No community start suggestion yet.
Was Bilam's desire for money really a character flaw? The Rambam (רמב"ם)'s distinction between geneivah (theft of money) and gezeilah (robbery of a person) reveals that wanting money is legitimate—even praiseworthy when used properly. Bilam's sin was rechavat ayin: coveting what specifically belonged to others, making the person—not the money—his victim.
This shiur examines a commonly misunderstood aspect of Bilam's character through the lens of a fundamental halachic distinction. When Bilam initially refuses to curse the Jewish people despite being offered great wealth, Chazal criticize him for having tremendous desire for money. This presents a puzzle: how can wanting money be considered a character flaw when figures like Dovid Hamelech and Yosef ben Kisma are praised for recognizing money's value? Rabbi Zweig resolves this through Rashi (רש"י)'s precise language. Rashi describes Bilam as having "rechavat ayin"—wide-open desires for what belonged to others. The issue was not appreciation of money per se, but specifically coveting others' possessions. This distinction is crystallized in a fundamental teaching from the Rambam (רמב"ם) in Hilchos Geneivah and Hilchos Gezeilah.
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.
How does the covenant of Arvot Moav differ from earlier obligations? The shiur develops the yesod that this covenant created a new level of unity — not just working for the same Master, but collectively becoming a reflection of Hashem's presence. When Klal Yisrael embraces yichud Hashem as a shared vision rather than individual service, future generations become bound, teshuvah becomes natural, and mutual responsibility reaches the depth of "kol Yisrael areivim zeh bazeh."
Why was Miriam punished with tzaraas when her criticism of Moshe seemed justified? The shiur develops a yesod based on a Midrash that Miriam's error wasn't lashon hara in the conventional sense — she actually intended to help with a shalom bayis issue — but rather her failure to search out Moshe's unique madrega and recognize that his separation from his wife was a halachic requirement for his level of nevuah, not just a chumra. This reframes the entire mitzvah of "zachor es asher asah Hashem" as an obligation to actively seek out people's hidden ma'alos.
Parshas Balak
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!
