The Historical Circumstances that Inspired the Korah Narrative

The story of Korah’s rebellion is composite, comprising at least two rebellions.

‏^{במדבר טז:א} וַיִּקַּח קֹרַח בֶּן יִצְהָר בֶּן קְהָת בֶּן לֵוִי וְדָתָן וַאֲבִירָם בְּנֵי אֱלִיאָב וְאוֹן בֶּן פֶּלֶת בְּנֵי רְאוּבֵן. ^טז:ב וַיָּקֻמוּ לִפְנֵי מֹשֶׁה וַאֲנָשִׁים מִבְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל חֲמִשִּׁים וּמָאתָיִם נְשִׂיאֵי עֵדָה קְרִאֵי מוֹעֵד אַנְשֵׁי שֵׁם.

^{Num 16:1} Now Korah, son of Izhar son of Kohath son of Levi, betook himself, along with Dathan and Abiram sons of Eliab, and On son of Peleth—descendants of Reuben—^16:2 to rise up against Moses, together with two hundred and fifty Israelites, chieftains of the community, chosen in the assembly, men of repute.^[1]

One story (typically assigned to the J document) describes the complaint of the Reubenites, Dathan and Abiram, against Moses’ leadership. The second (often identified as belonging to the Priestly author) involves the claim of Korah and other Levites against Aaron’s priesthood. The separation of these texts from one another allows us to appreciate the individual issues of each rebellion, and to identify the lessons from each.^[2]

We may also take a step beyond source criticism and try to understand each text on its own terms, in particular, what motivated each author, in his historical context, to write their particular story.

Dathan and Abiram: The Reubenites’ Loss of Leadership

The complaint of Dathan and Abiram, both identified as descendans of Reuben (v. 2) is directed at Moses:

‏^{במדבר טז:יב} וַיִּשְׁלַח מֹשֶׁה לִקְרֹא לְדָתָן וְלַאֲבִירָם בְּנֵי אֱלִיאָב וַיֹּאמְרוּ לֹא נַעֲלֶה. ^טז:יג הַמְעַט כִּי הֶעֱלִיתָנוּ מֵאֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבַשׁ לַהֲמִיתֵנוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר כִּי תִשְׂתָּרֵר עָלֵינוּ גַּם הִשְׂתָּרֵר.

^{Num 16:12} Moses sent for Dathan and Abiram, sons of Eliab; but they said, “We will not come! ^16:13 Is it not enough that you brought us from a land flowing with milk and honey to have us die in the wilderness, that you would also lord it over us?”

As already noted by ibn Ezra, their rebellion reflects the Reubenites’ desire to claim supreme power by dint of their birthright.^[3] The historical motivation for this story may be to explain the loss of power—and ultimate disappearance—of the tribe of Reuben among the Israelite tribes.^[4]

Thus, the text here is similar to, connected to, and serves the same function as the account of Reuben sleeping with his father’s concubine, Bilhah, in a clear attempt to usurp the father’s authority and power (Gen 35:22).^[5] This is echoed in Jacob’s “blessing” of his son (Gen 49:3–4), where Reuben is demoted for his actions,^[6] and in Chronicles’ genealogy of Reuben, which states explicitly: כִּי הוּא הַבְּכוֹר וּבְחַלְּלוֹ יְצוּעֵי אָבִיו נִתְּנָה בְּכֹרָתוֹ לִבְנֵי יוֹסֵף, “He was the first-born; but when he defiled his father’s bed, his birthright was given to the sons of Joseph” (1 Chr 5:1).^[7]

Traditional commentators would view such stories about ancestor figures that resemble later historical processes as the acts of the father being replayed through the acts of the children (מעשה אבות סימן לבנים), though I do not know of any commentators who make this observation about the Dathan and Abiram rebellion. Modern scholars see things the other way, however—that the stories of the descendants are retrojected back into the lives of their eponymous ancestors, i.e., that the stories are written to “prefigure” what would happen later.^[8]

