No community start suggestion yet.
Why should a beis din pursue compromise even when the dayan already knows who is legally correct? The shiur distinguishes between din Torah (תורה), which adjudicates monetary obligations, and pshara, which addresses the underlying relationship between parties. Preserving shalom between people is a higher responsibility than vindicating rights—even a "winning" verdict can destroy a friendship that years of peaceful coexistence built.
Rabbi Zweig addresses a fascinating question arising from Parshas Mishpatim, which contains many laws governing interpersonal monetary obligations and disputes. The halacha (הלכה) states that dayanim have a mitzvah (מצוה) liftzoa—an obligation to prefer pshara (compromise) over rendering a strict din Torah (תורה) verdict. Even more remarkably, this applies even when the dayan already knows "ad heichan hadin milsa"—who is legally correct. The question is profound: if the dayan knows Reuven is right, what justification exists for shifting to compromise? Isn't that depriving someone of what is rightfully theirs? Rabbi Zweig explains that din Torah and pshara are addressing fundamentally different questions. Din Torah adjudicates the object of dispute—who owes whom money, how much damage was caused, what obligations exist. The beis din is paskening on monetary rights and responsibilities. Pshara, by contrast, is not paskening the monetary dispute at all. Rather, it is paskening the relationship between the parties—how they are getting along and how they will continue to get along in the future.
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
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.
