Difference between revisions of "Korach's Rebellion/2"
m |
|||
Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
<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 nation's doubts necessitated a new test to confirm who was or was not worthy of priesthood. The blossoming of Aharon's staff decisively proved to the nation that he, and not members of other tribes, was Divinely selected.<fn>This position might point to Hashem's words "וְהָיָה <b>הָאִישׁ</b> אֲשֶׁר אֶבְחַר <b>בּוֹ</b> מַטֵּהוּ יִפְרָח" as evidence that the test's goal was to choose an individual and not a tribe. The fact that the staff is consistently referred to as "Aharon's staff" (see 17:21,23,25) and not as the staff of "the tribe of Levi" further suggests that the point was to highlight Aharon's worthiness specifically.</fn></point> | <point><b>The test of the staffs</b> – The nation's doubts necessitated a new test to confirm who was or was not worthy of priesthood. The blossoming of Aharon's staff decisively proved to the nation that he, and not members of other tribes, was Divinely selected.<fn>This position might point to Hashem's words "וְהָיָה <b>הָאִישׁ</b> אֲשֶׁר אֶבְחַר <b>בּוֹ</b> מַטֵּהוּ יִפְרָח" as evidence that the test's goal was to choose an individual and not a tribe. The fact that the staff is consistently referred to as "Aharon's staff" (see 17:21,23,25) and not as the staff of "the tribe of Levi" further suggests that the point was to highlight Aharon's worthiness specifically.</fn></point> | ||
− | <point><b>When does the story take place?</b> R"Y Bekhor Shor suggests that the story is chronological and follows the Sin of the Spies and the punishment of the nation as a whole. It is possible that the nation's ensuing despair 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 Sin of the Spies and the punishment of the nation as a whole. It is possible that the nation's ensuing despair fomented unrest and rebellion.<fn>See R"E Mizrachi that, according to Rashi, the story might have occurred before the Sin of the Spies. [Cf. Raman's understanding of Ibn Ezra below.] He points to Rashi's commentary on Devarim 1:1, where he writes, "וחצרות – מחלוקתו של קרח".  R. Mizrachi suggests that Rashi must assume that the rebellion took place in Chazerot, where the nation was encamped before the story of the Spies. He further notes that Rashi questions the juxtaposition of the sin of Miryam and the story of the Spies, suggesting that he thinks that the two did not follow one another (or Rashi would not comment).  This might be further proof that Rashi places the rebellion in between Miraym's sin and that of the spies.</fn></point> |
<point><b>Placement of the laws of Chapter 18</b><ul> | <point><b>Placement of the laws of Chapter 18</b><ul> | ||
<li>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.</li> | <li>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.</li> |
Version as of 13:47, 29 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.23
- 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.24
- 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.34
- 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, they35 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.36
- Protesting the selection of the Levites – Ibn Ezra, Ramban, Chizkuni, and Abarbanel view this complaint as emanating mainly from the firstborns37 who had originally played a role in the cultic service38 but were then displaced by the Levites.39 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.46 Netziv even presents them as holy men, with noble and sincere, though misguided, motives.47
- 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.59 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.