הֲצֹ֧אן וּבָקָ֛ר יִשָּׁחֵ֥ט לָהֶ֖ם וּמָצָ֣א לָהֶ֑ם אִ֣ם אֶֽת־כָּל־דְּגֵ֥י הַיָּ֛ם יֵאָסֵ֥ף לָהֶ֖ם וּמָצָ֥א לָהֶֽם׃ (פ)
Apakah kambing domba dan lembu sapi akan disembelih bagi mereka, sehingga cukup bagi mereka? Ataukah semua ikan di laut akan dikumpulkan bagi mereka, sehingga cukup bagi mereka?”
Rashi
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)
Kli Yakar
Should sheep and cattle be slaughtered for them? The understanding from Rashi’s commentary is as if Moses doubted God’s ability, heaven forbid. And because this was said in private, the Holy One, blessed be He, spared him. But all commentators disagree with this interpretation and tried to justify Moses’s words, each according to his understanding.
The most correct interpretation of all is derived from the phrase and it would suffice for them, because the meaning implies that slaughtering and gathering for them is possible in itself, but “sufficing them” is not possible. Since they are only seeking a pretext, even if you give them all the sheep and cattle and all the fish in the sea in the world, it would not suffice for them — it would not be enough for them because they would continue to rebel and seek pretexts.
This seems to be the meaning from the statement if all the fish in the sea were gathered for them and suffice for them. Why repeat for them twice? He could have combined them and said “if all the fish in the sea were gathered and suffice for them.” But he made two distinct parts because one of them is possible and the other is impossible, since they are seeking a pretext.
It’s possible that Rashi also believed that Moses never doubted God’s ability at all, and understood from his words the aforementioned interpretation or some other interpretation offered by the commentators. However, Rashi criticized him for saying his words in a manner that could give mistaken people room to err and say that he doubted God’s ability, heaven forbid, which would lead to desecration of God’s name. But since it was said in private, and he wasn’t concerned that the blind ones in the Hebrew camp might hear, he wasn’t careful with his language, as he was speaking with God, who understands his intentions, and not with those who err. But Listen, you rebels was said in public and all Israel heard it, as is known, therefore he was punished.
The most correct interpretation of all is derived from the phrase and it would suffice for them, because the meaning implies that slaughtering and gathering for them is possible in itself, but “sufficing them” is not possible. Since they are only seeking a pretext, even if you give them all the sheep and cattle and all the fish in the sea in the world, it would not suffice for them — it would not be enough for them because they would continue to rebel and seek pretexts.
This seems to be the meaning from the statement if all the fish in the sea were gathered for them and suffice for them. Why repeat for them twice? He could have combined them and said “if all the fish in the sea were gathered and suffice for them.” But he made two distinct parts because one of them is possible and the other is impossible, since they are seeking a pretext.
It’s possible that Rashi also believed that Moses never doubted God’s ability at all, and understood from his words the aforementioned interpretation or some other interpretation offered by the commentators. However, Rashi criticized him for saying his words in a manner that could give mistaken people room to err and say that he doubted God’s ability, heaven forbid, which would lead to desecration of God’s name. But since it was said in private, and he wasn’t concerned that the blind ones in the Hebrew camp might hear, he wasn’t careful with his language, as he was speaking with God, who understands his intentions, and not with those who err. But Listen, you rebels was said in public and all Israel heard it, as is known, therefore he was punished.
Sforno
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).