Tuesday, June 8, 2021

Bemidbar chapter 16 – Korah's rebellion: The great rebellion by an unholy coalition

Bemidbar 16 records Korah’s rebellion against Moshe and begins by recording that Korah took, and then mentions three other people, Datan, Aviram and On, 16:1. On is a mystery person in this chapter since we never hear of him again in the chapter, see our discussion on 16:1, “A few unworthy men.”

What is this taking in the first half of 16:1? Who or what did Korah take? Ibn Ezra (on 16:1, see Alter, 2004, p. 762 ) explains that Korah took people to join his rebellion. Hizkuni (on 16:1) explains that Korah took Datan, Aviram and On. The Rashbam and the Bekhor Shor (on 16:1) explains that Korah, Datan and Aviram took the 250 people mentioned in 16:2, but the Torah uses the singular, Korah took in 16:1, to teach us that of the three, Korah was the more active personality in this rebellion. I prefer the Ibn Ezra’s approach. Korah was the chief ringleader of the rebellion (17:14; 26:9), and he gathered or took together different groups of people to make a coalition against Moshe. The second half of 16:1, informs us that Datan, Aviram and On joined with Korah, and they were named possibly since they were his first followers, the most prominent or the most belligerent of his followers.

The beginning of 16:2 records that “they stood before Moshe.” The “they” refers to Korah, Datan and Aviram (and On?), and it can mean that they literally stood before Moshe or that they started organizing a challenge to Moshe. The they could also refer to other anonymous people that Korah took in 16:1. The reminder of 16:2 refers to 250 well known people that joined the rebellion. It would seem that the group of 250 people joined after Korah, Datan, Aviram and On began the rebellion. With regard to speculation as to who were these 250 people, see our discussion below on 16:2,"Who were the 250 men who were part of Korah’s rebellion?

As noted by many (for example, see S. R. Hirsch on 16:8-11) the rebellion consisted of two groups of people. One group was the 250 people who wanted to become priests or high priests and the second group was led by Datan and Aviram, but it also included other people, who were upset with Moshe’s political leadership. Korah was part of both groups and unified the two groups in the rebellion, 16:1,5,8,16,19,24. The Torah uses several words to connect the two groups. We will point out these literary hints and show that chapter 16 is one unit and not disjointed.

The beginning of 16:3 records that the group of rebels gathered on Moshe and Aharon. If one understands that 16:2 was referring to the rebels challenging Moshe without meeting him in person, then 16:3 records the first face to face confrontation between Moshe and the rebels, while if one understands that 16:2 refers to a physical meeting between Moshe and the rebels, then 16:3 records a second face to face confrontation between Moshe, this time also Aharon, with the rebels.

From 16:5,8 we know that Korah was part of this gathering referred to in 16:3, but it is not clear if Datan and Aviram was also part of the gathering in 16:3. 16:12 records that Moshe sends messengers to speak to them, which means that they were not present at the ensuing conversation, but did they leave after the rebels’ accusations in 16:3 (Aaron Israel, personal correspondence, suggested this to me) or did they not participate at all in this gathering. If they were not part of the gathering in 16:3, and 16:2 does not refer to an actual confrontation, then it could be that Datan and Aviram did not encounter Moshe until 16:27. If they were part of the gathering of 16:3, then when did they leave? Maybe after Moshe started to speak to Levites, as they decided that his speech was not relevant to them.

16:3 then records that the rebels said to Moshe and Aharon that since everybody is kadosh, why did Moshe and Aharon lord over them and the Jewish people? It is not clear exactly what the rebels wanted at this point: Did they want a democracy? Did they want anarchy? Did they want to replace Moshe and Aharon?

