Why did an angel come to Avraham?

Rashi: It helped him to fight the four kings.

Why was the angel called Laylah?

Maharal: It is because he diminished the nations, and made them like night. Avraham is compared to day, for until him, everything was void and dark, and the world began to illuminate, and night joined to day.

Maharsha: The verse is out of order. It should have said va'Ychalek Hu v'Avadav Aleihem Laylah. Also, it should have said ba'Laylah, and not Laylah! Therefore, we expound that Laylah is the subject; it is an angel. It is appointed over pregnancy. It brings the drop of semen from which a fetus will develop in front of Hash-m, and Hash-m decrees whether the person will grow to be strong or weak... (Nidah 16b). "Nimrod Hayah Gibor Tzayid Lifnei Hash-m" - it was decreed that he be a Gibor when the drop that conceived him was in front of Hash-m. It was proper that Amrafel (Nimrod) and the three kings with him defeat Avraham. Hash-m sent the angel Laylah itself to change the decree, so Avraham would win.

What deeds of the night were done for Avraham?

Rashi: Night stars fought for him, like they did for Barak.

Maharsha: R. Yitzchak Nafcha holds that Nimrod was born in Mazal Ma'adim - it is destined to spill blood. Avraham was born in Mazal Tzedek. Hash-m changed the Ma'arachah, and the stars in Ma'adim's legion fought against Nimrod and his allies. Avraham's deeds changed the Mazal, like Chazal said "He took him outside." 'Are you concerned because Tzedek (your Mazal) is in the west [which is too cold to father children]? I will put it in the east!' (Shabbos 156a)

Why is R. Yochanan called Bar Nafcha?

Rashi #1: His father's name was Nafcha.

Rashi #2: He is called so due to his beauty.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 4: In only one place, R. Yochanan emphasized that no one explained the Halachah until him - he explained that the argument about one who scoops coals discusses a Nafach (smith) (Kerisus 20a). Therefore, he was nicknamed Nafcha.

Reish Lakish himself taught that the angel appointed over pregnancy is called Laylah (Nidah 16b). Why did he prefer R. Yitzchak Nafcha's Perush?

Iyun Yakov: It is difficult to say that the angel appointed over pregnancy would be sent for a different mission.

In Nidah (16b), it seems that R. Yochanan does not hold that the angel appointed over pregnancy is called Laylah, unlike he says here!

Iyun Yakov #1: R. Yochanan retracted from what he said here, and concluded like R. Yitzchak Nafcha.

Iyun Yakov #2: R. Yochanan agrees that the angel is called Laylah, just he holds that it is called so to teach that only night is for pregnancy (Bi'ah).

Why did Avraham's strength wane when he reached Dan?

Mizrachi (Bereishis 14:14), Etz Yosef: "Va'Yirdof Ad Dan" is not needed to teach where they fell. It already says "va'Yakem va'Yirdefem Ad Chovah"! Rather, there he became weak due to the Egel that Yaravam set up there later.

Maharal: This place is exceedingly connected to idolatry. Certain places are prepared for certain matters, e.g. Yerushalayim is prepared to be Ir Elokim. Dan is prepared for idolatry, and there is a side of Yisrael that leans towards idolatry.

Maharsha: Surely "Ad Chovah" means Ad Dan. If it meant liability, it should have been written Malei with a Vav! Rather, since sometimes it says Dan, and sometimes Chovah, we expound that he became weak due to the liability of idolatry, like Rashi explained in Chumash. Do not say that we expound because the name Dan came only later. Many verses are written based on the future (Kesuvos 10b)! Bereishis Rabah (43b) says that idolatry in Dan strikes before and after. Before - "va'Yirdof Ad Dan" (it weakened Avraham before the idolatry was served); after - "mi'Dan Nishma..."

What was the Ones?

Etz Yosef citing Rashi Berachos 8b: He was ill, or was distracted with income for food.

Why does it specify a Zaken who forgot his learning amidst Ones?

Maharsha #1: It is common for an old, weak person to forgetting Ones his learning. Even though we say that they become greater Chachamim in old age, this is when they are healthy. Forgetting is common due to illness and weakness.

Maharsha #2: This is like it says (Berachos 39a) 'if there is not Chochmah here, there is Ziknah!' (NOTE: Even if you need not honor me due to my Chochmah, you must honor me due to my age. - PF)

How must one be careful about veins?

Rashi: Cut the veins of a bird during Shechitah (species the blood will flow out), for it is [often] roasted whole, and not salted the way that animals are salted.

