What is the meaning of 'over Rav Chisda'?

Rashi: The man stood and Rav Chisda sat, so it was as if he was over him.

Is the greatest praise, that Hash-m gave a three-fold Torah to a three-fold nation...? Is it not better to say that He chose us from all the nations...? And why is this next to the Drashah of holding the mountain over them?

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Even though Hash-m saw that Yisrael will sin with the Egel, He sought merits for them to give to them a three-fold Torah, and even though He would need to hold the mountain over them.

Iyun Yakov #1: Via Torah, which was given in three-fold ways, one is saved from Leshon ha'Ra, i.e. Lishna Tilsai (it kills three - the speaker, listener and the one slandered - Erchin 15b).

Iyun Yakov #2: Via Torah, Yisrael merited three crowns (Koheles Rabah).

What is the significance of all the three-fold aspects of Matan Torah?

Maharal (88b): The third is separate; it has balance. Physical matters normally lack balance. Every third has middle, which is balance.

Maharsha: In all of them, the first has an attribute, the second has an attribute not found in the first, and the third is greater than the first two.

Etz Yosef citing Yefe To'ar: This is like "veha'Chut ha'Meshulash Lo vi'Mherah Yinasek." Rav Elyashiv - We learn from here that if a Chacham's son and grandson are Chachamim, Torah will not cease from his seed. (NOTE: Bava Metzi'a 85a learns this from "Ruchi... u'Dvari... Lo Yamushu mi'Picha umi'Pi Zar'acha umi'Pi Zera Zar'acha... me'Atah v'Ad Olam." - PF)

Etz Yosef citing Ba'al Nehar Pishon: The number three has a natural and Divine Segulah. (NOTE: The three Avos correspond to the three primary Sefiros (Midos of Hash-m), and so do the three festivals...

How is the Torah three-fold?

Rashi: It has Torah, Nevi'im and Kesuvim.

Maharsha: Kesuvim have an attribute - they are via Ru'ach ha'Kodesh. Nevi'im, via Nevu'ah, is a higher level. Torah is the highest level - it was via Moshe, whose prophecy was via a clear glass - "Peh El Peh Adaber Bo... v'Lo b'Chidos."

Iyun Yakov: There is written Torah, oral Torah and their hidden parts.

Etz Yosef: Also Mishnah (NOTE: i.e. oral Torah) has Talmud, Halachos and Agados (Tanchuma (Warsaw) Yisro 10).

How is Yisrael three-fold?

Rashi: It has Kohanim, Leviyim and Yisraelim.

Maharsha: Yisrael are Kedoshim - they are separated from the nations. Leviyim are above them - "v'Hivdalta Es ha'Leviyim." Kohanim are higher than both of them - "va'Yibadel Aharon Lehakdisho Kodesh Kodoshim."

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Leviyim did not sin with the Egel; they are greater than Yisraelim, and Kohanim are highest.

Iyun Yakov #1: They rely on the merits of their three Avos.

Iyun Yakov #2: There are three Simanim of Yisrael - they are merciful, have shame, and bestow Chesed.

How was Torah given via a third?

Rashi: Moshe was born third, after Miryam and Aharon.

Maharsha: Miryam had the attribute of Nevu'ah, but not for matters that pertain to Mitzvos. Aharon's Nevu'ah was a higher level - Hash-m said several Parshiyos of Torah to him. (NOTE: The Torah says that "Yayin v'Shechar" was said to Aharon (Vayikra 10:5-6). Rashi (ibid. 1:1, citing Sifra) says that in 13 places, the Torah says that Hash-m told Mitzvos to Moshe and Aharon; 13 exclusions teach that He told only Moshe. However, some disagree. - PF) Moshe's Nevu'ah was highest - "Lo Kam k'Moshe Od", and the entire Torah is called on his name.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Moshe was away from Yisrael, and had no connection to the Egel. Miryam, and all women, did not contribute for it. Also Aharon, he intended l'Shem Shamayim.

Was Torah given on the third day?

Rashi: It was the third day from separation [from relations].

Maharsha: The first day of separation was not total - they had not separated the previous night. The second day was greater - also the night was abstention. The third day was greatest - the separation finished, so they could immerse and be Tehorim for Matan Torah.

Rav Elyashiv: This is why we say that the teaching is like Rabanan. According to R. Yosi, also the first day, they abstained also at night.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): On Rosh Chodesh, Yisrael said Na'aseh. At Matan Torah, they wanted to retract, so Hash-m held the mountain over them. Had this been the same day, they could claim that they were forced. However, after three days of separation, their minds were settled. We were considered like a betrothed woman, who may not retract, so He properly forced us. (NOTE: What is Rif's source that Yisrael said Na'aseh on Rosh Chodesh? Both Tana'im say that it was on Sivan 2 (86b-87a)! Why does inability to retract depend on three days from separation? If we could not retract on the third day of separation according to Rabanan, all the more so we could not retract three full days after separation according to R. Yosi! - PF)

Why is this like Rabanan? R. Yosi agrees that there were three days of separation, just they argue when it began!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): According to R. Yosi, the Torah was given on the fourth day from separation. (NOTE: The Torah says "ba'Yom ha'Shelishi", and both Tana'im explain that it was the third day from separation! - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf: R. Chananel brings texts that omit 'like whom is this? It is like Chachamim.'

What is the significance of the third month?

Tanchuma Yisro 11: This is like a female convert, captive or freed slave may not marry until three months. Rosh (Yisro 19:1) - normally, three full months are needed; amidst dearness of Yisrael to Hash-m, He counted part of the first month and third months as full months, and gave the Torah (marriage to Yisrael) early in the third month.

Maharsha: When Yisrael left Egypt, they were steeped in Aveiros, like the deeds of Egypt. They were not proper for Torah until purifying themselves for 50 days. The first month, Hash-m gave to them two Mitzvos - Milah and Pesach, to separate them from the deeds of Egypt. The second month they received several Mitzvos in Marah and with the manna. In the third month they were proper to receive the entire Torah.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Yisrael did not have three months to be Muchzakim in distancing from the idolatry of Egypt. Moshe hinted to this in his Tefilah "why are You angry with Your nation that You took out of [Tamei] Egypt?"

What is a Gigis?

Rashi: It is a big pot in which people put beer.

Aruch: It is a wicker basket with holes. (NOTE: I heard from R' David Kaplan, that Hash-m let Yisrael see outside, i.e. life without Torah; if you will not accept, you will be buried there - PF)

How do we learn from "b'Sachtis ha'Har"?

Rashi: They were literally under the mountain.

Maharsha: It does not say Tachas, rather, b'Sachtis - like a Gigis, which surrounds from all sides. Also, 'you will be buried there' - like a grave, surrounded on all sides.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Merafsin Igra (p.184): Here it says that if they will not accept, they will be buried there. Above, we said that if Yisrael will not accept, the world will return to emptiness! And why must He hold the mountain over them? If they refuse, the entire world will cease to exist! One who is Mekadesh 'on condition that your father consents', even if her father initially protested, he can return to consent (EH 38:10); it is a Safek until he dies (Rema). Also here, if Yisrael refuse, they can retract and accept, until they die. (NOTE: The stipulation was that they must accept on Sivan 6! Does he explain, if they will accept at any time the Torah that will be offered to them on Sivan 6?! - PF) Or, accepting written Torah sufficed to sustain the world; He put the mountain over them to accept oral Torah.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): We learn from "va'Yisyatzvu" - because initially they stood upright and said Na'aseh v'Nishma, afterwards, when they wanted to retract, Hash-m forced them.

Why did Hash-m need to bend Har Sinai over Yisrael like a Gigis? They already said Na'aseh v'Nishma!

Tosfos: Perhaps they would retract when they see the great fire. Their Neshamos departed!

Maharal (Netzach Yisrael 11): This is difficult. Yisrael's merit was saying Na'aseh v'Nishma. Heaven forbid to say that they would have retracted!

Maharal: Had they accepted willingly, they would think that Torah depends on their desire, and they can cease to guard it and nullify Matan Torah. Rather, they were forced to accept it, so they can never nullify this. One who marries a woman with her consent, he may divorce her. If he forced (raped) her, he may never divorce her. A Midrash says that Hash-m acted like a rapist; the Chibur (connection) can never be undone.

Daf Al ha'Daf: The Hafla'ah (Kesuvos 7a) brings from Seforim ha'Kedoshim that 'Har k'Gigis' is like a Chupah. The Torah itself is Eirusin. We bless 'Mekadesh Es Amo Yisrael Al Yedei Chupah v'Kidushin.'

