The Historical Circumstances that Inspired the Korah Narrative

Biblical translations follow NJPS, with modifications, unless otherwise noted. Other translations are mine.

For a source division along these lines, see Staff Editors, “Korah, Datan, and Abiram: A Case Study for the Methods of Academic Biblical Studies – Part 2: Korah and the Documentary Hypothesis,” TheTorah (2014). See also Adele Berlin, “Joining Rebellions: Dathan and Abiram Merge with Korah, Leader of the Levites,” TheTorah (2013).

^{אבן עזרא, במדבר טז:א} וקשר דתן ואבירם בעבור שהסיר הבכורה מראובן אביהם ונתנה ליוסף אולי חשדוהו בעבור יהושע משרתו.

^{Ibn Ezra, Num 16:1} Dathan and Abiram rebelled because he [Moses] had taken the birthright from Reuben their forefather, and had given it to Joseph. It is also possible that they suspected him because of Joshua, his assistant.

According to the sequence of the Primary History (Genesis–2 Kings), Reuben does not appear after Judges 5. While tribal names and affiliations appear far less frequently after the Pentateuch, most appear later in Judges, as well as into the Books of Kings. The mention of Reuben in Ezekiel 48:6, 31 is to an idealized restoration of the twelve tribes, not to participation in the story as it was taking place.

Compare Absalom’s rebellion, during which he slept with his father’s concubines.

Both Genesis 35:22 and 49:3–4, like the Dathan and Abiram rebellion, are J.

Ibn Ezra’s claim (see n. 2, above) that the birthright passed to Joseph is based on this verse. Unlike Chronicles, however, the J source is more interested in how Judah becomes pre-eminent among the Israelites.

Marc Z. Brettler, “The Typologies of Genesis” in The Creation of History in Ancient Israel (Routledge: London, 1995), 48–61.

If, as Richard Elliot Friedman argues (inter alia), the J source is related to the Solomonic rise to power, the three oldest sons of Jacob being dispossessed in favor of Judah may be understood as parallel to the three oldest sons of David being eliminated so that Solomon might become king.

The text is unclear whether Korah’s followers are all Levites or Israelites more broadly. Israel Knohl believes that there was originally an Israelite rebellion that gets recast as a Levitical rebellion by the Holiness School. See discussion in Staff Editors, “Korah, Datan, and Abiram: A Case Study for the Methods of Academic Biblical Studies – Part 3: Documentary and Redactional Approach: Israel Knohl,” TheTorah (2014).

^{אבן עזרא, במדבר יח:כב} ולא יקרבו עוד – בעבור עדת קרח

^{Ibn Ezra, Num 18:22} Henceforth, they shall not trespass – This was written because of Korah’s assembly.

^{במדבר ג:י} וְאֶת אַהֲרֹן וְאֶת בָּנָיו תִּפְקֹד וְשָׁמְרוּ אֶת כְּהֻנָּתָם וְהַזָּר הַקָּרֵב יוּמָת.

^{Num 3:10} You shall make Aaron and his sons responsible for observing their priestly duties; and any outsider who encroaches shall be put to death.

These are three of the five instances (4 of them in P) of God speaking directly to Aaron, instead of instructing Moses to convey the message. With regard to the other Priestly occurrence (Lev 10:8), Rashi explains that the privilege of hearing the divine instruction directly is a reward for his silence in the wake of his sons’ deaths (comment to 10:3). Aaron’s sons were killed by fire as a result of approaching the holy space inappropriately.

For two of the instances in this chapter (Num 18:1, 8), Rashi assumes that Moses must have intervened, because only in Leviticus 10:8 was Aaron deserving of direct divine communication. This seems like a circular argument. On the other hand, the similarity of the events leading up to the speech—divine fire coming forth to consume those who approach the sanctuary without authority—suggest that this context is what raises, or at least highlights Aaron’s status. The direct address to Aaron may be understood as a consequence of this encroachment, and therefore speaks to Aaron’s own responsibility for the security of the sanctum (18:1).

Ibn Ezra is not concerned by the direct speech since he sees Aaron as a prophet himself (see notes at both Lev 10:8 and Num 18:1) and pays no attention to the rarity of this.

Here is how the same hierarchy appears in chapters 3 and 8:

‏^{במדבר ג:ה} וַיְדַבֵּר יְ־הוָה אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר. ^ג:ו הַקְרֵב אֶת מַטֵּה לֵוִי וְהַעֲמַדְתָּ אֹתוֹ לִפְנֵי אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן וְשֵׁרְתוּ אֹתוֹ. ^ג:ז וְשָׁמְרוּ אֶת מִשְׁמַרְתּוֹ וְאֶת מִשְׁמֶרֶת כָּל הָעֵדָה לִפְנֵי אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לַעֲבֹד אֶת עֲבֹדַת הַמִּשְׁכָּן. ^ג:ח וְשָׁמְרוּ אֶת כָּל כְּלֵי אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וְאֶת מִשְׁמֶרֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לַעֲבֹד אֶת עֲבֹדַת הַמִּשְׁכָּן. ^ג:ט וְנָתַתָּה אֶת הַלְוִיִּם לְאַהֲרֹן וּלְבָנָיו נְתוּנִם נְתוּנִם הֵמָּה לוֹ מֵאֵת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. ^ג:י וְאֶת אַהֲרֹן וְאֶת בָּנָיו תִּפְקֹד וְשָׁמְרוּ אֶת כְּהֻנָּתָם וְהַזָּר הַקָּרֵב יוּמָת.

