Ramban on the Parsha | Rabbi Shlomo Friedman (Yeshivat Kerem B'Yavneh)

Yeshivat Kerem B'Yavneh
  • 0.0 (0)
  • Judaism

Shiurim by Rabbi Shlomo Friedman in KBY. Enjoyed? Your feedback means a lot to us. Click here to email us: https://tinyurl.com/thanksEN Donations: https://www.kby.org/english/support-us/?id=46

  1. Aug 30

    Ramban on Ki Tavo

    ── Shiur Outline ──(0:10) Bikkurim Locations: Shilo, Temple and Beyond(1:38) Who Is the Kohen 'In Our Days'?AI-Generated Summary (AI can be inaccurate. Check important information): This shiur explores various insights from the Ramban on Parshas Ki Savo, beginning with the laws of bikkurim and the requirement to bring them to the specific priest currently on duty rather than a preferred individual. The discussion examines the obligation to write the Torah on stones, suggesting this was achieved either through a miracle or by recording a concise minyan hamitzvos to demonstrate that the Torah is the prerequisite and purpose for dwelling in the land. Finally, the shiur addresses the communal responsibility of leadership, noting that the curse for one who does not "uphold" the Torah refers to those who deny its divinity or leaders who fail to ensure its observance among the people. 1. Defining the Chosen Place — The Ramban explains that Bikkurim were brought not only to the Beis HaMikdash but also to Shilo, and potentially other locations where the Mishkan stood, such as Gilgal, Nov, and Givon.2. Priority of the Serving Priest — The requirement to bring fruits to the Kohen "who shall be in those days" teaches that one must give to the Kohen currently on duty (mishmar), rather than bringing a personal favorite from home.3. Validity of the Act — According to the Sifrei, this phrase also ensures that if a Kohen performed the service and was later discovered to be disqualified (chalal), the mitzvah remains valid and need not be repeated.4. Action as Declaration — The term Higadeti (I have declared) in the past tense suggests that the very act of bringing the Bikkurim serves as a testimony and an act of hoda'ah (thanksgiving) to God.5. Deciphering "Giving to the Dead" — Regarding the declaration of Viduy Ma'aser, the Ramban disputes the Rambam's view that "not giving to the dead" refers metaphorically to any non-sustaining items like clothing.6. Writing the Torah on Stones — There are multiple views on how the whole Torah was written on stones: it may have been just a list of the 613 mitzvos as in Halachos Gedolos, or the entire text written miraculously or on massive stones.7. Prerequisite for the Land — The Torah was written upon entry to the land to teach that Torah study and mitzvah observance are both the prerequisite for and the ultimate purpose of inhabiting Eretz Yisrael.8. Upholding the Torah — The curse on one who "does not uphold (yakim) this Torah" refers to one who denies the divine origin or significance of the mitzvos, rather than a simple incidental transgression.9. Proper Torah Honor — On a drush level, "upholding the Torah" refers to the chazzan or the one performing hagbahah, who must ensure the scroll is stable and that the ksav (script) is visible to all.10. Leadership Responsibility — The obligation to "uphold" the Torah falls heavily on the Beis Din and the King, who must use their influence to ensure the entire nation remains faithful to the halacha.11. Order of Blessings and Curses — In the brachos, children (pri bitnecha) are mentioned before crops because they are more significant; in the klalos, the order is reversed so the suffering begins with property before reaching the family.12. Torah Study and Joy — The association of sacrifices and a feast with the writing of the Torah teaches that Kabbalas HaTorah must always be celebrated with simcha, serving as the source for making a siyum.

