11:1 VA YEHI HA AM KE MIT'ONENIM RA BE AZNEY YHVH VA YISHMA YHVH VA YICHAR APHO VA TIV'AR BAM EYSH YHVH VA TOCHAL BI KETSEH HA MACHANEH
וַיְהִי הָעָם כְּמִתְאֹנְנִים רַע בְּאָזְנֵי יְהוָה וַיִּשְׁמַע יְהוָה וַיִּחַר אַפּוֹ וַתִּבְעַר בָּם אֵשׁ יְהוָה וַתֹּאכַל בִּקְצֵה הַמַּחֲנֶה
BN (BibleNet translation): And the people began moaning, muttering negatives in the ears of YHVH; and when YHVH heard it, his nostrils were inflamed; and his fire burnt among them, and many were consumed by it the rear of the camp.
MIT'ONENIM: From the root ANAN (אנן) which in its basic form means "to mourn" or "lament", but here is in the Hitpa'el or reflexive form; the only other occurrence as such in Lamentations 3:39.
Only three days from the mountain, and the pillar of cloud in front of them - it does sound like the still-active volcano just spouted. The primitive assumption (actually we still do it today) is that the gods must be angry and we must have sinned.
But I need to emphasise the opening remark: only three days. That is all it ever takes for the moaning to begin. Just three days. And not two days or four days either, but the sacred number three, the space of darkness between the waxing of the old moon and the waning of the new. Cosmology, applied to human nature - better than horoscopes or Tarot cards!
VA YASHUVU: also difficult to translate, but at a very different level. A Ba'al Teshuvah in modern Judaism is a person who has left the faith, or lost his faith, but then recovered it, returned to it: a born-again, so to speak. The same verb is being used here, but the context obverses it: this is a return to the bad habits, not the good ones.
MI YA'ACHILEYNU BASAR: The translation makes them sound like cannibals; in fact, it simply says : "Who will feed us meat?" Which question must take us back to the problem of the oxen and the sheep in several of the most recent chapters - see Numbers 7, and my notes at verse 15 in particular; according to the description there, there is plenty of meat.
11:5 ZACHARNU ET HA DAGAH ASHER NOCHAL BE MITSRAYIM CHINAM ET HA KISHU'IM VE ET HA AVATICHIM VE ET HE CHATSIR VE ET HA BETSALIM VE ET HA SHUMIM
KJ: We remember the fish, which we did eat in Egypt freely; the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlick:
BN: "We remember the fish that we ate in Mitsrayim whenever we wanted; and the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlic...
11:6 VE ATAH NAPHSHENU YEVESHAH EYN KOL BILTI EL HA MAN EYNEYNU
KJ: But now our soul is dried away: there is nothing at all, beside this manna, before our eyes.
BN: "But now our souls are all dried up; there is nothing at all; we have nothing save this manna to look forward to."
11:7 VE HA MAN KI ZERA GAD VE EYNO KE EYN HA BEDOLACH
KJ: And the manna was as coriander seed, and the colour thereof as the colour of bdellium.
BN: And the manna tasted more like coriander seed, though it looked rather like bdellium.
BEDOLACH: For coriander seed, click here; for bdellium here, but also see Genesis 2:12.
11:8 SHATU HA AM VE LAKTU VE TAHANU VA RECHAYIM O DACHU BA MEDOCHAH U VISHLO VA PAROR VE ASU OTO UGOT VE HAYAH TA'AMO KE TA'AM LE SHAD HA SHAMEN
KJ: And the people went about, and gathered it, and ground it in mills, or beat it in a mortar, and baked it in pans, and made cakes of it: and the taste of it was as the taste of fresh oil.
BN: The people went around, gathering it, and they ground it in mills, or they beat it in mortars, and they boiled it in pots, and made cakes of it; and the taste of it was... just like a cake tastes when it is baked with oil.
It actually sounds pretty disgusting, and clearly very difficult to make edible; hardly surprising that they got fed up with it after a while. But what was it? We are never really told. Or we are, and this is the third time; but each time we have been told differently: the dew, on one occasion, quails, on one occasion, and now this herb. And when we get to Psalm 78:24, it will be different again, more bread-like, and tasting of honey (and three verses later in that Psalm, YHVH rains meat on them!)
TA'AMO KE TA'AM LE SHAD HA SHAMEN: The origins of Pita and Nan bread!
11:9 U VE REDET HA TAL AL HA MACHANEH LAILAH YERED HA MAN ALAV
KJ: And when the dew fell upon the camp in the night, the manna fell upon it.
BN: And when the dew fell upon the camp in the night, the manna fell upon it.
How does dew fall? Doesn't dew rise from the ground, like mist, where it is fog and rain that falls from the clouds? This makes it sound like something that fell from the trees or maybe was dropped by those passing quail; not that there were a lot of trees in the Sinai desert, and they ate all the quail the last time they demanded meat (Exodus 16). So, again, what was it?
11:10 VA YISHMA MOSHEH ET HA AM BOCHEH LE MISHPECHOTAV ISH LE PETACH AHALO VA YICHAR APH YHVH ME'OD U VE EYNEY MOSHEH RA
KJ: Then Moses heard the people weep throughout their families, every man in the door of his tent: and the anger of the LORD was kindled greatly; Moses also was displeased.
KJ: And Moses said unto the LORD, Wherefore hast thou afflicted thy servant? and wherefore have I not found favour in thy sight, that thou layest the burden of all this people upon me?
BN: And Mosheh said to YHVH: "Why have you dealt ill with your servant? and why have I not found favour in your sight, that you lay the burden of all this people upon me?..
HARIYTI...YELIDETIYHU: Using images of birth-giving. But also, as noted above, a word-game from RA in verse 10, to HAREY'OTA in verse 11, and now this.
HA OMEN: the same root that gives AMEN. More word-play.
Grammatically and syntactically this is an odd sentence. Mosheh imaginarily-quotes YHVH, but then switches out of the "quote" in mid-sentence.
It is also odd because - speaking as someone who now has grown-up children - back in the day before they were weaned, and they were hungry and crying for their mother's breast, having me hold them to my empty chest instead, actually made their crying worse, not better. Or is that Mosheh's point? That "I am not cut out for this leadership role, and I t-t-t-told you that, the very first t-t-t-time, remember, at Chorev" (with sincere apologies if this has offended anyone who is afflicted with a stammer or a stutter; my point, projected onto Mosheh's lips, is explained in my notes to Exodus 2:11: and 6:12).
11:13 ME AYIN LI BASAR LATET LE CHOL HA AM HA ZEH KI YIVKU ALAI LEMOR TENAH LANU VASAR VE NOCHELAH
KJ: Whence should I have flesh to give unto all this people? for they weep unto me, saying, Give us flesh, that we may eat.
BN: "And where am I supposed to find meat to feed all these people? They're reducing me to tears with their constant: 'Give us meat, that we may eat'...
And again the tone of this, in the Yehudit, needs to be conveyed in the English: it has a remarkably Yiddish feel to it!
11:14 LO UCHAL ANOCHI LEVADI LASET ET KOL HA AM HA ZEH KI CHAVED MIMENI
KJ: I am not able to bear all this people alone, because it is too heavy for me.
BN: "I cannot take charge of all this people on my own and single-handed. It's too much burden to carry...
Clearly he did not listen to Yitro, who told him to delegate. But this is a Chovav text (see note to Numbers 10:29), not a Yitro text, so perhaps he never received that excellent advice in this version.
KJ: And the LORD said unto Moses, Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and officers over them; and bring them unto the tabernacle of the congregation, that they may stand there with thee.
BN: Then YHVH said to Mosheh: "Bring me seventy of the elders of Yisra-El, men who you know are regarded as men of wisdom by the people, and who they will accept as officers over them. Bring them to the tent of meeting, that they may stand there with you...
KJ: And the LORD said unto Moses, Has the hand of YHVH waxed short? thou shalt see now whether my word shall come to pass unto thee or not.
BN: Then YHVH said to Mosheh: "Has YHVH's hand lost its strength? Now you shall see whether my word shall come to pass for you or not."
YAD...TIKTSAR: The Hand and the Name: Yad va Shem - the two key figures of speech for their deity throughout the Tanach. BE YAD CHAZAKAH... "with a mighty hand", he brought the Beney Yisra-El out of Mitsrayim (Exodus 3:19, Deuteronomy 26:8, Psalm 136:12 et al).
And surely this would be a far greater miracle than the mere crossing of the Sea of Reeds!
11:24 VA YETS'E MOSHEH VA YEDABER EL HA AM ET DIVREY YHVH VE YE'ESOPH SHIVIM ISH MI ZIKNEY HA AM HA YA'AMED OTAM SEVIVOT HA OHEL
KJ: And Moses went out, and told the people the words of the LORD, and gathered the seventy men of the elders of the people, and set them round about the tabernacle.
BN: And Mosheh went out, and told the people the words of YHVH; and he gathered seventy men from among the elders of the people, and stood them around the tent.
YASAPHU: The King James has this precisely opposite to its meaning: they did it now, because this was an aspect of the initiation rite; but LO YASAPHU, once the ceremony was over, they did not do so again.
Note also the play on words, relating back to the "rabble" of verse 4, HA'SAPHSUPH then, a rather more orderly "gathering" now, of Houyhnhnms rather than Yahoos.
