The rebellions of Korah and his followers form a powerful sequel to the doomed sentence dealt out in Parshat Shelah. Indeed as will be shown the stories prove themselves to be inseparable. Leadership and power are called into question as a generation must now face a dim destiny.

It is only the force of fear and the overwhelming sense of loss which may fuel the revolt among the masses. Thus we read:

“Now took, Korah son of Kehat the son of Levi, and Datan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab, and On the son of Pelet, of the sons of Reuben, and they rose before Moses, and men from Israel, 250, princes of the assembly, regularly summoned, men of name.” (Numbers 16:1-2)

the argument is one which we have seen before, too much power held in the hands of too few. The demand is for noble equality. Yet the premise itself undermines far more than is initially clear. The celebrated professor of political science, Aaron Wildavsky explains, “If all Israelites receive revelation equally, without the necessity of mediation, they need neither leaders nor priesthood...If the people are good in the sight of God by virtue of revelation, they do not have to strive to become good...this is the end of Israel.” (Aaron Wildavsky, Moses as Political leader pg.154) The argument taken to its logical conclusion removes the need for both nationality and ambition. Israel the collective entity would thus meet its end at the hand of subjective division.

Yet the altruistic appearance of the complaint is deceptive. These are after all “princes of the assembly...men of name.” Moses is quick to respond. The chiastic structure of the narrative amplifies the show of rhetoric:

“and they gathered themselves against Moses and Aaron, and said to them:

'YOU TAKE TOO MUCH upon yourselves, (a)

seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them,(b)

and the Lord is among them; (c)

why then do you raise yourselves up above the assembly of the Lord?'and Moses heard and fell upon his face.(d)

He[Moses] spoke to Korah and his company saying,(d)

tomorrow morning the Lord will show who is His, and who is holy, and will cause him to come near Him;(c)

This do; take censors, Korah and all his company; and put fire in them, and put incense in them before the Lord tomorrow; and it shall be the man whom the Lord chooses,he shall be holy(b)

YOU TAKE TOO MUCH UPON YOURSELVES, you sons of Levi.”(a)

(Numbers 16:3-7)

Here Moses the leader emerges at last. Not for the first time he falls in submission. Now, however he raises himself and meets his accusers. The hypocrisy shown is immediately addressed, these men are the benefactors of hierarchy. They believe fully in the worth of power, the only true complaint is that it is not completely in their hands. Next the ideological presumption is undermined. Holiness is a goal not a right. It is the Lord's alone to bestow.

Yet Moses here demonstrates even more. The test proposed is one without Divine prompting. Moreover upon close inspection of the text it seems that Moses never intended it to actually take place. Instead it is a strategy designed to calm the passions of the protesters.(indeed it is entirely possible that he did not believe they would dare use the same incense that had seen the end of Aaron's two sons in Leviticus 10) It is only after all negotiations fail that Moses finally turns to God in plea, “Have no regard to their offering, I have not taken one ass from any of them, nor have I hurt one of them.” (Ibid. 15) yet hitherto Moses attempts to resolve the uprising through human deeds.

Moses is constantly forced to develop as a leader throughout the saga of Numbers. The difference is great indeed between the silent Moses of Shelah and the Diplomat of Korah. Once he had fallen in submission before the cries of the people, who had just heard the account of Canaan. As Joshua and Caleb are forced to confront the people in place of Moses, his failing is evident. Yet here we encounter a Moses ready to meet his accusers in a battle of spirit and rhetoric.

In order to understand the actions of Moses we must first determine the nature of the challenge before him. Careful analysis reveals that there are in fact two disputes occurring in tandem. Rabbi Menachem Leibtag illustrates the division as such:

Yet the initial attack on the national leadership is made by an overwhelming mass. Though there are undoubtedly two divided groups before them, Moses and Aaron are met by a seemingly united multitude.

Moses, however, shows astute perception in his dealings with those before him. Through his various negotiations he attempts to divide the mutiny. First the incense test is put in place, granting an opportunity for deliberation. This test can only satisfy one half of the rebellion; indeed Datan and Abiram will not participate at all. Moses then turns to Korah alone(possibly invoking suspicion among his supporters). A plea of reason is given:

“Moses said to Korah: Hear I pray you, sons of Levi

IS IT A SMALL THING[a key phrase throughout the saga] that the God of Israel has separated you from the congregation of Israel, to minister to them? And He has brought you near to Him, and all your brethren the sons of Levi with you. And do you seek the priesthood as well? For which cause both you and all your company

are gathered together are against the Lord. And what is Aaron that you murmur against him?” (Numbers 16:8-11)

Here Moses responds to the lust for power being shown. Though the argument against Korah is given in full; we are never to learn the intended plea to Datan and Abiram. In a show of outward rebellion they refuse to appear before Moses. Yet in their refusal, revelation is to be found:

“We Shall not COME UP;

IS IT A SMALL THING that you have BROUGHT US UP, OUT of a land flowing with milk and honey, to put us to death in the wilderness

but you needs make yourself a prince over us?

