פרשת בהעלותך תש"ב - תלונות ישראל

And the people were as murmurers, speaking evil in the ears of the LORD; and when the LORD heard it, His anger was kindled; and the fire of the LORD burnt among them, and devoured in the uttermost part of the camp.

כמתאננים — The term מתאננים denotes [people who seek] “a pretext” — they seek a pretext how to separate themselves from following the Omnipresent. Similarly is stated in the narrative of Samson, (Judges 14:4) “for he sought a pretext (תואנה) [against the Philistines]” (Sifrei Bamidbar 85).

רע באזני ה׳ means a pretext that was evil in the ears of the Lord, i.e., that they intended that it should reach His ears and that He might show annoyance. They said: “Woe unto us! How weary we have become on this journey: it is now three days that we have had no rest from the wearisomeness of the march!”

And the people were like mitonenim: Ibn Ezra explained: "It is the same language as 'evil,' like it is used in the phrase 'your evil thoughts' (Jeremiah 4:14)...that is, they spoke evil words." But this is not correct. For why would the Torah hide their sin instead of telling us explicitly, like in every other place? The correct explanation seems to me to be that when they distanced themselves from Mount Sinai, which was almost like a permanent encampment, and then, after their first journey, found themselves in the vast terrifying wilderness, they made themselves uncomfortable. They said, "What will we do, how will we live in this wilderness? What will we eat and drink? How can we handle this oppression? When will we leave [this wilderness]? [Mitonenim, then] is like in the verse "What should a living man complain (yitonen) of? Each of his own sins" (Lamentations 3:39), meaning the pain and suffering one brings upon himself. Similarly, "the child of my pain (oni)," (Genesis 35:18); also in "The fisherman will lament (anu) and mourn" (Isaiah 19:8). Since the text says that the people were in pain and sorrow, it mentions and tells us their sin [explicitly], as they were speaking from the bitterness of their souls like people who are in pain do. And this was wicked in the eyes of God, for they should have followed Him with joy and good spirit from all of the good that God had bestowed upon them. Instead, they were like people being forced, like people in pain, like people who were annoyed at their poor situation. This is also why the Torah tells us a second time (in verse 4) that the Children of Israel returned and cried. Their first sin was that they were annoyed that they lacked enjoyable things in the wilderness. They then repeated this sin instead of receiving message of the fire of God that burned among them [after the first sin].

כמתאוננים, on account of the difficulties of the journey. They did not actually complain in their hearts as they had nothing to complain about. They only voiced complaints as a form of testing G’d.

And the mixed multitude that was among them fell a lusting; and the children of Israel also wept on their part, and said: ‘Would that we were given flesh to eat!

וישבו גם בני ישראל ויבכו AND THE CHILDREN OF ISRAEL ALSO AGAIN WEPT together with them.

וישובו ויבכו, they again pretended to have justified complaints, testing G’d’s patience. This time they cried that they had agreed to leave Egypt. This was equivalent to insulting the Presence of the Shechinah that had honoured them with its presence amongst them. Moses tells them this explicitly in verse 20 when he said: יען מאסתם את ה' אשר ,בקרבכם ותבכו לפניו לאמור למה זה יצאנו ממצרים?, “because you despised the Lord Who is in your midst and you cried, saying: “why is this that we left Egypt?”

And the people were like mitonenim: Ibn Ezra explained: "It is the same language as 'evil,' like it is used in the phrase 'your evil thoughts' (Jeremiah 4:14)...that is, they spoke evil words." But this is not correct. For why would the Torah hide their sin instead of telling us explicitly, like in every other place? The correct explanation seems to me to be that when they distanced themselves from Mount Sinai, which was almost like a permanent encampment, and then, after their first journey, found themselves in the vast terrifying wilderness, they made themselves uncomfortable. They said, "What will we do, how will we live in this wilderness? What will we eat and drink? How can we handle this oppression? When will we leave [this wilderness]? [Mitonenim, then] is like in the verse "What should a living man complain (yitonen) of? Each of his own sins" (Lamentations 3:39), meaning the pain and suffering one brings upon himself. Similarly, "the child of my pain (oni)," (Genesis 35:18); also in "The fisherman will lament (anu) and mourn" (Isaiah 19:8). Since the text says that the people were in pain and sorrow, it mentions and tells us their sin [explicitly], as they were speaking from the bitterness of their souls like people who are in pain do. And this was wicked in the eyes of God, for they should have followed Him with joy and good spirit from all of the good that God had bestowed upon them. Instead, they were like people being forced, like people in pain, like people who were annoyed at their poor situation. This is also why the Torah tells us a second time (in verse 4) that the Children of Israel returned and cried. Their first sin was that they were annoyed that they lacked enjoyable things in the wilderness. They then repeated this sin instead of receiving message of the fire of God that burned among them [after the first sin].

