Difference between revisions of "Korach's Rebellion/2"
m |
m |
||
Line 90: | Line 90: | ||
<point><b>Purpose of incense test</b> – According to most of these sources, the test was meant to discern both who was worthy of the Levites' position and who merited priesthood.<fn>Abarbanel further claims that, at least originally, it was also meant to test the claims of the Reubenites against Yehuda/Yosef. It is unclear, though, how this could be proven via the ritualistic offering of incense.  It is further difficult how, practically, the same test could simultaneously choose those worthy of being Levites and those worthy of ruling, considering that these would be different groups. Regardless, see below that Abarbanel posits that in the end, there was a change of plan and the Reubenites did not participate in the incense test.</fn>  However, as bringing incense is a priestly, rather than Levite, function, it is not clear how the same test could be used for both groups. This, perhaps, is what leads Hoil Moshe to conclude that the incense proved only who was worthy of the priesthood.<fn>See his comments to 17:18.</fn></point> | <point><b>Purpose of incense test</b> – According to most of these sources, the test was meant to discern both who was worthy of the Levites' position and who merited priesthood.<fn>Abarbanel further claims that, at least originally, it was also meant to test the claims of the Reubenites against Yehuda/Yosef. It is unclear, though, how this could be proven via the ritualistic offering of incense.  It is further difficult how, practically, the same test could simultaneously choose those worthy of being Levites and those worthy of ruling, considering that these would be different groups. Regardless, see below that Abarbanel posits that in the end, there was a change of plan and the Reubenites did not participate in the incense test.</fn>  However, as bringing incense is a priestly, rather than Levite, function, it is not clear how the same test could be used for both groups. This, perhaps, is what leads Hoil Moshe to conclude that the incense proved only who was worthy of the priesthood.<fn>See his comments to 17:18.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>"וְיֹדַע י״י אֶת אֲשֶׁר לוֹ וְאֶת הַקָּדוֹשׁ וְהִקְרִיב אֵלָיו וְאֵת אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר בּוֹ יַקְרִיב אֵלָיו "</b> – Most of these sources suggest that the doubling in the verse matches the dual purpose of the test.  It was to discern "אֶת אֲשֶׁר לוֹ" as far as the status of the Levites,<fn>See Ramban who notes that the language of "אֶת אֲשֶׁר <b>לוֹ</b>' is reminiscent of earlier statements of Hashem (in Bemidbar 3:12-13) relating to the selection of both the Levites ("וְהָיוּ <b>לִי</b> הַלְוִיִּם") and the firstborns ("כִּי <b>לִי</b> כׇּל בְּכוֹר"). The test is meant to demonstrate which of these two groups is truly His ("<b>לוֹ</b>"). Cf. Netziv who suggests that the phrase "אֶת אֲשֶׁר לוֹ' alludes back to Moshe's cry "מִי לה' אֵלָי" at the Sin of the Golden Calf and therefore hints to the Levites who answered Moshe's call and proved themselves to be Hashem's.</fn> and "אֶת הַקָּדוֹשׁ" regarding the priesthood.<fn>Abarbanel adds that "אֵת אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר בּוֹ" refers to the contest between Reuven and Yehuda / Yosef. [See above note that he maintains that the incense test was originally supposed to address the Reubenites' concerns as well.]</fn></point> | <point><b>"וְיֹדַע י״י אֶת אֲשֶׁר לוֹ וְאֶת הַקָּדוֹשׁ וְהִקְרִיב אֵלָיו וְאֵת אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר בּוֹ יַקְרִיב אֵלָיו "</b> – Most of these sources suggest that the doubling in the verse matches the dual purpose of the test.  