  2. Aug 24

    Ramban on Ki Seitzei

    AI-Generated Summary (AI can be inaccurate. Check important information):This shiur explores various insights from the Ramban on Parshat Ki Teitzei, focusing on the rationales behind specific biblical commandments and their impact on human character. The discussion highlights that many punishments, such as those for the wayward son or the false witness, serve as deterrents to protect society rather than being purely punitive for the act itself. Ultimately, the Ramban concludes that the mitzvos were given for the benefit and refinement of man’s soul, rather than for the sake of the Almighty, teaching us to avoid cruelty and maintain the presence of the Divine within the Jewish people. 1. Psychological adjustment in war — The aveilus of the yefas toar is not just for her own sake or to make her unattractive, but to allow her to psychologically come to terms with her new reality.2. Hedonism as a violation — A ben sorer u-moreh is punished partly for violating kedoshim tihyu, showing that excessive indulgence in kosher pleasures like meat and wine is a serious spiritual failure.3. Punishment as a deterrent — Certain individuals like the ben sorer u-moreh, zakein mamre, edim zomemim, and meisis are executed not solely for their past actions but as a necessary deterrent for the nation.4. Mitzvos benefit man — A fundamental principle in the Ramban is that God does not "need" our mitzvos; rather, they are given entirely for the refinement and benefit of the human soul.5. Warfare and the Shekhinah — The requirement for holiness in a military camp (v'nishmarta mikol davar ra) is essential to ensure the Shekhinah remains with the army, which is the true source of victory.6. Ribbis as a chessed — Taking interest (ribbis) is not inherently theft, but rather a prohibition against charging a brother; therefore, it is permitted to charge a goy interest as the duty of chessed does not apply.7. Lashon Hara as a Mitzvat Aseh — Remembering the story of Miriam is a positive commandment (mitzvat aseh) to internalize the severity of lashon hara and to teach this gravity to one's children.

  3. Jul 15

    Ramban on Devarim

    ── Shiur Outline ──(0:00) Opening Remarks and Acknowledging Missed Rambans(2:33) Why Certain Mitzvot Appear Only in Deuteronomy(4:12) Three Reasons for Moses' Mussar Introduction(5:53) Meaning of “Eileh Hadevarim” in Moses' Speech(9:38) Why Moses Gives Mussar While in the Desert(10:44) Origin of the Name Midbar Sinai(12:00) Establishing a Judicial System Before Entering the Land(14:15) Interpretation of “Ki HaMishpat L'Elokim Hu”AI-Generated Summary (AI can be inaccurate. Check important information): This shiur explores the Ramban’s introduction to Sefer Devarim, focusing on why Moshe Rabbeinu repeats certain laws while introducing new ones. The Ramban explains that Moshe specifically omitted laws pertaining to the Kohanim because they are diligent, whereas the rest of Israel required repeated warnings and additional Mishneh Torah explanations to ensure their spiritual success in the land. The discussion concludes that Moshe’s initial rebuke and his historical review were intended to demonstrate God’s mercy and to prove that the nation had been fully prepared—both judicially and spiritually—to enter the Land of Israel before their sins caused the forty-year delay. 1. Repetition for Israel — The Ramban explains that Mishneh Torah repeats laws relevant to the general population, whereas Torat Kohanim (laws for priests) is omitted because Kohanim are naturally zerizim (diligent) and require less repetition.2. Timing of Mitzvos — Although many mitzvos appear for the first time in Sefer Devarim, they were originally given to Moshe Rabbeinu at Har Sinai or in the Ohel Moed; they were delayed in writing because they were only applicable in the land or were not tadir (frequent).3. Purpose of Tochacha — The introductory mussar (rebuke) serves three goals: to highlight Hashem's rachamim (mercy), to prevent future sin, and to reassure the people that despite their failures, they can still inherit the land through repentance.4. Fear through Forgiveness — Analyzing the verse "For with You is forgiveness, that You may be feared" (Tehillim 130:4), the Ramban suggests that without the possibility of selichah (pardon), a sinner would despair and abandon all fear of God; the chance to fix mistakes motivates continued service.5. Judicial Readiness — Moshe Rabbeinu mentions the appointment of judges (shoftim) to show that the nation was fully prepared to enter the land; a functioning judicial system is a prerequisite for successful conquest and settlement.6. Judicial Integrity — The phrase "for judgment belongs to God" means that judges act as shluchim (emissaries) of the Almighty; a judge who perverts justice is violating a Divine mission, as God is the true source of din emet (true judgment).7. Moshe's Enduring Role — Despite appointing judges, Moshe Rabbeinu emphasizes that he remained the primary teacher of Torah and continued to pray for the people's needs, maintaining his unique spiritual connection to the nation.8. United Testimony — While Rashi attributes the report "the land is good" only to Yehoshua and Calev, the Ramban argues that all twelve meraglim (spies) agreed the land was wonderful; their sin lay in the lack of emunah (faith) regarding the ability to conquer it.9. Brotherhood of Esav — The Ramban posits that all descendants of Avraham Avinu are considered achim (brothers), which is why we are commanded not to abhor an Edomi; however, this relationship does not extend to the sons of the concubines, such as Yishmael.10. The Gift to Lot — The description of the giant Refaim being displaced from Moab highlights that although this land was part of the ten nations promised to Avraham, Hashem gave it to the children of Lot as a nes (miracle) in honor of Avraham.

