Exodus: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13a 13b 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30a 30b 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38a 38b 39 40
16:1 VA YISU ME EYLIM VA YAVO'U KOL ADAT BENEY YISRA-EL EL MIDBAR SIN ASHER BEYN EYLIM U VEYN SINAI VA CHAMISHAH ASAR YOM LA CHODESH HA SHENI LE TSE'TAM ME ERETS MITSRAYIM
וַיִּסְעוּ מֵאֵילִם וַיָּבֹאוּ כָּל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶל מִדְבַּר סִין אֲשֶׁר בֵּין אֵילִם וּבֵין סִינָי בַּחֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר יוֹם לַחֹדֶשׁ הַשֵּׁנִי לְצֵאתָם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם
KJ (King James translation): And they took their journey from Elim, and all the congregation of the children of Israel came unto the wilderness of Sin, which is between Elim and Sinai, on the fifteenth day of the second month after their departing out of the land of Egypt.
BN (BibleNet translation): And they continued their journey from Eylim, and all the congregation of the Beney Yisra-El came to the desert of Sin, which is between Eylim and Sinai, on the fifteenth day of the second month after their departing out of the land of Mitsrayim.
The 15th of Iyar, which would later become Pesach Sheyni, "Second Passover", from a ruling by Mosheh (Numbers 9:1-14) that the Passover sacrifice could only be eaten by people who were ritually pure. Some men went to Mosheh, complaining that, as people who came into contact with the dead, they were on that basis ritually unclean, and were unable to fulfill the mitzvah of Passover. Mosheh consulted YHVH, who responded by announcing that anyone who was unable to sacrifice the paschal lamb on the 14th of Nisan, either due to defilement or inability to journey to the place of sacrifice in time, was under the duty to perform the sacrifice on the 14th of Iyar, a full month later, and only then eat the paschal lamb along with matzah and maror on the 15th.
Given that First Passover was already in existence before the Exodus, might Second Passover have been too? Let us wait till we reach Numbers 9 and consider the matter then. For the moment, sufficient to point out that the date is very specific, where we have been given no dates since they left Mitsrayim. The 15th of the month is always the day of the full moon in the lunar calendar, YAH's day, as explained many times previously; YAH (יה) spells 15 in Yehudit numbers (Yud =10, Hey = 5: a decimal system).
Note that, once again, they are referred to as ADAT YISRA-EL, meaning a religious congregation. These are pilgrims, not refugees; their journey is from shrine to shrine, en route to the holy mountain.
WILDERNESS/DESERT OF SIN: SIN = "clay". We need to know what this really means to understand why the bread-test came here. But we also cannot ignore the connection between SIN (סין) and SINAI (סיני), self-evidently from the same root; the complication lies only in the fact that the ending is uncommon (for those of you not familiar with the Yehudit alphabet, the left-hand letter on SIN is the letter NUN-suphit, a variation that it always takes at the end of a word; it appears in its normal NUN form in SINAI; but the two are both composed of Samech-Yud-Nun, with Sinai adding a suffictual Yud).
On this occasion I am choosing "desert" rather than "wilderness" for MIDBAR; having visited the Sinai desert, as far as the Suez Canal, and spent much time in the Negev, the Aravah, etc, there is a palpable difference between the pure sand and dunes of the former and the endless miles of arid vegetation and trip-rock in the other, with the Negev offering both as the join between the other two. When we get to Ein Gedi and the Dead Sea, when we find ourselves in the West Bank, three hundred metres below sea level, but still sprouting plants, I will translate MIDBAR as "wilderness".
But more importantly, look again at the map at Exodus 15:15. The text of that chapter told us that they had come from Piy ha Chorot into the Wilderness of Shur, and that now they are in Eylim in the Wilderness of Sin - which means they have been travelling south, with the western fork of the Red Sea to their right.
But more importantly, look again at the map at Exodus 15:15. The text of that chapter told us that they had come from Piy ha Chorot into the Wilderness of Shur, and that now they are in Eylim in the Wilderness of Sin - which means they have been travelling south, with the western fork of the Red Sea to their right.
16:2 VA YALIYNU KOL ADAT BENEY YISRA-EL AL MOSHEH VE AL AHARON BA MIDBAR
וילינו כָּל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל עַל מֹשֶׁה וְעַל אַהֲרֹן בַּמִּדְבָּר
KJ: And the whole congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron in the wilderness:
BN: And the entire congregation of the Beney Yisra-El murmured against Mosheh and against Aharon in the desert.
VA YALIYNU, or possibly VA YILONU (וַיִּלּוֹנוּ), as it is at Exodus 15:24, because the scribes are in dispute about this, and different versions of the Yehudit text vary between these two - the question is whether this is in the Pa'al (regular active) or the Pi'el form (intensive), which would determine the type and scale of moaning: mere muttering would be Pa'al, where the full kvetch is definitely Pi'el. But we also have to ask, as I did at Exodus 15:24: are they really moaning at all; afre they not simply reciting petitional prayers? Is "mashiv ha ruach u morid ha gashem" ("let the winds blow and the rain fall") a moan? (I have chosen this example of a prayer which is a petition deliberately; see verse 4 to understand why). Perhaps, to Elohim, when we say it so mantraically every day for month after month, it comes across as a moan.
16:3 VA YOMRU AL'EHEM BENEY YISRA-EL MI YITEN MUTENU VE YAD YHVH BE ERETS MITSRAYIM BE SHIVTENU AL SIR HA BASAR BE ACHLENU LECHEM LA SOVA KI HOTSE'TEM OTANU EL HA MIDBAR HA ZEH LE HAMIYT ET KOL HA KAHAL HA ZEH BA RA'AV
וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֲלֵהֶם בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מִי יִתֵּן מוּתֵנוּ בְיַד יְהוָה בְּאֶרֶץ מִצְרַיִם בְּשִׁבְתֵּנוּ עַל סִיר הַבָּשָׂר בְּאָכְלֵנוּ לֶחֶם לָשֹׂבַע כִּי הוֹצֵאתֶם אֹתָנוּ אֶל הַמִּדְבָּר הַזֶּה לְהָמִית אֶת כָּל הַקָּהָל הַזֶּה בָּרָעָב
KJ: And the children of Israel said unto them, Would to God we had died by the hand of the LORD in the land of Egypt, when we sat by the flesh pots, and when we did eat bread to the full; for ye have brought us forth into this wilderness, to kill this whole assembly with hunger.
BN: And the Beney Yisra-El said to them: "Would that we had died by the hand of YHVH in the land of Mitsrayim, when we sat by the flesh-pots, when we ate bread to the full; for you have brought us out into this wilderness, to kill this whole assembly with hunger."
SIR HA BASAR: "The fleshpots of Egypt". Short memories; poor memories! I hear, when I read this, the survivors of Bergen-Belsen, sitting in their displaced persons camps, hungry and ignored, unwanted, nowhere to go, nothing to do... but still, I cannot imagine them complaining to their lords and masters, please, take me back to the fleshpots of...
KAHAL: Like ADAT, a word with unequivocal religious connotations. If a secular group was intended, then AM or even LE'UM would have been used.
Why is it sometimes only Mosheh, but sometimes Mosheh and Aharon? As we shall see somewhat later, it is possible that there were two versions of these legends, even beyond the YHVH and Elohim legends, even beyond the Midyanite and Yehudahite and Ephrayimite versions which scholars before me have deduced, one perhaps told by the Kohanim, with Aharon at the centre, the other by the Levitical supporters of Mosheh. Nor should this surprise us - there were probably dozens of different versions, because each tribe, even each clan, would have had its own, with itself and its leader of course at the heroic centre, just as there are a dozen versions of, say, the assassination of Kennedy or the causes of the First World War. What we have in the final redaction of the Tanach is simply an attempt to synthesise as many of these as possible into a reasonably consistent (albeit ideologically driven) single version.
Just as all women need to be perceived as barren before they can exalt the fertility goddess by miraculously falling pregnant, so the tale needs to have the people continuously moan and complain about thirst and hunger, to provide a pretext for the deity to intervene and show his beneficence and magnitude. The methodology of the tale is a necessity of the religion, as the very next verse will confirm.