It was to discern "אֶת אֲשֶׁר לוֹ" as far as the status of the Levites,<fn>See Ramban who notes that the language of "אֶת אֲשֶׁר <b>לוֹ</b>' is reminiscent of earlier statements of Hashem (in Bemidbar 3:12-13) relating to the selection of both the Levites ("וְהָיוּ <b>לִי</b> הַלְוִיִּם") and the firstborns ("כִּי <b>לִי</b> כׇּל בְּכוֹר"). The test is meant to demonstrate which of these two groups is truly His ("<b>לוֹ</b>"). Cf. Netziv who suggests that the phrase "אֶת אֲשֶׁר לוֹ' alludes back to Moshe's cry "מִי לה' אֵלָי" at the Sin of the Golden Calf and therefore hints to the Levites who answered Moshe's call and proved themselves to be Hashem's.</fn> and "אֶת הַקָּדוֹשׁ" regarding the priesthood.<fn>Abarbanel adds that "אֵת אֲשֶׁר יִבְחַר בּוֹ" refers to the contest between Reuven and Yehuda / Yosef. [See above note that he maintains that the incense test was originally supposed to address the Reubenites' concerns as well.]</fn></point> | ||
− | <point><b>"וַיִּשְׁלַח מֹשֶׁה לִקְרֹא לְדָתָן וְלַאֲבִירָם"</b> – According to Abarbanel, Moshe recognized that Datan and Aviram's grievance was distinct from the others (as it did not relate exclusively to cultic practices).<fn>According to many of these sources, Datan and Aviram had joined in the original complaints against Aharon and the tribe of Levi as well.  They simply had additional grievances which also needed to be addressed. See Ibn Ezra who explains the doubling in Datan and Aviram's words, "כִּי תִשְׂתָּרֵר עָלֵינוּ גַּם הִשְׂתָּרֵר" to refer to the power held by <i>both</i> Aharon and Moshe.</fn> He, therefore, summoned them separately to address their specific complaints and perhaps to appease them, hoping they would break away from the rest of the rebels.<fn>Abarbanel suggests that Moshe thought to offer them some special portion or other position of leadership upon arrival in Israel so as to appease them.  Datan and Avram retorted that, as they are all doomed to die in the Wilderness, this gesture would be worthless.</fn> They, however, refused to dialogue, saying "לֹא נַעֲלֶה".‎<fn>See above that | + | <point><b>"וַיִּשְׁלַח מֹשֶׁה לִקְרֹא לְדָתָן וְלַאֲבִירָם"</b> – According to Abarbanel, Moshe recognized that Datan and Aviram's grievance was distinct from the others (as it did not relate exclusively to cultic practices).<fn>According to many of these sources, Datan and Aviram had joined in the original complaints against Aharon and the tribe of Levi as well.  They simply had additional grievances which also needed to be addressed. See Ibn Ezra who explains the doubling in Datan and Aviram's words, "כִּי תִשְׂתָּרֵר עָלֵינוּ גַּם הִשְׂתָּרֵר" to refer to the power held by <i>both</i> Aharon and Moshe.</fn> He, therefore, summoned them separately to address their specific complaints and perhaps to appease them, hoping they would break away from the rest of the rebels.<fn>Abarbanel suggests that Moshe thought to offer them some special portion or other position of leadership upon arrival in Israel so as to appease them.  Datan and Avram retorted that, as they are all doomed to die in the Wilderness, this gesture would be worthless.</fn> They, however, refused to dialogue, saying "לֹא נַעֲלֶה".‎<fn>See above that according to Abarbanel, originally Datan and Aviram's claims were to be disproved through the incense test together with those of everyone else. In face of their refusal to negotiate, however, Moshe changed his mind and devised a new test for them alone. Abarbanel explains that it was this change in plan which necessitated Moshe's repeated instructions to Korach "אַתָּה וְכׇל עֲדָתְךָ הֱיוּ לִפְנֵי י״י אַתָּה וָהֵם וְאַהֲרֹן מָחָר", in which he excluded Datan and Aviram. [Others explain the repetition by positing a different change in plan, that Aharon was now to be included in the test, but had not been before.]</fn></point> |
<point><b>"אַל תֵּפֶן אֶל מִנְחָתָם"</b> – As these sources assume that Datan and Aviram's claims were not to be addressed by the incense test, they explain that the "<i>minchah</i>" refers to something else:<br/> | <point><b>"אַל תֵּפֶן אֶל מִנְחָתָם"</b> – As these sources assume that Datan and Aviram's claims were not to be addressed by the incense test, they explain that the "<i>minchah</i>" refers to something else:<br/> | ||
