|
INTRODUCTION TO PARASHAT HASHAVUA
PARASHAT BESHALACH
By Rav Zvi Shimon
The Test of the 'Manna'
After the miraculous splitting of the Sea of Reeds and the joyous song of
praise sung by Moses and the people of Israel in response to their salvation,
the nation prepares to march forward to receive the Torah and to enter the
promised land of milk and honey. The
people of Israel are at a spiritual high, filled with faith "in the Lord and His
servant Moses" (14:31). However, as
evidenced by the narratives following the awesome salvation, this faith and
spiritual high does not last very long.
The people of Israel set out into the wilderness and must now contend
with the difficulties of life in the desert.
The Torah relates three similar episodes following the song at the sea. The first episode which occurs at
Mara (15:24) and the third which takes place at Refidim (17:2) deal with the
people's thirst for water. The
middle episode set in the wilderness of Sin deals with their hunger for food
(16:3). In all three episodes the
people grumbled against Moses and in the second and third they even recall the
preferable conditions which they "enjoyed" as slaves in Egypt:
"If only we had died by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat
by the fleshpots, when we ate our fill of bread!
For you have brought us out into this wilderness to starve this whole
congregation to death." (16:3).
and again
"Why did you bring us up from Egypt, to kill us and our children and livestock
with thirst?"(17:3)
In all three cases the solution to the people's qualms is quick in
coming. God reveals no anger or
disappointment at the people's reaction but rather immediately complies with
their requests. In Mara, God tells
Moses to throw a piece of wood into the water thereby miraculously sweetening
the bitter waters (15:25). In Elim,
God begins providing them with the manna, the bread which they eat in the day,
and with quail to eat in the evening (16:13).
In the wilderness of Sin, God tells Moses to strike a rock from which
issues forth water for the people to drink (17:6).
The absence of a reprimand from God implies that the people's complaints
were justified. If that is the case,
then the question arises: Why did God not provide for the people's needs even
before their complaints? Why did he
make them march in the blazing desert until overcome by thirst and hunger? The fact that the needs of the people
were met almost immediately upon their being articulated proves that there was
obviously no difficulty in providing a solution.
What, then, is the reason for the withholding of these solutions? Why did God not provide a constant
supply of water from the very beginning of the travels in the desert?
One possible explanation is that had God indeed provided a constant
supply of water from the very beginning then the people would never truly
appreciate all that God was doing for them.
Only after experiencing the absence of something can one truly appreciate
its worth. After experiencing thirst
and hunger the people can come to an appreciation of God's kindness and
munificence.
An analysis of God's response to the complaints of the people of Israel
in the narrative of the manna, the divine bread, raises another possibility:
"In the wilderness, the whole Israelite community grumbled against Moses and
Aaron. The Israelites said to them,
'If only we had died by the hand of the Lord in the land of Egypt, when we sat
by the fleshpots, when we ate our fill of bread!
For you have brought us out into this wilderness to starve this whole
congregation to death.'
And the Lord said to Moses, 'I will rain down bread for you from the sky, and
the people shall go out and gather each day that day's portion - that I may thus
test them, to see whether they will follow My instructions or not. But on the sixth day, when they
apportion what they have brought in, it shall prove to be double the amount they
gather each day.'" (Exodus 16:2-5)
God states that he will rain down bread each day in order to TEST them,
to see whether they will follow "TOROTAI" (translated "My instructions"). The purpose of God's provision of the
manna is to test the people of Israel.
What is the test of the manna?
Our Sages offer the following explanation:
The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Israel:...'I gave you the Torah for you to
occupy yourselves therewith daily...in which case I will satisfy you daily with
bread from heaven as it says "and the people shall go out and gather each day
that day's portion - that I may thus test them, to see whether they will follow
My instructions or not" (Shemot Rabba 25:9).
The Chizkuni (Rabbi Chizkiya ben Manoach, France, mid-thirteenth century)
elaborates: "I will test them to see whether they will preoccupy themselves with
the study of the Torah. Since I
provide them with ready food without [their investing] any toil or effort, they
should therefore constantly deal with the study of Torah."
This 'midrashic'-homiletical explanation interprets the word "torotai"
(translated "My instructions") not, as intimated by the English translation, in
relation to certain specific instructions but rather to the Torah as a whole, to
all the commandments given by God.
The provision of the manna will create much "free" time. The Israelites will no longer have to
spend hours in order to put bread on the table.
God will provide them with ready-made meals. The test will be how the people will
take advantage of their "free" time.
