(Mishnah): There is a stringency of Divrei Sofrim (laws that Chachamim explained) over laws explicit in the Torah. If [a Chacham] says that there is no Mitzvah of Tefilin, which explicitly contradicts the Torah, he is exempt;

[If he says that] there are five boxes [in the head Tefilin], to add to what Chachamim explained, he is liable.

We do not kill him in the Beis Din in his city, nor in the Beis Din of Yavneh. Rather, we bring him to the Great Sanhedrin in Yerushalayim and wait until the Regel (festival) to kill him - "v'Chol ha'Am Yishme'u v'Yira'u." R. Akiva says so;

R. Yehudah says, we do not delay his execution. Rather, we immediately kill him, and write and send to everywhere "Ploni ben Ploni was Chayav Misas Beis Din."

Gemara (Talmidim citing R. Yochanan): Divrei Sofrim are close to Divrei Torah and dear like Divrei Torah - "v'Chikech k'Yein ha'Tov."

(Shimon bar Ba citing R. Yochanan): Divrei Sofrim are close to Divrei Torah and dearer than Divrei Torah - "Ki Tovim Dodecha mi'Yayin."

Support (R. Ba bar Kohen citing R. Yudah bar Pazi): Divrei Sofrim are dearer than Divrei Torah, for R. Tarfon, had he not read [Kri'as Shma], he would have transgressed only an Aseh. Through transgressing Beis Hillel (who permit to recite Shma while traveling), he became Chayav Misah due to "u'Foretz Gader Yishchenu Nachash."

(Beraisa - R. Yishmael): Divrei Torah have Isur and Heter. They have stringencies and leniencies. However, Divrei Sofrim are all stringent;

Proof (Mishnah): If one says that there is no Mitzvah of Tefilin, to transgress Divrei Torah, he is exempt. [If he says that] there are five boxes, to add to Divrei Sofrim, he is liable.

(R. Chinena brei d'R. Ada citing R. Tanchum bar Chiya): Divrei Zekenim (Chachamim) are more stringent than Divrei Nevi'im, for it says "Al Tatifu Yatifun", and it says "Atif Lecha la'Yayin vela'Shechar..." (Hash-m did not want to give Divrei Nevi'im to the people, but he wanted to give Divrei Sofrim.)

A Navi and Chacham, what do they resemble? It is like a king who sent two agents to a country. He wrote about one of them "if he does not show my signet and stamp, do not believe him." He wrote about the other "even if he does not show my signet and stamp, believe him";

So it says about a Navi, "v'Nasan Elecha Os Oh Mofes." However, it says here [about Chachamim] "Al Pi ha'Torah Asher Yorucha."

The Torah said four boxes [in the head Tefilin] with four Parshiyos. If he made (said that) there are five boxes with four Parshiyos, he is liable.

(R. Ba citing R. Yochanan citing R. Hoshayah): He is liable only if he ruled about something whose source is in the Torah, and it is explained through Divrei Sofrim, e.g. Neveilah or Sheretz, that their source is in the Torah, and it is explained through Divrei Sofrim (the Shi'ur for their Tum'ah, and how they are Metamei) .

(R. Zeirah): He is liable only if he denied and ruled about something whose source is in the Torah, and it is explained through Divrei Sofrim, e.g. Neveilah or Sheretz, that their source is in the Torah, and it is explained through Divrei Sofrim, and he detracts and adds. In the matter that he adds, he detracts (disqualifies the Mitzvah - KORBAN HA'EDAH). The only case we have is Tefilin.

R. Hoshayah's face shone (when R. Yochanan said the teaching in his name). R. Yochanan said to him "are you happy that I need [what I heard from] you? I do need [this that I heard from] you. [Others] taught more than you (R. Zeirah taught what you said, and also that he must add and detract)!

For 13 years [R. Yochanan] came in front of his Rebbi (R. Hoshayah, even though he had grown in Torah and) he did not need him [any more].

(R. Shmuel citing R. Zeira): Not only this - rather, he used to Mekabel Panav of (come to see) his Rebbi [every day], for one who is Mekabel Panav of his Rebbi is like one who Mekabel Pnei ha'Shechinah!

Question (R. Berachiyah): A Mishnah teaches that the size of a Baheres (appearance of Tzara'as) is like a Kilki bean, square! (If a Zaken Mamrei says that it need not be square, he adds and detracts. Why did R. Zeirah say that the only case we have is Tefilin?!)