We remember the fish, which we were wont to eat in Egypt for nought; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlic;

אשר נאכל במצרים חנם [WE REMEMBER THE FISH] WHICH WE DID EAT IN EGYPT FOR NOTHING — If you say that they meant that the Egyptians gave them fish for nothing (without payment), then I ask, “But does it not state, (Exodus 5:18): [Go, therefore, now, and work], for there shall no straw be given you”? Now, if they did not give them straw for nothing, would they have given them fish for nothing! — What then is the force of the word חנם? It means: free from (i.e. without us having been burdened with) heavenly commands (Sifrei Bamidbar 87).

but now our soul is dried away; there is nothing at all; we have nought save this manna to look to.’—

אל המן עינינו OUR EYES ARE ON THIS MANNA (i. e. we see nothing but this manna) — “manna in the morning, manna in the evening!” (Sifrei Bamidbar 87)

Now the manna was like coriander seed, and the appearance thereof as the appearance of bdellium.

והמן כזרע נד AND THE MANNA WAS AS CORIANDER SEED — He who said that (the previous verse) did not say this: Israel said, “our eyes are only on this manna”, but the Holy One, blessed be He had it written in the Torah, and the manna was like coriander seed” — as much as to say “See, ye people of the world, about what My sons were complaining, whilst as a matter of fact the manna is excellent in so many different ways!” (Sifrei Bamidbar 88).

והמן כזרע גד הוא, whereas its appearance was like that of crystals. In other words, whereas in fact it was soft inside, it appeared hard from the outside. When looking at it the people said ונפשנו יבשה, “we are completely dried out, like someone who has to eat hard and dry kernels of wheat. If so, why did G’d become angry as we are told in verse 10?
Now the Torah explains the reason for G’d’s anger. When the people would grind the manna crystals in their mortars or mills, its taste was like something creamy, oily. This taste which originally had been described as similar to crackers smeared with honey (Exodus 15,31) changed to be like nuts after they are ground. After undergoing grinding it now became moist and like an oily substance. Seeing that it did not taste dry at all, the people’s complaint was unfounded, and this is why G’d became angry at the unjustified accusation that the manna was the reason that their whole system dried out. In Beshalach, where the taste is described as a wafer smeared with honey, the Torah spoke about what the manna tasted like raw, in its original state, prior to assuming the taste of rich cream.

Have I conceived all this people? have I brought them forth, that Thou shouldest say unto me: Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing-father carrieth the sucking child, unto the land which Thou didst swear unto their fathers?

And if Thou deal thus with me, kill me, I pray Thee, out of hand, if I have found favour in Thy sight; and let me not look upon my wretchedness.’

ואם ככה את עשה לי AND IF THOU DO THUS WITH ME [KILL ME, I PRAY THEE …] — The Hebrew word for “Thou” appears in the feminine form את instead of the masculine אתה to intimate that Moses’ strength grew weak as that of a woman when the Holy one, blessed be He, showed him the punishment which He was to bring in future upon them for this (for their sin). He, (Moses) therefore, said before Him, “If so, kill me first” (Sifrei Bamidbar 91).

And if Thou deal thus with me, kill me, I pray Thee, out of hand, if I have found favour in Thy sight; and let me not look upon my wretchedness.’

And say thou unto the people: Sanctify yourselves against to-morrow, and ye shall eat flesh; for ye have wept in the ears of the LORD, saying: Would that we were given flesh to eat! for it was well with us in Egypt; therefore the LORD will give you flesh, and ye shall eat.

ואל אראה ברעתי AND LET ME NOT SEE MY EVIL — It ought to have written (according to the Midrashic explanation above) “and let me not see their evil”, only that Scripture modified the expression (i.e. it used a euphemistic expression referring the evil to himself instead of to the whole people). This is one of the variations occurring in the Torah such as writers make for the purpose of modifying and improving the phrase (cf. Rashi on Genesis 18:22 and Midrash Tanchuma, Beshalach 16).

ואל אראה ברעתי, the result of my inadequacy as a leader. If I had to witness this, this would be worse for me than dying at this time.

