A free account is required to play audio and download files.
No community start suggestion yet.
Why does Hebrew use the verb 'kores' (to cut) when making a covenant, which seems to contradict the binding nature of a bris? The ancient ceremony involved cutting everyone else out to create an exclusive relationship where two incomplete halves merge into genuine oneness. This transforms how we understand Jewish marriage, communal responsibility, and why Jewish relationships often seem more demanding than mere partnerships.
Rabbi Zweig begins by examining the puzzling Hebrew terminology in Parshas Nitzavim where the Torah (תורה) describes making a covenant (bris) using the verb 'kores' (to cut), which seems contradictory since covenant implies binding while cutting implies separation. Through Rashi (רש"י)'s interpretation, he explains that the ancient covenant ceremony involved creating barriers on both sides, with the covenant partners passing between them, symbolically cutting everyone else out of the exclusive relationship. The rabbi then distinguishes between partnership and covenant, explaining that partnership maintains two separate entities working together, while covenant creates a genuine merger - a oneness where two incomplete halves become a complete whole. This concept transforms our understanding of marriage, which is called a 'bris' in Jewish law. Rather than a partnership of two complete individuals accommodating each other, Jewish marriage represents two people recognizing their incompleteness and merging into one entity. Rashi's interpretation that 'one flesh' refers to children demonstrates this oneness - the child represents the indivisible unity of the parents. The rabbi extends this principle to the Jewish people's covenant in Parshas Nitzavim, which establishes the principle of 'Kol Yisrael areivim ze ba-ze' (all Jews are responsible for one another). This isn't merely social responsibility but reflects genuine oneness - when one Jew needs to perform a mitzvah (מצוה), it becomes every Jew's need. This explains why one can make kiddush for another even after fulfilling their own obligation. The concept also applies to the human-Divine relationship, where humans complete God's desire to express goodness in the world. The rabbi addresses practical implications, explaining why Jewish business relationships often seem more demanding than others - it stems from the healthy recognition of oneness rather than arm's-length partnerships. The seemingly negative aspects (demands, expectations) actually reflect the deep spiritual truth that Jews are genuinely interconnected. He concludes by noting that this oneness, while sometimes creating tension, is preferable to polite distance that would indicate the loss of Jewish peoplehood. The fundamental insight is that covenant requires 'surgery' - each party must cut away their sense of completeness to recognize their need for the other, enabling true merger rather than mere cooperation.
Parshas Nitzavim 29:9-11
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!
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 the Torah emphasize Rivka's Aramean ancestry when describing her marriage to Yitzchok? The shiur reveals that Arameans were master manipulators with extraordinary sensitivity to others' psychology. Rivka inherited this keen insight but channeled it into genuine chesed, which requires understanding what recipients actually need rather than what givers want to provide.
Why does the Torah separate Avrohom's eulogy for Sarah from his crying for her? The shiur shows that Sarah required a public eulogy focused on the communal loss of a leader, not Avrohom's private grief. This teaches that we must view Jewish tragedies through a national lens first, seeing attacks on Am Yisrael as collective losses that dwarf personal concerns.
Why does Rashi describe Avrohom and Ephron's land deal as happening "between friends" when they just met? The shiur develops the principle that overpaying transforms business transactions into expressions of friendship and respect. Great people habitually overpay to ensure no one feels exploited, creating "lekach tov" situations where both parties benefit with dignity.
Why did the brothers hate Yosef when he received the kutonet pasim, yet strangers saw him as special? The kutonet represented Yaakov's recognition of Yosef's leadership ability—his power to uplift and unify. The brothers' jealousy blinded them; the Torah omits his name when they see him (just "oto"), but strangers always saw "Yosef." True chein comes from seeing others clearly, without the bias of our own needs.
Why did the materials for the Mishkan equal exactly what was needed with no waste, despite the principle that blessing doesn't rest on counted items? The shiur explains that Moshe's complete faithfulness—working solely for Hashem's agenda—transformed counting from an act of personal ownership into one that strengthened divine connection, thereby increasing blessings. Korach's self-interest inverted this principle, costing him everything.
Why does Rashi describe the Mishkan as "collateral" for Jewish sins? Rabbi Zweig develops the concept that God limited His own collection rights—accepting only the Mishkan's destruction rather than the nation's annihilation. This reflects the relationship of a father who reduces his own claims to ensure his children's survival.
Why does the Torah give a detailed accounting of silver and copper but not gold in Parshas Pekudei? The three metals represent three types of givers: those who give selflessly (gold), those seeking a two-way benefit (silver), and those buying honor (copper). The Midrash's three groups suspecting or praising Moshe reveal more about themselves than about Moshe—we judge others by our own standards.