Answer (Rav Avmari): [Indeed,] there is one who says so [that we find this also in Tzara'as].

Question (R. Ba bar Mamal): It was taught that there are two Parshiyos in a Mezuzah. (If he adds, he detracts, for it is Pasul!)

Answer: [R. Zeirah said that the only case is] Tefilin; it is the same [and includes] Mezuzah.

Question (Rav Hamnuna): (We find this also regarding Tzitzis!) A Beraisa teaches that Tzitzis must be four strings of four fingers. ) If he made them three fingers [for each of the] four strings (also here he detracts)!

Answer: He detracted. He did not add [anything].

Question (R. Chagai to R. Yosi): It was taught that a third [of the 10 Esronim of flour used for the three kinds of Matzah in Lachmei Todah] is for Revichah, a third is for Chalos, and a third is for Rekikim. (Half of the half-Log of oil is for the Revuchah, and the other half is for the Chalos and Rekikim.) If he used a third for Revichah, a third for Chalos, and a third is for Rekikim [also here he adds to the latter two, and detracts from Revichah]!

Answer (R. Yosi): He detracted from Revichah, and added to the Chalos and Rekikim. (He does not add and detract in one matter.)

(Mishnah): A false Navi and one who gives a prophecy that he did not hear, or what was not said to him [receives Chenek].

However, one who withholds his prophecy (that Hash-m commanded him to tell), does not heed a Navi's words, and a Navi who transgresses his own words, he is killed bi'Ydei Shamayim, for it says "Anochi Edrosh me'Imo."

(Gemara): One who prophecizes what he did not hear - this is like Tzidkiyah ben Kena'anah. [One who prophecizes] what was not said to him - this is like Chananyah ben Ozer (this will be explained).

(R. Yehoshua ben Levi): Chananyah ben Ozer was a true Navi, but he had a mistake. He heard Yirmeyah prophecize in the upper market, and he descended and prophecized in the lower market;

Chananyah ben Ozer said, is this not the calculation? "L'Fi Melos l'Bavel Shiv'im Shanah Efkod Eschem"; all the years of Menasheh were 55. Deduct 20, for which Beis Din above does not give punishments or Kares (35 years remain). There were two years of Amon and 31 of Yoshiyah.

Note: Menasheh was 12 when he became king. We should deduct only eight years of his reign, for after this he was 20 years old! Mishneh Halachos (10:204) brings from Teshuvos Lachmei Todah (Mahari Basan) that when a Melech takes reign, his sins are pardoned, so the 20 years start from when he became king. He does not explain why we do not say similarly for Amon and Yoshiyah! Perhaps we say so only if he was less than 20 when he became king (PF). However, this is difficult, for one of his sources was Shmuel 1:13:1 "Ben Shanah Sha'ul b'Malcho", i.e. he was like a baby when he became king, for his sins were pardoned. He was above 40 at the time, for he reigned less than three years, and after that his son Ish Boshes became king at the age of 40 (Shmuel 2:2:10)! Perhaps Menasheh was special, because there was a decree that initially he would be a Rasha. I prefer to say that once the 70 years start, they are consecutive.

This explains "va'Yhi ha'Shanah ha'Hi b'Reishis Mamleches Tzidkiyah Melech Yehudah ba'Shanah ha'Revi'is ba'Chodesh ha'Chamishi Amar Elai Chananyah ben Ozer ha'Navi Asher me'Giv'on Beis Hash-m l'Einei ha'Kohanim v'Chol ha'Am Leimor; Ko Amar Hash-m Elokei Tzevakos Elokei Yisrael Leimor Shavarti Es Ol Melech Bavel; B'Od Shenatayim Yamim Ani Meshiv El ha'Makom ha'Zeh Es Kol Klei Beis Hash-m Asher Lakach Nebuchadnetzar Melech Bavel Min ha'Ir ha'Zos va'Yvi'em Bavel." (He said that it will be in two years, for then the 70 years will finish. It was the first year of Tzidkiyah, in which Yechanyah and 1000 Chachamim were exiled. "Revi'is" is the fourth year of Shemitah.)

Yirmeyah told him 'you say "b'Od Shenatayim Yamim Ani Meshiv...", and I say that Nebuchadnetzar will come and take the rest to Bavel, and there they will be...!"

