I’ve asked a number of people, lately, about manna. I say “What do you think about manna?,” and I get a lot of interesting looks in return. My favorite look is the double-take, where the person’s eyes literally blink two or three times while their head turns sideways and then quickly back in a fast darting motion (probably they are looking for an escape from the lunatic facing them).
Then I say, “You know, manna. You know what manna is, don’t you?”
Now that they understand I am not going to take out a bible and thump it or alternately try to sell them a new diet pill, they answer me.
“Of course!,” they say, still somewhat reluctant to talk about things other than the weather or Bernie Madoff. “The stuff that falls from the sky.”
And that is it. That is manna.
But then there are the ways we must really think of manna when we must really think of manna (which apparently is not often at all).
ReaderX in commentary seemed to see it as a desired salvation of sorts by groups of people seeking a ‘fix’ – which is what I always thought of manna as – a clear thing, a good thing, simple and pure in appearance (though perhaps questionable in true effect when taken and applied as a life-tool).
But in further exploration it seems this might not be the case for everybody, when they (have to) think of manna.
Maybe manna seems like a simple salvation for those on the outside of things, looking in.
Maybe, in the story, it is really something else.
But these musings are in the philosophic realm, and the real deal here is to Eat.
Today I’ll continue my search for the right kind of flour. Tomorrow, I’m going to look further – to find another kind of manna to dine upon.