  4. Jul 8

    Ramban on Matos and Masei

    ── Shiur Outline ──(0:05) Why the Parsha Begins with Vayedaber Moshe(1:12) Distinguishing Haforas Nedarim from Hatarras Nedarim(2:25) Geonic Era Avoidance of Publicizing Nedarim Study(24:15) Yishuv Ha'aretz and the Prohibition to Stay(26:14) Thorny Neighbors: Lesikim Be'eineichem(27:19) Modern Influences Beyond Physical Proximity(31:11) Counting Cities of Refuge: Six plus Forty‑Two(32:46) Sanhedrin Outside the Land and Its Limits(33:57) Ledoroseichem: Laws Beyond the Temple(35:07) Preventing the Land from Becoming Defiled(37:10) Ramban on Nedarim and Their Legal Nuances(0:00) Why Three Cities of Refuge on Each SideAI-Generated Summary (AI can be inaccurate. Check important information): This shiur examines the Ramban’s analysis of the laws of vows and the conquest of the land, focusing on why the Torah addresses the tribal leaders regarding Haforas Nedarim. The Ramban concludes that this specific address serves to prevent public trivialization of vows and to hint at the unique authority of a solitary expert judge in the annulment process. Additionally, the shiur explores the Ramban's view of settling the land as a formal positive commandment, alongside his explanations for the purification of Midianite vessels and the strategic distribution of cities of refuge. 1. Discretion in Nedarim — The Torah addresses the Rashei Hamatos (heads of tribes) specifically to limit public awareness of Haforas Nedarim, preventing potential lightheadedness regarding the sanctity of vows.2. Distinct Cancellation Mechanisms — A critical distinction exists between Haforas Nedarim (performed by a father/husband), which halts a vow from that point forward, and Hataras Nedarim (performed by a sage), which uproots the vow retroactively.3. Hidden Halacha — The concept of a sage dissolving a vow is a Halacha L'Moshe MiSinai only hinted at in the text through the phrase "lo yachel devaro" (he shall not profane his word).4. Cheftza vs. Gavra — A neder (vow) creates a prohibition on the object (issur cheftza), whereas a shvuah (oath) creates a personal obligation on the individual (issur gavra).5. Vows against Mitzvos — While an oath to violate a mitzvah is invalid, a neder can be binding even if it prevents a mitzvah performance by rendering the required object forbidden.6. Purification of Vessels — The process of kashering midianite booty follows the principle of kibol'o kach polto (as it absorbs, so it expels), requiring the same medium (fire or water) that caused the original absorption.7. Tevilas Keilim Debate — There is a significant discussion whether the immersion of vessels (Tevilas Keilim) is a Torah obligation derived from the text or a Rabbinic law with a scriptural support (asmachta).8. Eretz Yisrael Booty — The laws of kashering were not taught during the wars with Sichon and Og because the spoils of Eretz Yisrael were temporarily permitted even if non-kosher, unlike the spoils of Midian.9. Initiative of Gad — The tribe of Gad is mentioned before Reuven in the request for land because they were the initiators and leaders of the proposal to settle the Transjordan.10. Menashe's Settlement — The half-tribe of Menashe joined the settlement in the Transjordan not by original request, but as volunteers to fill the large expanse of land captured.11. Climate of Violence — The equal number of Arei Miklat (Cities of Refuge) in the Transjordan and Israel proper is attributed by Chazal to the negative spiritual climate of Gilead, which produced more murderers.12. Judicial Continuity — The phrase "bechol moshvoteichem" teaches that while capital punishment ceased with the Temple, other judicial functions requiring semicha (ordination) continue in all locations.

