As is well-known, Hashem created the world once, and from then, there are no new creations. How does that fit with the creation of the Manna?
Targum Yonasan: Hashem actually created the Manna during the six days of creation, 1 and stored it away until the need to feed Yisrael in the desert arose. 2
Pirkei Avos (5:6) lists the Manna as one of the ten things that Hashem created Erev Shabbos at dusk. (For Maharal, see 16:4:156:1 .)
Hence Hashem said, "I will rain down Manna for you;" and not 'I will create Manna for you.'
Why does the Torah use the word "Mamtir" regarding the Manna?
Ramban #1 (citing Ibn Ezra): Because it falls like rain; 1 and perhaps it even fell together with the rain. 2
Ramban #2 (citing Targum Onkelos) and Targum Yonasan: It means simply to bring it down.
Ramban #3: "Matar" and all its derivatives stem from the expression "Matara la'Chetz" - a target for the arrow - because whatever Hashem shoots down from the sky is comparable to an arrow that one shoots at the target. 3
As in Tehilim 11:6; and like we find in connection with the sulfur and fire that Hashem rained upon Sedom (see Bereishis 19:24).
Since when does it rain in Iyar?
Ramban: See, for example, Tehilim 78:27 .
Why does the Torah write here "Hineni Mamtir Lachem" (plural), but in Parshas Ki Savo, "Yiftach Hashem Lecha (singular) Es... ha'Shamayim" (Devarim 28:12)?
Ta'anis 9a: Because the Pasuk in Ki Savo is discussing rain, and Hashem will sometimes send down rain for an individual. The current Pasuk is discussing Parnasah, which Hashem will only send down in abundance, communally. 1
See Torah Temimah, note 3.
Why does the Torah refer to the Manna as "Lechem"?
Ramban #2 (citing Ibn Ezra and Radak): The Torah refers to all food as Lechem. 3
Ramban: As the Pasuk writes in Bamidbar 11:8; and in Tehilim we find "l'Hotzi Lechem Min ha'Aretz" (Tehilim 104:14) with reference to wheat.
Ramban: And all kinds of loaves are called bread, irrespective of the ingredients.
Ramban: In which case, they asked for meat as well as bread - both of which Hashem granted them (see 16:8). See for example, Vayikra 3:15 & Vayikra 21:6. See also Ramban's objection to this interpretation of these Pesukim. Refer also to 16:4:3.1:1 .
Why does the Torah refer to the Manna here as "Lechem;" and in Parshas Beha'alosecha as "Ugos" (cakes of dough), telling us that "Tachanu" (it still needed to be ground - Bamidbar 11:8)?
Yoma 75a: For the Tzadikim, the Manna fell in the form of Lechem; for the Beinonim, in the form of Ugos; whereas for the Resha'im, it still had to be ground. 1
How much effort was required to gather in the Manna? Why does the Torah write here "v'Yatze'u ha'Am v'Laketu;" whereas in Parshas Beha'alosecha, once it writes "uv'Redes ha'Tal Al ha'Machaneh ... Yereid ha'Mahn Alav" (Bamidbar 11:9), and once "Shatu ha'Am v'Laketu" (Bamidbar 11:8)?
Yoma 75a: For the Tzadikim, the Manna fell outside their tents - " uv'Redes ha'Tal Al ha'Machaneh ... Yereid ha'Man Alav." For the Beinonim -" v'Yatze'u ha'Am v'Laketu;" whereas for the Resha'im - "Shatu ha'Am v'Laketu" (they had to travel farther afield in order to find it). 1
See Torah Temimah, note 7.
Why does the Torah describe the Manna here as "Lechem," in 16:31 (below) as "Shemen," and in Parshas Beha'alosecha as "Devash" (Bamidbar 11:8)?
Yoma 75b: It tasted like bread to the young men, like a cake made with oil to the old people, and like honey-cake to the children. 1
Why does the Torah not mention the meat here, as it does in 16:8?
Ramban: Because, when recording a command and its execution, it is the way of the Torah to mention one of them and to omit the other. 1
As the Ramban explains often. Refer, for example, to Shemos 10:1:4:1 .
