9 Sivan, 5774/June 7, 2014

Yeshiva University Torah MiTzion Beit Midrash Zichron Dov Yeshiva University Torah MiTzion Beit Midrash Zichron Dov Yeshiva University Torah MiTzion Beit Midrash Zichron Dov
Toronto Torah Toronto Torah Toronto Torah
Parshat Behaalotcha Vol. 5 Num. 36

were very cheap. Ramban believes the
Jewish people actually were given these
foods, free of charge, while serving their
masters. The ones who worked in the
river were given fish that they captured
for their masters, and the ones who
worked in the fields were given from the
crops that they harvested for their
masters.

Identifying the food in Egypt as "free of
charge", demonstrates the Jewish
peoples ingratitude towards G-d.
Despite being fed manna every day, they
did not acknowledge that the manna,
too, was free of charge. Instead, they
focussed on their desire for food like
that which they had eaten in Egypt.

There is a stark difference between the
Divine response to this complaint and
the Divine response to a complaint
regarding hunger lodged by the Jewish
people one month after leaving Egypt.
Our story ends with death, while that
story ends with G-d giving the Jewish
people manna. The difference in Divine
responses may relate to the ingratitude
displayed in using the word chinam. The
earlier episode occurred as the Jewish
people began their journey in the
desert, without any visible source of
food; they legitimately thought they
would starve to death, and had reason
to complain. Now, G-d is providing them
with food, and all they need do is go
outside and collect it. The current
complaint is driven by desire, and
ingratitude toward G-d.

Free from Obligation
Rashi offers a different approach to the
word chinam. He questions whether the
Egyptians would have given food "free of
charge"; if the Egyptians did not provide
straw to produce the bricks, would they
have provided fish and vegetables?
Rather, the Jews want to eat fish "free
from obligation" meaning, free from
mitzvot.

Meshech Chochmah explains this
freedom in a narrow sense: in the desert
the Jewish people are only permitted to
eat meat if it was sacrificed as a korban,
and they recall the times when they
could eat food without the need to turn
every meal into a spiritual experience.

On a deeper level, Nechama Lebowitz
notes that their complaint for food
indicates a much greater problem. They
want their whole existence to be "free
from mitzvot." The reason a trivial
matter like food sparks an uproar is
because they arent happy with their
new Torah-based restrictions, and
therefore every obstacle in their lives is
magnified. They prefer living as slaves
because it requires less commitment
than being a servant of G-d. The Divine
response to this complaint is harsh; the
rebellion warrants a severe punishment
because they are rejecting the new life
they were supposed to embrace after
receiving the Torah.

Both approaches to the word chinam
reveal how the generation that leaves
Egypt struggles to deal with their new
existence in the desert. They struggle to
appreciate the tremendous miracles G-d
performs for them on a daily basis,
while they fondly recall the food they
had eaten in Egypt. They also struggle
to meet the constant demands needed
to be a true eved HaShem [servant of
G-d]. Only the next generation is able to
eradicate the slave mentality and fully
embrace the Torahs impact on their
everyday lives.

jgutenberg@torontotorah.com
No Such Thing as Free Lunch Rabbi Josh Gutenberg
To sponsor an issue of Toronto Torah for $180, please contact info@torontotorah.com or 647-234-7299
Parshat Behaalotcha describes two
complaints lodged by the Jewish
people. The second complaint begins
when a fringe group riles up the nation
to complain about the manna. They
are unsatisfied eating manna day in
and day out, and they desire a more
diverse menu. "We remember the fish
which we ate in Egypt chinam ["for
free"]; the cucumbers, melons, leeks,
onions and garlic." (Bamidbar 11:5)
Many commentators are troubled by
the word "chinam" - what is it referring
to? Is it describing the fish as free of
charge, or the status of the Jewish
people as free from obligation?

The word "chinam" has two precedents
in the Torah:
In Bereishit 29:15, Lavan tells
Yaakov that he cant work for free
(chinam); Yaakov must name a
price for his wages.
In Shemot 21:2 and 21:11, the
Torah describes a slave being freed
from service and a girl freed from
marriage using the word chinam.

