Difference between revisions of "Korach's Rebellion/2"

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
m
m
Line 9: Line 9:
 
<p>The whole rebellion revolved around one main issue, the choice of Aharon as priest.</p>
 
<p>The whole rebellion revolved around one main issue, the choice of Aharon as priest.</p>
 
<mekorot>Philo, <multilink><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews4-2" data-aht="source">Josephus</a><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews4-2" data-aht="source">Antiquities of the Jews 4:2</a><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews4-3-1-4" data-aht="source">Antiquities of the Jews 4:3:1-4</a><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews4-4-2" data-aht="source">Antiquities of the Jews 4:4:2</a><a href="Josephus" data-aht="parshan">About Josephus</a></multilink>, perhaps&#160;<multilink><a href="RashiBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RashiBemidbar17" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>,<fn>Rashi appears to read the entire narrative in light of a complaint about the priesthood alone. In his comments to verse 5, though, he writes "יודע י״י את אשר לו – לעבודת לוייה", implying that the incense test was meant to address a complaint against the Levites as well. Rashi does not elaborate and no where else in his commentary does he refer to such a complaint, suggesting that he thinks that even if some were bothered by the choice of Levites, by far the major focus of the rebellion was the choice of Aharon.</fn> perhaps <multilink><a href="RYosefKaraBemidbar16" data-aht="source">R. Yosef Kara</a><a href="RYosefKaraBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RYosefKaraBemidbar17" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17</a><a href="R. Yosef Kara" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Kara</a></multilink>,<fn>As we do not have all of R"Y Kara's commentary on the rebellion, it is difficult to know for certain how he reads the story.&#160; However, in his comments to 16:35, he appears to assume that the compaints of the 250 people and those of Datan and Aviram were identical (leading him to question why they then deserved different punishments).&#160; As he later writes that Korach objected to aharon's priesthood, it is possible that he thinks that the entire rebellion revolved around this one issue.</fn> <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBemidbar16" data-aht="source"> R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBemidbar17-5-23" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17:5-23</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RalbagBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RalbagBemidbar17-17" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17:17</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink>,</mekorot>
 