Thus, we may understand these stories of Reuben and his descendants as typologies explaining how the tribe lost its power. The rebellion of Dathan and Abiram cements this loss and shows that it is justified and divinely authored. The gradual disappearance of the tribe of Reuben that we see through the Primary History (Genesis–2 Kings) is represented here as sudden and as the result of an illegitimate Reubenite power grab.^[9]

The Korah Rebellion: A Change in Status for Aaronide Priests

The rebellion of Korah, the Levite (v. 1), is different from that of Dathan and Abiram—it is an attack on the exclusive priesthood of Aaron and his sons. Korah’s opening salvo is the claim that all of Israel is holy:^[10]

^{במדבר טז:ג} וַיִּקָּהֲלוּ עַל מֹשֶׁה וְעַל אַהֲרֹן וַיֹּאמְרוּ אֲלֵהֶם רַב לָכֶם כִּי כָל הָעֵדָה כֻּלָּם קְדֹשִׁים וּבְתוֹכָם יְ־הוָה וּמַדּוּעַ תִּתְנַשְּׂאוּ עַל קְהַל יְ־הוָה.

^{Num 16:3} They combined against Moses and Aaron and said to them, “You have gone too far! For all the community are holy, all of them, and YHWH is in their midst. Why then do you raise yourselves above YHWH’s congregation?”

Moses’ response makes clear that Korah’s underlying assertion is that all Levites ought to have the status of priests:

‏^{במדבר טז:ט} הַמְעַט מִכֶּם כִּי הִבְדִּיל אֱלֹהֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶתְכֶם מֵעֲדַת יִשְׂרָאֵל לְהַקְרִיב אֶתְכֶם אֵלָיו לַעֲבֹד אֶת עֲבֹדַת מִשְׁכַּן יְ־הוָה וְלַעֲמֹד לִפְנֵי הָעֵדָה לְשָׁרְתָם. ^טז:י וַיַּקְרֵב אֹתְךָ וְאֶת כָּל אַחֶיךָ בְנֵי לֵוִי אִתָּךְ וּבִקַּשְׁתֶּם גַּם כְּהֻנָּה.

^{Num 16:9} Is it not enough for you that the God of Israel has set you apart from the community of Israel and given you access to Him, to perform the duties of the YHWH’s Tabernacle and to minister to the community and serve them? ^16:10 Now that He has advanced you and all your fellow Levites with you, do you seek the priesthood too?

The primary rebellion of Korah ends with fire consuming his band of 250 (Num 16:35; contrast the deaths of Dathan and Abiram by being swallowed by the earth in 16:31–34).

While we as readers know who Moses and Aaron are, and we know that the rebellion will fail, the story is told without that a priori certainty. For example, unlike in the Dathan and Abiram story (16:12–14), Korah engages with Moses, employing democratic-sounding logic (16:3, 6). Moses cannot call upon the public (as he does in 16:15 in response to Dathan and Abiram) to stop the rebellion, but needs divine intervention (vv. 16–21).

Would the average Israelite standing there in the story have known that Korah was the bad guy? It takes the events of chapters 17 and ultimately 18 to firmly establish Aaron at the top of the hierarchy, demonstrating retroactively that Korah was wrong.

Korah vs. the Aaronide Priesthood: An Argument that was yet to be Determined

My understanding of the historical context behind the Korah narrative is underscored with a single word: עוֹד (ʿod), “henceforth”:

^{במדבר יח:כב} וְלֹא יִקְרְבוּ עוֹד בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶל אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לָשֵׂאת חֵטְא לָמוּת.

^{Num 18:22} Henceforth, Israelites shall not trespass on the Tent of Meeting, and thus incur guilt and die.

As ibn Ezra notes, the placement of this chapter and the implication of this verse is that this law is being enacted as a consequence of Korah’s rebellion.^[11] This is problematic, since the holy places had already been declared off limits to rank-and-file Israelites before the Korah rebellion. For example, YHWH has already declared that the stranger, namely the person not connected to the tribe of Levi, who approaches the Tabernacle will be put to death (Num 3:10).^[12]

And yet, the adverb עוֹד implies the existence of an alternative timeline. Whereas ibn Ezra makes use of the Korah story as the background for this strange verse, I believe that the there is a larger historical process that undergirds it, something more than just the actions of Korah.