How should one be careful about Bnei Amei ha'Aretz?

Rashi: If they became Chachamim, honor them.

Maharsha: Even though we say (Pesachim 49a-b) 'one should not marry a Bas Am ha'Aretz. They are Sheketz. Also if he will die or be exiled [from his house], his children will be Amei ha'Aretz', that is only for a Bas Am ha'Aretz; she has no one to learn from, except for her father. A Ben Am ha'Aretz can learn from a Chacham, and Torah will come from him.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 7: What is the Havah Amina that one need not honor a Chacham Ben Am ha'Aretz?!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 7: Be careful to teach to them Torah. Chachamim usually come from Bnei Amei ha'Aretz. Usually, Chachamim do not come from Chachamim, lest they say that Torah is an inheritance to them (Nedarim 81a).

Why did R. Zeira say 'even though R. Yehudah ben Beseira said... we inform [Bnei Amei ha'Aretz...]?'

Rashi citing his Rebbi: Even though one must be careful about the honor of a Chacham Ben Am ha'Aretz, we tell him that he merited his honor due to his ancestors' merits, even if they are small, just like Nebuchadnetzar merited his honor due to his four steps, like we say below.

Rashi: Even though Torah will come from Bnei Amei ha'Aretz, like it came from Sancheriv's descendants (they taught Torah to multitudes - Amud B), we inform them that their honor is due to their Torah, and not due to their parents, lest they be haughty to say that they are Bnei Tzadikim.

Maharal: They should not say that surely their parents had merit to cause that they became Chachamim. Rather, intellect is born from a physical person. A small Mitzvah sufficed for an Am ha'Aretz to merit a Ben Chacham.

Maharsha: Even though one may not teach Torah in front of an Am ha'Aretz (Pesachim 49b), this we may say. We tell them that it is possible that they will merit honor of their sons through a little [of the Am ha'Aretz'] merit, just like Nebuchadnetzar merited.

Iyun Yakov: Even though R. Yehudah ben Beseira taught about what one must be most careful about, one must inform them also this, that Hash-m does not deny the reward of any creation, even a light conversation or reward of steps.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 7: Even though he taught that Chachamim usually come from Bnei Amei ha'Aretz, this is not enough. Also teach the reward that Nebuchadnetzar received, and all the more so what the Avos will receive, to inspire Bnei Amei ha'Aretz to learn.

Why did Yirmeyah need to say "Tzadik Atah Hash-m"?

Maharsha: You are justified in all the punishments that came against Yisrael, for they sinned - "Lecha Hash-m ha'Tzedakah v'Lanu [Boshes ha'Panim]." However, I question why Resha'im succeed.

What success of Resha'im did Yirmeyah question?

Rashi: Why did Nebuchadnetzar succeed to conquer Yerushalayim?

Maharsha: "Derech Resha'im" hints that he questioned why for a small merit (four steps) he will succeed so much. Surely Yisraelim have such merits, and they do not succeed! He is more astounded about "Shalu Kol Bogedei Vagad." Yisrael betrayed You, and they are not serene. Nebuchadnetzar and his friends betrayed double, and they are serene!

Why did he add "Netatam Gam Shorashu"?

Maharsha: Their serenity is not due to Mazal - it is from You! "Yelechu Gam Asu" - he merited this via four steps.

What do we learn from "Karov Atah b'Fihem v'Rachok mi'Kilyoseihem"?

Maharsha: Nebuchadnetzar put Shalom of Shamayim before Shalom of earthly kings, like it says below, but You are far from their counsel. He said "E'eleh Al Bamasei Av Adameh l'Elyon"!

What do we learn from "la'Nevi'im Nishbar Libi..."?

Rashi: Yirmeyah is astounded when he thinks about the reward that Avraham, Yitzchak and Yakov will receive.

Maharsha: It is difficult to say that "Nevi'im" refers to Avraham, Yitzchak and Yakov!

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Maharsha means that it is difficult why Yirmeyah would be astounded. They are proper for reward!

Etz Yosef: If a Rasha did one Mitzvah and gets one Midah of reward, a Tzadik would get millions for the same Mitzvah, for combined with his other Mitzvos, that Mitzvah makes great luminaries in the upper world. This is like 'there is no comparison between the merit of one Tzadik and that of two Tzadikim.' If a Rasha received such reward for this Mitzvah, it is astounding what reward Tzadikim will receive!