And Moses said: ‘The people, among whom I am, are six hundred thousand men on foot; and yet Thou hast said: I will give them flesh, that they may eat a whole month!

הצאן והבקר ישחט SHALL THE FLOCKS AND HERDS BE SLAUGHTERED [FOR THEM TO SUFFICE THEM?] — This is one of those four things (Biblical passages) which R. Akiba interpreted in a certain way but R. Simeon did not interpret them similarly. Rabbi Akiba says: שש מאות אלף רגלי ... ואתה אמרת בשר אתן להם ואכלו חדש ימים הצאן ובקר — all this is to be taken literally and the words ומצא להם should be rendered by “would it suffice for them?”, in the same sense as we find this word used in (Leviticus 25:26) “and he have sufficient (ומצא כדי) for redeeming it" (ומצא להם is taken as the equivalent of ומצא כדי להם). Now — R. Akiba continued — which case was worse? This or that when Moses exclaimed, (Numbers 20:10) Hear now, ye rebels!?” Obviously this case here was worse, only because he did not utter his doubt in public, Scripture (God) showed some regard for him and did not punish him, whilst that sin at Meriba took place in public, therefore Scripture does not show any regard for him. Rabbi Simeon, however, says: “God forbid!” — “Such an idea never entered the mind of that righteous man! He of whom Scripture writes, (Numbers 12:7) ‘He is faithful in all my house’ — would he have said, ‘The Omnipresent cannot supply sufficient for us!’ But what he said was this: ‘[the people, amongst whom I am, are] six hundred thousand footmen; and Thou hast said, I will give them flesh, for a whole month — and then You want to kill a nation so great as this is?! Shall the flocks and the herds be slaughtered for them that they (the people) should immediately be killed, and this eating should be their last (lit., should satisfy them for ever: ומצא להם)?! Is this Your praise? Do people say to an ass, take (eat) this Kor of barley and then we will cut off thy head!’? The Holy One, blessed be He, thereupon said to him, ‘But if I do not give them flesh, they will say that My hand has waxed short; would it be pleasing to you that the hand of the Lord should appear in their eyes to have waxed short? — Let them and a hundred like them perish but let not My hand appear to them to have waxed short even for a single moment’!” (Tosefta Sotah 6:4)

עתה תראה היקרך דברי THOU SHALT SEE NOW WHETHER MY WORD SHALL COME TO PASS UNTO THEE [OR NOT]. — R. Gamliel, the son of R. Judah ha-Nasi said, “The dialogue took the following course: Moses said, “One can never understand a babbler! (One can never fathom his meaning.) Since they are merely seeking a pretext You will never satisfy them (the meaning of the text is: If all the cattle in the world were slaughtered for them, ומצא להם, would this suffice them, i. e., would they be satisfied with that?), in the end they will always argue against You. If You give them flesh of large cattle (oxen) they will say ‘We wanted that of small cattle (sheep)’; if You will give them flesh of sheep, they will say We wanted that of oxen’, or, ‘we wanted wild beasts (venison) and fowls’, ‘we wanted fish and locusts!’ Thereupon He said to him, ‘If that be so and I give them nothing at all, they will say that My hand has waxed short!’ “Moses thereupon said, “I will go and appease them”. He answered him: “Thou shalt see now whether My word shall come to pass unto thee — for they will not listen to thee”. Moses went to appease them and said to them, “Is the hand of the Lord waxed short? Behold, he continued with the words used later by the Psalmist, (Psalms 78:20): “He smote the rock that the waters gushed out, etc. Surely then he can give bread also [and can provide flesh for His people!]”. But they (the Israelites) said: “This what you have said is only a compromise (a way of satisfying us). He has really no power to grant our request!” This is what Scripture means by: “and Moses went out and spake to the people [the words of the Lord]” (i.e. he told them the words used by the Lord only with a different implication). Since, however, they would not listen to him, he gathered the seventy men of the elders [of the people] etc.” (cf. Sifrei Bamidbar 95:1; Tosefta Sota 6:4).

At any rate, הצאן ובקר ישחט להם ומצא להם? how will that suffice to assuage their complaints, seeing that what they are really asking for is only in order to provoke, as pointed out in Psalms 78,18 וינסו א-ל בלבבם, “they provoked G’d in their hearts.” No doubt, just as they provoked, tested Your patience with this, they will do this with other foods, for no valid reason. The problem is that You will not deprive them of their freedom of will, as we know from the axiom “all is within the power of heaven except control of who will possess reverence for G’d.” (B’rachot 33).