What is the source that Yehoshua forbade (a) rebuilding Yericho, even by a different name, and (b) building any city and calling it Yericho?

Maharal #1: If it was Yericho itself, Eliyahu would not have gone to Chi'el, for [if so] he was a total Rasha. Rather, Eliyahu judged him favorably, that he did not know that one may not build a city and call it Yericho.

Maharal #2, Margoliyos ha'Yam 17 citing Midrash Chaseros v'Yeseros: Yericho is written with a Hei at the end, to teach that it was another city.

Maharsha: R. Yehoshua should have said only 'u'Vanah Es Yericho.' He added 'Es ha'Ir ha'Zos' to teach that there are two Isurim.

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: Had it said u'Vanah Es ha'Ir Yericho, this would imply that it was Yericho itself. Es Yericho implies a different city, and he called it Yericho.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 18 citing Meshech Chochmah: Yericho was in Binyamin, in Malchus Yehudah. Why did Chi'el, in Malchus Efrayim, build it? Rather, it was a different city in Malchus Efrayim.

Why did Yehoshua forbid to rebuild Yericho?

Margoliyos ha'Yam 12 citing Moreh ha'Nevuchim 3:50: He wanted that the miracle will be blatant for people to see. It is not natural for a wall to sink into the ground!

What is the meaning of "Banah Chi'el Beis ha'Eli Es Yericho"?

Rashi: He built another city and called it Yericho. The verse calls it Beis ha'Eli, for he transgressed the Alah (curse).

Yericho was rebuilt before Chi'el! Shortly after it was destroyed, it was among the cities given to Binyamin (Yehoshua 18:21)! Also, "v'Yarshu Es Ir ha'Temarim" (Shofetim 3:13), "Shevu v'Yericho" (Shmuel II, 10:5)!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 12 citing Pri Tevu'ah: There was no Isur to build the houses and buildings, only the wall. Since the miracle was with the wall, the wall should not be rebuilt, to recall the miracle. The city was rebuilt without a wall, until Chi'el came and built it, and was punished. However, if the Isur is only so people will remember the miracle, why do we forbid to build even another city and call it Yericho?! (NOTE: Perhaps we do not want people to think that it is the original Yericho, and they will think that no miracle occurred with its wall! - PF) Perhaps the first builder was punished; the verse discusses Chi'el, for it was a bigger Chidush that he was punished for another city that he called Yericho.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 13: The Yerushalmi (Shabbos 1:7) says that Yericho was captured on Shabbos, therefore Yehoshua made it Cherem. Aruch l'Ner asked, its destruction was Kilkul (one is exempt for such Melachah)! However, if one will rebuild in the same place, it is constructive, and he is liable. Therefore, Yehoshua forbade to rebuild it, so it would be Kilkul.

What is the question 'what did Aviram and Seguv do'?!

Rashi: Why did the Gemara say that they are Resha'im?

Maharsha: The Gemara did not say that Seguv is a Rasha!

Maharsha: The Gemara said, granted, he did not realize that his firstborn died due to the curse, for Aviram was a Rasha. However, he should have realized that Seguv died due to the curse, for he was a Tzadik! We ask, what is the source that Aviram was a Rasha and Seguv was a Tzadik?

What is Bei Tamya?

Rashi: It is a mourner's house. Some texts say Bei Taima, with an Ayin, for Mat'imim Lo (they give to him tasty food to console him).

What is the source to expound that they went to console Chi'el?

Maharsha: Surely Eliyahu swore that there will not be rain due to Achav's sin (he made Asheirah...) Why did it mention in the middle that Chi'el built Yericho?

How does the rain not let people go to serve the idols?

Rashi: The roads are very muddy.

Why was the Torah's curse "va'Avadtem... v'Lo Yihyeh Matar" not fulfilled?

Maharsha: Really, the curse was, if you will serve idolatry, "va'Avadtem Meherah" (you will be exiled after 852 years, like the Gematriya of "v'Noshantem"; for Hash-m, this is called Meherah - Gitin 88a). Achav would not believe this. The rain was stopped in his days due to Eliyahu's word, for "Retzon Yere'av Ya'aseh", and in order to fulfill Eliyahu's Shevu'ah.

Iyun Yakov: The Torah's curse was not in a Shevu'ah, so it was not fulfilled immediately; Yehoshua's curse was in a Shevu'ah. Therefore, Eliyahu swore, and rain was withheld immediately.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 20, citing SH"K: The Torah's curse was on the Tzibur; Malchus Yehudah were not serving idolatry. Yehoshua's curse was on an individual.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 23 citing Parshas Derachim 21: Hash-m has a good storehouse of rain, and one that is not good. (The curse was fulfilled; the former was closed.)

What is the meaning of 'Hashem gave to him the key to rain'?

