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 a way be found 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

Hashem planned to punish only Korach's followers, but Moshe misunderstood and thought that Hashem intended to destroy the entire nation. In response, Hashem clarified his intent and corrected Moshe's mistake.

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" in verse 19

• 250 men – This approach would work well with the option² that verse 19 describes Korach assembling only his 250 men (‏"הָעֵדָה"‏ = עדת קרח)‎.³ The term "הָעֵדָה" throughout verses 19-21 would then consistently refer to the same group.⁴
• Entire people – R"Y Bekhor Shor, R. Bachya, and the Keli Yakar, however, all assert that the word "הָעֵדָה" refers to the whole nation of Israel,⁵ and that Korach gathered the various tribes in an attempt to convince them to join his camp.

Did the nation sin? If verse 19 refers only to Korach's group, there is no indication whatsoever that the nation at large committed an offense. Such a possibility exists only according to those commentators who think that verse 19 refers to the entire nation. These are split, with R"Y Bekhor Shor positing that the nation gathered merely to observe but did not participate in the sin, and R. Bachya opining that the nation was persuaded by Korach to support his rebellion.⁶

Hashem's initial plan ("הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה הַזֹּאת וַאֲכַלֶּה אֹתָם") – This approach maintains that Hashem never contemplated destroying the whole nation. When Hashem said, "הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה", He was referring to the congregation of Korach only,⁷ and not the nation of Israel.⁸

Moshe's plea (‏"וְעַל כׇּל הָעֵדָה תִּקְצֹף?"‏) – Moshe misunderstood and thought that Hashem wanted to destroy all of Israel and, thus, he requested that they be spared.⁹

• If one assumes, like R"Y Bekhor Shor, that the rest of the nation was innocent, Moshe was arguing that only Korach and his followers sinned so it would be unjust if the others were punished.¹⁰
• If one asserts, like R. Bachya, that much of 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.¹¹

Hashem's response – Hashem corrects Moshe's mistake, clarifying that when He said "הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה", He meant only "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. Discomfort with the possibility that Hashem might have initially "erred" or desired to do something that He would later regret, may be one of the motivations for this whole approach.

Is collective punishment just? According to this position, Hashem never meant to collectively punish the nation.¹² For more on collective punishment, see Are Children Punished for Parents' Sins.

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 the Divine word?¹³ None of these commentators address this question explicitly,¹⁴ but they apparently maintain that even a prophet like Moshe is human and might occasionally misunderstand Hashem.¹⁵ For elaboration and other examples, see Moshe – Overview.

Hashem Changed His Mind

Hashem's original plan would have led to the entire nation being punished, but Moshe persuaded Hashem to shift course. This position subdivides regarding the motivation for Hashem's change of heart and the substance of Moshe's argument:

Rescinded Decree of Collective Punishment

Moshe argued with Hashem on moral and 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" in verse 19

• Entire nation – According to most of these commentators, the term "עֵדָה" in this verse refers to the Children of Israel and not the 250 men.¹⁶ Korach had gathered all of the various tribes to persuade them to side with him against Moshe.
• 250 men – Ralbag suggests, in contrast, that the word refers to Korach's congregation,¹⁷ and not the larger nation. Korach had to actively reassemble his 250 followers, since many were afraid and hesitant to participate in the incense test and had thus dispersed.

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.¹⁸
• No – Ralbag and the Akeidat Yitzchak assert that the nation did not sin.¹⁹

Hashem's initial plan ("הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה הַזֹּאת וַאֲכַלֶּה אֹתָם")

• Collective punishment – Hashem is referring to the Congregation of Israel.²⁰ 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.
• Collateral damage – According to the Akeidat Yitzchak, in contrast, Hashem was planning on actively punishing only Korach and his men (‏"הָעֵדָה"‏ = עדת קרח). Nonetheless, Hashem was not planning on preventing the nation from suffering any collateral damage the punishment might cause.²¹ Thus, Hashem originally told only Moshe and Aharon to separate from the rebels (and thereby be protected from sharing their fate), but did not instruct the nation as a whole to do the same.