VA YERED YHVH BE ENAN: Given the extent to which these tales are a mythological attempt to explain the workings of volcanos, and the outcome, which is that it is always the gods being angry with sinful humans, we can ourselves make a prophesy at this point of the verse: that before this chapter ends there will be some kind of a rebellion or outrage in the camp, against Mosheh and/or YHVH, and that some people will be plunged into an earthquake or burned by volcanic ash or reduced to plague by dust-clouds of lava, as just punishment for that rebellion.
11:26 VA YISHA'ARU SHNEY ANASHIM BA MACHANEH SHEM HA ECHAD EL-DAD VE SHEM HA SHENI MEYDAD VE TANACH ALEYHEM HA RU'ACH VE HEMAH BA KETUVIM VE LO YATSU HA OHELAH VA YITNAB'U BA MACHANEH
KJ: But there remained two of the men in the camp, the name of the one was Eldad, and the name of the other Medad: and the spirit rested upon them; and they were of them that were written, but went not out unto the tabernacle: and they prophesied in the camp.
BN: But there were two men in the camp - one was named El-Dad, and the other was named Meydad - on whom the spirit had come to rest, and it stayed on them; they were among those who had been counted, but they had not gone out to the Tent; and they prophesied in the camp.
11:32 VA YAKAM HA AM KOL HA YOM HA HU VE CHOL HA LAILAH VE CHOL YOM HA MACHARATAH VA YASPHU ET HA SELAV HA MAMIT ASAPH ASARAH CHAMARIM VE YISHTECHU LAHEM SHATO'ACH SEVIYVOT HA MACHANEH
KJ: And the people stood up all that day, and all that night, and all the next day, and they gathered the quails: he that gathered least gathered ten homers: and they spread them all abroad for themselves round about the camp.
BN: And the people stayed up all that day, and all the night, and all the next day, and gathered the quails; he who gathered the least gathered ten heaps; and they spread them all along the ground, at every corner of the camp.
11:33 HA BASAR ODENU BEYN SHINEYHEM TEREM YIKARET VE APH YHVH CHARAM VA AM VA YACH YHVH BA AM MAKAH RABAH ME'OD
KJ: And while the flesh was yet between their teeth, ere it was chewed, the wrath of the LORD was kindled against the people, and the LORD smote the people with a very great plague.
BN: And while the meat was still between their teeth, even before it had been chewed, YHVH's nostrils were inflamed against the people, and YHVH smote the people with a very great plague.
YHVH said that he was sending meat; and here is the meat; so why is he so angry? Are they eating it raw? Have they failed to bring it to the Kohanim for ritual slaughter? Should they have waved one as a sign of thanksgiving? And what is the plague? Some disease brought by the quails? Yet again we have a human event being given a divine explanation. Is it because quail are treif? And if they are treif, and YHVH promised meat, and sent the quails... click here?
11:34 VA YIKRA ET SHEM HA MAKOM HA HU KIVROT HA TA'AVAH KI SHAM KAVRU ET HA AM HA MIT'AVIM
KJ: And he called the name of that place Kibrothhattaavah: because there they buried the people that lusted.
BN: And the place was given the name Kivrot Ha Ta'avah, because there they buried the people who fell to lusting.
Which refers back to the opening of this chapter; verse 4 especially; see my note there to HIT'AVU.
11:35 MI KIVROT HA TA'AVAH NASU HA AM CHATSEROT VA YIHEYU BA CHATSEROT
KJ: And the people journeyed from Kibrothhattaavah unto Hazeroth; and abode at Hazeroth.
BN: From Kivrot Ha Ta'avah the people journeyed to Chatserot; and they camped at Chatserot.
pey break
11:2 YITS'AK HA AM EL MOSHEH VA YITPALEL MOSHEH EL YHVH VA TISHKA HA ESH
KJ: And the people cried unto Moses; and when Moses prayed unto the LORD, the fire was quenched.
יִּצְעַק הָעָם אֶל מֹשֶׁה וַיִּתְפַּלֵּל מֹשֶׁה אֶל יְהוָה וַתִּשְׁקַע הָאֵשׁ
KJ: And the people cried unto Moses; and when Moses prayed unto the LORD, the fire was quenched.
BN: And the people cried out to Mosheh; and Mosheh prayed to YHVH, and the fire abated.
VA YITPALEL: Astonishing. A reference to prayer as an act of propitiation is astounding enough; but that Mosheh needed prayer, when he had regular audience in the Ohel Mo'ed, and simply needed to ask. A text from a different period perhaps? An allegory to justify the introduction of formal prayer at that particular moment of history (2nd Temple, probably 5th or perhaps 4th century BCE)? And yes, I know your answer: that it was precisely prayer that Mosheh used in his dialogues with YHVH. Obvious, standard, traditional answer. But then go back and look at that most central of all points of Jewish orthodoxy, the giving of the laws. YHVH dictates, Mosheh scribes. There is no prayer taking place at those times.
11:3 VA YIKRA SHEM HA MAKOM HA HU TAV'ERAH KI VA'ARAH VAM EYSH YHVH
KJ: And he called the name of the place Taberah: because the fire of the LORD burnt among them.
וַיִּקְרָא שֵׁם הַמָּקוֹם הַהוּא תַּבְעֵרָה כִּי בָעֲרָה בָם אֵשׁ יְהוָה
BN: And the name given to this place was Tav'erah, because the fire of YHVH burnt among them.
Or perhaps not a text from a different period; an aetiological myth.
TAV'ERAH: see also Deuteronomy 9:22. The root is BA'AR, which is the "consuming" of verse 1 rather more than it is the "burning" of verse 3. The Tav prefix is very rare, but is also the vindication of the modern grammatic form by means of which new verbs are added for new concepts, where no form exists to add them: similar to the way we create new words in English by making nouns or adjectives out of people's names (to boycott, a quisling, etc). LETDALEK for the refuelling of airplanes in midair is the example I have used previously. Here LITVA'ER.
11:4 VE HA'SAPHSUPH ASHER BE KIRBO HIT'AVU TA'AVAH VA YASHVU VA YIVKU GAM BENEY YISRA-EL VA YOMRU MI YA'ACHILENU BASAR
KJ: And the mixt multitude that was among them fell a lusting: and the children of Israel also wept again, and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat?
BN (polite translation): And the mixed multitude that was among them fell a-lusting; and the Beney Yisra-El also wept again, and said: "Would that we were given meat to eat!"
BN: (honest translation): And crowds of drunken yahoos among them went on a serious binge of booze and sex, while even the more orderly and respectable among the Beney Yisra-El went back to the old muttering: "We want meat!"
HA'SAPHSUPH: Should really be HA ASAPHSUPH, but the two become ellided because of the first-letter Aleph (א). This is another of those compound words like YERAKRAK for "greenish" and ADAMDAMET for "reddish" that we had earlier (see Leviticus 13). An Asephah is a "gathering" or a "meeting"; LE'ESOPH is the Po'al form that will yield the name Yoseph. Properly, technically, if we are translating honestly, Asaphsuph should be rendered as "rabble", "hoi poloi" or even "yahoos"; "mixed multitude" is a very generous euphemism; these are Chelsea supporters on a Saturday night, after another thrashing at White Hart Lane!
HIT'AVU: Hitpa'el form, and what is left is an unused root, AVAH (אָוָה), generally reckoned to be connected with AHAVAH (though that has a Vet, not a Vav - אהבה), which is "love" or "desire"; so, in this case, being reflexive, "self-love", "narcissistic self-interest", "self-indulgence", as you prefer.
וְהָאסַפְסֻף אֲשֶׁר בְּקִרְבּוֹ הִתְאַוּוּ תַּאֲוָה וַיָּשֻׁבוּ וַיִּבְכּוּ גַּם בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וַיֹּאמְרוּ מִי יַאֲכִלֵנוּ בָּשָׂר
KJ: And the mixt multitude that was among them fell a lusting: and the children of Israel also wept again, and said, Who shall give us flesh to eat?
BN (polite translation): And the mixed multitude that was among them fell a-lusting; and the Beney Yisra-El also wept again, and said: "Would that we were given meat to eat!"
BN: (honest translation): And crowds of drunken yahoos among them went on a serious binge of booze and sex, while even the more orderly and respectable among the Beney Yisra-El went back to the old muttering: "We want meat!"
HA'SAPHSUPH: Should really be HA ASAPHSUPH, but the two become ellided because of the first-letter Aleph (א). This is another of those compound words like YERAKRAK for "greenish" and ADAMDAMET for "reddish" that we had earlier (see Leviticus 13). An Asephah is a "gathering" or a "meeting"; LE'ESOPH is the Po'al form that will yield the name Yoseph. Properly, technically, if we are translating honestly, Asaphsuph should be rendered as "rabble", "hoi poloi" or even "yahoos"; "mixed multitude" is a very generous euphemism; these are Chelsea supporters on a Saturday night, after another thrashing at White Hart Lane!
HIT'AVU: Hitpa'el form, and what is left is an unused root, AVAH (אָוָה), generally reckoned to be connected with AHAVAH (though that has a Vet, not a Vav - אהבה), which is "love" or "desire"; so, in this case, being reflexive, "self-love", "narcissistic self-interest", "self-indulgence", as you prefer.
VA YASHUVU: also difficult to translate, but at a very different level. A Ba'al Teshuvah in modern Judaism is a person who has left the faith, or lost his faith, but then recovered it, returned to it: a born-again, so to speak. The same verb is being used here, but the context obverses it: this is a return to the bad habits, not the good ones.