^{Num 3:5} YHWH spoke to Moses, saying: ^3:6 Advance the tribe of Levi and place them in attendance upon Aaron the priest to serve him. ^3:7 They shall perform duties for him and for the whole community before the Tent of Meeting, doing the work of the Tabernacle. ^3:8 They shall take charge of all the furnishings of the Tent of Meeting—a duty on behalf of the Israelites—doing the work of the Tabernacle. ^3:9 You shall assign the Levites to Aaron and to his sons: they are formally assigned to him from among the Israelites. ^3:10 You shall make Aaron and his sons responsible for observing their priestly duties; and any outsider who encroaches shall be put to death.

‏^{במדבר ח:ה} וַיְדַבֵּר יְ־הוָה אֶל מֹשֶׁה לֵּאמֹר. ^ח:ו קַח אֶת הַלְוִיִּם מִתּוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְטִהַרְתָּ אֹתָם.... ^ח:יא וְהֵנִיף אַהֲרֹן אֶת הַלְוִיִּם תְּנוּפָה לִפְנֵי יְ־הוָה מֵאֵת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְהָיוּ לַעֲבֹד אֶת עֲבֹדַת יְ־הוָה.... ^ח:יג וְהַעֲמַדְתָּ אֶת הַלְוִיִּם לִפְנֵי אַהֲרֹן וְלִפְנֵי בָנָיו וְהֵנַפְתָּ אֹתָם תְּנוּפָה לַי־הוָה.... ^ח:יט וָאֶתְּנָה אֶת הַלְוִיִּם נְתֻנִים לְאַהֲרֹן וּלְבָנָיו מִתּוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לַעֲבֹד אֶת עֲבֹדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד וּלְכַפֵּר עַל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְלֹא יִהְיֶה בִּבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל נֶגֶף בְּגֶשֶׁת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶל הַקֹּדֶשׁ.

^{Num 8:5} YHWH spoke to Moses, saying: ^8:6 Take the Levites from among the Israelites and cleanse them…. ^8:11 and let Aaron designate the Levites before YHWH as an elevation offering from the Israelites, that they may perform the service of YHWH…. ^8:13 You shall place the Levites in attendance upon Aaron and his sons, and designate them as an elevation offering to YHWH…. ^8:19 and from among the Israelites I formally assign the Levites to Aaron and his sons, to perform the service for the Israelites in the Tent of Meeting and to make expiation for the Israelites, so that no plague may afflict the Israelites for coming too near the sanctuary.

Consider Numbers 2–6 in comparison to verses 1 and 7. Also, the description of Priestly prerogatives (Num 18:8–19) is immediately followed by a parallel description of the Levitical privileges (Num 18:20–32).

These expressions total 7 of the 12 verses in Deuteronomy that mention kohen. For more on this, see A. Avriech, “The Kohanim the Levi’im,” TheTorah (2013).

Of the four mentions of Aaron in Deuteronomy, the first two are in regard to his participation in the Golden Calf episode (9:20), and the other two recount his death (10:6; 32:50).

Because sociological developments are not always universal and linear within a society, we may not with certainty identify Deuteronomy as earlier than the Priestly text, even if we suggest that it presents an earlier idea.

While this seems vague to us as readers, it most likely refers to an event known to the original audience, but reference to it is no longer extant.

This is a demotion here. In contrast, the responsibilities given to the Levites in Numbers 3 and 8 are described as a promotion. The Levites are purified, given as a gift to the priests, and are designated as an “elevation” offering.

Among many historical critics, the Zadokites are the true referends of any mentions of Aaronide priests in the Pentateuch. Richard Elliot Friedman disagrees, arguing that the narrowing of the priesthood to Aaronides and to Zadokites reflects two separate occasions. Despite his claim, the similarity of Numbers 16–18 and Ezekiel 44 (see below) is too specific to deny a connection.

The Hebrew text does not specify to whom the duties were reassigned, but the absent object may have referred to the classes of people listed in verse 7. The Septuagint, however, includes the word “foreigner” (reflected in the NRSV translation).

There is also an interesting connection between Ezekiel 44:21 back to Leviticus 10:8–9 (see above n. 13).

Translations are my own to highlight their similarity. Note also, that Moses reverses the expression to הַמְעַט מִכֶּם, “is it not enough,” in verse 9.

Note that Ezekiel himself was a Zadokite. His view of Zadokites as the only acceptable priests can only be a projection into the future since had they been already in charge at the Temple, whatever this apostasy was would have been their responsibility.

As a parallel, see for example some recent work on circumcision (e.g., P. J. King, “Circumcision: Who Did It, Who Didn’t, and Why,” Biblical Archaeology Review 32.4 (2006).

Without taking this argument too far afield, consider the similarities of language to an opposite effect in Isaiah 56:6.

If we understand these texts as one responding to the other, we would draw one set of conclusions. For example, Michael Fishbane (Biblical Interpretation in Ancient Israel, 139ff.) argues that Ezekiel 44 is responding directly to Numbers 18 in an attempt to develop, hone, and modify the norms of Numbers. If, however, we understand them as both responding to an event or a no longer extant text, we would draw another set of conclusions.

For example, in וַיֵּצֵא יִצְחָק לָשׂוּחַ בַּשָּׂדֶה לִפְנוֹת עָרֶב, “Isaac went out walking in the field toward evening” (Gen 24:63), the rabbis understand the obscure word לָשׂוּחַ (here translated “went out walking”) as praying the afternoon service.