  5. Jun 30

    Ramban on Pinchas

    ── Shiur Outline ──(12:08) Ramban on Age Limits for the Census(15:47) Moshe’s Instruction and the Significance of Har HaAvarim(25:42) Why the Sacrificial Laws Appear Here(27:29) Pinchas, Midian, and the Moabite Sin(29:02) Moabite Descendants and Their Intended Legacy(30:04) Ard and Naaman: Family Relations ExplainedAI-Generated Summary (AI can be inaccurate. Check important information): This shiur explores the Ramban’s insights into the reward of Pinchas and the subsequent census, emphasizing that his zealotry served both God and the community. The discussion addresses the legal and genealogical complexities of the tribal portions and family lineages, specifically how the equal distribution of land functioned among the families that entered Egypt. The main conclusion highlights that the timing of historical events, such as Yocheved's birth and the specific age limits of the census, was divinely orchestrated to ensure that leaders like Moshe and Yehoshua were prepared to guide the nation into the Land of Israel. 1. Dual merit of Pinchas — The Ramban explains that Pinchas was rewarded both for his zealotry in the realm of bein adam la-Makom and for the tzedakah of saving the nation from the plague.2. Midyan's unique culpability — Although Moav was involved, the evil counsel to use znus as a weapon originated with Midyan and Bilaam, evidenced by the king of Midyan sending his own daughter Cozbi.3. Preempting the Kal Vachomer — God commanded "Do not distress Moav" before the command to attack Midyan to preempt Moshe Rabbeinu from logicially concluding that Moav deserved harsher punishment.4. Merit of Lot — Moav was spared from war because they acted out of fear, and more fundamentally, as a reward for Lot who served Avraham Avinu during their travels.5. Portions by families — Every shevet received an equal portion of the land, and every mishpacha (family) likewise received an equal share, regardless of their individual population count within the tribe.6. Identity of Ard and Naaman — To resolve contradictions between Bereishis and Pinchas, these were either grandsons called "sons" or later descendants named after original brothers who died childless.7. Definition of family heads — A rosh mishpacha is typically one who descended to Egypt, but can also be a later figure of such great renown that the clan identified solely by his name.8. Serach the stepdaughter — According to the Ramban, Serach was the stepdaughter of Asher, and she is listed in the census because she inherited a portion of land from her biological father.9. Yocheved's delayed birth — Yocheved was the only child of a tribal leader born in Egypt; this was divinely orchestrated so Moshe Rabbeinu would be the right age to lead the Exodus.10. The age of sixty — The census excluded Yehoshua and Kalev because they were over sixty, proving that yotzei tzava (military service) only applies to those between ages twenty and sixty.11. Father as heir — The Torah omits the father’s role in inheritance because it is logically derived: since inheritance passes to brothers via the father, the father himself must be the primary heir.12. Public charge to Yehoshua — Unlike Rashi, the Ramban argues that Moshe's public charge to Yehoshua was not about the people's flaws, but a dignified summary of his responsibilities as a leader and judge.