Moreover you have not brought us TO a land flowing with milk and honey, nor given us an inheritance of fields and vineyards;

will you put out the eyes of these men?

We shall not COME UP.”

(Numbers 16:12-14 division of text added to illustrate poetic structure of argument)

We find within their dissent a poetic play of words. They will not “come up” before Moses for they have seen the pain that it has brought before. They had been “brought up, out” of the “haven” of Egyptian slavery, only to die in the wilderness. Moreover they had not been allowed to “rise” to the land of Canaan. Instead they have only known Moses to have “risen” above them. Now in defiance of all that has happened they shall not “come up” before this failed leader.

As Wildavsky explains, “To Korah, there is excessive leadership; to Datan and Abiram the leadership is incompetent” (Aaron Wildavsky, Moses as Political Leader pg.155)

Though no date is given for this rebellion, we now understand its function as the sequel of the mission to Canaan. The themes of the Land are prevalent throughout. Indeed the two key phrases of the saga “Rav” (much) and “Ma'at” (little) which are used by both Moses and his adversaries, are intrinsically connected to the land. (See Numbers 13:18 and 26:52-56) Moreover the dispute over “going up” was the exact debate between Joshua, Caleb and the other representatives. (See Numbers 13:30-33) Rabbi Zvi Grumet argues this entire saga to be the result of the cry amidst Israel found in Shelah,“Let us appoint a head and return to Egypt.” (Ibid. 14:4) Moses is felt to have failed his people.

The irony is great as it is Moses who saves his people from Divine wrath. Yet this is not known to the masses who had never heard God's anger. They perceive their fate to be a result of Moses' incompetence as a leader. While in truth Moses is revealed to be completely dedicated to his people; tying his lot with their own.

Ultimately each group is punished according their deeds. Those who had aimed to seize power beyond themselves from those allocated by God, are consumed by the same heavenly fire that killed the two sons of Aaron. While Datan and Abiram show the same rejection of land and leader that began in Shelah with the depiction of Canaan as “a land which eats up its inhabitants” (Numbers 13:32). thus we are told, “the Earth opens her mouth, and swallowed them up” (Ibid. 16:31). we are shown that this wilderness, which they have doomed themselves to through sin, is the land that truly devours its inhabitants.

Moses the leader is now forced to learn that a show of terror does not earn loyalty:

“But on the morrow all the congregation of the children of Israel murmured against Moses and Aaron, saying: You have killed the people of the Lord” (Ibid. 17:6)

Yet do their complaints not bare a trace of truth? In the process of vindicating himself of the rebels accusations has he not proven them to be correct? Does he not now posses too much power? Moses may have developed as a leader yet he appears to have only used his new skills to transform himself into a despot.

It is God who must now teach Moses. Sending a plague against the nation, God forces Moses to act:

“And Moses said to Aaron: take a censor and put fire in it...and take it quickly to the congregation to make atonement for them.” (Ibid. 11)

Aaron is brought back to the people's grace as we read, “and he[Aaron] stood between the dead and the living and the plague was stopped.” (Ibid. 13). indeed the power of Eliezer the son of Aaron is also reinforced as he is sent to gather the censors used in Moses' trial.

God now proposes a new test for the people. This time individuals shall not be represented rather only tribes. Each is to take a marked staff and lay it in the Tent of Meeting. A new proof is given as it is found that “the staff Aaron for the House of Levi had sprouted, and brought forth buds, and blossomed, and yielded almonds” (Ibid. 23).

Ultimately both the censors from the test ordained by Moses and the staff of Aaron shall serves as “tokens. While the staff shall be placed “before the Testimony” as it is; the censors will be transformed into a covering for the alter, to serve always as a “memorial.” The lesson for the people is that the national leaders have indeed been Godly ordained. However, It seems that Moses too is meant to learn from these signs. The lesson for Moses is that terror will only alienate those forced under one's power.

The lessons of leadership, and of the dangerous necessity that is power are the clear themes of Parshat Korah. Within this saga all involved become students as well as teachers, as experience forces them to learn and serve as examples. God's message is clear as the final account of the narrative deals with more laws to the priests and the tribe of Levi. They are told of the rewards that are earned with their service. But before this they are made aware of their great responsibility “You and your sons and your father's house with you, shall bear the iniquity of the sanctuary.” (Ibid. 18:1) This comes in response to the people's fear of the sanctuary. Yet truly it is power that is to be feared; even by those who wield it. To the tribe of Levi is expressed the ultimate understanding of ideal Biblical leadership. It requires altruism, sacrifice and servitude. It is the ideal of raising ones followers and not raising oneself through followers. It is the greatest of burdens and the greatest of privileges.