What is an Arod?

Rashi: It is a crossbreed of a snake and a Tzav (lizard or toad).

Megadim Chadashim: Stam Arod in the Gemara is a wild donkey, which resembles a donkey. Ri ha'Levi says that they are spelled the same, but here it is pronounced Arvad, and a wild donkey is Arod.

Why did Chanina ben Dosa put his foot over its hole?

Maharsha: This is difficult, why he relied on a miracle! The Yerushalmi says that he was praying, and it came and bit him.

Iyun Yakov: He was sure that he will be saved, for a Bas Kol announced 'the entire world is fed due to My son Chanina, and Chanina suffices with a Kav of carobs from Erev Shabbos to Erev Shabbos!' (17b) Also, he prayed for the sick [and said 'if my Tefilah flows smoothly, it was accepted.'] Here he endangered himself to save the rest of the Tzibur from harm. Their merit was attributed to him. Saving the Rabim is different (one may endanger himself for this). Megadim Chadashim - Rishonim argue about whether or not one must put himself in Safek danger to save another from Vadai danger (CM 426). All agree that one may do so. How did Torah Temimah (Vayikra 19:16) learn from here that one must do so? Also, why is this considered Vadai danger of the Rabim? They can avoid going near it!

Megadim Chadashim: The Maharsha in Ta'anis (20b) says that Nachum Ish Gam Zu knew that he was a total Tzadik, so he put himself in danger. We can say the same about R. Chanina ben Dosa.

Rav Elyashiv: The Ra'avad explained that the Chasid did not interrupt even in a dangerous situation, for he was sure that Hash-m will do a miracle for him (32b). The same applies here.

Why did the Arod die after it bit R. Chanina?

Rashi citing Bahag: They say in Eretz Yisrael that when an Arod bites someone, the first one to come to water will live, and the other dies. A miracle occurred, and a spring opened under his heel.

Rav Elyashiv: Hash-m could have simply killed the Arod! He saved him in this way to publicize the miracle.

Maharsha: The Arod came via sin - a snake mated with a Tzav. Therefore, it is summonsed to bite sinners, like it says about the Nachash "v'Atah Teshufenu Akev" (Bereishis 3:15). R. Chanina put his heel on the hole, and it bit him and died - the opposite of sinners, who die when it bites them on the heel.

Iyun Yakov: He endangered himself to save the Rabim from harm. Their merit was attributed to him.

What is the significance of Da'as being at the beginning of the weekday Berachos?

Rashba: Da'as encompasses all of the weekday Berachos. Without Da'as, there cannot be Avodah and Mitzvos. Can one regret sin without Da'as?! Therefore, one should not have mercy on one who lacks Da'as.

Maharsha: We say 'if you acquired Da'as, you acquired everything. If you lack Da'as, you lack everything' (Nedarim 41a).

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Even though we do not have a Berachah of Da'as on Shabbos, R. Elazar teaches that it is great. It was put at the beginning of the weekday Berachos to teach that it is the foundation of all the Berachos. In Megilah (17b), we say that the Berachah of Binah is after Kedushah, because "v'Hikdishu Es Kedosh Yakov" is followed by "v'Yad'u So'ei Ru'ach Binah." Teshuvah is after Binah due to "his heart will understand, and he will repent and be cured." This shows that the primary Kedushah is amidst Binah; Teshuvah and Refu'ah follow from it.

Iyun Yakov: The beginning of the weekday Berachos corresponds to the first day of creation; the world was created with these three attributes. (Note: Above he mentioned De'ah Binah v'Haskel, and also Chochmah, Binah and Da'as. Perhaps he equates Haskel and Chochmah. - PF)

What is the significance of Da'as being between two Osiyos?

Rashba: Elokim is Midas ha'Din; Shem Yud Kei is Midas ha'Rachamim. The world could not exist with only one of them. Therefore, these names do not appear together in creation until Shamayim and Aretz were completed - "b'Yom Asos Hash-m Elokim Eretz v'Shamayim" (Bereishis 2:4). One who has Da'as understands what human intellect can grasp of His Emes and Midos, and knows to go in the ways of Avodah and Mitzvos - "Ki Im b'Zos Yis'halel ha'Mis'halel Haskel v'Yode'a Osi Ki Ani Hash-m Oseh Chesed..." (Yirmeyah 9:23). He understands that I do Chesed; he engages in Avodah and Mitzvos because I desire them.

Etz Yosef citing Iyei ha'Yam: [The verse says Kel;] the Rashba holds that also this is Midas ha'Din, unlike Acharonim who learn from "Chesed Kel Kol ha'Yom" (Tehilim 52:3) that Kel is Midas ha'Chesed. If Hash-m gave Da'as to someone, he understands that also Dinim that come from Hash-m bring Chesed and mercy to the world. One without Da'as does not understand this - "va'Ani Yisarti Chizakti Zero'osam v'Elai Yechashvu Ra" (Hoshe'a 7:15).

