Dialogue with the Divine During Korach's Rebellion/2

Dialogue with the Divine During Korach's Rebellion

Exegetical Approaches

Overview

Moshe's brief dialogue with Hashem presents us with the challenge of how to contend with a debate between two sides, both of whom are often viewed as infallible or close to it. How does one "choose sides" in such a case, or can one find a way to understand and justify both? R. Chananel adopts the approach that Hashem never had any intention of wiping out the entire people, but Moshe made a mistake and, due to the ambiguity of the word "הָעֵדָה", simply misunderstood what Hashem had said. Ralbag, in contrast, develops the notion that Hashem, indeed, sometimes applies collective punishment to completely innocent people, but Moshe prevailed upon Hashem to afford the nation the opportunity to distance themselves from Korach and thereby avoid punishment.

Other commentators try to present the exchange as Moshe pleading for Hashem to have mercy even upon sinners. Ramban proposes that the entire conversation revolved around the nation at large which had in fact sinned, but were nonetheless spared because Moshe succeeded in persuading Hashem to have mercy. The Melekhet Machshevet, though, explains that the discussion focused on the fate of Korach's followers, and that Moshe failed in his attempt to invoke Divine mercy upon them.

Hashem Corrected Moshe's Error

Moshe misunderstood Hashem's intentions, and thought that God wanted to destroy the entire nation while Hashem was never planning to do so. Hashem proceeded to clarify that Moshe had erred.

Sources: R. ChananelCited by Ramban Bemidbar 16:21About R. Chananel¹, R. Yosef Bekhor ShorBemidbar 16:19,22About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, R. BachyaBemidbar 16:19,21About R. Bachya b. Asher, SefornoBemidbar 16:22,24,26About R. Ovadyah Seforno, Keli YakarBemidbar 16:21,23-24About R. Shelomo Lunshitz, ShadalBemidbar 16:19, 21About R. S.D. Luzzatto

"וַיַּקְהֵל עֲלֵיהֶם קֹרַח אֶת כָּל הָעֵדָה" – R"Y Bekhor Shor, R. Bachya, and the Keli Yakar assert that the word "עֵדָה" refers to the entire nation of Israel² and that Korach gathered the various tribes in an attempt to convince them to join his camp. Alternatively, this position could assert that the verse is referring only to the 250 men ("הָעֵדָה" = עדת קרח).

Did the nation sin? R"Y Bekhor Shor explains that the nation did not participate in the sin. According to R. Bachya, in contrast, the nation was persuaded by Korach to join the rebellion.³

Hashem's initial plan – This approach maintains that Hashem never meant to destroy the whole nation. When Hashem said, "הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה", He was referring just to the congregation of Korach,⁴ not the nation of Israel.

Moshe's request – Moshe misunderstood Hashem, thinking that God wanted to destroy all of Israel and, thus, requested that they be spared.

• If one assumes, like R"Y Bekhor Shor, that the nation was innocent, Moshe was apparently arguing that only Korach sinned so it would be unjust if the others were punished.⁵
• If one asserts, like R. Bachya, that the nation did join the rebellion, then one must suggest that Moshe was pleading that only the inciter to rebellion should be punished, not those foolish enough to follow him.⁶

Hashem's response – Hashem corrects Moshe's mistake, clarifying that when He said "הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה", He meant "הֵעָלוּ מִסָּבִיב לְמִשְׁכַּן קֹרַח דָּתָן וַאֲבִירָם".

Can Hashem change His mind? According to this approach, Hashem is consistent and does not regret his initial decisions. In fact, discomfort with the possibility that Hashem might have initially "erred" or desired to do something that He would later regret, might be one of the motivations for this whole approach.

Is collective punishment just? According to this position, God never meant to collectively punish the nation.⁷

Can a prophet err? This approach must explain how it is possible for a prophet, especially one of the stature of Moshe, to err in his understanding of God. Is it not problematic that a prophet might mistakenly interpret the Divine word? None of the commentators address the question explicitly, but they might maintain that even a prophet is human and occasionally makes mistakes. It is not an issue, as long as God corrects him.⁸

Hashem Changed His Mind

Hashem and Moshe disagreed regarding Hashem's plans for punishment, and Moshe persuaded Hashem to change His mind. This position subdivides regarding the motivation for the shift and the substance of Moshe's argument:

Rescinded Collective Punishment Decree

Moshe argued with God on philosophical grounds, convincing Him not to collectively punish the innocent with the guilty.

