No community start suggestion yet.
Why does Rashi (רש"י) cite two separate pesukim to teach that no one was blind at Har Sinai? The shiur distinguishes between physical blemish (missing an eye) and functional impairment (inability to see). Hashem (ה׳) performed two distinct miracles: restoring physical completeness ("le'einei kol ha'am") and restoring all functions of sight, hearing, and speech ("ro'im es hakolos").
The shiur analyzes an apparent redundancy in Rashi (רש"י)'s commentary on the giving of the Torah (תורה) at Har Sinai. In Shemos 19:11, Rashi comments on the phrase "le'einei kol ha'am" (before the eyes of all the people) and teaches that there was no blind person among them—everyone was healed. Later, in Shemos 20:15 (or 20:18 in some editions), Rashi again comments on "v'chol ha'am ro'im" (and all the people saw) to teach the same point: that no one was blind, deaf, or mute. The question emerges: why does Rashi need to cite this teaching twice? Rabbi Zweig initially considers whether the first Rashi refers to a promise before Matan Torah and the second to the actual fulfillment afterward. However, he rejects this explanation because the proof-texts Rashi brings for the absence of mutes and deaf people ("vaya'anu kol ha'am" and "na'aseh v'nishma") both occur before the actual giving of the Torah, not after. Therefore, both Rashis are discussing the same time period.
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.
Shemos 19:11, 20:15 (Yisro)
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.