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Amidst Da'as, i.e. knowing his Creator, like it says "Da Es Elokei Avicha v'Avdehu" (Divrei ha'Yamim I, 28:9), he causes Kel (Midas ha'Din - "v'Kel Zo'em b'Chol Yom" (Tehilim 7:12)) to become mercy (Shem Havayah). This is like Chazal said, that Tzadikim turn Midas ha'Din to Midas ha'Rachamim. One who has no Da'as, the name of mercy does not rest on him, only pure Din. One may not have mercy on him - "Ki Lo Am Binos Hu Al Ken Lo Yerachamenu" (Yeshayah 27:11). Da'as removes the Din and anger. Since he is Ish De'os and Binos, Shem Havayah (pure mercy) rests on him.

Rav Elyashiv: Most Poskim hold that Kel is Midas ha'Rachamim. The 13 Midos of mercy begin "Hash-m Hash-m Kel Rachum..."! (The other opinion holds that the 13 Midos are after Kel.) Da'as is between two names of mercy, to hint that one needs much mercy to merit Da'as.

Maharsha: It is the highest of three Midos - Chochmah, Binah and Da'as, like Rashi explained in Shemos (31:3). It is Ru'ach ha'Kodesh. Hash-m's names are unlike other words composed of letters to show a certain matter. One who knows combinations of [letters of] Hash-m's names, this is Da'as and Ru'ach ha'Kodesh itself! We say that Betzalel knew how to combine the letters used to create Shamayim and Aretz (below, 55a)!

Iyun Yakov: It is listed last among Betzalel's attributes ("va'Amalei Oso Ru'ach Elokim b'Chochmah uvi'Svunah uv'Da'as" - Shemos 31:3), for it is greatest. We request it first in Shemoneh Esre (De'ah Binah v'Haskel) - we request Da'as, and if not, at least Binah or Haskel. This is unlike those who changed the order (Note: In Nusach Sefard and Sefardi, we request Chochmah, Binah and Da'as, just like the verse! - PF) The Siman is Devash - De'ah, Binah and Sechel.

Anaf Yosef citing Semichus Zekenim: Da'as is between two Osiyos (Sefiros) - Chochmah and Binah, which are the two Osiyos of Shem Yud Kei. (Perhaps Rashi (Sanhedrin 92a) said 'two letters of Shem' to hint to this.) Da'as is the intermediary between them. We bring the verse "Ki Kel De'os Hash-m", for the two names (Kel and Hash-m) hint to Chochmah and Binah.

Why may one not have mercy on one without Da'as? "V'Rachamav Al Kol Ma'asav" (Tehilim 145:9)!

Anaf Yosef (citing Maharsha Sanhedrin 92a): Man was made with Da'as and Sechel. If he has no Da'as, he lost his form. He is no longer included in "Kol Ma'asav." Hash-m made man with straight Da'as.

Rav Elyashiv: If one will have mercy on him, he will continue to sin. This is not mercy - rather, it shows that he desires the ways of the one without Da'as! Not having mercy on him is the true mercy.

Chashukei Chemed: We discuss one who could learn Da'as, but does not, due to slackening, pride and following his Yetzer ha'Ra. Here we do not discuss delving into deep investigations - expounding is not primary, rather, deed (Avos 1:17)! One must know how to act straightly according to Torah, in the eyes of Hash-m and people, as a Jew should. He should be straight with all people, be happy and good-hearted with people and in his portion, and conduct with Derech Eretz. One sins only if a Ru'ach of lunacy enters him! The most essential Da'as is to recognize that he does not have [enough] Da'as, and to seek to learn Da'as from every person, and all the more so from someone greater than himself in Chochmah, or from Seforim. If his Da'as is unlike theirs, he nullifies his Da'as due to theirs. He has full Emunah that if it is empty (he does not see Chochmah in the law), it is empty from him (he is not wise enough to grasp it).

What is the significance of the Mikdash being between two Osiyos?

Rashba: The Mikdash is the place of His dwelling. It is built for honor and glory.

Maharsha: It was built via Betzalel, who had Da'as and Ru'ach ha'Kodesh to combine the letters used to create Shamayim and Aretz, i.e. mercy and Din.

Rav Elyashiv: It is between two names of mercy, to hint that one needs much mercy to merit Binyan of the future Beis ha'Mikdash, like we said about Da'as. Ha'Kosev - do not say that one who serves in the Mikdash, it is as if he is a Ba'al Da'as. Even one who serves must strive to have proper Emunos and Kavanos.

If one has Da'as, why is it as if the Beis ha'Mikdash was built in his day?

Rashba: Its Kelim and matters hint to deep truths - "u'Re'eh va'Ase b'Savnisam Asher Atah Mar'eh ba'Har" (Shemos 25:40). From there people draw Ru'ach ha'Kodesh. One who has Da'as understands from the forms of the Mikdash. Therefore, it is as if it was built in his days.