<ul> | <ul> | ||
Line 96: | Line 96: | ||
<li>Hoil Moshe, in contrast, suggests that the phrase is a "תיקון סופרים" and should be read as if it said: "לא <b>א</b>פן אל מנחתם".  If so, Moshe's words are not a prayer that the rebels' sacrifices not be accepted, but rather a claim of Moshe's own innocence, paralleling the second half of this verse, "לֹא חֲמוֹר אֶחָד מֵהֶם נָשָׂאתִי".</li> | <li>Hoil Moshe, in contrast, suggests that the phrase is a "תיקון סופרים" and should be read as if it said: "לא <b>א</b>פן אל מנחתם".  If so, Moshe's words are not a prayer that the rebels' sacrifices not be accepted, but rather a claim of Moshe's own innocence, paralleling the second half of this verse, "לֹא חֲמוֹר אֶחָד מֵהֶם נָשָׂאתִי".</li> | ||
</ul></point> | </ul></point> | ||
− | <point><b>" בְּזֹאת תֵּדְעוּן כִּי י״י שְׁלָחַנִי לַעֲשׂוֹת אֵת כׇּל הַמַּעֲשִׂים הָאֵלֶּה "</b> – Ibn Ezra claims that Moshe is speaking, not of his entire mission, but only of the switching of the firstborns and Levites.<fn>Abarbanel, instead, claims that Moshe is speaking of each of the three issues being contested | + | <point><b>" בְּזֹאת תֵּדְעוּן כִּי י״י שְׁלָחַנִי לַעֲשׂוֹת אֵת כׇּל הַמַּעֲשִׂים הָאֵלֶּה "</b> – Ibn Ezra claims that Moshe is speaking, not of his entire mission, but only of the switching of the firstborns and Levites.<fn>Abarbanel, instead, claims that Moshe is speaking of each of the three issues being contested: the choice of Aharon, the selection of tribe of Levi, and the tribal status of Yehuda and Yosef (vs. Reuven).</fn></point> |
<point><b>Different punishments</b> – The various groups received different punishments, since they erred in different ways.  Those who rebelled over cultic issues (the choice of Aharon and the Levites) were punished by fire, while those who rebelled against Moshe's leadership were swallowed by the earth.<fn>The verses are somewhat ambiguous regarding the fate of Korach himself. From  <a href="Bemidbar26-9-10" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 26:10</a>, it sounds as if he shared the fate of Datan and Aviram.  On the other hand, <a href="Devarim11-6" data-aht="source">Devarim 11:6</a> mentions only Datan and Aviram as perishing in the earth, omitting Korach.  [See also Bemidbar 16:27 which similarly has only Datan and Aviram emerging from their tents, and 16:32 which mentions Korach's possessions being swallowed, but not Korach himself.] <br/> Ibn Ezra, Abarbanel, and Hoil Moshe all attempt to prove that Korach was burned together with the 250 men. As he, like they, protested on cultic grounds, it is logical that they all were punished in the same manner. See, though, the opinion in<multilink><a href="BavliSanhedrin110a" data-aht="source"> Bavli Sanhedrin 110a</a><a href="BavliSanhedrin110a" data-aht="source">Sanhedrin 110a</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>, which suggests that Korach received a dual punishment, being both burned and swallowed. This possibility, too, could make sense according to this approach which presents Korach as being the ringleader who united both groups of rebels.</fn></point> | <point><b>Different punishments</b> – The various groups received different punishments, since they erred in different ways.  Those who rebelled over cultic issues (the choice of Aharon and the Levites) were punished by fire, while those who rebelled against Moshe's leadership were swallowed by the earth.<fn>The verses are somewhat ambiguous regarding the fate of Korach himself. From  <a href="Bemidbar26-9-10" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 26:10</a>, it sounds as if he shared the fate of Datan and Aviram.  On the other hand, <a href="Devarim11-6" data-aht="source">Devarim 11:6</a> mentions only Datan and Aviram as perishing in the earth, omitting Korach.  [See also Bemidbar 16:27 which similarly has only Datan and Aviram emerging from their tents, and 16:32 which mentions Korach's possessions being swallowed, but not Korach himself.] <br/> Ibn Ezra, Abarbanel, and Hoil Moshe all attempt to prove that Korach was burned together with the 250 men. As he, like they, protested on cultic grounds, it is logical that they all were punished in the same manner. See, though, the opinion in<multilink><a href="BavliSanhedrin110a" data-aht="source"> Bavli Sanhedrin 110a</a><a href="BavliSanhedrin110a" data-aht="source">Sanhedrin 110a</a><a href="Talmud Bavli" data-aht="parshan">About the Bavli</a></multilink>, which suggests that Korach received a dual punishment, being both burned and swallowed. This possibility, too, could make sense according to this approach which presents Korach as being the ringleader who united both groups of rebels.</fn></point> | ||
<point><b>Test of the staffs</b> – These sources disagree regarding the goal of the test:<br/> | <point><b>Test of the staffs</b> – These sources disagree regarding the goal of the test:<br/> |
Version as of 03:07, 28 June 2019
Korach's Rebellion
Exegetical Approaches
Overview
Despite the infamy of Korach's rebellion, there is much dispute among commentators as to how to interpret the rebels' protests. The difference of opinion stems from several unknowns in the text, including the historical backdrop of the rebellion, the identity of the bulk of the dissidents, and the relationship between them.
A first approach, taken by R"Y Bekhor Shor and others, assumes that all of the rebels shared a single grievance over the selection of Aharon's family as priests, and that their dispute with Moshe was only in so far as they accused him of nepotism in choosing his brother. Thus, the rebels might have been comprised primarily of Levites who resented the need to "serve" the priests.
Ramban, in contrast, maintains that the rebellion had a dual focus, with Korach and his followers protesting the priesthood of Aharon, while Datan and Aviram challenged Moshe's leadership and highlighted his failure to bring them to the Promised Land. He places the story immediately after the Sin of the Spies, suggesting that the decree that they would perish in the Wilderness is what prompted the revolt.
Ibn Ezra adds a third component to the revolt, suggesting that the rebels questioned not only the choice of Aharon and authority of Moshe, but also the selection of the tribe of Levi as a whole. He reads the story on the backdrop of the replacing of the firstborns with the Levites, suggesting that this newly disenfranchised class comprised the majority of rebels, protesting their loss of status.
Against Aharon
The whole rebellion revolved around one central issue, the choice of Aharon and his family as priests.
- Levites – R. Chananel maintains that the 250 people were all from the tribe of Levi.7 They, like Korach, were unsatisfied with merely "serving the priests" but rather aspired to be priests themselves.
- Reubenites – According to Rashi, the men were mainly from the tribe of Reuven. Rashi suggests that their joining the rebellion was a technical result of their living close to and being swayed by Korach, but it is possible that the tribe as a whole felt that they deserved priestly status due to their ancestor being Yaakov's firstborn.8
- 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.9
- Moshe might have been hoping to weaken the coalition, trying to influence individual members to change course. Thus, after (unsuccessfully) trying to convince the Levites that they had no good cause for rebelling, he turned to attempt to persuade Datan and Aviram.
- According to R"Y Bekhor Shor, though Datan and Aviram agreed with Korach's challenging of Aharon, they opposed the proposed incense test.14 Moshe, thus, called to personally invite them to join the larger assembly in the contest. However, Datan and Aviram refused, claiming that they did not need a test to prove who was in the right.