Aaron’s Dominant Role in the Korah Story and its Aftermath

In my view, the story so well known by the name of Korah is not really about Korah but about Aaron. Several aftershocks in the chapter following the rebellion story assert Aaron’s predominance:

• The incense pans that symbolize the profanity of Korah’s rebellion are appropriated for a holy cover for the altar by Aaron’s son Elazar (Num 17:1–5).
• A panic resulting from the mass death of Korah’s band leads to a plague, which is stopped by Aaron, who stands between the living and the dead (vv. 6–15).
• In a test to see whose staff would sprout, Aaron’s not only sprouts, but flowers, and bears fruit (vv. 16–26).
• As the panic continues over the danger of approaching the Tabernacle (vv. 27–28), YHWH speaks directly to Aaron (18:1, 8, 20), laying out laws designed to protect the sanctity of the Tabernacle.^[13]

The Relationship between Aaronides and the Levite Brothers in Chapter 18

The laws that YHWH speaks to Aaron include an enumeration of ways that the Priests’ role in the cult is exclusive, especially in comparison to the roles of Levites. YHWH begins by granting to the priests of Aaron’s line primary responsibility for the sanctuary and assigning the Levites to serve the priests:

‏^{במדבר יח:א} וַיֹּאמֶר יְ־הוָה אֶל אַהֲרֹן אַתָּה וּבָנֶיךָ וּבֵית אָבִיךָ אִתָּךְ תִּשְׂאוּ אֶת עֲוֹן הַמִּקְדָּשׁ וְאַתָּה וּבָנֶיךָ אִתָּךְ תִּשְׂאוּ אֶת עֲוֹן כְּהֻנַּתְכֶם. ^יח:ב וְגַם אֶת אַחֶיךָ מַטֵּה לֵוִי שֵׁבֶט אָבִיךָ הַקְרֵב אִתָּךְ וְיִלָּווּ עָלֶיךָ וִישָׁרְתוּךָ וְאַתָּה וּבָנֶיךָ אִתָּךְ לִפְנֵי אֹהֶל הָעֵדֻת.

^{Num 18:1} YHWH said to Aaron: You and your sons and the ancestral house under your charge shall bear any guilt connected with the sanctuary; you and your sons alone shall bear any guilt connected with your priesthood. ^18:2 You shall also associate with yourself your kinsmen the tribe of Levi, your ancestral tribe, to be attached to you and to minister to you, while you and your sons under your charge are before the Tent of the Pact.

The hierarchy here is not new; it also appears in Numbers 3 and 8. In the verses here, however, it is difficult to miss the tension concerning the relationship between Aaron’s priestly family and Levites more generally. On one hand, Aaron—along with his brother Moses—is a Levite genealogically. Both by his relationship to Moses in particular and by being a Levite, Aaron exceeds non-Levite Israelites in status. On the other hand, the Aaronide priesthood outranks, or is in charge of the Levites, who are “attached” (root: ל.ו.י) to the priesthood as assistants.

While the general outline of this “attachment” is described in Numbers 3 and 8 and repeated here,^[14] this chapter provides a more detailed comparison of the tasks of each group, such that the limitations of the Levites are made clear.^[15]

^{במדבר יח:ג} וְשָׁמְרוּ מִשְׁמַרְתְּךָ וּמִשְׁמֶרֶת כָּל הָאֹהֶל אַךְ אֶל כְּלֵי הַקֹּדֶשׁ וְאֶל הַמִּזְבֵּחַ לֹא יִקְרָבוּ וְלֹא יָמֻתוּ גַם הֵם גַּם אַתֶּם. ^יח:ד וְנִלְווּ עָלֶיךָ וְשָׁמְרוּ אֶת מִשְׁמֶרֶת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד לְכֹל עֲבֹדַת הָאֹהֶל וְזָר לֹא יִקְרַב אֲלֵיכֶם. ^יח:ה וּשְׁמַרְתֶּם אֵת מִשְׁמֶרֶת הַקֹּדֶשׁ וְאֵת מִשְׁמֶרֶת הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וְלֹא יִהְיֶה עוֹד קֶצֶף עַל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל.