BE RA'AV: But have they not brought entire flocks of sheep and herds of cattle with them? Exodus 10:24 has Pharaoh giving them permission to leave, but without those sheep and cattle - but this is still in the early plagues, and his mind will change repeatedly, so we cannot take this as final. 12:38 is a better place to go; there you will find "a mixed multitude also went up with them; and flocks, and herds, and large numbers of cattle."
BE RA'AV: But have they not brought entire flocks of sheep and herds of cattle with them? Exodus 10:24 has Pharaoh giving them permission to leave, but without those sheep and cattle - but this is still in the early plagues, and his mind will change repeatedly, so we cannot take this as final. 12:38 is a better place to go; there you will find "a mixed multitude also went up with them; and flocks, and herds, and large numbers of cattle."
16:4 VA YOMER YHVH EL MOSHEH HINENI MAMTIR LACHEM LECHEM MIN HA SHAMAYIM VE YATSA HA AM VE LAKTU DEVAR YOM BE YOMO LEMA'AN ANASENU HA YELECH BE TORATI IM LO
וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל מֹשֶׁה הִנְנִי מַמְטִיר לָכֶם לֶחֶם מִן הַשָּׁמָיִם וְיָצָא הָעָם וְלָקְטוּ דְּבַר יוֹם בְּיוֹמוֹ לְמַעַן אֲנַסֶּנּוּ הֲיֵלֵךְ בְּתוֹרָתִי אִם לֹא
KJ: Then said the LORD unto Moses, Behold, I will rain bread from heaven for you; and the people shall go out and gather a certain rate every day, that I may prove them, whether they will walk in my law, or no.
BN: Then YHVH said to Mosheh, "You will see, I will cause it to rain bread from the heavens for you; and the people shall go out and gather a day's portion every day, that I may prove myself to them, so that they will decide whether to follow my laws... or not."
A mild sulk on this occasion. YHVH appears to sulk much more often than Elohim, though I confess that I haven't kept statistical records.
LECHEM: If YHVH is going to rain bread on them, we can assume leaven has been added (we know they brought the dough with them, from Exodus 12:34), and that the Passover is therefore completed.
LAKTU: The root is LAKAT (לקט), which means "to collect"; I bother to mention it only because the verb will crop up (forgive the pun) on a dozen and more occasions when the full 613 commandments are given, and later in the Book of Rut (Ruth), because this is the verb used for "to glean" (cf for example Leviticus 19:10). Presumably, in the original, the spring harvest had just taken place, and we can deduce from the text above that it did so on the 15th of Iyar; the Beney Yisra-El having completed their Lenten month are now able to go out into whatever fields there were in these parts, and take part in the ritual of gleaning.
Did the moan/prayer for food come first, or was the moan/prayer already there as liturgy because this became a key moment of the pilgrimage? They are, after all, now entering the sacred territory of Sinai for the first time, where the Law will be given, or re-affirmed. There are analogous ceremonies for pilgrims arriving at Mecca for the Hajj, particularly the circumambulations that we have been witnessing until now, the travelling between the two hill-shrines, etc. The "prove" is there to question their kavanah, their sincerity: you have come here on pilgrimage to re-affirm the Law, but are you really ready to make it a reality in your lives, and not just a mechanical function to be able to say you did it? Those who fail the test, in the Moslem world, are called munafiqun (Surah 63); surprisingly there is no specific Yehudit word for such people (well, actually, of course there is a specific word for such people, and it's TSAVU'A - צָבוּעַ = "hypocrite"; my point is that there is no "official" word for it, inside the Torah, the way there is in the Qur'an).
16:5 VE HAYAH BA YOM HA SHISHI VE HECHIYNU ET ASHER YAVIY'U VE HAYAH MI SHENEH AL ASHER YILKETU YOM YOM
וְהָיָה בַּיּוֹם הַשִּׁשִּׁי וְהֵכִינוּ אֵת אֲשֶׁר יָבִיאוּ וְהָיָה מִשְׁנֶה עַל אֲשֶׁר יִלְקְטוּ יוֹם יוֹם
KJ: And it shall come to pass, that on the sixth day they shall prepare that which they bring in; and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily.
BN: "And it shall be that, on the sixth day, they shall make preparations [for the Shabat] through what they bring in, and it shall be twice as much as they gather daily."
Conventional wisdom, supported by verse 29, states that they collected a double portion on the sixth day because the seventh was the Shabat, and they were not permitted to gather on the Shabat. But Shabat is not yet Torah; that will only be introduced when the Laws are given at Sinai. So again we have evidence that the Law-giving was a re-giving, not a newness; or else the text has made another error-by-anachronism.
16:6 VA YOMER MOSHEH VE AHARON EL KOL BENEY YISRA-EL EREV VIYDA'TEM KI YHVH HOTSIY ET'CHEM ME ERETS MITSRAYIM
וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן אֶל כָּל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל עֶרֶב וִידַעְתֶּם כִּי יְהוָה הוֹצִיא אֶתְכֶם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם
KJ: And Moses and Aaron said unto all the children of Israel, At even, then ye shall know that the LORD hath brought you out from the land of Egypt:
BN: And Mosheh and Aharon said to all the children of Yisra-El: "When this evening comes, then you will know that YHVH has brought you out of the land of Mitsrayim...
EREV: English translations provide a preposition, "at", which is not present in the Yehudit, either because it was forgotten by the original scribe and therefore left out by every scribe that followed, or because, back then, the idiom was understood without requiring the preposition. This is entirely possible, except that we would expect to find a second instance somewhere, or even a comparable instance for some morning or afternoon, and we don't - or only once, in the very next verse. This does not mean that I think they are wrong; I have actually added a good deal more; the point is that we have to translate the meanings of the words, and not just their literalities.
EREV is also significant for another reason, which I trust that, by this stage, if you have been following my commentary since Genesis 1, I don't need to restate yet again here. OK. Very well. For those of you who have not been here before. Evening (the point at which light and dark equalise by becoming level, even, twi, which is to say twin-light) is the time of day which is ruled neither by the sun nor by the moon (Genesis 1:5 and 1:14-19), but by the two of them, equally, or, at least, we have to hope, evenly. So the text should say "then you will know that YHVH and Yah together have brought you..." only the Tanach is a patriarchal text, and the female deity has either been left out altogether, or reduced to something rather less, or masculinised.
16:7 U VOKER U RE'IYTEM ET KEVOD YHVH BE SHAM'O ET TELUNOTEYCHEM AL YHVH VE NACHNU MAH KI TALIYNU ALEYNU
וּבֹקֶר וּרְאִיתֶם אֶת כְּבוֹד יְהוָה בְּשָׁמְעוֹ אֶת תְּלֻנֹּתֵיכֶם עַל יְהוָה וְנַחְנוּ מָה כִּי תלונו עָלֵינוּ
KJ: And in the morning, then ye shall see the glory of the LORD; for that he heareth your murmurings against the LORD: and what are we, that ye murmur against us?
BN: "And in the morning, then you shall see the glory of YHVH; for he has heard your murmurings against YHVH; and who are we, that you murmur against us?"
KEVOD: Yes, it is used to mean "glory", and also "honour", but both are metaphorical. KAVED means "heavy" and here should be translated as "you will feel the full weight"; but as we have seen previously, you will also see YHVH in his full glory, shining in the sky.
NACHNU: grammatical curiosity this, the dropping of the Aleph (א) after the conjunctive (אנחנו).
TALIYNU (תַלִּינוּ): we have already witnessed this problem in verse 2, with YALIYNU. The Yehudit text actually gives TALONU, but scholars, including orthodox Rabbis, agree that this is a typographic error (but one that is retained, because you cannot change Torah). What does Rashi say? He accepts TALIYNU, but rather long-windedly:
"Perforce, I must interpret תַלִּינוּ, in the sense of 'you make do something', [i.e., the hiphil conjugation] because of its [the 'lammed's'] 'dagesh' and the way it is read [i.e., the keri as opposed to the ketiv]; because if it were weak [i.e., not punctuated with a 'dagesh'], I would interpret it as 'you do something', [i.e., in the kal conjugation,] like 'and the people complained (וַיָלֶן) against Moshe' (Exodus 17:3), or if it [the 'lammed'] were punctuated with a 'dagesh' and it did not have a 'yud' [after it], and read תִלּוֹנוּ, [as it is written], I would explain it as meaning 'you complain'. Now, however, it means: 'you cause others to complain', like [the verse written in reference to] the spies: 'and they caused the entire congregation to complain (וַיַלִינוּ) against him' (Numbers 14:36)."
