What is the meaning of 'who sat you among the mighty of the world'?

Rashi: Who caused that your descendants will sit on the Great Sanhedrin?

Maharsha: Chazal knew that this was said in astonishment, for it did not give the reason why he merited this (fleeing), like it gave Yisrael's merit ("Lo Nachash b'Yakov.")

Iyun Yakov: Even though Yisro fled, it was improper to join with Resha'im initially - "k'Hischabercha Im Achazyah Paratz Hash-m Es Ma'asecha." If a judge knows that another judge is a Rasha (NOTE: our text in Shevu'os 30b says Gazlan - PF), he may not sit on a Beis Din with him - "mi'Devar Sheker Tirchak." His punishment is severe - "Ki Im Yihyeh Leva'er Kayin", with Galus of the 10 tribes, but not permanent Galus.

Etz Yosef citing Rashi on Chumash: Who sat you among the strength of Yisrael?

Etz Yosef based on Shemos Rabah 27: He said, you fled to a good place. Your dwelling is like Avraham's; he is Eisan ha'Mizrachi (Vayikra Rabah). [All] the Avos are called Eisanim (Rosh Hashanah 11a).

What is the significance of taking counsel with three?

Maharal: They were the greatest of the nations. Two of them have a connection to Yisrael; they do not totally oppose. One of them totally opposes. Avraham and Yitzchak had connection to the nations. Several nations came from Avraham, and Edom comes from Yitzchak. Yakov, the third, his seed was totally separated from the nations. Corresponding to them, Yisro was a convert, like Avraham. Yitzchak suffered afflictions; Bereishis Rabah 65 says that he was Mechadesh Yesurim; Iyov corresponds to him. He did not oppose Yisrael, just like Yitzchak did not oppose the nations. Yakov opposed the nations - "va'Yisrotzetzu ha'Banim b'Kirbah" - therefore came from them Bil'am, who totally opposed Yisrael.

Anaf Yosef citing Yefe To'ar: According to this, Bil'am lived many years. This is unlike it says (Amud b) that he lived less than 35 years. Seder ha'Doros says that Bil'am who counseled died, and he was reincarnated at the time of Dor ha'Midbar, and was killed via the sword in half his days (half a normal lifetime). [Yisrael] paid him for his evil counsel in his previous Gilgul. According to this, 'you were with us in the counsel' - you were with my previous Gilgul.

What was the counsel?

Rashi: [Bil'am] counseled Pharaoh to drown the baby boys in the river.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 105a 12, citing R. Menachem of Di'ano: We say that Bil'am lived only 33 years. If so, he was born after Yetzi'as Mitzrayim! Rather, this refers to Bil'am's counsel to seduce Bnei Yisrael to transgress Arayos. (NOTE: The primary opinion in Chazal is that Iyov was a Nochri who lived during the 210 years of Galus Mitzrayim. This counsel was 39 years after Yetzi'as Mitzrayim! Also, Hash-m accepted Moshe's Tefilah that Nochrim not have Shechinah and prophecy. Iyov had prophecy when he was afflicted! It is difficult to say that he was afflicted earlier, because later he would be silent at the counsel. And why would Yisro, who was already Moshe's father-in-law and counseled about appointing judges in Yisrael, go to such a counsel?! Perhaps Balak asked him to come (for Yisro knew about Moshe and Yisrael) without telling him why, or coerced him to come. Or, perhaps Yisro thought that he can give them a better counsel - do not worry, for Yisrael are commanded not to attack Mo'av! Or, ask Bil'am to bless Mo'av that its enemies cannot harm it! - PF) However, a Midrash says that at Matan Torah, the nations asked Bil'am what is happening. If so, he surely lived more than 40 years!

Here it says that Bil'am was killed for his counsel to Pharaoh. He was killed for his counsel in Shitim!

Etz Yosef citing Yefe To'ar: Both of them caused his death.

Why did Iyov receive great afflictions for being silent?

Anaf Yosef: The Zohar says that Pharaoh wanted to kill Yisrael. Iyov said, take their money and rule over their bodies with harsh labor, but do not kill them. Hash-m said, you will be judged similarly - "v'Ga El Atzmo v'El Besaro."

Etz Yosef: Anyone who could protest and does not, he is liable. This is even if his protest would not have helped - Hash-m knows so. The person did not, like it says in Shabbos (55).

Eizehu Mekoman Sotah 11a citing Sichos Musar (5733 5): Surely counsel to drown is worse than silence. Why did Iyov receive afflictions harsher than Bil'am, who was merely killed? Rather, this shows the value of life - it is greater than all afflictions! "Mah Yis'onen Gever Chai" (one who is alive should not complain, even if he is afflicted).

Margoliyos ha'Yam 4: Hash-m answered Iyov "Min ha'Se'arah va'Yomar; Mi Zehu Machshich Etzah Bli Da'as" (Iyov 38:1-2).

Chashukei Chemed: This was Midah k'Neged Midah (Sotah 11a). The Griz explained that Iyov did not protest, for he knew that it would not help. One who is afflicted screams, even though he knows that it will not help, amidst pain. Had Iyov felt pain [over the counsel to drown Jewish babies], he would have screamed!

NOTE: I heard that since Iyov did not object to Bil'am's counsel, Hash-m did not object to the Satan's counsel to afflict Iyov. (PF)

What is 'Mechayeh himself with the name Kel'?

Rashi #1: He deifies himself.

Rashi #2: He indulges himself with pleasures of this world and fattens himself, and casts off the yoke of Torah from himself.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): He says, so commanded Kel - "va'Chai Bahem"!

Maharal: It is a nation that diminishes Hash-m's Elokus and sustains itself with His name Kel. This hints to the fourth kingdom, which says 'who is to me in Shamayim?', as if it is Kel.

Maharsha: When evil comes upon them to eradicate them, they save themselves with Kel and other [Kodesh] names. Woe to those who do so - they are not worthy to be saved via Kodesh names! (NOTE: Eichah Zuta 1:7, partially cited in R. Avigdor on Eichah 2:9, says that Chanam'el (Yirmeyah's cousin) used Hash-m's name to bring down armed angels; the enemy fled. Hash-m changed the angels' names [and they departed]. - PF)

Iyun Yakov: Koheles Rabah says that one who engages in actions based on Kabalah, he may not benefit from people, lest he request and the person will not give, and he will kill him. 'Mechayeh himself with the name Kel' is to finance himself with the name Kel. Bil'am said so about himself - he wanted to receive reward for cursing Yisrael with the name Kel. The Midrash says that he used Shem ha'Mefurash when he came to receive reward.

What is the meaning of "mi'Sumo Kel"?

Rashi: When Hash-m will redeem Himself, and pay reward to Tzadikim in the future.

Maharsha: "Mi'Sumo" - when Hash-m will return to put name Kel in partnership with the name Yisrael.

What is 'the nation that will be found'?

Rashi: A nation that will want to stop Yisrael [from returning to their land].

Maharal: Also this refers to the fourth kingdom, which separates between Yisrael and Hash-m. As long as it is found, Yisrael are distanced from Hash-m.

What is the significance of putting his garment between two lions mating?

Rashi: He wants to stop them from mating. This is dangerous! Who can stop Yisrael when Hash-m wants to bring them?!

Maharsha: The letters of the names Lavi and Levi'ah spell Bi (in me is) Kel, and Bi ha'Kel, respectively.

What are "v'Tzim mi'Yad Kitim"?

Rashi: Tzim are great ships - "v'Tzi Adir Lo Ya'avrenu. Kitim is Liba Aspir (a place). The soldiers on the boats are Romans.

Etz Yosef: The Aruch says that Malchus Tzim is called Libin Aspar. In a Teshuvah, he explained that it is Roman legions.

