ANSWERS TO REVIEW QUESTIONS
prepared by Rabbi Eliezer Chrysler
Kollel Iyun Hadaf, Jerusalem
Previous daf Sanhedrin 93
(a) Rebbi Yochanan extrapolates from the sequence in the Pasuk, which
describes the 'three' men walking unscathed in the burning furnace and the
fourth figure resembling an angel - that Tzadikim are greater than angels.
(b) Rebbi Tanchum bar Chanila'i explains how all the nations of the world
came and tapped Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah on the face - because, they
claimed in wonder, if they had such a great G-d, how could they (Yisrael,
whom the three Tzadikim represented) prostrate themselves before the image?
(c) Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah responded with the Pasuk in Daniel -
"Lecha Hashem ha'Tzedakah ve'Lanu Boshes ha'Panim".
(d) Rebbi Yonasan explained the Pasuk ...
1. ... "Amarti E'eleh be'Tamar" - to mean that Hashem thought (Kevayachol)
that the whole of Yisrael (which is compared to a date-palm) was on His
side; however ...
(e) Yisrael is compared to a palm-tree - because like it, they only have one
heart (that is dedicated to their Father in Heaven).
2. ... "Ochzah le'Sansinav" - He 'discovers' (Kevayachol) that He only had
a thin branch to hold on to (Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah, who, out of all
the Tzadikim, were the only ones to refuse to prostrate themselves before
(a) In the Pasuk in Zecharyah ...
1. ... "Ra'isi ha'Laylah" refers to - Hashem's intention to turn the entire
world into night (to plunge it into darkness).
(b) Rav Papa extrapolates from this final D'rashah - that dreaming about a
white horse bodes well.
2. ... "Ish Rochev al Sus" refers to - Hashem (who is called "Ish
3. ... "Sus Adom" means - that He meant to turn the world into blood (to
4. ... "ve'Hu Omed Bein ha'Hadasim" - until He saw Chananyah, Mishael and
Azaryah (since Tzadikim are compared to myrtles).
5. ... "Asher ba'Metzulah" - who were in Bavel (which is called by this name
on account of its depth).
6. ... "Susim ... Levanim" - which is when the red horses turned white.
(c) According to Rav, after Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah were saved from
the furnace, they died from an Ayin ha'Ra, whereas according to Shmuel, they
drowned - in the spit of those who spat at them in disgust after they left
the furnace (see Marg'lis ha'Yam)?
(d) Rebbi Yochanan maintains - that they actually went to Eretz Yisrael,
where they married and had children.
(a) A similar Machlokes Tana'im is cited in the Beraisa between Rebbi
Eliezer, Rebbi Yehoshua and the Chachamim, respectively. The Chachamim there
prove from the Pasuk "Sh'ma Na Yehoshua ha'Kohen ha'Gadol Atah ve'Rei'echa
... ki Anshei Mofes Heimah" - that Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah went to
Eretz Yisrael, where Yehoshua Kohen Gadol served in that capacity, since
they are the "men of Miracles" referred to in the Pasuk.
(b) The problem we have with Daniel in respect of the episode with
Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah is - where he was when the three Tzadikim
were thrown into the furnace. Why was he not thrown in together with them?
(c) According to Rav, he went to dig a river in Teverya (or in Har
ha'Melech), and according to Shmuel, the king sent him to bring Aspasta
seeds. According to Rebbi Yochanan, he sent him to Egypt - to bring back
some large Egyptian sows for breeding.
(d) We reconcile this with Todos the doctor, who states in a Beraisa that
every cow or sow that left Egypt had to have its womb removed, to avoid
breeding it with their own males - by establishing the ones that Daniel
brought with him as being small (young) ones, which the authorities, unaware
that they were intended for breeding, permitted him to take out.
(a) When the Beraisa states 'Sheloshah Hayu be'Osah Eitzah' - it is
referring to the plan to get Daniel out of harm's way, before Chananyah,
Mishael and Azaryah were cast into the furnace.
