A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Torah (תורה) forbid personal revenge (lo sikom) yet command communal revenge against Midian? Rabbi Zweig distinguishes between nekom (revenge for imagined personal slights) and peraoni (payback for actual attacks). The issur of lo sikom prohibits making non-personal actions personal due to our insecurities.
Rabbi Zweig addresses a fundamental contradiction: the Torah (תורה) prohibits personal revenge (lo sikom v'lo sitor) yet commands Klal Yisrael to take revenge against Midian. He develops a crucial distinction based on the Targum's translation choices. When the Torah forbids personal revenge, it uses the word 'nekom,' but when describing legitimate communal revenge, it uses 'peraoni' (payback). The key insight is that the prohibition of lo sikom addresses taking things personally when there's no evidence of personal intent. When someone refuses to lend an object, there could be many legitimate reasons - they need it themselves, they're generally protective of their property, or they don't lend to anyone. The aveirah of nekom occurs when we assume the refusal was personal and respond accordingly. Lo sitor is even worse - it involves explicitly telling someone 'even though you didn't help me, I'll help you,' which articulates the personalization and creates a put-down. The fundamental issue is our insecurities leading us to imagine personal slights where none exist. However, when someone actually attacks us with clear intent to harm - as Midian did to the Jewish people - that constitutes a real put-down requiring a response. This isn't nekom but peraoni, legitimate payback for an actual offense. Midian's actions were 'erev lo lahem' - purely to harm the Jews, not for self-protection like Moab's fears. When Hashem (ה׳) takes revenge, it's always peraoni because He knows definitively when something was intended as a personal attack versus a neutral action. This distinction explains why communal and divine revenge can be justified while personal revenge based on imagined slights remains prohibited.
Parshas Matos
Looking for the full transcript?
Full access is available to members of the TUF Alumni Association or the Yam Hagadol Foundation.
Already a member? Let the admin know!
Dedicate a Shiur in Parsha
L'ilui nishmas a loved one. In honor of a simcha or yahrzeit. As a zechus for a refuah sheleimah. Your dedication helps carry Rabbi Zweig's Torah to learners around the world.
Up Next in this Series
Why did Potiphar's wife pursue Yosef, and what does Rashi mean when he calls her actions "leshem shamayim"? The shiur argues she correctly saw in astrology that she and Yosef would have a child—an unchangeable decree for most people. But as a descendant of Avrohom, whom Hashem lifted above the stars, Yosef possessed the unique power to bend astrological fate, transforming the prediction into fulfillment through her daughter (Osnas) instead.
Why did Hashem cure all the sick, blind, deaf, and lame before Matan Torah? The Rambam teaches that miracles require purpose. This shiur argues that the mass healing demonstrated that Torah is not meant for the downtrodden seeking comfort, but for healthy people who can fully channel their energies toward mitzvos and serve as proper examples to their communities.
Why does the Aramaic word for "accept" (Kabbalah) also mean "complain"? The shiur develops a profound insight: genuine acceptance only emerges from overcoming resistance. Without internal challenge, an idea merely passes through us—true commitment is born only when we wrestle with, resist, and ultimately decide to embrace a principle.
Why did the brothers hate Yosef when he received the kutonet pasim, yet strangers saw him as special? The kutonet represented Yaakov's recognition of Yosef's leadership ability—his power to uplift and unify. The brothers' jealousy blinded them; the Torah omits his name when they see him (just "oto"), but strangers always saw "Yosef." True chein comes from seeing others clearly, without the bias of our own needs.
Why did the materials for the Mishkan equal exactly what was needed with no waste, despite the principle that blessing doesn't rest on counted items? The shiur explains that Moshe's complete faithfulness—working solely for Hashem's agenda—transformed counting from an act of personal ownership into one that strengthened divine connection, thereby increasing blessings. Korach's self-interest inverted this principle, costing him everything.
Why does Rashi describe the Mishkan as "collateral" for Jewish sins? Rabbi Zweig develops the concept that God limited His own collection rights—accepting only the Mishkan's destruction rather than the nation's annihilation. This reflects the relationship of a father who reduces his own claims to ensure his children's survival.
Why does the Torah give a detailed accounting of silver and copper but not gold in Parshas Pekudei? The three metals represent three types of givers: those who give selflessly (gold), those seeking a two-way benefit (silver), and those buying honor (copper). The Midrash's three groups suspecting or praising Moshe reveal more about themselves than about Moshe—we judge others by our own standards.
