How would they see the Kavod of Hashem in the morning?
Rashi and Rashbam: It means that Hashem would provide them with bread in the morning, with a shining countenance. 1
Ramban (citing also Targum Onkelos): Refer to 16:6:1:2 .
What did Moshe mean when he said (about himself and Aharon), "v'Nachnu Mah"?
Rashi, Ramban and Targum Yonasan: He meant "Of what significance are we." 1
Rashi (to Devarim 7:7): This typifies Yisrael, who always belittle themselves. 2
Chulin 89a #1: 'I have a strong desire for you,' says Hashem, 'because even when I shower you with greatness, you make yourselves small. [For instance,] I bestowed greatness upon Moshe and Aharon .... 3
Chulin 89a #2: Based on a Gezerah Shavah "Nachnu Mah," "Toleh Eretz Al Bli-Mah" (Iyov 26:7) - the entire world exists only because of Moshe and Aharon. 4
Chulin 89a #3: What the Torah says about Moshe and Aharon, "v'Nachnu Mah;" is greater than what it says about Avraham, "v'Anochi Afar va'Efer" (Bereishis 18:27). 5
Ramban: So how could Yisrael complain about them, when everything that happens is orchestrated by Hashem, and they were totally incapable. This is the meaning of the word "Mah" - as in Tehilim 8:5, and in Yeshayah 2:22. Rashi (commenting on the Pasuk, "for you are the smallest of all the nations" - Devarim 7:7) - This is the mark of Tzadikim, who negate themselves before Hashem, like Avraham, who declared "I am dust and ashes" (Bereishis 18:27), and like Moshe and Aharon, who declared "and what are we!"
See note in answer #1. See also Torah Temimah, note 11.
See note in answer #1.
The Gemara (Chulin 89a) states, "What is said here by Moshe and Aharon, is greater than what was said by Avraham Avinu. Avraham said, 'I am dust and ashes' (Bereishis 18:27); whereas Moshe and Aharon said 'v'Nachnu Mah' - 'what are we?'" The Gemara adds that the world endures in their merit - interpreting the verse "Toleh Eretz Al Bli Mah" (Iyov 26:7) - as, "the world is dependent upon those who declare themselves to be nothing." Why is this so?
Maharal #1 (Derush l'Shabbos Ha'Gadol, printed after Hagadah of Maharal, p. 204): Eretz (earth) is the foundational element of everything, and it carries everything. Eretz is the lowest of the elements, 1 such that everything else is located upon it. That is why the earth endures - because Hashem upholds the lowly, due to that lowliness. 2 But although the earth is lowly, it is still "something" (Davar Mah). Hence, the Eretz stands above that which is "nothing"(Bli Mah) - above someone who is as nothing in his own eyes - e.g. Moshe and Aharon, who said "v'Nachnu Mah."
Maharal #2 (Nesivos Olam, Nesiv ha'Anavah, beg. Ch. 2, p. 5): Greatness among the nations is expressed in the physical plane. Therefore, their importance leads to arrogance - which is a trait of the physical. But Am Yisrael is a sanctified nation, and their greatness is expressed in G-dliness. Importance among Yisrael leads to humility 3 - just as Hashem's own grandeur is to be found alongside His humility (Megilah 31a). 4 Avraham described himself as "dust and ashes," because he was the beginning [of Am Yisrael]. Moshe and Aharon later said "what are we" [i.e. we are nothing], because they are primary in Am Yisrael. 5 They parallel the heart - the seat of a person's Sechel and Da'as, which are intangible - which is primary within the tangible Guf. 6
In classic thought, there are four component elements of Creation - fire, air, water, and earth. Earth is the lowliest of the four.
As Maharal (loc. cit.) writes at length - A person remains in existence due to his humility and lowliness. Hashem upraises the lowly, and He desires them.
The Gemara in Chulin 89a gives numerous examples of this contrast.