Maharsha: One who has Da'as, like Betzalel, it is proper for the Mikdash to be built in his days, via Da'as.

Iyun Yakov: The Mikdash below corresponds to the Mikdash above; influence flows down from above.

Anaf Yosef citing Toras ha'Olah: One who engages in Torah of Korbanos, it is as if he offered Korbanos. Surely it is not for merely reading the Parshiyos or learning the laws, rather, for one who looks into their reasons. One must seek to understand what he can of the Korbanos and the Mikdash, to know how he gets Kaparah. His primary intent must be to be pleasing to Hash-m. Since he obtains the purpose of the Mikdash, it is as if it was built in his day. Ha'Kosev - we learn this, for it is between two Osiyos, just like Da'as.

What is the question from vengeance?

Maharsha: Why is it between mercy and Gevurah? It is purely Midas ha'Din and Gevurah!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Does vengeance switch Din to mercy?! Where there is vengeance, there is no mercy!

Why is "Hofi'a me'Har Paran" vengeance for good?

Rashi: This is like it says in Bava Kama (38a), Hofi'a from Paran, and was Mafkir their money to Yisrael. If a Yisrael's ox gored a Nochri's ox, he is exempt. Hofi'a means that He revealed and made Hefker, when they did not accept the Torah.

Etz Yosef citing Semichus Zekenim: It is like a Gezeirah Shavah "Hofi'a me'Har Paran" and "Kel Nekamos Hofi'a" to teach that the reason that He was Mafkir their money is because they did not accept the Torah.

Ha'Kosev: He took Shechinah from the Nochrim and put it on Yisrael. After the Churban, one can merit as if he served in the Mikdash via Kin'ah and vengeance against Resha'im, for vengeance is between two Osiyos, just like the Mikdash. Perfection is acquired via investigation and deed - each of these has two parts. Investigation - in Torah, and in worldly matters. Deed - doing every proper deed for His Avodah, when possible, and conducting cruelty to take vengeance against evil.

Maharsha, Rif (on the Ein Yakov) #1: Amidst vengeance against idolaters, mercy will come to Yisrael.

Vilna Gaon (OC 695:2): One must get drunk on Purim until he cannot distinguish between Arur Haman (the vengeance against him) and Baruch (the aggrandizing of) Mordechai. Vengeance is great - it was put between two Osiyos. When one is drunk, he loses his Da'as, and cannot distinguish them. Rav Elyashiv - i.e. vengeance is between two Osiyos, like Da'as; without Da'as, he does not know which is greater. Surely vengeance for evil is better. The primary vengeance is wiping out Amalek; Hash-m's Kisei is not complete until they are wiped out!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov) #2: Amidst vengeance against idolaters, who did not accept the Torah, they will be merciful to Yisrael, who accepted the Torah. "Kel Nekamos Hofi'a" is vengeance for evil - if Yisrael do not guard the Torah, vengeance against the Nochrim will bring evil to Yisrael.

If one says both Havdalos, why will blessings rest on his head?

Maharsha: Birkas ha'Mavdil is honor of Shabbos and the day of rest. It says "va'Yvarech Elokim Es Yom ha'Shevi'i" (Bereishis 2:3). Therefore, one who honors the day of rest twice with Birkas ha'Mavdil, the Berachos of Shabbos will rest on his head also in the coming six weekdays.

What is the difference between Halachah, we lean, and Nir'in?

Rashi: Halachah, we expound so in public. We lean - we do not expound so in public, but if an individual asks, we tell him to do like R. Eliezer. Nir'in - we do not tell one to do so, but if he did, we do not retract.

Rav Elyashiv: What is the Havah Amina to retract? Even if one did not mention Havdalah at all, he does not pray again! Do not say that this affects one who did not say Havdalah in Tefilah, and ate before he said Havdalah over a cup. Rashi holds that he does not pray again! Perhaps one might have thought that saying it in the wrong place in Tefilah is like an interruption, so he must pray again. This is a weak answer.

How do we see that Rachba was so careful about his learning?

Rashi: He used the same word (Stav) that his Rebbi did, even though the Mishnayos use a different word (Istava).

Rav Elyashiv: He was unsure who taught this. He said, 'either R. Yehudah or Rav Yehudah taught...' The Gemara was concise and did not bring this.

Note: Rashi rejected this, for Rachba was born after R. Yehudah (and even R. Yehudah ha'Nasi) died! Those who explain so must say that he did not hear this directly; he was unsure in whose name it was said. (PF)

Why did he say 'I do not know this or that'?

Rashi: Not Nir'in, nor Modim, nor do we lean.

Why did Rav Yosef mention that they enacted the text in Bavel?

