No community start suggestion yet.
Why does the Torah (תורה) begin the social-justice laws with the obscure case of a Jewish slave, using the puzzling phrase "eved ivri" that seems both redundant and grammatically wrong? The shiur argues that theft uniquely reflects a slave mentality—avoiding responsibility—and only such a person can be enslaved. The ear-piercing ceremony teaches that consequences must be understood as justified to create genuine responsibility, not mere compliance through fear.
Rabbi Zweig opens by noting several structural anomalies in Parshas Mishpatim. The Torah (תורה) begins its social-justice legislation with the laws of a Jewish slave (eved ivri), a topic that seems both obscure and temporally distant—these laws wouldn't apply until the Jewish people conquered and settled the Land of Israel. More puzzling still, the laws of theft that create the conditions for slavery appear 40 verses later. The logical structure would be: first present the law of theft, then explain that an insolvent thief is sold as a slave, and finally detail the laws governing such slavery. Instead, the Torah presents these in reverse order. Even more striking is the Torah's language: "Ki tikneh eved ivri"—"When you acquire a Jewish slave." Rashi (רש"י) spends ten lines proving this refers to a Jewish slave rather than a non-Jewish slave owned by a Jew, because the phrase is fundamentally ambiguous. Rabbi Zweig asks: Why not simply say "Ki tikneh ivri"—"When you acquire a Jew"? That would be both clearer and more accurate, since you're not actually buying someone who is already a slave—you're buying a Jew who then becomes your slave through the transaction. The addition of the word "eved" (slave) creates confusion and seems grammatically incorrect.
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 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 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 21:1-6
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 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.