민수기 11:8의 주석

שטו [AND THE PEOPLE] WENT ABOUT — The term שיוט (i. e. any form of the root שוט) denotes strolling about; esbanoyer in O. F., English to walk about leisurely — they got the manna without exertion (cf. however, Yoma 75a and thereon s. v. ירד המן עליו).

לשד, all of it the substance, no part of it refuse, waste. The expression occurs in Psalms 32,4 נהפך לשדי בחרבוני קיץ סלה, “my vigor waned as in a summer drought.” On this verse, Rashi describes this as “my moisture dried up as when figs become dry.”

טעמו כטעם לשד השמן, “it tasted like a dough kneaded with oil.” The Torah testifies that this answers the accusation that the manna was completely dry-tasting, saying that, on the contrary, it contained elements which made it taste moist without requiring the people to even have to add an additive in order to make it moist tasting. After eating it the person having eaten it would feel very refreshed.

Rather [its taste] changed. Since it is written that it was similar to crystal. For what advantage would there be if it were similar to crystal but then it was crushed in mortars and cooked in pots, it which case its consistency would change. Rather it never descended into the millstone…

שטו העם ולקטו, “the people would leave the camp and collect;” the word שטו is familiar to us from Job 1,7 שוט, “roaming.” According to a midrash found in the Talmud, tractate Yuma folio 75, the line: שטו העם ולקטו, refers to the righteous Israelites who were eating the manna while it was descending through the atmosphere. They did not even have to bother to leave their homes and to collect it.

וטחנו ברחים וגו׳ AND THE PEOPLE GROUND IT WITH MILL STONES [OR POUNDED IT IN THE MORTAR, AND BAKED IT IN PANS] — As a matter of fact it (the manna) never went into a mill, nor a pot, nor a mortar, but its taste changed, according to one’s desire, into that of ground or pounded or cooked grain (Sifrei Bamidbar 89).

שטו, the expression occurs also in Job 1,7 and in Jeremiah 5,1 and in both instances refers to “roaming over an area.”

The lamed is part of the root. And the meaning of נהפך לשדי is [my moisture was overturned]…

וטחנו בריחים או דכו במדוכה, “they ground it in a mill, or pounded it in mortars;” this refers to the average Israelite.

בפרור — means [IN] A POT.

Kneaded, oil, honey. Meaning a mixture of oil and honey. This is what is meant by the words written afterwards “like a loaf kneaded with oil and coated with honey.”

ובשלו בפרוד, “or they boiled in pots.” According to that midrash, this refers to the relatively wicked Israelites, who had to spend more time and effort to make the manna palatable for themselves. This is also why the Torah reports in Numbers 15,32, that the Israelites found a man gathering kindling on the Sabbath. He was a sinner and wanted to boil the manna on the Sabbath.

לשד השמן [AND ITS TASTE WAS AS THE TASTE OF] — לשד השמן i. e. moisture of oil. Thus did Dunash ibn Labrat explain it. Similar to it is, (Psalms 32:4) נהפך לשדי בחרבוני קיץ, where the ל in the word לשד is a root-letter, the meaning being: “my sap (לשדי) is turned by the drought of summer”. Our Rabbis (Sifrei Bamidbar 89) explained it as meaning “breasts’ (i. e. just as the suckling imbibes, so to speak, every possible flavor with the mother-milk. so the Israelites found all flavors in the manna; cf. Sifrei), but really the subject of “breasts” has nothing to do with oil. One cannot, however, in order to justify the explanation of our Rabbis say that השמן in לשד השמן has a meaning similar to (Deuteronomy 32:15) וישמן ישורון, “But Jeshurun waxed fat (וישמן)” (when the meaning would be: “And the taste of it was similar to that of a fat breast”), for then the מ ought to be punctuated with Kametz (our Tséré: הַשָּׁמֵן) and the accent ought to be on the last syllable, beneath the מ. Now, however, that the מ is punctuated with Patach Katon (our Segol) and the accent is on the ש, it can only have a sense connected with שמן “oil”. As to the ש which is punctuated with Kametz Gadol (שָׁמן) and not with Segol (since the noun “oil” is שֶׁמן,) this is so because the word is at the end of the verse (and in the pausal form שֶׁמֶן becomes שָׁמֶן). — Another explanation is that לשד is an acrostic of ליש, “kneading”, שמן “oil”, דבש “honey”, i. e. that the manna was like “dough kneaded with oil, and smeared with honey” (קטף literally means “to tear”, and when used of dough it means “to tear a lump of dough into pieces for which purpose the kneader moistens his hands with some liquid; here with honey) (Sifrei Bamidbar 89). The rendering of Onkelos who translates the phrase by דליש במשחא, “[as the taste] of dough with oil”, inclines to the meaning given by Dunash, because dough which is kneaded with oil has in it some moisture of oil.

Leans towards Donash’s interpretation. You might ask: Does it not lean more towards the interpretation that it is an acronym? The answer is that the acronym mentions honey but the Targum does not. Re’m writes: Meaning that this is not like the interpretation of the Rabbis who explain it as a term meaning “breasts.” However, it is not to the exclusion of the interpretation that it is an acronym, which also leans towards the interpretation of Donash.