Maharsha #1: Bnei Eretz Yisrael would not enact this, for Yom Tov is only one day. In most years, there will not be Yom Tov on Motza'ei Shabbos, e.g. if Pesach falls on Tuesday or Thursday, only when it falls on Shabbos or Sunday. In Eretz Yisrael, in most years Yom Tov Rishon or Yom Tov Sheni falls on Sunday.

Note: Maharsha assumes that the calendar was fixed, therefore Pesach can fall only on Shabbos, Sunday, Tuesday or Thursday, and when it is Tuesday or Thursday, Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kipur will not be on Sunday. In the days of Rava, it was not yet fixed (Rosh Hashanah 21a). Rava was born when Rav Yehudah died (Kidushin 72b), after Rav and Shmuel (who composed the text) died! I have no idea how to resolve Maharsha's words. (PF)

Maharsha #2: 'Chagei Nedavah' hints to Yom Tov Sheni of Chutz la'Aretz. They would not say so in Eretz Yisrael.

What are Chagei Nedavah?

Maharsha: They cannot be Nedavos offered on the festival - we conclude that all agree that they are not offered on Yom Tov! (Beitzah 19a) Rather, it hints to Yom Tov Sheni of Chutz la'Aretz, which is the custom of our fathers. It is called Chagei Nedavah, for the Torah did not obligate it.

Why do our Sidurim add also 'You separated and sanctified Your nation Yisrael with Your Kedushah'?

Maharsha: If we list separations that Hash-m made, we should say all the separations that we say on a regular Motza'ei Shabbos - ha'Mavdil Bein Kodesh l'Chol, Bein Ohr l'Choshech...! Also, normally we say Bein Yisrael la'Amim. Why do we say now Hivdalta v'Kidashta Es Amecha...? Rather, this is like R. Tam said (in Tosfos Pesachim 104a) - for dearness of the day we say all seven separations. Two are within Yisrael - between Kohanim and Leviyim and Yisrael, which is like the closing of the Berachah 'Bein Kodesh l'Kodesh.'

Rav Elyashiv: Rav Yosef called this a pearl, for it fulfills the opinion that one must say all seven separations mentioned in the Torah. On a regular Motza'ei Shabbos we say only three, to avoid burdening the Tzibur.

What is improper about 'Your mercy is upon a bird's nest'?

Me'iri: This implies that there is Hashgachah Pratis for living beings [other than man]. "Va'Ta'aseh Adam ki'Dgei ha'Yam" (Chabakuk 1:14) teaches that the Hashgachah over living beings is only on the species, but not on individual creations.

Me'iri citing the Yerushalmi: It seems that he complains about Hash-m's Midos. You have mercy on a bird's nest and not on me! R. Yosah says, he limits His Midos. i.e. His mercy reaches only until a bird's nest.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Imrei No'am (the Vilna Gaon): The Torah mentions length of days only for two Mitzvos - Kivud Av v'Em and Shilu'ach ha'Kan, for perfection is seen only when man has opposite Midos, e.g. mercy and cruelty. If man conducts with one Midah, there is no proof that he is a Tzadik. Perhaps that is his nature! Therefore, Hash-m gave the Mitzvah of Kivud Av v'Em, which is great mercy. When parents are old and have no place to rest, it is proper to have mercy on them. Shilu'ach ha'Kan is cruelty - he takes the children and sends away the mother. The Yerushalmi says that sometimes the mother drowns in water amidst pain. "La'asos Nekamah ba'Goyim; ... Hadar Hu l'Chol Chasidav" (Tehilim 149:7, 9) - even though Chasidim conduct with mercy, they take vengeance against their enemies - the opposite Midah. This is Hadar (glory) for them!

Daf Al ha'Daf: The Chasam Sofer (Chulin 139b) brings from Chavos Ya'ir (67, citing the Zohar) that Shilu'ach ha'Kan arouses the Shechinah's mercy. Minchas Elazar (3:61) forbids only a Shali'ach Tzibur to say so, for he implies that the only reason is mercy. If so, he will expound reasons for Mitzvos also to be lenient (to exempt when the reason does not apply) in all Mitzvos, and come to stumble. The Isur to give reasons is lest one say that this is the primary reason. Just the contrary, it is a Mitzvah to give reasons if one is proper for this, like we find that Rishonim did!

The Rambam and Bartenura explain that he says 'just like Your mercy is upon a bird's nest, so have mercy on us.' Why did the Mishnah omit his final words?

Tzlach: The Mishnah teaches that we do not let him finish. We silence him in the middle! Etz Yosef - if so, why did Rabah and Abaye not interrupt the man who said 'You had mercy on a bird's nest. May You have mercy on us!' (Note: Perhaps Tzlach holds that Rabah was allowed to delay in order to test and sharpen Abaye. Abaye did not silence him, for this would be like ruling in front of his Rebbi (Rabah)! - PF)

How does this arouse jealousy among the creations?

Rashi: He says that Hash-m has mercy on birds, but not on other creations.