^{Num 18:3} They shall discharge their duties to you and to the Tent as a whole, but they must not have any contact with the furnishings of the Shrine or with the altar, lest both they and you die. ^18:4 They shall be attached to you and discharge the duties of the Tent of Meeting, all the service of the Tent; but no outsider shall intrude upon you ^18:5 as you discharge the duties connected with the Shrine and the altar, that wrath may not again strike the Israelites.

^{במדבר יח:ו} וַאֲנִי הִנֵּה לָקַחְתִּי אֶת אֲחֵיכֶם הַלְוִיִּם מִתּוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל לָכֶם מַתָּנָה נְתֻנִים לַי־הוָה לַעֲבֹד אֶת עֲבֹדַת אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד. ^יח:ז וְאַתָּה וּבָנֶיךָ אִתְּךָ תִּשְׁמְרוּ אֶת כְּהֻנַּתְכֶם לְכָל דְּבַר הַמִּזְבֵּחַ וּלְמִבֵּית לַפָּרֹכֶת וַעֲבַדְתֶּם עֲבֹדַת מַתָּנָה אֶתֵּן אֶת כְּהֻנַּתְכֶם וְהַזָּר הַקָּרֵב יוּמָת.

^{Num 18:6} I hereby take your brothers the Levites from among the Israelites; they are assigned to you in dedication to YHWH, to do the work of the Tent of Meeting; ^18:7 while you and your sons shall be careful to perform your priestly duties in everything pertaining to the altar and to what is behind the curtain. I make your priesthood a service of dedication; any outsider who encroaches shall be put to death.

These laws may sound like a reminder of everyone’s place in response to Korah and the aftermath, but the use of “henceforth” (v. 22) suggests that this is a momentous change in policy regarding the status of Aaronide priests.

Searching for the Historical Circumstances Behind the Narrative

The description of the change in policy as a reaction to Korah is, as discussed above, an attempt to describe historical processes in the framework of a narrative about Israel’s distant past. To identify the historical process by which the Aaronides became a separate class among the Levites and superior to them, we must step outside of Numbers and P more generally.

Arguing with certainty about the dates of particular texts is fraught, but we may derive clues about what ideas were circulating in ancient Israel. Deuteronomy, for example, does not seem to differentiate priests from Levites. Deuteronomy’s references to Levites fall into two categories: Levitical priests (כֹּהֲנִים לְוִיִּם or כֹּהֲנִים בְּנֵי לֵוִי),^[16] and, along with the stranger, orphan, and widow, a disenfranchised group. (This second category does not seem to exclude priests; however, it is not concerned with the priestly role.) Levite refers to a landless group within Israel, who may serve the function of priest. No separate group of כֹּהֲנִים (kohanim; sg. kohen) seems to exist, nor is the priesthood associated with Aaron or his descendants in the Deuteronomic corpus.^[17] Deuteronomy, therefore, seems to represent an earlier phase in the development of the priesthood.^[18]

The Differentiation between Zadokites and Levites: Ezekiel 44

Ezekiel 44 helps us to put the issue of the differentiation between Priests and Levites into historical perspective. The prophet, writing during the exile, envisions the restoration of Israel to its land, which comes with a restored Temple and a restored priesthood, but his view of Levites is quite negative.

