No community start suggestion yet.
Why did Yaakov tell Eisav he was merely a stranger by Lavan if the brachos guaranteed him wealth? The shiur develops a fundamental yesod: brachos are not for self-aggrandizement but tools to carry out Hashem (ה׳)'s will. Yaakov explains to Eisav that without the ability or responsibility to utilize wealth for higher purpose, the brachos don't take effect—and their ultimate fulfillment requires children who can implement them.
This shiur analyzes a Midrash on Parshas Vayishlach that interprets the pasuk in Tehillim "ha'zore'im b'dimah b'rinah yiktzoru" as referring to Yaakov Avinu and the brachos he received from Yitzchok. The Midrash traces the stages: "zara habrachos b'dimah" refers to Yaakov's tears and effort in acquiring the brachos through deception ("ulai y'musheni avi"), "b'rinah yiktzoru" refers to the immediate harvest when Yitzchok gave him the brachos ("vayiten lecha mital hashamayim"), "haloch yeilech uvachoh" refers to Yaakov crying when he saw Rochel, and "bo yavo b'rinah nosei alumosav" refers to Yaakov returning complete with his children. The central question is why Yaakov told Eisav "im Lavan garti"—that he was merely a stranger by Lavan and the brachos didn't take effect there. This seems to insult both the brachos and Eisav's intelligence. Does Eisav really believe the divine brachos wouldn't be fulfilled? The Maharal addresses this with several approaches, but Rabbi Zweig develops what he considers the simpler pshat.
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 Vayishlach (Bereishis 32-33), Tehillim 126:5-6
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!