Maharsha: It is as if birds were created with mercy, and not other beings. Really, all were created with mercy - "b'Yom Asos Hash-m Elokim" (Hash-m is Midas ha'Rachamim).

Me'iri: It means, he implies that there was jealousy among the creations, so Hash-m puts Hashgachah Pratis on each living being to remove the jealousy.

What does it mean that Hash-m's Midos are mercy, and why is this wrong?

Rashi: Hash-m's Mitzvos are not for mercy. Really, they are to impose on Yisrael His decrees, to publicize that they are His servants, even in matters that the Satan and Nochrim challenge, and say 'what is the need for this Mitzvah?'

Maharsha: Since the Torah did not reveal the reason, we should fulfill it like a decree. There is greater reward for Mitzvos that the Satan challenges.

Anaf Yosef: Devarim Rabah (Reish Ki Setzei) says that the Mitzvos of Oso v'Es Beno and Shilu'ach ha'Kan are because Hash-m had mercy on animals and birds!

Perush ha'Mishnayos: He says that Hash-m commanded not to take the mother on her young amidst mercy for the mother.) If so, He should not have permitted Shechitah! Me'iri - rather, Hash-m wants to train people to act with good Midos. This is like Chazal said (Bereishis Rabah 44:1), does Hash-m care whether Shechitah is from the neck or the back of the neck?! Rather, it is to perfect people. Rav Elyashiv - the Ramban (Devarim 22:6) elaborates about this.

Why did neither Rabah or Abaye silence the man who said 'You had mercy on a bird's nest...'?

Maharsha: We silence him after his Tefilah, lest he do so again. Also below, a man was adding praises, and R. Chanina rebuked him only after he finished.

Note: Why did Maharsha ask also about Abaye? If Abaye silenced him, this would be like ruling in front of his Rebbi! Perhaps Maharsha assumes that Rabah did not comment immediately, and asks why Abaye did not ask Rabah why he does not silence him.

Rav Elyashiv: The Yerushalmi says that we silence him only b'Tzibur. This is unlike Modim Modim, which we silence even if he prays alone. A support is that it says that we silence him - it does not say that we dismiss him from being Shali'ach Tzibur.

How was this a test to sharpen Abaye? The Mishnah explicitly forbids this!

Iyun Yakov: The man knew our Mishnah, therefore he said 'Chasta' and not Richamta. Chas is not amidst mercy on birds more than on other beings - "v'Rachamav Al Kol Ma'asav"! Rather, it was a decree that Hash-m was Chas (concerned for) birds. Rabah praised him for being meticulous to avoid an expression of Rachamim. Abaye said, what is so special that he did not transgress what the Mishnah explicitly forbids?

Rav Elyashiv citing Tzlach: One could have explained that the Mishnah forbids one who complains against Hash-m. The Yerushalmi says, he says 'You had mercy on a bird's nest, but not on us!' Abaye properly understood that it is forbidden even without a complaint.

Why did R. Chanina rebuke him only after he finished?

Maharsha: This is the Halachah; we silence him after his Tefilah, lest he do so again.

Anaf Yosef citing Ma'adanei Yom Tov: He did not want to confuse him in his Tefilah.

Are there Heterim to increase praises?

Me'iri: Ge'onim say that the Isur is in Tefilah (Shemoneh Esre), but in requests and supplications, one may add as he desires.

Where did Moshe write these?

Rashi: "Ha'Kel ha'Gadol ha'Gibor veha'Nora Asher Lo Yisa Panim v'Lo Yikach Shochad" (Devarim 10:17).

What is the significance of ha'Gadol ha'Gibor veha'Nora, which Moshe wrote?

Maharsha: This is Hash-m's primary praise, like it says in Yoma (69b).

Iyun Yakov: They correspond to the three Tefilos that they enacted corresponding to the three Avos. The man said 10 expressions, corresponding to the 10 Sefiros.

Anaf Yosef citing Eliyahu Rabah: Ha'Gadol corresponds to the world of angels - He is the greatest among them. Ha'Gibor corresponds to the Galgalim - Hash-m rotates them with Gevurah. Ha'Nora corresponds to the world of deeds. Via His awesome deeds with physical beings, it is recognized that He is awesome.

Where do we find that Anshei Keneses ha'Gedolah enacted to say them in Tefilah?

Rashi: This was when Ezra prayed about the sin of the Golah ("v'Atah Elokeinu ha'Kel ha'Gadol ha'Gibor veha'Nora Shomer ha'Bris..." (Nechemyah 9:32).

Megadim Chadashim: This was the Tefilah of Yeshu'a and Kadmi'el, the Leviyim! Below (54b), Rashi said 'the Tefilah of Ezra and his entourage.'