Moshe's plea (‏"וְעַל כׇּל הָעֵדָה תִּקְצֹף?"‏) – Moshe is arguing against collective punishment. According to the Tanchuma, Rashi, and Ralbag, he is challenging the fundamental principle, contending that it is unfair to punish the innocent along with the guilty.²² For the Akeidat Yitzchak, in contrast, even Moshe is not objecting to the concept per se, but rather only claiming that it should not be applied in this particular instance, since Korach had defied Moshe's authority and separated himself from the collective.²³

Hashem's response and the principle of collective punishment – All of these commentators maintain that, in the end, Hashem acquiesced to Moshe's request and changed His original plan. Tanchuma and Rashi present Moshe as convincing Hashem that collective punishment is not just. According to both Ralbag and the Akeidat Yitzchak, though, Hashem does not retract the principle of collective punishment,²⁴ but simply does not apply it in this case.²⁵

"הֵעָלוּ מִסָּבִיב לְמִשְׁכַּן קֹרַח דָּתָן וַאֲבִירָם" – Ralbag and Akeidat Yitzchak differ in their understandings 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 Hashem's providence to depart, Hashem needed to break up the collective. He, thus, commands Moshe to tell the nation, "הֵעָלוּ מִסָּבִיב לְמִשְׁכַּן קֹרַח דָּתָן וַאֲבִירָם", to separate themselves, and thus not be caught in the punishment of Korach's followers.
• Corrective – The Akeidat Yitzchak views these latter words of Hashem as modifying His original statement, "הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה". Hashem had originally told only Moshe and Aharon to separate from Korach's congregation, but He now extends this warning to the rest of the nation ("דַּבֵּר אֶל הָעֵדָה") so that they can all distance themselves and be saved.²⁶

Can Hashem change His mind? According to the Tanchuma and Rashi, Hashem simply accepted Moshe's argument and changed His course of action.²⁷ Ralbag and the Akeidat Yitzchak, though, present more rationalist understandings. Ralbag explains that due to the closeness of the prophet to Hashem, his intercession can impact Divine providence, while according to the Akeidat Yitzchak the nation's action in distancing themselves from Korach is what brought about the change result.²⁸

Can a prophet err? The Akeidat Yitzchak argues against the possibility that Moshe could possibly have erred in understanding Hashem's words.²⁹ Discomfort with this notion may be one of the main motivating factors for this position.

Pardoned Even the Undeserving

Moshe made an emotional argument before Hashem, appealing on humanitarian grounds to God's mercy and asking that He forgo punishing the nation even though they had sinned.³⁰

Sources: RambanBemidbar 16:21About R. Moshe Nachmanides,³¹ 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" in verse 19 – This position asserts that the term "עֵדָה" in this verse refers to the Children of Israel,³² and not the 250 men with Korach. Korach assembled the entire nation to convince them to join his 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.³³

Hashem's initial plan ("הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה הַזֹּאת וַאֲכַלֶּה אֹתָם") – According to all of these exegetes, Hashem is instructing Moshe and Aharon to distance themselves from the entire nation.³⁴ Since the people had all participated in the sin, Hashem desired to punish them as well.

Moshe's plea (‏"הָאִישׁ אֶחָד יֶחֱטָא וְעַל כׇּל הָעֵדָה תִּקְצֹף?"‏) – Moshe's argument is not a philosophical one, as above, but an emotional one. He pleas that Hashem should have mercy on the undeserving nation.³⁵ He attempts to mitigate the people's fault by pointing out that it was a sin of thought and not action. Moreover, he stresses that only Korach was really culpable, since without him the nation would not have been persuaded to sin.