Sources: TanchumaKorach 7About the Tanchuma, RashiBemidbar 16:19,22About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, RalbagBemidbar 16:19,22Bemidbar 16, Toelot 6-8About R. Levi b. Gershon, Akeidat YitzchakNumber 78 Questions 9-10Number 78About R. Yitzchak Arama

"וַיַּקְהֵל עֲלֵיהֶם קֹרַח אֶת כָּל הָעֵדָה"

• Nation – According to most of these commentators, the term "עֵדָה" in this verse refers to the Children of Israel and not the 250 men of Korach. Korach had gathered the various tribes to persuade them to side with him against Moshe.
• Korach's men – Ralbag suggests, in contrast, that the word refers to Korach's congregation,⁹ and not the larger nation. Korach had to actively gather them since many were afraid and hesitant to participate in the incense test.

Did the nation sin?

• Yes – According to Tanchuma and Rashi, Korach managed to persuade the nation to join his rebellion. They maintain, though, that some portion of the nation still refused to participate in the sin.¹⁰
• No – Ralbag and Akeidat Yitzchak assert that the nation remained innocent.¹¹

Hashem's initial plan

• Collective punishment – Even though the nation (or, according to Tanchuma and Rashi, a portion of the nation) was innocent, and did not play any role in the rebellion, Hashem planned on punishing them collectively along with the rebels. When Hashem says,"הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה הַזֹּאת וַאֲכַלֶּה אֹתָם" he is referring to the Congregation of Israel.¹²
• Collateral damage – According to Akeidat Yitzchak, in contrast, Hashem was planning on actively punishing only Korach and his men (עדת קרח=עֵדָה). Nonetheless, Hashem was not planning on preventing the nation from suffering from any collateral damage the punishment might cause.¹³ Thus, Hashem told only Moshe and Aharon to separate from the rebels (and thereby be protected from sharing their fate), but did not say the same to the nation as a whole.

Moshe's request – Moshe is arguing against collective punishment. According to Tanchuma, Rashi and Ralbag, he is attacking the fundamental principle, telling God that it is unfair to punish the innocent along with the guilty.¹⁴ According to Akeidat Yitzchak, in contrast, Moshe does not object to the concept, but claims that it should not be applied in this particular instance since Korach, by challenging Moshe's authority, had removed himself from the collective.¹⁵

Hashem's response – All of these commentators maintain that Hashem in the end acquiesced to Moshe's request and changed His original plan. According to both Ralbag and Akeidat Yitzchak, though, Hashem does not retract the principle,¹⁶ but simply does not apply it in this case.

"הֵעָלוּ מִסָּבִיב לְמִשְׁכַּן קֹרַח דָּתָן וַאֲבִירָם" – Ralbag and Akeidat Yitzchak differ in their understanding of the purpose of this directive:

• Preventative – According to Ralbag, since collective punishment is by nature what happens to a united group when one part sins and causes God's providence to depart, Hashem needed to break up the collective so as to prevent it. He, thus, commands Moshe to tell the nation, "הֵעָלוּ מִסָּבִיב לְמִשְׁכַּן קֹרַח דָּתָן וַאֲבִירָם", to separate themselves from the collective, and thus not be caught in the punishment.
• Correction – Akeidat Yitchak views Hashem's words "דַּבֵּר אֶל הָעֵדָה לֵאמֹר הֵעָלוּ מִסָּבִיב לְמִשְׁכַּן קֹרַח דָּתָן וַאֲבִירָם" as correcting His original statement, "הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה". Hashem had originally told only Moshe and Aharon to separate from Korach's congregation, but now tells the whole nation (דַּבֵּר אֶל הָעֵדָה) to protect themselves.

Can Hashem change His mind?

Is collective punishment just? Tanchuma and Rashi present Moshe as convincing Hashem that it is not just and Hashem agreeing. Ralbag and Akeidat Yitzchak, in contrast, have Hashem simply not apply the principle, but not agree that it is fundamentally wrong.¹⁷

Can a prophet err? The Akeidat Yitzchak argues against the possibility that Moshe could possibly have erred in understanding Hashem's words.¹⁸ Discomfort with this notion may be one of the main motivating factors for this position.