What test is the Pasuk referring to this time?
Rashi: To see whether they would adhere to the various Mitzvos connected with the Manna 1 - not to leave any of it over until the morning, and not to go out on Shabbos to collect it.
Ramban: Hashem was testing them whether they would follow Him, despite the fact that the Manna (of which they had never heard before) appeared only on a daily basis, and they never had food for the next day. 2
Rashbam: Since every day on an ongoing basis, they had to raise their eyes Heavenwards for their food, their Emunah in Hashem would increase. 3
Seforno: To see whether now, that they were receiving their sustenance without any effort on their part, they would go in the way of the Torah. 4
See Sifsei Chachamim.
Ramban: Thereby imbuing them with Emunah for the future (see Devarim 8:2).
Rashbam: As the Pasuk indicates in Devarim 8:2. (As for why Rashi does not explain this way, see 16:4:5.2 .)
Seforno: The Mechilta states, the Torah was only given to those who ate the Manna (since they had nothing to distract them from learning it).
Rashi comments "Lema'an Anasenu;" How does Rashi understand this phrase ?
Gur Aryeh: (The correct Girsa in Rashi should be "'Lema'an Anasenu' - Ki Anasenu.") Rashi is explaining the use of the word "Lema'an" in this context. The test would not be an outcome 1 of Hashem sending the Manna; rather, sending the Manna was itself the test.
Gur Aryeh: As in "Lema'an Yir'u Es ha'Lechem" (16:32), which means that the outcome of preserving a flask of Manna for generations, will be that future generations will be able to see it (and take Musar).
Seeing as "Himtir" implies from the sky, why does the Torah insert the words "Min ha'Shamayim"?
Hadar Zekenim (in Bereishis 19:24): We learn that Hashem punishes Resha'im from the Heaven - like we find by Sedom; yet also bestows good to Tzadikim from the Heaven. 1
Hadar Zekenim, ibid.: This can be compared to a man who is guarding an oven. He punishes his enemy with a hot spit-rod from the oven, and feeds his good friend hot bread from the same oven!
What was the import of the Manna, with which Hashem fed the Bnei Yisrael in the wilderness?
Maharal (Gevuros Hashem, end Ch. 59, p. 262): The common factor of the middle five stages of "Dayeinu" that we recite on Pesach night, is how Hashem raised Am Yisrael above nature (also refer to 14:16:3:3 ). He provided all their needs in the desert for forty years, and gave them the Manna, food which was un-natural - it was almost not physical at all! That is why the Manna was completely absorbed in the body's limbs (producing no waste) - because it did not have the baseness inherent in physicality. 1
Maharal (Derush Al ha'Torah p. 20): All of Bnei Yisrael's sustenance in the desert was Ruchani; it transcended the physical. The Manna was called "Lechem Abirim" (Tehilim 78:25); Chazal derive (Yoma 75b) that it was absorbed in the Eivarim (limbs) of the body -- it was Ruchani food. The well that accompanied them through the desert was a source of miraculous blessing; and even the Selav was called "birds of Heaven" - and not of the earth. Also see Maharal (Nesivos Olam, Nesiv ha'Avodah Ch. 17, p. 130) - When Hashem took the Bnei Yisrael out of Mitzrayim, making them His servants, He first gave sustenance to their Guf, via the Manna, and then He gave the Torah to sustain their Nefesh. Therefore, Chazal teach that we must say words of Torah at the table. If one fails to do so, he is failing to attribute his sustenance to Hashem (thus Chazal say (Avos 3:3) it is as if he ate of Zivchei Meisim - i.e. Avodah Zarah).
The Pasuk in Tehilim (78:25) says of the Manna, "Lechem Abirim Achal Ish." According to Rebbi Akiva (Yoma 75b), the Manna is called "bread of the mighty" because the angels eat it; whereas Rebbi Yishmael disagrees strongly -- seeing as angels do not eat! Rather, he interprets that [when Bnei Yisrael ate the Manna], it was absorbed by their 248 Eivarim (limbs). Upon what is this Machlokes based?