16:4 records that Moshe fell on his face. Why? The Rashbam (on 16:4) suggests it was to pray and that G-d then instructed Moshe what to respond to the claim of Korah and the 250 people. While this could be, this is not recorded in the Torah, and it could be that this falling down might have been just for Moshe to collect his thoughts how to respond to the rebels. With this idea, Moshe's response in the following verses was his idea, see our discussion on Shemot 16:6-13, "Predicting the future." In class, Nissim Edri suggested that he fell because he was so sad that the people would make these accusations against him. This would be like his falling on his face when the people said that they wanted to go back to Egypt after hearing the report of the spies, 14:5.

16:4 does not record that Aharon responded to the accusations of the rebels, even though later he would fall on his face, 16:22, and he fell on face when the people said that they wanted to go back to Egypt after hearing the report of the spies, 14:5. Maybe Aharon felt guilty about being the high priest since he had participated in the sin of the golden calf, Shemot 32:4,5.

16:5-7 record Moshe's first response to the rebels. He told them that in following morning there would be a test of the fire-pans that the people would put incense on these fire-pans and then G-d would make it known who was the one person who was kadosh. This statement is a repudiation of the claim of Korah and his followers that all the people are kadosh in 16:3. Also, since Moshe said that one person would be shown to be kadosh from the test this indicates that Moshe understood that the rebellion was because people were upset that he had appointed his brother Aharon to be the high priest, which might have been seen as a case of nepotism. It is interesting that Moshe did not include himself in this test, as this test was just to prove that Aharon was chosen by G-d to be the high priest.

Rashi (on 16:5) suggest that Moshe made the test for the following day to give the people a chance to think and decide to stop their rebellion. In class, David said that the people needed time to prepare the test. This is reasonable since they had to get incense and fire-pans, and it is not obvious that both items were so readily available.

In the end of 16:7, Moshe mentioned that the people from the tribe of Levi should not participate in this rebellion since they already have an official status though not as high a level as the priests. We know that Korah was from the tribe of Levi, 16:1, and most likely many of his followers were also Levites. Furthermore, as a literary point, Korah initially claimed to Moshe and Aharon that rav lachem “too much is yours,” 16:3, and Moshe responded to the Levites with the same words rav lachem bnei Levi, “too much is yours, sons of Levi,” 16:7.

16:8-11 records how after Moshe explained the test for the following day, he expanded on his plea for the Levites to desist from the rebellion. In these verses, Moshe was both trying to speak specifically to Korah and at the same time speak to the Levites who were part of the rebellion. 16:10 records how he explicitly stated that the rebels desired to be priests, and in 16:11 he tried to get them to stop attacking his brother Aharon. Moshe began this plea with a literary point, as in the end of 16:7, he said rav lachem, "too much is yours" and in 16:9, he began, ha-meaht, is it too little for you?

16:12 records that after Moshe tried to persuade the Levites from within the group of Korah and the 250 people to stop rebelling, he then attempted to talk to Datan and Aviram by sending messengers to ask them to come to him. However, they refused to come, and they spoke with great impudence to Moshe, 16:12-14. They accused Moshe of taking the people out Egypt, a land flowing with milk and honey (!), to have them die in the desert.

We see that Datan and Aviram were in close communication with Korah and the 250 people since they mimic Moshe's words to the Levites who were with Korah. In 16:9, Moshe said ha-meaht “is it too little” to the Levites, and Datan and Aviram used this same word ha-meaht, 16:13, when they accused Moshe “is it too little” that you took us out of Egypt. In class, Dror Haburu suggested that maybe they had heard Moshe speak these words, and then they left to go to their tents.

N. Leibowitz (1982, p. 206) adds that just as Moshe ended with a rhetorical question when he spoke to the group of 250 in 16:10, so too Datan and Aviram included a rhetorical question in 16:13. Milgrom (1990, p. 133) also notes that Datan and Aviram used the word tistarer, lord over, in 16:13 which is similar to the word that Korah and the 250 men said in 16:3, titnase`u, raise yourself.