Mercy Even Upon the Undeserving

Moshe made an emotional argument before God, appealing on humanitarian grounds to Hashem's mercy and asking that He forgo punishing even those who had sinned.

Sources: RambanBemidbar 16:21About R. Moshe Nachmanides,¹⁹ AbarbanelBemidbar 16, Question 13Bemidbar 16About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel, R. S"R HirschBemidbar 16:19Bemidbar 16:21,22,24About R. S"R Hirsch, MalbimBemidbar 16:20-26About R. Meir Leibush Weiser

"וַיַּקְהֵל עֲלֵיהֶם קֹרַח אֶת כָּל הָעֵדָה" – This position asserts that the term "עֵדָה" in this verse refers to the Children of Israel²⁰ and not the 250 men of Korach. Korach had assembled the nation to convince them to join the rebellion.

Did the nation sin? These commentators attribute varying degrees of guilt to the nation, suggesting either that they, too, had begun to question Moshe's authority, or that they were guilty of not protesting against Korach.

Hashem's initial plan – According to all of these exegetes, when Hashem says "הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה הַזֹּאת וַאֲכַלֶּה אֹתָם", He is instructing Moshe and Aharon to distance themselves from the entire nation. Since the people had all participated in the sin, Hashem desired to punish them as well.

Moshe's request – Moshe's argument is not an intellectual one, as above, but an emotional one. He pleas that Hashem should have mercy on the (undeserving) nation.²¹ He attempts to mitigate the people's fault by pointing out that theirs was a sin of thought and not action. Moreover, he stresses that only Korach, the leader, was really culpable, since without him the nation would not have been persuaded to sin.

Hashem's response – Hashem in the end agreed to Moshe's request, and changed His original plan. The commentators disagree regarding the intent of God's words, "הֵעָלוּ מִסָּבִיב לְמִשְׁכַּן קֹרַח דָּתָן וַאֲבִירָם":

• Correction – Ramban reads Hashem's words as correcting His original statement, "הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה". Hashem was no longer planning on punishing the whole עדה, but just Korach, Datan and Aviram.
• Demand for a show of loyalty – Malbim and R. Hirsch,²² in contrast, assert that in these words Hashem is demanding that the nation actively show that they no longer support Korach by distancing themselves from him. Only with such an atoning act will they no longer deserve to share Korach's fate.

Can Hashem change His mind? This approach asserts that at times Hashem might initially plan to act according to strict justice, but after the intercession of a prophet, decides instead to act according to the attributes of mercy.²³

Is collective punishment just? These commentators maintain this is not a case of potential collective punishment since the nation was also guilty of rebellion.

Can a prophet err? Ramban and Abarbanel utterly reject the possibility that Moshe could possibly have erred in understanding Hashem's words.²⁴

Hashem Rejected Moshe's Plea for Mercy

Moshe and Hashem's discussion focused only on the fate of the 250 followers of Korach, rather than the entire nation. Moshe begged God to have mercy even on these rebels, but Hashem denied his request.

Sources: Perhaps Ibn EzraBemidbar 16:21-22About R. Avraham ibn Ezra,²⁵ Melekhet MachshevetBemidbar 16:19-21About R. Moshe Hefetz

"וַיַּקְהֵל עֲלֵיהֶם קֹרַח אֶת כָּל הָעֵדָה" – This verse is referring to Korach gathering the 250 men.²⁶ One of the advantages of this approach is its consistency in reading the word "עֵדָה" as referring to עדת קרח.

Did the nation sin? The Melekhet Machshevet suggests that the larger nation was innocent. Ibn Ezra does not address the issue.²⁷

Hashem's initial plan – Hashem meant to punish the congregation of Korach (הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה = עדת קרח) aמd not the nation.

Moshe's request – Moshe requests that God act through His attribute of mercy, and that only Korach, the single inciting leader, be punished, but that his 250 followers be spared. According to R. Moshe Hefetz in his Melekhet Machshevet, Moshe thought that it was possible that the 250 followers were not truly backing Korach in their hearts and there was still room for them to repent.