Maharal (Chidushei Agados Vol. 3, p. 105, to Bava Basra 74b): Certainly Rebbi Akiva agrees that Mal'achim do not eat food in the usual, physical sense. Rather, he means that the Mal'achim are recipients (Mekablim) from Hashem, just like all creations; 1 and what they receive from him brings them to Shleimus (perfection). Because the Manna is not natural, Rebbi Akiva pinpoints the Manna as being the angels' "food." 2 Rebbi Yishmael responds that if being a Mekabel, means reaching completion through what one receives -- then a Mal'ach cannot be termed a Mekabel! The Mal'achim are static; they remain as a constant, at the same level at which they were created. 3
"Eating" in this sense means 'that which brings about continued existence' -- see our notes on the Pasuk above, "Mi Chamocha ba'Elim, Hashem" (15:11:153:1 ).
Maharal in that context is discussing the future banquet for the righteous. "Eating" need not mean in the physical sense, and he compares it to the "eating" of Mal'achim according to Rebbi Akiva. He emphasizes this idea further in Gur Aryeh to Bereishis 1:21, in his comments to Rashi about the Livyasan (see Bereishis 1:21:2.3 ).
Maharal presumably alludes to the Pasuk, "I shall give you [the ability] to move, among these standing ones" (Zecharyah 3:7). (EK)
The Gemara (Ta'anis 9a) tells us that we received the Manna in Moshe's merit. Why Moshe?
Maharal (Netzach Yisrael Ch. 54, p. 201): In Chazal's expression, the leader is known as a "Parnas" (lit. sustainer). Moshe, as the Parnas of the generation, was the fitting vehicle for their Parnasah (sustenance). Moshe filled in anything lacking of his generation; and Parnasah is what fills a person's lack. 1
See Maharal further as to why the Clouds of Glory were due to the merit of Aharon, and the Well, due to Miriam.
Another Gemara (Bava Metzia 86b) teaches that in the merit that Avraham personally served his angelic guests (Bereishis 18:8), Hashem Himself gave the Bnei Yisrael the Manna. Why is the Manna associated with Avraham?
Maharal (Chidushei Agados Vol. 3, p. 48, to Bava Metzia 86b): The need for food 1 was constant and crucial throughout our sojourn in the desert. HaSh-m performed many miracles for us on a one-time basis; but a constant miracle such as this had to come through some merit on our part. 2 We received the Manna as reward for the deeds of our forefather Avraham, who had acted likewise towards the angels. 3
Likewise for water and protection, which we also received in Avraham's merit. See Bereishis 18:4:1.4 .
Maharal (Nesivos Olam, Nesiv Gemilus Chasadim Ch. 3, p. 156): When a person bestows good upon another, Hashem does likewise for him, measure for measure. Also see Bereishis 18:4:1.3:1 .
Maharal (ibid.): Avraham constantly hosted people; but such Chesed to individuals was insufficient to stand as merit for an entire nation of his descendants. But on this occasion he hosted angels -- so there was no limit to the merit.
The Mishnah in Avos (5:6) teaches that the Manna was among the ten items created at twilight of the sixth day of Creation. Why at that time?
Maharal (Derech Chayim p. 236, to Avos 5:6): Bein ha'Shemashos, just as Shabbos is entering, is a more sanctified time than the rest of the six working-days, and the natural world that is associated with them. Nevertheless, it cannot be that Hashem did not create anything during Bein ha'Shemashos, seeing as (by Hashem's timekeeping) it was not yet Shabbos! 1 It must be that Hashem did create during Bein ha'Shemashos - specifically, elements of Creation that although associated to nature, are not fully natural 2 - such as the Manna.
See Rashi and Gur Aryeh to Bereishis 2:2 - Hashem knows the precise moment that Shabbos enters; it is only we, as finite beings, who must add from the weekday onto the time of Shabbos. See Maharal to Shabbos 34a - Chazal view the period of Bein ha'Shemashos as possibly day or night -- not as a doubt based on our lack of knowledge; but rather because its nature cannot be determined, i.e. that even Moshe Rabeinu treated this time as a doubt. Perhaps this is Maharal's intent here as well - Bein ha'Shemashos is the bridge between one day and the next. (EK)
What is the miraculous? See Maharal (ibid. p. 232) - According to the Rambam, Hashem's will does not develop or change; and miracles are woven into the fabric of Creation, from its outset. As Chazal say, Hashem stipulated with the Yam Suf at Creation, that it should later split before Bnei Yisrael. But Maharal himself disputes this approach at length. Refer to our discussion above, 14:27:0.3 .