Maharsha: Nevi'im are false Nevi'im, who promised Yisrael that Nebuchadnetzar cannot harm them, for he sins more than Yisrael. My heart is broken - Yisrael sinned greatly. The land is full of adulterers! Through Nebuchadnetzar's small merit, he will destroy the Bayis and exile Yisrael!

Iyun Yakov: This refers to the next verse "va'Tehi Merutzasam Ra'ah." Just like Hash-m rewards steps for good, He will punish those who run for evil!

Why were there only two hours of sun on the day that Achaz died?

Rashi: It was so there would not be time to eulogize and bury him. (NOTE: i.e. there was only time to bury him; no time remained to eulogize him. Since we eulogize before burial, we must say that at the start of the day, the sun jumped to where it is normally two hours before sunset, so they knew that there will be time only for burial. - PF)

Maharal: Hash-m did not totally nullify that daytime, for "v'Yom va'Laylah Lo Yishbosu." Ten are separate from two - they are a separate calculation.

Maharsha: Aveilus of the first day is mid'Oraisa. Hash-m arranged that immediately after the burial, night came, so there was no Aveilus over him. One who is not eulogized, it is a Kaparah for him (47b). Chizkiyah dragged his bones to disgrace him, be a Kaparah for him (Pesachim 56a).

What is the significance of returning 10 hours of daylight?

Maharsha: This was when Chizkiyah was healed - the sun heals (Bava Basra 16b).

Iyun Yakov #1: It was a sign - just like there was an addition to the day, years will be added to Chizkiyah's life.

Iyun Yakov #2: The day that Achaz died was short, so there was no time to eulogize him. They made a great eulogy for Chizkiyah when he died (Bava Kama 17a). The long day showed that he should have died that day, and been eulogized greatly, just Hash-m accepted his Tefilah and extended his life.

What is the significance of 'you called Him the great G-d'?

Maharsha: Idolaters worshipped many gods - vermin, animals, and birds lower than people. Had you written simply god, you could say that it refers to idolatry, and it is proper to put Melech Chizkiyah before it. However, the great G-d is greater than all gods - how can you put the honor of an earthly king before Him?!

Why did he not comment about mentioning Yerushalayim before Hash-m? In his correction, He put Hash-m also before Yerushalayim!

Iyun Yakov, Margoliyos ha'Yam 11: The first mentioned is most esteemed, and the last is second most esteemed. The only Tikun was to put Hash-m before Chizkiyah; he agreed that Yerushalayim should be in the middle (least esteemed). (NOTE: This is a great Chidush; they did not bring a source for it. Mechilta and Shemos Rabah 3:3 expound "Klei Chesef u'Chlei Zahav u'Smalos" - the last is most esteemed [and the first is least esteemed]! And when the most esteemed is listed first, e.g. in Nidvos ha'Mishkan - "Zahav va'Chesef u'Nechoshes", the last is least esteemed! I would say that both attributed the honor of Yerushalayim to the most esteemed, and its honor was second to Him (or him), so all put it in the middle. - PF)

What is Keraina d'Igreta?

Maharsha: It is the great scribe who reads what all other scribes write. He fixes what is not written properly. Since you put your heart to give praise to Hash-m and fix the letter, you should be the Shali'ach to return it!

What is the significance of the number of steps that he took?

Maharsha, Magen Avraham 123:1: The text of the Yalkut is three steps; for this, he merited three kings from him that will rule over the world. Since via three steps he merited to destroy the Beis ha'Mikdash, after we take three steps after Shemoneh Esre, we pray for the Beis ha'Mikdash to be rebuilt!

Etz Yosef: The text says three in Shir ha'Shirim Rabah, Esther Rabah and two places in the Zohar. It seems that also here, the text should say three. The Mashal (of the man who said that he can run three Parsa'os in front of horses) supports this.

Iyun Yakov: According to our text, we can say that he merited a fourth descendant that would rule over the world - Vashti. (NOTE: We do not find that she herself ruled; the calculation of the 70 years of Galus Bavel (Megilah 11b) attributes the two years from the death of Daryavesh and Koresh to Achashverosh, and not to her! That reflects Achashverosh's mindset, that he reigned due to himself. Vashti held that she inherited kingship, and he ruled only because he married her (Malbim on Megilas Esther). - PF)

Why did Gavriel stop him?