Ramah: In this Sugya, key is a Mashal. It is as if he locked a storehouse, and only he can open it.

Why did the Gemara interrupt to discuss the ravens bringing bread and meat to Eliyahu?

Maharsha #1: It is not relevant here, rather, in Chulin 5a, which discusses Shechitah of a Mumar. It is brought here only due to the other verses near it.

Maharsha #2: Hash-m told him to hide himself in Nachal Kris. He will drink from the river. When it dries, he will see the pain in the world [due to lack of rain]. Also the ravens will cease to bring to him food, for food is not found even in the king's house, so he will feel the pain. The Gemara means that Eliyahu saw that there is pain in the world; even so, he did not retract until Hash-m sent him to the widow.

What is the connection of the drought, and telling Eliyahu to go to Tzarfas?

Rashi: Hash-m will cause him to return the key of rain, like the Gemara explains.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Tiferes Yisrael Modazitz: i.e. He will say that it is improper that the Talmid holds two of the keys, and the Rebbi only one. After the miracle of the oil, Elisha told the widow "you and your children will live on the remainder"; Rashi explained, until Techiyas ha'Mesim. Hash-m gave to Elisha the key of Parnasah; Elisha knew that if he will need to revive a Mes (NOTE: perhaps he expected to, for he requested double of the Ru'ach on Eliyahu - PF), and take that key, he will need to return the key of Parnasah.

Daf Al ha'Daf (Amud b) citing Devar Yehoshua (1:50:14): It was never decreed that the child die permanently. It was only to cause Eliyahu to return the key of rain. Therefore, it does not say 'Mes', rather, "Lo Nosrah Bo Neshamah" - the Neshamah left, but it would return. The Zohar infers this from Rachel - "b'Tzeis Nafshah Ki Mesah." (NOTE: Moshav Zekenim (Bereishis 35:18) says that when she was about to die, they screamed; the Neshamah was startled, and returned to her, like they do nowadays. Therefore it 'repeats' "va'Tamas Rachel." I heard from R. Meir Eliyahu that it is easier to revive a Mes shortly after death. Both Rav Kahana and Reish Lakish died for upsetting R. Yochanan. Soon after Rav Kahana died, R. Yochanan regretted this, and revived him. He regretted Reish Lakish's death only after he found that there is no substitute for him. It was too late to revive him! - PF)

Why did Hash-m say that He never entrusted the keys to a Shali'ach? He gave to Eliyahu the key of rain!

Rashi: He meant, I never entrusted them to a Shali'ach, until you.

Maharsha, from Tosfos (Ta'anis 2a): I never entrusted them to a Shali'ach permanently.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 22, citing Aderes Eliyahu: 'Mafte'ach' is a Siman for the keys - it is an acronym for Matar, Parnasah, Techiyah and Chayah (birth). (NOTE: Chachmei Eretz Yisrael say that He has a fourth key, of Parnasah. R. Yochanan holds that this is the key of rain (Ta'anis 2b). - PF)

Margoliyos ha'Yam 23 citing Parshas Derachim 21): From the day of the Churban, rain does not come from Hash-m's good storehouse. "Yiftach... Otzaro ha'Tov" - only when Yisrael do Hash-m's will, we dwell in Eretz Yisrael and merit this blessing (Bava Basra 25b). This implies that there is an Otzar that is not good. We can say that the key to that Otzar was given to a Shali'ach. Ta'anis 10a implies like this. It says that Hash-m Himself waters Eretz Yisirael, and the rest of the world via a Shali'ach. Rabah said that he saw Ridiya (ibid. 25b); Rashi explains that it is the angel appointed over rain.

Why does the Gemara bring "Lech He'ra'eh El Achav v'Etenah Matar"?

Rashi: I will give rain; you will not give it.

How does the parable explain the episode with Eliyahu?

Rashi: Eliyahu stopped the rain, but he did not restore it.

Maharal: Eliyahu thought that just like he stopped the rain, he can open (return) it. It did not happen like he thought, just like a man locked his gate...

Maharsha: Even though Eliyahu did not lose the key, rather, he returned it, initially he expected to return the rain; in the end, it was not via him. It is as if he lost the key.

We find that others revived Mesim without the key of Techiyah. Why did Eliyahu need to request it?

Mas'as ha'Melech (Acharei Mos): Eliyahu was a Kohen. How was he allowed to enter the room of the dead child? Piku'ach Nefesh overrides Isurim only for natural cures! Therefore, he requested the key of Techiyah, i.e. a natural revival via the Mafte'ach. Daf Al ha'Daf - Tosfos (Bava Metzi'a 114b) asked how Eliyahu could be Metamei himself for the Safek that he would be able to revived him. He answered that Eliyahu was sure. Others ask, even Safek Piku'ach Nefesh overrides Isurim! It seems that Tosfos asked how Piku'ach Nefesh via Segulah permitted an Isur, and answered that it was not via Segulah.