Which is to say, there is indeed an error in the text, (but I, Rashi, am obfuscating to avoid actually declaring it). And oy va voy, if there can be one error in a divine text, and an almost-divine Rashi is willing to confirm it, can that mean, is it possible, dare we suggest, that there might be other errors besides?
MAH KI TALIYNU ALEYNU: Yes, well pointed out Mosheh; none of the murmurings were directly aimed at YHVH; they complained to Mosheh and Aharon about the decisions they had made as leaders. Now we understand that they are merely puppets controlled by YHVH, incapable of acting on their own initiative - or punished for eternity when they try to do so - and therefore a complaint against them is in fact a complaint against YHVH, but nonetheless...
16:8 VA YOMER MOSHEH BE TET YHVH LACHEM BA EREV BASAR LE'ECHOL VE LECHEM BA BOKER LISHBO'A BISHMO'A YHVH ET TELUNOTEYCHEM ASHER ATEM MALIYNIM ALAV VE NACHNU MAH LO ALEYNU TELUNOTEYCHEM KI AL YHVH
וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה בְּתֵת יְהוָה לָכֶם בָּעֶרֶב בָּשָׂר לֶאֱכֹל וְלֶחֶם בַּבֹּקֶר לִשְׂבֹּעַ בִּשְׁמֹעַ יְהוָה אֶת תְּלֻנֹּתֵיכֶם אֲשֶׁר אַתֶּם מַלִּינִם עָלָיו וְנַחְנוּ מָה לֹא עָלֵינוּ תְלֻנֹּתֵיכֶם כִּי עַל יְהוָה
KJ: And Moses said, This shall be, when the LORD shall give you in the evening flesh to eat, and in the morning bread to the full; for that the LORD heareth your murmurings which ye murmur against him: and what are we? your murmurings are not against us, but against the LORD.
BN: And Mosheh said: "When YHVH gives you meat to eat in the evening, and in the morning bread, it will be more than enough to fill you; for YHVH hears your mutterings and your murmurings against him; and who are we? your murmurings are not against us, but against YHVH."
BE TET: I have given this a rather more colloquial rendering than most translations, but I believe I have captured the tone rather better than they do, and word for word there can be no cause for criticism.
BASAR...LECHEM: It seems we have two versions of the same verse. BASAR does indeed mean "flesh", but it is always used to mean flesh in the sense of "meat"; and we know that they have meat, because we know (see verse 3) from Exodus 12:38 that they are travelling with sheep and cattle. And yet they appear to be meatless in this complaint. Or else BASAR on this occasion does not mean meat, 12:38 comes from a different version and therefore doesn't apply here, and what happens at verse 13 is an entirely different matter.
NACHNU: Note that missing aleph (א) again; as to the whole phrase, Mosheh seems to be endorsing my comment in the last verse.
16:9 VA YOMER MOSHEH EL AHARON EMOR EL KOL ADAT BENEY YISRA-EL KIRVU LIPHNEY YHVH KI SHAMA ET TELUNOTEYCHEM
וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל אַהֲרֹן אֱמֹר אֶל כָּל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל קִרְבוּ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה כִּי שָׁמַע אֵת תְּלֻנֹּתֵיכֶם
KJ: And Moses spake unto Aaron, Say unto all the congregation of the children of Israel, Come near before the LORD: for he hath heard your murmurings.
BN: And Mosheh said to Aharon: "Say to all the congregation of the Beney Yisra-El: 'Approach YHVH, for he has heard your murmurings.'"
The commentary once again repeats itself, but it needs stating and restating: conversations with YHVH are not just happening, a voice in the air that Mosheh engages in conversation, the way he is speaking to Aharon now. When people moan communally at their god, it is part of prayer; when the people's divine spokesperson communicates with YHVH, it is formal liturgy, just like any priest in any church or synagogue serving as mouthpiece in one or both directions (an interesting distinction, by the way, between the Reform and Orthodox method of prayer, and role of the Rabbi: in an orthodox synagogue the Rabbi stands facing the Ark, with the congregation around and behind him, so that he is their representative upwards to the deity; in a Reform synagogue, as in most churches, the Rabbi stands with his back to the Ark, the congregation in front of him, so that he is the deity's representative downwards to the congregation); when Mosheh tells Aharon to bring the people before YHVH, he is asking Aharon to act as muezzin, and summon the people to prayer. This is another stage of the pilgrimage. The call to prayer will later be handed to the lesser Leviyim, who will train men to blow the shofar (or for some purposes the chatsotsrah) through the camp, according to certain fixed signals. Tekiya. Teru'ah. Shevarim (click here to hear them).
For the interest, a chatsotrah is a straight trumpet, usually made of silver though it can be a horn if such a horn is found; the shofar is invariably curved, because it must be a ram's horn. The chatsotsrah was mostly used for military signals, the shofar for religious ones.
16:10 VA YEHI KE DABER AHARON EL KOL ADAT BENEY YISRA-EL, VA YIPHNU EL HA MIDBAR VE HINEH KEVOD YHVH NIRAH BE ANAN.
וַיְהִי כְּדַבֵּר אַהֲרֹן אֶל כָּל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיִּפְנוּ אֶל הַמִּדְבָּר וְהִנֵּה כְּבוֹד יְהוָה נִרְאָה בֶּעָנָן
KJ: And it came to pass, as Aaron spake unto the whole congregation of the children of Israel, that they looked toward the wilderness, and, behold, the glory of the LORD appeared in the cloud.
BN: And it came to pass, as Aharon spoke to the whole congregation of the Beney Yisra-El, that they looked towards the desert, and behold, the glory of YHVH appeared in the cloud.
It could be, of course, that what they see is simply a cloud of incense, or the torches ablaze, that they are accustomed to, or the sun finally breaking through on a cloudy day. But the god they are following is the volcano god of Sinai, and what better for an epiphany of the deity than an eruption of his holy mountain? A moment of speculation then. One unanswered question in all this is: why this year? We assume that the journey into the wilderness is a covenant renewal, resulting from years of not being permitted to worship the traditional gods of Mitsrayim (Egypt), first because Akhenaten replaced them with his sun-disc, then because the invading Hyksos imposed their religion. But the new Pharaoh, the new regime, had been in place for some while (until YHVH wiped it out). There are always signs and portents that a volcano is going to erupt: natural events rather than divine acts: minor earth-tremblings and intermittent brief puffs of smoke, and people who are sent to look and report back that the conditions are establishing for a full-scale blast; even burning bushes from early emanations from cracks in the sides of the volcano. So was it this year because they knew the eruption was due? And if so, was the pillar of cloud throughout this the volcanic blasts? I merely plant the idea, and we shall see whether or not it will bloom in this desert.
But if it is indeed a volcano, then we are in completely the wrong place for it geographically; we are currently pilgrimaging through the water-shrines of the Sinai desert; the volcano is many a mile away, to the eat and north, in Midyan - two tales, once again merged with conflicts.
But if it is indeed a volcano, then we are in completely the wrong place for it geographically; we are currently pilgrimaging through the water-shrines of the Sinai desert; the volcano is many a mile away, to the eat and north, in Midyan - two tales, once again merged with conflicts.
pey break
16:11 VA YEDABER YHVH EL MOSHEH LEMOR
וַיְדַבֵּר יְהוָה אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר
KJ: And the LORD spake unto Moses, saying,
BN: Then YHVH spoke to Mosheh, saying...
