No community start suggestion yet.
Why did Iyov receive suffering for staying silent when Pharaoh consulted him about enslaving the Jews? The shiur rejects the Brisker Rav's explanation and argues that Iyov's abstention was worse than Bilam's evil counsel because Iyov deluded himself into believing he bore no responsibility. When someone wants evil to occur but avoids taking ownership, self-delusion prevents teshuvah—and yissurim becomes the only path to recognition.
The shiur opens with a Midrash that three people advised Pharaoh on how to deal with the Jewish problem: Bilam, Iyov, and Yisro. Bilam counseled genocide and was killed. Yisro ran away and merited descendants in the Sanhedrin. Iyov remained silent and received suffering. The question is: what was Iyov's crime that warranted such severe punishment? The Brisker Rav explains that if Iyov were asked why he remained silent, he would have rationalized that speaking up wouldn't have helped anyway. Hashem (ה׳) therefore gave him yissurim to teach him that when something truly hurts, a person screams regardless of whether it helps. The fact that Iyov didn't protest proved the Jewish suffering didn't pain him. Yet Rabbi Zweig finds this explanation unsatisfying. Pharaoh convened three advisors precisely because this was a momentous decision involving a large population segment with potential for revolution. It's unlikely Iyov's input would have been ignored.
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.
Shemos - Midrash on Pharaoh's advisors
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!
