The manna, which transcended nature, represents the inner dimension of Torah. Therefore, the fact that the Jewish people “complained about the manna” was a matter affecting the innermost dimension of the soul, and the rebuke is consequently expressed only in a concealed manner. By contrast, the rebuke concerning the fact that the tribes of Gad and Reuven did not initially wish to enter Eretz Yisrael—a matter involving the refinement of the physical world—is stated openly, because the work of refinement is associated with the external dimension of the soul.
In our parshah, there are rebukes that are expressed only through hints and other rebukes that are stated explicitly. We must therefore understand why the rebuke directed toward the tribes of Gad and Reuven is stated openly, while the rebuke for the Jewish people’s complaint about the manna is concealed, merely alluded to in the word “Lavan.”
By way of introduction: When the Jewish people complained about the manna, the verse states, “It was like coriander seed, white, and its appearance was like the appearance of crystal.”
Seemingly, when emphasizing the special quality of the manna, the Torah should have focused on its taste rather than on its appearance. Why, then, does the verse emphasize that it was white?
The explanation is that the whiteness of the manna represents simplicity and purity. Since it was bread that descended from Heaven, it did not undergo a significant change from its original nature when it entered the physical world.
This is also why the manna could contain every possible taste. Since it was bread from Heaven and was therefore not limited by the laws of nature, it was capable of containing even opposite qualities simultaneously.
The Jewish people complained about the manna because they did not desire food that transcended nature.
The Zohar states that the members of the tribe of Gad cherished the manna. Therefore, they did not eat meat, and as a result they possessed abundant livestock. This was also the reason they wished to remain on the eastern side of the Jordan.
The deeper meaning is as follows: The ultimate purpose of the manna was to bring about refinement within the person below, including the refinement of a person who eats meat. In the case of the tribe of Gad, however, the ultimate purpose of the descent into the physical world was not fully realized. They therefore wished to remain on the eastern side of the Jordan, where they could serve as shepherds and remain somewhat removed from involvement with the world.
The manna represents the inner dimension of Torah. Therefore, the complaint against the manna concerned the inner dimension of the soul, and the rebuke is expressed only in a concealed manner.
By contrast, the rebuke concerning the reluctance of the tribe of Gad to enter Eretz Yisrael involved the work of birurim—the refinement of the physical world. It is therefore stated openly, because the work of refinement is connected with the external dimension of the soul.
This is also the connection to the conclusion of the haftarah:
“Tziyon will be redeemed through justice” refers to the revelation of the inner dimension of the soul through Torah.
“And those who return to her through tzedakah” refers to the elevation achieved through the refinements of exile—“those who return”—accomplished through the practical performance of mitzvos, represented by tzedakah.