Maharsha: Saying Na'aseh v'Nishma is not a total acceptance, until they accept with a Bris and Shevu'ah.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Yisrael wanted to retract; Hash-m needed to force them.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov), Rav Elyashiv and Daf Al ha'Daf, citing Tanchuma: They accepted written Torah willingly; they needed to be forced about oral Torah.

Etz Yosef: They did not accept oral Torah, for it entails exertion and pain, and fine points of light and severe Mitzvos. They did not think that they can fulfill all of them.

Daf Al ha'Daf: R' Y. Alter asked, since they said Na'aseh before Nishma, how did they know that written Torah does not entail exertion and pain?

Ben Yehoyada: Hash-m hollowed out the mountain and held it over them, to force them to accept also oral Torah. He hinted that oral Torah derives mounds of Halachos from every word of written Torah, like a receptacle that can hold millions of drops of wine. If you do not accept it, your burial will be there - in Malchus, like a denier, who is cut off from the primary world to come.

Iyun Yakov: They willingly accepted Torah when they said Na'aseh v'Nishma. However, they accepted the Torah "Lema'an Yitav Lahem v'Livneihem l'Olam", so that the angel of death would not rule over them, or [according to a different opinion] so that the nations would not rule over them. They accepted on condition that if they sin, and death (or Galus and Shibud) is decreed on them, they will be exempt from Torah and Mitzvos, like we expound "b'Mesim Chafshi." The Moda'ah is that they were forced to accept in any case. When they sinned and were exiled and became slaves of Achashverosh, amidst dearness of the miracle done for them, they accepted Torah and Mitzvos, even in Galus.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Sefas Emes: They needed to be forced only about Mesiras Nefesh for the three severe Aveiros. The rest they accepted willingly.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing ha'Makneh (Kidushin 57a): Even though they had great desire and supreme fear [of Hash-m's grandeur] at Matan Torah - "Pen Yehersu El Hash-m Lir'os", He needed to warn them about fear of punishment - 'if not, you will be buried there.' Even though supreme fear is a great level, there is also an attribute in fear of punishment.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing the Ba'al Shem Tov: Hash-m taught that even when vitality ceases, and Torah is a heavy burden, one must accept the yoke of Torah, as if he is forced. So a youth should not cease learning even when he does not desire.

What is the Moda'ah for Kabalas ha'Torah?

Rashi: If they will be judged for not fulfilling the Torah that they accepted, they can say that they were coerced to accept!

Tosfos: We say in Nedarim (25a) that Moshe made a Bris with Yisrael about Torah and Mitzvos, and made them swear about this. It says in Sotah (37b) that they accepted the entire Torah in Har Gerizim and Har Eival! Also that, Hash-m obligated them; it is as if they were forced.

Rav Elyashiv: The Mordechai (Shevu'os 757) says that the acceptance in Arvos Mo'av was considered forced, for they feared that if they refuse the Torah, Hash-m will make them wander in the Midbar, and they needed to enter Eretz Yisrael immediately. Even so, the acceptance was considered Ones, for Hash-m already promised that they, the children of those who accepted the Meraglim's words, will enter the land.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): They said Na'aseh v'Nishma, but they did not accept punishment if they will not fulfill it. Regarding this, they were forced.

Why is this a Moda'ah? Hash-m obligated them to fulfill Torah! If Chachamim coerced someone until he authorized to divorcee or bring a Korban, this is valid. Since it is a Mitzvah to obey Chachamim, amidst coercion, he resolved to do the Mitzvah. Obeying Hash-m is the ultimate Mitzvah!

Rav Elyashiv: Only after Matan Torah, Yisrael are obligated to guard Torah, we say that he wants to follow the Mitzvah. Beforehand, there is a claim of Ones. However, one who sold amidst coercion, the sale is valid(Bava Basra 48b), for he received in place of it. Here is like a sale, for via Kabalas ha'Torah the world continued to exist. Based on letter of the law, there is no claim of Ones. However, since there was not Ratzon (willingness), there is a Moda'ah.

Rav Elyashiv: In Avodah Zarah (2b-3a), it says that in the future, the Goyim will say 'did You hold a mountain over us, and we refused it?!' Hash-m answers, you did not observe your seven Mitzvos (therefore I did not force you to accept the rest). This shows that if the Avos willingly accepted, it is as if their seed accepted.

Mishneh l'Melech (Hilchos Mechirah 10:1) brings from the Mordechai that one who is mortally threatened resolves even to give a free gift. Since Yisrael were threatened mortally, surely they resolved, and there is no Moda'ah!

Daf Al ha'Daf: Beis Efrayim answered that Devarim sheb'Lev (intents that were not verbalized) help only if they are clearly known, i.e. one who is coerced to give a gift says ' I consent' only due to the coercion. Hash-m knows all thoughts, i.e. Yisrael accepted due to the coercion, so there was a Moda'ah. Minchas Yitzchak (6:107) asked, "Mi Yiten v'Hayah Levavam Zeh..." implies that Yisrael truly feared Hash-m at the time!

Daf Al ha'Daf: The Radak said that since Hash-m knows thoughts, they were coerced also regarding thoughts!

Daf Al ha'Daf: Tzitz Eliezer (4:21) says that 'amidst coercion, he resolves' is only when this ceases the coercion. Here it did not - they must always fulfill Torah! Therefore, it is a Moda'ah.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Os Tziyon (p.198) says that amidst a mortal threat, one resolves to give a gift once, but not if he will be obligated to forever give gifts.

Daf Al ha'Daf: R' D. Friedman says, the Mordechai (Gitin 394) distinguishes Sikrikon from a Gazlan. Sikrikon comes to kill - his victim offers him land in place of killing him. He resolves to give his land! Gazlan comes to steal - he threatens his victim, if you refuse, I will kill you. He consents only due to the coercion. Hash-m was like the latter - He wanted Yisrael to accept Torah. He did not come to kill them!

It says in Avodah Zarah (2b) that the Nochrim will say 'did You bend Har Sinai over us like a Gigis?' This implies that had Hash-m done so, they would have no defense for not guarding Torah. Here we say that it is a great Moda'ah!

Tosfos: Had Hash-m bent Har Sinai over them like a Gigis, they would have no defense for not accepting Torah. They would have a defense for not guarding it.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Tal Torah (Avodah Zarah 2b) says that the Rambam (Hilchos Gerushin 2:20) says that Beis Din can force a man to divorce, because a Jew's Nefesh wants to do good, just the Yetzer ha'Ra entices him to sin. After coercion, his desire returns. Beis Yosef (EH Sof 134, citing Maharik) derives that coercion does not help for a Mumar. All the more so it does not help for Goyim. Therefore, Hash-m did not force them.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Parshas Derachim (Drush 22): Moda'ah applies only to something that his colleague forces him to do Bal Korcho (against his will). If a king commanded his servants to do something, they must do it. They cannot claim Ones - Dina d'Malchusa Dina, and all the more so Dina of Melech Olam! The Ran (Gitin 4) says that Dina d'Malchusa is only for general decrees. A decree about an individual is royal extortion. The coercion of Matan Torah was not general - it was only for Yisrael. Had Hash-m forced all the nations, Dina d'Malchusa would have applied. This answers Tosfos' question. Had the verse said Eleh Elokecha Yisrael Asher Ha'alcha (singular, i.e. it alone redeemed us), Bnei Yisrael would have been worthy to be destroyed (Sanhedrin 63a). Rather, it says He'elucha (the Egel redeemed us, with Hash-m). Sho'el u'Meshiv (3:51) asks, Yisrael are liable also for Shituf (serving idolatry with Hash-m)! I answer that Hash-m decreed on everyone not to serve idolatry alone; it is binding on all. Only Yisrael were forbidden Shituf; Moda'ah helps for this.

Why did they accept Torah in the days of Achashverosh?

Rashi: It was amidst love of the miracle done for them.

In Megilah (7a), several sources were given that Megilas Esther was written with Ru'ach ha'Kodesh. Shmuel learned from "Kiymu v'Kiblu" - they fulfilled in Heaven what they accepted below. Rava said that one can dispel the other proofs, but not Shmuel's. Here, Rava himself expounds it differently - Jews affirmed what they already accepted!

Tosfos #1: If the text there says Rabah, this is fine.