Ramah: The Shali'ach was far away. Gavriel brought him back to Nebuchadnetzar, lest Nebuchadnetzar run more and receive more reward, and Yisrael will be punished via him. He is not commanded about Hash-m's honor, yet he was concerned for it. Yisrael are commanded - how much more so they should be concerned for His honor!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 13: Even though he intended to run more, for Nochrim, Hash-m does not reward a good intent as if he fulfilled it (Tosfos Kidushin 39b).

Maharsha: He was the angel of the Churban. He was concerned for Yerushalayim, lest it be totally destroyed forever. Therefore, he stopped Nebuchadnetzar. 'Had the coals [taken from between the Keruvim] not cooled off in the Keruv's hand before he gave them to Gavriel [to cast on Yerushalayim], there would be no remnant of the haters of Yisrael' (Yoma 77a). (NOTE: Gavriel was commanded to take the coals himself! He deviated amidst concern for Yisrael. - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Pirchei Shoshanim: This shows the difference between Yisraelim and Nochrim. When a Yisrael wants to do a Mitzvah, he overcomes great obstacles, e.g. Avraham on the way to the Akeidah, Chachamim who deprive themselves of sleep to learn and rise to pray at sunrise, and go through cold, rain and snow... Nebuchadnetzar was inspired to recall the letter. Gavriel put an obstacle for him after three steps, and Nebuchadnetzar did not exert to overcome it. If not for the obstacle, he would have caught the Shali'ach, and it would seem that also Nochrim toil for Elokei Yisrael's honor.

Why would there be no solution for the haters of Yisrael?

Rashi: Nebuchadnetzar's reward would have been so great that he would have totally destroyed Yisrael.

Maharal: Even though this was a light Mitzvah, its reward was great - 'you do not know the reward of Mitzvos' (Avos 2:1).

Why did they stop him from doing a Mitzvah?

Maharal: It is not proper for a Rasha to do a Mitzvah and Hash-m will need to reward him - it is like a burden for Him. "U'Meshalem l'Son'av El Panav Leha'avido." Daniel was punished for counseling Nebuchadnetzar [to do a Mitzvah] (Bava Basra 4a).

Why is Bal'adan ben Bal'adan a paradigm of honoring one's father? One may not call his father by his name!

Maharsha: Even though his father's face became like a dog's face, which is the most disgraced animal in the eyes of people, he was not disgraced in his son's eyes. He called himself on his father's name, as if his father was still honored.

Chashukei Chemed: Emek She'elah (YD 240:2) says that according to the opinion that writing is like speech, one may not write his father's name. Ru'ach Chayim permits if he intends to honor his father, like it says here about Bal'adan ben Bal'adan. Some asked how the Tur could write 'Adoni Avi ha'Rosh', and answered that it is permitted in writing. Yam Shel Shlomo (Kidushin 1:65) said that 'Rosh' is respectful - the head of Yisrael. Yosef Ometz (87) brought that Rashi, the Rambam and many other Rishonim included their fathers' names when then signed. Divrei Chayim (2 Hashmatos 43) permit when signing. Chazal enacted that a witness signs also with his father's name 'Ben Ish Ploni Ed' (Gitin 87a). Igros Moshe (YD 1:133) says that there is no Isur when writing, even not in a signature. I say that it is best to add 'Aba Mori', or at least 'R.', but if he cannot, he can rely on the Poskim who permit.

Iyun Yakov: Normally, a king does not honor his father, lest others diminish his honor. Similarly, when Maharam rose to grandeur, he distanced from his father (Rema YD 240:7). (NOTE: That is when people do not know that he is his father. This does not apply to Bal'adan ben Bal'adan! - PF)

What is the basis of the argument about whether Nevuzaradan had Nebuchadnetzar's image engraved on his chariot, or if he had great fear of him?

Maharal: The former opinion holds that he loved him; the master prefers this. The latter opinion holds that he feared him; the master prefers this.

Maharsha: The former opinion holds that "v'Eved Adonav" refers to the Reisha ("Ben Yechaved Av") - he honored him. The latter opinion holds that it refers to the Seifa (fear) - "v'Im Adonim Ani Aye Mora'i."

What is the significance of 300 mule loads of iron axes that can cut iron?

Maharal: This shows his great strength to break. Three always shows strength - "veha'Chut ha'Meshulash Lo vi'Mherah Yinasek." Three years makes Chazakah. Three hundred shows absolute strength, for 100 is three-fold in level - units, tens and 100. Nothing carries more than a mule. Also Titus had great strength to break. Three hundred mules were needed to carry the keys to Korach's treasure houses (110a).

Etz Yosef: The Rashbam (Pesachim 119a) says that whenever it says 300 in the Gemara, it is not precise.