Chananyah: Give a Siman for your words [to show that they will be fulfilled].

Yirmeyah: I foretell evil. I cannot give a Siman, for Hash-m says to bring evil and reconsiders! You foretell good. You must give a Siman for your words!

Note: Many Nevu'os for good did not have a Siman, e.g. Hash-m promised Eretz Yisrael to Avraham's seed (Bereishis 12:7), and that Barak would defeat Sisera (Shoftim 4:6). We find Nevu'os for bad with a Siman, e.g. the garment was torn to show that Sha'ul's kingship was torn from him (Shmuel I, 15:27-28)! Perhaps Yirmeyah meant that Hash-m refused to give a Siman for his Nevu'ah, for He might retract, but if Chananyah's Nevu'ah is true, there is no reason for Hash-m not to give a Siman! (PF)

Chananyah: No, you must give a Siman for your words (for your own prophecy supports me, based on the above calculation)!

Yirmeyah: If so, I give a sign and wonder. That man (you) will die this year, "Ki Sarah Dibarta El Hash-m." And so it was. "Va'Yamas Chananyah ha'Navi ba'Shanah ha'Hi ba'Chodesh ha'Shevi'i."

Question: It was a different year (the seventh month is after Rosh Hashanah). Can you say so (that his Siman was fulfilled)?!

Answer: Rather, this teaches that he died on Erev Rosh Hashanah, and commanded his sons and household about the matter to take him out [for burial] after Rosh Hashanah, to make it appear that Yirmeyah's prophecy was false.

One who withholds his prophecy - this is like Yonah ben Amitai.

(R. Yonah): Yonah ben Amitai was a true Navi. You find that when Hash-m told him "go to Ninveh the great city and prophecize about it, for their evil rose in front of Me"..."

Yonah reasoned - I know that Nochrim are prone to do Teshuvah. I will prophecize about it, and they will repent, and Hash-m will punish "the haters of" (this is a euphemism) Yisrael [since they did not repent]! What should I do? I should flee [from Eretz Yisrael, for normally prophecy is only in Eretz Yisrael]! "Va'Yakam Yonah Livro'ach Tarshishah mi'Lifnei Hash-m va'Yered Yafo va'Yimtza Aniyah Ba'ah Tarshish va'Yiten Secharah va'Yered Bah..."

One who does not heed a Navi's words - this is like Michah's friend (Michah commanded him in the name of Hash-m "hit me", and he refused), and a Navi who transgressed his own words, like Eido (Hash-m told him not to eat, and a false Navi told him to eat, and he heeded him);

(R. Shmuel bar Rav Yitzchak): This [false Navi] is Amatzyah the Kohen of Beis Kel.

(R. Yosi): There was much persuasion [to get him to eat]. Who was [the false Navi]? It was Yehonason ben Gershom ben Menasheh. (It was Moshe's grandson. Due to the honor of Moshe, it is written Menasheh);

You find that when David came and found (Yehonason) serving idolatry, he said "you are the grandson of that Tzadik, and you serve idolatry?!" He said "I have a tradition from my grandfather, sell youself to Avodah Zarah, and do not take [Tzedakah] from people."

David: Heaven forbid, he did not mean this! Rather, sell youself to Avodah (work) that is Zarah (foreign) to you, and do not take from people.

Once David saw that money was dear to [Yehonason], he appointed him over the storehouses of the Beis ha'Mikdash - "u'Shevu'el Ben Gershom ben Moshe Nagid Al ha'Otzaros."

He is called Shevu'el, for he was Shav (returned) to Kel (Hash-m) with all his strength. "Nagid Al ha'Otzaros" - he appointed him to be the head overseer of the storehouses.

Question (Talmidim, to R. Shmuel bar Nachman): He was a priest to idolatry, and he lived so long?! (The verse says that he lived until the Churban, over 450 years from the days of the Shoftim. And if Gershom was at most 90 when he fathered Yehonason, Yehonason lived at least 800 years!)

Answer: It is because he was stingy about his idolatry. If a man brought an ox, sheep or goat to the idolatry and told [Yehonason] "appease it for me", he would say "what will it help you? It does not eat, drink, do good or do evil!"

The man [who brought an animal] would say "what should we do?" Yehonason would say "bring to me one bowl of fine flour and 10 eggs, and I will appease it for you." When the man left, Yehonason would eat it.