(b) Hashem wanted Daniel out of the way - so that people would realize the
greatness of the three Tzadikim, and not attribute their salvation to
Daniel's righteousness (since he would have certainly been caught and thrown
into the furnace together with them).
(c) Nevuchadnetzar viewed Daniel - as a god (even going so far as to
prostrate himself in front of him).
(d) This explains the interest that ...
1. ... Daniel himself had to be out of the way - because he was afraid,
that, due to the Pasuk in Va'eschanan "Pesilei Eloheihem Tisrefun ba'Eish",
he would succumb to the fire.
2. ... Nevuchadnetzar had to remove him from the scene - because he did not
want people to say that he had burned his own god in fire.
(a) Achav ben Kulyah and Tzidkiyah ben Ma'aseyah were - false prophets.
(b) After portraying them as a public curse, the Pasuk writes about them
"Asher Kalam Melech Bavel", which Rebbi Yochanan in the name of Rebbi Shimon
ben Yochai explains to mean - that they were burned to a cinder (hence the
Lashon "Kalam" [rather than 'Sarfam'], from the word 'K'layos', ears of
corn, that are generally roasted).
(c) The disgusting thing they did - was to visit Nevuchadnetzar's daughter,
when each one tried to convince her, in the Name of Hashem, to be intimate
with his colleague.
(d) When Nevuchadnetzar's daughter reported their visit to her father - he
instructed her to send them to him.
(a) When Nevuchadnetzar told them that ...
1. ... Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah had informed him that what they
planned to do was prohibited, they replied - that they were as much prophets
as Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah were, and that Hashem had revealed this
to them and not to Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah.
(b) When Nevuchadnetzar then gave his consent to pick anyone they wished to
make up the threesome - they chose Yehoshua Kohen Gadol, thinking that they
would be saved on his merit.
2. ... he wished to put them to the test by throwing them into furnace, to
see whether they too, would survive, like the three Tzadikim had - they
replied that this was unfair, since the first ones were three, whereas they
were only two.
(c) We learn from the Pasuk "ha'Lo Zeh Ud Mutzal me'Eish" - that although
Yehoshua Kohen Gadol himself emerged from the furnace intact, his clothes
were scorched (hence he is referred to as an "Ud Mutzal me'Eish" [a log
saved from the fire]).
(d) He explained to Nevuchadnetzar that his clothes were burned, whereas the
clothes of ...
1. ... Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah were not - because they were three,
whereas he was only one.
(e) The adage that emerges from this is - that two dry logs cause a wet one
2. ... Avraham Avinu were not - because Avraham in the furnace was not in
the company of Resha'im, whereas *he* was.
(a) In spite of what we just explained, Rav Papa presents a legitimate
reason for Yehoshua Kohen Gadol's punishment - because his sons married
women who were not fitting for the Kehunah, and he did not rebuke them.
(b) This is even hinted in the Pasuk, where the Navi describes Yehoshua
Kohen Gadol as wearing - dirty clothes, which cannot be taken literally, and
must mean that although he himself was clean, his clothes were not (an
allusion to his sons who had sinned, even though he had not).
(a) Rebbi Tanchum cites bar Kapara in Tzipori, who discusses the Pasuk
"Sheish Se'orim ha'Eileh Nasan Li Bo'az". The problem bar Kapara has with
explaining the six barleys to mean ...
1. ... literally six grains of barley is - that Bo'az would never have given
Rus such a miserly gift, particularly in view of the Mishnah in Pe'ah, which
specifies the minimum gift to a poor person in the barn as six Kabin (1 Kav
= 24 egg-volumes).
(b) Neither can the Pasuk be referring to six Kabin or six Lugin (1 Lug = 6
egg-volumes [which *is* feasible for a woman to carry]) - because one only
tends to bring Sa'in into the barn, and not other measurements (see also
Agados Maharsha at the end of Amud Alef).
2. ... six Sa'in (1 Sa'ah = 144 egg-volumes) of barley is - that this is far
too much to expect a woman to carry.