Were the axes swallowed in one gate?

Rashi: They shattered when they struck the gate.

Iyun Yakov: Perhaps this is because the moment for the Churban did not yet come. One king cannot usurp the time allotted for another [and similarly, the time for the Bayis cannot be diminished]. Alternatively, perhaps Yisrael would repent in this time. Or, it was Midah k'Neged Midah. Hash-m sent many Nevi'im, and they did not succeed to make Yisrael repent - so the axes did not help, until he struck with the handle. (NOTE: Did they profit via their sin of not heeding the Nevi'im?! Perhaps indeed, their punishment was delayed, so they would recognize the Midah k'Neged Midah and know why the Churban came! - PF)

Maharal: The strength of Yerushalayim is Kadosh and separated. It swallows the power of iron, which is not like the attribute of Kedushah. It was not physical iron, rather, iron's power to break.

Etz Yosef: Nebuchadnetzar wanted to conquer Yerushalayim naturally, with sword, spear and many weapons. Therefore he sent a multitude of special hammers. Hash-m showed to him that He fights against Yisrael, and if not, Nebuchadnetzar could not defeat them; all his weapons are insignificant.

Maharsha: "Pitucheha Yachad b'Chashil" implies one axe on many gates! Below we say that one axe remained, and bring "... bi'Svach Etz Kardumos", which implies many axes! Also, the verses are brought out of order! It seems that there is a printing mistake. First we cite "Yivada k'Mevi l'Ma'alah bi'Svach Etz Kardumos" to teach that all the axes were swallowed on one gate, like Rashi explained in Tehilim - when the enemy struck on the gates of the Mikdash, it is as if they struck above in Shamayim. How was this known? The wooden ax-handles swallowed the blades, like Chazal said. After, we bring "Pitucheha Yachad b'Chashil" to teach that all the gates opened due to one ax; "v'Cheilafos Yahalomun" - the handle, without the blade. Even though the enemy saw that it is harsh in Hash-m's eyes, they did not refrain from striking on the gates.

Why is he called 'Shavar bar Shavar'?

Rashi: He is a jumper Ben jumper. He jumped once, with Sancheriv (he was a remnant of Sancheriv's camp that came against Yerushalayim), and now a second time.

Maharal: He is zealous, the son of a zealous one, i.e. very zealous for war.

Why did the Bas Kol say both 'for the Mikdash to be destroyed' and 'for the Heichal to be burned'?

Etz Yosef #1 citing Toras Chayim: The former refers to the Shechinah departing from there. The latter is simply the burning of the Heichal. Until the Shechinah departed, Nebuchadnetzar's army could not rule over it, like it says in the Pesichah to Eichah Rabah.

Etz Yosef #2 citing Toras Chayim: The former refers to the Mikdash above. The burning of the Heichal is below. The Mikdash above was destroyed via burning the Mikdash below. Hash-m will not enter the Mikdash above until the Mikdash below is rebuilt.

What is Kupa?

Ya'avetz: It is the wooden handle, and not the blade - "bi'Svach Etz Kardumos."

Etz Yosef: It is the back of the hammer.

What is the significance of striking on the gate with Kupa?

Ya'avetz, Etz Yosef: This teaches that it did not open due to the strength of iron, rather, it was a decree.

What is the meaning of "Yivada k'Mevi l'Ma'alah bi'Svach Etz Kardumos"?

Rashi: This is a Tefilah - may it be considered as if the axe was used against the Kisei ha'Kavod above.

What is the significance of having one axe left?

Maharal: He could not overcome Yerushalayim with Nebuchadnetzar's power of iron. He wanted to return, but Hash-m strengthened him, for He wanted to destroy the Bayis. Hash-m did not let Yerushalayim swallow all the strength - he left one axe. The Churban was not via Nebuchadnetzar's strength, rather, due to Hash-m's decree.

Did the Heichal literally start ascending?

Rashi: Yes - it wanted to ascend to Shamayim.

Maharsha: Yerushalayim below clung to Yerushalayim above - "Yerushalayim ha'Benuyah k'Ir she'Chubrah Lah Yachdav." Shamayim did not allow it - Hashgachah was removed.

Maharal: Its attribute is above. When they lit it on fire, due to its attribute to go above, the fire could not rule over it. However, Shamayim rejected it, for it was time for the Churban.

Why did the Bas Kol say 'you killed a Killed nation'?

Rashi: Their death was already decreed.

