출애굽기 16:15의 주석

מן הוא means this is something prepared for food, as in (Daniel 1:5) “And the king appointed (וימן) for them,”.

ויאמרו איש אל אחיו מן הוא, They said to one another it is manna, etc. We need to understand why this whole verse is necessary. Perhaps G'd caused them to say מן instead of מה, and this remained the name of this heavenly bread. This would correspond to a commentary on Psalms 46,9 in Berachot 7 where the word Shammot, desolation, is read instead as Shemot, names. According to the Talmud, G'd Himself named different phenomena in His world. The words כי לא ידעו, "for he (the people) did not know what it was," would be the reason why G'd had to supply the name. This may have been the reason the Israelites eventually lamented the nature of the manna. Perhaps the Israelites were very clever calling it מן as they realised (verse 31) that this word itself was something unusual and reflected the Spirit of G'd.

ויאמרו איש אל אחיו מן הוא, seeing that they did not know what it was; this is also the interpretation offered by Dunash in a book called “answers of Dunash,’ aimed at the commentary of Menachem, arguing that the end of the verse proves that this must be the meaning.

ויאמרו איש אל אחיו מן הוא?, they said to one another: ”what is it?” some commentators believe that the word מן is derived from the root מנה as in Daniel 1,10 מנה את מאכלכם, “he has provided your food,” although here the word appears in the text before Moses had told the people that this was to serve as their bread. Other commentators link the word to the expression מנה אחת אפים, “a gift of SPECIAL value.” (Samuel I 1,5) The final letter ה is missing in the word מן, according to that interpretation.

מן הוא, “it is a portion (of food)!” The word is derived from מנה, a gift.” we find the word in Samuel I 1,8 מנה אחת אפים, “a double-portion (of gifts).” Here too the arrival of the manna was a gift for Moses (who had not even had to ask G’d for it). The Torah had to explain this as the Israelites did not know what to make of this new phenomenon. Seeing that they did not know what it was they named it “a gift” (from heaven). Rabbeinu Chananel writes: the words מן הוא mean מאין הוא “where does it come from,” as they did not know its origin.

מן הוא; as if the Torah had written מאין הוא?, “where did it come from?”

(Exodus 16:15) "And the children of Israel saw it, and each said to his neighbor 'man hu.'" As one says to his friend "mah hu" ("What is it?") The expounders of metaphors said: Israel called it "man" ("sustenance"), as it is written (Ibid.) "And Moses said to them: This is the 'bread' that the L-d has given to you to eat." (viz. Ibid. 4) R. Yehoshua says: Moses said it to the elders, and the elders, to all of Israel. From here, R. Yossi and R. Shimon say: Israel "stuffed" themselves like horses at that time, it being written here "to eat," and elsewhere (re the manna) (Psalms 78:25) "Each man ate the bread of abirim." Read it not "abirim," but "eivarim" ("limbs") — bread that is absorbed by the limbs. He said to them: This "man" that you are eating is being absorbed by your limbs. (Psalms, Ibid.) "He sent them sustenance to satiety": This refers to Joshua the son of Nun, for whom the manna descended over and against all of Israel. Others say: On his limbs it descended, and from his limbs he took it to eat. Thus, "The bread of abirim was eaten by man ("ish")" (i.e., Joshua, viz. Numbers 27:15)

V. 15. מן, von מנה, zuzählen, von einem Gegenstande eine gewisse Anzahl für einen Zweck bestimmen. Daher מְנָת ,מָנָה und hier מָן: eine jemandem zugeteilte Gabe.

מן הוא, in the Egyptian language this word is equivalent to the Hebrew: מה, “what?” People were asking one another about the nature of this layer of a flaky substance above the layer of dew.

כי לא ידעו מה הוא FOR THEY KNEW NOT WHAT IS WAS so that they could call it by its name.

I say that the meaning of the words מן הוא is simply: “whose is it?” Seeing that this is an Egyptian expression, and in that tongue the meaning of מן is the same as the meaning of מה “what,” in Hebrew, the reason why Moses used the Egyptian term is simply because there was no comparable Hebrew word for that phenomenon. It is not so out of character for the Torah when quoting people, to describe what they said in the language in which it was said. Examples are: Genesis 31,47 where the words יגר שהדותא for the monument erected by Lavan and called Galed by Yaakov, is repeated verbatim in the local language Lavan spoke. When, in the Book of Esther 3,7 we read about a פור, which means “lots” in English, but is the Persian equivalent, this reflects what was familiar to people in that region and at that time. Esther and Mordechai did not have to use this Persian term at all. All they had to write was what they did write in explaining the meaning of the word, i.e. הוא הגורל, “that is the lot.” After all, the entire Book of Esther with the exception of a couple of words is written in Hebrew. However, if the Book of Esther had not first mentioned the word פור we would not have understood why the festival was called פורים. The word מן therefore is quite understandable in light of the circumstances.