16:12 SHAMA'TI ET TELUNOT BENEY YISRA-EL DABER AL'EHEM LEMOR BEYN HA ARBAYIM TOCHLU VASAR U VA BOKER TISHBE'U LACHEM VIYDA'TEM KI ANI YHVH ELOHEYCHEM
שָׁמַעְתִּי אֶת תְּלוּנֹּת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל דַּבֵּר אֲלֵהֶם לֵאמֹר בֵּין הָעַרְבַּיִם תֹּאכְלוּ בָשָׂר וּבַבֹּקֶר תִּשְׂבְּעוּ לָחֶם וִידַעְתֶּם כִּי אֲנִי יְהוָה אֱלֹהֵיכֶם
KJ: I have heard the murmurings of the children of Israel: speak unto them, saying, At even ye shall eat flesh, and in the morning ye shall be filled with bread; and ye shall know that I am the LORD your God.
BN: "I have heard the murmurings of the Beney Yisra-El. Speak to them. Tell them, : 'At dusk you will eat meat, and in the morning you will eat your fill of bread; and then you will know that I am YHVH your god."
SHAMA'TI: More or less what Mosheh said in verse 8, but isn't it odd that he said it then, and YHVH is only instructing him to say it now? An error of the scribe, or a prevision of Merivah by Mosheh?
BEYN HA ARBAYIM: We have come across this phrase before, slightly altered as BEYN HA ARBA'IM, in Exodus 12:6. On this occasion the scribe himself has added a Yud to the text, making it ARBAYIM rather than ARBA'IM, and the contrast with VA BOKER is plain; it is also endorsed by verse 8 above. Translating it as "afternoon" is nonetheless erroneous; linguistically that would be ACHAREY HA TSAHARAYIM, but verse 8 above said clearly "evening". "Between the evenings " is therefore the most precise, especially because this episode records Pesach Sheni, a 7 day festival from the 15th to the 21st of Iyar, with the first and final days given a status more or less equivalent to the Shabat; "between the evenings" allows for any time on the final day of the festival, and recognises that the going down of the sun, which is one of the two evenings, does not always coincide precisely with the rising of the moon, which is the other; and the reference to BOKER contains it back within the night. This is important because it once again makes a distinction between day and night, the quail being sent by the moon-goddess (whose bird it is), and the bread by the sun-god.
16:13 VA YEHI VA EREV VA TA'AL HA SELAV VA TECHAS ET HA MACHANEH U VA BOKER HAYETAH SHICHVAT HA TAL SAVIV LA MACHANEH
וַיְהִי בָעֶרֶב וַתַּעַל הַשְּׂלָו וַתְּכַס אֶת הַמַּחֲנֶה וּבַבֹּקֶר הָיְתָה שִׁכְבַת הַטַּל סָבִיב לַמַּחֲנֶה
KJ: And it came to pass, that at even the quails came up, and covered the camp: and in the morning the dew lay round about the host.
BN: And it came to pass in the evening, that quails flew up, and covered the camp; and in the morning there was a layer of dew around the camp.
The eleventh "plague" - or more than that actually, if we count in the pre-plague miracles as well (see previous notes). What connection is there between the quails and the dew? Logically, none at all, though many traditional Jewish scholars have argued that the "manna" is the quail and the dew is the "manna", making them the same thing.
SELAV: And: why quails? Cf Numbers 11:9 ff, which definitely regards the quail and the dew as being two. Psalm 78:26-30 tells how "he caused the east wind to blow in the heavens; and by his power he guided the south wind. He rained flesh also upon them as the dust, and winged birds as the sand of the seas, and he let it fall in the midst of their camp, round about their habitations. So they did eat, and were well filled, and he gave them their own desire", which appears to be yet another version of the tale we are reading now, and simply has a migrating flock of quails happen to alight in the vicinity of the Beney Yisra-El, presumably anticipating scraps of food among the refuse of the pilgrims. Psalm 105:40 affirms that "They asked, and he brought them quail; he fed them well with the bread of the heavens."
A better reading seems therefore to be that, once again, the apparent murmurring comes afterwards, not before, as a way of imparting divine power to the story. A large flock of quails flew in from Africa, on its spring migration, passing like a cloud. The hungry Beney Yisra-El took advantage, and afterwards thanked god for sating their hunger; to make the story deocentric, the Redactor had them murmur their hunger, and YHVH respond by sending the quail: a natural event transformed into the miraculous for ideological purposes.
The quail in question were most likely the Coturnix Vulgaris, a game bird closely related to the partridge but slightly smaller and less brightly coloured.
"Their plumage (click here for the source) is cut and penciled by markings, and their flesh is juicy and delicate - but not, alas, kosher. They nest on the ground and brood on from 12 to 20 eggs. They live in the open, brooding along roads and around fields. They have a longer, fuller wing than the partridge and can make stronger flight. In Israel they were migratory. The Yehudit SELAV means "to be fat." That would be precisely the condition of the quail after a winter of feeding in the South. The time was early spring, our April, and the quail were flocking from Africa and spreading in clouds, even to Europe. They were birds of earth, heavy feeders and of plump, full body. Migration was such an effort that when forced to cross a large body of water they always waited until the wind blew in the direction of their course, lest they tire and fall. Their average was about sixteen birds to each nest. If half a brood escaped, they yet multiplied in such numbers as easily to form clouds in migration. Pliny writes of their coming into Italy in such numbers, and so exhausted with their long flight, that if they sighted a sailing vessel they settled upon it by hundreds and in such numbers as to sink it".
Or might it not be egg or meat at all, but plant - see verse 31? So many of these tales are aetiological, attempts to explain the Physics, Chemistry and Biology of the Cosmos in the only language they had articulated for the purpose. The desert is a dry and barren place, but rains do come, and the wadis fill quickly with rain-water, and flora comes to life in the aftermath, and dies again. As to the dew, modern Israeli agricultural research has studied this in detail, and exploited the knowledge - dare I pun it? - gleaned. Click here, or here.
MAN HU: Or Mah hu? Either way, translating it as "manna" is not helpful, because a MANAH is simply "a portion", and what they are saying is really "well, I guess it's something to eat, whatever it is", though whether it constituted a sufficient "portion" to appease hunger is something we shall have to wait to see.
And was this whatever-it-was safe to eat? How do they know it isn't poisonous - after all, a gift from the deity is simply life in whichever of its forms. Presumably Mosheh has experience of all this from his time as a shepherd in Midyan (Exodus 3:1).
HA LECHEM: Except that it's rather more the BASAR than the LECHEM. Which is to say, it isn't actually "bread" at all. But LECHEM is a complex word, and really it doesn't mean bread, but "food", only bread is the basic staple diet, so LECHEM came to mean bread. How do we know this? Because the same root also yields MILCHAMAH, which means "war", and rival bakeries may go to war over their bread, but nations go to war over the necessity to feed their people, and this involves more than just the bread and/or matzah.
16:20 VE LO SHAM'U EL MOSHEH VA YOTIRU ANASHIM MIMENU AD BOKER VA YARUM TOL'A'IM VA YIV'ASH VA YIKTSOPH AL'EHEM MOSHEH.
(On the other hand, it could also help us understand how they were counting the Omer at this time, given that barley needs a good field to grow in).
MITSVOTAI VE TOROTAI: An utterly ludicrous and meaningless question if the laws have not yet been given! Nor can we dispute the matter on the basis of language; MITSVOTAI VE TOROTAI are MITSVOTAI VE TOROTAI, "commandments and laws". The indisputable implication is that they - whatever they were - must already have been in place, and thereby confirming our view that the events at Sinai are not law-giving, but law-affirming.
16:30 VA YISHBETU HA AM BA YOM HA SHEVIYI
MANAH: meaning "a portion", presumably because the instructions for collecting it made clear that each person should only take the "portion" needed for their family (see verse 18!). However, we are on pilgrimage, and whatever it is that quails leave behind when they have brooded on their eggs, it is not white unless the albumen has spilled, and it is not like coriander seed, nor does it come in some configuration of wafer with honey. We need to separate the quails from the manah (as was presumably the case before the Redactor found it convenient to join them), and recognise that the pilgrims, this Sabbath evening and through the Sabbath day, are eating some form of ceremonial meal. Today we would expect it to be a challah, often sprinkled with salt (which is white), often sprinkled with coriander seed, though most people prefer poppy seeds or sesame, on Rosh ha Shana dipped, for symbolic reasons, in honey.