<mekorot>Philo, <multilink><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews4-2" data-aht="source">Josephus</a><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews4-2" data-aht="source">Antiquities of the Jews 4:2</a><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews4-3-1-4" data-aht="source">Antiquities of the Jews 4:3:1-4</a><a href="JosephusAntiquitiesoftheJews4-4-2" data-aht="source">Antiquities of the Jews 4:4:2</a><a href="Josephus" data-aht="parshan">About Josephus</a></multilink>, perhaps&#160;<multilink><a href="RashiBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Rashi</a><a href="RashiBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RashiBemidbar17" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17</a><a href="R. Shelomo Yitzchaki (Rashi)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki</a></multilink>,<fn>Rashi appears to read the entire narrative in light of a complaint about the priesthood alone. In his comments to verse 5, though, he writes "יודע י״י את אשר לו – לעבודת לוייה", implying that the incense test was meant to address a complaint against the Levites as well. Rashi does not elaborate and no where else in his commentary does he refer to such a complaint, suggesting that he thinks that even if some were bothered by the choice of Levites, by far the major focus of the rebellion was the choice of Aharon.</fn> perhaps <multilink><a href="RYosefKaraBemidbar16" data-aht="source">R. Yosef Kara</a><a href="RYosefKaraBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RYosefKaraBemidbar17" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17</a><a href="R. Yosef Kara" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Kara</a></multilink>,<fn>As we do not have all of R"Y Kara's commentary on the rebellion, it is difficult to know for certain how he reads the story.&#160; However, in his comments to 16:35, he appears to assume that the compaints of the 250 people and those of Datan and Aviram were identical (leading him to question why they then deserved different punishments).&#160; As he later writes that Korach objected to aharon's priesthood, it is possible that he thinks that the entire rebellion revolved around this one issue.</fn> <multilink><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBemidbar16" data-aht="source"> R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RYosefBekhorShorBemidbar17-5-23" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17:5-23</a><a href="R. Yosef Bekhor Shor" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor</a></multilink>, <multilink><a href="RalbagBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RalbagBemidbar17-17" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17:17</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink>,</mekorot>
<point><b>"...וַיִּקַּח קֹרַח"</b> – R"Y Bekhor suggests that the verse means that Korach, Datan and Aviram, and On,&#160; who were all upset at the choice of Aharon (albeit for different reasons),<fn>Ralbag suggests that Moshe's words "וּבִקַּשְׁתֶּם גַּם כְּהֻנָּה" prove that this was the main point of contention.&#160; That Moshe viewS Korach as attacking Aharon and not himself might further be proved from Moshe's statement "<b>וְאַהֲרֹן</b> מַה הוּא כִּי [תַלִּינוּ] (תלונו) עָלָיו".</fn> together gathered others<fn>According to R"Y Bekhor Shor the verse is a "מקרא קצר", whose meaning is made clear by the following verse. He points to Bemidbar 13:30 (ויהס כלב את העם) as a similar case, where the text is brief, relying on a later verse (Devarim 1:9) to provide the missing content.</fn> to join in their rebellion.<fn>Alternatively, this approach could have suggested that Korach took the others mentioned in the verse to join in his rebellion, recognizing that they, too, shared his grievances against Aharon. [If so, the <i>vav</i> of "וְדָתָן וַאֲבִירָם" is extraneous and the verse is missing the word "את".]</fn> Korach, being a Levite, resented Aharon's superior position. The others, being of the tribe of Reuven, thought that their tribes' firstborn status should have merited them to be priests.<fn>Cf. Josephus. It is not clear if R"Y Bekhor Shor is assuming that originally firstborns performed the tasks later given to the priests, and that the firstborn Reubenites therefore wanted this position back, or if he is simply saying that the tribe of Reuven viewed themselves as meritorious, being the firstborn to Yaakov.&#160; Since R"Y Bekhor Shor does not mention other firstborns joining in the rebellion, he might be suggesting only the latter. <br/>Rashi, instead, claims that members of the tribe of Reuven joined in Korach's rebellion only because, being camped near Korach, they were the first to be swayed by his arguments.</fn></point>
+
<point><b>"...וַיִּקַּח קֹרַח"</b> – R"Y Bekhor suggests that the verse means that Korach, Datan and Aviram, and On,&#160; who were all upset at the choice of Aharon (albeit for different reasons),<fn>Ralbag suggests that Moshe's words "וּבִקַּשְׁתֶּם גַּם כְּהֻנָּה" prove that this was the main point of contention.&#160; That Moshe viewS Korach as attacking Aharon and not himself might further be proved from Moshe's statement "<b>וְאַהֲרֹן</b> מַה הוּא כִּי [תַלִּינוּ] (תלונו) עָלָיו".</fn> gathered others<fn>According to R"Y Bekhor Shor the verse is a "מקרא קצר", whose meaning is made clear by the following verse. He points to Bemidbar 13:30 (ויהס כלב את העם) as a similar case, where the text is brief, relying on a later verse (Devarim 1:9) to provide the missing content.</fn> to join in their rebellion.<fn>Alternatively, this approach could have suggested that Korach took the others mentioned in the verse to join in his rebellion, recognizing that they, too, shared his grievances against Aharon. [If so, the <i>vav</i> of "וְדָתָן וַאֲבִירָם" is extraneous and the verse is missing the word "את".]</fn> Korach, being a Levite, resented Aharon's superior position. The others, being of the tribe of Reuven, thought that their tribes' firstborn status should have merited them to be priests.<fn>Cf. Josephus. It is not clear if R"Y Bekhor Shor is assuming that originally firstborns performed the tasks later given to the priests, and that the firstborn Reubenites therefore wanted this position back, or if he is simply saying that the tribe of Reuven viewed themselves as meritorious, being the firstborn to Yaakov.&#160; Since R"Y Bekhor Shor does not mention other firstborns joining in the rebellion, he might be suggesting only the latter. <br/>Rashi, instead, claims that members of the tribe of Reuven joined in Korach's rebellion only because, being camped near Korach, they were the first to be swayed by his arguments.</fn></point>
 