Maharal: Simplicity (Peshitus) is the antithesis of physicality - for more about this trait in the writings of Maharal, refer to 14:19:4:2** , 12:15:154:4 , and 15:1:151:3*** . Also compare to Maharal (Chidushei Agados Vol. 4, p. 102, to Chulin 89a) - The earth endures due to its Peshitus. That which is straightforward is 'first' in the sense that it is independent of others - whereas something that is complex or composite relies upon others. Humility is simplicity; it is the greatest of all Midos. (In Maharal's terminology - Chomer is reliant upon its Tzurah (without which it would be undefined). The simpler an entity is, the less that it is reliant, and the greater degree to which it can endure independently. Maharal writes in numerous contexts that arrogance is a trait of Chomer, whereas humility is simple and above any physicality.) (EK) (Maharal frequently uses the terminology of "Chomer" and "Tzurah;" for explanation refer to 14:15:4:1* and 14:13:4:1* .)
Maharal (Chidushei Agados Vol. 4, p. 100, to Chulin 89a): "Afar" is close to Peshitus; and "Nachnu Mah" is absolute Peshitus.
Maharal further explains why this is the reason that the world endures in their merit. Also see Maharal (Nesivos Olam, Nesiv ha'Shalom beg. Ch. 3, p. 225; and Chidushei Agados (ibid.)) regarding the Gemara's discussion as to whether the world endures for someone who 'puts on the brakes' when involved in a fight, or someone who deems himself to be nothing.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "And in the morning, you shall see [the Glory of Hashem] - This does not refer to the 'Kevod Hashem' that is mentioned below - 'and behold, the Glory of Hashem had appeared in the Cloud' (16:10)." How does Rashi know this?
Gur Aryeh: Verse 16:10 did not take place the next morning, but rather that very same afternoon - as soon as Aharon spoke to the people. (Rather, the "Kevod Hashem" they would see in the morning, would be the manner in which Hashem delivered the Manna.)
Rashi writes: "'Your complaints on Hashem' - [I.e.] which are upon Hashem (Asher Al Hashem)."What is Rashi clarifying by adding the word "Asher"?
Gur Aryeh: Their initial complaint was not directed at Hashem, but rather at Moshe and Aharon (see 16:2-3)! Moshe is making it clear to them that nonetheless, it was in essence against Hashem, "... for we are nothing."
Rashi writes: "... Or alternatively, if [the word 'Talinu'] had a Dagesh, but was read without a Yud, as 'Tilonu,' I would have interpreted it as 'Tislonenu.'" What is the Dikduk involved in Rashi's argument?
Gur Aryeh: A Dagesh may be inserted into a word for various reasons - one of which is to stand in for a letter that "fell out." If our word were read as 'Tilonu,' it would mean that the Dagesh in the Lamed is in place of the missing Sav of 'Tislonenu' - a letter that should have been present in Binyan Hispa'el. 1 An example of such a Dagesh is in the word "Al Titame'u" (Vayikra 18:24) - with a Dagesh in the letter Tes. 2 "Tilonu' would then be a Po'al Omeid. 3 [However, our word is read not as 'Tilonu,' but rather "Talinu," with a Yud. If so, the Dagesh indicates that it is a Po'al Yotzei 4 - meaning 'you would cause others to complain.']
Binyan Hispa'el indicates a reflexive verb - something one does to oneself.
Short for 'Al Tis'tame'u' - do not defile yourselves.
Po'al Omeid - A verb relating only to the object itself.
Po'al Yotzei - A verb describing an effect upon someone or something else. A Dagesh can be indicative of such a verb; compare Rashbam to Devarim 7:23.
Rashi writes: "... But now, the word means 'Talinu Es Acherim' - 'that you would cause others to complain' - as in [the verse] about the Spies, 'va'Yalinu Alav Es Kol ha'Edah' (Bamidbar 14:36)." What is Rashi demonstrating here?
Gur Aryeh: Unlike the Pasuk later in Beshalach, "va'Yalen ha'Am" (17:3) - which has no Dagesh in the Lamed, and is a Po'al Omed; the verse Rashi cites in Bamidbar does have a Dagesh in the Lamed, and it is clearly a Po'al Yotzei - i.e., the Spies caused the people to complain. This demonstrates that a Dagesh can be indicative of a Po'al Yotzei. 1
See the footnotes to the preceding question. Also see Rav Hartman's notes in the Mechon Yerushalayim edition of Gur Aryeh.