Tosfos #2: Rava means, the other opinions are logically difficult. Shmuel is not so difficult, just his verse is needed for another Drashah.

Maharsha: We expound "Kiymu v'Kiblu", for if it referred to matters of the Megilah, it should have said Kiblu v'Kiymu - surely acceptance precedes fulfillment! In Shevu'os 39a we make a third Drashah - Mikra Megilah was already said at Sinai. Yisrael fulfilled what they already accepted [at Sinai]. All these Drashos are equal, so we expound all of them.

Ha'Kosev: The Rashba asked, if they were not obligated before Achashverosh, why were they punished? (NOTE: The Rashba's Chidushim on Dapim 69-90 were lost, but this is verbatim in the Ramban here. - PF) If it is because they transgressed their King's decree, this Moda'ah is Batel! Also, why did He obligate them to accept and make a Bris? It seems that initially they had a Moda'ah. However, Eretz Yisrael was given to them in order to fulfill the Torah - "va'Yiten Lahem Artzos Goyim... Ba'avur Yishmeru..." Initially, Yisrael did not mention the Moda'ah, as if they willingly said "Kol Asher Diber Hash-m Na'aseh v'Nishma." therefore, when they transgressed the Torah, they were exiled from the land. After exile, there is a Moda'ah - "veha'Oleh Al Ruchachem... Nihyeh ka'Goyim..." We say (Sanhedrin 105a), Yisrael asked Yechezkel, a master who sold his slave - does he have any claim against him?! When they entered the land the second time, in the days of Ezra, they willingly accepted Torah, without any claims of Moda'ah. Salvation from death was dearer to them than Ge'ulas Mitzrayim!

Etz Yosef citing Iyei ha'Yam: This answer is not enough. They received punishments other than Galus - sword, hunger, evil beasts and plague! I answer based on Tanchuma - they were punished for transgressing written Torah, including idolatry, Arayos and murder; they willingly accepted written Torah. (Also Merafsin Igra p.187 says so.)

Rav Elyashiv: Hash-m rejected Yisrael's claim. Even though they can say that they accepted only if they will be in Eretz Yisrael, they must obey Hash-m's command! In the days of Achashverosh, they accepted to guard Torah in all places and situations.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Gur Aryeh explains, since they willingly added a Mitzvah of Mikra Megilah, this shows that they accept the other Mitzvos. If not, why do they add?! If Reuven fenced between his property and Shimon's, and surround him on three sides, and Shimon fenced the fourth side, he must pay Reuven half the cost of the first three sides, for he revealed that it pleases him. R' Y. Engel learns from Kidushin 52b. If Reuven entered Shimon's field, gathered fruit, and separated Terumah without asking Shimon, and Shimon added more, the Terumah is valid.

What is the meaning of "[Hishmata] Din [Eretz]"?

Rashi: [You made them hear] Torah.

Maharsha: This refers to Din (judgment) against the land, i.e. it will return to non-existence if Yisrael will not accept the Torah.

What was the question 'if Yar'ah, why Shakatah? If Shakatah, why Yar'ah'?

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Yar'ah (past tense) implies that later there was serenity; Shakatah implies that initially, there was fear. The Gemara asked why it needed to say both of them

Iyun Yakov: "Hishmata Din" implies that Hash-m will judge Resha'im who do not guard Torah and Mitzvos. The land feared, for if they transgress, Hash-m will destroy the land and all flesh on it. (NOTE: Even if He swore not to flood the entire world, He can flood part, or send fire... - PF) If so, why was the land serene after Matan Torah - there is still concern! You must say that it knew that people will fulfill Torah. If it knows the future, why did it fear before Matan Torah? We answer that it does not know the future. It feared lest Yisrael not accept Torah, and the land will revert to nothingness. When Yisrael said Na'aseh v'Nishma, it was serene, for the stipulation was only that they accept Torah.

What are 'initially' and 'in the end'?

Rashi: They are before Yisrael accepted the Torah, and after they accepted it, respectively.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): It discusses two times. (a) Initially is at the time of Matan Torah. When the other nations refused the Torah, there was fear lest no one accept it, and the world will cease to exist. (b) In the future, when Hash-m comes to reward those who engage in Torah, the Goyim will request witnesses that Yisrael fulfilled it. The land will fear lest witnesses not be found. After the Goyim testify about Yisrael, the land will be serene. (NOTE: I do not understand this fear. Hash-m does not deny any creature's reward. If witnesses were not found, would Hash-m not pay Yisrael due to Goyim's request? He knows that they guarded it! - PF)

Why must we expound the Hei in ha'Shishi?

Rashi: On the other days of creation, there is no prefix Hei.

What is the source to expound that the creation was contingent of Yisrael accepting the Torah?

Rashi: Ha'Shishi implies a special sixth, known elsewhere. We expound "ha'Yarech" - the capable thigh (Chulin 91a).

R. Yosi holds that Yisrael accepted the Torah on the seventh. How does he expound "ha'Shishi"?

Tosfos (Avodah Zarah 3a) #1: On Rosh Chodesh, Hash-m did not address Yisrael, due to weakness from traveling. (They accepted the Torah on the sixth day from when Hash-m began discussing Matan Torah with them.)

Tosfos (Avodah Zarah 3a) #2: It was proper to give the Torah on the sixth. Moshe chose to add a day (NOTE: to enable Kabalas ha'Torah in greater Taharah. This is like acceptance! - PF)

Etz Yosef: He could expound like Tanchuma (Bereishis 1); the extra Hei hints that the world depends on the Torah, which has five Seforim (Chumashim)!

Rav Elyashiv: He holds like Pirkei d'R. Eliezer (46), that the Torah was given on Erev Shabbos. Ha'Shishi refers to Erev Shabbos; it was the seventh of Sivan. (NOTE: If he agrees that Yetzi'as Mitzrayim was on Thursday, he must say that both Nisan and Iyar were Chaserim. - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf (86b citing Avodas Avodah, Avodah Zarah 3a): Yisrael had the law of Bnei Noach until they came to Har Sinai on Rosh Chodesh Sivan, during the day. The first part of that day (the previous night) was considered Erev Rosh Chodesh, for the night followed the day. The sixth full day of Sivan was six days later - the seventh. After the first year, the day follows the night from the beginning, so Shavu'os is Sivan 6 (NOTE: i.e. the 50th day from the Omer. It need not be Sivan 6, e.g. if both Nisan and Iyar had 29 days, or both had 30. - PF)

What were the crowns made of?

Rashi: They were from radiance of the Shechinah.

Tosfos: They were of Hod (glory). Therefore, when Moshe took them, is face radiated.

Iyun Yakov: One crown was freedom from Galus, and the other was freedom from the angel of death. Therefore, when they sinned, Galus and death were decreed on them. Moshe took the crowns - he did not die via the angel of death, and he never suffered Shibud Galus. Just the contrary, he conquered Sichon and Og! In the future, Hash-m will return them - death and Shibud Galus will cease.

Iyun Yakov: Normally, learning is great, for it leads to deed (Kidushin 40b). i.e. it saves from the Yetzer ha'Ra. Putting Na'aseh before Nishma showed Bitul of the Yetzer ha'Ra, so now Torah was not merely for the sake of deed. It was its own end! Therefore, they merited two crowns, and not only one.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Beis ha'Levi and Chemdas Shlomo: Had they said Nishma before Na'aseh, this would imply that we will learn in order to know how to do the Mitzvos. If so, learning is merely in order to fulfill. Rather, first they said Na'aseh, which includes learning in order to fulfill, and afterwards Nishma - we will learn for the sake of Torah itself. Therefore, they merited two crowns.

Rav Elyashiv, based on Nefesh ha'Chayim 1:16: They were spiritual ornaments. The Gemara implies that only adult men received them, for it says that 600,000 angels gave them, and twice that number removed them. (NOTE: Many say that Reshus ha'Rabim must have 600,000 people passing through each day, like in the Midbar. Surely there were more than twice this amount if we include women and children! Rather, we use the number that the Torah revealed, even if it pertains to Misas Beis Din. All the more so, we can say that the Gemara used this number because the Torah said so, but not to exclude women and children! -PF)

What is the source that twice as many angels came to remove the crowns?

Tosfos: We learn from "va'Yisnatzlu". Some texts explicitly say 'it does not say va'Yinatzlu, rather, va'Yisnatzlu.' (NOTE: Bereishis Rabah 89:5 expounds that two matters irked Nebuchadnetzar, for it says va'Tispa'em, as opposed to va'Tipa'em regarding Pharaoh. - PF) Midah Tovah is greater than the Midah of punishment. Each good angel gave two crowns, and each damaging angel had power to remove only one.

