Why did the Gemara teach about the best oil for ink?

Ha'Kosev: Since we are commanded to write a Sefer Torah, Tefilin and Mezuzos, it is reasonable for Chazal to teach how to make [good] ink. Just like olive oil is best for lighting the Menorah, it is best to illuminate Yisrael's eyes with the light of Torah - "Ki Ner Mitzvah v'Sorah Ohr."

What is the question 'is olive oil best for smoking, or for kneading?'

Rashi: Ge'onim wrote that people smoke glass in steam of olive oil, until it blackens. They scrape off the black and knead it with a bit of oil; when it dries, it is smeared into ink.

Rav Shmuel bar Zutra taught two Beraisos, and did not mention that they disagree!

R. Simchah mi'Desvi, R. E.M. Horowitz: The text should say that Rav Shmuel bar Zutri taught the first.

Cheshek Shlomo: Some say that the latter opinion was his Perush of the Beraisa. 'Masni Hachi' implies unlike this.

What is the command "Lo Sasur"?

Rashi: "Lo Sasur Min ha'Davar Asher Yagidu Lecha [Yamin u'Smol]."

Rav Elyashiv: Rashi merely brought the end of the verse, to teach that it is what obligates heeding Chachamim, and not the Lav itself.

Daf Al ha'Daf: The Rambam (Hilchos Berachos 11:3) brought only the words before Lo Sasur, "Asher Yomeru Lecha Ta'aseh." The Kesef Mishneh explains that these words apply to an Aseh. (NOTE: Surely there is a printing mistake in Daf Al ha'Daf. It seems that this is his intent. - PF) Bikurei Yakov says that one who is engaged in a Mitzvah mid'Rabanan, since Lo Sasur applies, 'Osek b'Mitzvah Patur Min ha'Mitzvah' exempts him even from a Torah Mitzvah that arises at the time.

Are there other consequences of being obligated due to "Lo Sasur"?

Daf Al ha'Daf: R. Akiva Eiger (Teshuvah 169) asked, according to R. Yehudah who exempts a blind person from Mitzvos, if this is even from Lavim, or only from Mitzvos Aseh. He proved from Tosfos that he is obligated. Tosfos says that he blesses on Mitzvos mid'Rabanan. This shows that he is obligated in Lo Sasur!

Daf Al ha'Daf: Pnei Menachem asked, why must one borrow or sell his garment for Ner Chanukah? One need not spend all his money for a Mitzvas Aseh! Here he must, lest he transgress the Lav "Lo Sasur"! If so, this applies to every Mitzvah mid'Rabanan! However, many Meforshim on Sefer ha'Mitzvos say that the Rambam holds that Lo Sasur obligates only Megilah and Ner Chanukah mid'Oraisa. For other Mitzvos mid'Rabanan, it is a mere Asmachta. R. Yehudah Segel answered that Chachamim enacted like Torah law, and did not obligate [forfeiting one's money] more than for a Torah Mitzvas Aseh, except for Ner Chanukah and the four cups, which are to publicize the miracle, which is like Kidush Hash-m. This also answers the Ran's question, why Ner Chanukah has precedence over Kidush ha'Yom of Shabbos, which is an Aseh mid'Oraisa.

Why must we say 'they were in the miracle' to obligate women in Ner Chanukah, the Mitzvos of Purim and the four cups? Women are commanded about Lavim (including Lo Sasur), even if they are Zman Gerama!

Rav Elyashiv: Chavos Ya'ir and She'elas Ya'avetz asked this. If Lo Sasur commands about every mid'Rabanan law, every Mitzvah mid'Rabanan is stronger than a Torah Aseh for this reason (women are obligated even if it is Zman Gerama)! Surely this is not true. Really, Lo Sasur discusses a Zaken Mamrei. However, it reveals that one may not explain a verse unlike the majority of the Sanhedrin. It follows that any decree they make for a fence or other reason, it is like Torah law. The verse reveals that they decide Torah laws and its Perush. They themselves said that their law is only mid'Rabanan. Therefore, if it is an Aseh sheha'Zman Gerama, women are exempt unless there is a reason to obligate them. This is why Rashi merely brought the end of the verse, to teach that it is what obligates heeding Chachamim, and not the Lav itself. Rav Nechemyah holds that Lo Sasur applies only to fences of Isur. We must do actions that Chachamim decreed due to "She'al Avicha v'Yagedecha." However, the Rambam (Hilchos Mamrim 1:2) applies Lo Sasur to every mid'Rabanan law; Hasagos ha'Ramban on Sefer ha'Mitzvos (Shoresh 1) disagrees.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Nezer ha'Torah (3:3 p.166): If not that women were in the miracle, Chachamim would not have obligated them. They normally enact like Torah law, which exempts women from Mitzvas Aseh sheha'Zman Gerama.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Over Orach (687): R. Yehoshua ben Levi taught this. He holds that we do not bless on Mitzvos mid'Rabanan, like Lulav after the first day. He holds that Lo Sasur does not apply to Mitzvos mid'Rabanan, therefore we needed to say that they were in the miracle.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Klei Chemdah asked why Over Orach did not bring the Yerushalmi, which says that R. Yehoshua ben Levi holds that we bless on Ner Chanukah 'Asher Kideshanu b'Mitzvosav v'Tzivanu Al Mitzvas Zekenim.' The Bavli can agree. If so, he learns from "She'al Avicha v'Yagedecha Zekenecha...", and not from Lo Sasur. This is why he needed 'they were in the miracle'!