The first chinam is used in the sense of
"free of charge" while the other chinam
is used in the sense of "free from
obligation". The two different meanings
of chinam highlight the problem with
the nations complaint regarding the
manna, and why it ended in tragedy
and death.

Free of Charge
Several commentators believe that
chinam describes the fish and
vegetables as free of charge. Rabbi
Avraham ibn Ezra takes this approach,
explaining that the people were
exaggerating in claiming that they had
received free food; these items were
plentiful in Egypt, and therefore they
We are grateful to
Continental Press 905-660-0311
OUR BEIT MIDRASH
ROSH BEIT MIDRASH RABBI MORDECHAI TORCZYNER
SGAN ROSH BEIT MIDRASH RABBI BARUCH WEINTRAUB
AVREICHIM RABBI ADAM FRIEBERG, RABBI JOSH
GUTENBERG,RABBI ADAM LAW
CHAVEIRIM EITAN AZIZA, JOSH AZIZA, HILLEL BIERBRIER, DANIEL GEMARA, ALEX
HUBERMAN, RYAN JENAH, YOSEPH LEVI, AKIVA MARESKY, JACOB NEMIROV,
MITCHELL PERLMUTTER, ARYEH ROSEN, DANIEL SAFRAN, ARIEL SHIELDS, NOAM
SLODOVNICK, KOBY SPIEGEL, YAAKOV SPIVAK, GRAHAM TUGETMAN, SHALOM WISE
Visit us at www.torontotorah.com
us merit with a constant mitzvah involving our bread, so
that blessing would come to it via the mitzvah, and our
souls would acquire merit. Thus dough becomes food for the
body and food for the soul." Sefer haChinuch continues to
add that this mitzvah provides support for the kohanim,
permitting them to devote their energies to their ritual tasks
without concern for processing grain.

Rabbi Samson Raphael Hirsch identified an additional,
educational benefit for the person who separates the
challah: "By having in mind that the bread of your
household is taken from the soil vouchsafed to your people
by G-d, you acknowledge, just when you are in the greatest
danger of falling into the sin of self-deification and of self-
seekingly segregating yourself, that your home is but a limb
of the corporate body of your people, that your personal
welfare stems from, and is dependent upon, the welfare of
the people, and that in both you behold only the gift of the
G-d of Israel." (Horeb 304)

torczyner@torontotorah.com
2
According to Sefer haChinuch, the Torah's 385
th
mitzvah
commands us to separate a tithe from Jewish-owned dough.
One who bakes a quantity of dough equivalent to a tenth of a
biblical ephah separates an olive-sized amount from the
dough and gives it to a kohen; this separated dough is called
challah. In a time like the present, when kohanim are unable
to eat the challah in a state of ritual purity, we burn the
dough that has been separated. Ideally, challah is separated
from dough before it is baked, but one may still separate
challah after the baking process is complete. Eating bread
from which challah has not been separated is prohibited.

Biblically, the mitzvah of separating challah applies
exclusively in Israel. (Bamidbar 15:19-20) However, we have
a rabbinic mitzvah of separating challah anywhere in the
world, lest Jews outside of Israel forget the mitzvah.
(Mishnah Challah 4:8; Mishneh Torah, Hilchot Bikkurim 5:7-
9) We don't have a similar mitzvah for the terumah and
maaser tithes; some suggest that this is because those are
limited to farmers, or because dough could become obligated
in challah if brought to Israel. (See Tosafot Kiddushin 36b
kol.)

Per Sefer haChinuch, the mitzvah of separating challah is
meant to benefit our food. He writes, "A person lives via food,
and most of the world does so via bread. G-d wished to give
Haftorah: Zecharyah 2:14-4:7 Rabbi Mordechai Torczyner
Who is the prophet of our haftorah?
Zecharyah (G-d has remembered) was
a popular name in the generation that
returned to Israel to build the second
Beit haMikdash. Our prophet,
Zecharyah, lived in that first generation,
and taught the nation alongside
another prophet, Chaggai. Some
suggest that he was a kohen, based on
Nechemyah 12:16.