Maharsha: It says in Yoma (69b) that Yirmeyahu omitted 'Nora', and Daniel omitted 'Gibor' (Note: because these Midos are not seen when Nochrim frolic in His Heichal and subjugate His children. They were called Anshei Keneses ha'Gedolah because they returned these words to the text. Perhaps beforehand the custom was to say in Tefilah like Moshe said, but Anshei Keneses ha'Gedolah were the first to enact it. - PF)

If a king has millions of gold coins, what is the insult to praise him for his silver?

Ha'Kosev citing Ritva (Megilah 25a): The Mashal implies that the insult was for praising him for silver in place of gold, but not for a smaller quantity than he has. Really, human praises are physical. They are below the level of Hash-m, like the Rambam wrote (Etz Yosef - in Moreh ha'Nevuchim 1:59)!

Maharsha: Hash-m's primary praise is ha'Gadol ha'Gibor veha'Nora. These are compared to gold coins. Ha'Adir veha'Izuz... are additional praises. These are like silver coins for a mortal king. If first they praise a king for having millions of gold coins, and add that he has silver coins, this is no praise compared to the first praise. R. Chanina said, 'have you exhausted the praises of your Master?', for all that you add is not praise compared to the first praises. And so we explain "Lecha Dumiyah Sehilah" (Tehilim 65:2).

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): We say only part of a person's praise in front of him. Therefore, one cannot err to say that one finished his praises, for even if he has many, we say only some. The Mashal teaches that he did not say even part, like one who praises the king for having silver coins, and he has gold coins. The praise is defective! What people praise Hash-m is below his level. A mouth cannot tell His spiritual praises. How can one praise Him with physical praises?! Why did Moshe say them? He teaches that even though He is awesome on all around Him, and no one can tell Him 'what do You do?', He does not show favoritism or take bribes.

Iyun Yakov: The insult is not to the king - all know that he has more. The one who praises, he disgraces himself, that he does not know how to praise properly. Also the Ritva implies like this.

Rav Elyashiv: The insult is both qualitative and quantitative,

What does 'everything is in the hands of Shamayim' encompass?

Rashi: Everything that comes upon a person - tall, short, poor, rich, Chacham, foolish, white or black. However, Tzadik or Rasha is not bi'Ydei Shamayim. Hash-m gave to man two paths - he chooses Yir'as Shamayim.

Etz Yosef citing Mayan ha'Berachos: Why did Rashi mention these matters? This is like it says 'who rules over Me? A Tzadik - I decree, and he cancels it!' (Mo'ed Katan 16b) In these matters, a Tzadik cannot Mevatel Hash-m's decree. Who is greater than R. Elazar ben Pedas, to whom Hash-m offered 'would you like Me to destroy the world and remake it' [and even so, he was terribly destitute and had nothing to eat after letting blood - Ta'anis 25a]. (Note: One who wants Chochmah or wealth should pray for it and do Hishtadlus (Nidah 70b)! Rava requested awesome Chochmah and wealth, and received it (Mo'ed Katan 28a)! Perhaps this is only when there is no decree against it. However, R. Chanina ben Dosa and R. Shimon ben Chalafta were utterly impoverished (it seems that this was decreed on them). They requested wealth, and received it (Ta'anis 25a, Shemos Rabah 52:3)! Perhaps Hash-m gave it because He knew that when they realize that this will detract from their world to come, they will return it. - PF)

Megadim Chadashim: Nidah 16b says that Hash-m decrees strong or weak, poor or rich, and Chacham or foolish. Rashi added tall or short and white or black based on Tanchuma Pekudei 3. Also Chanah prayed that her son not be tall or short (31b). Iyun Yakov (31b) brought from Chesed l'Avraham (Ein Yakov Nahar 11) that man chooses how he will be created (poor or rich...) This requires investigation.

Megadim Chadashim: Maharsha (10a) said that even though Yir'as Shamayim is not bi'Ydei Shamayim, prayer helps; Shamayim helps him.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Tosfos (Nidah 16b) asked from Kesuvos (30a), which says that everything is bi'Ydei Shamayim, except for colds and heatstroke. Moshav Zekenim on the Torah (Parashas Ekev) says that there are two matters - physicality and the Nefesh. Colds and heatstroke refer to the body. When man goes in the market or street, mishaps can occur and the body will be damaged. 'Everything is bi'Ydei Shamayim, except for Yir'as Shamayim' teaches about the Nefesh. Such things are in man's hands. At the time of conception, it is decreed if the child will be male or female, strong or weak, wise or foolish... but not Tzadik or Rasha. So it says in Yirmeyahu - "Al Yis'halel Chacham b'Chachmaso v'Al Yis'halel ha'Gibor bi'Gevuraso Al Yis'halel Ashir b'Ashro", for these are from Hash-m "B'Zos Yis'halel ha'Mis'halel Haskel v'Yode'a Osi" (9:22-23). This is why it says ha'Gibor with the prefix Hei; there is no the prefix Hei before Chacham or Ashir, for there is a Gibor who can praise himself - one who rules over his Yetzer ha'Ra. (Note: i.e. the verse discusses only one kind of Gibor - a physically strong man. - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf: Arugas ha'Bosem (introduction to second edition): Sometimes requests from Hash-m are granted, and sometimes not - but a request for Yir'as Shamayim is surely granted, as long as he asks. Also the Seraf from Kutzk explained so.