If the Ba'al ha'Bayis will help his poor relative get all the Pe'ah, is this theft?

Rav Elyashiv: It is not truly theft. It is called theft, for he favors his relative and deprives other Aniyim.

What is 'at the end of his field'?

Rashi: When he finishes harvesting. "Lo Sechaleh" implies finishing off. Do not designate Pe'ah before this.

Daf Al ha'Daf: R. Avraham Klein says, this is so he will never think while harvesting 'all this is mine', and the field is his. Rather, he must always recall that it is Hash-m's. (NOTE: This is a nice reason. However, why didn't the Gemara say so? - PF)

What is 'a free time'?

Rashi: It is when no other Aniyim are around.

Why would passersby curse the Ba'al ha'Bayis for not leaving Pe'ah?

Rashi: They see the Ba'al ha'Bayis harvest everything that remains, and do not know that he previously separated Pe'ah.

Rav Elyashiv: If people see someone pass by a Beis ha'Keneses with another opening, they will assume that he entered via it. Here, why will they not assume that he left Pe'ah already? The Beis Yosef said, when there is monetary loss, people suspect more. Do not say that R. Shimon taught this according to his opinion, that we expound reasons for Mitzvos, and Chachamim disagree. Here, we do not learn new Halachos, only that we are concerned for suspicion. All agree to this!

Why does it say due to suspicion, and not due to curse?

Rav Elyashiv: We prove from here that we are concerned also for Ner Chanukah. There, only suspicion applies, but not curse, which applies only to one who harms a person.

What is the answer 'due to "Lo Sechaleh"'?

Rashi: This connotes the time of finishing.

What was the answer 'due to swindlers'?

Rashi: They do not leave Pe'ah, and claim that they already left it [and Aniyim took it].

Why will one who is Ragil b'Ner have children who are Chachamim?

Rashi: "Ki Ner Mitzvah v'Sorah Or" - via Ner Mitzvah of Shabbos and Chanukah, comes the light of Torah.

Iyun Yakov: Nowadays that everyone is careful about Ner Shabbos and Ner Chanukah, everyone should be Chachamim!

Maharal #1: In all these cases, one who is zealous about a Mitzvah, it is close to him. Man needs the light; it is extra close to him. When man does a Mitzvah close to him, he is prepared to receive the matter.

Maharal #2: These four matters correspond to the four worlds of a Tzadik. They are, in order, this world, after death, Techiyas ha'Mesim and Olam ha'Ba. Man's primary creation is prepared for these four worlds. This world is like a Ner. Chazal hinted to this in Sotah (21a), regarding "Ki Ner Mitzvah v'Sorah Or." Just like a lamp ceases (extinguishes), a Mitzvah ceases, but light does not cease, and so Torah does not cease. This world is called Ner, for it ceases, but the world to come does not. Ner is a Kli that receives light, and so is this world. Therefore, he merits children who are Chachamim, who are like a Kli to receive the light of Torah. This is perfection in this world. This world is physical, and Chochmah is found in it, i.e. in Chachamim of flesh and blood.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): The evil kingdom wanted to make Torah forgotten from Yisrael. Hash-m saved them, and returned the crown to its old status. Burning Ner Chanukah shows that Torah is dear to him. (NOTE: The Rif's text was Ner Chanukah. Maharsha's text said Ner Shabbos. - PF)

Iyun Yakov: This means that he has a Ner so his household can learn at night.

Why will one who is Ragil b'Ner not become a Chacham himself?