Why did R. Yosi call him Aba Eliyahu ?

Rashi: He is my dear friend, and greater than me.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 25, from Iyun Yakov: There is an Aba that gives rain, and an Aba that does not give rain (Ta'anis 23b).

Why did Eliyahu not come for three days?

Margoliyos ha'Yam 1: Bereishis Rabah 91:7 says that Hash-m does not leave Tzadikim in affliction for more than three days, like we find with Yosef (incarcerated his brothers for three days), Yonah, Mordechai and David. It says "Yechayenu mi'Yomayim ba'Yom ha'Shelishi Yekimenu v'Nichyeh."

Why did R. Yosi say that Eliyahu was a Kapdan?

Rashi: He got angry at Achav, and swore that there will not be rain.

Maharal: He should not have sworn. He should have talked to Achav, to make him repent. Also what he said to Hash-m "Azru Vrisecha... v'Es Nevi'echa Hargu" was due to anger, like a Midrash says, because his Midah was fire. Eliyahu was a Kohen. Kohanim are Kapdanim (Bava Basra 104b). This is because they are Kadosh, and Kadosh is fire. If you see a Chacham get angry, the Torah burns in him (Ta'anis 4a). His name was Eliyahu; anyone called so is like fire. (NOTE: Perhaps this is because his name begins with Kel, according to the opinion that this is Midas ha'Din. It also has Yud-Kei, which is a name of Din (Kol Eliyahu Balak, citing Midrash Peli'ah). - PF) Also Moshe got angry - he said "Shim'u Na ha'Morim", for he was called Ish ha'Elokim; Aharon did not get angry.

Anaf Yosef citing Toras Chayim: Why did Eliyahu object to being called a Kapdan? This is Emes! And why did R. Yosi need to prove this from Eliyahu's Hakpadah against R. Yosi? It is clear from his anger against Achav! If a Chacham get angry, this is not derogatory It is a good Midah! The Torah burns in him - "ha'Lo Cho Devarai ka'Esh"! This is when he sees a Rasha transgress; he has Kin'as Hash-m. It is not proper to call Eliyahu a Kapdan for this. His Hakpadah against R. Yosi was due to his own honor; it is proper to call him a Kapdan for this. Margoliyos ha'Yam 2 - Sha'arei ha'Kedushah of R. Chaim Vital says in the name of Eliyahu that Torah is not explained to a Kapdan, and I do not reveal myself to a Kapdan.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 2: R. Yosi proves this from not coming for three days, for one does not receive a 'label' for one occurrence. The Gemara asks, what was [a second] episode for which R. Shimon ben Chalifta was called an Askan (one who experiments - Chulin 57b). "Rovetz (crouching)" excludes a Ravtzan (an animal that normally crouches - Bava Metzi'a 33a).

How do we learn from "v'Lo Yidbak b'Yadcha Me'umah Min ha'Cherem" that as long as there are Resha'im in the world, Hash-m's anger is in the world?

Iyun Yakov: The verse ends "Lema'an Yashuv Hash-m me'Charon Apo."

Why did the Gemara ask 'which Resha'im are discussed?'

Iyun Yakov: We were discussing Ir ha'Nidachas. It should have said 'as long as Ir ha'Nidachas is in the world'! Rather, it says 'Resha'im' to include those who are evil to Shamayim and to people. They are punished in this world and in the world to come, like it says in Kidushin (40a). (NOTE: There, it says that an evil Rasha is evil to Hash-m and to people. However, it says that for sins that have Peros, the punishment has Peros. Iyun Yakov brings from Rashi that 'a sin with Peros' causes others to sin. He bring from the Yerushalmi that four sins have punishment in this world and the principal is intact for the world to come - idolatry, Arayos, murder and Leshon ha'Ra. Geneivah is not included according to either Perush! - PF)

Etz Yosef: It cannot discuss Ir ha'Nidachas, for they already received their punishment - "Hake Sakeh Es Yoshvei ha'Ir..."!

Why did Rav Yosef say that the Mishnah refers to thieves?

Maharal: A thief acts as if Hash-m does not hear or see (he fears people more than Hash-m - Bava Kama 79b). Semachos 2:9 says that it is as if he murders. It is not only like murder, rather, also like idolatry and Arayos. A thief makes a lack in his victim. A robber makes a smaller lack, for the victim knows who took his money. Chet is an expression of lack. It is as if the thief killed him; he can sustain himself with what he stole. It is worse than murder, which takes the Nefesh and leaves the body, and even the Nefesh remains for the world to come. Geneivah totally removes the money. Idolatry is following Sheker - it is lack of intellect. Arayos is with the body; it is lack of the body.