What is the source to expound that they will kill everyone until Ashur, and from there on, they will subjugate the nations?

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): If the punishments of Ashur and Ever were the same, it should have said 'v'Inu Ashur v'Ever.' "v'Inu Ever" is like an inclusion after an inclusion; it diminishes.

Why should he have said 'I will counsel what your nation should do to this nation'?

Rashi citing his Rebbi: He counseled that they make Yisrael stumble in Zenus.

Iyun Yakov: Rashi on Chumash explained that the Reisha "I will counsel you" does not explain the counsel; the Seifa 'Asher Ya'aseh ha'Am ha'Zeh l'Amecha" discusses the days of David - "u'Machatz Pa'asi Mo'av."

What curse was attributed to others?

Rashi citing his Rebbi: Bil'am did not want it to sound as if Balak needs to take counsel how to make Yisrael stumble. Rather, he attributed the lowliness to Yisrael, as if they need counsel how to make Bnos Mo'av sin, lest Mo'av overpower Yisrael.

Rashi: Bil'am said 'what your nation will do to this nation.' The Torah did not want to it sound as if Yisrael was cursed, so it changed it to what this nation will do to your nation.'

Maharsha: This was lowliness for Mo'av, to make their daughters Hefker for Zenus. Therefore, he attributed to Yisrael, as if they made their daughters Hefker. Here, 'curse' means lowliness.

Iyun Yakov: Bil'am did not want to attribute his curse to Yisrael, for Hash-m forbade him, and put an angel or hook in his mouth. Therefore, also his counsel, he said like one who curses himself and attributes it to others. He spoke as if he counsels Yisrael to harm Mo'av; really, it is for Mo'av to harm Yisrael.

Why did Bil'am say 'their G-d'? He was a Navi. He knew that there is only one Elokim!

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim #1: Because Hash-m designates His name on Yisrael, He is called Elokei Yisrael.

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim #2: Bil'am was already despised in Hash-m's eyes; he said 'I cannot transgress Pi Hash-m", and did not say 'Elokai', like he said initially. Therefore, he said 'their G-d', and not Elokim.

Why should they make curtains?

Rashi: They should make tents out of curtains.

Anaf Yosef citing Toras Chayim: Here it says that Bil'am counseled only to make them stumble in Zenus, but not in idolatry, i.e. to serve Ba'al Pe'or or eat Zivchei Mesim. The girls themselves did so! They refused to consent to Bi'ah until the men did so. The Sifri implies like this. This explains why Moshe told the army officers "Hen Henah Hayu li'Vnei Yisrael bi'Dvar Bil'am Limsor Ma'al ba'Shem Al Devar Pe'or." i.e. Bnos Midyan were a stumbling block for Bnei Yisrael in Bil'am's counsel for Zenus, and they added "Limsor Ma'al ba'Shem Al Devar Pe'or." The plague was primarily due to the idolatry. Therefore, it was most appropriate to take vengeance against the women.

What is Har Sheleg?

Rashi: It is Senir.

How did they know that Yisrael love linen garments?

Rashi: They were in Egypt, where linen is plentiful - "Ovedei Pishtan", and in the 40 years in the Midbar they lacked them and sought to buy them. (NOTE: Why did they lack clothing? Everyone took from Egypt at least 80 or 90 donkeys laden with silver, gold and garments! The cloud rubbed the garments, and they did not wear out and moths did not eat them (Devarim Rabah 7:11)! Perhaps the clothes wore out after the clouds departed when Aharon died, before the clouds returned. Or, even when they returned, they ceased to preserve the clothing, for now they were only in the merit of Moshe, or in order to accustom Am Yisrael to natural conduct; soon they will enter Eretz Yisrael. Presumably, Midyan did not know about the miracle or its cessation, and assumed that Yisrael desire linen garments. - PF)

Iyun Yakov: Rashi (Shemos 12:35) says that the garments were dearer to them than the silver and gold.

Why does it say 'when Yisrael ate, drank and were merry, they went to tour in the market'?

Iyun Yakov: One Aveirah leads to another. Amidst excess eating and drinking, and Simchah not of a Mitzvah, they went to tour, and did not engage in Torah. They came to drink [Amoni] wine, Zenus, and idolatry. 'Wine and youth can cause many things' (Sotah 7a). Here both of them were together!

What is the significance of drinking Amoni wine?

Maharal: This is what caused Yisrael to cling to them. It says Tzirtzur (flask), for it caused them to make a Tzarah (affliction, or rival) to Hash-m. It was Amoni wine, for the Amoni nation came to the world via wine (Lot's daughters inebriated him).

Margoliyos ha'Yam 9: Why did Bnos Mo'av have Amoni wine? Perhaps Amon were more fanatical about idolatry than other nations, and Moshe already decreed to forbid their wine [for it is likely that it was offered to idolatry].

When was Nochri wine forbidden?

Anaf Yosef citing Zera Avraham: Pinchas decreed to forbid Stam wine of Goyim after the episode of Bnos Midyan. Some say that Daniel decreed about it - "va'Yasem Daniel Al Libo Asher Lo Yisga'el..." Actual Yayin Nesech (that was poured to idolatry), the Torah forbids it!

Did Yisrael agree to excrete in front of Ba'al Pe'or?

Maharsha: Yes. The girls told them, I do not ask you to serve it, only to disgrace it. (NOTE: Initially, they asked them to serve it! It seems that they hoped to make Yisrael serve it b'Mezid. When the Yisrael refused, they asked them to disgrace it; Yisrael did not know that this is how Ba'al Pe'or is served. Rashi (Bamidbar 25:5, citing above, 18a) says that each of the 78, 600 judges killed two sinners. If so, many served b'Mezid! - PF)

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Alei Veradim Sotah 22b: King Yanai told his wife 'you need not fear the true Perushim, nor those who are not Perushim, only the Tzevu'im (who portray themselves to be Perushim). They sin like Zimri, and anticipate reward like Pinchas (Sotah 22b). R. Yosef Chaim Zonenfeld asked, where do we find that Zimri requested reward? Targum Yonason (Sof Balak) says that they were crying Pesach Ohel Mo'ed and reciting Shma. What is the connection between crying and reciting Shma? We find here that the primary sin was Zenus, and not idolatry. When [judges] were killing people from Shevet Shimon, they complained to their Nasi Zimri that they intended for Zenus, and not for idolatry. Zimri took Kozbi by her hair into the camp, in order to sin with her. If primarily they wanted to serve idolatry, they can avoid this, via bringing the girls to the camp. (How will this avoid idolatry? Perhaps no Yisrael would lower himself so much to publicly excrete in front of an idol. I did not understand the question; it does not say that Zimri requested reward! - PF) Zimri and his Shevet recited Shma, to show that the Yetzer ha'Ra for Zenus befuddled them. Zimri thought that he deserved reward for preventing Yisraelim from serving idolatry.

Why did she ask him to deny the entire Torah of Moshe?

Maharsha: The Torah forbids Mo'av to marry into Yisrael.

What is the meaning of "va'Yinazru la'Boshes va'Yihyu Shikutzim k'Ahavam"?

Rashi: Amidst desire of love to be Mezaneh, they were despicable - they denied Hash-m.

What is the argument about Shitim?

Maharal #1: R. Eliezer holds that since man has a body, he is prepared for sin. We need not expound a reason why they sinned. R. Yehoshua holds that man sins only when he is drawn after deeds without substance. Therefore, he expounds that they engaged in Shtus. They argue similarly about Refidim. R. Yehoshua holds that one sins only when he turns away from Divrei Torah. In Shitim was Zenus, a sin of the body; it comes via Shtus. In Refidim was a sin of the Sechel, to say 'is Hash-m among us?' It comes via veering from Torah, which is intellectual.

