Commento su Esodo 16:20

ויותרו אנשים BUT SOME MEN LEFT OF IT — Dathan and Abiram (Shemot Rabbah 24:10; cf. Rashi on Exodus 2:13).

AND IT BRED WORMS, AND IT STANK. “This is a verse that is to be transposed, because [the manna that was left over until the morning] must have first stunk and afterwards become wormy, just as it is said, and it did not stink, neither was there any worm therein,³⁹⁶Further, Verse 24. this being the way of all things that become wormy.” Thus Rashi’s language. Now if the manna had become wormy in a natural way, as is the way of all things that become wormy, Rashi’s statement would be correct. But since the manna became wormy in a miraculous way, it is possible that it bred worms first,³⁹⁷For had it given off a stench first, they would have sensed it at night, and they would have disposed of it. This was why it became wormy first, and Dathan and Abiram, who left it until the morning, contrary to Moses’ command, did not know it. In the morning it stank and it became known to all, and Moses was angry with them (Tur). The source of this reasoning is found in Shemoth Rabbah, mentioned further on in the text. and there is thus no need for inverting] the verse. Moreover, the verse which states [concerning the manna which they retained for Sabbath morning], and it did not stink, neither was there any worm therein,³⁹⁶Further, Verse 24. proves that it was so, [i.e., that the manna left over by Dathan and Abiram bred worms first and then stank]. Had it not become wormy until it first stank, when Scripture says [concerning the manna left for the Sabbath], and it did not stink, it would thereby have already assured us that there was no worm therein. Why then should it repeat afterwards, neither was there any worm therein? If however, as the plain meaning of Scripture indicates, the manna that was left over until the morning by Dathan and Abiram became wormy first [in a supernatural way], it became necessary for Scripture to state that this manna [that was left over for the Sabbath] did not stink, nor did any worm come therein at all. Even things which become wormy in a natural way do not give off a stench unless they are warm and moist, but dry things only become wormy and do not give off an odor at all, just as wormy wood or fruits that become wormy when still growing or [immediately] afterwards. Thus Scripture relates that this manna [which Dathan and Abiram left over on a weekday, also stank [in the morning] by a miracle. And in Eileh Shemoth Rabbah we find that the Rabbis have said:³⁹⁸Shemoth Rabbah 25:14. “Is there anything that first becomes wormy and then gives off a stench? It is only that the Holy One, blessed be He, wanting to expose the deeds [of Dathan and Abiram] to the people, therefore caused [the left-over manna] to give off no stench at night lest they throw it out. Instead, during the entire night, it formed rows upon rows of worms, and at once Moses was wroth with them.”

ויקצף עליהם משה, the reason that Moses was angry was that the leftover manna was not the result of it being more than the people could eat, but because it represented an attempt by the people to find out if what they had been warned of would really happen.

וירם תולעים, it developed worms. The reason the Torah tells us about this prior to telling us that the left-over manna rotted is, that normally we find worms develop only in foods which are sweet whereas these do not rot and stink. Since we have been told that the normal taste of the manna was like that of wafers covered with honey, we would have expected it to develop worms but not to rot and to give off a foul odour. The Torah therefore tells us that not only did it develop worms but it also rotted and began to stink.

וירם תולעים ויבאש, “it became infested with worms and stank.” Rashi claims that the Torah reports matters in inverted order, i.e. that it began to stink before worms infested it. He bases himself on the following sequence (16,24) ולא הבאיש ורמה לא היתה בו “it did not cause a stink, and had not produced worms.” Nachmanides writes that Rashi would be correct if matters had occurred in a natural sequence. Seeing that nothing connected to the manna could be judged by phenomena we are familiar with in our world, there is nothing strange in the Torah also reporting the process of manna going to rot as not conforming to natural phenomena. The reason why G’d arranged for the sequence of decomposition followed by stench, followed by worms, to be reversed, was that had the usual sequence been followed the stench during the night would already have alerted the Israelites and they would have discarded all the leftover manna immediately. In such an event Moses would not have any chance to vent his anger on those people who had disobeyed his instructions. By writing the inverted sequence on one occasion and the normal sequence on the other occasion, the Torah refers to this very point that we are dealing with another supernatural phenomenon and makes this quite clear.

Dosson and Aviram. [Rashi knows this] because it is written אנשים . Anywhere that it says “ אנשים ” [in a negative context], or נצים , it refers to Dosson and Aviram.

(Exodus 16:19-20) "And Moses said to them: Let no man leave over of it until morning. And they did not heed Moses": These were the faithless in Israel. "and men left over of it": Good men did not leave over; men who were not good, did. "and it raised worms and it was rotted": This verse is inverted. Does it raise worms and then rot? First it rots, and then it raises worms, as in (Ibid. 24) "and it did not rot and there was no worm in it." "and Moses was wroth with them": He manifested anger against them and asked them "Why did you do this?"

