Ramban (Nachmanides) on the Torah

AND THE PEOPLE WERE ‘K’MITHON’NIM.’ Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that [the word k’mithon’nim is] “of the root aven (wickedness); similarly, the thoughts of ‘oneich’ (thy evil thoughts), for they spoke words of wickedness.” But this is not correct, for why would Scripture have concealed their sin, and not stated [clearly what it was], as it does in all other places! The correct interpretation appears to me to be that as they got further away from Mount Sinai, which was near an inhabitable settlement, and entered the great and dreadful wilderness in their first journey, they became upset and said: “What shall we do? How shall we live in this wilderness? What shall we eat and what shall we drink? How shall we endure the trouble and the suffering, and when shall we come out of here?” The word k’mithon’nim is thus related to the expression, Wherefore doth a living man ‘yithonein’ (complain), a strong man because of his sins? which is an expression indicating pain, and feeling sorry for oneself. Similarly, ben oni means “the son of my sorrow; “‘v’anu hadayagim’ (and the fishers shall lament) and all they that cast angle into the Nile shall mourn. Thus when Scripture states that they felt anxious and upset, it has thereby already mentioned and told [the nature of] their sin. It states that they were k’mithon’nim (‘as’ murmurers), meaning that they spoke in the bitterness of their soul as do people who suffer pain, and this was evil in the sight of the Eternal, since they should have followed Him with joyfnlness, and with gladness of heart by reason of the abundance of all good things which He gave them, but they behaved like people acting under duress and compulsion, murmuring and complaining about their condition. It is for this reason that He states with regard to the second [sin, or punishment], and the children of Israel also wept ‘again,’ meaning that their first sin consisted of complaining about their lack of comforts in the wilderness, and now they again did a similar thing, and they did not receive correction from the fire of G-d which devoured them.

AND HE [Moses] CALLED THE NAME OF THAT PLACE TABERAH (Burning). [The meaning thereof is that] he called the place on which the fire came down in the uttermost part of the camp by that name, and they did not journey from that place, for whilst still encamped there they fell a lusting, Verse 4. [for flesh], and called the name of the city or place Kibroth-hattaavah (the graves of lust).

AND THE MIXED MULTITUDE THAT WAS AMONG THEM ‘HITHAVU TA’AVAH’ (FELL A LUSTING). The meaning of this [double expression, which translates literally as “lusted a lust,” is] that they had nothing lacking in the wilderness, for they had plenty of manna and they could make of it all different kinds of delicacies with distinguished flavors, as Scripture relates further on, but they goaded themselves to a great desire, as if they wanted to eat [even] charcoal or earth and other bad foods.
AND THEY SAID: WHO SHALL GIVE US FLESH TO EAT. [They used this expression who shall give us] because there was not enough meat for the whole people to have every day, although they did eat it many times, for some of them had herds, but [only] the important people ate it [every day], as happens in camps and places where prices are high. But about fish they said, We remember the fish, like one who remembers forgotten things, since they had not eaten any fish from the day that they left Egypt until now.

WE REMEMBER THE FISH WHICH WE WERE WONT TO EAT IN EGYPT FOR NOUGHT. According to the plain meaning of Scripture [the explanation of the verse is that] the Egyptian fishermen used to put them to work to bring in the fish that they caught in their trawls and nets, and they would give them some fish [to eat], as is the custom of those that spread nets [upon the waters]. And cucumbers, melons, leeks, onions and garlic are very abundant in Egypt, for it is as a garden of herbs, and when they dug for the Egyptians in gardens and in all manner of service in the field they would eat the vegetables. Or perhaps the Israelites who were the king’s slaves doing his work would be supported by him with sparing bread and scant water, and they would be dispersed throughout the city and would enter the gardens and fields, and eat of the vegetables without leaving anything over, as the king’s servants do. And [in addition it is possible that] they would give them at the edge of the river [Nile] small fish from the king’s portion which have no market-price in Egypt, as I have explained in Seder V’eileh Shemoth., 11. This was the complaint of the children of Israel, not the complaint of the mixed multitude [who were originally not of the stock of Israel and were not enslaved in Egypt, therefore they could not say, We remember the fish, which we were wont to eat in Egypt for nought; but after the mixed multitude fell a lusting they all] complained to Moses and demanded of him, Give us flesh, that we may eat, as Scripture mentions further on.