Exodus: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13a 13b 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30a 30b 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38a 38b 39 40
"Their plumage (click here for the source) is cut and penciled by markings, and their flesh is juicy and delicate - but not, alas, kosher. They nest on the ground and brood on from 12 to 20 eggs. They live in the open, brooding along roads and around fields. They have a longer, fuller wing than the partridge and can make stronger flight. In Israel they were migratory. The Yehudit SELAV means "to be fat." That would be precisely the condition of the quail after a winter of feeding in the South. The time was early spring, our April, and the quail were flocking from Africa and spreading in clouds, even to Europe. They were birds of earth, heavy feeders and of plump, full body. Migration was such an effort that when forced to cross a large body of water they always waited until the wind blew in the direction of their course, lest they tire and fall. Their average was about sixteen birds to each nest. If half a brood escaped, they yet multiplied in such numbers as easily to form clouds in migration. Pliny writes of their coming into Italy in such numbers, and so exhausted with their long flight, that if they sighted a sailing vessel they settled upon it by hundreds and in such numbers as to sink it".
How can quail be non-kosher, if YHVH sent them here to feed the Beney Yisra-El, and they were allowed to eat them? Take a look here; but in brief, the Torah lists twenty-four species of non-kosher fowl, and all the rest are permitted. But no one is quite sure, even with the quail, what birds the Yehudit text really means, and if in doubt, don't eat it. So if you are orthodox and starving in the desert today, and your god sends quail, it may be a miracle, but it can't be lunch (actually it can now; see below).
And of course, like the meat cooked in milk that Av-Raham served the three men in Genesis 18:8, kosher or non-kosher didn't matter to the Beney Yisra-El now, because the laws of Kashrut had not yet been given!
And anyway I am now going to throw the entire commentary to this verse back into the crater, because that comparison of the quail with the partirdge has alerted me to do so, because, as noted many times before in these pages, the partridge is connected to the Pesach, and they are celebrating Pesach Sheni, so it is actually much more likely that the SELAV was a partridge and not a quail anyway. And yes, the partridge is kosher. How come? For the same reason that the quail is now kosher too - click here, and then here.
And of course, like the meat cooked in milk that Av-Raham served the three men in Genesis 18:8, kosher or non-kosher didn't matter to the Beney Yisra-El now, because the laws of Kashrut had not yet been given!
And anyway I am now going to throw the entire commentary to this verse back into the crater, because that comparison of the quail with the partirdge has alerted me to do so, because, as noted many times before in these pages, the partridge is connected to the Pesach, and they are celebrating Pesach Sheni, so it is actually much more likely that the SELAV was a partridge and not a quail anyway. And yes, the partridge is kosher. How come? For the same reason that the quail is now kosher too - click here, and then here.
TA'AL...TAL: A word game is in play here. TA'AL (תעל - Tav-Ayin-Lamed) from LA'ALOT = "to go up" and TAL (טל - Tet-Lamed) = dew. Is TELUNOT (תל - Tav-Lamed...) also part of the word game? It becomes especially playful in the next verse.
16:14 VA TA'AL SHICHVAT HA TAL VE HINEH AL PENEY HA MIDBAR DAK MECHUSPAM DAK KA KEPOR AL HA ARETS
וַתַּעַל שִׁכְבַת הַטָּל וְהִנֵּה עַל פְּנֵי הַמִּדְבָּר דַּק מְחֻסְפָּס דַּק כַּכְּפֹר עַל הָאָרֶץ
KJ: And when the dew that lay was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderness there lay a small round thing, as small as the hoar frost on the ground.
BN: And when the layer of dew was gone up, behold upon the face of the wilderness a fine, scale-like thing, fine as the hoar-frost on the ground.
MECHUSPAM: Rashi writes at length on this, but without a resolution. The quail brood, the dew settles, and then lifts as the sun rises and the quail fly on. What is left behind is what is described here: some residue of the egg presumably, or at least of the egg-shell. Interesting that the part that is being provided by the goddess should turn out to be oestral! The masculine deity just sticks to bread and meat - a Big YHVH!
Or might it not be egg or meat at all, but plant - see verse 31? So many of these tales are aetiological, attempts to explain the Physics, Chemistry and Biology of the Cosmos in the only language they had articulated for the purpose. The desert is a dry and barren place, but rains do come, and the wadis fill quickly with rain-water, and flora comes to life in the aftermath, and dies again. As to the dew, modern Israeli agricultural research has studied this in detail, and exploited the knowledge - dare I pun it? - gleaned. Click here, or here.
16:15 VA YIR'U VENEY YISRA-EL VA YOMRU ISH EL ACHIV MAN HU KI LO YAD'U MAH HU VA YOMER MOSHEH AL'EHEM HU HA LECHEM ASHER NATAN YHVH LACHEM LE ACHLAH
וַיִּרְאוּ בְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיֹּאמְרוּ אִישׁ אֶל אָחִיו מָן הוּא כִּי לֹא יָדְעוּ מַה הוּא וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֲלֵהֶם הוּא הַלֶּחֶם אֲשֶׁר נָתַן יְהוָה לָכֶם לְאָכְלָה
KJ: And when the children of Israel saw it, they said one to another, It is manna: for they wist not what it was. And Moses said unto them, This is the bread which the LORD hath given you to eat.
BN: And when the Beney Yisra-El saw it, they said to each other: "What is it?" for they had no idea what it was. And Mosheh said to them: "This is the bread which YHVH has given you to eat...
MAN HU: Or Mah hu? Either way, translating it as "manna" is not helpful, because a MANAH is simply "a portion", and what they are saying is really "well, I guess it's something to eat, whatever it is", though whether it constituted a sufficient "portion" to appease hunger is something we shall have to wait to see.
And was this whatever-it-was safe to eat? How do they know it isn't poisonous - after all, a gift from the deity is simply life in whichever of its forms. Presumably Mosheh has experience of all this from his time as a shepherd in Midyan (Exodus 3:1).
HA LECHEM: Except that it's rather more the BASAR than the LECHEM. Which is to say, it isn't actually "bread" at all. But LECHEM is a complex word, and really it doesn't mean bread, but "food", only bread is the basic staple diet, so LECHEM came to mean bread. How do we know this? Because the same root also yields MILCHAMAH, which means "war", and rival bakeries may go to war over their bread, but nations go to war over the necessity to feed their people, and this involves more than just the bread and/or matzah.
16:16 ZEH HA DAVAR ASHER TSIVAH YHVH LIKTU MIMENU ISH LEPHI ACHLO OMER LA GULGOLET MISPAR NAPHSHOTEYCHEM ISH LA ASHER BE AHALO TIKACHU
זֶה הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהוָה לִקְטוּ מִמֶּנּוּ אִישׁ לְפִי אָכְלוֹ עֹמֶר לַגֻּלְגֹּלֶת מִסְפַּר נַפְשֹׁתֵיכֶם אִישׁ לַאֲשֶׁר בְּאָהֳלוֹ תִּקָּחוּ
KJ: This is the thing which the LORD hath commanded, Gather of it every man according to his eating, an omer for every man, according to the number of your persons; take ye every man for them which are in his tents.
BN: This is the Word that YHVH has spoken by way of instruction: Every man shall gather as much of it as he needs for a meal; one omer a head should be sufficient, each man taking according to the number of people who are in his tent."
Note the use of DAVAR again: the "Word", manifested as Nature.
OMER LA GULGOLET: An omer was a sheaf, whether of wheat or barley, and used as a measuring weight it counted (see verse 36) as the tenth of an ephah, (an ephah was about twenty litres). The period of the counting of the Omer begins on the 2nd day of Passover, and continues until Shavu'ot, 49 days in total, though whether the custom already existed is a matter of speculation. The commandment was given in Leviticus 23:15-16, and the custom was Second Temple, so probably not. But it sure does make for an interesting coincidence that they are collecting what might very well be desert-barley by this word.