Maharal #2: R. Eliezer holds that the place causes. Some places are more prepared for sin than others. The place was called Shitim, for there they did an act of Shtus and Zenus. It was prepared for this; it is in Eretz Mo'av. Mo'av [and Amon] were born via Lot's Bi'ah with his daughters, so they were prepared for this.

Iyun Yakov: The place causes Zenus. The Midrash says, they did not breach [Arayos] until they came to Shitim.

Maharsha: R. Yehoshua agrees that the place was Shitim, and also regarding Refidim. He says that they were called so due to the Shtus and Rifyon Yadayim.

Iyun Yakov: One sins only if a spirit of Shetus enters him (Sotah 3a).

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Chasam Sofer (Parshas Balak): Because "Yisrael" (the greatest of the nation) engaged in Shetus and neglected Torah, "va'Yachel ha'Am" - the commoners descended and began to be Mezaneh. A breach always begins with the leaders of Torah. If Talmidei Yeshivah decline, a university student is prone to become an apostate.99

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Yisrael dwelled "mi'Beis ha'Yeshimos Ad Evel ha'Shitim"; they did not dwell in Shitim. Also, it is called Evel ha'Shitim! Also, Shitim are trees - "Atzei Shitim"! Therefore, R. Yehoshua expounds the name.

What is the argument about "va'Tikrenah"?

Rashi: R. Eliezer holds that they encountered their bodies.

Maharsha: One who is clothed, another encounters his clothes before his body.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): What is the source to expound so? Also, how does this connect to the continuation of the verse "[va'Tikrenah] la'Am l'Zivchei Eloheihen"? (NOTE: Pesikta d'Rav Kahana 11 expounds "v'Lo Nacham Elokim Derech Eretz" (Shemos 13:17) - Hash-m did not conduct Yisrael with Derech Eretz. Normally, water comes from above, and food from below. In the Midbar, food came from above and water from below! The Vilna Gaon proved from this that one may expound words of a Pasuk even if the following words ("Pelishtim Ki Karov") make no sense by themselves (Chumash ha'Gra). - PF)

Maharal: R. Eliezer holds that man is prepared for sin. Via touching (the bodies), they came to sin. R. Yehoshua holds that man sins only when he is drawn after physical deeds. Keri comes from thought in the Nefesh; this was the beginning of the sin.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): They were serving their god Ba'al Pe'or, and via this they became exposed, and then they encountered Bnei Yisrael.

How did Yisrael slacken from Divrei Torah?

Maharsha: They desecrated Shabbos, which is equal to the entire Torah, like it says in Shabbos.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): All must agree that its name is Refidim. It says in Mas'ei "va'Yachanu bi'Rfidim; va'Yis'u me'Refidim." We ask what Refidim means, for (a) it should have said that Amalek came to Refidim before saying "va'Yavo Amalek va'Yilachem Im Yisrael bi'Refidim", and (b) just before this, it says "va'Yikra Shem ha'Makom Masah u'Merivah." R. Eliezer holds that this name was added; the initial name Refidim remained its primary name.

What is the meaning of "Lo Hifnu Avos El Banim me'Rifyon Yadayim"?

Rashi: Fathers did not benefit their sons. Just like there it was due to slackening in Torah and Mitzvos, also here.

Maharsha: This is difficult. The verse discusses the fall of the Pelishtim, who lack Torah and Mitzvos!

Etz Yosef: The Mechilta is like Rashi. "Va'Yhi... Azav Es Toras Hash-m; ... Alah Shishak Melech Mitzrayim"

Why does "va'Yeshev" denote pain?

Maharal: Dwelling causes man to stumble. A man who toils, his deed is not complete. He seeks perfection, and is not drawn to Chisaron (lack). When it says "va'Yeshev", and he rests, as if he already reached perfection, he is drawn after lack. There is no perfection in the world to which Chisaron does not cling. Chazal hinted to this above (91b). The Yetzer ha'Ra is put in man from when he leaves the womb - "Ki Yetzer Lev ha'Adam Ra mi'Ne'urav." Ne'urav is written Chaser (without a Vov); we read it Nin'ar - from when he is moved to leave the womb. The Yetzer ha'Ra is the Satan; it is the angel of death (Bava Basra 16a). It brings man to lack and to death. Before man enters the world, he moves towards perfection. Lack does not cling to him. It is the opposite of existence; two opposites are not found together. Once he moves to leave, he is complete; then, lack, the Yetzer ha'Ra, which is the Satan and the angel of death, clings to him.

Iyun Yakov: Even though va'Yeshev implies dwelling in Shalom and serenity, this causes the Satan to prosecute that he wanted to dwell in serenity, and pain results. So the Midrash says at the beginning of Parshas va'Yeshev. We do not bring the verse from Parshas Bereishis "va'Yeshev b'Eretz Nud", or "va'Yeshev Avraham b'Elonei Mamrei", because "va'Yhi bi`Ymei" caused the pain, like it says in Megilah. The best answer is, the Gemara lists cases in which the dwelling caused the pain. Shitim caused the Zenus. Yakov's desire to dwell in serenity caused his anguish over Yosef. "Va'Yeshev Yisrael... b'Eretz Goshen", i.e. he went to Chutz la'Aretz, caused his death.

Anaf Yosef: "Va'Yeshev Avraham b'Elonei Mamrei", "va'Yeshev Avraham b'Ve'er Sheva", "va'Yeshev Yosef b'Mitzrayim" and many others are not pain! Chazal said, we do not learn from general rules, even when it says 'except for', and especially Midrashim, which are like Asmachtos, mountains hanging from hairs. Chazal said also that "va'Yhi" is always affliction, and "v'Hayah" is Simchah, and we find thousands of exceptions! Rather, it means in most cases.

Anaf Yosef citing Toras Chayim: Man must make his dwelling in this world Arai (haphazard), as if he has no fixed dwelling, so he will always remember his death and repent to Hash-m. Therefore, wherever Yisrael wanted to make themselves a fixed dwelling, agitation came upon them, even though we find Tzadikim who enjoyed both tables (wealth and serenity in this world, and surely also the world to come). If Tzadikim consume both words, do they despise this?! (Horayos 10b) This is when the wealth and pleasure come automatically. Then, they may enjoy it in an Arai way, like a guest who comes to lodge. Tzadikim may not seek pleasure of this world and wealth. About this, the Midrash says 'is it not enough for them what is prepared for them in the world to come?' This is when they seek to enjoy serenity in this world in a fixed way. The Midrash says, when Hillel left the Beis Midrash, his Talmidim asked where he is going; he said, to do Chesed with this guest in this house. They asked, do you have a guest every day? He said, this poor Nefesh - is it not a guest?! Today it is here... He did not tell his Talmidim that he is going to eat, to teach that man's eating and pleasure in this world should be like a guest in an inn, and the horses are tied to the wagon ready to go. Such a guest diminishes his pleasure; he eats and drinks briefly.

Etz Yosef: Va'Yeshev is like Vai (woe) Shav.

Daf Al ha'Daf citing Pardes Yosef (Parshas Vayeshev): Esav hates Yakov, especially when a Jew considers himself a native and openly demands his rights. Then they say 'let us be wise [against them], for Yisrael is great and awesome, and all their wealth is from us; they took all our wealth!' A Jew must know that he is on a foreign land, until Hash-m will return the exile of His nation. 'Wherever', i.e. in all lands of our Galus, when one says va'Yeshev - I will be like a native, Yisrael's afflicters will not rest until they end the serenity of Yisrael.