Ezekiel is concerned with regulating who may enter the Temple:

^{יחזקאל מד:ה} וַיֹּאמֶר אֵלַי יְ־הוָֹה בֶּן אָדָם שִׂים לִבְּךָ וּרְאֵה בְעֵינֶיךָ וּבְאָזְנֶיךָ שְּׁמָע אֵת כָּל אֲשֶׁר אֲנִי מְדַבֵּר אֹתָךְ לְכָל חֻקּוֹת בֵּית יְ־הוָה וּלְכָל תורתו [תּוֹרֹתָיו] וְשַׂמְתָּ לִבְּךָ לִמְבוֹא הַבַּיִת בְּכֹל מוֹצָאֵי הַמִּקְדָּשׁ.

^{Ezek 44:5} Then YHWH said to me: O mortal, mark well, look closely and listen carefully to everything that I tell you regarding all the laws of the Temple of YHWH and all the instructions regarding it. Note well who may enter the Temple and all who must be excluded from the Sanctuary.

He is motivated by some rebellious act that took place in the past involving a violation of the Temple’s sanctity:^[19]

‏^{יחזקאל מד:ו} וְאָמַרְתָּ אֶל מֶרִי אֶל בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל כֹּה אָמַר אֲדֹנָי יְ־הוִה רַב לָכֶם מִכָּל תּוֹעֲבוֹתֵיכֶם בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל. ^מד:ז בַּהֲבִיאֲכֶם בְּנֵי נֵכָר עַרְלֵי לֵב וְעַרְלֵי בָשָׂר לִהְיוֹת בְּמִקְדָּשִׁי לְחַלְּלוֹ אֶת בֵּיתִי בְּהַקְרִיבְכֶם אֶת לַחְמִי חֵלֶב וָדָם וַיָּפֵרוּ אֶת בְּרִיתִי אֶל כָּל תּוֹעֲבוֹתֵיכֶם. ^מד:ח וְלֹא שְׁמַרְתֶּם מִשְׁמֶרֶת קָדָשָׁי וַתְּשִׂימוּן לְשֹׁמְרֵי מִשְׁמַרְתִּי בְּמִקְדָּשִׁי לָכֶם.

^{Ezek 44:6} And say to the rebellious House of Israel: Thus said the Lord YHWH: Too long, O House of Israel, have you committed all your abominations, ^44:7 admitting aliens, uncircumcised of spirit and uncircumcised of flesh, to be in My Sanctuary and profane My very Temple, when you offer up My food—the fat and the blood. You have broken My covenant with all your abominations. ^44:8 You have not discharged the duties concerning My sacred offerings, but have appointed them to discharge the duties of My Sanctuary for you.

Consequently, aliens (בני נכר)—which refers not to foreigners, but to average Israelites—are prohibited from entering the Temple:

^{יחזקאל מד:ט} כֹּה אָמַר אֲדֹנָי יְ־הוִה כָּל בֶּן נֵכָר עֶרֶל לֵב וְעֶרֶל בָּשָׂר לֹא יָבוֹא אֶל מִקְדָּשִׁי לְכָל בֶּן נֵכָר אֲשֶׁר בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל.

^{Ezek 44:9} Thus said the Lord YHWH: Let no alien, uncircumcised in spirit and flesh, enter My Sanctuary—no alien whatsoever among the people of Israel.

In Ezekiel’s next words, we learn that the Levites are held responsible for this violation and are punished—presumably, because they had been in charge of the sanctuary when this violation had occurred:

‏^{יחזקאל מד:י} כִּי אִם הַלְוִיִּם אֲשֶׁר רָחֲקוּ מֵעָלַי בִּתְעוֹת יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר תָּעוּ מֵעָלַי אַחֲרֵי גִּלּוּלֵיהֶם וְנָשְׂאוּ עֲוֹנָם.

^{Ezek 44:10} But the Levites who forsook Me when Israel went astray—straying from Me to follow their fetishes—shall suffer their punishment.

