No community start suggestion yet.
Why did the brothers propose circumcision to Shechem after Dinah's violation? Rashi (רש"י) calls their plan "chochmah" (wisdom), not merely trickery. The shiur develops that they created a litmus test: if Shechem would endure pain and change to earn the privilege of marrying into Yaakov's family, he'd retroactively acknowledge their dignity—a wiser resolution than striking back in fury.
This shiur explores the narrative of Dinah's abduction by Shechem and the brothers' response in Parshas Vayishlach. The Torah (תורה) describes the brothers as both deeply pained (va'yis'atzu) and furious (va'yichar lahem me'od) when they heard what happened. Yet their response was to propose a treaty requiring circumcision of all the men of Shechem. The Torah calls this "va'ya'anu bnei Yaakov...b'mirmah" (the sons of Yaakov answered with mirmah). The Ramban (רמב"ן) questions the straightforward reading: if the brothers' plan was trickery from the start—intending to kill the city after they weakened themselves through circumcision—then why did Yaakov later complain to Shimon and Levi? He should have been a co-conspirator. The Ramban therefore explains that the original plan was only to weaken Shechem enough to retrieve Dinah; Shimon and Levi independently decided to destroy the entire city, which is why Yaakov singled them out for rebuke.
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.
Bereishis 34:7-13 (Parshas Vayishlach)
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!