In addition, Gary Rendsburg (2002, pp. 415,416) notes that Datan and Aviram’s retort to Moshe comprised one word/ sound four times, which he calls a leading word. 16:12,14 record that Datan and Aviram twice said that they would not go up to Moshe, lo naaleh, and in 16:13 they said that Moshe took them up from Egypt, he-elitanu, and that Moshe was ruling over them, alenu

This same word/ sound also appears by Moshe’s last statement to the Levites right before he sent for Datan and Aviram, when Moshe questioned the Levites why were they protesting against Aharon, alav, end of 16:11. In addition, when Moshe gave the instructions to the 250 men, he also used a word with the same sound, alehen, on it, 16:7. All these six words have the letters ayin and lamed. In addition, while the word for protesting used by Moshe, talinu, 16:11, in reference to the Levites, does not have the letter ayin, it has a similar sound to the words he-elitanu and alenu in 16:13 and the word lanu in 16:14 said by Datan and Aviram via the letters lamed, nun and vav. These words/ sounds are a literary way to connect the two groups of rebels.

Datan and Aviram's claim in 16:13 that Moshe was killing the people is difficult. They must have been claiming that it was Moshe's fault that the people were to die in the desert. The people were stuck in the desert due to the sin of the spies. Was Moshe responsible for the sin of the spies? Maybe they were claiming that Moshe should not have sent the spies since they believed it was his decision to send the spies. Or, maybe they were upset that Moshe did not join the people when they tried to go to the land of Israel on their own, 14:44, since they thought that Moshe made this decision on his own without speaking to G-d.

In any event, we see that while the two groups of rebels had different complaints against Moshe, they were unified by the same underlying rationale. Korah and the 250 people claimed that Moshe appointed Aharon as the high priest on his own since Aharon was his brother, and Datan and Aviram claimed that Moshe caused the people to be stuck and die in the desert on his own. We see that this was the main point of contention from Moshe’s words in 16:28,29 prior to the land opening up.

16:15 records Moshe's response to Datan and Aviram's claim. The verse records that Moshe was angry probably because they spoke with so much impudence. 16:15 records three statements Moshe said to G-d: One, do not accept their minhah; Two, I did not take a donkey from them; Three, I did not wrong any of them. To understand these statements, we need to understand that while Moshe was responding to the statements of Datan and Aviram, he was still standing in front of Korah and the 250 people. Moshe heard Datan and Aviram's tirade from their messenger, but he had not moved from his discussion with Korah and the 250 men. Thus, the first statement "not to accept their minhah," means, as explained by Rashi (on 16:15) that Moshe was asking G-d not accept the incense offering the following day of the 250 people. This was a hint or warning to the 250 people not go ahead with their incense test the following day since if G-d would not accept their incense they could die. The second statement that he did not take a donkey from anybody was against the claim of the Korah and the 250 men, that he appointed Aharon to be the priest since he was his brother, as here Moshe denies taking anything at all for himself even a donkey. Note, in Moshe's second statement he did not literally say that he did not take any donkey but that he did not lift anything, nasa`ti, and when Korah and the 250 men complained in 16:3 of Moshe lording over them, they used the same word, titnase`u. Moshe’s third statement was in response to Datan and Aviram's tirade that he had caused the people to die in the desert. Moshe said he had not wronged the people, which was saying that the people were destined to die in the desert because of their sins and not his actions.

16:16,17 then record that Moshe told Korah and the 250 people to appear the following morning and offer an incense offering. These instructions, repeat Moshe’s instructions from 16:5-7. The Ramban (on 16:16) notes that here Moshe specifically included Aharon in the test, and this was not mentioned previously. In addition, from a literary perspective, the repetition of the instructions forms a bookend after the interlude with Datan and Aviram, which occurs numerous times in the Torah, for example, Shemot 6:13,29. Furthermore, it is typical that people repeat instructions to make sure they are understood. Also, maybe Moshe repeated the instructions to the test since he wanted to make sure that the 250 people understood the risk they were taking by doing the test since it is possible that from the first set of instructions in 16:5-7, the 250 people did not comprehend that they could die from the test. Finally, when Moshe repeated the instruction, he again used the leading word/ sound based on the letters, ayin and lamed, alehem, 16:17.