BUT NOW OUR SOUL IS DRIED AWAY. This means that because of their many desires their temperaments had become heated and then dried up, as Onkelos translates it [“but now our soul is lusting”]. Or it may be that [they meant that] our soul is dried away because there is nothing with which to moisten it, since food produces [essential] liquids in the body which satisfy the soul. And they said, we have nought save this manna ‘to look to,’ meaning that even the food [i.e., the manna] on which we live is not in our possession so that our soul can be nourished and satisfied with it; but we desire it and look to it [i.e., we are dependent upon it] at all times, in anticipation that it will come to us; thus we have nothing at all save our hope for the manna. They thus gave expression to the known proverb: “One cannot compare a person who has bread in his basket with one who does not have bread in his basket.”, Verse 20), they were therefore in constant worry for their next day’s food. Therefore Scripture tells how many qualities the manna had, stating that its taste was as the taste of a cake baked with oil, thus declaring that the souls of those who ate it did not dry up, for it [the manna] supplied the body with the [essential] liquids and kept it satisfied, and the souls of those who ate it were like a watered garden and like a spring of water.

DID I ‘HARITHI’ ALL THIS PEOPLE? In the opinion of Onkelos [who rendered it: “Am I ‘the father’ of all this people?” the word harithi] is like [the expression] beyond the blessing of ‘horai’ (my progenitors), for a father is called horeh [of the root haroh, “to conceive” or “become pregnant”] because it is he who causes conception and brings about the pregnancy [of the mother]. Thus Moses is saying: “Am I their father [who has caused their conception], or am I their mother who has given birth to them?” — is thus explained as referring to the separate functions of father and mother. But the masters of the plain meaning of Scripture. interpreted the verse in the opposite manner: “Am I their mother who was pregnant with them and gave birth to them?” Similarly, ‘Vatahar’ eth Miriam v’eth Shammai means “she was pregnant with them and gave birth to them.” “Or am I their father who begot them?” [the word y’lidetihu being] like: ‘vayoled Noach’ (and Noah begot); thy father that ‘y’ladecha’ (begot thee), and other similar expressions. And Moses said, as ‘ha’omein’ carrieth the sucking child, [the word ha’omein] being a reference to the [nursing-] father or mother. In my opinion the whole verse is a figurative reference to the mother, and the meaning thereof is as follows: “Have I conceived all this people and have I given birth to them?” Moses mentioned it in this way [speaking as the mother] because it is the woman who suffers the pain of raising children, remembering what she suffered for them from birth, pregnancy, and conception. But Moses said omein [in the masculine] since he is speaking of himself as a nursing-father, since he is not an omeneth (a nursing-mother).

I AM NOT ABLE TO BEAR ALL THIS PEOPLE MYSELF ALONE. The meaning thereof is not that the elders should help him to give the people flesh, for where should they get it from? Moreover, even if they would have many leaders they would still only complain against Moses our teacher who took them out of Egypt, as they used to say to him, And wherefore have ye made us to come up out of Egypt? [asking him] that he should give them through his prayers all that they asked for, and grant them their desires [and so they would still continue to complain to him rather than to the elders]! But Moses thought that if they would have many leaders they would appease their wrath by speaking to their hearts when they would start complaining. Or it is possible that when the elders prophesied, and the spirit [which was upon Moses] was put upon them, the people would know that these elders are established as prophets, and would not all gather against Moses but would ask for their desires from them as well [by means of their prayers].

AND IF ‘AT’ (THOU) DO THUS WITH ME. “[The Hebrew word for Thou appears here in the feminine form at, instead of atah in the masculine, because] Moses’ strength grew weak, like that of a woman, because the Holy One, blessed be He, showed him the punishment He was to bring upon them for this [sin of theirs]. Moses then said to Him, ‘If so, kill me, I pray Thee.’” This is Rashi’s language. But I do not understand this. For the pronoun at refers here to Him on high, [for since it is Moses who is speaking in the verse, his use of the second-person pronoun must be referring to G-d; so how can Rashi explain that the feminine form is used to indicate that Moses’ strength weakened like that of a woman]! But according to the plain meaning of Scripture, the custom of the [Hebrew] language is [to use the form at] even when referring to a man, such as, ‘at’ (thou) the far-covering cherub. refers to k’ruv (cherub), which is a masculine noun. And by way of the Truth, [the mystic teachings of the Cabala], And if ‘at’ do thus with me refers to the attribute of justice [“attribute” in Hebrew being feminine, and the meaning of the verse is: “if it be decreed that the attribute of justice encounter me, then kill me, I pray Thee], just as it is said, and the anger of the Eternal was kindled greatly. Similarly, ‘v’at’ shalt speak unto us is a reference to the great fire,, Verse 22. “Fire” can be feminine or masculine in Hebrew. from which you shall speak the words of G-d unto us, and we will hear it from your mouth, and do it. Similarly, ‘at’ the far-covering cherub refers to k’ruv (cherub), which is a masculine noun. alludes to the second cherub. The student versed [in the mystic lore of the Cabala] will understand.