<point><b>Who were the 250 men?</b> This position might suggest that the 250 men comprised any of the following:<br/>
 
<point><b>Who were the 250 men?</b> This position might suggest that the 250 men comprised any of the following:<br/>
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
<li><b>Levites&#160;</b>– <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">R. Chananel</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> maintains that the 250 people were all from the tribe of Levi.&#160; They, like Korach, were not satisfied with "serving the priests" and aspired to be priests themselves.</li>
+
<li><b>Levites&#160;</b>– <multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">R. Chananel</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> maintains that the 250 people were all from the tribe of Levi.<fn>See below that this is supported by teh fact that Moshe addresses the Levites directly, telling them "רַב לָכֶם בְּנֵי לֵוִי"&#160; and "שִׁמְעוּ נָא בְּנֵי לֵוִי".</fn>&#160; They, like Korach, were not satisfied with "serving the priests" and aspired to be priests themselves.</li>
 
<li><b>Reubenites</b> – According to Rashi, they were mainly from the tribe of Reuven. Though Rashi suggests that their joining the rebellion was a technical result of their living close to and being swayed by Korach, it is possible that the tribe as a whole felt that they deserved priestly status due to their ancestor's being the firstborn to Yaakov (see R"Y Bekhor Shor above).</li>
 
<li><b>Reubenites</b> – According to Rashi, they were mainly from the tribe of Reuven. Though Rashi suggests that their joining the rebellion was a technical result of their living close to and being swayed by Korach, it is possible that the tribe as a whole felt that they deserved priestly status due to their ancestor's being the firstborn to Yaakov (see R"Y Bekhor Shor above).</li>
 
<li><b>All of Israel</b> – Alternatively, it is possible that this group was comprised of people from all the tribes.&#160; This position might maintain that before the sin of the Calf and the building of the Tabernacle, every individual Israelite had been allowed to sacrifice on private altars, and the people were hoping to return to this status quo.<fn>See&#160;<multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Ramban Bemidbar 16:21</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> (in the later <a href="../Commentators:Ramban's_Updates/Bemidbar" data-aht="parshan">update to his commentary</a>) and Hoil Moshe below who say this explicitly. See also Hoil Moshe's position in&#160; <a href="Altars of Earth, Stone, and Wood" data-aht="page">Altars of Earth, Stone, and Wood</a>.</fn></li>
 
<li><b>All of Israel</b> – Alternatively, it is possible that this group was comprised of people from all the tribes.&#160; This position might maintain that before the sin of the Calf and the building of the Tabernacle, every individual Israelite had been allowed to sacrifice on private altars, and the people were hoping to return to this status quo.<fn>See&#160;<multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Ramban Bemidbar 16:21</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> (in the later <a href="../Commentators:Ramban's_Updates/Bemidbar" data-aht="parshan">update to his commentary</a>) and Hoil Moshe below who say this explicitly. See also Hoil Moshe's position in&#160; <a href="Altars of Earth, Stone, and Wood" data-aht="page">Altars of Earth, Stone, and Wood</a>.</fn></li>
Line 29: Line 29:
 
<point><b>"אַתֶּם הֲמִתֶּם אֶת עַם י"י"</b> – R"Y Bekhor Shor asserts that the people blamed Moshe for using a test which involved incense, something which had already proven in the past (by Nadav and Avihu) to be fatal.&#160; Moreover, as Nadav and Avihu, who were by all accounts chosen for the priesthood, nonetheless died when they brought incense, the test could not serve as proof of unworthiness to the position.<fn>The fact that Aharon alone was saved might prove that he was more worthy than others (and, thus, deserving of the high priesthood), but it still did not prove that others were not worth of being regular priests</fn> As such, a new test was necessary.</point>
 
<point><b>"אַתֶּם הֲמִתֶּם אֶת עַם י"י"</b> – R"Y Bekhor Shor asserts that the people blamed Moshe for using a test which involved incense, something which had already proven in the past (by Nadav and Avihu) to be fatal.&#160; Moreover, as Nadav and Avihu, who were by all accounts chosen for the priesthood, nonetheless died when they brought incense, the test could not serve as proof of unworthiness to the position.<fn>The fact that Aharon alone was saved might prove that he was more worthy than others (and, thus, deserving of the high priesthood), but it still did not prove that others were not worth of being regular priests</fn> As such, a new test was necessary.</point>
 