V. 20. וירם וגו׳, rad. רמם im Kal und Niphal, וירם כבוד וגו׳ Jecheskiel 10, 4 הרמו מתוך העדה Bamidbar 17, 10: sich von der Stelle erheben. Der Übergang einer leblosen, somit bewegungslosen, am Boden ruhenden Masse in lebendige, sich selbst bewegende Wesen, wie diese Erscheinung bei der Fäulnis hervortritt, kann nicht treffender als durch רמם ausgedrückt werden. Das bis dahin durch die Schwerkraft der Materie an den Boden gefesselte Pünktchen fängt an, sich vom Boden zu erheben: es lebt! Daher heißt רִמָה der in Fäulnis sich erzeugende Wurm, und das Sicherheben der toten Masse zum Leben heißt: רמם. Aus diesem Ausdrucke ist übrigens nichts hinsichtlich der großen Streitfrage einer Generatio äquivoca zu folgern, da, selbst wenn eine solche Erzeugung aus Eiern entstehen sollte, der Ausdruck der lebendig gewordenen toten Masse den Vorgang schildert, wie er sich den Sinnen darstellt. — תולעת ,תולע aber, entweder von ילע, gleichbedeutend mit ושמת שכין בלועך ,לוע (Prov. 23, 2) dem Chald. für לחי Kinnbacken, oder von תלע, der Wurzel von מתלעות עול (Job 29, 17) מתלעות לביא (Joel 1.6) ebenfalls Kinnbacken, Name für die von außen kommenden, die Stoffe zerfressenden Würmer, אין כחה אלא בפה, wie חז׳׳ל sich zur Stelle אל תיראי תולעת יעקב ausdrücken. Die im Manna sich erzeugenden Würmer waren nicht solche, wie sie gewöhnlich aus Fäulnis entstehen, vielmehr umgekehrt, sie waren nicht die Folge, sondern die Ursache der Fäulnis, sie gingen der Fäulnis voran, nicht ובאש וירם תולעים, sondern וירם תולעים ויבאש, was daher keineswegs ein מקרא מסורס zu sein scheint. Der Beweis aus V. 24 scheint vielmehr dagegen zu sprechen. Wenn die Würmer aus der Fäulnis entstanden wären, so hätte es nur heißen dürfen ולא הבאיש, dass dann keine Würmer darin sich gezeigt hätten, verstände sich von selbst; oder es hätte dann eben umgekehrt heißen müssen: es zeigte sich nicht nur kein Wurm darin, sondern es war nicht einmal faul geworden. So aber heißt es: es war nicht nur nicht faul geworden, sondern es war nicht einmal ein Wurm darin. — Diese Erscheinung lehrte für das Nahrungsstreben: was der Mensch gegen Gottes Willen, in Besitz vergötterndem, Gott verleugnendem Sinne aufspeichert, das macht Gott den Würmern verfallen und es wird faul.

וירם תולעים AND IT BRED WORMS — the word וירם is of the same meaning and root as רִמָּה, worm.

Derived from רמה . [ רמה and תולעים are synonyms, so] it is like saying והתליעו תולעים . וירם is not derived from הורמה , in which case it would mean: “the manna brought up worms,” for we never find וירם as a transitive verb.

Verse 24 proves that our interpretation is correct, seeing that in that verse the absence of the foul odour is mentioned prior to the absence of worms. By reporting matters in that sequence the Torah tells us that even the worms which would normally develop did not develop overnight.

Die bei dem sechstägigen Mannalesen zu machenden Erfahrungen geben somit bei dem dadurch konstituierten jüdischen Nahrungssystem sofort die bedeutsamsten Lehren für dasselbe in alle Zukunft hin. Es wird die Trägheit, die Habgier, der Geiz und der verkümmernde Kleinmut gegeißelt, und es wird der Fleiß, die Genügsamkeit, der genießende Frohsinn und die gottvertrauende Zuversicht gekrönt.

ויבאש AND IT STANK — This is an inverted verse, because first it must have stunk and afterwards have become wormy, just as it is said, (v. 24) “And it did not stink and there was no worm therein — for this is the way of all things that become wormy (Mekhilta d'Rabbi Yishmael 16:20).

This verse is inverted. . . It seems to me that it is not inverted. The manna was a heavenly food (see Tehillim 78:25), and it was not natural for it to become putrid. So first it became wormy, and because of the worms it became putrid. (Maharshal) But what he says seems incorrect, for it is written, “. . .As Moshe had commanded. It did not become putrid, and it had no worms” (v. 24). [This shows that the order was first putrid and then wormy, as Rashi said.]

I have noted that the Mechilta does not explain things the way we do; perhaps the author felt that the development of the worms preceded the decomposure of the manna although usually decomposure is the cause of the worms emerging (even though sweet foods do not rot and create foul odours).

I believe it is likely that the Mechilta felt that the message of the Torah in relating these details was that worms by definition are the product of something which has gone rotten. Onkelos translates the word ויבאש as רע ביש, "bad and evil." Evil may be defined as the result of ignoring or violating the commandments of the Torah; a person who commits sins will eventually sprout worms. The mystical dimension of the existence of worms, i.e. parasites, is the sin committed by Adam when he ate from the tree of knowledge. It was an interaction of the fruit and the air (which he had polluted by his sin) which produced the first worm. All this is alluded to in the strangely worded וירם תולעים, "it raised worms," the cause being ויבאש, that something sinful had been committed with the manna. The Torah confirms this by its long-winded report in verse 24 where the Israelites are described as conforming with the instructions Moses had given concerning the treatment of the manna which had fallen on Friday. The thrust of that whole verse is to inform us that since no violation of the law had been committed there was no rotting and no worms were generated. When we are told in various stories in the Talmud that the bodies of certain righteous people did not produce worms after death, this merely confirms the nature and origin of worms. Compare Baba Metzia 84 about the single worm that grew out of the ear of Rabbi Eleazar son of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai. That single worm was attributed to a sin committed with that ear.