What is the question 'why was Bil'am with Midyan'?

Maharsha: He was from Aram Naharayim. R. Yochanan said, he went to collect reward. Why did he go to Midyan, and not to Mo'av, who promised reward to him? Meforshim elaborated about this. I can say that Balak told him "Amarti Kabed Achabedcha v'Hine Mena'acha Hash-m mi'Kavod" - he did not take his counsel. Midyan accepted his counsel. Tzur, who was their king, was Mafkir his daughter for Zenus with Yisrael. This is why Yisrael took vengeance against Midyan, and not against Mo'av! (NOTE: This is unlike Rashi (Bamidbar 31:2), who says that Yisrael took vengeance against Midyan, and not against Mo'av, because Midyan entered a feud that did not pertain to them. - PF)

Iyun Yakov: He went to Midyan, for now Yisrael made war with them, and due to him, there were fewer Yisraelim. He thought that Midyan would pay him for this. (NOTE: Yisrael sent only a small number of soldiers - 1000 from each Shevet! Perhaps he claimed that many of their greatest warriors died. The claim is better based on the Midrash that every judge of Yisrael killed two people [for idolatry]. Together with those who died in the plague, almost 200,000 died. However, the Gemara says that he sought reward only for felling 24,000. - PF)

Etz Yosef: Also Mo'av was in this war. Sifri Matos says that Tzur is Balak, who promised reward to Bil'am!

Did Bil'am kill 24,000 Yisraelim?

Rashi: His counsel caused their death.

What is the relevance of 'the camel asked for horns, and they cut off its ears'?

Rashi: So Bil'am requested wages, and he was killed.

Why was he a Navi, and in the end, a Kosem?

Rashi: After he sought to make curse Yisrael, his Nevu'ah was removed; he became a magician.

Ramah: He lost his Ru'ach ha'Kodesh, but he still strove to know the future, he was (only) a magician.

Maharal: Initially he was a Navi before Yisrael left Egypt. Then, also the nations had Nevu'ah. After Yetzi'as Mitzrayim, Moshe asked that Shechinah be only on Yisrael, and not on the nations. Before this episode, it was not totally removed. When Bil'am, from the nations, agreed to the Berachos, Shechinah totally left the nations. (NOTE: This is like the opinion that Bil'am was one of Pharaoh's advisors, unlike we say below, that Bil'am lived only 33 years. How did Bil'am agree to the Berachos? He wanted to curse, and Hash-m forced him to bless! - PF)

Iyun Yakov: Wherever there is Kedushah, there is a fence from Ervah. He counseled for Zenus, so Kedushah departed from him; he became a Kosem.

Who are Gavrei Nagrei, and what is the comparison?

Rashi #1: They are people who pull ships.

Rashi #2: They are carpenters. Ramah - when her husband died, she can marry only someone else who bears weapons. A carpenter carries a plane, ax and saw, which are like weapons. (NOTE: Rema's text says Haviyan (they married); our text, says, Havai Ayizan. Rashi explained, they were Havai (married) to nobles, and they were Ayizan (Mezanah) with Nagrei. - PF)

Why did they perform all four Misos Beis Din on Bil'am?

Maharal: He lost the world to come; it was proper that he be killed in every way. Surely Misas Beis Din relates to the sin done. Bil'am sinned in everything; he did not have a particular sin, therefore they judged him in all four Misos. Life is the middle; death is the sides. There are four sides (directions). Even if a sinner leaned to a side and was executed, he is proper for the world to come. Bil'am sinned on every side.

Maharsha: Perhaps they knew that he was liable all four Misos. We said, 'except for Bil'am - expound as much as you can about him!'

Iyun Yakov: One who is Chayav two different Misos receives only one, due to "Kedei Rish'aso" (NOTE: the more stringent one, or the one that arose first (81a). That applies to Jews. A Goy's Misah is always via the sword (56a)! - PF) Perhaps since he was a Kosem, they could not kill him simply, until they tried all four Misos Beis Din.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 1 citing Bereishis Rabah 65:22: The nephew of R. Yosi ben Yo'ezer arranged that all four Misos Beis Din be performed on him, for the sake of Teshuvah.

How did they perform all four Misos Beis Din on Bil'am?

Rashi: They hung him, lit a fire under his body, cut off his head and it fell into the fire. Hanging is choking; cutting off his head is Hereg (the sword); falling to the ground is stoning, and falling into the fire is burning.

Maharsha: This is difficult. Stoning and burning were after death, i.e. after his head was cut off! Torah Serefah is pouring molten lead down his throat! (NOTE: This is due to "v'Ahavta l'Re'echa Kamocha" - choose a nice death for him (45a). This does not apply to Bil'am! - PF)

Maharsha: Initially they stoned him a little, but not to the point of death. They poured a little molten lead down his throat - he did not die yet. They choked him a little, but not to the point of death. After, they beheaded him via a sword. This is considered performing all the Misos on him - partial killing is like total killing (Chulin 35b). The pronoun at the end of "Chaleleihem" refers to Bnei Yisrael - they killed him via their Torah executions.

Why did he ask about Bil'am's years?

Maharal: He was a great Rasha. Life is not proper for him. Below, we bring "Anshei Damim u'Mirmah Lo Yechetzu Yemeihem" regarding Do'eg and Achitofel. They were great Chachamim and Resha'im. They were Anshei Damim, and also Bil'am was - he wanted to kill an entire nation! The primary life is half (a normal lifespan). It is proper that they not reach it. Really, "Anshei Damim", who kill others, life is not proper for them at all. One who is full of Mirmah (guile) and ruses, like Bil'am, who was Kosem. Anyone who is Kosem does not go in Tamim (pureness) - "Tamim Tihyeh Im Hash-m Elokecha." A Tamim is part of existence. One who is not Tamim - a Kosem, or Ba'al Mirmah, like Bil'am, a Chacham for evil - he counseled Mo'av to make their daughters Hefker (for Zenus) - this is not in existence. Sechel is existence; Mirmah is not.

Why did he say 'presumably he lived 33 or 34 years'?

Maharsha: It should be recognized that he died lest he reach half his years. Since he does not retract from his evil deeds until half his years, afterwards he will not retract. He is not proper to live more. Also oppositely, if a Tzadik reached half his years and did not sin, afterwards he will not sin (Yoma 38b).

Etz Yosef citing Toras Chayim: He was unsure if he finished 33 years and entered his 34th, or finished 34 years and entered his 35th. He was unsure whether or not part of a year is considered like a full year, like we find regarding Dor ha'Midbar. If it is like a full year for Bil'am, he did not pass 34 years, for then it is as if he lived 35 - "Anshei Damim u'Mirmah Lo Yechetzu Yemeihem"!

R. Chanina holds that Bil'am lived less than 35 years. This is unlike R. Chiya bar Aba taught, that Paro took counsel with three, including Bil'am!

Rashi: Indeed, they argue. According to R. Chiya bar Aba said, Bil'am lived more than 210 years.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 3: This is difficult. Yisrael were in Egypt 210 years in all. Pharaoh's decree was after Yosef died (71 years after Yisrael descended), and before Moshe's birth. (NOTE: Rashi could say that the slavery began only after Yosef died, but the counsel was in his lifetime. However, what forced Rashi to say so? Even if the counsel was shortly before Yetzi'as Mitzrayim, this was 40 years before Bil'am died, unlike R. Chanina! - PF)

Why should one expound only about Bil'am?

Rashi: This refers to expounding for detriment.

Maharal #1: The others [without a share in the world to come] were Jewish. It is a disgrace for Yisrael that Resha'im came from them. Bil'am was a Goy - their disgrace is honor for Yisrael.