Will they deteriorate into a hedonistic frivolous lifestyle? Or will they take advantage of this
golden opportunity in order to grow spiritually in the service of God, in the
understanding of Torah.
This test is not unique to the generation of the desert. Modern technology has provided
similar, albeit scaled down, opportunities.
Many countries have a five-day work week (recently even Israel!) allowing
for much more free time. To what
ends is this time used? A marvelous
example of a positive usage of increased free time is the initiative of numerous
communities in Israel of establishing Friday 'Beit Midrash' Torah programs
(Friday and not Sunday is the additional off day in Israel). Increased affluence is put to use for
spiritual growth.
Rashi (Rabbi Shlomo ben Yitzchak, France, 1040-1105), by contrast,
interprets the word 'torotai' as referring not to Torah as a whole but rather to
specific instructions related to the manna:
"That I may thus test them" (16:4) - "Whether they will keep the commandments
which are associated with it [the manna], i.e., that they should not leave over
of it [for the following day] and that they should not go out on the Sabbath to
gather it."
The test of the manna relates to the laws governing its collection. The verse immediately following God's
announcement of his provision of the manna states the prohibition of the
collection of the manna on the Sabbath: "But on the sixth day, when they
apportion what they have brought in, it shall prove to be double the amount they
gather each day" (verse 5). Later,
Moses also forbids the leaving over of the manna for the following day: "Let no
one leave any of it [the manna] over until morning" (16:19). God will test the people's devotion
and their adherence to His commandments through the laws related to the manna. The manna is thus a tool for testing
the people's loyalty to God. Will
they adhere to the laws of the manna or will they enjoy the benevolence of God
while ignoring his commandments?
The Ramban (Rabbi Moshe ben Nachman, Spain, 1194-1274) rejects Rashi's
interpretation claiming it is incorrect without explaining why. What is problematic about Rashi's
interpretation?
The difficulty which the Ramban has with Rashi's interpretation is
probably the order of the verses.
The statement by God: "that I may thus test them to see whether they will follow
My instructions or not" (verse 4) appears before the specification of the rules
relating to the collection of the manna.
It would seem from the above verse that not the rules governing the manna
but rather the manna itself was the test.
After rejecting Rashi the Ramban goes on to give his own interpretation:
"But this [Rashi's interpretation] is not correct. Rather, the intent [of the trial
mentioned here] is as He said, 'Who fed thee in the wilderness with manna, which
thy fathers knew not; that He might afflict thee, and that He might try thee, to
do thee good at thy latter end" (Deuteronomy 8:16). [The manna itself] was a trial to
them, since they had no food in the wilderness and were without recourse to any
sustenance except the manna, which they knew not from before and had never heard
of from their fathers. Each day's
quantity came down on its day, and they were eagerly desirous for it. Yet with all this, they hearkened to
walk after God to a place of no food.
And so indeed He said to them again, 'And thou shalt remember all the way
in which the Eternal thy God hath led thee these forty years in the wilderness,
that He might afflict thee, to try thee, to know what was in thy heart, whether
thou wouldest keep His commandments, or no' (ibid., verse 2).
He could have led them by way of 'the
cities that were round about them.'
Instead, He led them 'through the wilderness wherein were serpents, fiery
serpents, and scorpions' (Deuteronomy 8:15), and each day's quantity of food
would come to them only from heaven in order to try them..."
The Ramban cites a verse from Deuteronomy which was said at the end of
the forty-year sojourn in the desert and which specifically relates to the
giving of the manna. The manna was
an unknown form of nutrition which the Israelites ate for forty years straight,
day in day out. The manna is
actually symbolic of the whole nature of desert existence. The Israelites traveled in areas
which had minimal vegetation, "a place of no food." God could have led them through more
sympathetic terrain but He purposefully did not do so in order to "AFFLICT"
them. Living on manna was, according
to the Ramban, an existence on the utter bare necessities. This bare bone existence in a land of
serpents and scorpions is a test for the people of Israel to see whether they
will follow God irrespective of the difficulties which this entails. Will they tolerate the plain
unadorned life in the desert? Will
they be satisfied with the manna and forego luxuries? Is their devotion to God dependent on
material enjoyment or is it completely free of any material limitations? The manna is thus a test of
whole-hearted commitment. The
prophet Jeremia, indeed, states that the people of Israel's willingness to
follow God into the desert is a great merit: "Zakharti lakh chesed ne'urayikh' -
"I accounted to your favor the devotion of your [Israel's] youth, your love as a
bride - How you followed Me in the wilderness in a LAND NOT SOWN" (Jeremia 2:2).