  6. Jun 25

    Ramban on Balak

    ── Shiur Outline ──(0:01) Why Balak Isn’t Called King at Start(1:24) Ramban’s Two Explanations for Balak’s Status(3:34) God’s Change of Mind on Bilam’s Mission(5:36) Bilam’s Conditions and God’s Response(8:18) The Speaking Donkey’s Deeper Meaning(10:05) Bilam: Not a Prophet, According to Ramban(12:47) God Speaking Through Bilam’s Mouth(18:14) Future Nations and the Daled Malchuyos(21:53) Amalek as ‘Reshis Goyim’ – Strongest Nation(23:36) The Dal Malkiyos Debate: Yishmael vs Others(25:04) Pinchas’ Role and the Numbers of the DeadAI-Generated Summary (AI can be inaccurate. Check important information): This shiur explores the Ramban’s commentary on Parshas Balak, specifically addressing why the Torah initially omits Balak’s title as king and whether Bilaam possessed genuine prophecy. The Ramban suggests that Balak was either a renowned warrior whose strength proved insufficient to calm Moab’s fear, or a leader appointed specifically to address the perceived threat of the Israelites. A central theme is the sovereignty of Divine speech, demonstrated by the miracle of the talking donkey and God’s manipulation of Bilaam’s words to ensure that the "spokesman of the nations" would ultimately bless Israel. The shiur concludes by outlining Bilaam’s four visions, which progress chronologically from the conquest of Canaan to the eventual arrival of Mashiach and the final destruction of Amalek. 1. Balak's unconventional rise — The Ramban explains that Balak was either a known gibbor (warrior) whose strength didn't ease Moav's fear, or he was appointed as king specifically to deal with the threat of Yisrael.2. God's consistent message — Though it seems like HaKadosh Baruch Hu changed His mind about Bilam going, the Ramban argues the prohibition against klalah (cursing) never changed; the anger stemmed from Bilam's failure to disclose his restrictions to the messengers.3. Internalizing the mouth's Master — The nes (miracle) of the ason (donkey) speaking was intended to show Bilam that God controls all speech, proving He can open the mouths of the mute or silence the eloquent at Will.4. Sorcerer, not prophet — Despite the heights he reached for the sake of Yisrael's honor, Bilam was fundamentally a kosem (sorcerer) rather than a true navi, as evidenced by the need for his eyes to be "uncovered."5. Memorized Divine words — The phrase Vayasem Hashem davar b'fiv implies that Bilam was commanded to learn the blessings by heart (sheyigros otam b'piv), similar to the requirement for the Jewish people regarding Shiras Haazinu.6. The singular nation — The blessing of Am levadad yishkon ensures that the Jewish people remain distinct and will never truly be dominated by or become tafel (secondary) to the nations of the world.7. Immunity to sorcery — The principle of Lo nachash b'Yaakov teaches that Yisrael is not subject to nachash (augury) or the "natural" laws of history; their fate is determined solely by the Divine Word.8. Progression of prophecy — Bilam's four prophecies follow a chronological trajectory, moving from the identity of the people to the conquest of the land, then to peaceful dwelling, and finally to the Acharis HaYamim (End of Days).9. Messianic star and Edom — The Kochav (star) represents Moshiach, who will gather the dispersed and bring about the downfall of Edom, a kingdom associated with Rome that persists until the final redemption.10. Amalek's deceptive strength — Described as Reshis Goyim, Amalek was the strongest and bravest of nations, which is why Moshe required a miraculous milchamah (war) involving tefillah and raised hands to defeat them.11. Refuting the four kingdoms — The Ramban critiques the Ibn Ezra's view that Yishmael is one of the four kingdoms, clarifying that the Daled Malchuyos must succeed one another in a specific historical chain.12. The impact of Pinchas — While the sin of Baal Peor was widespread and could have resulted in over 150,000 deaths, the zealous act of Pinchas stayed the mageifah (plague) and saved many of the people.

  7. Jun 18

    Ramban on Chukas

    ── Shiur Outline ──(0:04) Why a Dead Person Is Considered Tamei(1:20) Tzadikim Not Tamei vs Gemara on Rebbi Batla(2:37) Can a Kohen Become Tamei After a Tzadik Is Buried?(3:58) Parah Adumah and the Laws of Tumah in the Ohel(5:18) Missing Tumat Masa and Its Derivation from Neveilah(7:08) Implications of Cherev K'Chalal for Ohel, Nazir, and Kohen(8:46) Different Kodeshim – Ramban vs. Ibn Ezra(13:32) Ramban’s Sharp Rebuttal to Anger Criticism(18:33) Passage Through Edom and Sichon – Ramban’s Explanation(20:33) Arad Conquest and the Role of the Deceased Aaron(24:30) Chazal's View on Captives vs Pshat(25:39) Ramban on Canaanite Minor Victory and the Neder(27:38) Nachash Nechoshet and Its Symbolic Meaning(28:59) Rashi vs Ramban on the Necessity of the Peace Terms(31:34) The Sanctity Status of the Jordan River(36:28) Ramban’s Discussion on Tumah and Ritual PurityAI-Generated Summary (AI can be inaccurate. Check important information): The Ramban addresses the nature of ritual impurity, explaining that the tumat meis generated by a corpse stems from the influence of the primordial snake and the angel of death, which implies that exceptionally righteous individuals who die a "death by a kiss" may not transmit impurity. Regarding the sin of Moses at Mei Merivah, the Ramban rejects the explanations of Rashi and the Rambam, suggesting instead that the failure lay in the phrasing "shall we bring forth water," which obscured the fact that the miracle was performed solely by God. Finally, the shiur explores the conquests of Sichon and Og, noting that Moses initially sought to avoid settling the Transjordan to maintain the unified holiness of the nation, and only engaged in battle once God assured him that even the ancestral merits of these giants would not protect them. 1. Root of Tuma — The Ramban explains that tumas meis (ritual impurity from a corpse) stems from the original sin involving the nachash (serpent), which brought death through the malach ha-moves.2. Righteousness and Purity — Because tuma is linked to the serpent's influence, those who die misas nishika (divine kiss) are fundamentally not tamei (me-ikar ha-din), leading to the principle that tzadikim do not convey impurity.3. Imperfect Peace Offers — Moshe Rabbeinu acted lifnim mishuras ha-din (beyond the letter of the law) by offering Sichon mere passage rather than demanding full subservience and taxes as required when dealing with the Cna'anim.4. Preferring the Main Land — Moshe initially intended to avoid conquering Ever HaYarden (Transjordan) because its holiness is lesser and he desired all of Israel to dwell together in the land of milk and honey.5. The Sin at the Rock — Rejecting other explanations, the Ramban suggests the plain meaning (peshat) of Moshe's sin was saying "shall we bring forth water," potentially obscuring the Kiddush Hashem that God was the direct source.6. Divine Strategy in Defeat — The initial minor success of the Kna'ani was orchestrated by God to motivate the Jewish people to pray and take a neder (vow), ensuring a more significant spiritual victory.7. Courage of the Righteous — Moshe's fear of Og was not due to the giant's physical strength, but rather a spiritual concern that the zchut (merit) of Og’s past service to Avraham might protect him.8. Legal Extension of Tuma — The principle of cherev harei hu k'chalal (a sword is like the slain) equates a metal vessel's impurity to the corpse itself, yet it carries specific kulos (leniancies), such as not being metamei b'ohel.