What is R. Chanina's Chidush 'everything is bi'Ydei Shamayim, except for Yir'as Shamayim'? This is clear from the verse! And why did we not ask the contradiction between "Ki Im Leyir'ah" and "Yir'as Shamayim Hi Otzaro"?

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): We can also ask, perhaps fear is great; the verse says that Hash-m requests only fear, for everything else is bi'Ydei Shamayim! We did not ask the contradiction, because fear is great and dear in His eyes. It is His good Otzar and Segulah. However, we find that Hash-m puts His Chesed and good on His creations. All borrow from Him, and He need not borrow from His creations. He commanded them Torah and Mitzvos for their benefit! We answer that Moshe considered it a small matter, for it is bi'Ydei Adam, and he had it. One who has a big Kli, it is small in his eyes. Hash-m considers it big, for it is not in His hand!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Hash-m asks that we fear Him, for one who serves only amidst love, he is not concerned if he refrains from a Mitzvah. We must also love Him, for one who serves only amidst fear, even though he fulfills many Mitzvos, he might rebel internally and do Bal Korcho (against his will).

Iyun Yakov: Even though we are "ka'Chomer b'Yad ha'Yotzer" (Yirmeyahu 18:6), Hash-m gave to us choice. One who comes to purify himself, [Shamayim] helps him (Yoma 38b). If not for R. Chanina, one could have said that many things are bi'Ydei Adam; even so, Hash-m desires only fear, for it is great. However, now that he taught that only Yir'as Shamayim is bi'Ydei Adam, surely the verse says that Hash-m desires only this small matter!

What is the significance of 'Hashem's treasure-house contains only Yir'as Shamayim'?

Iyun Yakov: What one puts in Beis Genazav, it is hidden from all people. So one who has Yir'as Hash-m in his heart, no one else knows, for "man sees what eyes can see; Hash-m sees the heart" (Shmuel I, 16:7).

Etz Yosef citing the Vilna Gaon: A king makes a storehouse only of something not found in his country. Hash-m makes a storehouse of Yir'as Hash-m, for everything else is His (He created it).

What is the answer? Even if fear is a small matter for Moshe, for Yisrael it is great!

Ha'Kosev: Moshe recognized that it is a small matter, therefore he was able to say 'I request a small matter from you.' I am made of physical matter and was born to a woman. Initially fear was hard for me; afterwards, my intellect overpowered my physicality, and subdued them until fear remained carved in my heart. Now it is a small matter. Also Yisrael can do so! Really, Yir'as Shamayim is Hash-m's special storehouse. Amidst Moshe's humility, he thought that all of Yisrael, the sons of Avraham, Yitzchak and Yakov, can be like him.

Megadim Chadashim: Tif'eres Yisrael (Kidushin 4:77) brings a story that Moshe was born with all bad Midos, just he overcame them. Tif'eres Yakov on Tif'eres Yisrael brings so from Shitah Mekubetzes (Nedarim Sof Perek 3), but there it does not mention Moshe. The Aderes and Maharil Diskin challenged this. When Moshe was born, they saw "Ki Tov Hu" (Shemos 2:2), and the house filled with light (Sotah 12a)! However, Talmidim of the Ba'al Shem Tov said like Tif'eres Yisrael. Zecher Yehosef says that the story about Moshe is a mere Mashal to teach about his great level.

Maharsha: We could have asked that the verse itself implies that fear is a small matter - Hash-m asks from you only...! Also the Mashal is not precise. Moshe said, Hash-m requests only fear - for them, surely it is a great Kli! I answer that there are two kinds of fear. Natural Yir'as Shamayim is fear of punishment; this is like a small Kli. The second is intellectual fear of something great and awesome - "va'Yira va'Yomar Mah Nora..." (Bereishis 28:17). This is complete fear - like a big Kli. We could explain that the verse discusses fear of punishment; it is small. R. Chanina discusses what is not bi'Yedei Shamayim, and depends on choice. Fear of punishment is partially bi'Ydei Shamayim. Hash-m punishes others to instill fear in Bnei Yisrael, so they will repent - "Tir'i Osi Tikchi Musar" (Tzefanyah 3:7; Yevamos 63a)! R. Chanina said that even this is small, for he cites "Ki Im Leyir'ah." We answer that it is because Yisrael saw an awesome wonder - "the skin of Moshe's face radiated, and they feared to approach him." This was not fear of punishment - Moshe could not punish them without Hash-m's permission! They feared his grandeur, so it was simple to similarly fear Hash-m. This is like R. Yochanan ben Zakai said 'fear of Heaven should be upon you like fear of people' (28b), i.e. intellectual fear. The Mashal said 'if they request a large Kli (intellectual fear) and he has it, it is like a small Kli', for it is found with people (fear of punishment). If they request a small Kli and he does not have it, for it is partially bi'Ydei Shamayim, it is like a big Kli.