GULGOLET sounds like it must be from the same root as GIL-GAL; and indeed it is, but the two are reached from different directions. The source is GALAL = "to roll", from which GAL means "a heap of stones", and GULGOLET (Golgotha) is "a skull". From this the idea of "counting heads", which is the sense in which it is being used here.
16:17 VA YA'ASU CHEN BENEY YISRA-EL VA YILEKTU HA MARBEH VE HA MAM'IYT
וַיַּעֲשׂוּ כֵן בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיִּלְקְטוּ הַמַּרְבֶּה וְהַמַּמְעִיט
KJ: And the children of Israel did so, and gathered, some more, some less.
BN: And the Beney Yisra-El did so, and gathered some more, some less.
16:18 VA YAMDU VA OMER VE LO HE'DIPH HA MARBEH VE HA MAM'IYT LO HECHSIR ISH LEPHI ACHLO LAKATU
וַיָּמֹדּוּ בָעֹמֶר וְלֹא הֶעְדִּיף הַמַּרְבֶּה וְהַמַּמְעִיט לֹא הֶחְסִיר אִישׁ לְפִי אָכְלוֹ לָקָטוּ
KJ: And when they did mete it with an omer, he that gathered much had nothing over, and he that gathered little had no lack; they gathered every man according to his eating.
BN: And when they measured it by the omer, he who had gathered much had nothing over, and he who had gathered little had no lack; every man gathered according to his eating.
Is this a polite way of saying that the greedy were able to stuff themselves, while those with small appetites were comfortably filled? It is hardly imaginable, after all, that every member of the tribe took precisely what he needed, and not a lollipop more.
16:19 VA YOMER MOSHEH AL'EHEM ISH AL YOTER MIMENU AD BOKER
וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֲלֵהֶם אִישׁ אַל יוֹתֵר מִמֶּנּוּ עַד בֹּקֶר
KJ: And Moses said, Let no man leave of it till the morning.
BN: And Mosheh said to them: "Let no one leave any of it for the morning."
Presumably because whatever it was would have gone rotten by then - see next verse. Though it might also be because it was a gift of the moon-goddess, rather than the sun-god; both the dew, which comes pre-dawn, and the worms, which inhabit the Underworld, are her creatures.
וְלֹא שָׁמְעוּ אֶל מֹשֶׁה וַיּוֹתִרוּ אֲנָשִׁים מִמֶּנּוּ עַד בֹּקֶר וַיָּרֻם תּוֹלָעִים וַיִּבְאַשׁ וַיִּקְצֹף עֲלֵהֶם מֹשֶׁה
KJ: Notwithstanding they hearkened not unto Moses; but some of them left of it until the morning, and it bred worms, and stank: and Moses was wroth with them.
BN: Nevertheless they did not heed Mosheh's instruction, and some of them did leave it for the morning, and it bred worms, and rotted; and Mosheh was angry with them.
16:21 VA YILKETU OTO BA BOKER BA BOKER ISH KE PHI ACHLO VE CHAM HA SHEMESH VE NAMAS
וַיִּלְקְטוּ אֹתוֹ בַּבֹּקֶר בַּבֹּקֶר אִישׁ כְּפִי אָכְלוֹ וְחַם הַשֶּׁמֶשׁ וְנָמָס
KJ: And they gathered it every morning, every man according to his eating: and when the sun waxed hot, it melted.
BN: And they gathered it morning by morning, each man according to his needs; and as the sun grew hotter, so it rotted.
BOKER BA BOKER: Given the note about the Omer, above, I can't help but wonder for how long they went on gathering it, and if, by the time Shavu'ot came around, there was simply no more of it to glean. But no - see verse 35.
NAMAS: Melted? Rotted? Ice cream melts, quail generally doesn't, and dew dissolves. Properly speaking, NAMAS can indeed mean "melted", but in the previous verse were were told that "it bred worms and rotted", and NAMAS can also mean "rotted" - "destroyed" is the generality; so of course it could perfectly well have done both.
NAMAS: Melted? Rotted? Ice cream melts, quail generally doesn't, and dew dissolves. Properly speaking, NAMAS can indeed mean "melted", but in the previous verse were were told that "it bred worms and rotted", and NAMAS can also mean "rotted" - "destroyed" is the generality; so of course it could perfectly well have done both.
16:22 VA YEHI BA YOM HA SHISHI LAKTU LECHEM MI SHENEY SHENEY HA OMER LA ECHAD VA YAVO'U KOL NESIY'EY HA EDAH VA YAGIYDU LE MOSHEH
וַיְהִי בַּיּוֹם הַשִּׁשִּׁי לָקְטוּ לֶחֶם מִשְׁנֶה שְׁנֵי הָעֹמֶר לָאֶחָד וַיָּבֹאוּ כָּל נְשִׂיאֵי הָעֵדָה וַיַּגִּידוּ לְמֹשֶׁה
KJ: And it came to pass, that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers for one man: and all the rulers of the congregation came and told Moses.
BN: And it came to pass that on the sixth day they gathered twice as much bread, two omers each; and all the rulers of the congregation came and told Mosheh.
For the second time we are witnessing behaviour that reflects Shabat laws that have not yet been given, so this is either anachronistic, or some form of Shabat law was already in place before the version given at Sinai.
16:23 VA YOMER AL'EHEM HU ASHER DIBER YHVH SHABATON SHABAT KODESH L'YHVH MACHAR ET ASHER TO'PHU EPHO VE ET ASHER TEVASHLU BASHELO VE ET KOL HA ODEPH HANIYCHU LACHEM LE MISHMERET AD HA BOKER
וַיֹּאמֶר אֲלֵהֶם הוּא אֲשֶׁר דִּבֶּר יְהוָה שַׁבָּתוֹן שַׁבַּת קֹדֶשׁ לַיהוָה מָחָר אֵת אֲשֶׁר תֹּאפוּ אֵפוּ וְאֵת אֲשֶׁר תְּבַשְּׁלוּ בַּשֵּׁלוּ וְאֵת כָּל הָעֹדֵף הַנִּיחוּ לָכֶם לְמִשְׁמֶרֶת עַד הַבֹּקֶר
KJ: And he said unto them, This is that which the LORD hath said, To morrow is the rest of the holy sabbath unto the LORD: bake thatwhich ye will bake to day, and seethe that ye will seethe; and that which remaineth over lay up for you to be kept until the morning.
BN: And he said to them: "This is what YHVH has said: To-morrow is a solemn rest, a holy Sabbath to YHVH. Bake what you want to bake, and boil what you want to boil; and whatever remains, lay it up to be kept for the morning."
Or is the Sabbath in fact being instituted now, and what happens at Sinai will be the re-affirmation? The Thirteen Laws of Hermeneutics, as defined by Rabbi Yishmael, and on which the final Talmudic version of the 613 Commandments is based, would definitely regard this verse as the institution of the Sabbath.
ET ASHER: While we can believe that the refugees carried tents, and even cooking implements, is it feasible that they had the means, in the middle of one of the world's most barren deserts, of setting up the means of baking and boiling, and especially while they were moaning about the lack of water? And if they could, and did, and we have been told that they took huge numbers of sheep and cattle with them, why were they murmurring about a lack of food, and in need of the quail? The story simply does not add up. And if your response is: the sheep and cattle were for sacrifice, the answer to that is: only some of them were; not the females, not the blemished or the lame; there would have been plenty for eating, if there was the means to cook them.
16:24 VA YANIYCHU OTO AD HA BOKER KA ASHER TSIVAH MOSHEH VE LO HIV'ISH VE RIMAH LO HAYETAH BO
וַיַּנִּיחוּ אֹתוֹ עַד הַבֹּקֶר כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה מֹשֶׁה וְלֹא הִבְאִישׁ וְרִמָּה לֹא הָיְתָה בּוֹ
KJ: And they laid it up till the morning, as Moses bade: and it did not stink, neither was there any worm therein.
BN: And they laid it up for the morning, as Mosheh instructed; and it did not rot, nor was any worm found in it.
