place. When they come to it, they rest there and do not leave. Had Yisrael yearned for their land, they would have never left. Now that they did not desire it, rather, they despised it, they did not remain in it. It depended on the generation that left Egypt, for they were the beginning and Ikar of Yisrael. Due to their crying, Eretz Yisrael is not considered Yisrael's natural place.

Maharal #3: They cried due to Leshon ha'Ra. Leshon ha'Ra always cuts off.

Why is crying at night heard more than crying during the day?

Rashi: During the day there is noise from the sun sawing through the Raki'a (Yoma 20a). She cries at night so people will hear and have mercy on her. Even so, "Ein Menachem Lah."

Maharsha: One who is afflicted cries at night, lest his beloved does not know. At night, surely his beloved will hear! Even so, "Ein Menachem Lah mi'Kol Ohaveha."

When one cries at night, why do the stars and constellations cry with him?

Maharal: Laylah (night) is destruction and Yelalah (wailing). It is called Laylah based on Yelalah. It is the opposite of day, which is totally light. Light is Simchah - "la'Yehudim Haysah Orah v'Sason v'Simchah." The stars and constellations that serve man at night, they serve him also when he cries. This is called 'they cry with him.' The sun does not serve one who cries, since it serves during the day.

Maharsha: This means that they did not radiate - "Shemesh v'Yare'ach Kadru." The verse mentions night, for then the stars of the Mazalos are seen more than during the day, so their crying (lack of radiance) over the Churban is noticed more.

When one cries at night, why does anyone who hears him cry with him?

Rashi: He is heard well. This softens the heart of the one who hears him.

Maharal: Night lacks light, i.e. Simchah. Therefore, it is a time prone for crying, so one who hears him cry, he cries with him.

What is the meaning of "Al Lecheyah"?

Rashi: It is an expression of Lachos (moist and fresh).

Iyun Yakov: There is consolation over a Mes, but not over a Chai. She is only like a widow - her Husband will return, therefore she cannot be consoled until He will return - "Anochi... Menachemchem." Therefore, her tear is always on her cheek.

Why is she called Besulah? There was Nisu'in!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 6 citing Pesikta Zutresa Bamidbar 4:1: As long as she did not give birth, she is called Besulah. Also Bahag says that one who has a child is consoled; a Besulah is not.

Why does it specify "Al Ba'al Ne'ureha"?

Rashi: She cries constantly over him; her tears are often found.

Maharsha: This hints to the Shechinah, which separated from her - the opposite of "Zacharti Lach Chesed Ne'urayich."

Why does the nation that afflicts Yisrael become the dominant power?

Tosfos (Chagigah 13b): It is lest people say that Hash-m handed His nation over to a lowly nation. Therefore, they become primary before afflicting Yisrael.

Maharsha: Yisrael is afflicted for their sins. Hash-m appoints the nation to be His staff to strike them, so they become a Rosh - "ha'Misnasei l'Chol l'Rosh." This is due to Yisrael's level; they should not be humbled under a lowly nation.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): It should have said 'Hayu Tzareha Rosh.' Rather, it says "l'Rosh" - they afflicted Yisrael to become the head, for whatever nation afflicts Yisrael becomes the head.

Etz Yosef: Hash-m arranged this so nations will want to pain Yisrael! (NOTE: They succeed only when Hash-m decides that Yisrael need to be pained. - PF)

Why does a nation that afflicts Yisrael not weary?

Maharsha: Hash-m gives to them strength due to Yisrael's sin.

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: It is so they will not cease to pain them,

To whom was "Lo Aleichem..." said?

Rashi (based on Hagahos in the Oz v'Hadar edition): The Navi discusses the Churban that did not yet come, and tells Yisrael that it should not come upon them. It seems that he addresses Bnei Moshe, or the 10 tribes that Nebuchadnetzar did not exile them (Sancheriv exiled them).

What is Kuvlana?