MI YA'ACHILEYNU BASAR: The translation makes them sound like cannibals; in fact, it simply says : "Who will feed us meat?" Which question must take us back to the problem of the oxen and the sheep in several of the most recent chapters - see Numbers 7, and my notes at verse 15 in particular; according to the description there, there is plenty of meat.
11:5 ZACHARNU ET HA DAGAH ASHER NOCHAL BE MITSRAYIM CHINAM ET HA KISHU'IM VE ET HA AVATICHIM VE ET HE CHATSIR VE ET HA BETSALIM VE ET HA SHUMIM
זָכַרְנוּ אֶת הַדָּגָה אֲשֶׁר נֹאכַל בְּמִצְרַיִם חִנָּם אֵת הַקִּשֻּׁאִים וְאֵת הָאֲבַטִּחִים וְאֶת הֶחָצִיר וְאֶת הַבְּצָלִים וְאֶת הַשּׁוּמִים
BN: "We remember the fish that we ate in Mitsrayim whenever we wanted; and the cucumbers, and the melons, and the leeks, and the onions, and the garlic...
They ask for meat but they nostalge for fish and vegetables. Why CHINAM? Or even, how CHINAM? If this is what they ate in Mitsrayim, they were unusually well-fed slaves and they must indeed have been living in fleshpots; which adds weight to the argument that they were never slaves in the first place, but at most indentured labourers.
11:6 VE ATAH NAPHSHENU YEVESHAH EYN KOL BILTI EL HA MAN EYNEYNU
וְעַתָּה נַפְשֵׁנוּ יְבֵשָׁה אֵין כֹּל בִּלְתִּי אֶל הַמָּן עֵינֵינוּ
BN: "But now our souls are all dried up; there is nothing at all; we have nothing save this manna to look forward to."
Or maybe all the cattle and the flocks that they have brought with from Egypt (I have no idea how slaves acquired them) are the exclusive property of the Kohanim and Leviyim, and it is only the regular Beney Yisra-El who are surviving on manna. (I apologise, but I merely read the text as it is presented; I am not responsible for its inner contradictions and confusions).
11:7 VE HA MAN KI ZERA GAD VE EYNO KE EYN HA BEDOLACH
וְהַמָּן כִּזְרַע גַּד הוּא וְעֵינוֹ כְּעֵין הַבְּדֹלַח
BN: And the manna tasted more like coriander seed, though it looked rather like bdellium.
BEDOLACH: For coriander seed, click here; for bdellium here, but also see Genesis 2:12.
11:8 SHATU HA AM VE LAKTU VE TAHANU VA RECHAYIM O DACHU BA MEDOCHAH U VISHLO VA PAROR VE ASU OTO UGOT VE HAYAH TA'AMO KE TA'AM LE SHAD HA SHAMEN
שָׁטוּ הָעָם וְלָקְטוּ וְטָחֲנוּ בָרֵחַיִם אוֹ דָכוּ בַּמְּדֹכָה וּבִשְּׁלוּ בַּפָּרוּר וְעָשׂוּ אֹתוֹ עֻגוֹת וְהָיָה טַעְמוֹ כְּטַעַם לְשַׁד הַשָּׁמֶן
BN: The people went around, gathering it, and they ground it in mills, or they beat it in mortars, and they boiled it in pots, and made cakes of it; and the taste of it was... just like a cake tastes when it is baked with oil.
It actually sounds pretty disgusting, and clearly very difficult to make edible; hardly surprising that they got fed up with it after a while. But what was it? We are never really told. Or we are, and this is the third time; but each time we have been told differently: the dew, on one occasion, quails, on one occasion, and now this herb. And when we get to Psalm 78:24, it will be different again, more bread-like, and tasting of honey (and three verses later in that Psalm, YHVH rains meat on them!)
TA'AMO KE TA'AM LE SHAD HA SHAMEN: The origins of Pita and Nan bread!
11:9 U VE REDET HA TAL AL HA MACHANEH LAILAH YERED HA MAN ALAV
וּבְרֶדֶת הַטַּל עַל הַמַּחֲנֶה לָיְלָה יֵרֵד הַמָּן עָלָיו
BN: And when the dew fell upon the camp in the night, the manna fell upon it.
How does dew fall? Doesn't dew rise from the ground, like mist, where it is fog and rain that falls from the clouds? This makes it sound like something that fell from the trees or maybe was dropped by those passing quail; not that there were a lot of trees in the Sinai desert, and they ate all the quail the last time they demanded meat (Exodus 16). So, again, what was it?
11:10 VA YISHMA MOSHEH ET HA AM BOCHEH LE MISHPECHOTAV ISH LE PETACH AHALO VA YICHAR APH YHVH ME'OD U VE EYNEY MOSHEH RA
וַיִּשְׁמַע מֹשֶׁה אֶת הָעָם בֹּכֶה לְמִשְׁפְּחֹתָיו אִישׁ לְפֶתַח אָהֳלוֹ וַיִּחַר אַף יְהוָה מְאֹד וּבְעֵינֵי מֹשֶׁה רָע
KJ: Then Moses heard the people weep throughout their families, every man in the door of his tent: and the anger of the LORD was kindled greatly; Moses also was displeased.
BN: And Mosheh heard the people weeping, family by family, every man at the door of his tent; and YHVH's anger was kindled greatly; and Mosheh was displeased.
BOCHEH: Yes, literally, "weeping". But it doesn't mean "weeping", in this context. More euphemisms. Muttering, moaning, groaning, bitching, whingeing, whining...
VA YICHAR... U VE EYNEY MOSHEH RA: I do love this implied criticism of the deity: YHVH, as usual, throws a tantrum, inflamed nostrils, Nichretah weaponry at the ready... Mosheh is merely "displeased" - literally, "it was bad in his eyes"; or maybe "wicked", for which RA is also used (and note that it will be used again, in a different grammatical form - HAREY'OTA - in the next verse; and then turned into a word-play - HARIYTI - in the verse after that). But still, a tut, not an eruption.
11:11 VA YOMER MOSHEH EL YHVH LAMAH HAREY'OTA LE AVDECHA VE LAMAH LO MATSATI CHEN BE EYNEYCHA LASUM ET MASA KOL HA AM HA ZEH ALAY
וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶליְהוָה לָמָה הֲרֵעֹתָ לְעַבְדֶּךָ וְלָמָּה לֹא מָצָתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ לָשׂוּם אֶת מַשָּׂא כָּל הָעָם הַזֶּה עָלָי
KJ: And Moses said unto the LORD, Wherefore hast thou afflicted thy servant? and wherefore have I not found favour in thy sight, that thou layest the burden of all this people upon me?
BN: And Mosheh said to YHVH: "Why have you dealt ill with your servant? and why have I not found favour in your sight, that you lay the burden of all this people upon me?..
They kvetch, so he kvetches. What makes the verse interesting is the psychology of his kvetching; he complains to YHVH about YHVH, but really he is complaining to YHVH about his own people.
11:12 HE ANOCHI HARIYTI ET KOL HA AM HA ZEH IM ANOCHI YELIDETIYHU KI TOMAR ELAI SA'EHU VE CHEYKECHA KA ASHER YISA HA OMEN ET HA YONEK AL HA ADAMAH ASHER NISHBA'TA LA AVOTAV
KJ: Have I conceived all this people? have I begotten them, that thou shouldest say unto me, Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing father beareth the sucking child, unto the land which thou swarest unto their fathers?
BN: "Did I conceive all this people? Did I give birth to them, that you should say to me: Nurture them at your breast, the way a nursing-father carries the sucking child, to the land which you promised their fathers?..
11:12 HE ANOCHI HARIYTI ET KOL HA AM HA ZEH IM ANOCHI YELIDETIYHU KI TOMAR ELAI SA'EHU VE CHEYKECHA KA ASHER YISA HA OMEN ET HA YONEK AL HA ADAMAH ASHER NISHBA'TA LA AVOTAV
הֶאָנֹכִי הָרִיתִי אֵת כָּל הָעָם הַזֶּה אִם אָנֹכִי יְלִדְתִּיהוּ כִּי תֹאמַר אֵלַי שָׂאֵהוּ בְחֵיקֶךָ כַּאֲשֶׁר יִשָּׂא הָאֹמֵן אֶת הַיֹּנֵק עַל הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר נִשְׁבַּעְתָּ לַאֲבֹתָיו
KJ: Have I conceived all this people? have I begotten them, that thou shouldest say unto me, Carry them in thy bosom, as a nursing father beareth the sucking child, unto the land which thou swarest unto their fathers?
BN: "Did I conceive all this people? Did I give birth to them, that you should say to me: Nurture them at your breast, the way a nursing-father carries the sucking child, to the land which you promised their fathers?..
HARIYTI...YELIDETIYHU: Using images of birth-giving. But also, as noted above, a word-game from RA in verse 10, to HAREY'OTA in verse 11, and now this.
HA OMEN: the same root that gives AMEN. More word-play.
Grammatically and syntactically this is an odd sentence. Mosheh imaginarily-quotes YHVH, but then switches out of the "quote" in mid-sentence.
It is also odd because - speaking as someone who now has grown-up children - back in the day before they were weaned, and they were hungry and crying for their mother's breast, having me hold them to my empty chest instead, actually made their crying worse, not better. Or is that Mosheh's point? That "I am not cut out for this leadership role, and I t-t-t-told you that, the very first t-t-t-time, remember, at Chorev" (with sincere apologies if this has offended anyone who is afflicted with a stammer or a stutter; my point, projected onto Mosheh's lips, is explained in my notes to Exodus 2:11: and 6:12).