Anaf Yosef #1: We discuss when he already is a Chacham, or he is not proper to become a Chacham.

Anaf Yosef #2: Ner Chanukah hints to Bris Milah that Yavan abolished. Therefore, he merits to have sons to circumcise them, and they will be Chachamim.

Anaf Yosef citing Or Zaru'a and Eliyahu Rabah: Surely, the verse is primarily about Ner Shabbos, which (i.e. Shabbos) is mid'Oraisa, and the Mitzvah is primarily for women. Women cannot be Chachamim - one who teaches his daughter Torah [it is as if he teaches to her Tiflus (folly or promiscuity - Sotah 20a).

Regarding the others, it says 'one who is careful.' Why does it say here 'he is Ragil?'

Maharsha: He is commanded greatly about the others. The primary Mitzvah of Ner [Shabbos] was given to women. ' Here it says that he is Ragil, i.e. he accustoms his wife to fulfill it. Regarding a woman, it says that if she is not careful about it (she is prone to die during childbirth - 32a).

Iyun Yakov: It is not obligatory to have a Ner so his household can learn at night. The others are obligations.

Rav Elyashiv: Here it says Ragil, for he does more than letter of the law requires, and lights additional Neros [according to the number of days] - he was Ragil b'Shargei Tuva. Or, he uses olive oil amidst dearness [of the Mitzvah] and love. One who merely fulfills the Mitzvah does not get the great reward promised here. It seems that also one who lights two Ner Shabbos gets the reward, for this is above the Chiyuv, even though everyone does so. Being careful and Mezuzah and Tzitzis is fulfilling all the opinions. Being careful about Kidush is using a superb wine. R. Zakai attributed his long life to three merits; one was, he never missed making Kidush on wine. Once, his elderly mother sold her kerchief to buy for him wine for Kidush. (Megilah 27b) Surely she did so because she saw that he esteemed Kidush so much.

Daf Al ha'Daf: The Bach says, Ner Shabbos is a Chiyuv, for Shalom Bayis! The Tur says that the reward is for making it nice, for Kevod Shabbos - this is a Mitzvah, but not a Chiyuv. The Vilna Gaon (OC 263) says that the source to make it nice is Amud A. Damesek Eliezer and Birkas Eliyahu explain, Rabah used to use sesame oil, for it burns longest. After he heard R. Yehoshua ben Levi's teaching, that olive oil is best, for its light is clearest, he would seek olive oil.

Why did Rav Huna said that two great Chachamim will come from Avin, and Rav Chisda said that a great Chacham will come from Bei Nasa of Rav Shizbi?

Tosfos: Regarding Avin it says Regili - he and his wife. Therefore, they merited two Chachamim. Regarding Bei Nasa of Rav Shizbi, it says Regila - only his wife.

Rav Elyashiv: This implies that also the man should glorify Ner Shabbos, i.e. arrange them. However, perhaps it means that also he should light.

Daf Al ha'Daf: R. Akiva Eiger (on Mishnayos) brings from Tikunei Zohar that the man prepares the Neros, and she lights them. Rav Huna used to light a lamp for Kevod Shabbos (119a). Maharshal says, his wife lit others. Imrei Emes says, he lit first, so she would light a Ner Shel Mitzvah. i.e. he lit and extinguished, so the wick was singed and prepared for the Mitzvah.

Maharsha: Rav Huna saw that he was careful about Ner Shabbos and Ner Chanukah. Rav Chisda saw only that he was careful about one of them.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Some texts say that Avin was Ragil b'Shargei (he lit two Neros), and Bei Nasa of Rav Shizbi was Ragil b'Sharga (one).

Daf Al ha'Daf citing R. Nachum of Raizin, in va'Yita Eshel (p.662): Rav Huna holds like Rava (Mo'ed Katan 28), that children do not depend on merit, rather, Mazal. Therefore, he did not say that via Neros 'Zocheh' (he will merit something new, i.e. children will be born and they will be Chachamim), rather, 'Havyan' (his existing children will be Chachamim). Rav Huna knew that Avin had two sons, so he said that two great Chachamim will come from him. Rav Chisda knew that Bei Nasa of Rav Shizbi had one child, so he said that one Chacham will come from him. Tosfos said that Bei Nasa had already died - surely he means that his son will become a Chacham! Rav Aharon Kotler heard this, and said that such Nevu'os could not produce three Amora'im, unless new Neshamos were put in the boys. However, perhaps Rav Huna and Rav Chisda meant that if you always did so, your sons will become great Chachamim.