16:18 records that on the following day, the 250 people (not Datan and Aviram), went to the entrance of the ohel moed to do the incense test, and they stood near Moshe and Aharon. The entrance to the ohel moed is usually referring to the area in the courtyard of the mishkan by the curtain that leads into the mishkan itself, though it could also refer to the entrance to the courtyard. 16:18 twice records the word alehem, the eighth and ninth times this word/ sound appears in the chapter.

16:19 records that Korah gathered all of the edah on them, alehem, by the entrance to the ohel moed, and that the glory of G-d appeared to/ before the edah. The word alehem, is the fourth time this word appears since 16:17, and the tenth time this sound of the letters ayin and lamed appears in the chapter.

This information about the gathering in front of the ohel moed in 16:19 appears to repeat 16:18. Also, what does it mean “on them” in 16:19? On who? In addition, why now did the glory of G-d appear?

Rashi (on 16:19) suggests that during the time from Moshe’s instructions concerning the test the previous day until the morning of the incense test, Korah went around to gather (take, like in 16:1) more supporters to the rebellion. This is logical. 16:18 then refers to the 250 people from 16:2 that they were standing by the entrance to the ohel moed, while 16:19 refers to Korah and these additional people, who were supporting the 250 people, who also gathered in the ohel moed (the courtyard of the mishkan), and who are referred to as he-edah. The phrase “on them” in 16:19 would then be that these additional people were added to the gathering of the 250 people and Moshe and Aharon mentioned in 16:18.

My understanding is that usually only the Levites and priests could enter the courtyard, and the 250 people, who were not all Levites, were given special permission to be in the courtyard to do the test.  However, these additional people who entered the courtyard of the mishkan did not have permission to be there, and this infringement might be what caused the appearance of the glory of G-d. Maybe there was a fear that people would enter the inner room of the mishkan, and the glory of G-d was to stop them.

16:20,21 record that G-d told Moshe and Aharon to separate from this edah, since G-d (the glory of G-d?) was going to kill ha-edah. Why would G-d threaten to kill Korah, the 250 people and the additional people if they were allowed to do the incense test, which was not yet finished since it appears that Aharon had not yet lit his fire-pan? The answer is that the threat was with regard to the additional people, ha-edah from 16:19, who were not included in the incense test, and who had no reason to be in the courtyard of the mishkan.

G-d did not want to kill these people since otherwise G-d would have done so without informing Moshe. Instead, G-d wanted Moshe and Aharon to pray, which they did in 16:22. G-d’s threat here is similar to G-d’s statement to Moshe by the sin of the golden calf, Shemot 32:10,  by the sin of the spies  Bemidbar 14:11-20, and in the next chapter 17:10, see our discussion on Bemidbar 17:10,11, “A quick learner.”

16:22 records that Moshe and Aharon prayed for the edah, which again is the additional rebels that Korah gathered in between the announcement of the test and the morning of the test. Moshe and Aharon blamed their actions on one person, which was Korah who had convinced them to join the rebellion, 16:19. It is not recorded that these additional rebels died, as the Torah only records that 250 people died by the ohel moed, 16:35. This would mean that G-d accepted Moshe and Aharon’s prayers in 16:22. However, maybe these were the people who afterwards claimed that Moshe and Aharon killed the people of G-d, 17:6, and then they were killed in the ensuing plague, 17:17:14.

While in 16:22 Moshe and Aharon were praying for G-d to spare ha-edah, the group of additional people that gathered with Korah in 16:19, Moshe and Aharon’s prayer was just as relevant to the people who had gathered around Datan and Aviram. G-d responded to Moshe and Aharon’s prayer by telling Moshe to go to the tents of Korah, Datan and Aviram to speak to ha-edah, the people who gathered around these tents that they should move away, he-alu, from Datan and Aviram (and Korah?), 16:23,24. This word he-alu is again the word/ sound with the letters ayin and lamed. Note, the word used for tent in 16:24 is mishkan, which here is not a cultic place, but a regular tent, and it connects with Moshe’s words in 16:9, that it should have been enough for the Levites to work in the mishkan/ ohel moed.