Hashem's response – Hashem agrees to Moshe's request, and changes His original plan. The commentators disagree regarding the intent of Hashem's words, "הֵעָלוּ מִסָּבִיב לְמִשְׁכַּן קֹרַח דָּתָן וַאֲבִירָם" in verse 24:

• Correction – Ramban reads Hashem's words as correcting His original statement, "הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה". Hashem was no longer planning on punishing the enitre "עֵדָה", but rather only Korach, Datan, and Aviram.
• Demand for a show of loyalty – Malbim and R. Hirsch,³⁶ in contrast, assert that in verse 24, 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.³⁷ Compare also to the impact which Moshe's prayers after the sins of the Golden Calf and the Spies had on Hashem's initial decrees.

Is collective punishment just? These commentators maintain this was never a case of potential collective punishment since the nation was also guilty of rebellion.³⁸

Can a prophet err? Ramban and Abarbanel utterly reject the possibility that Moshe could possibly have erred in understanding Hashem's words.³⁹

Hashem Rejected Moshe's Plea for Mercy

Hashem denied Moshe's request to have mercy even upon the 250 followers of Korach, but the entire dialogue did not relate at all to the fate of the rest of the nation as they were never in danger.

Sources: Perhaps Ibn EzraBemidbar 16:21-22About R. Avraham ibn Ezra,⁴⁰ Melekhet MachshevetBemidbar 16:19-21About R. Moshe Hefetz

"וַיַּקְהֵל עֲלֵיהֶם קֹרַח אֶת כָּל הָעֵדָה" in verse 19 – This verse is referring to Korach's gathering of the 250 men.⁴¹ One of the advantages of this approach is its consistency in reading the word "הָעֵדָה" throughout this episode as referring exclusively to עדת קרח.‎⁴²

Did the nation sin? The Melekhet Machshevet suggests that the larger nation was innocent. Ibn Ezra does not address the issue.⁴³

Hashem's initial plan ("הִבָּדְלוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה הַזֹּאת וַאֲכַלֶּה אֹתָם") – Hashem meant to destroy the congregation of Korach (‏"הָעֵדָה" = עדת קרח‏) aמd not the rest of the nation.

Moshe's plea (‏"הָאִישׁ אֶחָד יֶחֱטָא וְעַל כׇּל הָעֵדָה תִּקְצֹף?"‏) – Moshe requests that Hashem display His attribute of mercy, and that only Korach, the ringleader, 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 that 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.⁴⁴ Moshe had simply set up a test whereby Hashem's true choice would become evident when Aharon's offering was accepted and that of the others rejected.⁴⁵

Hashem's response – Despite the request for mercy, Hashem 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 leaders of the rebellion.⁴⁶ But while the nation of Israel distanced themselves, the 250 men remained 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? The Melekhet Machshevet rules out the possibility of Hashem making a mistake or needing to change His mind.

Is collective punishment just? R. Moshe Hefetz maintains that Hashem 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 Hashem nor Moshe err,⁴⁷ 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 Cf. Ralbag below.

³ As the gathering of Korach's followers was mentioned already in verse 18, this position would need to assert that verse 19 is a recapitulation.

⁴ Various forms of the word "עדה" refer to Korach's assembly also in verses 5-6, 11, 16 (and perhaps verse 3 as well). According to this approach, it is only due to his misunderstanding of Hashem's usage, that Moshe employs the term "הָעֵדָה" in verse 22 to refer to the entire nation of Israel, and Hashem then reflects Moshe's usage in verse 24. Cf. the position of the Melekhet Machshevet below which interprets "הָעֵדָה" to mean Korach's followers in these verses as well.

⁵ This would appear to be the simple reading of verse 19, as verse 18 already spoke of the 250 men's assembly at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, and it would thus be redundant to repeat this information in verse 19. According to this interpretation, the term "הָעֵדָה" ("the congregation") is employed throughout most of the chapter to refer only to the nation at large, while Korach's group is referred to as "Korach's congregation" ("עֲדָתוֹ", "עֲדָתְךָ"). However, verse 21 is the somewhat problematic exception to this rule – see below.

⁶ 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.

⁷ 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". However, it is unclear 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 (and this would obviate some of Ramban's objections).