Maharal #2: It is due to his great evil. He was a Navi, and a Rasha, and they performed all four Misos Beis Din on him - one cannot explain all his sin. Surely he sinned in all that we can expound! This does not apply to other Resha'im; if it is not clear that they sinned [in particular ways], do not expound that they did.

Iyun Yakov: Those who expound hints taught that all the others in our Mishnah have a share in the world to come.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 4 citing Tana d'Vei Eliyahu 18: Whatever [evil] you can attribute to Resha'im, attribute to them.

Did Pinchas kill Bil'am?

Rashi: Even if someone else killed him, the entire war is called on his name, for he was Sar Tzeva.

Anaf Yosef citing Galya Masechta: Rashi comes to resolve our Gemara with the Zohar, which says that a man named Tzelah killed him. Bil'am was flying; Tzelah flew higher, and killed him.

How do we explain the name Doyeg?

Rashi: The Vov-Yud in Doyeg hints that [after he sinned,] Hash-m said Vai.

Maharal: He was great in Chochmah, so initially Hash-m desired that he not be a Rasha. After he sinned, Oy (woe) to him and Oy to Me over his loss.

Maharsha: The Shechinah is pained over the loss of Resha'im, like we say (46a) 'when [even a Rasha] is in pain, the Shechinah says 'My head hurts Me.'

Why was Hash-m worried lest Do'eg sin? Did He not know that he will sin?!

Ramah: This is a Mashal. It is as if He does not know, for it is not decreed that anyone be a Tzadik or Rasha. Even though Hash-m knows what will be, His knowledge is unlike other knowledge. It is because He is the cause of everything. Since He knows Himself, He knows everything. (Margoliyos ha'Yam 5 - this is unlike a Chacham who knows the causes, and can deduce the result that they obligate. Rather, it is like knowing that one who casts a lottery, a certain number will come up. This is a knowledge above ours. Many stumbled because they did not understand this.) Even though Hash-m knew that he will be a Rasha, He created him, for He does not judge creations based on the future, until it comes to deed (Margoliyos ha'Yam 5 - especially because in the end, the entire world will be fixed with Hash-m's kingship. Also burned Neshamos of Resha'im, their ashes are scattered. This is not total destruction, for in the end they return to their source.) If so, why was He worried? Hash-m was not worried for Himself, rather, for Do'eg and the world, which was liable due to him. Hash-m does not desire death of Resha'im! This is a Mashal; worry does not apply to Hash-m. Rather, it is bad in His eyes, even though it does not affect Him.

What is the meaning of 'are you not a Gibor in Torah? Why do you exalt yourself in evil'?

Maharsha: Since you are a Gibor in Torah, it is not praiseworthy for you to engage in Leshon ha'Ra.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): The verse is difficult. If he exalts himself in evil, he does not exalt himself in Chesed Kel. These are opposites! Also, Ra'ah and Chesed Kel should have been taught together! Rather, Hash-m said, since you are a Gibor in Torah, you know how severe is the Isur of Leshon ha'Ra.

Iyun Yakov #1: The verse cannot mean that he is a normal Gibor, who conquers his Yetzer ha'Ra, for it says "Mah Tis'halel b'Ra'ah"! Rather, you are a Gibor in Torah. It should save you from Leshon ha'Ra - "Marpei Lashon Etz Chayim"!

Iyun Yakov #2: There are two reasons why Torah is called Toshiyah. (a) It is Mateshes (weakens) man's strength. (b) The world is Meshusas (based) on it. (26b. NOTE - there a third reason was brought, because it was given b'Chashai (quietly), due to the Satan. - PF) When Hash-m wanted to create man, He asked angels if He should create man. The first two groups said not to; He burned them. When Dor ha'Midbar and Dor ha'Flagah came (they transgressed greatly), the third group said 'the first groups were right! "Mah Enosh Ki Sizkerenu"? Hash-m said "v'Ad Ziknah... Ani Esbol." Chidushei Agados explained this to discuss Matan Torah. Hash-m appeared like an elder. I explain that Hash-m saw the Resha'im's deeds - sin extinguishes Mitzvah. Therefore, they said that the first groups were right. Hash-m answered, "v'Ad Ziknah" - until Matan Torah, "Ani Esbol", for sin does not extinguish Torah (so after Matan Torah, their merit of Torah will sustain them).

Anaf Yosef citing Midrash Shochar Tov: Is it Gevurah to see someone by the opening of a pit, and to push him in? Is it Gevurah push someone on the roof [and he falls down]?! Gibor is when one is about to fall, and he holds him so he does not fall, or he sees someone in a pit, and raises him! You saw Sha'ul angry at David, and you cast water on his limbs!

Margoliyos ha'Yam 6 citing Midrash Shmuel 18:4: Do'eg was equal to all of Yisrael. Rashi (Shmuel I, 15:24) explains "Yareisi Es ha'Am" to refer to Do'eg, who was as important as all of them. Therefore, he cannot be considered Shogeg about obeying the king to transgress!

Why did Hash-m say 'when you reach the Parshiyos of murder and Leshon ha'Ra, what do you expound about them?

Rashi: You killed the Kohanim of Nov [and slandered David]!

Iyun Yakov #1: He tells Do'eg, you have no Heter to slander David (the merit of his Torah is intact). The Parshah of murderers teaches that sin does not extinguish Torah. Divrei Torah are a Miklat (refuge) - "Es Betzer ba'Midbar...; v'Zos ha'Torah" (Makos 10). However, perhaps that is for Shogeg, but Mezid extinguishes Torah! We learn from Leshon ha'Ra. What is the solution for one who spoke Lashon ha'Ra? He should engage in Torah - "Marpei Lashon Etz Chayim" (Erchin 15b). However, perhaps that is only for Leshon ha'Ra - speech without an action! We learn from a Tzad ha'Shavah of both of them. When you reach the Parshiyos of murder and Leshon ha'Ra, you should learn from the Tzad ha'Shavah. If so, how do you slander David?!

Iyun Yakov #2: Why was Do'eg punished so severely for Leshon ha'Ra? (NOTE: Even though he killed Kohanei Nov, he was cut off due to Leshon ha'Ra - "Yachres Hash-m Kol Sifsei Chalakos." - PF) It is a mere Lav. Even though Leshon ha'Ra kills three, that is merely Gerama (causation), for which one is exempt! Some say that Leshon ha'Ra to a king is different; he will immediately kill. However, once Shmuel told Sha'ul "Hash-m tore the kingship from you, to give it to your colleague who is better than you", he did not have the law of a king. When you reach the Parshiyos of murder and Leshon ha'Ra, how do you justify yourself? Why did you kill Kohanei Nov? Normally, Ein Shali'ach li'Devar Aveirah. You must hold that A king is different; you Do'eg did not expound Ach and Rak, and held that one must obey the king even to transgress. If you murdered because you considered him king, and you must obey him, you should not have told to him Leshon ha'Ra - telling a king is like an action! (NOTE: Even if Hash-m did not consider Sha'ul to be king, people considered him king, and all his servants helped him to try to kill David! In any case, telling him Leshon ha'Ra is like a Ma'aseh! Sha'ul considered the Kohanim to be Mored b'Malchus for helping David, so it was permitted to kill them, but Do'eg knew that this is false. - PF)

Why does it say Lo Chesed Kel Natuy Alecha Kol ha'Yom?

Maharsha: Is not His good Midah stretched over you the entire day to accept your Teshuvah?

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): Is it not Chesed Kel to teach to you how harsh is the Isur of Leshon ha'Ra?!

Iyun Yakov: This is not said in astonishment. Torah of Chesed is one who learns Lishmah (Sukah 49). If Torah does not save you from sin, surely you did not learn Lishmah, and Chesed Kel is not over you. His Torah was from the lips and outward.