Rashi #1: When telling one's afflictions, he must say that it should not come upon the listener. [If not,] it is prone to come upon the listener. One who is adamant [not to hear afflictions] for this reason, this is not [forbidden due to] Nichush.

Iyun Yakov: "Lo [Aleichem]" is written with a Vov and an Aleph, to hint to both Perushim. With an Aleph - it should not come upon you. With a Vov - the affliction is not only for the afflicted. All Overei Derech should be informed!

Rashi #2: It is a scream. One who is afflicted should inform the Rabim.

Maharsha: This is so they will request mercy for him (Shabbos 67a). We learn from the Torah - "Tamei Tamei Yikra." Perhaps "Lo Aleichem..." is Derech Eretz (proper conduct, to say that the listener should not be afflicted).

Rashi #3: It means opposite; the Targum of Neged is Kabel. This is like one who says 'I do not speak about you.'

Margoliyos ha'Yam 7: One who is afflicted may inform the Rabim of his pain. It is not considered complaining about Hash-m's Midos.

Why do we expound "Overei Derech"?

Maharsha: It should have said Holechei Derech. Therefore we expound Over to be transgressing. Stam Derech is the true creed, like Derech ha'Yashar, Derech Hash-m.

Was Sedom Over Al Da'as?

Maharsha: They transgressed etiquette - matters that intellect mandates, such as Mishpat and Tzedakah.

Why does it say "va'Yigdal Avon Bas Ami me'Chatas Sedom"?

Maharsha #1: Sedom is considered like Chatas (Shogeg sin), for they were not commanded [about Tzedakah]. Yisrael were commanded, so it is considered Avon (Mezid) for them.

Maharsha citing Eichah Rabah 4:9: Yisrael's sin was "Gadol bi'M'od" (Yechezkel 9:9); Sedom's was only "Kavdah Me'od."

Maharsha #2: Me'od refers to money. Midas Sedom is 'mine is mine, and yours is yours'; they sinned only with their own money. It says about Yisrael "Gezelas he'Oni b'Vateichem" - they sinned also with others' money.

What is the question 'was Hash-m partial to Yerushalayim?'

Rashi #1: Since Yerushalayim sinned more than Sedom, why was it not overturned (totally destroyed), like Sedom?

Rashi #2: Regarding Sedom, "va'Shem Himtir" - He Himself punished them. Why did he send the fire against Yerushalayim via a Shali'ach, and not by Himself?

What was the answer 'about Yerushalayim it says "Nashim Rachamaniyos Bishlu Yaldeihem Hayu Levaros Lamo"'?

Rashi #1: This was an attribute of Yerushalayim. Merciful women who cooked their children, they shared them with others. This partially atoned for it, so Yerushalayim was not overturned. It says about Sedom "Yad Oni v'Evyon Lo Hechizikah."

Maharsha: Anyone who is merciful, they have mercy on him from Shamayim (Shabbos 151b).

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Derech Sichah on "Chet Chat'ah Yerushalayim Al Ken l'Nidah Haysah": Chet is Shogeg; They sinned amidst desire; therefore, they were able to have Chesed. Therefore, they are like a Nidah, which has a Heter - so Yerushalayim will be redeemed in the future.

Rashi #2: In this respect, Yerushalayim was punished harsher than Sedom - they needed to eat their children. Sedom did not experience poverty - "Ga'on Siv'as Lechem."

Etz Yosef: "They cooked their children Levaros" - in order to give the Seudas Havra'ah (an Avel's first meal after the burial). They did not literally cook their children. Rather, they gave their food to an Aval, even though they did not keep food to give to their children; it is considered as if they cooked their children.

What is the connection of "Silah Kol Abirei Hash-m" to a coin that was Nifsal?

Rashi: Silah is like Mesilah (a path). Hash-m rendered the Abirim (mighty ones) useless, and made them Pesulim and downtrodden, like a path. They are like a coin that was Nifsal - there is no solution for it.