(c) What the Pasuk means - is that Bo'az gave Rus six barley grains, but not
to sustain her (which presumably, he gave her separately), only as a hint
that six great Tzadikim would descend from her, each of whom would be
blessed with six B'rachos.
(d) Three of the Tzadikim hinted there were David, Mashi'ach and Daniel. The
other three were - Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah.
(a) The six B'rachos of David are contained in the Pasuk in Shmuel "va'Ya'an
Echad me'ha'Ne'arim va'Yomer Hinei Ra'isi ben le'Yishai Beis-ha'Lachmi ...
". The 'lad' said this - because Shaul was beset by an evil spirit and was
looking for a harpist to remove it.
(b) Rav Yehudah Amar Rav explains the six B'rachos. By "Yode'a Nagein"
Do'eg meant that David knew how to ask Kashyos, and by "ve'Gibor Chayil" -
that he also knew how to give answers.
(c) When the 'lad' said ...
1. ..."ve'Ish Milchamah", he meant - that he knew how to 'fight the battles
of Torah' (i.e. Pilpul)
(d) "ve'Ish To'ar" meant that he could prove his point down to the Halachah,
and "va'Hashem Imo" - that the Halachah was always like him.
2. ... "ve'Navon Davar" - that he was able to extrapolate one thing from
another (Meivin Davar mi'Toch Davar).
(a) Shaul's response to this was - that his son Yonasan possessed all those
qualities, all that is, except for the last one, which even he himself did
(b) The significance of the Pasuk ...
1. ... (in connection with Shaul) "u've'Chol Asher Yifneh Yarshi'a" is -
proof of what we just said (because if Shaul himself transgressed the Torah
[see Agados Maharsha], then the Halachah would obviously not have been like
him [like Rebbi Eliezer, like whom we do not generally rule because he was
(c) The 'lad' who told Shaul about David was - Do'eg ha'Edomi, an
outstanding Talmid-Chacham who was even the Av Beis-Din of the Beis-Din
2. ... (in connection with David) "u've'Chol Asher Yifneh Yatzli'ach" (the
true quotation is "be'Chol Derachav Maskil") is - proof that the Halachah is
always like him.
(d) Rav Yehudah refers to his statement as Lashon ha'Ra - because he heaped
all these praises on David (see Agados Maharsha) in order to kindle the
spark of jealousy in Shaul's heart, in the hope that he would subsequently
(a) The Pasuk "ve'Nachah Alav Ru'ach Hashem, Ru'ach Chochmah u'Vinah, Ru'ach
Eitzah u'Gevurah - Ru'ach Da'as ve'Yir'as Hashem" pertains to Mashi'ach.
(b) Rebbi Alexandri explains the Pasuk there "ve'Hericho be'Yir'as Hashem"
to mean that he is loaded with Mitzvos and suffering. According to Rava
however, based on the Pasuk there "ve'Lo le'Mar'eh Einav Yishpot ... ", it
means - that he will able to judge people with his sense of smell alone.
(c) ben Kuziba - ruled Yisrael after the dynasty of Hurdus (Herod)
terminated, for two and a half years.
(d) The Chachamim killed him - because he claimed to be Mashi'ach, yet he
was unable to judge by means of smell (see also Metzapeh Eisan).
(a) The Pasuk "Asher Ein Bahem Kol Me'um, ve'Tuvei Mar'eh, u'Maskilim
be'Chol Chochmah, ve'Yod'ei Da'as, u'Mevinei Mada, va'Asher Ko'ach Bahem
La'amod be'Heichal ha'Melech ... " - is written about Daniel, Chananyah,
Mishael and Azaryah.
(b) The meaning of ...
1. ... "Asher Ein Bahem Me'um is - that they did not even have a puncture
made by the lancet of a blood-letter (common practice in those days) see
also Agados Maharsha.