Maharsha: Via Keser Torah, they merited two other crowns - of kingship and Kehunah - "V'Atem Tihyu Li Mamleches Kohanim v'Goy Kadosh." Putting Na'aseh before Nishma shows acceptance of the two parts of Torah - Mitzvos Aseh and Lavim. Because they fulfilled Mitzvos Aseh before hearing the Lavim, they merited these two crowns. Each angel held Keser Kehunah in his right hand (Chesed), and Keser Malchus in his left hand (Din). When they sinned with the Egel, and transgressed the Aseh "Anochi Hash-m Elokecha" and the Lav "Lo Yihyeh Lecha Elohim Acherim Al Panai", which they heard from Hash-m (Makos 24a), Damaging angels descended - the angel of death ruled over them, "k'Adam Tamusun." The crowns were removed when Yisrael were exiled for Chet ha'Egel - "uv'Yom Pakdi u'Fakadti..." This was at the time of the Churban - "Karvu Pekudos ha'Ir" (Sanhedrin 102a). Kingship and Kehunah ceased then - "remove the Mitznefes and lift off the crown" (Gitin 7a) - crowns are only when the Kohen Gadol wears his Mitznefes (i.e. when the Mikdash stands). "Va'Yisnatzlu... Edyam me'Har Chorev" - when the Beis ha'Mikdash, which is called Har, is Charev (destroyed), There were twice the number of angels, for kingship and Kehunah ceased twice - at Churban Rishon and Churban Sheni. (NOTE: Each time, there was one angel for each person. 'Twice 600,000' hints to the sum of the number at Churban Rishon and at Churban Sheni; we do not know the actual number. Perhaps it says that 600,000 gave the crowns, for so we call Yisrael's population in the Midbar, even if also men below 20 and women received crowns. - PF)

Maharal: One angel tied both on each person, for Na'aseh and Nishma are one matter. One does not exist without the other. A separate damaging angel was sent to remove each, for there was no connection between taking one and taking the other.

Iyun Yakov: It makes no difference whether one angel takes all the crowns, or each takes one. Hash-m sent them lest there be many prosecutors above. This is Midah Tovah!

What do we learn from "u'Moshe Yikach Es ha'Ohel"?

Rashi #1: He took the crowns.

Maharsha: Moshe received the crowns (he was Melech, and Kohen Gadol during Chaunkas ha'Mishkan) due to learning in the Ohel, i.e. the crown of Torah.

Rashi #2: Ohel is like "b'Hilo Nero Alei Roshi" - this was the radiance that came from Moshe's face.

What is the significance of "u'Fduyei Hash-m Yeshuvun... v'Simchas Olam Al Rosham"?

Maharsha: The previous redemptions were via angels - "u'Mal'ach Panav Hoshi'em." In the future, Hash-m will redeem us, and the crowns will be on our heads forever.

Here it says that an apple tree's fruit precedes its leaves. We see that it is like other trees (the leaves come first)!

Tosfos: Tapu'ach is Esrog. The Targum of "Rei'ach Apecha k'Sapuchim" is k'Reicha d'Esroga. Its fruit precedes its leaves, for the fruit remains on the tree from year to year (NOTE: for three years - PF), and after a year its leaves fall. When new leaves grow the next year, Esrogim are on the tree before the leaves.

Maharsha: Deed is compared to fruits, and hearing to leaves, for 'learning is not primary, rather, deed' (Avos 1:17).

Iyun Yakov: Other trees, if the leaves do not protect the fruits, things will stop the fruits from growing, just like the Yetzer ha'Ra blocks man from doing Mitzvos. Yisrael are like an apple tree (nothing will stop them from fruits, i.e. good deeds).

Daf Al ha'Daf: The Imrei Emes said that there is a species of apple trees that grow leaves before fruits. R' N. Lubart said that fruits are initially the size of a bean, and a flower and leaves come on top. The fruit is not considered Pri yet, so we say that the leaves came first. An apple is considered a Pri even when it is tiny, so the fruits came first. 'Apples and Esrogim, both big and small must be tithed' (Ma'aseros 1:4).

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Likutei Imrei Emes: Perhaps after Yisrael sinned, the sprouting of apples changed. Alternatively, the Targum is 'like apple trees of Gan Eden.' Perhaps their fruits precede their leaves!

Why did we bring "k'Sapu'ach ba'Atzei ha'Ya'ar [Ken Dodi Bein ha'Banim]", which refers to Hash-m? We should have brought "Rei'ach Apecha k'Sapuchim", which refers to Yisrael!

Tosfos: This is difficult.

Maharsha: Perhaps the Gemara hints to the Seifa "Ken Rayasi Bein ha'Banos", which refers to Yisrael amidst the nations.

Etz Yosef: Surely Yisrael compared Hash-m to an apple tree because they themselves resemble it in their deeds! The way we appear in front of Him, so He appears to us!

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Likutei Imrei Emes: Perhaps the tree is compared to Hash-m, and the fruits to Yisrael. The Zohar says that Yisrael are called the limbs of the Shechinah.

Why is "Osei Devaro Lishmo'a" special about angels?

Rashi: They are prepared to do, even before they hear the command. Other servants must first hear the command, to know whether or not they can fulfill.

Iyun Yakov: Learning is great, for it leads to deed (Kidushin 40b). i.e. "Yetzer Lev ha'Adam Ra mi'Ne'urav" - it blocks a person from good deeds. Engaging in Torah saves from the Yetzer ha'Ra; it is the spice for the Yetzer ha'Ra. Angels have no Yetzer ha'Ra, so deed is primary for them. Therefore, first they do. Also Yisrael, when they said Na'aseh v'Nishma, their hearts were totally with Hash-m; the Yetzer ha'Ra was uprooted from their hearts. Therefore, they could do first and hear later.

Why is putting Na'aseh before Nishma called a secret?

Maharsha: An angel is totally spiritual. It has no intent other than to do Hash-m's will. It is prepared to do so; it is as if it is already done. Man is a partnership of body and Nefesh. He has a Yetzer ha'Ra, which incites to do evil, unlike His will. At Matan Torah, this secret was revealed to Yisrael, to have only one intent (His will) - "Mi Yiten v'Hayah Levavam Zeh..." i.e. both their hearts (Yetzarim) had one intent, like angels, who are ready to do before they hear.

Etz Yosef: Had they put Nishma first, they would be commanded and fulfill. This is a higher level than fulfilling without being commanded, for the Yetzer ha'Ra entices him to transgress (Tosfos). This does not apply to angels, so they put Na'aseh first - it is better to fulfill without being commanded (NOTE: for he does more than he is required - Kidushin 31a). At Matan Torah, Yisrael's Yetzer ha'Ra ceased, so also they put Na'aseh first.

Why did the Tzeduki say that we should have heard first?

Rashi: Only after hearing, we can judge whether or not we can fulfill, and decide whether or not to accept.

What did Rava answer the Tzeduki?

Rashi: We went with a pure heart. We serve amidst love, and rely on Hash-m not to impose on us more than we can fulfill.

Iyun Yakov: The nations asked 'what is written in the Torah?' We did not, for our heart was totally with Hash-m.

Maharsha: Shamayim leads one in the way that he wants to go. One who wants to be Metaher himself, Hash-m helps him (104a). "Tumas Yesharim" are those who want to go in the straight path. Even if it is hard for them, "Tanchem" (Shamayim helps them).

What are 'those who have many accusations'?

Rav Elyashiv: They treat Torah like business. They want to profit from accepting it. Therefore, they ask what is written in it, if we will profit via guarding it.

What do we learn from "v'Selef Bogdim Yeshadem"?

Maharsha: One who wants to go in a crooked path - one who wants to be Metamei himself, Hash-m gives to him the opportunity (104a).

Rav Elyashiv: It says about the Yesharim "Tanchem" - Hash-m helps them. He does not help one who seeks to defile himself, just He lets him do so.

What is the meaning of "Libavtini"?

Rashi: You drew Me close [to you].

Iyun Yakov: He did not explain simply, for their hearts were not proper - "va'Yfatuhu b'Fihem uvi'Lshonam Yechazvu Lo; v'Libam Lo Nachon Imo."