HORGEINI NA HAROG’ (KILL ME, I PRAY THEE). This means that Thou should send upon me those that kill by the sword, for it is better for me to die even by the sword of man than to live with this grief. It is possible that the sense [of the term horgeini] is “take my life” [and not, as explained before, that it means death by human agency]. A similar [usage of the term is found in these verses]: and let their men be ‘harugei maveth’ (slain of death), and their young men smitten of the sword in battle; and breathe ‘baharugim ha’eileh’ (upon these slain). is to be understood literally: “upon those that were killed [by the sword]” (R’dak).

AND THE ETERNAL SAID UNTO MOSES: GATHER UNTO ME SEVENTY MEN OF THE ELDERS OF ISRAEL. Our Rabbis have already mentioned that there are seventy nations with seventy languages, each one having a constellation in the heavens with a prince above it, as it is said in the Book of Daniel, and the prince of the kingdom of Persia, and it is [further] written with reference to the kings of Greece, lo, the prince of Greece shall come; and it is about this that Scripture states, And the Eternal will punish the host of the high heaven on high. The Rabbis have also said that the [seventy] bullocks [brought as offerings on the seven days] of the Festival of Tabernacles allude to them. [A similar reference to the seventy princes we find, in connection with the Tower of Babel] in the Pirkei d’Rabbi Eliezer: “Said the Holy One, blessed be He, to the seventy kings that surround the throne of His Glory: ‘Let us come and confound their language.’” It was for this reason that the number of those who went down to Egypt was seventy,, 46:27. and that He commanded that there should be this number of judges in Israel [as is stated in the verse before us], for this number includes all opinions [that are possible in a given case] since it comprises all powers, and there will not be anything too hard for them. etc. — and go to the judges of the Great Sanhedrin and they will answer you. The point is thus clear: there will not be anything “too hard” for them. Similarly at the Giving of the Torah [special prominence was given to] seventy elders of Israel, and it is fitting that the Glory of the Divine Presence should rest upon [a group of] this perfect number, since it is [comparable to] the camp on high, for Israel are the hosts of the Eternal, 12:41. See also Vol. I, p. 393. on earth, just as the ark and its cover and the Tabernacle were all made in the likeness of those that minister [before Him] on high. So also were the [four] standards made in the image of the Divine Chariot which Ezekiel saw, in order that the Divine Presence should rest upon them on earth as it is present in the heavens. Now Moses was above the seventy elders [in authority], thus alluding to Israel, a nation one in the earth. And our Rabbis have received by tradition that every Sanhedrin (Great Court) that sits in G-d’s House in the place which He shall choose on which to rest His Presence, should consist of this number, seventy, with the head [of the Court] above them [in authority] like Moses our teacher, and thus they comprise [a Court] a seventy-one [judges, and with the Divine Presence in their midst they are seventy-two]. Similarly the letters in the Great Ineffable Divine Name are seventy-two, corresponding to the seventy princes [of the seventy nations, together with Israel, making seventy-one nations], and the One G-d who is the sole Master over all. It is to this that Scripture hints in saying, G-d standeth in the congregation of G-d; in the midst of the judges He judgeth, for the Divine Presence is with them to assent to their judgment. And Scripture further states, How long will ye judge unjustly?,, Verse 2. thus admonishing [and saying] that since the Glorious Name is with them in giving judgment, how can you not be fearful of Him when you pervert justice, as in the expression, the people that provoke Me to My face continually. And it states furthermore [in that psalm], “I said: Ye are godlike beings, and all of you sons of the Most High, for your number is the same as the number of the princes above and the One Master, and so I said that you will sit in the seat of G-d on earth. But ‘k’adam’ ye shall die — like the first man [Adam] who was driven from his glorious place [in the Garden of Eden] and died, so will you [who judge unjustly] be driven out of the House of G-d and die. And like one of the princes on high you were, but you fell from that high position.” I have already mentioned something of this matter in Seder V’eileh Hamishpatim. — Exodus 21:1. The verse referred to is ibid., 6.