(c) According to Rebbi Elazar, all four above-mentioned Tzadikim were from
Yehudah. Rebbi Shmuel bar Nachmeni however, maintains - that only Daniel was
from the tribe of Yehudah. The other three were from other tribes. As for
the six Tzadikim that would descend from Rus, cited above - he does not
subscribe to that opinion. Note, that a number of the forthcoming opinions
disagree with statements made earlier.
2. ... "va'Asher Ko'ach Bahem La'amod be'Heichal ha'Melech". Besides having
to hold back their laughter and not talking, according to Rebbi Chama
b'Rebbi Chanina - they also had to stay awake and refrain from relieving
themselves, for the long hours that they stood before Nevuchadnetzar.
(d) The Navi Yeshayah told Chizkiyah ha'Melech that some of his descendants
(Daniel, Chananya, Mishael and Azaryah) would be "Sarisim", which means
eunuchs, according to Rav. The reason that they did that to them is -
because someone who has no family is more free to serve the king diligently
(see Agados Maharsha).
(a) Rebbi Chanina interprets "Sarisim" to mean - that Avodah-Zarah was
uprooted (at the time of the episode with Chananyah, Mishael and Azaryah).
(b) Rav will explain the Pasuk ...
1. ... that we quoted earlier "Asher Ein Bahem Kol Me'um" to refer -
specifically to the time that they were appointed (but not necessarily
(c) Rav has no problem with the Pasuk "Koh Amar Hashem la'Sarisim Asher
Yishmeru es Shabsosai ... ", in spite of its derogatory connotations -
because in fact, he concedes that "Sarisim" also incorporates Rebbi
Chanina's interpretation (in which case, it refers here, to the
nullification of the Avodah-Zarah, even according to Rav).
2. ... "ve'Chaval Lo Isai Behon" to mean - that they were not wounded from
3. ... "ve'Rei'ach Nur Lo Adas Behon" to mean - that they were even wounded
from the smoke.
(d) Rebbi Chanina (who does not hold that they were eunuchs) explains the
Pasuk there "be'Veisi u've'Chomosai Yad va'Shem Tov mi'Banim u'mi'Banos" to
mean (not that they could not have children, but) - that what Hashem would
yet give them would be better than the children that they had already had
and who had died young.
(e) Rebbi Tanchum quoting bar Kapara in Tzipori, explains the end of that
Pasuk "Shem Olam Eten Lo Asher Lo Yikares" to mean - that he would merit a
Seifer to be written in his name.
(a) Rebbi Yirmiyah bar Aba learns from the Pasuk in Nechemyah "Zachrah Li
Elokai le'Tovah" - that Nechemyah patted himself on the back (by asking
Hashem to remember his good deeds), which is the reason why, despite the
fact that the majority of Seifer Ezra was said by Nechemyah (see also Agados
Maharsha), it is called Ezra (and Nechemyah in effect, does not have a
Seifer called after him [even though most of Ezra is unofficially referred
to as 'Nechemyah']).
(b) Granted that David too, said "Zochreini Hashem bi'Retzon Amecha" - but
he was asking on the merits of Hashem's mercy, not on that of his own good
(c) According to Rav Yosef, Nechemyah too, was asking on the merits of
Hashem's mercy, and the reason that he was punished in this way was - for
speaking derogatively about his predecessors, including Daniel, who was
greater than him, accusing them of not lowering the market prices of basic
(d) We know that Daniel was greater than Nechemyah from the fact that he saw
a vision, which the men who were with him were unable to see. And those men,
according to Rebbi Yirmiyah (or Rebbi Chiya bar Aba) were none other than -
Chagai, Zecharyah and Malachi, who were prophets (which Nechemyah was not).
(a) Daniel was greater than Chagai, Zacharyah and Malachi in that he saw the
vision, whereas they did not, and they were greater than him - inasmuch as
they were Nevi'im, which he was not.
(b) Daniel was exiled to Bavel with Yechonyah, eleven years before the
Churban, whereas Nechemyah led Yisrael out of Galus Bavel seventy years
after the Churban.