Zecharyah's audience was the group of
Jews who returned from Bavel. A small
population, indigent and unlearned,
they were discouraged by the difficulties
of building the Beit haMikdash and
establishing their community.
Zecharyah exhorted the kohanim and
political leaders to work in tandem for
the national good. Much of his early
message is presented through dramatic
visions of horses, flying women, and
angels; some take his unusual and
opaque visions as an indication that his
prophecy was on a lower level than that
of earlier prophets (Ibn Ezra to
Zecharyah 1:1; Moreh haNevuchim
2:44; Radak to Zecharyah 5:3). Others
argue that these visions were a function
of the depth and distance of the future
he was perceiving. (Abarbanel)

At the end of his book, Zecharyah
predicts a great battle, Mashiachs
arrival, and an expanded Jerusalem.

The message of our haftorah
Our haftorah begins with the pledge
that G-d will return to live among the
Jews, and that the nations will join us
as well. (2:14-16) The passage
continues with a vision of Yehoshua,
the Kohen Gadol, wearing dirty
clothes, facing an angel and a being
identified as a "satan". G-d orders the
dirty clothing replaced with clean
clothing. (3:1-5)

Commentators differ in explaining this:
According to Rashi, Yehoshua is on
trial for the guilt of his children, who
intermarried; his dirty clothing
proclaims their sin. The "satan"
prosecutes; G-d supports Yehoshua.
The clothing is replaced because
Yehoshua's children ultimately
separate from their non-Jewish
wives. (Ezra 10)
According to Ibn Ezra and Radak,
Yehoshua represents the Jews who
are building the Beit haMikdash,
and the dirty clothes represent their
poverty. The "satan" represents
earthly forces attempting to prevent
the construction; G-d enables the
builders to succeed. The new, clean
clothing represents the end of that
generation's poverty.
Per Abarbanel, Yehoshua represents
his descendants, the Chashmonaim,
who are guilty of taking the throne
inappropriately; kohanim are not
supposed to rule as kings. Their
clothing is dirty because they wear
royal garb inappropriately. The
"satan" accuses them of guilt, and
G-d defends them for their
righteousness in battling
Hellenization. They are given clean
clothing when their monarchy ends.

Toward the end of the haftorah (4:1-7),
Zecharyah envisions a menorah; this
menorah is the simplest reason for us
to read this haftorah for Parshat
Behaalotcha, which begins with the
mitzvah of lighting the menorah in the
Mishkan. Unlike the menorah in the
Beit haMikdash, though, this menorah
receives its oil via channels which
stem from two olive trees.
Commentators differ in their
understanding of how many channels
led to the branches; Ibn Ezra saw 7,
Abarbanel understood there to be 14,
and Rashi calculated 49.

Zecharyah asks what the menorah
represents, but our haftorah ends
before he receives an answer. Later on,
an angel explains the vision of the
menorah (4:11-14). Commentators
disagree regarding the meaning of the
explanation, but Rashi, Ibn Ezra and
Abarbanel agree that the two olive
trees, and their associated channels,
represent the separate roles of priestly
authority and political authority. The
vision of the two trees fueling the
menorah conveys that in the future
there will be peace between these two
branches of government, as they unite
in the service of G-d.
613 Mitzvot: #385
Separating Challah
Rabbi Mordechai Torczyner
Question: In many communities there
is a practice, during long summer days,
to recite the evening shema and to pray
the evening service three or four hours
before nightfall. Is there any way to
justify or rationalize this practice? There
are many great Torah scholars among
the masses who are acting this way.

Answer: We do not have the ability to
find an answer or a reason for the way
they hurried so much three or four
hours [before nightfall]. For Rabbeinu
Tam wrote that after plag hamincha and
onward is considered nighttime, like
Rabbi Yehudah, and then you can fulfill
your obligation of the nighttime shema
a nd t he e v e ni ng pr a y e r s . .
Nevertheless, this time is only one and a
quarter hours before nightfall, and from
where [do they get the idea] to perform
[nighttime mitzvot] earlier?