11:13 ME AYIN LI BASAR LATET LE CHOL HA AM HA ZEH KI YIVKU ALAI LEMOR TENAH LANU VASAR VE NOCHELAH
מֵאַיִן לִי בָּשָׂר לָתֵת לְכָל הָעָם הַזֶּה כִּי יִבְכּוּ עָלַי לֵאמֹר תְּנָה לָּנוּ בָשָׂר וְנֹאכֵלָה
BN: "And where am I supposed to find meat to feed all these people? They're reducing me to tears with their constant: 'Give us meat, that we may eat'...
And again the tone of this, in the Yehudit, needs to be conveyed in the English: it has a remarkably Yiddish feel to it!
11:14 LO UCHAL ANOCHI LEVADI LASET ET KOL HA AM HA ZEH KI CHAVED MIMENI
לֹא אוּכַל אָנֹכִי לְבַדִּי לָשֵׂאת אֶת כָּל הָעָם הַזֶּה כִּי כָבֵד מִמֶּנִּי
KJ: I am not able to bear all this people alone, because it is too heavy for me.
BN: "I cannot take charge of all this people on my own and single-handed. It's too much burden to carry...
Clearly he did not listen to Yitro, who told him to delegate. But this is a Chovav text (see note to Numbers 10:29), not a Yitro text, so perhaps he never received that excellent advice in this version.
And either way, we just spent the whole Book of Leviticus and the opening chapters of Numbers establishing a military structure, with six-figure number soldiery, a tribal structure of clans ruled by princes, and a priesthood of some 23,000 souls - how does any of that leave Mosheh "single-handed"?
11:15 VE IM KACHAH AT OSEH LI HARGENI NA HAROG IM MATSATI CHEN BE EYNEYCHA VE AL ER'EH BE RA'ATI
KJ: And if thou deal thus with me, kill me, I pray thee, out of hand, if I have found favour in thy sight; and let me not see my wretchedness.
BN: "But if this is how you intend to deal with me, then please just kill me now, done, right now, as proof that I've found favour in your sight; better that than you see me in this state of depression."
Irreverent? Did I just imagine you describing the translation here as irrelevant? This is why reading it in the Yehudit is so essential. The words, and the tone. And then ask someone from Israel, someone who speaks modern Ivrit, whether my translation or King James is the more precisely accurate, words as well as tone.
With one possible exception. ER'EH appears to be in the first person singular, future tense, and therefore could be Mosheh not wanting to see himself ever again in this wrestched state; however ER'EH is preceded by AL, and not by LO. AL is an imperative, "Do not", so it requires an addressee beyond the self.
Several verses ago we heard that there were murmurings, and that Mosheh went and prayed; we were never given the words of the prayer. But perhaps these are they, and the two incidents should be seen as one.
Where does the sentence break? "Kill me if I have found favor in your sight" or "If I have found favor, do not let me see my own wretchedness?" Either way is viable.
AT: Some Yehudit texts point it as ET, but ET introduces an accusative noun, and this is introducing a verb. Is it simply a scribal error, a missing Hey at the end, and it should be ATAH - masculine "You"? Because, as it stands, it is AT, feminine "you", in which case the pointing for the next word should give OSAH rather than OSEH - but rather than making an argument for a female deity here, even though we are on pilgrimage around the water-shrines, all of which were female shrines, sacred to Mir-Yam (Miriam) the water-goddess... no, I am going to take the traditional route, and look at all the other endings of the all the equivalents in this text... and they are all masculine. It must just be a missing Hey (ה).
The responses of both leaders are nothing short of pathetic. YHVH, as always, goes off on a tantrum, then retreats into a sulk. Mosheh just wants to die. Wonderful models for us to learn from!
pey break
11:16 VA YOMER YHVH EL MOSHEH ESPHAH LI SHIVIM ISH MI ZIKNEY YISRA-EL ASHER YADATA KI HEM ZIKNEY HA AM VE SHOTRAV VE LAKACHTA OTAM EL OHEL MO'ED VE HITYATSVU SHAM IMACH
11:15 VE IM KACHAH AT OSEH LI HARGENI NA HAROG IM MATSATI CHEN BE EYNEYCHA VE AL ER'EH BE RA'ATI
וְאִם כָּכָה אַתְּ עֹשֶׂה לִּי הָרְגֵנִי נָא הָרֹג אִם מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ וְאַל אֶרְאֶה בְּרָעָתִי
KJ: And if thou deal thus with me, kill me, I pray thee, out of hand, if I have found favour in thy sight; and let me not see my wretchedness.
BN: "But if this is how you intend to deal with me, then please just kill me now, done, right now, as proof that I've found favour in your sight; better that than you see me in this state of depression."
Irreverent? Did I just imagine you describing the translation here as irrelevant? This is why reading it in the Yehudit is so essential. The words, and the tone. And then ask someone from Israel, someone who speaks modern Ivrit, whether my translation or King James is the more precisely accurate, words as well as tone.
With one possible exception. ER'EH appears to be in the first person singular, future tense, and therefore could be Mosheh not wanting to see himself ever again in this wrestched state; however ER'EH is preceded by AL, and not by LO. AL is an imperative, "Do not", so it requires an addressee beyond the self.
Several verses ago we heard that there were murmurings, and that Mosheh went and prayed; we were never given the words of the prayer. But perhaps these are they, and the two incidents should be seen as one.
Where does the sentence break? "Kill me if I have found favor in your sight" or "If I have found favor, do not let me see my own wretchedness?" Either way is viable.
AT: Some Yehudit texts point it as ET, but ET introduces an accusative noun, and this is introducing a verb. Is it simply a scribal error, a missing Hey at the end, and it should be ATAH - masculine "You"? Because, as it stands, it is AT, feminine "you", in which case the pointing for the next word should give OSAH rather than OSEH - but rather than making an argument for a female deity here, even though we are on pilgrimage around the water-shrines, all of which were female shrines, sacred to Mir-Yam (Miriam) the water-goddess... no, I am going to take the traditional route, and look at all the other endings of the all the equivalents in this text... and they are all masculine. It must just be a missing Hey (ה).
The responses of both leaders are nothing short of pathetic. YHVH, as always, goes off on a tantrum, then retreats into a sulk. Mosheh just wants to die. Wonderful models for us to learn from!
pey break
11:16 VA YOMER YHVH EL MOSHEH ESPHAH LI SHIVIM ISH MI ZIKNEY YISRA-EL ASHER YADATA KI HEM ZIKNEY HA AM VE SHOTRAV VE LAKACHTA OTAM EL OHEL MO'ED VE HITYATSVU SHAM IMACH
וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל מֹשֶׁה אֶסְפָה לִּי שִׁבְעִים אִישׁ מִזִּקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר יָדַעְתָּ כִּי הֵם זִקְנֵי הָעָם וְשֹׁטְרָיו וְלָקַחְתָּ אֹתָם אֶל אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וְהִתְיַצְּבוּ שָׁם עִמָּךְ
KJ: And the LORD said unto Moses, Gather unto me seventy men of the elders of Israel, whom thou knowest to be the elders of the people, and officers over them; and bring them unto the tabernacle of the congregation, that they may stand there with thee.
BN: Then YHVH said to Mosheh: "Bring me seventy of the elders of Yisra-El, men who you know are regarded as men of wisdom by the people, and who they will accept as officers over them. Bring them to the tent of meeting, that they may stand there with you...
So Mosheh's rant turns out to have been mere hysteria and neurosis - the full leadership is of course in place, and he isn't single-handed.
And in fact much of this is the Yitro tale, being told somewhat differently: the outcome at least is about to be the same, the appointment of a leadership hierarchy, so that delegation can become possible. First the military, then the religious, now the secular. In the context, it is quite logical.
ZAKENIM: Two meanings, and both used in the same sentence, which appears to have confused many translators. The false belief that our elders are always wiser than ourselves, combined with the commandment to honour and respect our parents. Actually the root, ZAKAN, simply means "a beard".
11:17 VE YARADETI VE DIBARTI IMACH SHAM VE ATSALTI MIN HA RU'ACH ASHER ALEYCHA VE SAMTI ALEYHEM VE NASU IT'CHA BE MASA HA AM VE LO TISA ATAH LEVADECHA
KJ: And I will come down and talk with thee there: and I will take of the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, that thou bear it not thyself alone.
BN: "And I will come down and speak with you there. And I will take away this burden that is on you, and I will put it on them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with you, so that you do not have to bear it yourself alone...
All of which appears to be a rather more exalted way of doing what Yitro did in the earlier version (Exodus 18:13 ff); and shows again that we have two versions of the tale combined. What might be interesting to explore is the thought that Mosheh never really speaks to YHVH directly; that it is just a metaphor (see for example, Maimonides' commentary on the Kavod in Exodus 24:16); what he does is communicate with the idea of the divine through the interventions of the priest; and in the first version, Yitro, we hear the priest telling him with his own lips; but in this second version, Chovav, it is put more literally into the mouth of YHVH. In the one version, Mosheh gives the law through divine inspiration; in the second, he receives it direct from YHVH on Mount Sinai. And in that distinction, the career of Rabbi Louis Jacobs is ruined and Masorti Judaism founded; in that distinction, the central disagreement between orthodox and Reform Judaism.
The above thus becomes a parallel to the fertility tales: there, all women are barren and infertile until the goddess grants them her favours: exalting thereby the goddess. Mosheh here is a complete incompetent in leadership, until YHVH shows him what do to, and then lo and behold... the problem with this - the fundamental problem of religious faith per se - is that superiorising the deity and crediting everything there also inferiorises human beings and validates passive compliance: social control.