Understanding the incense test – This position must maintain that Moshe had not intended the incense test to end in the deaths of the participants. Otherwise, his plea to spare the 250 men is totally illogical.²⁸ Moshe had simply set up a test whereby God's true choice would become evident, as Aharon's offering was accepted and that of the others rejected.²⁹

Hashem's response – Despite the request for mercy, God decides to punish all those in Korach's rebel camp.

• According to R. Moshe Hefetz, when Hashem tells Moshe, "דַּבֵּר אֶל הָעֵדָה לֵאמֹר הֵעָלוּ מִסָּבִיב לְמִשְׁכַּן קֹרַח דָּתָן וַאֲבִירָם", he is directing him to speak to Korach's congregation (and not the nation), to test them if they are really willing to separate themselves from the rebel leaders.³⁰ While the nation of Israel distances themselves, the 250 men remain in place, and as a result, rightfully, get punished.
• Alternatively, there words are simply a reiteration of Hashem's original words (הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה); Hashem is telling Moshe that his plea was rejected and that He is continuing with His original plan.

Can Hashem change His mind? According to the Melekhet Machshevet, God does not make mistakes and thus never needs to change His mind.

Is collective punishment just? R. Moshe Hefetz maintains that God would never punish anyone who had not sinned.

Can a prophet err? R. Moshe Hefetz rejects the possibility that Moshe could have misunderstood Hashem's words.

Crux of the position – This position manages to resolve many of the philosophical issues raised by the others - neither God nor Moshe err,³¹ and there is no potential issue of collective punishment. It has the additional advantage of maintaining a consistent understanding of the word "עֵדָה" throughout the narrative, referring always to עדת קרח. It does encounter difficulty with the tone of the rest of the chapter, though, which does not sound as if Moshe was necessarily looking out for the welfare of the rebels.

¹ This interpretation is cited by Ramban who apparently obtained a copy of R. Chananel's commentary only upon his arrival in Israel. This passage is one of Ramban's Eretz Yisrael additions to his commentary. For further discussion, see Ramban's Updates, and specifically Ramban Bemidbar 16:21.

² This would appear to be the simple reading of the verses, as verse 18 already speaks of the assembly of the 250 men so it would be redundant to repeat that Korach gathered his own men.

³ Keli Yakar leaves the question open, suggesting that though Korach attempted to sway the nation, they might not have agreed to support him. He suggests that Moshe initially did not think that the nation sided with Korach; only after misunderstanding that Hashem wanted to destroy them did he think that maybe the nation had indeed sinned.

⁴ Ramban understands R. Chananel to be saying that Hashem was referring specifically to Korach, Datan and Aviram, and not the 250 people. He, thus, questions whether three people can really be referred to as an "עֵדָה". It is not clear, though, why one would be compelled to read R. Chananel in this manner and it is likely that R. Chananel was referring to the entire camp of Korach, including the 250 men.

⁵ See R. Yosef Bekhor Shor who echoes the Tanchuma, having Moshe argue that since God can distinguish between the innocent and the guilty, He should only punish the blameworthy.

⁶ See Keli Yakar who suggests a comparison to the sin of Miryam and Aharon against Moshe. There, only Miryam who began the defamatory speech was punished, while Aharon who just followed her lead, was spared.

⁷ According to those who suggest that the nation was innocent, this is what Moshe fears God is to do, and what he argues against, but it is not God's plan. Here, too, commentators might be driven by a desire to not have God even potentially desire to collectively punish the nation.

⁸ It is possible that these commentators might also be uncomfortable with the idea that Moshe might blunder, but given a choice between Hashem "erring" and being convinced to change his mind by Moshe, or Moshe erring and Hashem correcting him, they prefer the latter.

⁹ Since verse 18 already mentions the assembly of men, Ralbag would have to posit either that verse 18 is achronological or read this verse as a summary sentence.

¹⁰ Both sources are somewhat confusing since they assert in their earlier comments that Korach incited the people עד שנתפתו כלם. Later, though, when Moshe argues with God, it becomes evident that at least some of the nation did not sin.

¹¹ According to Akeidat Yitzchak, though Korach had attempted to sway the people, the arrival of God's presence instilled a fear of God upon them so that they remained silent. He is hesitant to say that the nation actively sinned, for then, how could Moshe honestly question "הָאִישׁ אֶחָד יֶחֱטָא"?

¹² Cf.other cases such as the Sin of the Golden Calf or the Sin at Shittim, where Hashem similarly aims to or actually punishes the collective for the sins of the few.