⁸ As noted above, this works well if one takes the approach that "הָעֵדָה" refers to the 250 men in verse 19 as well, as there is then some consistency in its usage. However, according to the commentators who read "הָעֵדָה" in verse 19 as speaking of the whole nation, it is difficult to understand why Hashem in verse 21 would employ the term to refer to Korach's group (and thereby cause Moshe's confusion), while the other seven occurrences of the word in the chapter would be speaking of the entire nation.

⁹ Cf. the parallel verse in Yehoshua 22:20 "וְעַל כָּל עֲדַת יִשְׂרָאֵל הָיָה קָצֶף וְהוּא אִישׁ אֶחָד" which speaks of the entire nation.

¹⁰ 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.

¹¹ See Keli Yakar who suggests a comparison to the sin of Miryam and Aharon against Moshe. There, only Miryam who initiated the defamatory speech was punished, while Aharon, who just followed her lead, was spared.

¹² According to those who suggest that the nation was innocent, this is only what Moshe fears Hashem plans to do and what he argues against, but is not Hashem's intention. Here, too, commentators might be driven by a desire to not have God even potentially contemplate collectively punishing the nation.

¹³ See Ramban's objection: "וחלילה שלא יבין משה נבואתו ויטעה בה".

¹⁴ It is possible that even if they have discomfort with the notion of Moshe erring, they prefer this to the alternative that Hashem "erred" or was convinced to change His mind by Moshe.

¹⁵ See Seforno Bemidbar 14:13,20 where he suggests similarly.

¹⁶ See above that this would appear to be the simple reading of verse 19, as verse 18 already spoke of the 250 men's assembly at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting, and it would thus be redundant to repeat this information in verse 19. Additionally, according to this approach, all eight usages of the term "הָעֵדָה" ("the congregation") in the chapter would consistently refer to the nation at large, with Korach's 250 men being called specifically "Korach's congregation" ("עֲדָתוֹ", "עֲדָתְךָ").

¹⁷ Since verse 18 already mentions the assembly of men, Ralbag would have to posit either that verse 18 is achronological or read verse 19 as a summation.

¹⁸ Both sources are somewhat confusing since they assert in their earlier comments that Korach incited the people "עד שנתפתו כלם". Later, though, in their explanation of Moshe's argument with Hashem, it becomes evident that at least part of the nation did not sin.

¹⁹ According to the Akeidat Yitzchak, although Korach had attempted to sway the people, the arrival of Hashem's presence instilled a fear of God upon them so that they remained silent. He is hesitant to say that the nation actively sinned, as this would have prevented Moshe from honestly claiming "הָאִישׁ אֶחָד יֶחֱטָא וְעַל כׇּל הָעֵדָה תִּקְצֹף"?

²⁰ This possibility is supported by the almost identical formulation in 17:10 "הֵרֹמּוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה הַזֹּאת וַאֲכַלֶּה אֹתָם כְּרָגַע" which clearly refers to the entire nation.

²¹ The later verse (16:26), "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.

²² According to this interpretation, Moshe's words parallel Avraham's plea to save Sedom "חָלִלָה לְּךָ מֵעֲשֹׂת כַּדָּבָר הַזֶּה לְהָמִית צַדִּיק עִם רָשָׁע וְהָיָה כַצַּדִּיק כָּרָשָׁע חָלִלָה לָּךְ הֲשֹׁפֵט כָּל הָאָרֶץ לֹא יַעֲשֶׂה מִשְׁפָּט". In fact, in explaining Moshe's argument, Ralbag even places 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 (regarding whether Avraham also attempted to save sinners, see Avraham's Prayer for Sedom), and that only Korach himself be punished. Thus, he interprets the words "הָאִישׁ אֶחָד יֶחֱטָא" literally, as referring to Korach the individual. According to Ralbag and the Akeidat Yitzchak, in contrast, the phrase refers to "Korach's congregation", while according to the Tanchuma it is even broader in meaning and refers to all those who sinned.

²³ See below that the Akeidat Yitzchak himself believes that collective punishment is just.