Maharal: When a coin is Nifsal, its form is Batel. So the human form was Batel. Each nation has a human form that rules and overpowers. Their form was Batel to the point that they have no strength.

Maharsha: Abirei is an expression of Evarai (my limbs). The limbs were trampled, and their form is not recognized, like a coin that its form was Nifsal. They were killed, but their wives were forbidden to remarry (since the bodies were not recognized, no one could testify that they died).

Margoliyos ha'Yam 10 citing Divrei Sha'ul: Sometimes a coin's form is erased via great usage. Or, the form is intact, just the kingdom disqualified it. So here, the Abirim were intact, just Hash-m disqualified them.

What is the significance of "Patzu Aleihem Pihem"?

Maharal: The Meraglim said Sheker about the land. It says "Yachres Hash-m Kol Sifsei Chalakos Lashon Medaberes Gedolos" - therefore, the sin of Sheker about the land caused them to be cut off from it to go to Galus. There is no solution for one who spoke Leshon ha'Ra. David cut him off with Ru'ach ha'Kodesh - "Yachres Hash-m..." (Erchin 15b). The tongue separates people from each other. Therefore, it says about a Metzora "Badad Yeshev mi'Chutz la'Machaneh." Since he divided man from his wife or from his friend, he dwells alone. Therefore, he is cut off from his source and goes to Galus. Also this is Kerisah - cutting off from where he is planted.

Why is Pei before Ayin in the three middle Perakim of Eichah, but not in the first?

Maharal: It is lest one say that this is the proper order of the Aleph Beis. (NOTE: Tehilim was before Eichah, and all the Tehilim based on the Aleph Beis put Ayin before Pei! Perhaps one would realize that David or Yirmeyah had a reason to deviate from the proper order, but it would not be known which of them. Or, we would have assumed that David deviated, for some Tehilim based on the Aleph Beis have deviations, e.g. no verse starts with Nun (Tehilah l'David), or with Vov ("l'David b'Shanoso..." - Tehilim 34), or with Beis, Vov or Kuf, and two verses begin with Reish ("l'David Elecha Hash-m Nafshi Esa..." - Tehilim 25). - PF)

Maharsha: It is lest one say that this is Yirmeyah's order of the Aleph Beis.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): This hints that the Meraglim saw the praise of Eretz Yisrael, and afterwards opened their mouth. Had they not seen with their eyes, their punishment would not be so great.

Iyun Yakov: Initially, they said Emes - "Eretz Zavas Chalav u'Devash" (Sotah 35). Therefore, the first time it is written properly, for they said what their eyes saw.

How did the Meraglim put the Peh (mouth) in front of the Ayin?

Rashi: They put their mouths (decided to give a derogatory report) before [seeing the land with] their eyes.

Maharal: The eye [sees] reality. Also the mouth (speech) should be like reality. The Meraglim were drawn after Sheker, and not after reality. Sheker is Heder (lack). Therefore, the land will be Nedar from them, and they will be exiled. The Gemara said that they were exiled due to transgressing the 36 Kerisos! If not for Chet ha'Meraglim, the Kerisos would have caused that they themselves are cut off, but not from the land. If not for the Kerisos, they would not have been cut off from Hash-m. Together, they caused them to be cut off.

Etz Yosef: Rashi implies that they said what they saw only later. Really, they said only what they already saw, or Sheker! Rashi on Chumash said "va'Yelchu va'Yavo'u" - just like they came back with evil counsel, they left with evil counsel.

What does Rabah learn from "Ochlei Ami Ochlu Lechem"?

Rashi: Nochrim enjoy the taste of bread when they steal it from Yisrael.

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: Eichah Rabasi says, Yisrael asked, Nebuchadnetzar gathered all money in the world. Does he need [to take] also our money?! Hash-m said, I will make your money dear to him.

Maharal: Yisrael have absolute existence. The same applies to what pertains to them. Therefore, one who eats their bread, he eats real bread.

