ציטירנדיקער פּירוש אויף זכריה 4:7

You will need to appreciate that some Kabbalists are in doubt whether the fact that the procedure involving the red cow was carried out completely outside the confines of the Temple meant that it represented a higher degree of sanctity than that which pervaded the Sanctuary. In other words, everything connected with the red cow would have represented “holy of holies,” whereas only a small portion of the Sanctuary itself was designated as “holy of holies.” If so, the level of sanctity represented by the red cow as well as its remains would have been superior to that of the sacrificial animals offered on the Altar inside the precincts of the Temple so that there was really no comparison between the red cow and its counterparts inside the Holy Temple.
On the other hand, some Kabbalists think that the reason the procedure of the red cow was conducted outside holy precincts points to the fact that its sanctity was below that of even the lowest level of sanctity inside the holy precincts and that this is the reason that no part of it was processed inside those confines. These people then raised the following question: assuming that the red cow was of such a high level of sanctity that it surpassed the levels of sanctity in the Temple, how could it possibly confer impurity on its (uncontaminated) handlers? On the other hand, if it was of such inferior sanctity that it had to be slaughtered and its remains kept outside sacred ground, how was it capable of conferring purity on the previously impure?
Some Kabbalists answered these questions by saying that indeed the entire red cow was “holy of holies” and that the reason it conferred impurity on its handlers was that any pure person on earth will automatically become impure through contact with extra-terrestrial purity (which is of far higher degree). Seeing the red cow represented extra-terrestrial i.e. celestial purity (or sanctity) we do not have a problem. This concept is reflected in the Torah writing (Exodus 29,37) “anyone touching the Altar will become holy,” i.e. will be burnt (as had happened to the two sons of Aaron, Nadav and Avihu). Total terrestrial sanctity is relegated when it confronts celestial sanctity. What applies to relative sanctity, i.e. terrestrial sanctity versus celestial sanctity, also applies to terrestrial purity as opposed to celestial purity. This may be the meaning of Yuma 21 that אש דוחה אש, אש אוכלת אש, “one category of fire displaces, relegates, another category of fire.” The “fire” of the Shechinah displaces or relegates terrestrial fire.
The Talmud there describes the penalty incurred by the angels who had opposed the creation of Adam by saying that he did not deserve G’d’s consideration. G’d is reported as having stretched out His finger at these angels and burning them. If differences in the quality of fire exist among the angels in the celestial regions it is easy to understand why terrestrial fire should be inferior to even the lowest of the celestial fires.
We are told in a Midrash that when Moses ascended Mount Sinai he reached a certain spot where the angel Matniel barred his way. This angel instructed Moses to proceed further and meet the angel Sandalfon. Moses answered that he was afraid to do so as that angel (angel of fire) would likely burn him. Thus far the Midrash. [Our author’s point in quoting this excerpt is simply to draw our attention to “fires” in celestial regions. Ed.]
According to some Kabbalists the red cow was entirely in the category of holy of holies. Personally, I feel that in some respects it was holy whereas in other respects it was totally secular in status. Seeing that the red cow transmits a spirit of ritual impurity it contains a purely secular element. Seeing, however, that the Torah refers to it as חטאת, i.e. acting as a means to expiate, it must also contain an element of holiness. Because of the fact that it is composed of two opposite elements the Torah applied stricter rules to it than apply to the animals which serve as sacrificial offerings on the Altar, seeing no one is in doubt about their status.
The reason that the Torah writes here about the rules of purification for people contaminated by impurity conferred by contact with the bodies of human beings who have died, is that the ash of the red cow is so crucial in the purification process of such people. The root cause of living creatures contracting spiritual impurity dates back to the original cause of death, the serpent in Gan Eden. This root cause is known as כח המושל, or הר הגדול, (Compare Kohelet 10,4 and Zecharyah 4,7 respectively). Nachmanides writes that the bodies of people whose death is due to נשיקה, a “kiss” by G’d, do not become ritually impure. The prophet Zecharyah in that verse describes the elimination of death, the angel of death, etc., in the future. He employs the simile of the “great mountain which will be flattened at that time” as the simile describing the overcoming of the greatest obstacle in our lives on this earth prior to the coming of the Messiah. This is what Maimonides had in mind when he stipulates that the red cow which will be burned by the Messiah will be the tenth and final one as with the absence of death there will be no need for further such means of purification.

