No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Torah (תורה) call the Euphrates River "hanahar hagadol" but not use similar language for the southern border? The distinction reveals which waters belong to Israel versus Egypt. Rashi (רש"י)'s explanation about the river being "next to" Eretz Yisrael actually defines territorial water rights — the eastern boundary waters fully belong to Israel while the southern waters belong to Egypt.
This shiur examines the Torah (תורה)'s description of Eretz Yisrael's boundaries in the Brit Bein HaBesarim, specifically analyzing why the Euphrates is called "hanahar hagadol" (the great river) while the southern boundary is simply called "Nahar Mitzrayim." Rabbi Zweig questions the conventional understanding of Rashi (רש"י)'s explanation that the Euphrates is called "great" merely because it borders Eretz Yisrael, noting that if this were true, the same designation should apply to both borders. The shiur develops a novel interpretation of Rashi's commentary about the river being "davuk le'Eretz Yisrael" (connected to Eretz Yisrael) and the analogy of an "eved melech" (servant of a king). Rather than simply honoring a geographical feature, this language defines actual territorial water rights and sovereignty. The designation "hagadol" indicates that the Euphrates River, as the eastern boundary, belongs entirely to Eretz Yisrael — all fishing rights, mineral rights, and whatever lies beneath those waters.
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.
Parshas Lech Lecha 15:18
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!