Why will one who is careful to fulfill Mezuzah properly merit to have a nice dwelling?

Maharal: The world after death is called Mador. "Ki Holech ha'Adam l'Veis Olamo - every person has a Mador according to his level (152a). Via fulfilling Mezuzah, a Mitzvah on the house, he merits a nice dwelling in this world - he is proper for this after death. How reward in this world resembles what he will get in the future.

Why will one who is careful about Tzitzis merit to have a nice garment?

Maharal: The world after death is called Mador. "Ki Holech ha'Adam l'Veis Olamo - every person has a Mador according to his level (152a). Via fulfilling Mezuzah, a Mitzvah on the house, he merits a nice dwelling in this world - he is proper for this after death.

Why will one who is careful about Kidush ha'Yom merit to have much wine?

Maharal: Wine is like the world to come. "Mah Rav Tuvecha Asher Tzafanta li'Yre'echa" is wine that has been guarded for Tzadikim in the world to come (Berachos 34b). (NOTE: Our text learns from "Ayin Lo Ra'asah..." - PF)

Maharsha: The reward is similar to the Mitzvah. "Zachor Es Yom ha'Shabbos Lekadsho" - be Zocher Shabbos over a cup (of wine - Pesachim 106a).

What is 'Bei Nasa'?

Rashi #1: It is his father.

Rashi #2: It is his father-in-law.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Sho'el u'Meshiv (1:2:19) discusses whether inheritance of Rabanus applies to a son-in-law. R. Sha'ul of Krakow inferred from Rashi that it does. The Gemara said 'come out from them Rav Shizbi.' i.e. what was decreed to come from his seed can be fulfilled via a son-in-law.

Initially, when did Rav Yosef's wife light?

Rashi: It was close to dark.

Ran: Surely she was not Mechalel Shabbos! Rather, it was close to the time of Tosefes Shabbos. Rav Elyashiv - she thought that this is more honor of Shabbos, for it is evident that the Ner is for Shabbos. The Rema (OC 262:3) says that one should wear Bigdei Shabbos right after showering. Therefore, one should shower close to evening.

What do we learn from the fact that the fire came before the cloud left?

Rashi: It is proper to light before dark. "Lo Yamish" is extra, to teach this.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): I say that it should have said Lo Yamish mi'Lifnei ha'Am. Rather, it says "Lifnei ha'Am" to teach that the cloud remains until the fire comes. i.e. before it departs, the fire already came in front of the Am.

Maharal: If one departed before the other came, it would seem that there are two powers, Heaven forbid. Rather, before it departs, the other comes, for both of them are from Hash-m, Who is one. This is why we must mention the Midah of the day at night (in the first Berachah before Shma), and the Midah of night during the day (Berachos 11b), to show that both come from one Maker. We light Ner Shabbos for the sake of the night, and via it, man sees. Therefore, it is like the pillar of fire, via which Yisrael went. Ner Shabbos is a Mitzvah. It is like Ner Hash-m, like the pillar of fire. Therefore, one must light it before sunset, like the pillar of fire. (NOTE: Maharal holds that Bein ha'Shemashos begins a period of time after sunset. If not, one would need to light before sunset even without the semblance to the pillar of fire! - PF) Rav Elyashiv - Rav Yosef proved from the pillar of fire that one must light early even when there is no concern for Isur, e.g. on Yom Tov. The SMA's son (introduction to Perishah) brings from his mother that on Yom Tov Rishon, she must light before her husband returns from the Beis ha'Keneses, so everything will be ready.

Why may one not light too early?

Rashi: Then it is not evident that the Ner is for Shabbos.

Rav Elyashiv: The Rambam explained that this refers to Ner Chanukah. Why did Rav Yosef tell his wife to light early? Women do not light Ner Chanukah! The Magen Avraham says that a blind man, his wife lights for him. If this refers to Ner Chanukah, it shows that it is a Mitzvah to light early, so they will be lit when the time of the obligation comes. This requires investigation.

Why will one who loves Chachamim have children who are Chachamim?

Maharal: One's Nefesh is tied to one whom he loves. Surely his Nefesh is totally tied to his son. If he loved Chachamim, he will be totally tied to Torah.

Iyun Yakov: Since he loves Chachamim and has mercy on them like a father on his son, Midah k'Neged Midah, his sons will be Chachamim.

Why will who honors Chachamim have son-in-laws who are Chachamim?

