פירוש על במדבר 11:4

והאספסף AND THE THRONG — This was the mixed multitude that had gathered themselves unto them when they left Egypt (the word is from the root אסף, “to gather”) (Sifrei Bamidbar 86). — The next words of the Biblical text must be inverted to read as follows:

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?”

התאוו תאוה, “they induced a craving in themselves.” Nachmanides writes that actually they did not lack anything at all as they had enough manna to satisfy each one of them, and they were able to satisfy their palates by wishing how that manna should taste each time they ate it. However, they abused these powers of imagination and wished the manna to taste revoltingly in order to have an excuse to complain about not getting proper food.

והאספסף, “and the rabble,” these people were the fellow travelers, they were not natural born Israelites. They were described elsewhere as ערב רב, “a mixed multitude.” The word אספסף, is a doubling of certain letters just as we find in the word סחרחר, or חמרמרו מעי in Psalms 38,11 (reeling) or in Lamentations 1,20 (my entrails are distressed).

And wept with them. Rashi is answering the question: “Bnei Yisroel also began to weep” implies that the mixed multitude also wept, however it is not written that they cried. Therefore Rashi explains “Bnei Yisroel turned, also, and wept with them” meaning that the word “also” refers to “began to have strong cravings” — that the mixed multitude turned away from Hashem and craved meat. Then the Bnei Yisroel also turned and craved meat and afterwards wept with them, meaning that both wept together.

AND THE MIXED MULTITUDE THAT WAS AMONG THEM ‘HITHAVU TA’AVAH’ (FELL A LUSTING). The meaning of this [double expression, which translates literally as “lusted a lust,” is] that they had nothing lacking in the wilderness, for they had plenty of manna and they could make of it all different kinds of delicacies with distinguished flavors, as Scripture relates further on, but they goaded themselves to a great desire, as if they wanted to eat [even] charcoal or earth and other bad foods.

V. 4. וְהָאסְפסוף, wieוְהָאסַפְסוף , das ערב רב, das sie aus Ägypten mit sich in ihre Mitte äufgenommen hatten. Die Verdoppelung bezeichnet die häufige Wiederholung der Aufnahme, somit die Menge der Aufgenommenen. Indem das א dabei quiesziert, ist damit die Nuance der Bedeutung gegeben, dass die Aufnahme eine mehr äußerliche geblieben, die Aufgenommenen eben nicht in, das Wesen und die Einheit der sie aufnehmenden nationalen Individualität eingegangen. Es war mehr ein ספף als ein אסף. Israel war ihnen mehr סף, das "Gefäß" und die "Schwelle", sie waren äußerlich von ihm umfangen, gingen aber nicht auf und nicht ein in sein innerstes Wesen. התאוו תאוה: es war nicht eine durch die äußeren Umstände willenlos bei ihnen geweckte, sondern gerne und willkürlich von ihnen genährte Lüsternheit. וישבו ויבכו וגו׳: das התאונן (V. 1) war ja auch ein inneres Weinen, und ist daher das וישבו ויבכו ganz entsprechend. Ist unsere Auffassung des רבבות אלפי ישראל (Kap. 10, 36) nicht irrig, so stände auch diese Verleitung des Volkes durch das האספסוף אשר בקרבו im schroffen Kontraste zu der dort ausgesprochenen idealen und ihrer Verwirklichung entgegenreifenden Bestimmung Israels. Israel in seiner numerischen Winzigkeit sollte und wird einst den geistigen und sittlichen Kern bilden, an welchen sich die Myriaden zu Gott zurückkehrender Völker anschließen werden — und hier verfällt es noch selber dem entsittlichenden Einflusse einer unter ihm weilenden unveredelten fremden Minorität! —

'והאספסוף אשר בקרבו התאוו תאוה וגו, “and the mixed multitude that were amongst the people, etc.” everything written here until the beginning of verse 30 when Moses selects the elders who are to assist him, occurred during the first three days after the people had moved away from Mount Sinai.

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

AND THEY SAID: WHO SHALL GIVE US FLESH TO EAT. [They used this expression who shall give us] because there was not enough meat for the whole people to have every day, although they did eat it many times, for some of them had herds, but [only] the important people ate it [every day], as happens in camps and places where prices are high. But about fish they said, We remember the fish,¹⁵⁹Verse 5. like one who remembers forgotten things, since they had not eaten any fish from the day that they left Egypt until now.

מי יאכלנו בשר?, They said this in order to test if He would permit incestuous relations to His people (compare Psalms 78,18 where Assaph says וינסו א-ל בלבבם לשאל אוכל לנפשם, they asked openly for meat, and in their hearts for sexual gratification other than by their wives).

ויאמרו מי יאכילנו בשר, “they said: ‘who is going to feed us meat?’” Nachmanides explains this request by saying that not all the people had meat to eat on a daily basis, even though most of them had access to meat on frequent occasions, as a good part of the people owned livestock and they would slaughter them regularly. The adults would eat of these animals, whereas the younger people were not so lucky. The fact is that, seeing that they spoke of “remembering we used to eat fish in Egypt without needing to pay for them,” (verse 5) indicates that as far as even fish were concerned they could do no more than ”remember” it

את הקשאים usw. Wir folgen in der Übersetzung der herkömmlichen Auffassung dieser Pflanzennamen, ohne dafür eine etymologische Begründung geben zu können.

And the reason they begun with meat and ended with fish is that fish points to promiscuity in sexual relations more than the expression "meat", since fish reproduce more than any animal alive, and they were using the word "flesh" as a compromise: "if only we ate meat" actually means "we want to be uninhibited in sexual relations as the other animals, even though we won't be like the fish - at least they did not ask all of it. But in any instance they did say "we remember the fish that we used to eat free in Egypt" (Numbers 11:5): when we were in Egypt all was permitted to us, even as to live like the fish, and now, let us at least be like the other animals, and this is what they mean by "if only we ate meat". And if one listens closely [one can see that] all this is very much like the simple meaning of the text, their intent was to ask for meat, which is the food that most warms a person up, and expands the sexual desires, and this is expressed in the language of "gluttonous craving" [the Hebrew expression is doubled 'they craved a craving'], meaning, they craved for a food that would enhance their sexual cravings. ...

The letter א (though silent anyways) is not read.

מי יאכלנו בשר WHO SHALL GIVE US FLESH TO EAT? — But did they not have flesh? Has it not been already stated, (Exodus 12:38) “and a mixed multitude went up with them and flocks and herds, [even very much cattle]”?! If you say, “They had already eaten them”, then I reply, “But is it not stated at a later period, when they were about to enter the Land, (Numbers 32:1), “Now the children of Reuben had cattle in a very great multitude”? But the truth is that they were only seeking a pretext (Sifrei Bamidbar 86).

וישובו ויבכו גם בני ישראל, “and in due course even the elite of the people, the בני ישראל, also joined the weeping of discontent that had been started by the mixed multitude. This is when they expressed their urge to be given meat to eat.

מי יאכילנו בשר, “if only someone would feed us meat!” The quails which had materialized on the evening before the manna started its daily appearance (Exodus 16,13) had come to an end some time ago. From this verse we understand the substance of the people’s complaint.