The Levites will henceforth be “servitors” in the Temple, responsible for all sorts of duties, including minding the gates, and performing other chores. They are explicitly prohibited from serving as priests.^[20]

^{יחזקאל מד:יא} וְהָיוּ בְמִקְדָּשִׁי מְשָׁרְתִים פְּקֻדּוֹת אֶל שַׁעֲרֵי הַבַּיִת וּמְשָׁרְתִים אֶת הַבָּיִת הֵמָּה יִשְׁחֲטוּ אֶת הָעֹלָה וְאֶת הַזֶּבַח לָעָם וְהֵמָּה יַעַמְדוּ לִפְנֵיהֶם לְשָׁרְתָם. ^מד:יב יַעַן אֲשֶׁר יְשָׁרְתוּ אוֹתָם לִפְנֵי גִלּוּלֵיהֶם וְהָיוּ לְבֵית יִשְׂרָאֵל לְמִכְשׁוֹל עָוֹן עַל כֵּן נָשָׂאתִי יָדִי עֲלֵיהֶם נְאֻם אֲדֹנָי יְ־הוִה וְנָשְׂאוּ עֲוֹנָם. ^מד:יג וְלֹא יִגְּשׁוּ אֵלַי לְכַהֵן לִי וְלָגֶשֶׁת עַל כָּל קָדָשַׁי אֶל קָדְשֵׁי הַקְּדָשִׁים וְנָשְׂאוּ כְּלִמָּתָם וְתוֹעֲבוֹתָם אֲשֶׁר עָשׂוּ. ^מד:יד וְנָתַתִּי אוֹתָם שֹׁמְרֵי מִשְׁמֶרֶת הַבָּיִת לְכֹל עֲבֹדָתוֹ וּלְכֹל אֲשֶׁר יֵעָשֶׂה בּוֹ.

^{Ezek 44:11} They shall be servitors in My Sanctuary, appointed over the Temple gates, and performing the chores of My Temple; they shall slaughter the burnt offerings and the sacrifices for the people. They shall attend on them and serve them. ^44:12 Because they served the House of Israel in the presence of their fetishes and made them stumble into guilt, therefore—declares the Lord YHWH—I have sworn concerning them that they shall suffer their punishment: ^44:13 They shall not approach Me to serve Me as priests, to come near any of My sacred offerings, the most holy things. They shall bear their shame for the abominations that they committed. ^44:14 I will make them watchmen of the Temple, to perform all its chores, everything that needs to be done in it.

Among the Levites, however, the Zadokites are given exemption from this punishment and special priority of entering the sanctuary and making sacrifices to YHWH:

‏^{יחזקאל מד:טו} וְהַכֹּהֲנִים הַלְוִיִּם בְּנֵי צָדוֹק אֲשֶׁר שָׁמְרוּ אֶת מִשְׁמֶרֶת מִקְדָּשִׁי בִּתְעוֹת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל מֵעָלַי הֵמָּה יִקְרְבוּ אֵלַי לְשָׁרְתֵנִי וְעָמְדוּ לְפָנַי לְהַקְרִיב לִי חֵלֶב וָדָם נְאֻם אֲדֹנָי יְ־הוִה. ^מד:טז הֵמָּה יָבֹאוּ אֶל מִקְדָּשִׁי וְהֵמָּה יִקְרְבוּ אֶל שֻׁלְחָנִי לְשָׁרְתֵנִי וְשָׁמְרוּ אֶת מִשְׁמַרְתִּי.

^{Ezek 44:15} But the levitical priests descended from Zadok, who maintained the service of My Sanctuary when the people of Israel went astray from Me—they shall approach Me to minister to Me; they shall stand before Me to offer Me fat and blood—declares the Lord YHWH. ^44:16 They alone may enter My Sanctuary and they alone shall approach My table to minister to Me; and they shall keep My charge.

