ייִדישער מחשבֿה אויף משלי 16:17

(1) The people were "as if complaining," refers to a trumped up charge, one not voiced openly. They were ashamed to voice their real complaint, and instead they voiced some diversionary complaint. Their real complaint, of course, had reached the ears of G'd who is familiar with what goes on in people's hearts. For this reason, G'd says later "you have wept in the earshot of G'd, who will feed us meat?" G'd had heard and was angry. At the time Abraham had weighed the money to Ephron for the burial ground he was purchasing for Sarah, he had also "heard" Ephron's unspoken words, not only the flattering offer of a gift. Despite Moses' prayer, which had stopped the fire consuming the people at tav-eyrah, the people sinned again for an entirely unprovoked reason. The assafsuff, the fringe elements, did not lust after meat. They induced in themselves lust after meat, a most despicable trait. Aristotele in chapter 9 of his book of ethics deals with this trait. When a person sees someone else enjoying something that he himself neither feels the lack of, nor the need for, he desires to be possessed of the urge to enjoy the same thing. If one observes a thirsty person slake his thirst with ice cold water, then such a person wishes to become thirsty in order to be able to quench his thirst. This is the basest way of enslaving oneself to physical greed and passions. Such people cannot even claim in defence of their behaviour that an outsider tempted them as Eve had done in Genesis 3,13. When the rest of the people observed the lust of the assafsuf, they wept again as they had done previously. This time however, they articulated their lust for meat. What displeased G'd most, was, that they had chosen to be free from moral imperatives (Torah) over freedom from enslavement to their physical urges. In Egypt, while they had been enslaved physically, Torah legislation had not yet regulated their freedom to partake of all the physical gratifications that presented themselves. Their food intake, sex life etc. had not yet become subject to Torah law and guidance. The fact that they now disdained the very thing that would lift them to the level of being truly free persons, particularly angered G'd. Whenever the Torah reports Israel as displaying a preference for Egypt, i.e. "we were better off in Egypt," the reference is to the exchange of physical freedom for the sacrifice of moral licentiousness. (see comment of Sifri on the word chinam, i.e. free from the yoke of the mitzvot,) The right to eat any fish without examining if such fish was equipped with fins and scales, was more important to them than to harbour the shechinah, Presence of G'd in their midst. After all, that shechinah, guided their destiny. (2+3) By their own admission,they had never eaten meat to their satisfaction; they only talk about sitting close to other people's fleshpots. But, even the memory of their erstwhile proximity to meat, was preferable to the availability of man, Heavenly food. At Refidim, when they did get quail, apparently it had not been to satisfy their bellies, since the fowl had not been described as performing that function. (as distinct from the "bread" which is described as lasovah, to satisfy. Exodus 16,8) Their complaint that they had nothing to look at but the man, underlined that they felt dependent daily on its re-appearance. The Torah says "who feeds you manna in the desert to keep you afflicted, unsatisfied, to test you, so that in the end you will be well off." (Deut. 8,17) G'd did not want Israel to gorge themselves on food, not even on man. When our sages in Yuma 74, tell us that blind people are never satisfied after having eaten, the reason is that they did not see the food. This places Israel's complaint into focus. "The only thing we can see is the manna." In other words, the only thing that they get their fill of is the manna. Abaye, in the same discussion in the Talmud, suggests that banquets should not be held at night, as one cannot enjoy one's food in the dark. Since the people had expressed themselves in a derogatory fashion about the manna, its appearance, its feel, etc.,the Torah proceeds to give us an objective report about its properties. In Proverbs 16,17, Solomon writes "better a dish of vegetables that is served and eaten with love, than a fatted ox which is served and eaten with hatred." He illustrates the attitude of the people towards the most delectable of dishes, handpicked by G'd Himself. The Torah's description of the layer of dew upon which the manna descended nightly, proves that the people's state of mind was not due to an inherent shortcoming of the manna.