No community start suggestion yet.
What is the fundamental difference between shevuah and eidus in shomrim cases? Rashi (רש"י)'s approach, challenged by Ramban (רמב"ן), distinguishes between establishing the trustworthiness of a person (shevuah) and establishing objective facts (eidus). The shiur shows that by shomer chinam, where liability depends only on wrongdoing, shevuah suffices; by shomer sachar, where the specific cause of loss matters, eidim are required to establish facts.
The shiur addresses two challenges the Ramban (רמב"ן) raises against Rashi (רש"י)'s commentary on the laws of shomrim (bailees) in Parshas Mishpatim, and offers a unified approach to resolve both. The first case involves a shomer chinam (unpaid guardian). The Torah (תורה) states that if the thief is not found, the guardian comes to court and takes an oath. Rashi explains the oath as "shelo shalach yado" — that he did not personally take or use the deposited item. The Ramban objects: Why would Rashi focus on this oath? Since a shomer chinam is exempt from liability for theft and loss, the primary oath should be that the item was stolen (shenignav). That is the factual basis for his exemption. Why does Rashi emphasize the oath that he did not misappropriate the item rather than the oath establishing the theft itself?
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.
Parshas Mishpatim (Shemos 22:6-12)
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.