Maharal: He does so because he honors Torah. Therefore, Torah should honor him - "Ki Mechabedai Achabed." One who honors Torah, people honor him (Avos 4:1). A son-in-law is mere honor - he is not a son, who is the father's flesh. This is like garments, which R. Yochanan called 'what honors me' (below, 111a), for they cling to man. So sons-in-law cling to him via Kidushin with his daughters.

Iyun Yakov: This is Midah k'Neged Midah - one is obligated to honor his father-in-law. If his sons are Chachamim, they do not honor him; they should distance from each other (Rema YD 240:7 - if people do not know that he is the Chacham's father, he would disgrace the honor of his Torah if he lower himself in front of his father). Maharam did so.

Why will one who fears Chachamim himself become a Chacham?

Maharal: One who fears another, he nullifies himself to him. He esteems him, but not himself. One who fears Chachamim, he totally clings to them and becomes a Chacham. This is unlike one who loves another; he does not nullify himself to him.

Maharsha: Love is a higher level than fear. (All the more so, one who loves Chachamim should himself become a Chacham!) Since he loves Chachamim, surely he is already a Chacham. Amei ha'Aretz, including R. Akiva in his youth, have great hatred for Chachamim (Pesachim 49b). Therefore, his reward will be that also his sons will be Chachamim.

Rav Elyashiv: Shimon ha'Amsoni feared to expound only "Es Hash-m Elokecha Sira" (Kidushin 57a) - this is fear and authority. He expounded "v'Ahavta Es Hash-m Elokecha" (which is earlier in Torah), to include loving Chachamim. Maharsha holds that any non-Chacham is an Am ha'Aretz, and hates Chachamim. See what I wrote in Pesachim 49a (NOTE: that there is a level in the middle. I prove this from Kesuvos 111b. An Am ha'Aretz can merit Techiyah via marrying his daughter to a Chacham and benefiting Chachamim from his property. Would one who hates Chachamim do so?! Also, all of Pumbadisa hated Rabah [because he rebuked them for fraud - below, 153a]. Surely Chachamim did not hate him. If all others hate Chachamim, Rabah is like all Chachamim! Also, usually, Bnei Chachamim are not Chachamim (Nedarim 81a). Do most Chachamim not love Chachamim?! - PF)

Chashukei Chemed citing R. S.Z. Auerbach: Fear of Hash-m is natural. One sees Midas ha'Din in the world! Ahavas Hash-m is a higher level that requires work to acquire it. Regarding Chachamim, it is simpler to love them. It is harder to acquire fear of them, that 'their sting is the sting of a scorpion' (Avos 2:10).

Iyun Yakov: He fears his Rebbi like Shamayim. Midah k'Neged Midah, people will fear him and heed his words.

Kol Eliyahu, Divrei Eliyahu: The Vilna Gaon changed the text to 'one who fears Chachamim will have son-in-laws who are Chachamim; one who honors Chachamim will himself become a Chacham.' A verse supports this. We find that "Es Hash-m" includes Chachamim, like R. Akiva expounded "Es Hash-m Elokecha Sira." After "v'Ahavta Es Hash-m Elokecha" (which includes loving Chachamim) it says "v'Shinantam l'Vanecha" - he will merit children who are Chachamim. "V'Atem ha'Devekim ba'Shem" - is it possible to cling to Hash-m?! Rather, if one marries his daughter to a Chacham... (he is considered to cling to the Shechinah - Kesuvos 111b). i.e. one who fears Chachamim (after "Es Hash-m Elokecha Sira", it says "u'Vo Sidvak") will merit son-in-laws who are Chachamim. (NOTE: We similarly expound there "You will love Hash-m and cling to Him." Granted, we already expounded that one who loves Chachamim will merit children who are Chachamim. Why do we not additionally expound that he will merit son-in-laws who are Chachamim? - PF)

When is it not feasible for someone to become a Chacham?

Rashi: He does not regularly engage in Torah.

Rav Elyashiv: He lacks aptitude, or there are other impediments. (NOTE: Eliyahu's rebuke of the fisherman (Eliyahu Zuta 14, Yalkut Shimoni Nitzavim 940) implies that all people have aptitude for Torah - "Karov Elecha ha'Davar Me'od"! However, perhaps it applies only to those who know a trade, but not to people who carry burdens. Surely deaf-mutes and lunatics are excluded! - PF)

Why will his words be heeded like those of a Chacham?

Maharal: A Chacham's words are heeded, for physicality heeds intellect. One who fears Chachamim, he draws close to intellect. If he cannot be a Chacham, he will approach his level, and his words will be heeded.