<point><b>The plague</b> – Aharon's saving of the nation via the incense was meant to teach the nation that, contrary to their beliefs, in the right hands, the incense brings life, not death.</point>
 
<point><b>The plague</b> – Aharon's saving of the nation via the incense was meant to teach the nation that, contrary to their beliefs, in the right hands, the incense brings life, not death.</point>
<point><b>The test of the staffs</b> – The blossoming of Aharon's staff finally proved to the nation, that he, and not members of other tribes, was selected for the priesthood. Though one might suggest that since each tribe contributed a staff, this test must have related to tribal status rather than individual status, Hashem's words "וְהָיָה<b> הָאִישׁ</b> <b>אֲשֶׁר אֶבְחַר בּוֹ</b> מַטֵּהוּ יִפְרָח" suggest that the point was to choose an individual.&#160; As such, too, the staff is consitently&#160; referred to not as the staff of "the tribe of Levi" but as "Aharon's staff" (see 17:21, 23, 25).</point>
+
<point><b>The test of the staffs</b> – The blossoming of Aharon's staff finally proved to the nation, that he, and not members of other tribes, was selected for the priesthood. Though one might suggest that since each tribe contributed a staff, this test must have related to tribal status rather than individual status, Hashem's words "וְהָיָה<b> הָאִישׁ</b> <b>אֲשֶׁר אֶבְחַר בּוֹ</b> מַטֵּהוּ יִפְרָח" suggest that the point was to choose an individual.&#160; As such, too, the staff is consistently referred to not as the staff of "the tribe of Levi" but as "Aharon's staff" (see 17:21, 23, 25).</point>
 
<point><b>When does the story take place?</b> R"Y Bekhor Shor suggests that the story is chronological and follows the decree of death in the wilderness after the sin of the spies. It is possible that the despair felt by the nation fomented unrest and rebellion.</point>
 
<point><b>When does the story take place?</b> R"Y Bekhor Shor suggests that the story is chronological and follows the decree of death in the wilderness after the sin of the spies. It is possible that the despair felt by the nation fomented unrest and rebellion.</point>
 
</category>
 
</category>
Line 36: Line 36:
 
<p>The rebellion had two focal points.&#160; Korach and his 250 followers objected to Aharon's priesthood, while Datan and Aviram challenged Moshe's leadership.</p>
 
<p>The rebellion had two focal points.&#160; Korach and his 250 followers objected to Aharon's priesthood, while Datan and Aviram challenged Moshe's leadership.</p>
 
<mekorot><multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RambanBemidbar17-62025" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17:6, 20, 25</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> #2,<fn>This is how Ramban interprets the chapter "על דרך הפשט".&#160; See the end of his <a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">commentary on Bemidbar 16:21</a>. [Most of his commentary on the chapter, though, is "על דרך רבותנו", who assume that the firstborns were originally involved in sacrificial service.&#160; See Ramban in the third position, below, who develops how according to this, the firstborns played a large role in the rebellion, protesting the selection of the Levites in their stead.]</fn> <multilink><a href="RSRHirschBemidbar16" data-aht="source">R. S.R. Hirsch</a><a href="RSRHirschBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RSRHirschBemidbar17-6-18" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17:6:18</a><a href="RSRHirschBemidbar17-6-28" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17:6-28</a><a href="R. Samson Raphael Hirsch" data-aht="parshan">About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch</a></multilink>, contemporary scholars</mekorot>
 