What is the significance of drawing close to Hash-m with one eye, and later with two?

Maharal: At Matan Torah there was only Nishma (hearing and accepting), but not Na'aseh (deed).

Maharsha: Man has intellectual vision, and physical vision. Initially your heart was complete with the former, Na'aseh v'Nishma. Later, through keeping Torah, your heart will be complete also with physical vision, i.e. deed.

Iyun Yakov: If a Kalah's eyes are beautiful, one need not check her body (Ta'anis 24a).

What is Aluvah?

: It is brazen.

Why does it mention a bride who was Mezanah at the Chupah?

Rashi: This is like Yisrael, who made the Egel at Sinai.

Etz Yosef: He means, when they were still engaged in Kabalas ha'Luchos. Moshe was receiving the Luchos when they made the Egel. R. Meir explains the verse to discuss when Hash-m was in His honored place in Shamayim. It is called Chupaso, for He bent all seven Reki'im on Har Sinai.

What is the meaning of "Nasan Reicho"?

Rashi: It abandoned its good scent to others.

Etz Yosef: It abandoned its bad odor - the Mishkan atoned for the Egel. They gave gold for the Egel - so they gave for the Mishkan (Shmos Rabah 48-49).

What is the source that Yisrael retains its dearness to Hash-m?

Rashi: Even though the verse discusses our detriment, it shows our dearness, via not writing 'stank'.

Tosfos: Surely the verse should not have written a derogatory expression! Rather, it should have written Azav Reicho, which would imply that it stank. Rather, it wrote Nasan (as if it gave a good smell) - dearness.

Iyun Yakov: If it putrefied, there is no solution - it must be discarded. However, Yisrael have a solution via Teshuvah. They made [the Egel] only to show [the power of] Teshuvah.

Etz Yosef: The verse teaches that it abandoned its bad odor via Teshuvah (building the Mishkan).

Why does it say both 'he is insulted and does not insult', and 'he hears his shame and does not answer'?

Rif (on the Ein Yakov) #1: The latter means, Ploni hears Reuven slandering Shimon for a shortcoming that also Ploni has. He serves from love - he is quiet because he does not want to disgrace Hash-m's creations, and not amidst fear lest Reuven insult him. (NOTE: He should protest the insult to Shimon! Perhaps he knows that this would only cause Reuven to insult him more. - PF)

Rif (on the Ein Yakov) #2: The latter means, Reuven insults Ploni for a shortcoming that also Reuven has. Ploni is quiet, and does not mention this.

Iyun Yakov: He is insulted not in front of others; he hears his shame in front of others.

One who was insulted - may he insult in return?

Rav Elyashiv: The Me'iri (Yoma 23a) says that Nekamah (vengeance) applies to monetary matters (you did not lend to me, so I will not lend to you). If one struck or insulted someone, Nekamah does not apply. In any case, if he overlooks the insult this is the attribute of 'he is insulted and does not insult.' However, a Chacham may not overlook and pardon his honor, for it is not his own honor; it is the Torah's honor.

How do we learn from "v'Ohavav k'Tzeis ha'Shemesh bi'Gvuraso"?

Maharal: One who is insulted and silent, he seeks to purify himself and separate from physicality. He resembles the sun, which illuminates; light is separated from physicality. Koheles Rabah (3) says that Hash-m seeks [to help] the pursued, and rejects the pursuer. Turim and Bnei Yonah (turtledoves and doves) are pursued more than any other birds, and the Torah allows only these birds for Korbanos (Bava Kama 93a). Esav pursued Yakov - Hash-m loves Yakov and hates Esav (Mal'achi 1). 'He serves from love' is the Midah of Avraham, who is called Ohavi. Rejoicing in afflictions is the Midah of Yitzchak, who was Mechadesh afflictions.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): When the moon complained that two kings cannot reign together, suggesting that it should be supreme and the sun diminished, the sun was silent, and Hash-m made it supreme. So a Ne'elav who does not insult in return, he will be raised.

Anaf Yosef citing Ohr k'Salmah: After the sun demanded that Hash-m wage Moshe's battle against Korach (but it did not protest against people who worship it), every day arrows and spears are shot at it. Even so, "la'Shemesh... Yasis k'Gibor" - it rejoices in its afflictions!

Rav Elyashiv: Because they lose honor via not responding to insult, the verse promises that they will have honor and grandeur.

What afflictions does he accept?

Rashi: He is insulted.

Maharal: This is brought here, for the nations taunt Yisrael 'how great is your sin - you were Mezanah at the Chupah!' Yisrael are insulted and silent. This shows a great level. One who returns insult has brazenness, even though he does so because he was insulted.

Why does he rejoice in afflictions?

Maharal: He yearns for Hash-m in all his deeds. Afflictions come to minimize the body and purify the Nefesh from physicality and sin.

Why does R. Yochanan expound "Hash-m Yiten Omer ha'Mevasros Tzava Rav"?

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): It should have said Omer ha'Mevaser, or Omeros ha'Mevasros. Rather, every utterance split into 70 languages, so Omer (singular) is Mevasros (plural).

What is "Tzava Rav"?

Rashi: It is all the nations.

What is the significance of splitting into 70 languages?

Maharsha: The nations should not have a claim 'had we heard Torah in our language, we would have accepted it.'

How does a hammer divide into many Nitzotzos?

Rashi: It breaks a rock into many pieces.

Tosfos: So the verse implies, and we see that a hammer shatters a rock. However, the Gemara says that the hammer is shattered! We cannot switch the text, for Divrei Torah are compared to a hammer, and they split into many!

Tosfos citing R. Tam: The verse discusses a rock that breaks iron. Midrash Chazis says that a man bought sapphire. To check it, he put it on an anvil and struck it with a sledgehammer. The hammer split, the anvil broke and the sapphire did not budge. The verse means uch'Patish Yefotzetzenu Sela; even so, it says Yefotzetz. Many verses are like this, e.g. "Avanim Sachaku Mayim" - the water minced the rock. We say (Kidushin 30b) 'if this disgusting one (the Yetzer Ra) encounters you, drag it to the Beis Midrash. If it is stone, it will melt - "Avanim Sachaku Mayim." If it is iron, it will be shattered - "uch'Patish Yefotzetz Sala." Even though there the Yetzer ha'Ra is compared to a hammer, and here Divrei Torah are compared to a hammer, one verse has many meanings.

Maharsha (Sanhedrin 34a): Sela is a coin. If it was disqualified, it can be reshaped via striking it with a hammer or melting it. Similarly, if a person's form was ruined [via sin], Divrei Torah give to him a new form and Ru'ach (Yetzer Tov). Even if the Sela is of iron, another iron (hammer) shatters it. Any Chacham who is not hard like iron (a hammer, via Torah) is not a [true] Chacham (Ta'anis 4a).

What is the connection between 'every utterance of Hash-m split into 70 languages' and 'just as a hammer divides into many Nitzotzos...'?

Iyun Yakov: One who quarries a rock, he strikes with a hammer to make it even and smooth. Chips are strewn here and there, but the rock remains smooth. Also here, the utterances are split into 70 languages, but the Torah remains for Yisrael; it was given for them.

What are Negidim?

Maharsha: It is an expression of authority, and a royal crown. The plural teaches [at least] two.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Just like a Nagid decrees to kill one person and sustain another, Torah sustains those who make it primary, and kills those who make it secondary.

Why does it say that Negidim can kill, before it says that they can keep alive?

Iyun Yakov: Initially, it is not appropriate to say that they have power Lehachayos. (NOTE: They cannot revive the dead! - PF) However, they can sentence to die. Afterwards, they can [retract and] let the person live. So Yisrael's Neshamos left, to show that Hash-m can kill and revive. Also, death is first, for initially a person learns Lo Lishmah (death), and from this he comes to Lishmah (life).

Who are Maiminim?

Rashi: They engage in Torah with all their strength, and exert to know its secrets, like one who uses his right hand, which is primary.

Maharsha: i.e. they learn Lishmah. This is like we say (Yoma 72b) "v'Zos ha'Torah Asher Sam Moshe" - if one merits, Torah is a Sam (potion) of life for him; if not, it is Sam Misah. So the Ritva explains there.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Sefas Emes: They merit that Torah makes them new.

Who is a Masme'il?

Maharsha citing Ritva (Yoma 72b): He learns in order to aggrandize himself. It would have been better had he never been born (Berachos 17a)! 'One should always engage in Torah and Mitzvos, even Lo Lishmah' (Pesachim 50b) refers to one who does amidst fear (NOTE: of punishment - PF).