Maharsha: Just like man is not nourished and appeased until he eats bread, so Nochrim are not appeased until they eat bread of Yisrael.

Why does "Hash-m Lo Kara'u" apply to the judges?

Rashi: Nochrim ate Yisrael's bread because Yisrael judges perverted justice.

Maharsha: Judges and teachers of children, if they eat bread of My nation (are paid for judging or teaching), for they have no other income, they are not proper to call Hash-m. i.e. a judge when he calls a litigant to swear, or when a teacher reads with the children, he is not proper to say Hash-m with his mouth.

Iyun Yakov: They did not put to their hearts that judgment is not of man - "ha'Mishpat lei'Lokim Hu" (8a). They tilted Mishpat - where is Mishpat, there is the Rasha.

Ben Yehoyada #1: We normally pronounce Shem Havayah like Aleph Dalet [Nun Yud]. These are the letters of Dina. They judged falsely, and blemished this name. Therefore, Shem Havayah was not pronounced like Aleph Dalet.

Ben Yehoyada #2: Sometimes Shem Havayah is pronounced Elokim, e.g. when it follows Shem Aleph Dalet, e.g. "Hash-m Elokim Mah Titen Li", "Hash-m Elokim Atah Hachilosa..." Judges are called Elohim, e.g. "v'Nikrav Ba'al ha'Bayis El ha'Elohim." The judges did not judge properly, so they were not worthy to be called Elohim.

Why does "Hash-m Lo Kara'u" apply to teachers of children?

Rashi: They taught improperly.

Maharal: In Shabbos (139a), it says that punishments come to the world only due to [improper] judges of Yisrael. No one argues there! It seems that they argue about the Perush of "Hash-m Lo Kara'u." They ate My nation's bread, but did not call Hash-m to their bread, like "Kiren Lo v'Yochal Lechem." Rav says that these are the judges - Hash-m should be with them. We cannot explain "Hash-m Lo Kara'u" simply, for one does not call Hash-m to man's bread. The judges did not have mercy on Hash-m's nation [to judge properly]. He did not explain that they are Chachamim, for one does not call them to bread, just like one does not call the Shechinah to bread. "Es Hash-m Elokecha" includes Chachamim. It is a disgrace for a Chacham to make a meal! Rather, the verse discusses judges, for "ha'Mishpat lei'Lokim." Shmuel says that they are teachers of children, who influence Torah, even though it is only to children.

Iyun Yakov: It says "Arur Oseh Meleches Shamayim Remiyah."

Ben Yehoyada: A teacher is called Aluf - "v'Atah Enosh k'Erki Alufi." Also Hash-m is called Alufo Shel Olam. The teachers were not worthy to be called Alufim.

Why do we ask 'who compiled the list'?

Maharsha: This can be known only via Nevu'ah. We answer that Anshei Keneses ha'Gedolah listed them; there were Nevi'im among them. (NOTE: Chachamim learned from verses! Why is Nevu'ah needed? Perhaps Maharsha holds that there is no need for Tanach to teach about individuals who have no share. Surely Chachamim knew from Nevu'ah, and brought verses for a mere Asmachta. They suggested adding Michah, Yehoyakim and Shlomo, and did not bring verses for them! Maharsha brings a verse that Shlomo sinned, but it does not imply that he has no share in the world to come! - PF)

Why did the image of David come and bow in front of them?

Maharal: A father can bring merit to his son. They did not heed this, for they held that Shlomo sinned.

Iyun Yakov: They did not heed David's image, for a father does not bring merit to his son! (NOTE: We said that a son brings merit to his father, but a father does not bring merit to his son, i.e. for matters of the world to come! - PF)

Maharsha: This means that his deeds had a semblance of David's - "va'Ye'ehav Shlomo Es Hash-m Laleches b'Chukos David Aviv." However, his heart was not totally like David's. "Az Yivneh Shlomo Bamah li'Chmush Shikutz Mo'av" - he sought to build, but he did not. (Because he could have protested against his wives' idolatry, but did not, the Torah considers it as if he sinned. - Shabbos 56b)

Margoliyos ha'Yam 13 citing the Rav of Ruzhin: Just like he sought to build, but he did not, they sought to list him, but did not.