Why does it say "Mah Lecha Lesaper Chuki"?

Maharsha: He counted 300 laws of Migdal Pore'ach b'Avir. All the more so he counted the Mitzvos (613). Why do you count them? You are missing many of them, e.g. the entire Parshah of murderers, the Parshah of those who speak Leshon ha'Ra. You transgress the simple meaning - what do you expound to remove them from their simple meaning?

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): This refers to the Parshah of murderers and slanderers. You showed that they are [to you] Chukim without a reason. Therefore, you spoke [Leshon ha'Ra].

Iyun Yakov #1: You transgress even Mitzvos of intellect, such as murder and Leshon ha'Ra. All the more so you transgress Chukim, which the Satan and nations challenge them (for we cannot explain their reason)! What will you say about them?!

Iyun Yakov #2: It says in Sotah (21a) that an Aveirah extinguishes (inhibits the reward for) a Mitzvah, but it does not extinguish Torah. Had Doeg and Achitofel expounded so, they would not have pursued [to kill] David. They said "Elokim Azavo Ridfu v'Sifsuhu Ki Ein Matzil", for Aveirah extinguished his merits. They did not know that it does not extinguish Torah.

How do we learn from "va'Tisa Vrisi Alei Ficha" that Do'eg's Torah was from the lips and outward?

Rashi: It is not in his heart.

Maharsha: The inner Kelim - the powers of speech, e.g. the palate and throat, he did not use for Divrei Torah. Only from the lips and outward, he said Divrei Torah inaudibly, like it says about Chanah "Rak Sefaseha Na'os v'Kolah Lo Yishama." That is proper for Tefilah. For Divrei Torah, one should be audible!

Daf Al ha'Daf citing R. Yechezkel of Kozmir: The Torah of a Do'eg, i.e. one who worries constantly, and is distracted with worldly matters, is from the lips and outward.

Why did Tzadikim initially fear, and in the end, they laughed?

Maharsha: Initially they feared due to Leshon ha'Ra that he said about Tzadikim, e.g. Kohanei Nov and David. In the end, when he died before his time, they laughed - "b'Avod Resha'im Rinah", when they die before their time.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): There are two difficulties in the verse. Laughing is the opposite of fear. Also, why is "Alav" between "v'Yira'u" and "Yischaku"? It should be after Yischaku! Therefore, we expound that first they feared, and in the end, they laughed.

Iyun Yakov: Initially they feared that one about whom it says "Ayei Shokel v'Ayei Sofer" could stumble in such great sins. In the end, they saw that his Torah was only from the lips and outward, they laughed at him.

Did Do'eg die before half his years?!

He died before half his (normal allotment of) years.

What was the answer "Chayil Bala va'Yaki'enu"?

Rashi: Wait until he forgets his Torah.

Maharsha: This is a verse in Iyov. Tzofar said it about Resha'im. We expound that Hash-m told David that Do'eg's Torah was swallowed; it was not eaten. He will vomit it out, i.e. forget it.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 7: One who learns Torah Lishmah, he digests Divrei Torah and they are absorbed in his blood. Torah that is from the lips and outward, it is like one who eats without chewing, just he swallows. It is not digested. It turns to blood, and in the end he vomits it out.

What was the request "mi'Bitno Yorishenu Kel"?

Rashi: Do not wait until he forgets it. Cause him to forget it soon!

Maharsha: i.e. expel his Torah via another party. Hash-m sent an angel to make him forget it.

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): We expound it to discuss Do'eg, for the Reisha is in past tense, and the Seifa is in the future. If you will sweeten it in your mouth, and suppress it under your tongue, "Lachmo b'Me'av Nehpach Meroras Pesanim b'Kirbo" (the previous verse), David's Tefilah about Do'eg, who spoke evil about him with his mouth. The food in his innards should be converted to snake venom. After this it says Chayil Bala va'Yaki'enu - Hash-m's words. The following verse "Rosh Pesanim Yinak Tahargehu Leshon Ef'eh" - Leshon ha'Ra, which kills like a snake and Ef'eh, should kill him. This is because Hash-m told David to wait until Do'eg forgets his Torah, for as long as one engages in Eitz ha'Chayim (Torah), it is a cure, and he is not stricken with Nega'im. (NOTE: He must mean that he need not leave the camp due to Tzara'as. Moshe and Aharon were briefly stricken with Tzara'as! David has Tzara'as for six months! There, he requested it for Kaparah. - PF) Therefore, David prayed "Yachtecha v'Yisachacha me'Ohel v'Shereshcha me'Eretz Chayim" - he should not engage in Torah, which is Eitz ha'Chayim.

What was the request "Gam Kel Yitatzcha la'Netzach"?

Maharsha: The previous verse says "Ahavta Kol Divrei Vala", i.e. the words of Bil'am, who is called Bala ven Be'or. Also he was a Ba'al Leshon ha'Ra, with Ayin ha'Ra. Hash-m suggested that Do'eg will receive his punishment in this world, and come to the world to come. David said that he should be cut off from the world that is Nitzchi (eternal).

Rif (on the Ein Yakov): "Gam" is extra. Therefore, we expound that Hash-m said..., and David asked that also the one who advocates for Do'eg should agree that he not come to the world to come.

Why did Hash-m suggest that teachings be said in Do'eg's name?

Maharsha: He accepted David's Tefilah that Do'eg lose both worlds. In His mercy, He wanted to bring to him some merit in both worlds. "Agura v'Ahalecha Olamim" - can a person dwell in two worlds?! Rather, David requested of Hash-m that people should say teachings in his own name in this world [for then, his lips move in the grave - Yevamos 96b-97a]. He prayed that Do'eg not merit this.

Anaf Yosef, Margoliyos ha'Yam 9: Amora'im argue about "Asher Ein Chalifos Lamo v'Lo Yar'u Elokim", if it refers to one who dies without a son, or one who dies without a Talmid (Bava Basra 116a. Hash-m wanted that Talmidim say teachings in his name, or he will have children who will be Chachamim. David prayed that neither occur.)

What was the request "Yachtecha v'Yisachacha me'Ohel"?

Maharsha: David requested that people will not say teachings in Do'eg's name, lest he merit that his lips move in the grave. The double expression shows that he requested that Do'eg be uprooted from both worlds.

Why did David request "v'Shereshcha me'Eretz Chayim"?

Maharsha: Do'eg loved Chochmah; one who loves Chachamim, he will have children who are Chachamim (Shabbos 23b). David requested that Do'eg not have this - the Torah, which is Eitz Chayim, should be uprooted [from his seed].

Does R. Yitzchak praise Do'eg for being able to count all the letters of the Torah?

Rashi: He was expert in the extra and missing letters.

Maharsha: It says in Kidushin (30a) that early Chachamim were called Soferim, for they counted all the letters in the Torah. They said that the Vov of Gachon is the middle letter (Kidushin 30a).

What is the meaning of 'could be Shokel all the Kal va'Chomerim in the Torah'?

Rashi: He knows to expound Kal va'Chomer.

Maharsha: He knows to weigh Kal v'Chomerim, to which side they lean - he knew the reasoning and challenges.

In the days of Rava, did they learn only Uktzin?

The text of Ramah and Be'er Sheva, and in Ta'anis (24b) and Berachos (20a) is 'six Sedorim of the Mishnah.'

What are laws of Migdal Pore'ach b'Avir?