Maharsha: So Rashi here holds - Masme'il is Lo Lishmah.

Rav Elyashiv: Rashi implies that he engages in Torah, but not with all his strength. Is Torah Sam Misah for him?!

Rav Elyashiv: Masme'ilim learn Lo Lishmah, in order to quarrel. If he learns Lo Lishmah for honor, this is fine - one should do so, for amidst Lo Lishmah he comes to Lishmah.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Sefas Emes: Torah does not make him new.

What is Sam Misah?

Maharal (Derech Chayim Avos 6:2): It is a lethal poison. (NOTE: This is the simple meaning. Surely, all Meforshim who did not specify, hold like this. - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Sefas Emes: It cures from death, i.e. stops him from doing bad deeds, so he will not die.

Rav Elyashiv citing Sefas Emes: Rather, there are two kinds of cures. Sam Chayim strengthens man. Sam Misah does not strengthen him, but it prevents death.

How could Hash-m tie crowns to words that He uttered?

Rashi: His words were tangible and seen - "Ro'im Es ha'Kolos."

Why does each Dibur have two crowns?

Maharsha: It is due to two aspects - revealed and hidden.

Iyun Yakov #1: It is due to the two Ta'amim (notes for reciting Aseres ha'Dibros) - the upper Ta'am and the lower Ta'am. They are like crowns on the letters!

Iyun Yakov #2: The two crowns show that 'these and these are Divrei Elokim Chayim.' Those who are Metaher and those who are Metamei, those who obligate and those who vindicate, those who forbid and those who permit - all of them merited Keser Torah.

What use is "Tzeror ha'Mor"? It said above "Nirdi Nasan Reicho" - it abandoned its good scent!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Yisrael says, even though I sinned with the Egel and abandoned my good scent, and Hash-m commanded me to remove my ornaments, He commanded to build a Mishkan and constricted His Shechinah between Badei ha'Aron.

What is the meaning of 'Meitzar u'Meimar Li'?

Rashi: (He pains and embitters me.) At the Egel, He commanded to remove Edecha (the crowns that you received for Na'aseh v'Nishma).

Maharsha: He is pained and embittered due to me - "b'Chol Tzarasam Lo Tzar", He is with us in Galus.

How do we see that He dwells in Yisrael's bosom?

Rashi: He commanded to build the Mishkan right away. He constricted His Shechinah between the two poles of the Aron. They made protrusions on the Paroches , a semblance of breasts.

Maharsha: "Bein Shakai Yalin" is like "b'Tzel Shakai Yislonan."

Iyun Yakov: This is like "even when they were in their enemies' land, I did not despise them." "Bein Shakai Yalin" is like Yakov said "v'Kel Shakai Yiten Lachem Rachamim" - the One who said to His world Dai (enough) He will say Dai to my afflictions. So He will say Dai to our bitter Galus, lest they eradicate us!

How do we expound "Eshkol" to means the One who owns Kol?

Maharsha: The text of Yalkut is better - Ish sheha'Kol Shelo. Hash-m is called Ish - "Hash-m Ish Milchamah." We say similarly in Sotah 47a - Eshkolos are Ish sheha'Kol Bo.

Anaf Yosef citing Be'er Avraham: What is the connection of Ish sheha'Kol Shelo to atoning for Yisrael? R. Yehoshua ben Levi teaches like he taught (Avodah Zarah 5a) that Yisrael were not proper to make the Egel. Rather, it was to teach the power of Teshuvah. Toras Chayim explained, "Mi Yiten v'Hayah Levavam Zeh Lahem [Leyir'ah Osi]" shows that they were Tzadikim. Hash-m should have helped them - "Tzofeh Rasha la'Tzadik...; Hash-m Lo Ya'azvenu v'Yado." Because ha'Kol Shelo, and He can help against the Yetzer ha'Ra, and He did not, in order to teach the power of Teshuvah, therefore He atones for them.

What is my sin of Gedi?

Rashi #1: This is like an Egel (calf), a Behemah, like a Gedi (kid).

Maharsha: Rashi (Shemos 23:19) explained that Gedi is a tender young animal. Surely Egel is included!

Anaf Yosef: We expound this, for why is Ein Gedi mentioned more than other cities of the border of Eretz Yisrael?

Rashi #2: This refers to idolatry - "ha'Orchim la'Gad Shulchan."

Maharal: This means, after I was a Tayish (adult goat), I became a Gedi (kid, i.e. lowly) due to my sin. This is like 'the Gediyim became Tayashim' (Berachos 63b).

What is the meaning of "Charamti"?

Rashi: I gathered [lusted for] many gods - "Eleh Elohecha Yisrael."

What is 'a launderer's chair that Chormim Kelim on it?

Rashi: It is a long board with many holes. One gathers clothes on it, and puts incense below the boards, and the clothes absorb the scent.

Maharsha: Rashi's text said Mechanesh (gather). The Aruch's text is Mechabesh (press). They put weights on the clothes to make folds in them.

Why did every utterance that left Hash-m's mouth fill the entire world with fragrant spices?

Maharsha: Lechayav is an expression of Luchos. Every Dibur on the Luchos... The fragrant spices were to help revive them, for they were weak from fright from the voice of the Dibros.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): The Neshamah benefits from smell. When Hash-m revived them, the Neshamah was still weak; fragrant scent strengthened it.

Iyun Yakov: Yisrael are compared to a Kalah, who is perfumed. So the Dibros perfumed Yisrael. The entire world received the scent, just like each Dibur was divided into 70 languages. This shows that each Dibur has its reward, not dependent on another.

To where did the wind clear the spices?

Rashi: To Gan Eden

Maharsha: Surely Gan Eden can contain all the spices for each Dibur, for the entire world is one part in 60 of Gan Eden (Ta'anis 10a)

Rav Elyashiv: Why did a wind remove the spices, and new spices came will the next Dibur? The first spices could have remained! We must say that the next Dibur was a different level of scent.

Why did Yisrael's souls left them on every Dibur?

Iyun Yakov #1: One understands Divrei Torah only if he kills himself for them.

Iyun Yakov #2: This teaches that one who transgresses any command of the King is Chayav Misah.

Here, R. Yehoshua ben Levi says that they retreated. This implies that they did not die. Above, he said that they died, and needed Techiyas ha'Mesim!

Maharsha: I answer that there were different groups. Some became weak and did not die - the spices sufficed for them. Some had a weaker nature, and died [and were revived]. And some retreated.

Why did we ask 'if they died from the first utterance, how could they hear the second?!' We could have asked, how they were alive afterwards!

Maharsha: Rather, we teach a Chidush, that they died and were revived 10 times. (NOTE: Yisrael told Moshe "Lamah Namus...; Kerav Atah u'Shama... v'At Tedaber Elenu" (Devarim 5:22, 24), and Hash-m approved. This implies that Yisrael did not hear all the Dibros; Makos 23b expounds that Yisrael heard only [the first] two directly from Hash-m! Surely, they did not hear after the first two, and did not die again from the Dibur!- PF)

Rav Elyashiv, and Daf Al ha'Daf citing Rid of Belz: Birkei Yosef (EH 17) asked, if a man died and returned to life, is his wife still married to him? We may infer that she is, for Bnei Yisrael died at Matan Torah and were revived, and were told to return to their wives, and every wife became pregnant with a boy! (NOTE: Perhaps marriages lasted at Matan Torah, for all died simultaneously, and were destined to be revived very soon. If one spouse died, this breaks the marriage bond; a widow may remarry. Is there a source that when an individual is revived, also his marriage is resurrected?! R. Akiva said, divorce 'on condition that you not marry Ploni' is invalid, for if she married David, had children from him, and then married Ploni after David died or divorced her, this would uproot her marriage to David, and her children from David would be Mamzerim (Gitin 83a). If revival restores marriage, and can retroactively make her children from her new husband Mamzerim, the same could apply to a conditional divorce! However, perhaps revival does not bring back marriage in such a case. Or, divorce is different - the Torah requires Kerisus. - PF)

Why do we learn from "Geshem Nedavos Tanif..."?

Rashi: The verse discusses Matan Torah.

Maharsha: Tal (dew) is called Geshem Nedavos, for it comes to the world bi'Ndavah. Dew is never withheld, but sometimes rain comes only via merit.

What is the significance of 12 Mil?