Anaf Yosef: Tanchuma (Vayeshev 8) says that when Yosef was about to sin with Eshes Poifar, he saw the image of his father, and it warned him. I brought from Megaleh Amukos that it was the light of Sechel, which is the image of his father. We can say similarly here.

Why did a fire come from Shamayim?

Maharsha: It is because fire came from Shamayim via Shlomo's Tefilah. Iyun Yakov - they did not heed it, for an Aveirah extinguishes a Mitzvah.

What is the significance of the Bas Kol?

Maharsha: "Lifnei Melachim Yisyatzav" - Lifnei kings who merit the world to come, and not Lifnei those dark in Gehinom. "Lifnei" means before - he was chronologically before the other kings, except for David.

Iyun Yakov: Shlomo built the Mikdash and brought merit to the Rabim - man did not lodge in Yerushalayim with sin, for the Korbanos atone. One who brings merit to the Rabim, sin does not come via him. Surely, one who says that he sinned, he errs (Shabbos 56b)! (NOTE: Our Gemara implies that it is specifically because he was zealous about building the Mikdash! - PF)

What is the source that Shlomo built the Mikdash more quickly than his house due to zeal?

Etz Yosef: It says that he began in his fourth year, and finished in his 11th year. Why must another verse say that he built it for seven years? It teaches that he engaged in building all seven years (Kli Yakar). He was lazy about his house [and engaged in other matters in the middle], therefore it took 13 years.

What is the meaning of "hame'Imach Yeshalmenah Ki Mo'asta Ki Atah Tivchar v'Lo Ani"?

Rashi: You do not give reward and punishment, to decide who will be in the world to come!

Maharal: Only Hash-m knows this. Sometimes a Mitzvah appears small, but it is great for the world to come - 'be careful with a light Mitzvah like with a severe Mitzvah' (Avos 2:1).

Maharsha: "Atah Tivchar" - choice is given to man; in My hands is only reward and punishment, according to his deeds.

Etz Yosef citing Yefe Mar'eh : Elihu said so to Iyov! The verse was brought out of its context to convey the idea [that man does not decide reward and punishment] in the words of a verse.

Who are Doreshei Reshumos?

Rashi: They expound verses - "ha'Rashum bi'Chsav Emes."

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: They expound Setumos (closed, i.e. unclear verses). Rashum is a tightly sealed barrels (Bava Metzi'a 23b).

Do Doreshei Reshumos argue with the Tana of our Mishnah?

Rekanati (Shemos 33:19), partially brought in Margoliyos ha'Yam 12: (They need not argue; one can come to the world to come, but 'Ein Lo Chelek.') Tanchuma (Ki Sisa 27) expounds "v'Chanosi Es Asher Achon" - Hash-m has a storehouse of reward for one who lacks good deeds. The Chacham R. Ezra says that 'has no share in the world to come' means that he does not have his own house, a storehouse under his authority. They said 'they make for him a dwelling according to his honor' (Shabbos 152a). One who lacks merit is in a place where many stand. (NOTE: This explains why we need verses to teach that Ein Lahem Chelek, and a verse to teach that they come to the world to come. If they held that even the greatest sinners have a share in the world to come, why must a verse teach about these six? - PF)

Margoliyos ha'Yam (18): There is no argument. All Jews come to the world to come, but some sinners do not receive a share above what they merited. One opinion (110b) says that Dor ha'Midbar has no share in the world to come. It included many great Tzadikim, e.g. Nachshon! (NOTE: If all Jews come to the world to come, how could David complain why Do'eg and Achitofel are there? - PF)

How does "Li Gil'ad v'Li Menasheh" teach that they come to the world to come?