This being the case, it seems that there
is no way to justify this using reason or
logic from the Talmud. Rather, we can
suggest that this practice developed due
to weakness that descended to the
world. Many community members are
eager and hungry to eat while much of
the day remains, during the longer days.
And if they were to eat before minchah,
they would become engrossed in their
food and drink and they would not come
to the synagogue at all. Therefore, many
great rabbis have forbidden eating even
a small meal close to the time of
minchah gedolah. It would not then be
acceptable to eat before minchah on a
weekly basis. The result is that Torah
scholars had no power to stop the
masses from praying the evening service
and reciting shema while it was still day.

I have also heard in the study hall,
from one of the great sages, who heard
by tradition that in earlier days in
Krems, they prayed the evening service
and recited shema on Friday while it
was still daytime. So much so, that the
rabbi of the city, who was from the great
[rabbis] of generations past, and all of
the prestigious people along with him,
went for a leisurely stroll on the banks
of the Danube River after eating their
Shabbat meal and would return to their
homes before nightfall. It seems that
even a Torah scholar, if he is with the
community and he cant separate the
community from this practice, need not
distance himself. He may pray and
recite shema with them, and he fulfills
his obligation.
Torah and Translation
Making a Very Early Shabbat
Rabbi Yisrael Isserlein
Terumat haDeshen 1
Translated by Rabbi Adam Frieberg
Biography
Rabbi Yisrael Isserlein
Rabbi Mordechai Torczyner
Visit us at www.torontotorah.com 3
Rabbi Yisrael Isserlein was born into a
scholarly family in Marburg an Drau,
now Slovenia, in 1390. (Some contend he
was born in Regensburg.) He was
educated by his mother's brother in
Germany until the latter was killed in the
"Vienna Gezeirah" pogroms of 1421. He
fled the pogroms to Italy, ultimately
returning home to become Rabbi in
Brunn, then Marburg, and eventually
Neustadt until he died in 1460. R'
Isserlein was the leading light for
thousands of Jews during a period of
pogroms and martyrdom. He was a
popular orator, and he prescribed paths
of repentance for Jews who had left
Torah and desired to return. He
corresponded with the leaders of
Ashkenazi Jewry of his day, and was
treated with the greatest respect.

R' Isserlein and his wife Schoendlein had
four sons, as well as a daughter who died
as a child. Schoendlein was also
scholarly, and known for specific pious
practices; she is also reported (Leket
Yosher 20) to have answered a halachic
question on her husband's behalf.

Expert in both halachah and kabbalah,
and reported (by Chida) to have engaged
in "practical kabbalah", R' Isserlein was
an ascetic who devoted all of his energies
to piety and the study of Torah. R'
Isserlein is considered one of the last
great Ashkenazi authorities of the pre-
Shulchan Aruch era, one of the
establishers of Ashkenazi custom for
centuries to come. His work was a major
influence on R' Moshe Isserles, author of
the Ashkenazi component included in
Shulchan Aruch. R' Isserlein signed his
letters, "The smallest and youngest in
Israel".

The greatest written legacy of R' Isserlein
is his "Terumat haDeshen" collection of
354 responsa, which are models of
brevity and clarity. The Shach (Yoreh
Deah 196:20) wrote that R' Isserlein
created the questions himself as a means
of educating the public in halachic
matters, but others disagree. R' Isserlein
also wrote Hagahot Shaarei Dura and a
commentary on Rashi on Chumash. A
student of his wrote "Leket Yosher",
collecting additional responsa from R'
Isserlein as well as his customs and
anecdotes about him; some have
challenged its authenticity, but the major
halachic authorities of our day accept its
legitimacy.

torczyner@torontotorah.com
: ,
, " ,
, ' '
.
? "
.


:
, '
' , "
, " ,
" .... "
,
?







,
,

. ,

. ,
.
"
, ,


.






, ,
"

, ,
,
,
" ,
. . .
" ,
, ,
.
34 aircraft to rescue 14,325 people. Many of the aircraft
contained hundreds more passengers than seats. Notably, one
plane carried 1,122 people (the seating capacity is 760), and
five babies were born on the planes. The whole operation
lasted thirty hours. Prime Minister Yitzchak Shamir said,
"We've stood up to our obligation and completed the operation
bringing all of the Jews. It gives us a feeling of strength."

