No community start suggestion yet.
Why does tzaraas require someone else to identify your nega — you cannot diagnose your own? The shiur develops that negaim expose character flaws we're blind to in ourselves. A stingy person denies having what he won't lend, convinced he can't spare it. The makkah forces his possessions into public view, demonstrating the ayin hara he would never admit. Lashon hara works identically: we begrudge others honor but justify it by 'finding' their flaws, blind to worse failings in ourselves.
The shiur begins with a halachic discussion from Parshas Ki Seitzei regarding the law that "kol ha-negoim adam roeh chutz min nega atzmo" — a person can examine anyone's tzaraas except his own. Rabbi Meir extends this to prohibit examining relatives' negaim as well. The shiur contrasts Rashi (רש"י)'s reading of the episode of Miriam's tzaraas with Targum Onkelos, showing that Onkelos understands Aharon's looking at Miriam as the halachic act that rendered her tameh ("vayifen Aharon el Miriam" means he formally examined her as a kohen), while Rashi reads it as Aharon simply observing what happened to her. The core of the shiur emerges from a Midrash explaining why tzaraas comes from ayin hara (evil eye). The Midrash presents cases where someone refuses to lend an item (an axe or sieve), claiming "ain li" (I don't have it). When tzaraas strikes his house, he must remove all his possessions publicly, exposing that he did in fact possess what he claimed not to have. The question arises: what is the measure-for-measure punishment here?
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.
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.
Ki Seitzei - Zachor es asher asah Hashem l'Miriam
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!