The Rashbam (Rabbi Shmuel ben Meir, France, 1080-1160) and the Ibn Ezra
(Rabbi Avraham ben Ezra, Spain, 1092-1167) offer a different explanation of the
test of the manna. It is not, as the
midrash explains, a test to see whether the Israelites will use their free time
for Torah study. Nor is it, as Rashi
suggests, related to the keeping of the commandments governing the collection of
the manna or as the Ramban interprets, a test to see whether the Israelites will
be satisfied with the manna and the simple and unadorned life in the desert. The test of the manna, according to
the Rashbam and the Ibn Ezra, stems from the manner in which the manna was
provided: "and the people shall go out and gather each day that day's portion
that I may thus test them" (16:4).
Rashi comments on this verse:
"What is needed for a day's eating they shall gather on that day, and not today
for what is needed tomorrow."
Moses indeed later explicitly commands them: "Let no one leave any of it
[the manna] till morning" (16:19).
The people received their daily ration of the manna but they could never stock
it for future supply. Every day they
had to go collect the manna of that day.
Our sages comment on this aspect of the giving of the manna:
"EACH DAY THAT DAY'S PORTION" - "Rabbi Shimon says: 'because of God's love for
the people of Israel He provides them each day with that day's portion.
A parable - to what is this similar? To a king of flesh and blood who was
angry at his son and said he [his son] would no longer see him but would receive
his full year's sustenance once at the beginning of the year. While his son was being sustained
that year he agonized [over not being able to see his father] wishing to see his
father even at the cost of not being sustained by him at all. Once his father had forgiven him he
said: 'let him [his son] come and receive his portion daily' ... so too the
people of Israel, because of God's love for them, He gives them their sustenance
daily so that they will constantly anticipate and enjoy His presence each day"
(Mekhilta of Rabbi Shimon Bar Yochai, 'Tannaitic halakhic midrash' of the school
of Rabbi Akiva on the book of Exodus).
According to this interpretation the manner of the distribution of the
manna was desirable and beneficial.
It allowed for a closer and more continuous connection to God. Each day in the desert, the
Israelites waited for God's provision of the manna and through the manna were
afforded an opportunity to sense God's kindness and love for them.
The Rashbam and the Ibn Ezra offer an opposite explanation. They suggest that this specific
aspect of the manna, its daily distribution, is not a gift but a difficult test. While in the desert the people of
Israel never have the security of reserve supplies of food, the manna makes them
totally dependent on God. Their eyes
are constantly looking to the sky in anticipation of God's kindness. Rabbi Bekhor Shor (Rabbi Yosef Ben
Yitzchak Bekhor Shor, France, 12th century) comments on the physical source of
the manna, its raining down from the sky.
Why did the manna originate from the sky?
"From the sky - a place which is unreachable so that they would be incapable of
acquiring the manna themselves but would always be looking upward towards Me."
The manna tests the people's willingness to be totally dependent on God. Will the people have faith in God's
capacity to provide for their needs?
Will they be willing to lead such an existence devoid of independent security? Will they accept a lifestyle in which
they depend completely on God's kindness to survive? An articulation of this approach can
be found in the Mekhilta of Rabbi Yishmael (Tannaitic halakhic midrash on
Exodus):
"From the narrative of the manna Rabbi Elazar Ha-moda'i inferred: "Whoever has
what to eat today but asks what shall I eat tomorrow lacks faith as it is
written: "that I may thus test them to see whether they will follow My
instructions or not" (Mekhilta Beshalach).
God did not provide a constant supply of nutrition and water from the
very beginning of the travels in the desert in order to transform the people's
dependence on their past Egyptian masters to dependence on God. God wished to foster among the people
the realization of man's dependence on Him.
This is a basic ingredient of a spiritual life. Man, gifted with awesome talents
which allow him to harness nature to his advantage, must strive to maximize his
potential. However, with all his
greatness he is still in need of God's kindness.
This was the test of the manna.
Those who lacked faith in God were constantly apprehensive of tomorrow
and thus attempted to stock up on the manna disobeying Moses' prohibition of
keeping the manna for the following day.
Those who had full faith in God had no problem with receiving daily
rations of food. Their unwavering
faith allowed them to overcome the uncertainties of tomorrow and approach the
future with confidence and security.
The faithful not only passed the test of the manna, they indeed viewed its daily
distribution as preferable, as a gift from God which allowed for a daily
recognition and experience of God's benevolence.
Their constant dependence on God for nutrition, whether it be the manna,
quail or water was not a burden or liability.
It was an opportunity for strengthening their awareness and connection to
God.
|