Rashi: This is the size of Machaneh Yisrael. Those closest to the Dibur retreated to the other end of the camp amidst fear of the voice. (NOTE: Rashi (Shemos 19:24) says that the Am had no Heter to leave Matzavam (their place). Verse 12 said to fence off "Saviv" [the mountain], and the border told the Am 'you may not ascend further' (Rashi). It seems that they left the Machaneh, to approach as much as allowed. If so, what is the relevance of the size of Machaneh Yisrael?

The Torah was given on Shabbos. How could they leave the Techum?

Iyun Yakov #1, Daf Al ha'Daf citing Maharam bar Baruch: Machaneh Yisrael was within the Techum, because Anenei ha'Kavod surrounded them. They are no less than a wall of people! (NOTE: Some say that the Techum of 12 Mil is mid'Oraisa. All agree that the Techum of one Mil is mid'Rabanan. Surely Rabanan did not yet decree, according to the opinions that sometimes they traveled on Shabbos before Matan Torah! - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf: The Roke'ach (178) and Moshav Zekenim (Bamidbar 2:2) say that due to Anenei ha'Kavod. Machaneh Yisrael was Reshus ha'Yachid. Rav Elyashiv - even so, we learn Hotza'ah from Yisrael in the Midbar (Machaneh Yisrael was Reshus ha'Rabim)! We must say that there was a greater surrounding at the time of Matan Torah.

Iyun Yakov #2: Since they left due to Ones, and were returned, it is as if Goyim took them outside the Techum [and returned them; it is as if they did not leave - OC 405:5].

Daf Al ha'Daf: Birkas Shimon (Shabbos, 9:7) says that there is no question about leaving amidst Ones of fear. The question is why they were able to return. Do not answer that since angels nudged them, this is abnormal. This does not permit Techumim. Rashi (Eruvin 43a) said that the question about Techumim above 10 Tefachim pertains to jumping via Hash-m's name! Chemdas Shmuel (146) permits to leave the Techum backwards. (NOTE: This seems unlike Rashi. Also, one may say on Shabbos 'I will go to city Ploni tomorrow', for if there were huts along the way, he could go on Shabbos (below, 150b). We do not permit 'because one may go backwards'! Perhaps it is unfeasible to go so far backwards, especially if he must traverse steep hills. - PF) The question was only about returning. Tosfos Yeshanim (Yoma 68a) says that the Torah forbids only leaving the Techum in which he acquired Shevisah. If so, one who left may return! Those who asked, they disagree. (NOTE: Regarding the custom to eat dairy on Shavu'os, Merafsin Igra (p.182, citing R. Simchah Zissel) says that perhaps they descended from Har Sinai after Shabbos; see Bi'urei Agadah for Shabbos 86:3:e. Perhaps they did not return on Shabbos, for they left their Techum! - PF)

What is the difference between Yidodun and Yedadun?

Rashi: Yidodun means that they themselves move. Yedadun means that they move others.

Maharsha: We expound so due to the repetition. The first Yidodun simply means that the angels moved; we expound the latter to teach that they made Yisrael move.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov), Rav Elyashiv: They were weak after being revived, so angels needed to help move them, like one helps a toddler to walk.

Why did they call Torah 'Your hidden treasure'?

Maharsha: This refers to hidden parts of Torah.

What is the source that the Torah was 974 generations before creation?

Rashi: In the 2000 years that the Torah preceded the world, these generations were destined to be created - "Davar Tzivah l'Elef Dor." Hash-m saw that the world cannot exist so long without Torah, so He did not create them, and gave Torah after 26 generations; 974 were omitted.

Anaf Yosef: Tosfos Chadashim (Sof Makos) brings from Bahag (introduction) that the Torah was created 2000 years before the world. It turns out that each Dor is two years, 19 days, 11 and two thirds hours and 14 parts (of 1080 in an hour).

Why did they say "Mah Adir Shimcha b'Chol ha'Aretz Asher Tenah Hodecha Al ha'Shamayim"?

Rashi: Your name is very mighty in the land - it is not proper to put Your Hod (glory) there, rather, in Shamayim.

Maharsha: You are Adir (mighty) to take payment from Resha'im - the Adir (Hash-m) will take payment from Adirim (Pharaoh) (the text in Menachos 53a says 'ha'Mitzrim'). "Hodecha" - secrets of Torah, should be in Shamayim, and not on the land. This is why Torah was not given in the earlier generations, for they were not worthy of it. Also now, physical beings born to women are not worthy of it. The answer was [the next verse] "mi'Pi Olelim v'Yonekim." The world endures only due to the breath (words) of children learning from their Rebbi. You cannot compare breath [from a mouth] that sinned to breath free of sin (below, 119b). Even though adults are not worthy of Torah, minors are worthy. [The next verse is] "va'Techaserehu Me'at me'Elokim" - You revealed to him secrets of Torah - 49 gates of Binah were revealed to Moshe (NOTE: of the 50; the Gematriya of Me'at is 49); "v'Chavod v'Hadar Te'aterehu" - the crowns of Malchus and Kehunah given to them at Sinai.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Malbim explains that Hadar is outer beauty, like "Pri Etz Hadar." Hod is inner beauty; "Hodecha" is the interior (secrets) of Torah. Moshe answered that the interior of Torah and Mitzvos of deed are interwoven; one cannot separate them.

Iyun Yakov: The angels knew that Torah is for Yisrael - "Daber El Bnei Yisrael", "Tzav Es Bnei Yisrael"! Rather, matters come from above to below. Hash-m brings influence on angels, and they bring on Yisrael. Yakov said "ha'Mal'ach ha'Go'el Osi." The angels knew that Moshe ascended with Hash-m's permission, therefore they asked why he is there. The influence should come via us! Moshe's answer was, since you cannot fulfill the Torah, you cannot be the Shali'ach [to give it]. The angels gave to him gifts, to show that all influence is via them, except for the Torah.

Anaf Yosef: What bothered the angels if Moshe ascended to receive the Torah? Why did they say '[why is a man] among us?' They should have said 'here'! They did not understand how a physical man, with all possible shortcomings, came closer to Hash-m than they are. Hash-m told him Chazor to them an answer - their very claim! Because man can have shortcomings, he needs Torah!

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Chanukas ha'Torah: They said, man is prone to sin. Torah should be in Shamayim, where there is no sin! Hash-m told Moshe 'Hachazir Lahem Teshuvah' - say that sin can be fixed via Teshuvah. The angels sought to burn him with the breath of their mouths - one who repented is below one who never sinned. Hash-m told him to hold onto Kisei ha'Kavod - Teshuvah reaches Kisei ha'Kavod. The next verse says "mi'Pi Olelim v'Yonekim" - also we have breath without sin, i.e. children learning from their Rebbi.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Radvaz (3:643/1068): Did the angels not know what is written in the Torah?! Rather, they read the Torah in a spiritual way, with different breaks between words. The entire Torah is names of Hash-m. Hash-m informed them that there is another way to read it pertaining to physical matters that pertain to man - Tum'ah and Taharah, Isur and Heter, Patur and Chayav...(NOTE: Hash-m rebuked the angels 'when you descended, you ate meat and milk [by Avraham - Midrash Tehilim 8:2]. If they did not know the Mitzvos, they were blameless! - PF) Hash-m commanded to write it without Nekudos (vowels) to enable both readings. One who can understand, he will understand. Betzalel knew how to join the letters used to create Shamayim and Eretz. Hash-m gave the Nekudos and Ta'amim (musical notes for Torah) orally, like the rest of oral Torah; they explain written Torah. There are many way to read the letters without Nekudos and Ta'amim, with different meanings. We write Nekudos and Ta'amim in Chumashim due to "Es La'asos la'Shem Heferu Sorasecha", lest they be forgotten.

In Sanhedrin 38b, we expound "Mah Enosh..." to say that the angels said that man should not be created!

Maharsha: We expound both of these due to the repetition "[Mah Enosh Ki] Sizkerenu [u'Ven Adam Ki] Sifkedenu." The Reisha (the claim not to create man) says Enosh, for only after he was created "va'Yikra Es Shmam Adam." The Seifa (the claim not to give Torah to man) says Adam, after he was created, like we say 'payment for having called you 'Adam'.'

What is the source to expound Piresh Shakai mi'Ziv?

Rashi: Parshez is an acronym for this.

What was Moshe's concern lest the breath of their mouths burn him?

Maharsha #1: They will defeat me, for they are purely spiritual, and more proper for spirituality than man is.

