No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Torah (תורה) specify that Yaakov placed his sons on the camels before his wives, while Eisav reversed the order? Rashi (רש"י) shifts the language from "sons/wives" to "males/females," prompting an exploration of different priorities: Yaakov prioritizing builders who create Jewish infrastructure in new places, versus Eisav prioritizing cultural adaptation and assimilation into local society.
This shiur examines a striking Rashi (רש"י) on Parshas Vayeitzei that changes the Torah (תורה)'s terminology when describing the order in which Yaakov and Eisav placed their families on their animals. The Torah states that Yaakov put his "banim" (sons) before his "noshim" (wives), while Eisav did the reverse. Rashi, however, reformulates this as "males before females" for Yaakov and "females before males" for Eisav, a significant departure from the Torah's own language. The Maharal in Gur Aryeh offers an interpretation: Eisav married primarily for companionship and physical intimacy, with children being merely a consequence. Therefore, his wives came first in his priorities. Yaakov, by contrast, married primarily to have children and build the Jewish people, making his sons the central purpose of marriage and thus placing them first. The shiur raises a fundamental challenge to this interpretation: if this were Rashi's intent, why didn't Rashi simply say "Yaakov put sons before wives, Eisav put wives before sons"? By deliberately changing the language to males/females, Rashi seems to be conveying something different than the Maharal's explanation about the purpose of marriage.
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 33:2, 36:6
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!