The change in status among the Levites—who are demoted, and the Zadokites^[21]—who are elevated, is connected to an episode of encroachment into the Temple that constituted a violation of the Levites’ duties or “charge” (מִשְׁמֶרֶת). Indeed, this accusation is leveled at both the Levites (v. 14) and the Israelites more generally (v. 8), who are accused of delegating the charge to others.^[22]

The Parallel between Ezekiel and Numbers

The particular duties assigned here to the Levites are the same as those assigned to them in Numbers 18. For example, in both passages,

• The Levites are instructed to serve (לשרת) in the cult (Ezek 44:11–2; Num 18:2).
• The Levites must discharge the duty of the Temple (Ezek 44:14) and of the Tent of Meeting (Num 18:3–4), corresponding entities in the respective settings.
• The priests are specifically assigned to serve YHWH in both texts (Ezek 44:15–16; Numbers 18:8).^[23]

In addition, even the apostasy is discussed with similar language. Ezekiel accuses the Israelites in the same language with which Korah accuses Moses and Aaron, and with which Moses responds:

Ezekiel 44:6

רַב לָכֶם מִכָּל תּוֹעֲבוֹתֵיכֶם בֵּית יִשְׂרָאֵל

You have gone too far with all your abominations, O House of Israel!

Numbers 16:3 (Korah)

רַב לָכֶם

You have gone too far!

Numbers 16:7 (Moses)

רַב לָכֶם בְּנֵי לֵוִי

You have gone too far, O sons of Levi!^[24]

The Contribution of Historical Criticism to Understanding the Torah’s Narratives

It seems probable that these two texts, Numbers 16–18 and Ezekiel 44, both reflect the same encroachment episode. Their use of the same language both in describing the episode and in the realignment of responsibilities in its aftermath is too compelling to ignore. Whatever the actual encroachment was, P couches it allegorically in the period of the Wandering. Ezekiel uses it as motivation for his ideal Restoration.^[25] We cannot be sure which came first: Do we have these laws because of the offense—as Ezekiel and the Korah narrative suggest, or are the stories, like just-so stories, written to justify an existing practice?^[26]

Regardless, putting these two texts into conversation with one another is illuminating for several reasons. First, it allows us to understand both Ezekiel and the Priestly text (the same is true of other parts of the Pentateuch as well) as participating in a dynamic historical process rather than simply describing a static society. Life in ancient Israel, like any other culture, changed over time, and in some cases, the Bible preserves the impetus for such changes. Had this idea of a restricted priesthood been widely accepted in ancient Israel, our texts, which justify this development, would not have been written.

Second, different authors respond to the same situation in different ways.^[27] The similarity of Ezekiel 44 and Numbers 18 should not be confused with total identity. Certain differences, such as Ezekiel’s use of בְּנֵי נֵכָר, and perhaps the focus on Zadok, instead of Numbers’ focus on Levites and Aaron, indicate disagreement among these texts.^[28]

Third, the comparison of these two texts demonstrates the existence of a type of exegesis that integrates narrative and law. In the case of the Priestly text, the author felt a need to explicate the situation by retrojecting a relatively recent incident of encroachment into the distant past, making it a foundational part of Israelite religious practice. The urge to authenticate practice–in this case, limiting access to the Temple to priests–by connecting it with ancestors is strong and understandable and widely attested in many cultures. It is a direct consequence of looking to the ancestors as exemplars.

To illustrate this with an example, the rabbis’ identifying the three Patriarchs as the originators of the three daily prayer services (b. Berachot 26b; Genesis Rabbah 68) is a fundamentally similar process. To do this, the rabbis interpret certain actions of the individual characters, which originally had nothing to do with prayer, as describing prayer.^[29]

Historical Criticism

Each of our primary texts seeks to contextualize this limitation of the priesthood in its own way. What Ezekiel describes as inappropriate access to and inappropriate activity in the Temple, P describes as a grass-roots movement seeking to participate in the cult (Num 16) and a larger-scale attempt to access the Tabernacle (Num 17:27–28).

Historical Criticism seeks to situate biblical texts in the historical processes that inspired them. The Dathan and Abiram narrative can be read alongside J texts from Genesis to recognize the decline of Reuben as an important theme in the Torah. Similarly, the Korah narrative and its associated legislation (Num 16–18) and Ezekiel 44 refer to some event of import. Both of these texts are concerned that access to the sanctuary be limited because in the past it was not, and illustrate the consequences of this breach.