Maharsha: The enemy was haughty to think that its strength overpowered.

What do we learn from "v'Tachani Kemach"?

Rashi: It does not say wheat, rather, flour. You, Yisrael, are already ground, and you will be grinded again.

Etz Yosef: Bavel will be punished and kings of Madai and Paras will subjugate them. Captives generally do heavy work like grinding. It says flour, and not wheat, to hint that it is a punishment for doing so to Yisrael; they were already ground due to Hash-m's decree, and Bavel ground them again.

What is Portisa that Nevuzaradan send to his house?

Rashi: It is a document commanding [how to divide his property].

Margoliyos ha'Yam 8, citing a comment in Teshuvas ha'Ge'onim: It is unreasonable that he abandoned his family and converted, but was concerned lest they quarrel about his property!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 8: Teshuvas ha'Ge'onim (ha'Rachavi 301) explains that he made breaches in his Chatzer; some versions say, in his house. They hold that Nebuchadnetzar heard that he intends to convert, and puts guards around his house. Nevuzaradan escaped and converted. (NOTE: Why did he not convert immediately, before returning to Bavel? We find that Yisro returned to his family to convert them (Mechilta Yisro 2). Perhaps Nevuzaradan wanted to do similarly; he delayed converting lest Nebuchadnetzar find out. Even so, Nebuchadnetzar learned of his intent to convert, and tried to stop him. - PF)

How did Na'aman become a Ger Toshav?

Rashi: He accepted not to serve idolatry.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 9, citing Be'er Sheva: Rashi implies that this is enough to become a Ger Toshav. This is like R. Meir. Why did Rashi abandon Chachamim and explain like R. Meir? Perhaps Chachamim hold that Yisrael are commanded to sustain him only if he accepts all seven Mitzvos, but for other laws it suffices to reject idolatry.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 13, Daf Al ha'Daf: Na'aman was a Sar Tzeva and very esteemed. Surely he did not rob, murder, eat Ever Min ha'Chai... He needed to accept only not to serve idolatry. (NOTE: Even if he already guarded his other Mitzvos, surely he must accept them! Further, who says that he kept his other Mitzvos? Did he set up fair courts? Also Sisera was a Sar Tzeva, and he was Mezanah with an Eshes Ish (Ya'el)! If his king told him to kill an innocent person, or blaspheme, would he refuse? Even Yisraelim, most transgress [offshoots of] theft (Bava Basra 165a)! Some Poskim hold that eggs are considered Ever Min ha'Chai for Goyim! - PF)

Do we know which descendants of Sisera taught Torah in Yerushalayim?

Margoliyos ha'Yam 11 citing Rav Nisim Gaon: R. Akiva descends from Ya'el, who became pregnant from Sisera. R. Akiva holds that the child of a Yisrael from a Nochri or Eved Kena'ani is a Mamzer. Did he hold that he himself is a Mamzer?! Nachal Eshkol brings from Sefer ha'Eshkol of ha'Ra'avad that R. Akiva descends from a Shifchah who became pregnant from a [Mamzer] descendant of Sisera. Her child is a regular slave; when he is freed, he is like a normal convert. Regarding Sancheriv and Haman, it says that their descendants taught Torah [b'Rabim and bi'Vnei Berak]. Regarding Sisera, it says that they learned in Yerushalayim, for R. Akiva learned there; when he taught, he fixed his Yeshivah in Bnei Berak.

NOTE: Indeed, R. Akiva taught in Bnei Berak (32b). However, why did we teach where he learned, and not where he taught? Also, it seems that he did not learn in Yerushalayim, for his father-in-law Ben Kalba Savu'a was in Yerushalayim, and when R. Akiva was returning after learning for 24 years, Ben Kalba Savu'a heard that a Chacham was coming, but did not know who it was (Kesuvos 63a). The text in Ein Yakov says 'taught' also regarding Sisera's descendants. (PF)

It says that descendants of Sancheriv (Shemayah and Avtalyon) taught Torah b'Rabim. i.e. they were Nasi and Av Beis Din. The Nasi's parents must be Yisraelim!

Tosfos Yom Tov (Avos 1:10, citing Maharal): They descended from Sancheriv, but their parents were from Yisrael. Some say that they themselves converted; this is wrong.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 12 citing Pesach Einayim: Because there was no one else like them in Yisrael, it was permitted (Magen Avos).

Daf Al ha'Daf citing the Tumim (7): Malchus Chashmona'i appointed them; the king may appoint whom he desires.