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "'Devar Yom b'Yomo' - [I.e.], the food they need for the day, they must gather on that day; they may not gather today for tomorrow." But perhaps "Yom b'Yomo" simply means that they must gather every day, without missing a day?
Gur Aryeh (citing Mizrachi): There was no express command regarding that. 1
Mizrachi: If, for whatever reason, one did not wish to gather Manna one day, he could refrain from doing so. The verse only comes to forbid gathering for the next day.
Rashi writes: "... They may not gather today for tomorrow." The Gemara (Sotah 48b) observes that someone who has 'bread in his basket,' and yet he says 'What will I eat tomorrow?,' is of little faith (mi'Ketanei ha'Emunah). Indeed, the Midrash (both Mechilta and Tanchuma) derives this from the Manna. Why is this attitude called "little faith"?
Maharal (Chidushei Agados Vol. 2, p. 87, to Sotah 48b): Hashem grants sustenance to His creations, every single day. Therefore, a person should not harbor doubts as to what he will eat tomorrow. 1 Furthermore, it is a fundamental of Emunah to believe that Hashem's abilities are infinite. One must believe that Hashem will grant sustenance to His world, omitting nothing. 2
The Gemara (Sotah ibid.) tells us that being "small of faith" in this outlook, can cause someone who is [otherwise] righteous to use up his "table" in the world-to-come (see below in note #2, citing Nesivos Olam). Maharal explains - Someone who is truly a Ma'amin, believes in Hashem despite that he does not know just yet what Hashem is going to do (to bring him sustenance); he believes even regarding that which is [as of yet] hidden and concealed. This is in contrast to someone of little faith - who does not believe in Hashem regarding anything that he cannot see and does not yet know. (It seems Maharal is explaining why Chazal draw their contrast, not between a believer and one who does not believe; but rather between a Ma'amin and Ketanei Emunah (those of little faith). His belief is limited to specific areas - e.g., he can believe that any sustenance he already has, comes from Hashem - and yet he does not see the big picture; namely that it is Hashem's will that the world should endure, and His assurance that He will continue to guide and sustain it. Someone who believes with Emunah Sheleimah, however, knows to have reliance upon Hashem even for matters that have not been promised to him - such that he will not ask, 'what will I eat tomorrow.') (EK)
As above - Someone of little faith only believes in the bounty that his eyes can see; whereas a full Ma'amin will understand, based on that which he has already received, that there are no limits to the beneficence that Hashem can provide. Maharal (Nesivos Olam, Nesiv ha'Emunah, end Ch. 2, p. 212) - It is a fundamental of Emunah to believe that everything is within Hashem's power, this is our Emunah. The Gemara (Sotah ibid.) is telling us that the good Hashem will bestow upon us in the next world, is limited only by the "limits" that we ourselves impose on Hashem's abilities, so to speak, by lack of faith in this world. Also see Beitzah 15b -The Pasuk says regarding spending money to honor the Shabbos, "Because joy in Hashem is your strength" (Nechemyah 8:10). Hashem says to us, "Trust in Me, borrow on My [credit] and I will repay it!" On Shabbos it is fitting to have a "full table;" if we indeed believe fully that Hashem can do anything, He will ensure that we lack for nothing.
Rashi writes: "'Will they follow My Torah' - [I.e.], will they keep the Mitzvos associated with the Manna?" But perhaps the test was whether they would doubt Hashem in their heart (as Rashi himself comments to Devarim 8:2)?
Gur Aryeh: One cannot tell a person in advance, 'I am going to test you now, and see whether you doubt me' -- because it would no longer be a test! Rather, the test would be whether they would keep the Mitzvos of the Manna, when put into practice. 1
Gur Aryeh: In Sefer Devarim, Moshe told Bnei Yisrael after the fact, that a test in Emunah was involved here as well.