RU'ACH: translated here as 'spirit', in the sense of 'mood'; but that isn't really what it means. What is being taken away is the burden of sole responsibility.
SEVENTY ELDERS: Is this also the origins of the Sanhedrin?
11:18 VE EL HA AM TOMAR HITKADSHU LE MACHAR VA ACHALTEM BASAR KI BECHITEM BE AZNEY YHVH LEMOR MI YA'ACHILENU BASAR KI TOV LANU BE MITSRAYIM VE NATAN YHVH LACHEM BASAR VA ACHALTEM
KJ: And say thou unto the people, Sanctify yourselves against to morrow, and ye shall eat flesh: for ye have wept in the ears of the LORD, saying, Who shall give us flesh to eat? for it was well with us in Egypt: therefore the LORD will give you flesh, and ye shall eat.
BN: "And tell the people: Undertake what is necessary to make yourselves pure for to-morrow, and you shall eat meat. You have wept in the ears of YHVH, saying: 'Who is going to give us meat to eat, and make life good for us, like it was in Mitsrayim?' So YHVH will give you meat, and you will eat...
ZAKENIM: Two meanings, and both used in the same sentence, which appears to have confused many translators. The false belief that our elders are always wiser than ourselves, combined with the commandment to honour and respect our parents. Actually the root, ZAKAN, simply means "a beard".
11:17 VE YARADETI VE DIBARTI IMACH SHAM VE ATSALTI MIN HA RU'ACH ASHER ALEYCHA VE SAMTI ALEYHEM VE NASU IT'CHA BE MASA HA AM VE LO TISA ATAH LEVADECHA
וְיָרַדְתִּי וְדִבַּרְתִּי עִמְּךָ שָׁם וְאָצַלְתִּי מִן הָרוּחַ אֲשֶׁר עָלֶיךָ וְשַׂמְתִּי עֲלֵיהֶם וְנָשְׂאוּ אִתְּךָ בְּמַשָּׂא הָעָם וְלֹא תִשָּׂא אַתָּה לְבַדֶּךָ
KJ: And I will come down and talk with thee there: and I will take of the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, that thou bear it not thyself alone.
BN: "And I will come down and speak with you there. And I will take away this burden that is on you, and I will put it on them; and they shall bear the burden of the people with you, so that you do not have to bear it yourself alone...
All of which appears to be a rather more exalted way of doing what Yitro did in the earlier version (Exodus 18:13 ff); and shows again that we have two versions of the tale combined. What might be interesting to explore is the thought that Mosheh never really speaks to YHVH directly; that it is just a metaphor (see for example, Maimonides' commentary on the Kavod in Exodus 24:16); what he does is communicate with the idea of the divine through the interventions of the priest; and in the first version, Yitro, we hear the priest telling him with his own lips; but in this second version, Chovav, it is put more literally into the mouth of YHVH. In the one version, Mosheh gives the law through divine inspiration; in the second, he receives it direct from YHVH on Mount Sinai. And in that distinction, the career of Rabbi Louis Jacobs is ruined and Masorti Judaism founded; in that distinction, the central disagreement between orthodox and Reform Judaism.
The above thus becomes a parallel to the fertility tales: there, all women are barren and infertile until the goddess grants them her favours: exalting thereby the goddess. Mosheh here is a complete incompetent in leadership, until YHVH shows him what do to, and then lo and behold... the problem with this - the fundamental problem of religious faith per se - is that superiorising the deity and crediting everything there also inferiorises human beings and validates passive compliance: social control.
RU'ACH: translated here as 'spirit', in the sense of 'mood'; but that isn't really what it means. What is being taken away is the burden of sole responsibility.
SEVENTY ELDERS: Is this also the origins of the Sanhedrin?
11:18 VE EL HA AM TOMAR HITKADSHU LE MACHAR VA ACHALTEM BASAR KI BECHITEM BE AZNEY YHVH LEMOR MI YA'ACHILENU BASAR KI TOV LANU BE MITSRAYIM VE NATAN YHVH LACHEM BASAR VA ACHALTEM
וְאֶל הָעָם תֹּאמַר הִתְקַדְּשׁוּ לְמָחָר וַאֲכַלְתֶּם בָּשָׂר כִּי בְּכִיתֶם בְּאָזְנֵי יְהוָה לֵאמֹר מִי יַאֲכִלֵנוּ בָּשָׂר כִּי טוֹב לָנוּ בְּמִצְרָיִם וְנָתַן יְהוָה לָכֶם בָּשָׂר וַאֲכַלְתֶּם
KJ: And say thou unto the people, Sanctify yourselves against to morrow, and ye shall eat flesh: for ye have wept in the ears of the LORD, saying, Who shall give us flesh to eat? for it was well with us in Egypt: therefore the LORD will give you flesh, and ye shall eat.
BN: "And tell the people: Undertake what is necessary to make yourselves pure for to-morrow, and you shall eat meat. You have wept in the ears of YHVH, saying: 'Who is going to give us meat to eat, and make life good for us, like it was in Mitsrayim?' So YHVH will give you meat, and you will eat...
Won't immediate surrender on this scale just encourage more moaning? And then more demands? Lord, you gave us meat, now we want vegetables; and dessert; wine would be nice; a digestif; After Eight mints...
Ah, but just wait, YHVH isn't really surrendering at all... and you can hear it in the edges of his tone, the hints of sarcasm, the residual anger... And we should know this anyway, from our past experience of him in three books and 10 chapters of the Torah; first the "obey me or there will be Nichretah", then the tantrum when they don't; followed by the sulk; and then... an entire eruption of bile in the form of volcanic lava...
11:19 LO YOM ECHAD TOCHLUN VE LO YOMAYIM VE LO CHAMISHAH YAMIM VE LO ASARAH YAMIM VE LO ESRIM YOM
KJ: Ye shall not eat one day, nor two days, nor five days, neither ten days, nor twenty days;
BN: "You shall not eat one day, nor two days, nor five days, nor ten days, nor twenty days...
11:20 AD CHODESH YAMIM AD ASHER YETS'E ME APHCHEM VE HAYAH LACHEM LE ZARA YA'AN KI ME'ASTEM ET YHVH ASHER BE KIRBECHEM VA TIVKU LEPHANAV LEMOR LAMAH ZEH YATSANU MI MITSRAYIM
KJ: But even a whole month, until it come out at your nostrils, and it be loathsome unto you: because that ye have despised the LORD which is among you, and have wept before him, saying, Why came we forth out of Egypt?
BN: "But a whole month, until it comes out of your nostrils, until it becomes loathsome to you; because you have rejected YHVH who is among you, and have troubled him with weeping, saying: 'Why, now, did we ever leave Mitsrayim?'"
Ah, but just wait, YHVH isn't really surrendering at all... and you can hear it in the edges of his tone, the hints of sarcasm, the residual anger... And we should know this anyway, from our past experience of him in three books and 10 chapters of the Torah; first the "obey me or there will be Nichretah", then the tantrum when they don't; followed by the sulk; and then... an entire eruption of bile in the form of volcanic lava...
11:19 LO YOM ECHAD TOCHLUN VE LO YOMAYIM VE LO CHAMISHAH YAMIM VE LO ASARAH YAMIM VE LO ESRIM YOM
לֹא יוֹם אֶחָד תֹּאכְלוּן וְלֹא יוֹמָיִם וְלֹא חֲמִשָּׁה יָמִים וְלֹא עֲשָׂרָה יָמִים וְלֹא עֶשְׂרִים יוֹם
KJ: Ye shall not eat one day, nor two days, nor five days, neither ten days, nor twenty days;
BN: "You shall not eat one day, nor two days, nor five days, nor ten days, nor twenty days...
11:20 AD CHODESH YAMIM AD ASHER YETS'E ME APHCHEM VE HAYAH LACHEM LE ZARA YA'AN KI ME'ASTEM ET YHVH ASHER BE KIRBECHEM VA TIVKU LEPHANAV LEMOR LAMAH ZEH YATSANU MI MITSRAYIM
עַד חֹדֶשׁ יָמִים עַד אֲשֶׁר יֵצֵא מֵאַפְּכֶם וְהָיָה לָכֶם לְזָרָא יַעַן כִּי מְאַסְתֶּם אֶת יְהוָה אֲשֶׁר בְּקִרְבְּכֶם וַתִּבְכּוּ לְפָנָיו לֵאמֹר לָמָּה זֶּה יָצָאנוּ מִמִּצְרָיִם
KJ: But even a whole month, until it come out at your nostrils, and it be loathsome unto you: because that ye have despised the LORD which is among you, and have wept before him, saying, Why came we forth out of Egypt?
BN: "But a whole month, until it comes out of your nostrils, until it becomes loathsome to you; because you have rejected YHVH who is among you, and have troubled him with weeping, saying: 'Why, now, did we ever leave Mitsrayim?'"
Tantrum and sulk all in one on this occasion. Perhaps we need to re-think what we mean when we ask: do you believe in "God"? Do you believe in His existence? Yes - consciousness equals consciousness of something, so the deity exists by the very fact that we are discussing him. But instead, as one might ask about a CEO or a Prime Minister or a team captain: do you believe in him? Does he have the what-it-takes? To which the answer has surely to be no, we need a better god.