<mekorot><multilink><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Ramban</a><a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RambanBemidbar17-62025" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17:6, 20, 25</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Nachman (Ramban, Nachmanides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Nachman</a></multilink> #2,<fn>This is how Ramban interprets the chapter "על דרך הפשט".&#160; See the end of his <a href="RambanBemidbar16" data-aht="source">commentary on Bemidbar 16:21</a>. [Most of his commentary on the chapter, though, is "על דרך רבותנו", who assume that the firstborns were originally involved in sacrificial service.&#160; See Ramban in the third position, below, who develops how according to this, the firstborns played a large role in the rebellion, protesting the selection of the Levites in their stead.]</fn> <multilink><a href="RSRHirschBemidbar16" data-aht="source">R. S.R. Hirsch</a><a href="RSRHirschBemidbar16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 16</a><a href="RSRHirschBemidbar17-6-18" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17:6:18</a><a href="RSRHirschBemidbar17-6-28" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 17:6-28</a><a href="R. Samson Raphael Hirsch" data-aht="parshan">About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch</a></multilink>, contemporary scholars</mekorot>
<point><b>When did the rebellion take place?</b></point>
+
<point><b>When did the rebellion take place?</b> Ramban asserts that the story is in its chronological place and follows the decree of death in the wilderness after the sin of the Spies. It is this which prompt's Datan and Aviram's complaint, "הַמְעַט כִּי הֶעֱלִיתָנוּ מֵאֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבַשׁ <b>לַהֲמִיתֵנוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר</b>".&#160; Though Korach's grievance against Aharon preceded the decree, it served to spur him into action as well. Beforehand, no one would have dared rebel against Moshe, whom the nation viewed as savior and defender.&#160; The decree, though, embittered the nation, making the time ripe for Korach's incitement.</point>
 
<point><b>"...וַיִּקַּח קֹרַח"</b></point>
 
<point><b>"...וַיִּקַּח קֹרַח"</b></point>
 
<point><b>Who were the 250 men?</b></point>
 
<point><b>Who were the 250 men?</b></point>

Version as of 11:56, 25 June 2019

Korach's Rebellion

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Against Aharon

The whole rebellion revolved around one main issue, the choice of Aharon as priest.

"...וַיִּקַּח קֹרַח" – R"Y Bekhor suggests that the verse means that Korach, Datan and Aviram, and On,  who were all upset at the choice of Aharon (albeit for different reasons),3 gathered others4 to join in their rebellion.5 Korach, being a Levite, resented Aharon's superior position. The others, being of the tribe of Reuven, thought that their tribes' firstborn status should have merited them to be priests.6
Who were the 250 men? This position might suggest that the 250 men comprised any of the following:
  • Levites R. ChananelBemidbar 16About R. Moshe b. Nachman maintains that the 250 people were all from the tribe of Levi.7  They, like Korach, were not satisfied with "serving the priests" and aspired to be priests themselves.
  • Reubenites – According to Rashi, they were mainly from the tribe of Reuven. Though Rashi suggests that their joining the rebellion was a technical result of their living close to and being swayed by Korach, it is possible that the tribe as a whole felt that they deserved priestly status due to their ancestor's being the firstborn to Yaakov (see R"Y Bekhor Shor above).
  • All of Israel – Alternatively, it is possible that this group was comprised of people from all the tribes.  This position might maintain that before the sin of the Calf and the building of the Tabernacle, every individual Israelite had been allowed to sacrifice on private altars, and the people were hoping to return to this status quo.8
"רַב לָכֶם בְּנֵי לֵוִי" – According to R. Chananel, Moshe's address is logical; he mentions the Levites in particular since most of the rebels were from that tribe. The other sources might suggest that Moshe singles out the Levites, not because they were the majority but because their complaint was the most troubling given their already exalted status.
Purpose of the incense test – Since the sole contested issue was who was deserving to serve as priest, and since bringing incense was a rite reserved for priests, it was an appropriate test.
"וְיֹדַע י״י אֶת אֲשֶׁר לוֹ וְאֶת הַקָּדוֹשׁ וְהִקְרִיב אֵלָיו וְאֵת אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר בּוֹ יַקְרִיב אֵלָיו " – This position would suggest that there is no significance to the doubling in this verse9 and that all three phrase ("אֶת אֲשֶׁר לוֹ", "אֶת הַקָּדוֹשׁ", "אֵת אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר בּוֹ") speak of the selection of Aharon.10
Datan and Aviram's complaint

According to this approach, Datan and Aviram are not really bothered by Moshe's leadership as a whole, only by (what they perceived as) his nepotism in choosing his brother.11