¹³ The later verse, וַיְדַבֵּר אֶל הָעֵדָה לֵאמֹר סוּרוּ נָא מֵעַל אׇהֳלֵי הָאֲנָשִׁים הָרְשָׁעִים... פֶּן תִּסָּפוּ בְּכׇל חַטֹּאתָם might further support this read as it suggests that the reason to separate is lest the people get caught up in the punishment of the sinners.

¹⁴ Moshe, thus, becomes very similar to Avraham in his pleas to save Sedom. In explaining Moshe's argument, Ralbag even puts Avraham's words into Moshe's mouth, having him tell Hashem "חלילה לך מעשות זאת". From Rashi, it seems as if Moshe is requesting that even some of the guilty be saved, and only Korach himself be punished. He can thus, read the words "הָאִישׁ אֶחָד יֶחֱטָא" to literally refer to Korach. According to Ralbag and Akeidat Yitzchak, in contrast, the words would refer to "Korach's congregation" while according to Tanchuma they wold be even broader in meaning and refer to all those who sinned.

¹⁵ Akeidat Yitchak himself believes that collective punishment is just. If are part of one whole, it is logical that one section might suffer due to another,just as one part of the body might suffer when another part is harmed. Moreover, he asserts that this is God's general working attitude so it would be illogical for Moshe to argue about it on a fundamental level. For more about Akeidat Yitzchak and collective punishment see Are Children Punished for Parents' Sins.

¹⁶ According to Ralbag, collective punishment is built into God's manner of providence. A collective that merits God' providence will all suffer if that providence is removed due to the sin of just one or a few.

¹⁷ Both these exegetes are not personally troubled by the concept and see it as a principle by which God leads the world, so it is logical that they present Hashem as not fundamentally agreeing with a complaint against it.

¹⁸ See Akeidat Yitzchak who says, "והוא מגונה שיאמר זה על שום נביא, כל שכן על רבן של נביאים שאי אפשר שיפול במה שיגיע אליו מהנבואה שום ספק".

¹⁹ Ramban's commentary on this verse was augmented significantly upon his arrival in Israel. For further discussion, see Ramban's Updates, and specifically Ramban Bemidbar 16:21.

²⁰ Ramban proposes that it refers specifically to the leaders of Israel or, according to Chazal, the firstborns who had previously been dedicated to the service of Hashem, and not to the entirety of Israel.

²¹ Ramban points to other cases, such as David, in which a leader does similarly.

²² Abarbanel hints to this idea but does not say it explicitly.

²³ Thus, Hashem's initial assessment of the nation as sinners was accurate, but due to Moshe's plea for mercy, Hashem decided nonetheless not to punish the nation.

²⁴ See Ramban who says, "וחלילה שלא יבין משה נבואתו ויטעה בה".

²⁵ Ibn Ezra is somewhat ambiguous as he only comments on the topic briefly. Abarbanel understands Ibn Ezra to be taking the position of R. Chananel above, that Moshe misunderstood Hashem. Ibn Ezra, though, never says explicitly that there was a misunderstanding.

²⁶ As their assembly has already been mentioned in verse 18, this position would probably assert that the verse is a summary statement.

²⁷ Whether or not the nation sinned is not crucial for this position since the conversation is only revolving around the 250 men.

²⁸ Why ask God to save the very people you have just sent to die?

²⁹ This might be supported by Moshe's prayer "אַל תֵּפֶן אֶל מִנְחָתָם" in which he does not pray that the men get punished, but that their offering is not accepted. [Ibn Ezra himself does not understand the verse this way and thinks that the מנחה refers to a sacrifice offered by Datan and Aviram, not the one to be brought by the 250 people.] Alternatively, as suggested by Chizkuni and Seforno, Moshe had never meant for the test to be carried out, and had intended it as a scare tactic to convince the people to repent.

³⁰ This was meant to prove to Moshe that, contrary to his hopes, Korach's followers really were culpable and fully siding with Korach.

³¹ This appears to be the main motivation of Melekhet Machshevet to read the verses as he does. See his opening question on the exegetes who preceded him, "וכבר העמיקו בזה המפרשים. ועל כלם יקשה שהי"ת או משה יטעה בדין ובעונש ישראל?"