הלכה על במדבר 11:4

Despite the fact that it was permitted to humans to eat meat, one should be very careful with the desire that is connected to the eating of meat, which tends to make a person go after brutishness and sin. And so we find that the desire to eat meat caused Israel to sin, as it is written (Numbers 11:4) "Now the riffraff among them craved a craving and moreover the Children of Israel wept again and said: Who will give us meat to eat?" And Moshe our teacher complained to Hashem: "From where should I [get] meat to give to this entire people, when they weep on me, saying: Give us meat so that we may eat! I am not able, I alone, to carry this entire people, for it is too heavy for me!" (Numbers 11:13-14). And so Moshe was commanded to answer Israel that their punishment was going to come in the fulfillment of their request: "for a monthful of days, until it comes out of your nostrils and becomes for you something-disgusting because you have spurned Hashem who is among you, by weeping before him, saying: Why, now, did we leave Egypt?" (Numbers 11:20) " and a rush-of-wind moved from Hashem and swept in quails from the sea... the people arose all that day and all night, and all the morrow day and gathered the quail; the least gathered ten homers [a large measure, some say a homer is 30 gallons] and they slaughtered all around the camp. The meat was still between their teeth, not yet completely chewed, when the anger of Hashem flared up among the people, and Hashem struck down among the people an exceedingly great striking. So they called the name of that place: Kivrot Ha-Taava/ Burial-Places of the Craving, for there they buried the people who had-the-craving"(Numbers 11:31-34). From this we learned for the generations how severe and dangerous the exaggerated desire to eat meat is, that it extinguished the light of the soul and kills the body.

(Chet) [Yet] I saw ‘difficult visions’: Behold, it is written in Parashat Behaalotecha (Num. 11:35-12:1), “Then the people set out from Kivrot-Hataavah to Hatserot and were in Hatserot. Miriam and Aharon spoke against Moshe because of the Cushite woman he had married.” And Tosafot on Yevamot 62a (s. v. dekhtiv emor lehem) asked why it is that they waited a long time after the giving of the Torah to speak about Moshe (since their problem was that he had separated from his wife earlier, from when the Torah was given). And they answered that – according to that which is found in the Talmud Yerushalmi³¹The common text of Tosafot has the citation as Sifrei and presumably refers to the account in Sifrei Zuta 12:1. – the seventy elders were chosen at Kivrot-Hataavah. And [at that time] Miriam said to Tsipporah, “Happy are the wives of these [men] that were chosen for greatness.” Tsipporah [however answered], “Woe to them, as behold my husband Moshe separated from me from the day that the Holy One, blessed be He, started speaking to him.” And then the matter became known to them. See there. And it appears [that this is connected to] that which we find there (Num. 11:4-7) that “they desired a desire […] and they said, ‘Who will feed us meat? We remember the fish that we used to eat free in Egypt, etc. Now our souls are dry; there is nothing at all but this manna in our eyes.’ And the manna was like coriander seed, and in color it was like bdellium.” And Rashi (Rashi on Numbers 11:7) explained, “He who said that (i.e. the previous verse) did not say this […]; but rather [it is] the Holy One, blessed be He, who had, ‘And the manna was like coriander seed,’ written in the Torah (even though no one said it).” And it is [further] written (Num. 11:10), “And Moshe heard the people weeping, each family apart, each person at the entrance of his tent.” And Rashi (on this verse) explained [that] “each family apart”³²Le’mishpechoteichem, which can also be read as, for their families. [means], “because of family affairs – because of the sexual prohibitions [of blood-relatives] that had been forbidden to them.” See there. And that is astonishing; as what does the quarrel of the manna have to do with matters of sexual prohibitions? And it appears that it can be explained according to what the Rabbis, may their memory be blessed, said about that which is found in the Gemara (Shabbat 88a), “‘And they stood at the lowermost part of the mountain’³³Be’tachtit haHar, which can also be read as, in the lowermost part of the mountain. (Exod. 19:17) – […] teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, overturned the mountain above [the Jews] like a tub, [and said to them], ‘If you accept the Torah, excellent; but if not, there will be your burial.’” And it was asked [that] behold, they already assented and said (Exod. 24:7), “We will do and hear!”³⁴While this is essentially the same question that he cites from the Midrash Tanchuma in Paragraph Zayin, he will now proceed to give a different answer. And it is written in Gur Aryeh³⁵Gur Aryeh on Exodus 19:17. that it is not possible for the Torah to be received by choice – that they would accept it if they wanted to, and not accept it if they did not want to – but rather the Holy One, blessed be He, is showing them that the Torah is imperative for them (that it had to be accepted by them). And something imperative exists permanently; as it is found in the Midrash, that concerning a [woman] forced [to have sexual relations], it is written (Deut. 22:19), “he may not send her away all of his days.”³⁶This midrash is unknown. See Yehoshua Hartman’s edition of Gur Aryeh ad loc., Note 273; and M. Kasher’s Torah Shelemah ad loc., Note 224. See there. And behold we have found that they desired a desire; meaning that they did not have any physical desire and – as is written by (Rabbi Moshe) Alshekh (on Num. 11:4) – they desired that they would have desire. See there. And according to what I have written, the reason is that on account of the manna – that was from the minister of the Torah, and was the bread of mighty ones – all of their wish and yearning was only for Torah. And ‘their souls were dry’ and empty from all physical desire. And [so] they desired desire, such that the receiving of the Torah could be of their wish and wanting, like [when] they said, “We will do and hear” – as no one wishes forced love. Therefore they quarreled about the manna and its forcing the love of Torah [upon them]. And [when] they said, “We remember the fish that we used to eat free (chinam) in Egypt,” its explanation is [that it was] without force, but rather that [it was that] which we chose and which appealed to us. As this is the understanding of the word chinam, as is elucidated in Radak’s³⁷R. David Kimchi (Provence, 1160-1235) was a Biblical commentator and grammarian. Book of Roots under the root, chanan (graced). [And the meaning of] “Now our souls are dry; there is nothing at all but this manna,” is that we were forced, and we want that the choice be in our hands. However we would also eat the manna by choice. As if the manna were not ‘good to eat and appealing to the sight,’ we would have needed force; but in fact, “the manna was like coriander seed and in color it was like bdellium,” and we would certainly eat of it.³⁸In this way, one no longer has to resort to Rashi’s answer that this phrase was added by God to the quote of the people which accordingly ended abruptly. However all of the desires would [then] not be removed from us and the receiving of the Torah would be with wanting and choice – as [when] they said, “We shall hear and do.”

