Parashat Behaalotcha
June 14, 2022
Rabbi Yitzchak Zilbiger, High School Tanakh Teacher
There is no such thing as free food.
“זָכַרְנוּ אֶת הַדָּגָה אֲשֶׁר נֹאכַל בְּמִצְרַיִם חִנָּם אֵת הַקִּשֻּׁאִים וְאֵת הָאֲבַטִּחִים וְאֶת הֶחָצִיר וְאֶת הַבְּצָלִים וְאֶת הַשּׁוּמִים”.
“We remember the fish that we used to eat free in Egypt, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks, the onions, and the garlic.”
Yes, the above description appears in this week’s parashah — Behaalotcha.
“זָכַרְנוּ אֶת הַדָּגָה אֲשֶׁר נֹאכַל בְּמִצְרַיִם חִנָּם אֵת הַקִּשֻּׁאִים וְאֵת הָאֲבַטִּחִים וְאֶת הֶחָצִיר וְאֶת הַבְּצָלִים וְאֶת הַשּׁוּמִים”.
“We remember the fish that we used to eat free in Egypt, the cucumbers, the melons, the leeks, the onions, and the garlic.”
Yes, the above description appears in this week’s parashah — Behaalotcha.
Fish, cucumbers, melons, and more seem to have been free back in Egypt. Reading this makes everyone raise an eyebrow. First, the description of the Israelites’ “shopping list” itself is very appealing. Moreover, is this really what the Israelites remember from Egypt, the free food? Did they not study the beginning of Shemot – Exodus? Did they forget the short but famous description of their days in the house of bondage, “וַיְמָרְרוּ אֶת חַיֵּיהֶם בַּעֲבֹדָה קָשָׁה” – “And they made their lives bitter with hard labor”? Where does this idea of free food come from? What happened to all the persecutions they went through, the hard labor, casting the children into the Nile? Surely these memories are as fresh in their minds at least as the vegetables they are yearning for.
The Sages expressed astonishment at this idyllic picture as well by asking: “If the Egyptians would not give them straw for nothing, would they have given them fish for nothing?” The famous answer given by the midrash and quoted by Rashi explains that “free” does not refer to the food, but to the Israelites being “free”. Free from mitzvot, free from commandments, free from obligations.
Nechama Leibowitz (1905 –1997) in her Studies in Bamidbar discusses this idea at length saying that although the midrash’s answer is removed from the world of the Israelites’ grumblings, it has a deeper meaning, applies best to the generation who left Egypt, and has a timeless message.
Famous classic commentaries explain the idea of free as a degree of exaggeration on the part of the Israelites. Ibn Ezra, an eleventh-century commentator, suggests that “free” in this context means cheap. Ramban suggests that free means available. Whether the variety of vegetables was free, at a discount price, or plentiful, the point is that the Israelites demonstrate a very selective memory of what the price was for this “free” food. Therefore, Nechama prefers the midrash quoted above and suggests that the midrash’s understanding of “free” demonstrates insight into the Israelites’ character then and beyond. Nechama’s analysis (below) is profound and worth quoting.
“A community will accept suffering with enthusiasm and eagerness, provided the aim of it all is one which appeals to them or with which they can identify themselves. No sacrifice of convenience, property, health, and even those near and dear will be too great, provided the goal is valued and sacred in their eyes. On the other hand, when discontent lurks in the heart of the public or individual, grumblings and murmurings, criticism and defamation will flare up at the slightest pretext. The most trivial difficulty will be magnified sevenfold and even the tiniest inconvenience demanded regarded as a major violation of their rights. The real motive for the inner discontent is not explicitly expressed, either because the person is unaware of its cause or because it springs from forbidden desires which must be suppressed and concealed. Instead, the malcontents make many trivial complaints and always have a grievance. The onlooker will be puzzled: Are these trivialities worth such an outcry? His eyes will not be able to distinguish between the pretext and the real cause lurking deep down.”