How could descendants of Haman convert? The Mechilta, brought in Yalkut b'Sof Beshalach, says that we do not accept any convert from Amalek!

Iyun Yakov: Our Gemara is unlike the Mechilta. This requires investigation.

Daf Al ha'Daf: The Rambam (Hilchos Melachim 6:1-4) says that if Amalek accept to keep their seven Mitzvos, conversion helps, and we need not kill them. Avnei Nezer (OC 508) asks that this is unlike the Mechilta! (NOTE: Perhaps the Rambam means only that they can become Gerei Toshav. However, he taught them together with the seven Kena'ani nations, who can become Gerei Tzedek; he implies that their laws are the same. - PF) Torah mi'Tziyon says that the Rambam learns from here, that descendants of Haman taught Torah.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 13: The text of the Tur (Shemos 28:7) was 'from Bnei Banim of Na'aman.' This is reasonable, for he was mentioned above (he became a Ger Toshav) Tzinaisa of Bavel, i.e. they inhibit the date trees from producing dates.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing the Admor of Gur: Haman's mother was from Yisrael. Gilyonei ha'Shas says, a female Amaleki married a Nochri from another nation. The child follows his father, so he is not considered Amalek, and he may convert. Merafsin Igra (Beshalach) brings this and other answers.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Emek Berachah (p.126): The only reason Amalek may not convert is because the judges have a Mitzvah to kill him; conversion nullifies the Mitzvah. Therefore, if a Nochri came to convert and did not say that he is he from Amalek, the conversion was valid.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Merafsin Igra (Beshalach): We say that Amon and Mo'av are not in their place, because Sancheriv mixed up the nations. Perhaps also Haman, it is not certain that he was from Amalek.

Margoliyos ha'Yam (13): We cannot say so, for Melech Amalek is always called Agag (just like Melech Mitzrayim is always Pharaoh, and Melech Pelishtim is always Avimelech), and the Mordechai (Yevamos Perek 8) says that the seed of the kingship was not mixed up. In five places, Megilas Esther calls Haman "ha'Agagi"!

Why did Resha'im merit that their descendants taught Torah?

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Kedushas Levi (Eichah): It is because miracles were done in their downfall. There was Kidush Shem Shamayim, and His name was elevated in all the worlds. Resisei Laylah (55) says that there was a spark of good in Sha'ul's mercy on Agag; this led to Haman's descendants teaching Torah. Machshevos Charutz (73b) says that Haman's merit was that he caused Yisrael to accept the Torah willingly, even though he intended for evil. Ul'Levi Amar says that in 'Ma'oz Tzur' we say about Haman 'Rov Banav... Talisa', for there was a remnant of his seed, like it says here. Regarding Pharaoh, it says 'v'Chol Zar'o Yardu k'Even.' Perhaps Korach merited that Shmuel ha'Navi descended from him due to the Kidush Hash-m that came from his demise!

How does "Ripinu Es Bavel v'Lo Nirpasa" apply to Nebuchadnetzar?

Rashi: Hash-m sought to cure him, to bring from his descendants under the Shechinah; it was not done.

Maharsha: Nevuzaradan repented and converted. Sisera, Sancheriv and Haman remained in their evil and were killed, but they had descendants who repented and converted. Also Nebuchadnetzar had descendants who wanted to convert; the descendants were worthy of this. The angels said that they should not be accepted due to their ancestor; Hash-m agreed.

Maharal: Sancheriv had supreme power, just he leaned towards Tum'ah. Just like a doctor removes the bad until good remains, so Hash-m removed the evil from Sancheriv's power until good remained. Similarly, even though Nevuzaradan destroyed the Bayis, he had supreme power mixed in. The evil was removed and he was cured, and he converted. There was no cure for Nebuchadnetzar.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Kedushas Levi (Kelilos ha'Nisim): Descendants of Sancheriv and Haman taught Torah, for Kidush Hash-m came from their demise. There was no Kidush Hash-m from Nebuchadnetzar, only Chilul Hash-m (he destroyed the Mikdash). (NOTE: The miracles of the salvation of Daniel, Chananyah, Misha'el and Azaryah came via him! These were not salvations of all of Yisrael, but there was Kidush Hash-m! - PF)

How does "Ripinu Es Bavel v'Lo Nirpasa" apply to the rivers of Bavel?

Rashi: The water is bad for drinking.