²⁴ Both of these exegetes are not personally troubled by the concept, but rather view it as a principle by which God leads the world, so it is natural that they present Hashem as not fundamentally agreeing with a complaint against it. According to Ralbag, collective punishment is built into Hashem's manner of providence. All members of a collective which merits Hashem's providence will suffer if that providence is removed due to the sin of just one or a few. For the Akeidat Yitzchak, when there are parts of one whole, it is only logical that one section might suffer due to another, just as one part of the body suffers when another part is harmed. Moreover, he asserts that this is Hashem's general modus operandi, as is manifest from cases such as the Sin of the Golden Calf or the Sin at Shittim. Thus, he says it would be strange for Moshe to suddenly here question its legitimacy.

²⁵ For analysis of the various positions regarding collective punishment, see Are Children Punished for Parents' Sins.

²⁶ He adds that this is the logic in excommunicating an egregious sinner. By distancing themselves from the evildoer, the rest of the congregation is saved from being punished along with him.

²⁷ Cf. Devarim Rabbah 5:13, Bemidbar Rabbah 19:33, and Shemot Rabbah 19:3 which list other cases where Hashem changed His policies or course of action as a result of Moshe's argumentation.

²⁸ There remains a separate question regarding the change in Hashem's instructions to Moshe.

²⁹ See the Akeidat Yitzchak's formulation: "והוא מגונה שיאמר זה על שום נביא, כל שכן על רבן של נביאים שאי אפשר שיפול במה שיגיע אליו מהנבואה שום ספק".

³⁰ The placement and categorization of this position depends on how the issue is framed. From Hashem's perspective, this opinion is similar to the preceding one ("Rescinded Collective Punishment"), in that both understand Hashem to be changing course midstream. However, from the perspective of Moshe, this opinion is closer to the following one ("Hashem Rejected Moshe's Plea"), as both of these view Moshe as appealing for mercy rather than strict justice (this second method of organization is reflected in the Overview above).

³¹ 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.

³² Ramban also offers an alternative that it refers specifically to the leaders of Israel or the firstborns who had previously been dedicated to the service of Hashem. Since according to Ramban (16:1), the 250 men were the firstborns, this last option comes very close to maintaining that "הָעֵדָה" refers to Korach's followers (cf. Ralbag above).

³³ Cf. Midrash HaGadol Bemidbar 16:21.

³⁴ Ramban notes that this option is supported by the almost identical formulation in 17:10 "הֵרֹמּוּ מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה הַזֹּאת וַאֲכַלֶּה אֹתָם כְּרָגַע" which clearly refers to Moshe and Aharon separating from the rest of the nation.

³⁵ Ramban points to other cases, such as David, in which a leader does similarly.

³⁶ Abarbanel hints to this idea but does not say it explicitly.

³⁷ 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.

³⁸ See Ramban Bemidbar 17:10 who also rejects the possibility of collateral punishment.

³⁹ See Ramban who says: "וחלילה שלא יבין משה נבואתו ויטעה בה".

⁴⁰ 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 explicitly says that there was a misunderstanding.

⁴¹ As their assembly has already been mentioned in verse 18, this position would probably assert that verse 19 is a summary statement.

⁴² In addition to the occurrences of "הָעֵדָה" in verses 19 (2x), 21, 22, 24, 26, according to this position, other forms of the word "עדה" refer to Korach's assembly in verses 5-6, 11, 16 (and perhaps verse 3 as well).

⁴³ Whether or not the nation sinned is not crucial for this position since the conversation revolves only around the 250 men.

⁴⁴ Why ask Hashem to save the very people you have just sent to die?

⁴⁵ This might be supported by Moshe's prayer "אַל תֵּפֶן אֶל מִנְחָתָם" in which he does not pray that the men get punished, but only that their offering not be accepted. [Ibn Ezra himself, however, 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 only intended it as a scare tactic to convince the people to repent.

⁴⁶ This was meant to prove to Moshe that, contrary to his hopes, Korach's followers really were fully siding with Korach.

⁴⁷ 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?‏"