The operation took place on Shabbat, as the government
viewed this as a case of saving lives. Had Israel waited, the
rebels could have taken over, or the Ethiopian officials could
have changed their minds. Also, since El Al did not fly on
Shabbat, planes were more readily available to airlift them.

The New York Times quoted one of the olim, Mukat Abag, as
saying, "It was a very nice flight. We didn't bring any of our
clothes, we didn't bring any of our things, but we are very glad
to be here."
ymanas@gmail.com
11 Sivan is Monday
In early 1991, the Ethiopian government was on the verge of
being overthrown by Eritrean and Tigrean rebels. The
president had previously blocked Ethiopian Jews from
emigrating to Israel, but as he was about to lose power, an
opportunity presented itself to bring them to Israel. Also,
Israel and various Jewish organizations were concerned for
the safety and welfare of Ethiopia's Jews under the rebels.

Israel began negotiating to allow the Jews to come to Israel.
There was a dispute regarding whether the Ethiopians were
considered Jewish, but the Sephardi Chief Rabbi had ruled
them to be Jewish in 1973. Israel reached an agreement
with the remaining officials of the Ethiopian government,
who agreed to allow the Jews to immigrate in exchange for
35 million dollars and shelter in the United States.

In 1990, Israel drew up plans to airlift the Jews to Israel,
and on May 24, 1991, Israel executed the mission, sending
Visit us at www.torontotorah.com
4
We would like to thank koshertube.com for filming our shiurim!
Highlights for June 7 June 13 / 9 Sivan 15 Sivan
Time Speaker Topic Location Special Notes
SHABBAT JUNE 7
Before minchah R Mordechai Torczyner Daf Yomi BAYT
Pre-minchah R Adam Frieberg Pirkei Avot Shaarei Tefillah
After minchah R Mordechai Torczyner Gemara Avodah Zarah BAYT
SUNDAY JUNE 8
8:45 AM R Mordechai Torczyner
Medical Halachah: Patients
of the Opposite Gender
BAYT
CE credit for dentists
All are welcome
8:45 AM R Josh Gutenberg
Contemporary Halachah:
Shabbat Elevators
BAYT
9:15 AM R Shalom Krell Kuzari Zichron Yisroel With light breakfast
10 AM to
11:20 AM
R Adam Frieberg
R Elan Mazer
Laws of Early Shabbat
Theology of the Spoken Torah
BAYT
MIDRESHET YOM
RISHON FOR WOMEN
8:30 PM R Baruch Weintraub
Halachah and the Modern State of Israel
On-line shiur in Hebrew: http://www.torontotorah.com/online
MONDAY JUNE 9
10:15 AM R Mordechai Torczyner Chabura: Times of Davening Yeshivat Or Chaim University students
7:45 PM R Shlomo Gemara The Prophets of Israel: Yoel Bnai Torah
7:45 PM R Mordechai Torczyner Medicine on Shabbat Shaarei Shomayim
TUESDAY JUNE 10
12:30 PM R Mordechai Torczyner Living Midrash Shaarei Shomayim
8:30 PM R Adam Frieberg Laws of Shabbat Shaarei Tefillah Not this week
WED. JUNE 11
10:00 AM R Mordechai Torczyner The Jew and Her Food, Wk 5 BEBY
1:30 PM R Mordechai Torczyner Book of Yehoshua 68 Theodore, Thornhill For women only
7:30 PM
9:00 PM
R Mordechai Torczyner
R Yehoshua Weber
Business Ethics: Lending
Responsa: Yom Yerushalayim
Yeshivat Or Chaim
Community
Beit Midrash Night
THU. JUNE 12
10:15 AM R Aaron Greenberg Laws of Shabbat Yeshivat Or Chaim University students
FRI. JUNE 13
10:30 AM R Mordechai Torczyner Contemporary Halachah Yeshivat Or Chaim Advanced
This Week in Israeli History: 11 Sivan, 1991 - Operation Solomon Rabbi Yair Manas