Aharon was not told to accompany Moshe to go got Datan and Aviram, 16:23, since Aharon had to remain with the 250 people since he was involved in the incense test, 16:16. When Moshe went to the tents of Korah, Datan and Aviram, Aharon participated in the incense test with the 250 people. However, Aharon was no longer involved in the "action," which further indicates that the rebellion was primarily in reference to Moshe since the finale of the rebellion is Moshe speaking in the following verses.

The word ha-edah in 16:22,24 connects the two groups of rebels. In 16:22, the reference to the word ha-edah is to the additional rebels with Korah and the 250 people, while in 16:24 (and in 16:26) the term ha-edah is referring to the additional rebels with Datan and Aviram. This term ha-edah in these verses gives a seamless transition from the focus being on the rebellious group of Korah and 250 men to focusing on the other rebellious group of Datan and Aviram.

16:25,26 record that Moshe followed G-d’s instructions and went to Datan and Aviram's compound (for the first time) to request the people to separate from Datan and Aviram. This request was a warning to them to save their lives, which is similar to Moshe’s (and Aharon’s) prayer to G-d to spare the people who had joined the 250 people, 16:22, and in both cases the word, chet, appears, 16:22,26.

In addition, 16:25 states that Moshe got up, kam, since he had fallen on his face to pray, 16:24, but when he fell on face beforehand, 16:4, the Torah did not mention that he stood afterwards prior to his speaking to Korah, 16:5. Possibly, here the word kam is mentioned to connect to the beginning of the rebellion, when Korah, Datan and Aviram (and On?) stood, kamu, before Moshe, 16:2. Now, Moshe is standing and this standing signals that the rebellion is about to end.

One curiosity about 16:25 is that for the first and only time in this incident the elders of the people are mentioned, as they accompanied Moshe when he went to Datan and Aviram. Maybe this mention was to show that not everybody was involved in the rebellion or for the elders to be witnesses to the impending miracle.

The first half of 16:27 records that the people who had been with Datan and Aviram accepted Moshe’s warning to separate from Datan and Aviram. This separation is referred to by the word, va-yealu, which is not the usual word for people leaving an area, but it corresponds to the word he-alu in 16:24. Their separation is also the opposite of what Datan and Aviram did, as they said in 16:12,14, lo naaleh, we will not go up to Moshe, but their supporters separated from them. This word ve-yealu is the twelfth time this word/ sound appears in the chapter.

The second half of 16:27 records that Datan and Aviram remained with their families steadfast in their rebellion. 16:27 records that they were standing by the entrance of their tents, petach ohalehem, which is another literary connection with the 250 people who were by the entrance of the ohel moed, petach ohel moed, 16:18,19. Also, Datan and Aviram had accused Moshe of blinding the people, 16:14, while they had blinded their family to stay with them and die.

16:28-30 record that Moshe made an impassioned speech to counter the claims of the two groups of rebels that he was doing things on his own without being commanded by G-d. Moshe said if that G-d would do an unprecedented miracle to swallow up Datan and Aviram, then this would show that Moshe did not act on his own. 16:31-34 then record that this happened. Note, Moshe ended his speech by using the word, ni-atsu, 16:30, which has a similar sound to the description of the Datan and Aviram being defiant, nitsavim in 16:27. Also, Rendsburg (2002, pp. 416, 417) quotes Moshe Garsiel, who noted that the phrase Moshe used in 16:30, ve-im beriah, has the five letters of the name Aviram.