"לֹא נַעֲלֶה"
  • These sources might suggest that Moshe had wanted to speak to Datan and Aviram alone, hoping to convince individual members of the coalition to change their mind, but they refused to come before him.
  • According to R"Y Bekhor Shor, in contrast, Moshe had called Datan and Aviram not to influence them, but to invite them to join the larger assembly in the incense test (as they, too, were challenging Aharon's priesthood).12  The brothers refused, claiming that they did not need a test to prove who was in the right.
"אַל תֵּפֶן אֶל מִנְחָתָם" – Rashi and R"Y Bekhor Shor maintains that the minchah of the verse refers to the incense test.  Since Datan and Aviram shared the grievances of the rest of the nation, it was originally assumed that they too would participate, leading to Moshe's prayer that their incense not be accepted.13 Only because they refused to participate did Moshe feel a need to devise a different test to prove them wrong, leading to the miracle of the earthquake.
" בְּזֹאת תֵּדְעוּן כִּי י״י שְׁלָחַנִי לַעֲשׂוֹת אֵת כׇּל הַמַּעֲשִׂים הָאֵלֶּה " – Rashi and R"Y Bekhor Shor assert that "כׇּל הַמַּעֲשִׂים הָאֵלֶּה" refers to the appointment of Aharon.14 The earth's swallowing of Datan and Aviram was meant to prove that, in contrast to their claims of nepotism, the selection of Aharon as priest came from Hashem, not Moshe.
Different punishments – If Datan and Aviram's complaints were no different than that of the other rebels, one might have expected them to share the same fate. However, as mentioned above, it is likely that it was simply their refusal to partake in the incense test that necessitated the alternative punishment.15
"אַתֶּם הֲמִתֶּם אֶת עַם י"י" – R"Y Bekhor Shor asserts that the people blamed Moshe for using a test which involved incense, something which had already proven in the past (by Nadav and Avihu) to be fatal.  Moreover, as Nadav and Avihu, who were by all accounts chosen for the priesthood, nonetheless died when they brought incense, the test could not serve as proof of unworthiness to the position.16 As such, a new test was necessary.
The plague – Aharon's saving of the nation via the incense was meant to teach the nation that, contrary to their beliefs, in the right hands, the incense brings life, not death.
The test of the staffs – The blossoming of Aharon's staff finally proved to the nation, that he, and not members of other tribes, was selected for the priesthood. Though one might suggest that since each tribe contributed a staff, this test must have related to tribal status rather than individual status, Hashem's words "וְהָיָה הָאִישׁ אֲשֶׁר אֶבְחַר בּוֹ מַטֵּהוּ יִפְרָח" suggest that the point was to choose an individual.  As such, too, the staff is consistently referred to not as the staff of "the tribe of Levi" but as "Aharon's staff" (see 17:21, 23, 25).
When does the story take place? R"Y Bekhor Shor suggests that the story is chronological and follows the decree of death in the wilderness after the sin of the spies. It is possible that the despair felt by the nation fomented unrest and rebellion.

Against Aharon and Moshe

The rebellion had two focal points.  Korach and his 250 followers objected to Aharon's priesthood, while Datan and Aviram challenged Moshe's leadership.

When did the rebellion take place? Ramban asserts that the story is in its chronological place and follows the decree of death in the wilderness after the sin of the Spies. It is this which prompt's Datan and Aviram's complaint, "הַמְעַט כִּי הֶעֱלִיתָנוּ מֵאֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבַשׁ לַהֲמִיתֵנוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר".  Though Korach's grievance against Aharon preceded the decree, it served to spur him into action as well. Beforehand, no one would have dared rebel against Moshe, whom the nation viewed as savior and defender.  The decree, though, embittered the nation, making the time ripe for Korach's incitement.
"...וַיִּקַּח קֹרַח"
Who were the 250 men?
"רַב לָכֶם בְּנֵי לֵוִי"
Purpose of the incense test

Against Aharon, Moshe and the Tribe of Levi

The rebellion was multi-faceted, with groups complaining about both spiritual and political status.  Some protested the priestly class, others challenged the choice of the Levites, while yet others had issue with Moshe.