  8. Jun 11

    Ramban on Korach

    ── Shiur Outline ──(0:00) Rashi, Midrash and the meaning of Vayikach Korach(1:00) Location of Yad Avshalom and its significance(4:43) Ramban on timing after the meraglim rebellion(6:02) Rashi on lineage and Korach's complaint(10:01) Ketores proposal: Moshe’s initiative or divine inspiration(14:55) Rabbeinu Chananel’s view on hibadlu and Ramban’s responseAI-Generated Summary (AI can be inaccurate. Check important information): In his commentary on Parshat Korach, the Ramban rejects the Ibn Ezra’s view that the rebellion occurred early on during the replacement of the firstborns, arguing instead that it happened chronologically after the Sin of the Spies when the nation was demoralized and ripe for revolt. Regarding the census of 250 men, he disputes Rabbeinu Chananel's claim that they were all Levites, explaining that Korach used populist rhetoric about the holiness of the entire congregation to entice members from all tribes to challenge the priesthood. The shiur concludes by highlighting the Ramban’s psychological and theological insights, noting that Moshe’s plea for the congregation despite their partial guilt reflects the role of a leader to emphasize the instigator's culpability and treat the priesthood as a divine gift rather than a burden. 1. The timing of Korach's rebellion — Unlike the Ibn Ezra who places the rebellion earlier, the Ramban maintains the chronological order of the Torah, explaining that the rebellion occurred only after the Meraglim (Spies) caused a national shift in mood toward despair.2. Lashon lekicha as initiative — The term Vayikach ("and he took") indicates that Korach took the initiative and woke up to act, similar to how Avshalom took action in his rebellion.3. Collective guilt vs. the instigator — While the Eidah (congregation) was technically guilty for being swayed by Korach, Moshe and Aharon acted as melamdei zechus (defenders) by arguing that the punishment should focus on the single instigator who misled them.4. The sin of building the Mikdash — A parallel is drawn to the time of David HaMelech, where the nation was punished for their lack of initiative (his'orerus) in seeking the building of the Beis HaMikdash.5. Priesthood as a gift — The term Avodas Matana teaches that the Kehuna (priesthood) and mitzvos in general should not be viewed as a burdensome shibud (yoke) but as a precious gift from Hashem.6. Self-deception in holiness — The machtos (fire-pans) became kodesh because the 250 men sincerely believed they were acting leshem shamayim (for the sake of heaven), proving that subjective sincerity does not always equal objective truth.7. Eating in a holy fashion — The instruction to eat "in the Kodesh HaKodashim" is interpreted by the Ramban as a requirement to eat the kodshei kodashim with specific holiness and appropriate conduct.8. Scope of the rebellion — Moshe realized Korach's populist rhetoric about "the whole congregation is holy" was a facade for his personal grievance over Elizaphan being appointed Nasi.

See All (26)

About

Shiurim by Rabbi Shlomo Friedman in KBY. Enjoyed? Your feedback means a lot to us. Click here to email us: https://tinyurl.com/thanksEN Donations: https://www.kby.org/english/support-us/?id=46

Information