Moshe’s speech and ensuing miracle are the crucial points of the incident since the lesson of this incident is to teach again that Moshe is a messenger of G-d. This lesson was known from the plagues and the splitting of Yam Suf, Shemot 14:31, but maybe after some time (a year?), people were starting to doubt that Moshe was G-d's messenger. Also, maybe the arguments of Korah and the 250 people that if everybody was kadosh, 16:3, then how could it be that G-d has chosen Aharon to be the high priest was causing people to believe that it was Moshe's decision to appoint Aharon. Also, after the debacle of the spies, as argued by Datan and Aviram, maybe people were starting to doubt that Moshe was G-d's messenger. Thus, this miracle of the land swallowing up Datan and Aviram again showed that Moshe was G-d's messenger, and hence Moshe had to announce this sign before it occurred. Maybe this lesson is why this incident is recorded in the Torah since from a narrative perspective the whole rebellion could have been skipped.

16:33 records that the ground covered Datan and Aviram and maybe Korah (see our discussion on 16:32-35, "How did Korah die?), and has the leading and connecting word, alehem, which is the thirteenth time in the chapter this word/ sound appears, seven by the rebellious group of Datan and Aviram and six by the rebellious group of the 250 men. A 14th time, and the seventh by the group fighting against Aharon occurs by the aftermath of the rebellion, in 17:11, aleha, when Aharon again takes a pan with ketoret. This count does not include the word al, which appears seven times in chapter 16, 16:3(3),4,11,22(2), and the words me-al, 16:26,27.

Simultaneously with the ground opening up and swallowing Datan and Aviram, 16:35 records that a fire went forth, most likely from the glory of G-d mentioned in 16:19, and killed the 250 people offering the incense, see also 26:10. This test showed that G-d had chosen Aharon since Aharon was the only person who survived the incense test. Not only did the two groups of rebels die at the same time, but since both groups were standing by the entrance to their respective tents, then from a literary point of view, they died in the same location. Also, the fire went forth, yatsa, 16:35, just like Datan and Aviram, yatsu, went out of their tents, 16:27.

Many have noted, already by Philo (Moses 2:285,286), that the punishments to the two groups were parallel, as one group, Datan and Aviram, was punished from below while the other group, the 250 people, was punished from above. In addition, the different punishments were to answer the different claims of the two groups. The group of 250 people wanted to become priests so they were given this opportunity by being able to offer the incense offering, which Rashi (on 16:6) explains was the most desired sacrifice. This was a cultic test to see if G-d would accept them as priests, but this had no relevance to Datan and Aviram who were arguing that Moshe should not be the leader of the people. Had Datan and Aviram died from the fire of G-d by the incense offering this would have just proved that they were not worthy of being priests but that was not their argument. Instead, Datan and Aviram's punishment was that a new miracle was done which was a sign that Moshe was truly G-d’s emissary since Datan and Aviram had challenged Moshe's leadership.

The different punishments also correspond to the different statements of each group. Datan and Aviram said that they would “not go up” to see Moshe, 16:12,14, and they were punished by going down in to the ground. With regard to the group of 250 men the key word is k-r-v, come close, which is mentioned in 16:5,9,10,17,35. Ostensibly they wanted to become priests to become close to G-d. Yet there are limits to how close mankind can get to G-d without being killed, and they were killed when they tried to get too close to G-d.

Bibliography:

Alter, Robert, 2004, The five books of Moses: A translation and commentary, New York: W. W. Norton and Company.

Leibowitz, Nehama, 1982, Studies in Bemidbar, translated and adapted by Aryeh Newman, Jerusalem: The World Zionist Organization.

Milgrom, Jacob, 1990, The JPS Torah Commentary: Numbers, Philadelphia: The Jewish Publication Society.

Rendsburg, Gary, A., 2002, The Leitwort in parashat Korah, in A divinely given Torah in our day and age, Vol. II, edited by Aryeh A. Frimer and Shlomo H. Pick, Ramat Gan: Bar Ilan University, pp. 414-417.