A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Torah (תורה) twice state that the staves must remain in the Aron's rings? Rashi (רש"י) reads the repetition as reinforcing a permanent status: the staves are part of the Aron itself—its design—and may never be removed. The Rambam (רמב"ם) reads the same repetition as limiting the prohibition to times of transport: the staves are functional, not structural, and may be removed when the Aron is stationary.
Rabbi Zweig opens with a textual difficulty in Parshas Terumah concerning the staves (badim) of the Aron. The Torah (תורה) first commands that the staves be placed in the rings on the sides of the Aron to carry it (Shemos 25:14). Immediately afterward, the Torah repeats that the staves should be in the rings (25:15), and then states "lo yasuru mimennu"—they shall not be removed from it. Rashi (רש"י) comments "le'olam"—the staves may never be removed, even when the Aron is stationary. The Sifsei Chachamim explains that Rashi infers this from the seemingly superfluous prohibition; since the Torah already commanded that the staves be there, adding "lo yasuru" must teach that removal is forbidden at all times, not merely that the staves must remain in place. Rabbi Zweig rejects this reading of Rashi. He argues that the first pasuk establishing that the staves must be in the rings constitutes a positive commandment (asei), while "lo yasuru" introduces a negative commandment (lav). The lav does not simply restate the asei; it adds independent force. Therefore, the Sifsei Chachamim's explanation—that the repetition teaches "all the time"—is unnecessary. Instead, Rashi is addressing a different difficulty: why does the Torah repeat twice that the staves must be in the rings? Pasuk 14 says to place the badim in the rings to carry the Aron, and pasuk 15 repeats that the badim should be in the rings of the Aron. These four words appear entirely redundant.
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!
Shemos 25:14-15
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!
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 did Potiphar's wife pursue Yosef, and what does Rashi mean when he calls her actions "leshem shamayim"? The shiur argues she correctly saw in astrology that she and Yosef would have a child—an unchangeable decree for most people. But as a descendant of Avrohom, whom Hashem lifted above the stars, Yosef possessed the unique power to bend astrological fate, transforming the prediction into fulfillment through her daughter (Osnas) instead.
Why did Hashem cure all the sick, blind, deaf, and lame before Matan Torah? The Rambam teaches that miracles require purpose. This shiur argues that the mass healing demonstrated that Torah is not meant for the downtrodden seeking comfort, but for healthy people who can fully channel their energies toward mitzvos and serve as proper examples to their communities.
Why does the Aramaic word for "accept" (Kabbalah) also mean "complain"? The shiur develops a profound insight: genuine acceptance only emerges from overcoming resistance. Without internal challenge, an idea merely passes through us—true commitment is born only when we wrestle with, resist, and ultimately decide to embrace a principle.
Why did the brothers hate Yosef when he received the kutonet pasim, yet strangers saw him as special? The kutonet represented Yaakov's recognition of Yosef's leadership ability—his power to uplift and unify. The brothers' jealousy blinded them; the Torah omits his name when they see him (just "oto"), but strangers always saw "Yosef." True chein comes from seeing others clearly, without the bias of our own needs.
Why did the materials for the Mishkan equal exactly what was needed with no waste, despite the principle that blessing doesn't rest on counted items? The shiur explains that Moshe's complete faithfulness—working solely for Hashem's agenda—transformed counting from an act of personal ownership into one that strengthened divine connection, thereby increasing blessings. Korach's self-interest inverted this principle, costing him everything.
Why does Rashi describe the Mishkan as "collateral" for Jewish sins? Rabbi Zweig develops the concept that God limited His own collection rights—accepting only the Mishkan's destruction rather than the nation's annihilation. This reflects the relationship of a father who reduces his own claims to ensure his children's survival.
Why does the Torah give a detailed accounting of silver and copper but not gold in Parshas Pekudei? The three metals represent three types of givers: those who give selflessly (gold), those seeking a two-way benefit (silver), and those buying honor (copper). The Midrash's three groups suspecting or praising Moshe reveal more about themselves than about Moshe—we judge others by our own standards.