- The directives regarding guarding the Mishkan and not coming too close to it might have been repeated here since the rebellion proved that previous warnings had not been sufficient.
- Hashem may have introduced the law that the priests (and Levites) are not to inherit land, to highlight to the rebelling nation that priesthood comes not only with privileges, but also with costs.
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 authority.
- Two complaints – The arguments of Korach and the 250 men and the complaints of Datan and Aviram are totally distinct, one focusing on the cultic realm and one on political issues.
- Different attitudes to Moshe – While Korach and the 250 princes recognize Moshe's authority and heed his words, Datan and Aviram do not.22
- Two locales – Physically, the two groups are located in different places. The fact that Moshe must send for Datan and Aviram (v. 12) may imply that they were situated separately from the other rebels.23
- Two tests / punishments – The two groups are proven wrong and meet their fates in different ways. While the 250 princes are burned by a Heavenly fire, Datan and Aviram are swallowed by the earth.
Against Aharon, Moshe, and the Tribe of Levi
The rebellion was multi-faceted, with various groups complaining about spiritual and/or political status. Some protested the selection of the priestly class, others took issue with Moshe's leadership, while yet others challenged the choice of the Levites.
- Challenging Aharon and the priesthood – Most of these sources assume that Korach was envious of and coveted Aharon's position. Ibn Ezra adds that the Levites as a whole may have resented needing to serve the priests. According to Netziv and Hoil Moshe, in contrast, it was the lay Israelites who wished to be priests.33
- Challenging Moshe – According to Ramban and Hoil Moshe, Datan and Aviram challenged Moshe's overall leadership, blaming him for taking them to die in the Wilderness. In contrast, according to Ibn Ezra and Abarbanel, they34 were upset about their tribe losing its firstborn status to Yosef with regard to a double portion of inheritance and to Yehuda with regard to leadership.35
- Protesting the selection of the Levites – Ibn Ezra, Ramban, Chizkuni, and Abarbanel view this complaint as emanating mainly from the firstborns36 who had originally played a role in the cultic service37 but were then displaced by the Levites.38 Netziv and Hoil Moshe, in contrast, claim that the Israelites at large were bothered by the monopoly of the tribe of Levi.
- Firstborns – Ibn Ezra, Ramban, Chizkuni, and Abarbanel assume that the 250 men were composed mainly of firstborns who protested the selection of the Levites and their being ousted from cultic service.
- Noble Israelites – Hoil Moshe, in contrast, assume that the 250 men were noblemen from all of the tribes, who questioned the monopoly on sacrificial service held by both the priests and the tribe of Levi as a whole. They wished to return to the state which existed before the Sin of the Golden Calf, when all could partake in the service.45 Netziv even presents them as holy men, with noble and sincere, though misguided, motives.46
- Ibn Ezra posits that Datan and Aviram had offered a sacrifice at some point prior to our story, and Moshe prays that it not be accepted by Hashem.
- Hoil Moshe, in contrast, suggests that the phrase is a "תיקון סופרים" and should be read as if it said: "לא אפן אל מנחתם". If so, Moshe's words are not a prayer that the rebels' sacrifices not be accepted, but rather a claim of Moshe's own innocence, paralleling the second half of this verse, "לֹא חֲמוֹר אֶחָד מֵהֶם נָשָׂאתִי".
- Selection of Priests and Levites – According to Ibn Ezra and Abarbanel, the nation was not convinced by the incense test, blaming Moshe for telling the rebels to bring a fatal foreign fire (or otherwise causing the people's deaths). As such, a new test was needed to prove the worthiness of both Aharon and the Levites.
- Selection of the tribe of Levi – Alternatively, Hoil Moshe suggests that the incense test sufficed to convince the nation of Aharon's worthiness, as he alone survived, proving that he was the only one worthy of bringing incense. However, the people still had doubts regarding the selection of the tribe of Levi as a whole.58 Since the bringing of incense was a rite reserved for priests, it shed no light on who was worthy of Levitical service and a new test was needed for this aspect.