No community start suggestion yet.
How could Geviha ben Pesisa demand wages from Egypt if Jews were slaves, since slaves earn nothing for their masters? Rashi (רש"י)'s reading of 'mibeis avodim' reveals that Jews were Pharaoh's subjects, not slaves, entitled to compensation. This distinction reframes our relationship with Hashem (ה׳) as covenant partners rather than property, explaining why Torah (תורה) promises reward for mitzvos.
This shiur provides a detailed analysis of Sanhedrin 91a, examining the fascinating Talmudic account where Egypt demanded reparations from the Jewish people after the Exodus. The Egyptians claimed: 'You took our gold and silver - return what you stole.' The Jewish response, delivered by Geviha ben Pesisa, was remarkable: 'Pay us wages for 600,000 people who worked for 430 years, then we'll discuss returning what we took.' Rabbi Zweig explores the fundamental weakness in this argument - if Jews were slaves in Egypt, then according to the principle 'mar sh'kono eved kono rabo' (what a slave acquires belongs to his master), slaves have no right to demand wages. This leads to a crucial analysis of Rashi (רש"י)'s commentary on the verse 'mibeis avodim' (from the house of slavery). Rashi explains this doesn't mean we were slaves to slaves, but rather that we were Pharaoh's direct subjects, not his slaves. This distinction is revolutionary - a king's subjects, unlike slaves, are entitled to compensation for their labor. Rabbi Zweig demonstrates how this interpretation transforms our understanding of the first commandment 'Anochi Hashem (ה׳) Elokeicha asher hotzeiticha mei'eretz Mitzrayim mibeis avodim.' Rather than establishing God's ownership through creation, this verse establishes Him as our King through redemption, making us His subjects rather than His property. This has profound implications for our relationship with Hashem - while He certainly owns us as Creator, He relates to us as subjects in a covenant relationship. The shiur explores how this explains the concept of 'schar' (reward) in Torah (תורה) observance. A master owes nothing to his slave, but a king owes compensation to his subjects. Therefore, Hashem obligates Himself to reward us for our service. This transforms our understanding of Rosh Hashanah as proclaiming God's kingship (malchus) rather than His mastery (adnus), and explains why the Torah promises reward for mitzvah (מצוה) observance. The analysis extends to explaining why Egypt's wealth ultimately belonged to Pharaoh through the slavery system established during the famine years, while the Jewish people maintained their status as royal subjects entitled to compensation.
Dedicate a Shiur in Aggadita
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.
How long must Hashem tolerate the Jewish people's rebellious behavior? A Midrash compares this to the halachic question of carrying a child holding muktze on Shabbos. The analysis reveals that rejecting Eretz Yisrael represents a deeper spiritual corruption than individual acts of avoda zara.
Sanhedrin 91a
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!
What did Dovid mean when he reduced the 613 mitzvos to twelve principles? The Gemara reveals that mitzvos have two dimensions: fulfilling the obligation and achieving personal completion (hashlomah). Dovid identified twelve core principles that encapsulate the essential character development aspect of all mitzvos.