And unfortunately, returning to his actual response, the evidence of human history is that his solution doesn't work anyway; the more they are given, even to the point of suicidal excess - fat-to-bursting so to speak - the more humans will indulge their greed, the more they will go on wanting.
KJ: And Moses said, The people, among whom I am, are six hundred thousand footmen; and thou hast said, I will give them flesh, that they may eat a whole month.
BN: Then Mosheh replied: "I am here with six hundred thousand men on foot; and yet you have said: 'I will give them meat, that they may eat for a whole month!'..
Whoa there! Wait a minute! Mosheh is there with 600,000 men on foot - that is to say, he is there with his army, because that is precisely the number counted in the military census. Where then are the women and the children and the sick and the elderly, the remainder of the people? And why has he only taken the men of military age - is this a story of a mutiny in the ranks of Ach-Mousa as he marched against the Hyksos, and not the pilgrimage tale, or the volcano-expedition tale, or the Exodus tale at all?
But don't you just love the on-going argument between Mosheh and YHVH? Like Av-Raham at Sedom. YHVH wants total obedience, but he isn't going to get total obedience, not when he's wrong. And Mosheh, at last, throughout this chapter, standing up for himself, removing the burden of doing everybody else's job instead of his own, and free now to do that job: being a leader.
11:22 HA TSON U VAKAR YISHACHET LAHEM U MATSA LAHEM IM ET KOL DEGEY HA YAM YE'ASEPH LAHEM U MATSA LAHEM
KJ: Shall the flocks and the herds be slain for them, to suffice them? or shall all the fish of the sea be gathered together for them, to suffice them?
And unfortunately, returning to his actual response, the evidence of human history is that his solution doesn't work anyway; the more they are given, even to the point of suicidal excess - fat-to-bursting so to speak - the more humans will indulge their greed, the more they will go on wanting.
11:21 VA YOMER MOSHEH SHESH ME'OT ELEPH RAGLI HA AM ASHER ANOCHI BE KIRBO VE ATAH AMARTA BASAR ETEN LAHEM VE ACHLU CHODESH YAMIM
וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה שֵׁשׁ מֵאוֹת אֶלֶף רַגְלִי הָעָם אֲשֶׁר אָנֹכִי בְּקִרְבּוֹ וְאַתָּה אָמַרְתָּ בָּשָׂר אֶתֵּן לָהֶם וְאָכְלוּ חֹדֶשׁ יָמִים
KJ: And Moses said, The people, among whom I am, are six hundred thousand footmen; and thou hast said, I will give them flesh, that they may eat a whole month.
BN: Then Mosheh replied: "I am here with six hundred thousand men on foot; and yet you have said: 'I will give them meat, that they may eat for a whole month!'..
Whoa there! Wait a minute! Mosheh is there with 600,000 men on foot - that is to say, he is there with his army, because that is precisely the number counted in the military census. Where then are the women and the children and the sick and the elderly, the remainder of the people? And why has he only taken the men of military age - is this a story of a mutiny in the ranks of Ach-Mousa as he marched against the Hyksos, and not the pilgrimage tale, or the volcano-expedition tale, or the Exodus tale at all?
But don't you just love the on-going argument between Mosheh and YHVH? Like Av-Raham at Sedom. YHVH wants total obedience, but he isn't going to get total obedience, not when he's wrong. And Mosheh, at last, throughout this chapter, standing up for himself, removing the burden of doing everybody else's job instead of his own, and free now to do that job: being a leader.
11:22 HA TSON U VAKAR YISHACHET LAHEM U MATSA LAHEM IM ET KOL DEGEY HA YAM YE'ASEPH LAHEM U MATSA LAHEM
הֲצֹאן וּבָקָר יִשָּׁחֵט לָהֶם וּמָצָא לָהֶם אִם אֶת כָּל דְּגֵי הַיָּם יֵאָסֵף לָהֶם וּמָצָא לָהֶם
KJ: Shall the flocks and the herds be slain for them, to suffice them? or shall all the fish of the sea be gathered together for them, to suffice them?
BN: "If all the flocks and herds are slaughtered for them, will that suffice them? Or if all the fish in the sea are gathered together for them, will that suffice them?"
Is this my sarcasm being echoed, my irreverence as you called it a few verses ago; or have I simply been echoing this very different Mosheh? Is Mosheh seriously questioning the ability of YHVH to provide this much flesh - and now we recall that there has been meat, plenty of meat, the bringing of countless sacrifices, and verses telling us about all the sheep and cattle they had brought with from Mitsrayim. But obviously you don't want to slaughter everything in one go - you need husbandry, pregnant females producing new-born. Other than those of the wandering Bedou, sheep and cattle are not commonplace in the midst of the Sinai desert; and it will require farmloads to feed these numbers.
pey break
11:23 VA YOMER YHVH EL MOSHEH HA YAD YHVH TIKTSAR ATAH TIREH HA YIKRECHA DEVARI IM LO
pey break
11:23 VA YOMER YHVH EL MOSHEH HA YAD YHVH TIKTSAR ATAH TIREH HA YIKRECHA DEVARI IM LO
וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֶל מֹשֶׁה הֲיַד יְהוָה תִּקְצָר עַתָּה תִרְאֶה הֲיִקְרְךָ דְבָרִי אִם לֹא
KJ: And the LORD said unto Moses, Has the hand of YHVH waxed short? thou shalt see now whether my word shall come to pass unto thee or not.
BN: Then YHVH said to Mosheh: "Has YHVH's hand lost its strength? Now you shall see whether my word shall come to pass for you or not."
YAD...TIKTSAR: The Hand and the Name: Yad va Shem - the two key figures of speech for their deity throughout the Tanach. BE YAD CHAZAKAH... "with a mighty hand", he brought the Beney Yisra-El out of Mitsrayim (Exodus 3:19, Deuteronomy 26:8, Psalm 136:12 et al).
Yehudit as a language, as noted many times, is built from roots that form nouns, verbs, adjectives, adverbs, according to fixed rules. But it also builds those roots in patterns, so that often two words (or more) of similar meaning will come from different roots, and yet demonstrate their similarity alphabetically. So here. There is the root KATSATS (קצץ), which means "to cut off", or "to amputate" (Deuteronomy 25:12 for the hand, Jeremiah 9:25 for the hair); and there is the root KATSAR (Leviticus 19:9, Jeremiah 12:13), which is used for reaping and harvesting, a form of cutting off, but also different. It is the latter that is being used here, and the distinction is needed: YHVH's is not suggesting that his hand has been cut off, only that it has been shortened, which is to say weakened. This is actually more about the CHAZAKAH than it is the YAD.
And surely this would be a far greater miracle than the mere crossing of the Sea of Reeds!
11:24 VA YETS'E MOSHEH VA YEDABER EL HA AM ET DIVREY YHVH VE YE'ESOPH SHIVIM ISH MI ZIKNEY HA AM HA YA'AMED OTAM SEVIVOT HA OHEL
וַיֵּצֵא מֹשֶׁה וַיְדַבֵּר אֶל הָעָם אֵת דִּבְרֵי יְהוָה וַיֶּאֱסֹף שִׁבְעִים אִישׁ מִזִּקְנֵי הָעָם וַיַּעֲמֵד אֹתָם סְבִיבֹת הָאֹהֶל
KJ: And Moses went out, and told the people the words of the LORD, and gathered the seventy men of the elders of the people, and set them round about the tabernacle.
BN: And Mosheh went out, and told the people the words of YHVH; and he gathered seventy men from among the elders of the people, and stood them around the tent.
11:25 VA YERED YHVH BE ENAN VA YEDABER ELAV VA YA'TSEL MIN HA RU'ACH ASHER ALAV VA YITEN AL SHIVIM ISH HA ZEKENIM VA YEHI KE NO'ACH ALEYHEM HA RU'ACH VA YITNAB'U VE LO YASAPHU
KJ: And the LORD came down in a cloud, and spake unto him, and took of the spirit that was upon him, and gave it unto the seventy elders: and it came to pass, that, when the spirit rested upon them, they prophesied, and did not cease.
BN: Then YHVH came down in the cloud, and spoke to him, and lifted the spirit that was on him, and placed it on the seventy elders; and it came to pass, that, when the spirit rested on them, they prophesied, but they did so no more.
וַיֵּרֶד יְהוָה בֶּעָנָן וַיְדַבֵּר אֵלָיו וַיָּאצֶל מִן הָרוּחַ אֲשֶׁר עָלָיו וַיִּתֵּן עַל שִׁבְעִים אִישׁ הַזְּקֵנִים וַיְהִי כְּנוֹחַ עֲלֵיהֶם הָרוּחַ וַיִּתְנַבְּאוּ וְלֹא יָסָפוּ
KJ: And the LORD came down in a cloud, and spake unto him, and took of the spirit that was upon him, and gave it unto the seventy elders: and it came to pass, that, when the spirit rested upon them, they prophesied, and did not cease.
BN: Then YHVH came down in the cloud, and spoke to him, and lifted the spirit that was on him, and placed it on the seventy elders; and it came to pass, that, when the spirit rested on them, they prophesied, but they did so no more.
Cf Sha'ul prophesying,in 1 Samuel 19:24. What does "the spirit being upon them" actually entail? A drug-induced state? Spiritual intensity? Trance? And what did they prophesy? Or does prophesy here mean something different? And why did they stop? In a sense what is on him, and being transferred, is the Smicha described in the opening verse of Pirkei Avot: the authority to interpret the law.
YA'TSEL: There seems to be a vowel missing.
YITNABU: the root gives NAVI = prophet.
