Why does this verse say that Hashem would give us meat "in the Erev" (evening), whereas Pasuk 12 below promises the meat "Bein ha'Arbayim" -- which usually means in the afternoon (see 12:6)?
Gur Aryeh (to 12:6): Rashi (loc. cit.) explains that the reason that the time from Chatzos (midday) until nightfall is called "Bein ha'Arbayim," is because the term 'Erev' can imply night or darkness. "Bein ha'Arbayim" refers to the time in between 'the Erev of the day' (after midday, when the shadows begin to lengthen) and 'the Erev of the night' (when darkness falls). Thus, "Erev" and "Bein ha'Arbayim" in this context are one and the same.
Why did Moshe say "Lechem Lisbo'a," but "Basar le'Echol"?
Why did Moshe add, "bi'Shemo'a Hashem Es Telunoseichem," which is obvious?
Seforno: He was explaining that part of his Tefilah was that Hashem should send food in such a way that Yisrael should realize that their complaints were against Him (and not against Moshe and Aharon), and that He had now answered them.
Why did Moshe need to say "Lo Aleinu Telunoseichem, Ki al Hashem"?
Sanhedrin 110a: To teach us that if someone complains against his Rebbi, 1 it is as if he complained against the Shechinah.
Or who quarrels with him. See Torah Temimah, note 16. For Maharal's commentary, see the next question.
The Gemara (Sanhedrin 110a) derives from this Pasuk that someone who grumbles (ha'Misra'em) against his Rebbi, is tantamount to one who grumbles against the Shechinah. Why is that the case?
Maharal (Nesivos Olam, Nesiv Yir'as Hashem, end Ch. 5, p. 36): A Torah teacher is parallel to the Shechinah, in the sense that he is the cause (Ilah) 1 and the reason for his student's wisdom. A teacher is thus comparable to a father, 2 because a person's existence is not completed without Torah; and the Rebbi is the one who will lead him to the World-to-Come. 3
In Maharal's expression, the term "Ilah" is usually in reference to Hashem, - the Prime Cause of everything.
Maharal: Just like the obligation to honor parents is compared to that of honoring Hashem (Kidushin 30b), so too for the Torah teacher.
Maharal: The Gemara (Sanhedrin 110a) discusses four categories - one who splits away from his Rebbi, one who makes a dispute against his Rebbi, one who complains against him, one who doubts him. Maharal (ibid.) explains that these are four levels in decreasing severity -- and yet all four are the equivalent of doing so against the Shechinah.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes: "'Meat to eat' - and not for satiation... Because they requested the bread properly... whereas the meat was an improper request." But Rashi already wrote this, in his comments to the preceding Pasuk?
Gur Aryeh: Our Rashi began by saying that the Torah is teaching us proper conduct - that one should not satiate himself on meat. Rashi then anticipates the question, that perhaps they would not eat the meat to satiation simply because it would arrive in the evening - and because there would be insufficient time to prepare a large amount of meat, Hashem would send only a small amount! Rashi therefore continues, that Hashem sent the meat specifically in the evening - with all the extra efforts which that would entail on our part - as punishment for the improper request. 1 Had there been only a little meat to prepare, we would have managed well, and it would not have been a punishment. (Rather, there would be an abundance of meat; and the reason not to eat it until satiated was Derech Eretz.)
Gur Aryeh: We already know there was an aspect of punishment involved, from the contrast in the preceding Pesukim (16:6-7); the gift we would receive in the morning would demonstrate "Kevod Hashem;" whereas the gift in the evening would not (Rashi to 16:7).