Maharsha #2: There is no sin in their mouths; man's mouth has sin.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): The angels' Torah is all unity and names of Hash-m. There is no physicality in their breath.

What is the significance of holding onto Kisei ha'Kavod?

Maharsha: Even though man's body is physical, Tzadikim's Neshamos are bound in the bind of life, under Kisei ha'Kavod. They are prepared to receive spiritual and hidden matters. Since also man is proper for the hidden part, it is better to give Torah to man, for only he is proper for the revealed part. "Alisa la'Marom Shavisa Shevi" - you took the revealed part of Torah, which was like a captive above; it does not belong to the angels, like Moshe proved.'

Anaf Yosef: He should look at his Neshamah, which is Atzeilus (copied) from Kisei ha'Kavod. Then he will rise above the angels' level.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Chanukas ha'Torah: Teshuvah reaches Kisei ha'Kavod.

When did Moshe prove that the Torah is for man? If it was after Matan Torah, what was the angels' claim? If it was before, how did Moshe know what is written in the Torah?

Daf Al ha'Daf citing R' C. Lichtenstein: 'When Moshe ascended' implies after Matan Torah. And if it was before, perhaps Moshe learned what is in it when Hash-m offered it to the nations.

What was the question 'did you descend to Mitzrayim?!'

Rav Elyashiv: Both parts of Torah are suitable for man - you have no connection at all to the revealed part, i.e. Mitzvos!

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Yad Mordechai: Is this a sufficient reason to give into man's hands the perfection of the creation? Really, Moshe answered well. Nothing blocks angels from serving Hash-m. Man has a Yetzer ha'Ra and obstacles to Avodas Hash-m. If he serves, he deserves reward! This is why afterwards, the angels gave to Moshe gifts. It sufficed to admit that he is correct! Rather, they recognized that man's Avodah is greater, and it is proper to give to him gifts.

Why did Moshe mention Shabbos before "Lo Sisa"? "Lo Sisa" is earlier in Aseres ha'Dibros!

Daf Al ha'Daf citing R' Feivel Grosman #1: First Moshe proved that even Mitzvos Bein Adam l'Makom, e.g. idolatry and Shabbos, do not apply to angels, and all the more so Shevu'os, which are also Bein Adam l'Chavero, and all the more so Kivud Av v'Em, adultery and murder, which are purely Bein Adam l'Chavero..

Daf Al ha'Daf citing R' Feivel Grosman #2: Ba'al ha'Turim explains that Kivud Av v'Em is taught next to Shabbos to teach that just like one must honor Shabbos, one must honor parents. Moshe separated them, to show the angels that adjacency of the verses does not apply to them.

Why did Moshe mention Shabbos before false oaths? This is unlike their order in Aseres ha'Dibros!

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Kerem Shlomo (14:7, p.47): There are three kinds of Mitzvos - Bein Adam l'Chavero, Bein Adam l'Makom, and Mitzvos that apply to both. Moshe began with the biggest Chidush - even Mitzvos Bein Adam l'Makom, e.g. "Anochi Hash-m Elokecha", "Lo Yihyeh Lecha Elohim Acherim Al Panai" and Shabbos, are only for people. All the more so false oaths, which are against Hash-m and people, do not pertain to angels, and all the more so Mitzvos purely Bein Adam l'Chavero, such as Kivud Av v'Em, murder, theft and adultery,

What is the connection of "Lo Sirtzach Lo Sin'af Lo Signov" to envy and a Yetzer ha'Ra?

Rashi: Via envy, one comes to murder.

Here, Moshe said that angels have no envy. Rashi (Bereishis 1:26) says that Hash-m consulted with the angels about creating man, lest they envy him!

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Gilyon ha'Shas: The Taz (Divrei David there) says that they do not envy each other, but they could envy man, who was made in their form and has an attribute like them, but he is physical. Pnei Menachem added that angels envied Yakov, and wanted to harm him (Chulin 91b). Tosfos (Berachos 3a) says that we say Kaddish in Arame'ic, lest angels envy us.

What is the significance of calling Moshe 'Adam'?

Rashi: It is an expression of lowliness - he was created from Adamah (earth).

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Siduro Shel Shabbos (2, 2:1:8): "Ashrei ha'Ish Asher Lo Halach..." - man's praise is to reach the level of Ish, which is the greatest of his four names - Ish, Adam, Enosh, Gever. In Be'er Mayim Chayim (Sof Tazri'a), he wrote that Adam is the choicest name - it is like "Adameh l'Elyon." (NOTE: One opinion holds that Yisrael are called Adam, but Nochrim are not (Yevamos 61a). - PF)

Why did every angel give something to Moshe?

Iyun Yakov: It was to show that all influence is via them, except for the Torah.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Yad Mordechai: They recognized that man's Avodah is greater, and it is proper to give to him gifts. Yeshurun (15, p.421) says, if Reuven convinces Shimon that a precious item is proper for Reuven, Shimon will not give to him gifts. Our Gemara teaches unlike this! The angels recognized that Torah is proper for Yisrael, so they sought closeness to man. They loved Moshe, and honored him with gifts. We learn from here how much one must honor Chachamim! People are foolish - they stand for a Sefer Torah, but not for a great Chacham (Makos 22b)! One should contemplate their level and glory - it is proper to cling to them, love them, and bestow to them from all that Hash-m gave to him.

Rav Elyashiv: They had insulted him via saying 'why is one born to a woman among us?' They gave gifts to appease him.

What did the Satan give to Moshe?

Rashi: He told him to burn Ketores at the time of a plague, and to stand between the dead and the living.

Maharsha: Moshe did many things, even though the Torah does not specify that Hash-m commanded him! However, Hash-m said "Heromo... va'Achaleh Osam k'Raga", so surely He did not tell him to burn Ketores to stop the plague. (NOTE: Rashi (Bamidbar 17:13; Tanchuma Tetzaveh 15 is close to this) says that Aharon told the angel of death 'Moshe told me to stop you. He says only according to Hash-m!' If so, Moshe did not need the Satan's 'gift'! Heromo was said to Moshe and Aharon (Bamidbar 17:8-10; also Aharon fell when he heard so). Perhaps Moshe inferred that if they will separate from Yisrael, Hash-m will consume them; if not, they can save them! Moshe similarly expounded "Hanichah Li... va'Achalem" (Rashi Shemos 32:10). Therefore, Moshe asked Hash-m if Aharon may burn Ketores to stop the plague. - PF)

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): What is the source that the angel of death told Moshe to stand between the dead and the living? It says that Aharon did so, but it does not say that Moshe commanded him to do so!

Daf Al ha'Daf: Panim Yafos (Acharei Mos) says that Ketores weakens the Satan. This explains why Kav ha'Yashar (59) says that there is a great benefit in saying the Beraisa of the Ketores every day with great intent. Ba'al ha'Tanya said that at a time of anger, they should learn Parshas ha'Ketores in every Beis ha'Keneses Gilyonei ha'Shas brings from Mabit (Beis Elokim, Sha'ar ha'Tefilah 16) says that perhaps when the Mikdash stood, when there was a plague, the Kohen Gadol would offer Ketores, in addition to the usual Ketores offered morning and afternoon. This is not considered entering the Heichal without need - it is for Klal Yisrael! (NOTE: We do not find that they offered Ketores at the time of the plague in Shitim, or in the days of David. Bnei Yisrael attributed Aharon's ability to stop the Satan to his level (Rashi Bamidbar 20:29), but our Gemara implies that any Kohen could stop a plague via Ketores. An individual may not offer voluntary Ketores (Sifri Nasa 51). Perhaps for the sake of the Tzibur is not called 'Yachid'. Rashi (Shemos 30:9) says that the Isur of "Ketores Zarah" is any Ketores of Nedavah. - PF)

The Rambam (Perush ha'Mishnayos Yoma Perek 8) forbids healing via anything not natural, even for Piku'ach Nefesh. How could Moshe use Ketores to stop a plague? One may not burn Ketores [of Hekdesh] outside the Mikdash!

Rav Elyashiv: If the Isur was because the cure is not clear, here, the Satan told Moshe in order to save - surely it saves! However, the Rambam forbids because it is not natural, i.e. even if it surely heals! Really, the Torah Isur to burn outside is only on a Mizbe'ach (Zevachim 108a-b). Even though it is forbidden mid'Rabanan even not on a Mizbe'ach, Moshe did properly.