Hence, the midrash’s interpretation suggests that it was not the food, the drink, the fish, or the cucumbers that the Israelites were yearning for. It was the “freedom” from demands and “freedom” from self-discipline which the Israelites “enjoyed” in Egypt. That is what they are desiring now, a year later.
Although the Israelites went forth from slavery to freedom, however, some “slavery” left Egypt with them. Freedom does not mean lawlessness; freedom does not mean “free meals”. Real freedom includes commitments, obligations, and boundaries. A kehilah needs rules and the individual needs guidelines that are willingly accepted. No commitment and no obligations ultimately mean no freedom. Restrictions do not limit freedom but create a healthy and safe environment. They give a sense of belonging to something bigger than oneself. Recognizing this will make all individuals pay attention to details and realize the essence of the core values of the kehilah they belong to. We ought to remember that there is no such thing as free food; prepare ahead and you will be served.
Have a healthy and productive summer.
Shabbat Shalom
The Sages expressed astonishment at this idyllic picture as well by asking: “If the Egyptians would not give them straw for nothing, would they have given them fish for nothing?” The famous answer given by the midrash and quoted by Rashi explains that “free” does not refer to the food, but to the Israelites being “free”. Free from mitzvot, free from commandments, free from obligations.
Nechama Leibowitz (1905 –1997) in her Studies in Bamidbar discusses this idea at length saying that although the midrash’s answer is removed from the world of the Israelites’ grumblings, it has a deeper meaning, applies best to the generation who left Egypt, and has a timeless message.
Famous classic commentaries explain the idea of free as a degree of exaggeration on the part of the Israelites. Ibn Ezra, an eleventh-century commentator, suggests that “free” in this context means cheap. Ramban suggests that free means available. Whether the variety of vegetables was free, at a discount price, or plentiful, the point is that the Israelites demonstrate a very selective memory of what the price was for this “free” food. Therefore, Nechama prefers the midrash quoted above and suggests that the midrash’s understanding of “free” demonstrates insight into the Israelites’ character then and beyond. Nechama’s analysis (below) is profound and worth quoting.
“A community will accept suffering with enthusiasm and eagerness, provided the aim of it all is one which appeals to them or with which they can identify themselves. No sacrifice of convenience, property, health, and even those near and dear will be too great, provided the goal is valued and sacred in their eyes. On the other hand, when discontent lurks in the heart of the public or individual, grumblings and murmurings, criticism and defamation will flare up at the slightest pretext. The most trivial difficulty will be magnified sevenfold and even the tiniest inconvenience demanded regarded as a major violation of their rights. The real motive for the inner discontent is not explicitly expressed, either because the person is unaware of its cause or because it springs from forbidden desires which must be suppressed and concealed. Instead, the malcontents make many trivial complaints and always have a grievance. The onlooker will be puzzled: Are these trivialities worth such an outcry? His eyes will not be able to distinguish between the pretext and the real cause lurking deep down.”
Hence, the midrash’s interpretation suggests that it was not the food, the drink, the fish, or the cucumbers that the Israelites were yearning for. It was the “freedom” from demands and “freedom” from self-discipline which the Israelites “enjoyed” in Egypt. That is what they are desiring now, a year later.
Although the Israelites went forth from slavery to freedom, however, some “slavery” left Egypt with them. Freedom does not mean lawlessness; freedom does not mean “free meals”. Real freedom includes commitments, obligations, and boundaries. A kehilah needs rules and the individual needs guidelines that are willingly accepted. No commitment and no obligations ultimately mean no freedom. Restrictions do not limit freedom but create a healthy and safe environment. They give a sense of belonging to something bigger than oneself. Recognizing this will make all individuals pay attention to details and realize the essence of the core values of the kehilah they belong to. We ought to remember that there is no such thing as free food; prepare ahead and you will be served.
Have a healthy and productive summer.
Shabbat Shalom