AND I WILL COME DOWN AND SPEAK WITH THEE THERE, ‘V’ATZALTI’ (AND I WILL TAKE) OF THE SPIRIT WHICH IS UPON THEE, AND WILL PUT IT UPON THEM. The intention of the verse is to say that the transmission [of the spirit resting on Moses to the seventy elders] will take place at the time when G-d will speak to Moses; and it will be from that [Divine communication that the prophetic power will be transmitted to them], as is stated at the actual occurrance [of the events], And the Eternal came down in the cloud, and spoke unto him, [and took of the spirit that was upon him, and put it upon the seventy elders]. Now Scripture did not explain here what this communication was about, as is [usually] written in the whole Torah, where after [stating that G-d spoke to Moses] it explains what the Eternal said and what He spoke. [The reason for this is] that what happened here was that the elders, of whom Scripture states that they prophesied, did not hear any communication from the mouth of G-d, nor did He appear to them in a vision or in a dream, but G-d spoke to Moses, and from the atziluth [as is explained further on] of the spirit upon Moses, they understood that Divine communication. This is the sense of the expression, and they prophesied, but they did so no more, meaning that they did not continue receiving Divine communication on their own, for it was only the communication that G-d said to Moses in which they shared. This is also the meaning of v’atzalti [of the root eitzel — “near”], that “I will hold back with Me of the spirit which I put upon you, and I will put it upon them.” This is not the same idea as in the verse, and thou [Moses] shalt put of thy honor upon him [Joshua],, 27:20. for the term atziluth always means “holding something back,” as in the expressions: And whatsoever mine eyes desired ‘lo atzalti’ (I did not keep) from them; ‘Halo atzalta’ (Hast thou not reserved) a blessing for me? Similarly, [Now the upper chambers were shorter, for the galleries took away from these, more than from the lower and the middlemost, in the building. For they were in three stories, and they had not pillars as the pillars of the courts;] therefore ‘ne’etzal’ (room was taken away) from the lowest and the middlemost, in comparison with the ground, meaning that more [room] was left by them [i.e., the upper chambers] relative to the ground, than by the chambers on the bottom and middle [stories], since their galleries did not take away from these upper chambers. used in the verse signifies “holding back.” Likewise, and to the ‘atzilei’ of the children of Israel means “those who were left and were separated from them, who were withdrawn to themselves from the rest of the ordinary people.” Or it may be that great men are so called [atzilim — from the root eitzel (near)] because everybody comes to them [for counsel and instruction]. And translators of languages (an Emanation from which emanated a second) etc. (Hirschfeld’s translation, I, 1, p. 36). use the term atziluth with reference to an emanation of any powers [coming forth] from the Creator and spreading to a created object. Thus they speak of the soul as atzulah (emanating) from Ruach Hakodesh (the Holy Spirit), since they understand atziluth as an expression of “drawing forth.” But it does not appear to me to be correct that atziluth should mean “drawing forth” or — “or placing upon”]: ela hanachah — “but placing upon.” That is to say, Ramban differs with the translators who understood atziluth as an act of both, coming forth from one subject and spreading to another, while Ramban holds it is primarily a concept of “placing upon” a subject, part of something which the bestower has set aside for it. — See further my Hebrew commentary p. 235. “placing upon” [the receiver], something which the bestower has set aside [for him]. Onkelos, however, explained that the term atziluth has two meanings. Thus he translated here [v’atzalti] — “and I shall make great” [thus indicating that the term atziluth is to be understood as a “drawing forth” by the giver for the benefit of the receiver, that he will be made great], and similarly and to the ‘atzilei’ [he translated], “and to the great men;” but he rendered ‘Halo atzalta’ a blessing for me — “Have you not ‘left’ for me a blessing?” Thus it appears that his opinion about the meaning of atziluth is that it [sometimes] refers to a drawing forth or bestowing by a giver on a receiver; thus [according to this interpretation] the verse here is saying: “I will draw forth from that which is upon you [Moses] of the spirit of prophecy, and I will put it upon them.” But we may [also use the term atziluth in speaking of] a “drawing forth” which a giver does to himself from that which is given, so that it remains with him, this being the meaning of the verse, ‘Halo atzalta’ a blessing for me — “Have you not kept to yourself for me one of the blessings with which to bless me?” The general principle about the elders is that their Divine communication came only from [G-d’s] spirit which spoke to Moses, and from him it came to them. Therefore the Rabbis have said in Bamidbar Sinai Rabbah:. “This can be compared to a master who gave an orchard to a guardian, and paid him a wage for his service. After a while the guardian said to him: ‘I cannot guard the whole orchard alone; bring in some more people to guard it with me.’ Thereupon the master said to him: ‘I gave you my orchard to guard, and all the fruits for guarding it I gave you [i.e., I gave you a reward for it], and now you tell me to bring in others to guard it with you! I will bring in others to help you guard it, but you should know that I will not give them wages for watching it out of my resources; rather it is from the wages that I have given you that they will take their payment.’ So did the Holy One, blessed be He, say to Moses: ‘I have given you spirit and knowledge to lead My children, and I did not want anyone else [to help you], in order that you alone should be singled out for this guardianship, and now you want someone else! Know then that from Me they will not take anything, but I will take of the spirit which is upon thee, and will put it upon them.’ Yet nonetheless Moses did not lose anything [of his spirit].” Thus far is in the Midrash. It appears likely to me that this [bestowing of the Divine spirit that was upon Moses] happened to the elders throughout their lives, so that they knew whatever G-d commanded Israel by the hand of Moses in connection with the temporary needs of the people and the events which happened to them in the wilderness. This is the meaning of the expression [in the verse before us] and they shall bear the burden of the people with thee, that whatever Moses told the people they knew, and each one would pass the Divine communication about it to the people of his tribe, and thus Moses no longer had to bear their complaints alone.

YE SHALL NOT EAT ONE DAY. The meaning thereof is: “you shall not eat for only one day, nor only two days [but even a whole month]. Similarly, the phrase not once nor twice means “not only once nor twice.” And in my opinion it cannot be said of a person who eats or does something for many consecutive days that he ate or did [that action] for one day. is to be understood literally, for since they will eat for a consecutive period of thirty days, it cannot be said of them that they ate for one day. Likewise the phrase nor twenty days is to be understood in its plain sense: “you will not eat of it twenty days, but thirty days.” Similarly it cannot be said of one who eats [something] for thirty consecutive days that he ate it for twenty days. is to be understood literally, for since they will eat for a consecutive period of thirty days, it cannot be said of them that they ate for one day. Likewise the phrase nor twenty days is to be understood in its plain sense: “you will not eat of it twenty days, but thirty days.” Or it may be that the word “one” [Ye shall not eat ‘one’ day] is connected [with the following phrases]: “Ye shall not eat one day, nor two days, nor ten or twenty single [non-consecutive] days, but a full month.” Thus He gave them the meat which they craved for, but not the fish or the vegetables, for their main demand for which they wept was give us flesh. And the meaning of the expression, But even a whole month, until it come out of your nostrils, and it be loathsome unto you is that He will give them a lot of meat, and they will eat it for a whole month to such a great extent that they will become sick of it, and they will consider it detestable and like a strange inedible food. According to the plain meaning of Scripture the following is what happened: On the first day [of their eating the meat] they were smitten with a very great plague and the people that were the first to lust died,, Verse 34. these being the mixed multitude that was among them, also the children of Israel mentioned at the beginning who said, Who shall give us flesh to eat? But the rest of the people who wept afterwards family by family, every man at the door of his tent, Verse 10. ate of it for a whole month until it became loathsome to them and they threw away any heaps they had left of it. And so does the psalm state: He caused flesh also to rain upon them as the dust; So they did eat, and were well-filled, and He gave them that which they craved. They were not estranged from their craving, their food was still in their mouths, when the anger of G-d went up against them etc., Verses 29-31. For some of them ate and were well-filled, but those who lusted did not satisfy their lust at all, for while their food was still in their mouths … the anger of G-d went up against them., Verses 29-31. Now the [Midrashic] interpretations of Rabbi Shimon 22. If flocks and herds be slain for them, will they suffice them? or if all the fish be gathered together for them ‘umatza lahem’ (will they suffice them)?” Since it is inconceivable that Moses actually doubted G-d’s powers, Rashi [in Verse 22] quotes the interpretation of Rabbi Shimon in the Sifre, that Moses’ intent was as follows: “The people are so many, and Thou hast said ‘I will give them flesh, for a whole month’ — and then you will kill them! Shall the flock and herds be slaughtered for them so that they [the people] will be killed immediately, and this eating should be their last, satisfying them forever!” Then G-d said to Moses: Now shalt thou see etc. (see note that follows). and of Rabbi Yehudah Hanasi (Verse 23) — for they will not listen unto thee.” Moses then went to appease them and told them what G-d said to him: Is the hand of the Eternal waxed short? (ibid.) But the people answered that He indeed has no power to grant their request. This is what the following verse [24] means: And Moses went out, and told the people the words of the Eternal. Since, however, they refused to listen to him, the verse continues, and he gathered seventy men etc. do not fit in properly with the language of Scripture, because He said, Now shalt thou see whether My word shall come to pass unto thee or not. And Moses said: ‘I will go to appease them.’ And G-d said to him: ‘They will not listen unto thee. Now shalt thou see whether My word shall come to pass unto thee [that they will not listen unto thee] or not …’” the interpretations of Rabbi Shimon and of Rabbi Yehudah Hanasi would have fitted in with the text of Scripture. But all which is written after the phrase, Is the hand of the Eternal waxed short? is: Now shalt thou see etc. which implies that Moses, as it were, doubted that G-d would satisfy them. Hence we must offer another interpretation, as set forth in the text that follows. And the interpretation of Rabbi Akiba who says that the words [of Moses] are to be taken literally, namely “Will it be enough for them?” is the true sense of Scripture, and this is the opinion of Onkelos [who translated umatza lahem — “will it suffice them?”]. But the event itself is amazing, as Rabbi Shimon said [commenting on Rabbi Akiba’s interpretation]: “The person of whom Scripture writes, he is trusted in all My house, would he say that G-d cannot supply enough for them!” Moreover, all of them had already seen far greater wonders than this! And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra answered this [by saying] that Moses thought that G-d would not create a new wonder except to vindicate His prophet [as happened in the affair of Korach, further, Chapter 16; and since the truth of his prophecy was not now in question, Moses thought that no miracle would happen merely to satisfy the people’s requests]. But this too, does not appear correct to me, for He had already done for them [a miracle] of this sort with the first quail, and also with the water, 17:6. and the manna,, Chapter 16. for all of these things were given to them to satisfy their complaints. The correct interpretation appears to me to be that when G-d does signs and wonders for Israel, they are deeds of kindness from Him, and they are all for their good, for The Eternal is good to all; and His tender mercies are over all His works, except when there is wrath gone out against those who transgress His Will, when He acts towards them with anger and the attribute of judgment to their complete punishment. Thus miracles can only be [manifestations of] complete and perfect goodness in mercy, or retribution by the attribute of judgment. But now when G-d told Moses that He would fulfill their request and they would eat meat until it cometh out at your nostrils, and it be loathsome unto you, Moses our teacher knew that there would not be a wonder from G-d to supply them with flesh as He gave them the corn of heaven, similar to which the Sages say: “No evil thing comes down from heaven.” Moreover, all miracles He told Moses about beforehand: Behold, I will cause to rain bread from heaven for you; Behold, I will stand before thee there on the rock in Horeb; [and thou shalt smite the rock, and there shall come water out of it]., 17:6. But here since He told him, And say unto the people: Sanctify yourselves against tomorrow, and He did not inform him [that he would then give them meat, as He informed about the other miracles], Moses understood that there would be no miracle from Him, blessed be He. Therefore he asked in astonishment: “What can He do [to satisfy] them by natural means? If all the flocks and herds around them be slaughtered for them they will still not be satisfied, and if all the fish of the sea in the place nearest to them be gathered in for them it would still not be sufficient for them.” Therefore G-d answered that His hand is not too short to fulfill their request even by ordinary events, this being the meaning of the expression ‘ha’yikrecha’ [of the root mikreh — “chance”] My word or not, [i.e., Now shalt thou see whether My word ‘shall suffice for thee even by chance’]. And He said, Is the Eternal’s ‘yad’ (hand) waxed short, similar to the expression, and royal wine in abundance, according to the ‘yad’ (bounty) of the king, but He did not say, Is there anything too hard for me? since this was not done by a wonder. And so indeed it came to pass, that there went forth a wind from the Eternal in accordance with natural events, neither a very strong west wind nor a strong east wind, as Scripture mentions in speaking of the miracles, but a normal wind as is usual, and it brought across quails from the sea, not that they were now created for their sake, and so there was nothing different in this from the natural events of the world. Besides, this had already happened to them before, and the only new element in it now was that the quails were in great abundance.