RIMAH: Wait a moment, Mr King James translator. You gave us "worm" in verse 20, when the Yehudit said TOL'A'IM. But here it says RIMAH, and you are rendering that too as "worms" (I nearly chose "maggots", but that would have been wrong, as you will see; though for the purpose here it makes no difference):
Other than being the unlikely name for a son of Yisaschar (Genesis 46:13), Tol'a is definitely a worm, and definitely one that is found on rotten food and abandoned carcases (far too many references to bother to quote; try Isaiah 14:11 if you insist; you'll see why I went for this one when you get there!). RIMAH, on the other hand, is only found on three other occasions besides the Isaiah, all in the Book of Job (e.g. 25:6), which probably makes it a Babylonian word, or some dialect thereof, where Tol'a may be Egyptian or Hurrian or both. And in Job it means... definitely a maggot, not a worm, the one apparently growing bacterially inside the food, where the other comes to settle on it and dehygienises it externally, usually laid in a fly-egg. So the translation both is and is not correct; remember that the Redaction was done by returnees from Babylon, so they would likely have known the NAMAS as RIMAH, and not had the science to understand the difference, or the etymology either. And we can date the text from this as well!
Other than being the unlikely name for a son of Yisaschar (Genesis 46:13), Tol'a is definitely a worm, and definitely one that is found on rotten food and abandoned carcases (far too many references to bother to quote; try Isaiah 14:11 if you insist; you'll see why I went for this one when you get there!). RIMAH, on the other hand, is only found on three other occasions besides the Isaiah, all in the Book of Job (e.g. 25:6), which probably makes it a Babylonian word, or some dialect thereof, where Tol'a may be Egyptian or Hurrian or both. And in Job it means... definitely a maggot, not a worm, the one apparently growing bacterially inside the food, where the other comes to settle on it and dehygienises it externally, usually laid in a fly-egg. So the translation both is and is not correct; remember that the Redaction was done by returnees from Babylon, so they would likely have known the NAMAS as RIMAH, and not had the science to understand the difference, or the etymology either. And we can date the text from this as well!
16:25 VA YOMER MOSHEH ICHLUHU HA YOM KI SHABAT HAYOM LA YHVH HA YOM LO TIMTSA'UHU BA SADEH
וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אִכְלֻהוּ הַיּוֹם כִּי שַׁבָּת הַיּוֹם לַיהוָה הַיּוֹם לֹא תִמְצָאֻהוּ בַּשָּׂדֶה
KJ: And Moses said, Eat that to day; for to day is a sabbath unto the LORD: to day ye shall not find it in the field.
BN: And Mosheh said: "Eat that to-day; for to-day is a Sabbath to YHVH; to-day you will not find it in the field...
SADEH: Sometimes the errors in the text are anachronisms, sometimes they are just plain sloppy. A SADEH is a field, very precisely "a field", an area of soil not sand, a place where crops are planted, not camels walked. To put the word SADEH in Mosheh's mouth, writing a thousand years after the event, is the equivalent of a writer today thinking that Napoleon would have had wifi on Saint Helena.
(On the other hand, it could also help us understand how they were counting the Omer at this time, given that barley needs a good field to grow in).
16:26 SHESHET YAMIM TILKETUHU U VA YOM HA SHEVIY'I SHABAT LO YIHEYEH BO
שֵׁשֶׁת יָמִים תִּלְקְטֻהוּ וּבַיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי שַׁבָּת לֹא יִהְיֶה בּוֹ
KJ: Six days ye shall gather it; but on the seventh day, which is the sabbath, in it there shall be none.
BN: "For six days you shall gather it; but the seventh day is Shabat, on it there will be none."
The second phrase is redundant, so we have to assume it was there for emphasis; and what is being emphasised is, again, that the Sabbath pre-existed the giving of the Torah. Note how the phrasing echoes the phrasing when the Sabbath laws are given (Exodus 20:8)
16:27 VA YEHI BA YOM HA SHEVIY'I YATS'U MIN HA AM LILKOT VE LO MATSA'U
וַיְהִי בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי יָצְאוּ מִן הָעָם לִלְקֹט וְלֹא מָצָאוּ
KJ: And it came to pass, that there went out some of the people on the seventh day for to gather, and they found none.
BN: And it came to pass on the seventh day, that some of the people went out to gather, but they found none.
Human nature I suppose. Guys, I who am in communication with the supplier, I am telling you that there will be none tomorrow - but there are always one or two who just have to go and check it for themselves. In modern parlance, circa 2020, it applies to wearing masks in shops, visiting the beach in Bournemouth, or going for an eye-test in Durham.
MATSA'U: Just happens to be an aural pun on the other food they had; matzah. Shame there wasn't a fight over their going-out against instruction, and we could have had an aural pun on LECHEM too.
samech break
16:28 VA YOMER YHVH EL MOSHEH AD ANAH ME'ANTEM LISHMOR MITSVOTAI VE TOROTAI
וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל מֹשֶׁה עַד אָנָה מֵאַנְתֶּם לִשְׁמֹר מִצְוֹתַי וְתוֹרֹתָי
KJ: And the LORD said unto Moses, How long refuse ye to keep my commandments and my laws
BN: And YHVH said to Mosheh: "How long will you go on refusing to keep my commandments and my laws?..
AD ANAH: Yet again that Isaiac "how long?". "Then I said, YHVH, how long? And he answered, 'Until the cities are devastated and without inhabitant, until the houses are without people and the land is utterly desolate.…'" (Isaiah 6:11)
Interesting also to point out that the same complaint goes in both directions: the highly-challenged ability of Humankind to believe in (have faith in) the deity paralleled by the equally highly-challenged ability of the deity to believe in (have faith in) Humankind.
16:29 RE'U KI YHVH NATAN LACHEM HA SHABAT AL KEN HU NOTEN LACHEM BA YOM HA SHISHI LECHEM YOMAYIM SHEVU ISH TACHTAV AL YETS'E ISH MIMKOMO BA YOM HA SHEVIYI
רְאוּ כִּי יְהוָה נָתַן לָכֶם הַשַּׁבָּת עַל כֵּן הוּא נֹתֵן לָכֶם בַּיּוֹם הַשִּׁשִּׁי לֶחֶם יוֹמָיִם שְׁבוּ אִישׁ תַּחְתָּיו אַל יֵצֵא אִישׁ מִמְּקֹמוֹ בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִי
KJ: See, for that the LORD hath given you the sabbath, therefore he giveth you on the sixth day the bread of two days; abide ye every man in his place, let no man go out of his place on the seventh day.
BN: "See that YHVH has given you the Sabbath; that is why, on the sixth day, he gives you bread for two days. Let every man stay in his place. Let no man go out of his place on the seventh day."
What, not even to go to shul and pray? Stay at home on Sabbath. That is clearly what it says. Do not leave your house. Stay at home. Do not tell this to the Rabbis!
וַיִּשְׁבְּתוּ הָעָם בַּיּוֹם הַשְּׁבִעִי
KJ: So the people rested on the seventh day.
BN: So the people rested on the seventh day.
16:31 VA YIKRE'U VEYT YISRA-EL ET SHEMO MAN VE HU KE ZERA GAD LAVAN VE TA'MO KE TSAPIYCHIT BI DEVASH
וַיִּקְרְאוּ בֵית יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת שְׁמוֹ מָן וְהוּא כְּזֶרַע גַּד לָבָן וְטַעְמוֹ כְּצַפִּיחִת בִּדְבָשׁ
KJ: And the house of Israel called the name thereof Manna: and it was like coriander seed, white; and the taste of it was like wafers made with honey.
BN: And the house of Yisra-El named it "manna"; and it was like coriander seed, white, and it tasted like wafers made with honey.
MANAH: meaning "a portion", presumably because the instructions for collecting it made clear that each person should only take the "portion" needed for their family (see verse 18!). However, we are on pilgrimage, and whatever it is that quails leave behind when they have brooded on their eggs, it is not white unless the albumen has spilled, and it is not like coriander seed, nor does it come in some configuration of wafer with honey. We need to separate the quails from the manah (as was presumably the case before the Redactor found it convenient to join them), and recognise that the pilgrims, this Sabbath evening and through the Sabbath day, are eating some form of ceremonial meal. Today we would expect it to be a challah, often sprinkled with salt (which is white), often sprinkled with coriander seed, though most people prefer poppy seeds or sesame, on Rosh ha Shana dipped, for symbolic reasons, in honey.
