No community start suggestion yet.
Does raising your hand to threaten someone violate the Torah (תורה)'s prohibition against hitting, or is it merely wicked behavior? The shiur analyzes Targum Yonasan ben Uziel's interpretation that the fortieth lash is an assault gesture (kamatzef), not actual contact. This suggests assault may carry the same halachic status as battery, with major implications for teshuvah and chinuch.
Rabbi Zweig examines the Torah (תורה)'s requirement to give the wicked person forty lashes (malkus), noting that in practice only thirty-nine are administered. The Rosh explains this as the Torah speaking in round numbers, a common principle where the Sages interpret the precise number differently than the literal text suggests. Targum Yonasan ben Uziel offers a fascinating alternative: thirty-nine actual lashes are given, but the fortieth is kamatzef—a threatening gesture, as if to strike. This creates forty total actions: thirty-nine batteries and one assault. The shiur explores the conceptual distinction between battery (actual hitting) and assault (threatening to hit) in both secular and Torah law.
Looking for the full summary?
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 does Rashi give conflicting descriptions of Israel's leaders in Egypt? The shiur explores how two different leadership styles emerged: those who pushed people to work harder while taking beatings, versus those who simply absorbed punishment to spare their people. The Torah prioritizes the first type - leaders who accomplish things even when unpopular.
Why does the Midrash connect Pharaoh's expulsion of the Jews to the mitzvah of shiluach hakan? The shiur develops a chiddush that Pharaoh's sin wasn't only drowning the children, but the insensitivity of expelling the parents afterward. The deeper analysis reveals that Pharaoh may have valued the Jews greatly and wanted to control them—making his expulsion an act of tremendous cruelty, not liberation.
Why does Moshe respond to the splitting of the sea with shirah rather than praise or thanksgiving? Rashi's use of "al libo" reveals that shirah is an emotional expression—a response of love to love. When Hashem shows personal care, the only adequate response is "I love You too," not mere gratitude or praise, and this principle applies to all relationships.
Parshas Mishpatim (malkus/lo yosef) and Parshas Shemos (kol hameirim yad)
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!
Why didn't Noach daven for his generation while Avrohom advocated for Sedom? Noach viewed each person as an independent island responsible only for their own teshuvah. Avrohom understood that all humanity is interconnected through shared perspective and values, making prayer for others both possible and necessary.