MY LORD MOSES, ‘K’LA’EIM’ (SHUT THEM IN). The meaning of this is that Moses had told the people the words of G-d, that He would take of the spirit which was upon him and put it upon those that will stand with him in the Tent of Meeting. Now those that did not go to the Tent [i.e., Eldad and Medad who had also been designated for that honor], and yet held themselves to be among those upon whom Moses’ spirit had been put [by prophesying in the camp, as Eldad and Medad did], were as rebels against Moses’ words. Therefore Joshua said to Moses, “Shut them in, for perhaps it is a lying spirit in their mouths, or it is an evil spirit that terrifies them, and thus they must be put in a prison like a man that is mad, and maketh himself like a prophet.” But Moses in his humility answered: “Would that all the people of the Eternal were prophets, that the Eternal would give His spirit upon them! — for G-d put His spirit directly upon them without taking of the spirit which was upon me, and would that this would happen to all the people.” However, from the words of our Rabbis it appears that the custom in Israel was that no one would prophesy about future events in the presence of a prophet who is greater than him, but they would follow him as his disciples, and these were the sons of the prophets. as “those who sought the prophetic gift. And although they directed their minds towards it, the Divine Spirit might or might not rest upon them” (Hilchoth Yesodei Hatorah 7:5). Thus the Rabbis have said in Tractate Sanhedrin [with reference to the prophecy of Eldad and Medad]: “We can well understand according to that Sage who said that [Eldad and Medad prophesied that] ‘Moses will die [before entering the Land],’ that Joshua therefore said, My lord Moses, shut them in [since he wished to save Moses from grief]. But according to the Sage who said that [they prophesied] about the quails [that they would come from the sea], why should they be shut in [and not prophesy]? It is because the case resembled that of a pupil who renders a decision in the presence of his master.” Similarly [this was the reason why they were forbidden to prophesy] according to the Sage who says that they prophesied about Gog and Magog. And the Rabbis have mentioned a similar case in Tractate Megillah in the matter of Deborah. But Moses said that he, being the master, foregoes the honor due to him [and the law is that a Rabbi is able to renounce the honor due to him], and he desires and is happy [that they prophesy]. And I have seen that the Targum Yerushalmi rendered: “k’la’eim — withhold from them the Holy Spirit.” The Targum thus understood the word k’la’eim to be like the expressions: Behold, ‘lo echla’ (I did not refrain) my lips; ‘lo thichla’ (Thou wilt not withhold) Thy compassions from me., Verse 12. Now the reason for this matter is that Joshua thought that [Eldad and Medad] were prophesying because they were of them that were recorded [among the prescribed number of seventy men that were to join Moses], because the spirit of Moses was transmitted to all that were recorded, for he intended that all [seventy of them should become prophets]. Therefore Joshua said to Moses: “It is not fitting that they [Eldad and Medad] should prophesy in the camp, since they did not fulfill the word of G-d who commanded: and thou [Moses] shalt bring them unto the Tent of Meeting, that they may stand there with thee, and thus it might appear that not all of them prophesied through His putting of the spirit which was upon you [on them]. It is therefore fitting for my lord to direct your mind towards the spirit of G-d [which is upon you] and to bring it [completely] back to you, so that it should not be taken from you except for those who stand before you in accordance with the word of G-d. For it was because you intended at first that all who were recorded [should be prophets] that some of your glory came upon them, and if you will now intend to withdraw it from them, it will come to rest only upon those who stand before you in accordance with the word of G-d.” But Moses answered [Joshua by saying] that he should not be zealous for his sake, for he wishes that they prophesy whether in his presence or outside it, since G-d had put His spirit upon them — either by transmission from Moses or [directly from G-d] without such a transmission.