ZERA GAD: Coriander, also known as cilantro, was regarded as an aphrodisiac by both the Chinese and the Egyptians, who placed coriander seeds in tombs to sweeten the smell of putrefaction. As this entire legend is about the rebirth of Osher (Osiris), we can presume that this is the basic connection. Sweetening it with honey probably connects it to Tamar rather than Devorah - the former the date-goddess, the latter the bee-goddess, but it was Tamar's shrine that was was visited just a few days previously, where there has been no mention, not even a hint, of a Deborah shrine yet in the Exodus text. If we then think of the traditional seder plate, believed to have been used by the Beney Yisra-El since Temple times at least, we know that one practice is the eating of charoset, between two pieces of matzah; charoset today is made from chopped nuts, grated apples, cinnamon, and sweet red wine, though Sephardi recipes, which are generally closer to the original, call for dates and honey in addition to chopped nuts, cinnamon, and wine. The items on the seder plate were first eaten by the Beney Yisra-El slaves while they were building the storehouses of Egypt (see Exodus 12:8).
TSAPICHIT BI DVASH: Tsapichit or Tsaphichit? This is the one and only use of the word in the Bible; its root is Tsapach (צפח) = "wide" or "ample", and therefore is a description of the quantity and shape of the sandwich rather than its proper name. But it gives us certainty: the meal in question was the ceremony of the charoset, and clearly it wasn't only eaten at Pesach - unless we are still in the week of Pesach sheni, which is possible.
16:32 VA YOMER MOSHEH ZEH HA DAVAR ASHER TSIVAH YHVH MELO HA OMER MIMENU LE MISHMERET LE DOROTEYCHEM LEMA'AN YIR'U ET HA LECHEM ASHER HE'ECHALTI ET'CHEM BA MIDBAR BE HOTSIY'IY ET'CHEM ME ERETS MITSRAYIM
וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה זֶה הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהוָה מְלֹא הָעֹמֶר מִמֶּנּוּ לְמִשְׁמֶרֶת לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם לְמַעַן יִרְאוּ אֶת הַלֶּחֶם אֲשֶׁר הֶאֱכַלְתִּי אֶתְכֶם בַּמִּדְבָּר בְּהוֹצִיאִי אֶתְכֶם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם
KJ: And Moses said, This is the thing which the LORD commandeth, Fill an omer of it to be kept for your generations; that they may see the bread wherewith I have fed you in the wilderness, when I brought you forth from the land of Egypt.
BN: And Mosheh said: "This is what YHVH has instructed: Let an omerful of it be kept throughout your generations; that they may see the bread with which I fed you in the wilderness, when I brought you out of the land of Mitsrayim."
How are they expected to keep it, given that it rotted, and/or melted, by the evening on which it was gathered? Some form of taxidermy?
16:33 VA YOMER MOSHEH EL AHARON KACH TSINTSENET ACHAT VE TEN SHAMAH MELO HA OMER MAN VE HANACH OTO LIPHNEY YHVH LE MISHMERET LE DOROTEYCHEM
וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל אַהֲרֹן קַח צִנְצֶנֶת אַחַת וְתֶן שָׁמָּה מְלֹא הָעֹמֶר מָן וְהַנַּח אֹתוֹ לִפְנֵי יְהוָה לְמִשְׁמֶרֶת לְדֹרֹתֵיכֶם
KJ: And Moses said unto Aaron, Take a pot, and put an omer full of manna therein, and lay it up before the LORD, to be kept for your generations.
BN: And Mosheh said to Aaron: "Take a jar, and put an omerful of manna in it, and lay it up before YHVH, to be kept throughout your generations."
TSINTSENET: Which answers my query from the previous verse. A jar. Then, like heimische cucumbers, which are also part of the traditional Shabat evening meal, the manna will be pickled. (Jars at that time sounds like an anchronism. Pickling jars need to be made of glass, but did the ancient Egyptians... apparently they did - click here).
DOROTEYCHEM is the give-away here that this is Mosheh reciting liturgy; if he were really giving an instruction to Aharon he would have said DOROT without the redundant pronoun.
16:34 KA ASHER TSIVAH YHVH EL MOSHEH VA YANIYCHEHU AHARON LIPHNEY HA EDUT LE MISHMARET.
כַּאֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהוָה אֶל-מֹשֶׁה וַיַּנִּיחֵהוּ אַהֲרֹן לִפְנֵי הָעֵדֻת לְמִשְׁמָרֶת
KJ: As the LORD commanded Moses, so Aaron laid it up before the Testimony, to be kept.
BN: As YHVH instructed Mosheh, so Aharon set it before the congregation, as a memorial.
The translation of EDUT as "testimony" is erroneous and anachronistic. The "testimony" means the "OHEL MO'ED", or the "MISHKAN", neither of which have been established yet. EDUT, as we have seen before, means "congregation", in the sense of an assembly of worshippers. So, again, confirmation that this is liturgy and ceremony: Mosheh recites the instruction in the formal language of prayer, and Aharon the High Priest (though he hasn't yet been formally appointed High Priest) performs the ritual. What we can now recognise is that, in this strange tale of the manna, both the quali and the coriander seed, we are witnessing Mass being performed, the ceremony of Eucharist, in its pre-Judaic and pre-Christian Egyptian form.
MISHMARET: Why does it change from MISHMERET previously?
16:35 U VENEY YISRA-EL ACHLU ET HA MAN ARBA'IM SHANAH AD BO'AM EL ERETS NOSHAVET ET HA MAN ACHLU AD BO'AM EL KETSEH ERETS KENA'AN
וּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אָכְלוּ אֶת הַמָּן אַרְבָּעִים שָׁנָה עַד בֹּאָם אֶל אֶרֶץ נוֹשָׁבֶת אֶת הַמָּן אָכְלוּ עַד בֹּאָם אֶל קְצֵה אֶרֶץ כְּנָעַן
KJ: And the children of Israel did eat manna forty years, until they came to a land inhabited; they did eat manna, until they came unto the borders of the land of Canaan.
BN: And the Beney Yisra-El consumed their portion for forty years, until they came to an inhabited land; they ate their portion, until they came to the borders of the land of Kena'an.
Meaning either that they repeated the ceremony every year of their wandering, or that this was adopted as the regular food. Both are logical, and it may well be that both are intended. If we think practically about the facilities available for cooking, especially the absence of anything in the desert from which to make bread rise; and knowing the customs of the Bedou and "Berber" as far as culinary matters go, we might simply be describing an early form of pizza base.
I cannot resist adding this comment: when children ask their teachers, especially their religious studies teachers, perfectly obvious questions to which the teachers have no perfectly obvious answers, they have three responses available. The first, which would be the best, would be to admit that we simply don't have an answer to the question. The second is to claim that this is one more of the great mysteries of the deity; which is actually the first answer, but delivered insincerely and disingenuously, both of which are bad teaching because mean to children. The third option is to make up a completely ridiculous story, and not only insist on its veracity, but demand faith in it as well; and then the story enters custom and tradition, and becomes history. So we can imagine the child asking: how did Mosheh manage to feed 1.5 million people, for 40 years, in a desert? And answer 1, or even answer 2, would have been much more intelligent.
16:36 VE HA OMER ASIYRAT HA EYPHAH HU
וְהָעֹמֶר עֲשִׂרִית הָאֵיפָה הוּא
KJ: Now an omer is the tenth part of an ephah.
BN: Now an omer is the tenth part of an ephah. {P}
EPHAH: see verse 16. But why does it need to be stated here? Either it was a Mosaic weight and measure, and the people of the era of the scribe no longer used it, or vice versa. Either way, its presence here can only be for one or other of these two, and therefore further evidence of the history of the date of the writing of the Torah.
pey break
pey break
Exodus: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13a 13b 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30a 30b 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38a 38b 39 40
Copyright © 2020 David Prashker
All rights reserved
The Argaman Press
No comments:
Post a Comment