No community start suggestion yet.
Why does Bereishis 28:10 specify that Yaakov left Be'er Sheva when Yitzchok lived in Hebron? The shiur develops a novel pshat that Yaakov didn't leave his father's house from Be'er Sheva—he left Yeshivas Ever, which was located there. The choice of "vayeilech haranah" (rather than "lecharan") indicates he wasn't stopping along the way but was already en route, supporting that this verse describes leaving yeshiva after fourteen years, not leaving home.
Rabbi Zweig begins with a fundamental textual difficulty in Parshas Vayeitzei. The opening verse states "Vayeitzei Yaakov mibeersheva vayeilech haronah"—Yaakov left Be'er Sheva and went toward Charan. However, this is problematic because we know from Parshas Vayishlach that when Yaakov returns after twenty-two years, he goes to Hebron where Yitzchok was living. If Yitzchok lived in Hebron, why does the Torah (תורה) say Yaakov left from Be'er Sheva? Rabbi Zweig notes that Rashi (רש"י) addresses a related issue earlier in Parshas Toldos, explaining that when Yitzchok became blind and confined to his house ("kalu b'habayis"), he was considered "like dead," which is why Hashem (ה׳) attached His name to Yitzchok while he was still alive—something normally only done after a tzaddik's death. This suggests Yitzchok was in Hebron at this time, not Be'er Sheva.
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 28:10 (Parshas Vayeitzei)
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!