Maharsha: "Al Naharos Bavel Sham Yashavnu Gam Bachinu" - when we were exiled from Eretz Yisrael, whose rivers have sweet water, we sat by the rivers of Bavel with bitter water, and cried over the loss.

Maharal: Bavel is the opposite of Eretz Yisrael, which is totally good; Bavel has bad.

What are Tzinaisa of Bavel?

Rashi #1: They are bitter date trees that stand in the river.

Rashi #2: Some texts say Tzinunaisa of Bavel. They are bad date trees of rivers that do not bear fruits, for the water is bad for growing Peros. In Sotah (46b), we say that Tzinaisa of Bavel are from six days of creation, and the river under these Tzinunaisa is bitter water.

Maharsha: Normally, date trees grow by sweet water. In Bavel, the water is bitter even where date trees grow.

What is the significance of Amon and Mo'av being bad neighbors of Yerushalayim?

Maharal: Just like Nebuchadnetzar, who destroyed the land, no one descended from him converted, also those who counseled him to destroy are removed from Yisrael - "Lo Yavo Amoni u'Mo'avi bi'Khal Hash-m." We find that Esav, who pursued Yisrael, was Yakov's brother. Amon and Mo'av were from Lot, to whom Avraham said "Achim Anachnu."

What was the reply "Ein ha'Ish b'Veiso"?

Maharsha: This is a verse in Mishlei. It discusses a married Zonah assuring the adulterer not to fear her husband. Yisrael are called Hash-m's wife - "v'Ashuvah El Ishi ha'Rishon." From when they sinned, they are called a Zonah - "Eichah Haysah l'Zonah." Hash-m was their Husband, to fight their wars, e.g. against Sancheriv.

What was the dialogue about whether Hash-m is near or far?

Maharsha: Nebuchadnetzar said "Karov Hash-m l'Chol Kore'av." They answered, He distanced - "v'Richak Hash-m Es ha'Adam."

Etz Yosef: Nebuchadnetzar said that He is close, and He will come when they are in trouble. When they sin and distance themselves, also He distances Himself from them. When they repent, He returns to them - "Shuvah Elai v'Ashuvah Aleichem." He held that they did not sin much, and He did not distance, so He will still hear their Tefilah when they are in distress, even though He is not with them.

How did Hash-m take the Tzadikim?

Rashi: They died.

Maharsha: This is like "Mipnei ha'Ra'ah Ne'esaf ha'Tzadik", so he will not shield a generation of Resha'im.

How does "va'Ekereh Li ba'Chamishah Asar Kesef v'Chomer Se'orim v'Lesech Se'orim" teach that Kesef refers to Tzadikim?

Rashi: In the merit of Tzadikim, who are called Kesef. A Chomer is 30 Sa'im. A Lesech is 15 Sa'im. These are the 45 Tzadikim on whom the world stands. Sometimes 30 are in Bavel and 15 are in Eretz Yisrael, and sometimes it is vice-versa (Chulin 92a). (NOTE: Our texts say that [always] 15 are in Bavel and 30 are in Eretz Yisrael! - PF)

Ramah: Hash-m redeemed Yisrael due to 15 Tzadikim - the Avos and the 12 Shevatim.

What time did Hash-m fix?

Rashi: He will not come until 70 years of Galus Bavel are completed.

Maharsha: Even Teshuvah will not help until that time.

Iyun Yakov: This is unlike the final Galus, which has no fixed time. It depends only on Teshuvah - every day is the time - "ha'Yom Im b'Kolo Sishma'u" (98a).

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): When need not said that Tzadikim will pray and Hash-m will return, they should have answered immediately that He fixed a time! It seems that Tzadikim have a great power to nullify what was decreed. However, when there are not Tzadikim, even if Resha'im repent, they cannot nullify what was decreed. (NOTE: If Resha'im repent, they are Tzadikim! Perhaps he holds that only a Tzadik who never sinned can nullify what was decreed. - PF)

Why did Nebuchadnetzar say 'it is winter'?

Maharsha: His army came against Yerushalayim in Teves (Melachim II, 25:1). Kings do not normally go to war in winter! Therefore, we say that Amon and Mo'av persuaded him.

Can Nebuchadnetzar and his army stay in Yisrael's graves?!

Rashi: This refers to burial caves. (NOTE: There is a hollow, and coffins in holes in the walls around the hollow. - PF)

What do we learn from "Yotzi'u Es Atzmos Malchei Yehudah..."?

Rashi: In the future (NOTE: when Nebuchadnetzar's camp will lodge in the burial caves - PF), they will remove the buried bones.