Anaf Yosef citing Ohr k'Salmah: Moshe saw that Yisrael feared him. This was not fear of punishment, rather, of grandeur. In his humility, he thought, who am I? If they fear my grandeur, it is a simple matter!

Anaf Yosef citing Tal Oros: Fear of people is natural. Man naturally fears a king or officers when he stands in front of them. Moshe thought that after Yisrael saw Giluy Shechinah and His mighty acts and wonders, fear of Him should be natural and easy for them like it is for Moshe himself.

Etz Yosef citing Mayan ha'Berachos: Humility is greater than fear (Avodah Zarah 20b). Humility is the only Midah that one cannot know whether he has it. One who considers himself humble, this is pride! Moshe was the humblest man (Bamidbar 12:3); he thought that others are more humble than him. He thought, if fear is easy for me, all the more so for Yisrael, who are more humble than me! (Note: He could not think so after Hash-m said that he was the humblest man! We must say that Hash-m had not yet taught him that verse. Even the opinion that Moshe wrote each Parashah once it was given (Gitin 60a) can say so. - PF) Really, for people who are not so humble, fear is a great matter.

Rav Elyashiv: Some say that for anyone who has a Rebbi like Moshe, it is simple.

Why does it say 'this is like one who is asked for a large Kli - if he has it, it is like a small Kli'?

Iyun Yakov, Etz Yosef: R. Yehoshua ben Levi said that humility is the greatest Midah. Since Moshe had this Midah, which is greater than all of them, fear was a small matter for him.

Is it a problem to repeat words other than Shema or Modim?

Tosfos (34a): Perhaps even Shema is forbidden only when he recites Keri'as Shma in its time and accepts Ol Malchus Shamayim. In any case, it is good to be stringent at other times. On Yom Kipur and Hoshana Rabah we say "Hash-m Hu ha'Elokim" seven times, to praise the Creator who dwells above seven Reki'im. This is proper. It is repeated twice in a verse (Melachim I, 18:39)!

Megadim Chadashim: Seemingly, only these are problematic because it looks like he accepts two authorities. However, Maharam Shik (OC 31) protests against Chazanim who repeat words, for Anshei Keneses ha'Gedolah composed the text so that every word has secrets.

Daf Al ha'Daf: Gilyonei Yo'el was unsure if this applies elsewhere, e.g. in Hallel "me'Es Hash-m Haysah Zos..."

What is the question 'a peer of Hash-m?!'

Rashi: Does he speak to Him like one speaks to a friend [without intent]?!

Iyun Yakov: We say Dibrah Torah k'Leshon Bnei Adam. People repeat things, for they did not have intent the first time. One may not speak so to Hash-m - he must have intent the first time!

Rav Elyashiv: Repeating Shema is a problem, for it looks like he accepts two authorities. The Makshan asked, if he did not intend the first time, and repeats it with intent, he does not accept two authorities! The Tartzan answered, since he is not a peer of Hash-m, surely he had intent the first time; people will suspect that he accepts two authorities. The Shulchan Aruch (61) rules that if he did not have intent the first time, he repeats it quietly. (Note: Mishnah Berurah 61:22 says so; I did not find this in Shulchan Aruch.) The Pri Megadim says that if he is alone, and no one hears him, he may repeat it aloud. This is astounding. It is forbidden due to Mar'is Ayin. Whenever Chachamim forbade due to Mar'is Ayin, it is forbidden even if he is isolated! The Pri Megadim relied on Tosfos (34a), who brought from the Yerushalmi that for Modim, it is permitted in private, for it is supplication. The Tur says that the Bavli did not say so, for it disagrees. This is astounding. It says, does Shamayim have a peer?! It is not possible that he did not intend. Therefore, it did not discuss this! We hold that it is feasible, therefore one can say like the Yerushalmi! I say that there are two possibilities - he adds supplications, or he accepts two authorities. B'Tzibur, it is like accepting two authorities, for people hear. When alone, since no one hears him, we say that it is for supplications. (Note: Why does it depend on people hearing him? Perhaps if he knows that people hear him, and he is not concerned lest they think that he accepts two authorities, we assume that he does so! - PF) The Yerushalmi discusses b'Tzibur. Do not ask that whenever Chachamim forbade due to Mar'is Ayin, it is forbidden even if he is isolated - the decree was only b'Tzibur. We find decrees in Reshus ha'Rabim and not in his house, e.g. we do not slaughter into a cavity. It is permitted in his house, for we say that he needs to clean his house.

Maharsha: Repeating it makes it seem that there are two authorities, i.e. Hash-m has a peer.