Rashi: It is upon Me to bear their sin, so they will merit [the world to come].

Maharsha: We expound about Achav from a verse that hints to his death, who died in Ramos Gil'ad, for his death atoned for him, so he would merit the world to come. "Menasheh" teaches about Menasheh himself, for he repented; his name is still on him to bring him to the world to come.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing me'Am Lo'ez (Melachim I, 21:24): He merited a share in the world to come because he was Moser Nefesh for Yisrael. When he was mortally wounded in the war, he did not let the nation see that he was wounded, lest they fall in the war.

How does "Efrayim Ma'oz Roshi" hint that Yarav'am has a share in the world to come?

Maharsha: He was the first of Malchei Yisrael. A Navi appointed him. It is not proper that he descend to Gehinom. (NOTE: Is this a reason not to descend to Gehinom? A king should lead people to serve Hash-m. He caused them to serve idolatry! - PF)

What is the source that Achitofel was from Shevet Yehudah?

Rashi: David said "v'Atah Enosh k'Erki Alufi u'Meyuda'i" - Meyuda'i is my relative. Also Achitofel was from Yehudah.

How does "Yehudah Mechokeki" hint that Achitofel has a share in the world to come?

Maharsha: David said this; he was David's Rebbi. David brought him to the world to come, just like R. Meir brought his Rebbi Acher to the world to come. (NOTE: R. Meir wanted to bring Acher to the world to come. Did David want to help Achitofel? He said about him [and Do'eg] "Toridem li'V'er Shachas" (Tehilim 55:24), and angels asked 'if David will complain why Do'eg and Achitofel are in the world to come...'! However, Maharsha's Perush of "Al Edom" implies that David intended to help Do'eg. - PF)

Why does it say "Mo'av Sir Rachtzi"?

Rashi: David comes from Mo'av.

Maharsha: He explains that "Mo'av" refers to what came above. Who said "Yehudah Mechokeki"? David, who comes from Mo'av.

How does "Mo'av Sir Rachtzi" hint that Geichazi comes to the world to come?

Maharsha: He was stricken for matters of Na'aman's Rechitzah (washing); Na'aman's Tzara'as clung to him. This atoned for him, to merit the world to come.

How does "Al Edom Ashlich Na'ali" hint that Do'eg ha'Edomi comes to the world to come?

Maharsha: We say below (106b) that an angel scattered his ashes in Batei Kenesiyos and Batei Midrash. David said that he will trample on his ashes. This is his Kaparah to bring him to the world to come.

The angels should ask 'if David) will complain why Do'eg and Achitofel are in the world to come....' Why did they add 'who killed the Plishti and made Your children receive Gas'?

Maharsha: This pertains primarily to Do'eg; it is right after "Al Edom..." David brought a total Ge'ulah, and at that time, Do'eg ha'Edomi prosecuted him! Sha'ul asked, who is his father? Do'eg said, before asking if he is proper for kingship, ask if he may marry into Klal Yisrael! He also slandered him to Sha'ul regarding Galyus' sword, which Kohanei Nov gave to David.

Margoliyos ha'Yam citing Toras Chayim: Do'eg envied David from when David killed Galyus.

Why is it incumbent on Hash-m to make them friends?

Maharal: There is no argument in the world to come, only friendship and connection. Even opposites in this world, Hash-m unites them. So we explained 'any argument l'Shem Shamayim, in the end it will last.' Hash-m will be a crown for those who merit the world to come, and unite them.

Maharsha: [Do'eg] sinned only Bein Adam l'Chavero, which is pardoned only after the victim pardons the sinner (Yoma 85a). Therefore, I must make them friends, so David will pardon him and he can come to the world to come.

Iyun Yakov: This is His Midah - Oseh Shalom bi'Mromav Hu Ya'aseh Shalom Aleinu v'Al Kol Yisrael.