An empty person came [to offer to the idol], and [Yehonason] said so to him. He said back "if it does not help at all, what do you do here?" He said "for livelihood."

Question (against R. Shmuel bar Nachman): It is written [that Yehonason and his sons were Kohanim of the idol] "Ad Yom Gelos ha'Aretz"!

Answer (R. Shmuel bar Nachman): Once David died, and Shlomo switched all the overseers, [Yehonason lost his appointment and] he returned to his ruin.

And a Navi who transgresses his own words - this is Edo the seer. It says "v'Navi Echad Zaken Yoshev b'Veis Kel va'Yavo Beno va'Yesaper Lo Es Kol ha'Ma'aseh Asher Asah Ish ha'Elokim..."

"Va'Yomer Lahem Avihem Ei Zeh ha'Derech Halach..." "va'Yomer El Banav Chavshu Li Es ha'Chamor... va'Yelech Acharei Ish ha'Elokim va'Yimtza'ehu Yoshev Tachas ha'Elah... va'Yomer Lech Iti ha'Baysah ve'Echol Lechem va'Yomer Lo Ochal Lashuv... Ad va'Yomer Lo Gam Ani Navi Kamocha u'Malach Diber Elai bi'Dvar Hash-m Leimor... Ad va'Yochal Lechem v'Yesht Mayim Kichesh Lo." What is Kichesh Lo? He lied to him.

"Va'Yhi Hem Yoshvim Al ha'Shulchan va'Yhi Devar Hash-m El ha'Navi Asher Heshivo." It does not say 'Asher Hushav', rather, "Asher Heshivo" (this shows that Hash-m spoke to the false Navi, who persuaded the true Navi to return). We can make a Kal v'Chomer. One who fed his friend false bread, Hash-m's word came to him - one who feeds his friend true bread (i.e. l'Shem Shamayim), all the more so! (ALEI TAMAR - he wanted to do Chesed with the Navi. He needed to lie in order to get him to eat. He thought that the Mitzvah would protect him from punishment.)

(Now we explain one who does not heed a Navi's words, i.e. Michah's friend, who refused to hit him.) It says "vIsh Echad mi'Bnei ha'Nevi'im Amar El Re'ehu bi'Dvar Hash-m... va'Yomer Lo Ya'an Asher Lo Shamata b'Kol Hash-m Hincha Holech me'Iti v'Hikecha ha'Aryeh va'Yelach me'Ito va'Yimtza'ehu ha'Aryeh va'Yakehu."

"Va'Yimtza Ish Echad va'Yomer Hakeni Na va'Yakehu... va'Yelech ha'Navi va'Ya'amod la'Melech Al ha'Darech va'Yitchapes ba'Afer Al Einav va'Yhi ha'Melech Over v'Hu Tzara'as'Yakov El ha'Melech... va'Yhi Avdecha Asah Henah v'Henah...

Question: "Va'Ymaher va'Yasar Es ha'Efer me'Al Einav va'Yomer Lo Ko Amar Hash-m Ya'an Asher Shalachta Es Ish Chermi mi'Yad v'Haysah Nafshecha Tachas Nafsho v'Amcha Tachas Amo", and it says "va'Yigash Ish ha'Elokim va'Yomer Ko Amar Hash-m" - why does it say va'Yomer twice?

Answer: The first time, he said "if Ben Hadad comes under your hand, do not have mercy on him and do not have compassion on him." The second time, he said "since you sent the man I make war with..."

How many traps and nets I made for him until I delivered him under your hand, and you sent him and he went in peace?! Therefore, your life is in place of his life, and your nation is in place of his nation.

You find that when Yisrael went to war, of all of them only Achav Melech Yisrael died. It says "v'Ish Mashach b'Keshet l'Sumo va'Yakeh Es Melech Yisrael Bein ha'Devekeim u'Vein ha'Shiryan va'Yomer l'Rakavo Hafoch Yadcha v'Hotzi'eini Min ha'Machaneh Ki Hachaleisi."

Question: How do we explain v'Amcha Tachas Amo", and it says "va'Yigash Ish ha'Elokim va'Yomer Ko Amar Hash-m" - why does it say va'Yomer twice?

Answer (R. Yochanan citing R. Shimon ben Yochai): The drop [of blood] that left that Tzadik (Michah) atoned for all of Yisrael.