YA'TSEL: There seems to be a vowel missing.
YITNABU: the root gives NAVI = prophet.
YASAPHU: The King James has this precisely opposite to its meaning: they did it now, because this was an aspect of the initiation rite; but LO YASAPHU, once the ceremony was over, they did not do so again.
Note also the play on words, relating back to the "rabble" of verse 4, HA'SAPHSUPH then, a rather more orderly "gathering" now, of Houyhnhnms rather than Yahoos.
VA YERED YHVH BE ENAN: Given the extent to which these tales are a mythological attempt to explain the workings of volcanos, and the outcome, which is that it is always the gods being angry with sinful humans, we can ourselves make a prophesy at this point of the verse: that before this chapter ends there will be some kind of a rebellion or outrage in the camp, against Mosheh and/or YHVH, and that some people will be plunged into an earthquake or burned by volcanic ash or reduced to plague by dust-clouds of lava, as just punishment for that rebellion.
11:26 VA YISHA'ARU SHNEY ANASHIM BA MACHANEH SHEM HA ECHAD EL-DAD VE SHEM HA SHENI MEYDAD VE TANACH ALEYHEM HA RU'ACH VE HEMAH BA KETUVIM VE LO YATSU HA OHELAH VA YITNAB'U BA MACHANEH
וַיִּשָּׁאֲרוּ שְׁנֵי אֲנָשִׁים בַּמַּחֲנֶה שֵׁם הָאֶחָד אֶלְדָּד וְשֵׁם הַשֵּׁנִי מֵידָד וַתָּנַח עֲלֵהֶם הָרוּחַ וְהֵמָּה בַּכְּתֻבִים וְלֹא יָצְאוּ הָאֹהֱלָה וַיִּתְנַבְּאוּ בַּמַּחֲנֶה
KJ: But there remained two of the men in the camp, the name of the one was Eldad, and the name of the other Medad: and the spirit rested upon them; and they were of them that were written, but went not out unto the tabernacle: and they prophesied in the camp.
BN: But there were two men in the camp - one was named El-Dad, and the other was named Meydad - on whom the spirit had come to rest, and it stayed on them; they were among those who had been counted, but they had not gone out to the Tent; and they prophesied in the camp.
If YHVH has put the spirit on them, and then removed it, what kind of infallible god is he who manages to leave two of them still in trance?
We know that myrrh and especially frankincense were standard elements of the rituals around the altar, and both have chemical properties that can affect people, but unless those people have specific allergies they are unlikely to affect them as described here. In the world of Zoroastrianism - with which the Beney Yehudah became familiar during the exile in Babylon, and during the century between Zeru-Bavel's return, and that of Ezra and Nechem-Yah, the drug of preference for heightened spiritual response was haoma, for information about which, click here.
Is there any significance in the names El-Dad and Meydad? El-Dad is the equivalent of Theophilus in Greek - "who the god loves". Meydad has no meaning as such, though it could be read as "from the deity". It is possible, from the similarities of spelling, that El-Dad was actually Eldad, or that Meydad should be Mey-Dad - this would allow the latter to relate to the waters of the deity, except that the waters are always female, and so it is unlikely to be associated with "the beloved". It is likely one pairing or the other, where the KJ and most other translators give one of each. My own inclination is towards El-Dad and Mey-Dad - the Dad being the Dod, the "beloved", which is the root of King David's name, but also connected to the mandrakes (DUDA'IM - דוּדָאִים) in Genesis 30:14 ff (note that the word used there has a final aleph; the tale is set in Padan Aram, and so it has, quite logically, the Aramaic spelling).
Their being "counted" simply means that they were among the seventy elders; presumably they were the most affected because they were among the first to enter, took the seats further from the door, and were exiting last - so they got rather more of the substance than others would have done.
We know that myrrh and especially frankincense were standard elements of the rituals around the altar, and both have chemical properties that can affect people, but unless those people have specific allergies they are unlikely to affect them as described here. In the world of Zoroastrianism - with which the Beney Yehudah became familiar during the exile in Babylon, and during the century between Zeru-Bavel's return, and that of Ezra and Nechem-Yah, the drug of preference for heightened spiritual response was haoma, for information about which, click here.
Is there any significance in the names El-Dad and Meydad? El-Dad is the equivalent of Theophilus in Greek - "who the god loves". Meydad has no meaning as such, though it could be read as "from the deity". It is possible, from the similarities of spelling, that El-Dad was actually Eldad, or that Meydad should be Mey-Dad - this would allow the latter to relate to the waters of the deity, except that the waters are always female, and so it is unlikely to be associated with "the beloved". It is likely one pairing or the other, where the KJ and most other translators give one of each. My own inclination is towards El-Dad and Mey-Dad - the Dad being the Dod, the "beloved", which is the root of King David's name, but also connected to the mandrakes (DUDA'IM - דוּדָאִים) in Genesis 30:14 ff (note that the word used there has a final aleph; the tale is set in Padan Aram, and so it has, quite logically, the Aramaic spelling).
Their being "counted" simply means that they were among the seventy elders; presumably they were the most affected because they were among the first to enter, took the seats further from the door, and were exiting last - so they got rather more of the substance than others would have done.
11:27 VA YARATS HA NA'AR VA YAGED LE MOSHEH VA YOMAR EL-DAD U MEYDAD MITNAB'IM BA MACHANEH
KJ: And there ran a young man, and told Moses, and said, Eldad and Medad do prophesy in the camp.
BN: And the young man ran and told Mosheh, saying: El-Dad and Mey-Dad are prophesying in the camp.
HA NA'AR: Why the definite article? And what previously unmentioned young man? The KJ translation "answers" these questions by not translating the verse as it is written.
MITNABIM: What is actually taking place? Some kind of hysteria-induced speaking-in-tongues? Or a euphemism for revolutionary speechifying? Remember that non-approved prophesying has been outlawed - Leviticus 19:31.
11:28 VA YA'AN YEHOSHU'A BIN NUN MESHARET MOSHEH MI BECHURAV VA YOMAR ADONI MOSHEH KELA'EM
KJ: And Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of Moses, one of his young men, answered and said, My lord Moses, forbid them.
BN: And Yehoshu'a bin Nun, one of Mosheh's personal servants from his youth onward, answered and said, "My lord Mosheh, lock them up".
BIN NUN: Why is he Bin and not Ben? Nor is it an error here; he is always Yehosu'a bin Nun. Probably it was a regional variation: we are accustomed to Ben in the Yehudit, but Arabic is always Ibn, and Aramaic was always Bar.
MESHARET: how come we were never told this before? We were told that YHVH just intervened because Mosheh had no advisors? This feels like Yehoshu'aites needing this addition later on to give their man status (we have already seen this at least twice before)
MI BECHURAV: "One of his boys". Or perhaps he had some kind of butlering responsibilities, as the young David was King Sha'ul's armour-polisher.
KELA'EM: "Lock them up"? Then maybe it was indeed a euphemism for revolutionary speechifying! But where do you lock people up, in a nomadic caravan of linen tents?
וַיָּרָץ הַנַּעַר וַיַּגֵּד לְמֹשֶׁה וַיֹּאמַר אֶלְדָּד וּמֵידָד מִתְנַבְּאִים בַּמַּחֲנֶה
KJ: And there ran a young man, and told Moses, and said, Eldad and Medad do prophesy in the camp.
BN: And the young man ran and told Mosheh, saying: El-Dad and Mey-Dad are prophesying in the camp.
HA NA'AR: Why the definite article? And what previously unmentioned young man? The KJ translation "answers" these questions by not translating the verse as it is written.
MITNABIM: What is actually taking place? Some kind of hysteria-induced speaking-in-tongues? Or a euphemism for revolutionary speechifying? Remember that non-approved prophesying has been outlawed - Leviticus 19:31.
11:28 VA YA'AN YEHOSHU'A BIN NUN MESHARET MOSHEH MI BECHURAV VA YOMAR ADONI MOSHEH KELA'EM
וַיַּעַן יְהוֹשֻׁעַ בִּן נוּן מְשָׁרֵת מֹשֶׁה מִבְּחֻרָיו וַיֹּאמַר אֲדֹנִי מֹשֶׁה כְּלָאֵם
KJ: And Joshua the son of Nun, the servant of Moses, one of his young men, answered and said, My lord Moses, forbid them.
BN: And Yehoshu'a bin Nun, one of Mosheh's personal servants from his youth onward, answered and said, "My lord Mosheh, lock them up".
BIN NUN: Why is he Bin and not Ben? Nor is it an error here; he is always Yehosu'a bin Nun. Probably it was a regional variation: we are accustomed to Ben in the Yehudit, but Arabic is always Ibn, and Aramaic was always Bar.
MESHARET: how come we were never told this before? We were told that YHVH just intervened because Mosheh had no advisors? This feels like Yehoshu'aites needing this addition later on to give their man status (we have already seen this at least twice before)
MI BECHURAV: "One of his boys". Or perhaps he had some kind of butlering responsibilities, as the young David was King Sha'ul's armour-polisher.
KELA'EM: "Lock them up"? Then maybe it was indeed a euphemism for revolutionary speechifying! But where do you lock people up, in a nomadic caravan of linen tents?
11:29 VA YOMER LO MOSHEH HA MEKAN'E ATAH LI U MI YITEN KOL AM YHVH NEVIY'IM KI YITEN YHVH ET RUCHO ALEYHEM
KJ: And Moses said unto him, Enviest thou for my sake? would God that all the LORD'S people were prophets, and that the LORD would put his spirit upon them!