Anaf Yosef citing Ya'aros Devash: "Matan b'Seser Yichpeh Af" - one who gives covertly, he does not intend for pride, or so others will show appreciation. It is only l'Shem Shamayim; therefore, it overcomes Af. A thief acts as if Hash-m does not see - if so, "Matan b'Seser Yichpeh Af" does not apply (Hash-m does not see it), so there is much anger in the world! (NOTE: Even if the thief thinks that Hash-m does not see, really, He sees! Why does covert Tzedakah not suppress anger? Granted, Midah k'Neged Midah, Hash-m should conduct with him as if anger is not suppressed. However, the Mishnah implies that there is anger for everyone! This requires investigation. - PF)

Maharsha: We said that Hash-m's anger is due to Cherem. In the Beis ha'Keneses, they make Cherem against thieves.

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: It refers to those who steal from Shelal Ir ha'Nidachas. This refers to what was said above "V'Lo Yidbak b'Yadcha Me'umah Min ha'Cherem."

Margoliyos ha'Yam 3 citing Toras Chayim: For other Aveiros, the world is judged based on its majority. For theft from Ir ha'Nidachas, the Rabim are drawn after an individual. Achan sinned, and it says "Ganvu v'Gam Kachashu."

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Ya'aros Devash 2:1: (The Lavim correspond to the days of the year.) Erev Yom Kipur corresponds to "Lo Signov", for this is the ultimate Teshuvah. We conclude Tefilos Yom Kipur (the end of Ne'ilah) with 'Lema'an Nechdal me'Oshek Yadenu.' We slaughter chickens for Kaparos, to hint that if there is Din against us for benefit from theft, His anger should be spilled on birds, which steal from fields and vineyards.

How can we say that when a Rasha enters the world, anger enters the world? It is not determined that he will be a Rasha. He has choice! Hash-m judges a person according to his present state - all the more so He will not bring evil to the world based on what the Rasha will do later!

Anaf Yosef citing Sefas Emes: The Zohar says, a child is born from Arayos is a Rasha that Hash-m leaves him to destroy him in the world to come. (NOTE: This answers the question if it means that he was a Rasha in a previous Gilgul. - PF) All Yisraelim transgress Isurei Aseh - Hash-m punishes for them only at a time of anger; when such a Rasha enters the world, there is anger.

What do we learn from "Mipnei ha'Ra'ah Ne'esaf ha'Tzadik"?

Rashi: A Tzadik dies before the evil comes, for once he dies, evil comes. When a Tzadik comes to the world, evil ceases.

The Gemara says about death of a Rasha 'Avad', and about a Tzadik 'Niftar'. The verse cited says "ha'Tzadik Avad... Anshei Chesed Ne'esafim... Ne'esaf ha'Tzadik"!

Maharsha: The Rasha, a thief, seeks excess desires. If he does not have, he steals. Even Anshei Chesed, who engage in burying a Tzadik, they gather in his house, and do not properly eulogize him [in public]. They do not understand that due to the evil, a Tzadik is Ne'esaf - he departs from the world. He is not lost like a Rasha is lost.

Why does good comes to the world when a Tzadik comes to the world?

Maharal: A Tzadik is called Tov - "Imru Tzadik Ki Tov."

Iyun Yakov: Even though a Tzadik died, when is fulfilled "v'Zarach ha'Shemesh ua'Va ha'Shemesh", "veha'Aretz l'Olam Omedes" and another Tzadik is born, the first Tzadik died lest evil come to the world, and good comes due to the new Tzadik. "V'Ein Ish Sam Al Lev" - people think that he died to atone, "Mipnei ha'Ra'ah Ne'esaf ha'Tzadik." However, if also "Anshei Chesed Ne'esafim", then "Mipnei ha'Ra'ah" surely means before the evil, so he will not see it. This is why they all died!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 5: If the Tzadik is born where the old Tzadik died, no evil comes. After "v'Zarach ha'Shemesh ua'Va ha'Shemesh", it says "Holech El Darom v'Sovev El Tzafon" - if he is born elsewhere, the place where the old Tzadik died, it feels the lack.

What is the significance of "Zeh Yenachamenu mi'Ma'asenu ume'Itzevon Yadenu"?

Maharsha: Etzvon Yadenu is the curse of Adam ha'Rishon - "b'Itzavon Tochalenah." Ma'asenu is the punishment of Ma'ase Dor ha'Midbar - via it, Hash-m swore not to bring another [flood]. We end with this, because the entire Perek discusses Yemos ha'Mashi'ach and future reward and punishment. This Shevu'ah to Noach teaches about the Bris Shevu'ah with us - "Ki Mei Noach Zos Li Asher Nishbati... Ken Nishbati mi'Ketzof Alayich umi'Ge'ar Bach", and good comes to the world.