(Chet) [Yet] I saw ‘difficult visions’: Behold, it is written in Parashat Behaalotecha (Num. 11:35-12:1), “Then the people set out from Kivrot-Hataavah to Hatserot and were in Hatserot. Miriam and Aharon spoke against Moshe because of the Cushite woman he had married.” And Tosafot on Yevamot 62a (s. v. dekhtiv emor lehem) asked why it is that they waited a long time after the giving of the Torah to speak about Moshe (since their problem was that he had separated from his wife earlier, from when the Torah was given). And they answered that – according to that which is found in the Talmud Yerushalmi³¹The common text of Tosafot has the citation as Sifrei and presumably refers to the account in Sifrei Zuta 12:1. – the seventy elders were chosen at Kivrot-Hataavah. And [at that time] Miriam said to Tsipporah, “Happy are the wives of these [men] that were chosen for greatness.” Tsipporah [however answered], “Woe to them, as behold my husband Moshe separated from me from the day that the Holy One, blessed be He, started speaking to him.” And then the matter became known to them. See there. And it appears [that this is connected to] that which we find there (Num. 11:4-7) that “they desired a desire […] and they said, ‘Who will feed us meat? We remember the fish that we used to eat free in Egypt, etc. Now our souls are dry; there is nothing at all but this manna in our eyes.’ And the manna was like coriander seed, and in color it was like bdellium.” And Rashi (Rashi on Numbers 11:7) explained, “He who said that (i.e. the previous verse) did not say this […]; but rather [it is] the Holy One, blessed be He, who had, ‘And the manna was like coriander seed,’ written in the Torah (even though no one said it).” And it is [further] written (Num. 11:10), “And Moshe heard the people weeping, each family apart, each person at the entrance of his tent.” And Rashi (on this verse) explained [that] “each family apart”³²Le’mishpechoteichem, which can also be read as, for their families. [means], “because of family affairs – because of the sexual prohibitions [of blood-relatives] that had been forbidden to them.” See there. And that is astonishing; as what does the quarrel of the manna have to do with matters of sexual prohibitions? And it appears that it can be explained according to what the Rabbis, may their memory be blessed, said about that which is found in the Gemara (Shabbat 88a), “‘And they stood at the lowermost part of the mountain’³³Be’tachtit haHar, which can also be read as, in the lowermost part of the mountain. (Exod. 19:17) – […] teaches that the Holy One, Blessed be He, overturned the mountain above [the Jews] like a tub, [and said to them], ‘If you accept the Torah, excellent; but if not, there will be your burial.’” And it was asked [that] behold, they already assented and said (Exod. 24:7), “We will do and hear!”³⁴While this is essentially the same question that he cites from the Midrash Tanchuma in Paragraph Zayin, he will now proceed to give a different answer. And it is written in Gur Aryeh³⁵Gur Aryeh on Exodus 19:17. that it is not possible for the Torah to be received by choice – that they would accept it if they wanted to, and not accept it if they did not want to – but rather the Holy One, blessed be He, is showing them that the Torah is imperative for them (that it had to be accepted by them). And something imperative exists permanently; as it is found in the Midrash, that concerning a [woman] forced [to have sexual relations], it is written (Deut. 22:19), “he may not send her away all of his days.”³⁶This midrash is unknown. See Yehoshua Hartman’s edition of Gur Aryeh ad loc., Note 273; and M. Kasher’s Torah Shelemah ad loc., Note 224. See there. And behold we have found that they desired a desire; meaning that they did not have any physical desire and – as is written by (Rabbi Moshe) Alshekh (on Num. 11:4) – they desired that they would have desire. See there. And according to what I have written, the reason is that on account of the manna – that was from the minister of the Torah, and was the bread of mighty ones – all of their wish and yearning was only for Torah. And ‘their souls were dry’ and empty from all physical desire. And [so] they desired desire, such that the receiving of the Torah could be of their wish and wanting, like [when] they said, “We will do and hear” – as no one wishes forced love. Therefore they quarreled about the manna and its forcing the love of Torah [upon them]. And [when] they said, “We remember the fish that we used to eat free (chinam) in Egypt,” its explanation is [that it was] without force, but rather that [it was that] which we chose and which appealed to us. As this is the understanding of the word chinam, as is elucidated in Radak’s³⁷R. David Kimchi (Provence, 1160-1235) was a Biblical commentator and grammarian. Book of Roots under the root, chanan (graced). [And the meaning of] “Now our souls are dry; there is nothing at all but this manna,” is that we were forced, and we want that the choice be in our hands. However we would also eat the manna by choice. As if the manna were not ‘good to eat and appealing to the sight,’ we would have needed force; but in fact, “the manna was like coriander seed and in color it was like bdellium,” and we would certainly eat of it.³⁸In this way, one no longer has to resort to Rashi’s answer that this phrase was added by God to the quote of the people which accordingly ended abruptly. However all of the desires would [then] not be removed from us and the receiving of the Torah would be with wanting and choice – as [when] they said, “We shall hear and do.”