BN: And Mosheh said to him, "Are you jealous for my sake? Would that all of YHVH's people were prophets, that YHVH would put his spirit upon them!"
It is unclear why he would be jealous? Of what? The translation is not precisely accurate. Presumably by "prophesying" is meant they are rushing around telling everyone what they think this volcanic cloud means, a kind of altermative oracle or punditry; and Yehoshu'a thinks only Mosheh should be interpreting the messages of YHVH. Interesting that he wants them locked up - censorship, imprisonment of anyone with a different view, centralised control etc...
11:30 VA YE'ASEPH MOSHEH EL HA MACHANEH HU VE ZIKNEY YISRA-EL
KJ: And Moses gat him into the camp, he and the elders of Israel.
BN: And Mosheh withdrew into the camp, he and the elders of Yisra-El.
11:31 VE RU'ACH NAS'A ME ET YHVH VA YAGAZ SALVIM MIN HA YAM VA YITOSH AL HA MACHANEH KE DERECH YOM KOH U CHE DERECH YOM KOH SEVIYVOT HA MACHANEH U CHE AMATAYIM AL PENEY HA ARETS
KJ: And there went forth a wind from the LORD, and brought quails from the sea, and let them fall by the camp, as it were a day's journey on this side, and as it were a day's journey on the other side, round about the camp, and as it were two cubits high upon the face of the earth.
BN: And a wind blew from YHVH, and brought quails out of the sea, and they flew all around the camp, about a day's journey on this side, and a day's journey on the other side, all around the camp, and about two cubits above the face of the earth.
ME ET YHVH: Interesting description! "From YHVH". Once again we appear to have a natural event interpreted as a divine intervention.
MIN HA YAM: Interesting geography too. But it could be either the Red Sea or the Mediterranean - click here. And clearly quail in vast numbers was and still is a common sight in the area at this time of year.
YITOSH: From the root NATASH = "to spread out", and nothing to do with things being "let fall". They are simply flying all over the camp - and not surprising if they are scavenging birds: they are very hungry, there are a million people camped down there, there is bound to be food - though in the eventuality they will themselves become food.
Does quail count as "meat", of the sort the Beney Yisra-El were demanding. Very small amounts of meat and an awful lot of tiny bones on a quail. And are quail kosher? That depends on the type of quail: bobwhite, button or coturnix: click here. And it is even disputed where SALVIM were really quail anyway: click here, and here.
I think we need to go back again to Exodus 16, and compare these two tales line by line, because it seems to me that this is simply a second version of that tale.
וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ מֹשֶׁה הַמְקַנֵּא אַתָּה לִי וּמִי יִתֵּן כָּל עַם יְהוָה נְבִיאִים כִּי יִתֵּן יְהוָה אֶת רוּחוֹ עֲלֵיהֶם
KJ: And Moses said unto him, Enviest thou for my sake? would God that all the LORD'S people were prophets, and that the LORD would put his spirit upon them!
BN: And Mosheh said to him, "Are you jealous for my sake? Would that all of YHVH's people were prophets, that YHVH would put his spirit upon them!"
It is unclear why he would be jealous? Of what? The translation is not precisely accurate. Presumably by "prophesying" is meant they are rushing around telling everyone what they think this volcanic cloud means, a kind of altermative oracle or punditry; and Yehoshu'a thinks only Mosheh should be interpreting the messages of YHVH. Interesting that he wants them locked up - censorship, imprisonment of anyone with a different view, centralised control etc...
11:30 VA YE'ASEPH MOSHEH EL HA MACHANEH HU VE ZIKNEY YISRA-EL
וַיֵּאָסֵף מֹשֶׁה אֶל הַמַּחֲנֶה הוּא וְזִקְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל
KJ: And Moses gat him into the camp, he and the elders of Israel.
BN: And Mosheh withdrew into the camp, he and the elders of Yisra-El.
11:31 VE RU'ACH NAS'A ME ET YHVH VA YAGAZ SALVIM MIN HA YAM VA YITOSH AL HA MACHANEH KE DERECH YOM KOH U CHE DERECH YOM KOH SEVIYVOT HA MACHANEH U CHE AMATAYIM AL PENEY HA ARETS
וְרוּחַ נָסַע מֵאֵת יְהוָה וַיָּגָז שַׂלְוִים מִן הַיָּם וַיִּטֹּשׁ עַל הַמַּחֲנֶה כְּדֶרֶךְ יוֹם כֹּה וּכְדֶרֶךְ יוֹם כֹּה סְבִיבוֹת הַמַּחֲנֶה וּכְאַמָּתַיִם עַל פְּנֵי הָאָרֶץ
KJ: And there went forth a wind from the LORD, and brought quails from the sea, and let them fall by the camp, as it were a day's journey on this side, and as it were a day's journey on the other side, round about the camp, and as it were two cubits high upon the face of the earth.
BN: And a wind blew from YHVH, and brought quails out of the sea, and they flew all around the camp, about a day's journey on this side, and a day's journey on the other side, all around the camp, and about two cubits above the face of the earth.
ME ET YHVH: Interesting description! "From YHVH". Once again we appear to have a natural event interpreted as a divine intervention.
MIN HA YAM: Interesting geography too. But it could be either the Red Sea or the Mediterranean - click here. And clearly quail in vast numbers was and still is a common sight in the area at this time of year.
YITOSH: From the root NATASH = "to spread out", and nothing to do with things being "let fall". They are simply flying all over the camp - and not surprising if they are scavenging birds: they are very hungry, there are a million people camped down there, there is bound to be food - though in the eventuality they will themselves become food.
Does quail count as "meat", of the sort the Beney Yisra-El were demanding. Very small amounts of meat and an awful lot of tiny bones on a quail. And are quail kosher? That depends on the type of quail: bobwhite, button or coturnix: click here. And it is even disputed where SALVIM were really quail anyway: click here, and here.
I think we need to go back again to Exodus 16, and compare these two tales line by line, because it seems to me that this is simply a second version of that tale.
11:32 VA YAKAM HA AM KOL HA YOM HA HU VE CHOL HA LAILAH VE CHOL YOM HA MACHARATAH VA YASPHU ET HA SELAV HA MAMIT ASAPH ASARAH CHAMARIM VE YISHTECHU LAHEM SHATO'ACH SEVIYVOT HA MACHANEH
וַיָּקָם הָעָם כָּל הַיּוֹם הַהוּא וְכָל הַלַּיְלָה וְכֹל יוֹם הַמָּחֳרָת וַיַּאַסְפוּ אֶת הַשְּׂלָו הַמַּמְעִיט אָסַף עֲשָׂרָה חֳמָרִים וַיִּשְׁטְחוּ לָהֶם שָׁטוֹחַ סְבִיבוֹת הַמַּחֲנֶה
BN: And the people stayed up all that day, and all the night, and all the next day, and gathered the quails; he who gathered the least gathered ten heaps; and they spread them all along the ground, at every corner of the camp.
11:33 HA BASAR ODENU BEYN SHINEYHEM TEREM YIKARET VE APH YHVH CHARAM VA AM VA YACH YHVH BA AM MAKAH RABAH ME'OD
הַבָּשָׂר עוֹדֶנּוּ בֵּין שִׁנֵּיהֶם טֶרֶם יִכָּרֵת וְאַף יְהוָה חָרָה בָעָם וַיַּךְ יְהוָה בָּעָם, מַכָּה רַבָּה מְאֹד
KJ: And while the flesh was yet between their teeth, ere it was chewed, the wrath of the LORD was kindled against the people, and the LORD smote the people with a very great plague.
BN: And while the meat was still between their teeth, even before it had been chewed, YHVH's nostrils were inflamed against the people, and YHVH smote the people with a very great plague.
YHVH said that he was sending meat; and here is the meat; so why is he so angry? Are they eating it raw? Have they failed to bring it to the Kohanim for ritual slaughter? Should they have waved one as a sign of thanksgiving? And what is the plague? Some disease brought by the quails? Yet again we have a human event being given a divine explanation. Is it because quail are treif? And if they are treif, and YHVH promised meat, and sent the quails... click here?
11:34 VA YIKRA ET SHEM HA MAKOM HA HU KIVROT HA TA'AVAH KI SHAM KAVRU ET HA AM HA MIT'AVIM
וַיִּקְרָא אֶת שֵׁם הַמָּקוֹם הַהוּא קִבְרוֹת הַתַּאֲוָה כִּי שָׁם קָבְרוּ אֶת הָעָם הַמִּתְאַוִּים
KJ: And he called the name of that place Kibrothhattaavah: because there they buried the people that lusted.
BN: And the place was given the name Kivrot Ha Ta'avah, because there they buried the people who fell to lusting.
Which refers back to the opening of this chapter; verse 4 especially; see my note there to HIT'AVU.
11:35 MI KIVROT HA TA'AVAH NASU HA AM CHATSEROT VA YIHEYU BA CHATSEROT
מִקִּבְרוֹת הַתַּאֲוָה נָסְעוּ הָעָם חֲצֵרוֹת וַיִּהְיוּ בַּחֲצֵרוֹת
KJ: And the people journeyed from Kibrothhattaavah unto Hazeroth; and abode at Hazeroth.
BN: From Kivrot Ha Ta'avah the people journeyed to Chatserot; and they camped at Chatserot.
pey break
Copyright © 2020 David Prashker
All rights reserved
The Argaman Press
No comments:
Post a Comment