Rashi citing his Rebbi: The upper stick (roof) of the Lamed - why is it bent below? (NOTE: Even if there are 300 reasons for this, why are these considered 300 Halachos? Perhaps it pertains to 300 Halachos, e.g. the space required between letters, between words, between lines, how much of a word may leave the line, if it was written improperly how it may be fixed... - PF)

Maharal #1: This refers to man's Sechel, which ascends above. It is called a Migdal Pore'ach b'Avir. Even though man bears his Sechel, he is not mixed with it; it stands in the air. The Sechel has the form of a Lamed. It is separated from the body and above it. How it is Kafuf (bent, or dependent on) to the physical body that bears it, there are 300 Halachos about this. (NOTE: Perhaps these Halachos pertain to punishment for sin of intellect (e.g. heresy or blasphemy) or of the body, e.g. Mis'asek is always exempt, except for Aveiros of Achilah and Arayos, because the body benefited. - PF)

Rashi #1: If one entered Chutz la'Aretz in an airborne chest, box or tower, is he Tamei?

Margoliyos ha'Yam 12 citing AMaTz: In Shabbos (15a), it says that Chachamim decreed Tum'ah on Chutz la'Aretz before Churban Sheni! The text of Rashi must say 'he entered a cemetery in a chest...'

Rashi #2: To do witchcraft to stand a tower in the air. This is like 300 Halachos of planting gourds (68a).

Margoliyos ha'Yam 12 citing AMaTz: Rashi did not say that he stands it up via a Shem of Hash-m, even though we find that R. Yehoshua built a house in the air via a Shem (Bechoros 8b), for 'Halachos Pesukos' does not apply to this. We find '300 Halachos of planting gourds via witchcraft' (above, 68a), i.e. in which cases the witch is liable.

Rashi: My Rebbi says that the text should say 'a tower standing in the air.' This is a Mishnah (Ohalos 4:1). There is Tum'ah inside it; the Kelim inside are Temei'im.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 11: Ramah brings from Rav Hai Gaon says that the tower is of wood. The Safek is about Binyan and Stirah in Kelim. It flies via a miracle, or via Hash-m's name, or via a magnet. Also the Rashba (Teshuvah 5:185) says so. The questions were based on cases related to the Mishnah.

Daf Al ha'Daf: We do not make many Halachos about what depends on miracles, Hash-m's name or witchcraft. Rather, in those days they had Merkav El Hava; it was forgotten, and recently invented again. (NOTE: Perhaps the Halachos to discuss a tower thrown in the air! However, in any case, we must explain the Mishnah of a tower standing in the air; it is reasonable to say that they discuss the same case. - PF)

Maharal #2: These are intellectual matters not mixed with physicality.

Maharsha: It says in Zevachim (54b) that David and Shmuel were in Ramah, engaging in the Noy (beauty) of the world. They thought to build the Beis ha'Mikdash in the highest place. They decided to lower it slightly, due to "u'Vein Keseifav Shachen" (between the shoulders, which is just below the highest part, i.e. the head). Do'eg was jealous of this - "Kin'as Beisecha Achalasni", "Zechor Hash-m l'David Es Unoso." Chazal expounded that [the former] applies to Do'eg. Before it, it says "Muzar Hayisi l'Echai v'Nochri li'Vnei Imi"- Do'eg considered David like a Nochri, like it says in Yevamos (76b), that he said 'ask whether David is proper to marry into Kahal Yisrael!' The Mikdash is called Migdal - "k'Migdal David Tzavarech." Therefore it says that he learned 300 Halachos about a Migdal ha'Pore'ach b'Avir. It is called ha'Pore'ach b'Avir, for its place was not known. His Halachos were about its place, even though he did not know the place until David. It says Migdalim (plural) due to the chambers in it, or because there were many possible places for it; they were unsure. Also the 400 questions that Do'eg and Achitofel had about Migdal ha'Pore'ach b'Avir were because they were unsure about its place. (NOTE: How can this be? Do'eg envied David for determining the place. Achitofel was born after Do'eg died! Was Achitofel was unaware that David determined the place? He was there when David dug the foundations for the Mikdash (Makos 11a)! Perhaps his questions were before that episode. This is unlike Margoliyos ha'Yam 10 brings from the Zohar, that no one was able to resolve the questions until Shlomo resolved all of them. - PF)

What is the significance of 400 questions about Migdal Pore'ach b'Avir?

Maharal #1: A question is deeper than the Halachah. Therefore, one cannot resolve it. Because it is a greater level, the number 400 applies.

Maharal #2: The number three applies to decided Halachos. The middle of three does not lean towards either end. So a decided Halachah does not lean towards either end. Therefore, it said that they had 300 Halachos about airborne towers. The number four applies to questions, which lean to different sides; there are four sides.

In the days of Rav Yehudah, did they learn only Nezikin?

Rashi: They learned Gemara (to resolve difficulties in Mishnayos) only in Nezikin.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 14 citing Be'er Sheva: They learned Nezikin, for one who wants to grow wise, he should engage in monetary laws (Bava Basra 175b). Rava said, he should engage in matters of Avos; Maseches Avos is in Seder Nezikin.

Margoliyos ha'Yam 14 citing Ramah: They delved in Nezikin due to cases that arose. Jn other Sedorim, they resolved the Mishnayos and teachings, but they did not delve deeply.

How is she Kovesh vegetables in a pot, and why are they Tehorim?

Rashi: She pickles them in vinegar or brine. They do not receive Tum'ah via their stems, for they are not a Yad (handle). Since they were pickled, the stems are left only for appearance (there is no need for them).

Etz Yosef: She presses them to expel the liquid, so they will dry. When she presses them, the stem breaks, so it has no use and it is not a Yad.

When olives are pickled with their leaves, why are they Tehorim?

Anaf Yosef: If Tum'ah touched the leaves, the olives are Tehorim. The leaves are not considered a Yad nor a Shomer. They are left only for appearance, so it will look like they were detached recently.

Why would Rav Yehudah remove one shoe?

Anaf Yosef: It was to afflict himself.

Why does Hash-m desire the heart?

Anaf Yosef citing Toras Chayim: Everything depends on the heart. It is the residence of the Neshamah; all the limbs are drawn after it. If one engage in Torah and Mitzvos, and his heart is not to Shamayim, this is like a body without a Neshamah; he is like an animal. This is why R. Yochanan ben Zakai said 'I prefer R. Elazar ben Arach's words, that the proper path for man is a good heart, over your (his other Talmidim's) words, for your words are included in his' (Avos 2:13).

Margoliyos ha'Yam 13: The text says 'Rabah', and not Rava, for Rabah decreed a fast, and rain did not come; Rava requested mercy, until the water from the gutterpipes of Tzipori reached the Diglas river (Ta'anis 24a-b).

Why does reaching the correct Halachah depend on "Sod Hash-m li'Yre'av "?

Maharal: The Halachah is Sod Hash-m; it reaches the world to come. 'When he gets to the crossroads, he is saved from all of them' - this is a Chacham who reaches the correct Halachah (Sotah 21a). It is called Halachah because it is Holech (goes) until the world to come, which is Sod and hidden. These lost the world to come, so they have no share in the reaching the Halachah.

Iyun Yakov: Because he did not reach this level, he was not saved from sin.

What do we learn from "Hu Yamus b'Ein Musar uv'Rov Ivalto Yishgeh..."?

Maharsha: This discusses a Rasha. Above, it says "Avonosav Yilkedenu ha'Rasha." Even though in his lifetime he had Torah and Musar, he will die without Musar. "Uv'Rov Ivalto Yishgeh" - he said that David is Pasul to the Kahal. He was Shogeh (erred); this is not the Emes.

Why did he forget all his Torah before he died?

Iyun Yakov: Happy is one who comes to here (the world to come) with his learning in his hand (he remembers it - Mo'ed Katan 28a). Before Moshe died, Nistam Mimenu Mayanos ha'Chochmah - he did not forget his learning, just he ceased to add to it like a flowing spring.