ויסר מעלינו את הנחש “so that He will remove the snake (plague of) from us.” Actually, we would have expected the word הנחשים, “the snakes” (pl.), instead of the word הנחש, “snake” (sing.). The reason the Torah uses the singular is to allude to the lethal power of the snake, serpent, mentioned earlier. The Torah refers to the spiritual representative of the snakes whose residence is in the desert. When the Jewish people said מעלינו, instead of ממנו, they meant “the one who is above us,” instead of merely “away from us.” We find a similar expression in Numbers 14,9 where Calev described that the protective force of the Canaanites had already been withdrawn from them as: סר צלם מעליהם, “their protective shadow has departed from above them.” This will also enable you to understand a verse in Zecharyah 6,1 וההרים הרי נחשת, “and the mountains are mountains made of copper” [a comment which appears irrelevant at first glance. Ed.]. The word נחשת is understood as derived from השחתה, “destruction.” Although the mountains mentioned by the prophet are destructible, the four chariots representing the glory of the Lord mentioned in that same verse are indestructible (based on Maimonides Moreh Nevuchim section two 10th chapter). It is a reference to the “great mountain” which features in the vision of Zerubabel as an insurmountable obstacle but which G’d promises will be reduced to level ground (vision of Yehoshua High Priest, Zecharyah 4,7)

“A land in which you will not eat bread in poverty, etc.” Our Sages interpreted (Taanit 4a): A land whose stones are iron — do not read it as stones [avaneha] but as “builders” [boneha]. These are the Torah scholars who engage in building the world, and they sharpen each other like iron. What prompted them to interpret this verse about Torah learners instead of its literal meaning? It seems they found it difficult because this verse begins with matters of eating bread, and afterward it says and you shall eat and be satisfied. How could there be a gap between these connected ideas, interrupted by talk of iron? Rather, certainly this all speaks of the conduct of Torah learners, for such is the way of Torah: bread with salt shall you eat (Avot 6:4).
The explanation is that in this land, you will not eat bread in poverty and destitution as it is, for you shall not lack anything in it. Rather, because it is a land whose stones/builders are iron — they sharpen each other in halakhic discussion, and they will have such desire for Torah that they will not demand “where are the sacrifices, slaughter sheep and cattle,” but will be satisfied with bread alone. And do not say that because of this their strength will diminish; on the contrary, they will be strong as iron, for the Torah will increase their strength.
Regarding the interpretation of avaneha [its stones] as “boneha” [its builders], this explanation is not necessary, because it is common in Scripture to refer to distinguished people as stones, as in the stone that the builders rejected (Psalms 118:22), the stones of a crown, lifted up as a banner (Zechariah 9:16), the cornerstone (Zechariah 4:7), and many others.
And of them it says, and you shall eat and be satisfied, for the righteous person eats to satisfy his soul, whether he eats little or much. And similarly, what it says and from its mountains refers to distinguished people who are called by the name of mountains, as it is said Hear, O mountains, the Lord’s contention (Micah 6:2). From them you will mine copper [nechoshet], for their bite is the bite of a serpent [neshichatan neshichat nachash] (Avot 2:15), and the wordplay is fitting.

קשתו means his power.

ויפזו זרעי ידיו — This refers to the placing of the king’s signet-ring on his hand, יפזו being connected in meaning with the expression (1 Kings 10:18) זהב מופז “the finest gold”, so that the translation would be “his hands were made golden”. This happened to him from the hands of (i.e. through the instrumentality of) the Holy One, blessed be He, who is the Mighty One (אביר) of Jacob. From here (from his position as Viceroy) he rose to become the Feeder of the Foundation Stone of the Israelites, i.e. of the Originator of the tribes of Israel (Jacob). The word אבן, stone, has here the same sense as in (Zechariah 4:7) אבן הראשה, “the chief stone”, where it denotes high position. Onkelos also translates it in this manner: His translation of the verse is as follows: ותשב he translates by “and the prophecy returned upon (was fulfilled in) them (the brethren) i.e. the prophecy contained in the dreams which he dreamed regarding them was fulfilled, “because he observed the Law in secret” — this is an addition made by Onkelos, having no words in the Hebrew text to correspond to it. “And he put in “The Might his trust” is the translation of the Hebrew words באיתן קשתו. The following is how the wording of the Targum fits in with the Hebrew text: “His prophecy was fulfilled (וַתָּשָׁב) because the might (איתן) of the Holy One, blessed be He, served him as his bow (קשתו) and trusty weapon; therefore gold was placed on his arms” — the last words being the Targum of לכך] ויפזו זרועי ידיו], taking ויפזו as connected in meaning with פז, fine gold.