How could an angel burn Do'eg's Neshamah? It is not physical!

Maharal: Investigators asked this; they erred. Just like it can be created, it can be lost! (NOTE: I heard in the name of R. Moshe Shapiro, based on Rama mi'Piano, that surely every Jew has a share in the world to come, for his Neshamah comes from under Kisei ha'Kavod. Surely it is eternal! Maharal could agree to this; it is a mistake to say that any Neshamah (even of a Goy) cannot be burned, for it is not physical. - PF)

Anaf Yosef: It could be burned only after he forgot his Torah. Salamandri'a comes from fire; one who anoints with its blood, fire does not rule over him. A Chacham's entire body is fire -"ha'Lo Cho Devari ka'Esh." All the more so fire does not rule over it (Chagigah 27a)! (NOTE: The Gemara discussed fire of Gehinom, so we can say that it applies only to the body, but not to the Neshamah. Must we say that Nadav and Avihu forgot their Torah before they were burned?! - PF)

Why did he become a Metzora?

Maharsha: Anyone who speaks Leshon ha'Ra, Tzara'as comes upon him. It says "Melashni va'Seser Re'ehu Oso Atzmis," and the Targum of "la'Tzemisus" is la'Chalutin (Erchin 15b). We should have brought that verse here - it explicitly discusses Leshon ha'Ra!

Had we brought that verse, one might have thought "Oso Atzmis" teaches like Rav Chisda (Erchin 15b), that one who speaks Leshon ha'Ra is proper to be stoned, for it says "Tzamsu va'Bor Chayai va'Yadu Even Bi."

What is the significance of the three damaging angels that came to Do'eg?

Maharsha: These are the three groups of damaging angels that greet a Rasha when he dies. One group says "Ein Shalom Amar Hash-m la'Resha'im"; corresponding to them, an angel made Do'eg forget his Torah, for Torah gives Shalom. One group says "In sadness you will lie down"; corresponding to them, an angel burned his Neshamah, so it lies in sadness. The third group says "descend and lie with the uncircumcised." Corresponding to them, an angel scattered his earth... It says about Arelim "v'Asosem Resha'im Ki Yihyu Efer Tachas Kapos Ragleichem."

Iyun Yakov: They correspond to his three attributes - "Ayei Sofer Ayei Shokel Ayei Sofer Es ha'Migdalim." Even so, he did great sins. Therefore, three damaging angels punished him.

What is the significance of scattering his ashes in Batei Keneses and Batei Medrash?

Maharal: This is total loss. It was spread under Tzadikim's feet. It is not physical at all. Man's beginning is physical substance, and form is his completion. The angel who burned his Neshamah, it nullified its form to the point that it is not found. Burning and Bitul apply to the completion, but not to the beginning, which is not a matter to which Bitul applies. Something under another's feet, it is as if it is not found. After his form (completion) was Batel, his ashes (beginning), to which Bitul and burning does not apply, was spread under Tzadikim's feet. The angel who made him forget his Torah was in the middle; the one who burned his Neshamah was on the left, and the one who scattered his ashes was on the right. Understand this!

Anaf Yosef citing Toras Chayim: A sinner of Yisrael with his body - after 12 months, his Neshamah is burned, and wind scatters him, and he becomes ashes under the feet of Tzadikim - "v'Asosem Resha'im."

What is the source that Do'eg and Achitofel did not see each other?

Maharsha: Do'eg was in Malchus Sha'ul on the Sanhedrin, and David was still a youth then. David lived 70 years, and Achitofel was towards the end of his kingship, which was 40 years. Do'eg and Achitofel each lived less than 35 years; had they lived together, perhaps David could not have stood against their evil counsel against him. (NOTE: Achitofel lived during Avshalom's rebellion, which began 40 years after Yisrael requested a king (Nazir 5a). Since Sha'ul reigned two and a half years, this was about the 38th year of David's reign, so Achitofel was born in David's fifth year. If Do'eg was at least 30 when he was on the Sanhedrin in Sha'ul's day, he did not live until David's fifth year. He was not merely on the Sanhedrin - he was "Abir ha'Ro'im Asher l'Sha'ul" (the biggest Chacham)! Also, he had to be strong to kill 85 Kohanim in one day - at the age of 30 comes strength (Avos 5:25). Also, if he lived after Sha'ul died, why is there no mention of him in Ish Boshes' kingship? However, perhaps Ish Boshes did not want a Rasha who killed the Kohanim. No other servant of Sha'ul consented to kill them. - PF)

Why did Do'eg live 34 years, and Achitofel only 33?

Maharal: It was decreed that Achitofel be choked due to David's curse. (When David was digging the foundations for the Mikdash, water from below threatened to flood the world. David asked if one may write Hash-m's name on pottery and drop it on the source of the water (which might cause His name to be erased), in order to stop the water. No one answered him. He said, if anyone knows and does not answer, he should be choked! Even though Achitofel told him, the curse was fulfilled. - Makos 11a) He should have lived 34 years, due to "Anshei Damim u'Mirmah Lo Yechetzu Yemeihem." If so, the curse would not be fulfilled! There is no difference if he is choked, or dies via others. Due to the curse, he died a year earlier.

Maharsha: "Anshei Damim" applies to Do'eg, who killed Kohanei Nov. "U'Mirmah" refers to Achitofel's counsel.

Why must we know that first, David called Achitofel his teacher, and later his colleague, and in the end, his Talmid?

Iyun Yakov: This teaches the order of learning. First one learns from his Rebbi - 'I learned much from my Rebbeyim.' After, he learned with him like a colleague - 'I learned more from my colleagues.' After David grew greatly in Chochmah, he learned with him like with a Talmid - 'I learned most from my Talmidim' (Ta'anis 7a). One may not reverse the order, to learn with Talmidim before learning from his Rebbi and colleagues. 'If Rebbi did not teach it, how would R. Chiya (his Talmid) know it?!' (Yevamos 43a)

How does "Ish Shlomi... Ochel Lachmi Higdil Alai Akev" teach that David called Achitofel his Talmid?

Maharsha: Achitofel is Ish Shlomi, for David married his granddaughter. David trusted that he would not give counsel to one who hates him. Ochel Lachmi - he was also his Talmid. Even so, Higdil Alai Akev -via his counsel, he raised Avshalom, David' son, his Ekev (end), against David.

The verses are not written in the order that the Gemara brings them!

Maharsha: Presumably, Achitofel, who was a Rasha, he forgot his Torah, and David added Chochmah in his old age. (NOTE: Also at the end of his life, Achitofel's counsel was "Ka'asher Yish'al Ish bi'Dvar ha'Elokim" (Shmuel II, 16:23)! - PF) The Midrash says that David learned two matters from Achitofel, for after "Alufi u'Meyuda'i" it says "Asher Yachdav." Achitofel found David learning alone, and told him "Asher Yachdav Namtik Sod" (one learns better with a colleague). Later, he found him walking to the Beis ha'Keneses. He told him "Beis Elokim Nehalech b'Ragesh" (you should run)! How does the Gemara learn from here that David called Achitofel his colleague? Just the contrary, Achitofel called David his colleague, and via this he called him his Rebbi! Midrashim argue about what he learned from him. In Makos 11a, we say that Achitofel taught David a Kal va'Chomer to permit writing Hash-m's name to save the world, even if His name might be erased. We can learn this from "v'Atah Enosh" - after you saw that the Tehom will flood the world like in the generation of Enosh, in which the Tehom flooded a third of the world, you became my teacher via teaching to me the Kal va'Chomer.