Commentaire sur Les Nombres 27:3

והוא לא היה וגו׳ AND HE WAS NOT [… IN THE CONGREGATION OF KORAH] — Because they intended to state בחטתו מת, that HE DIED IN HIS OWN SIN they felt compelled to say he had taken no part in the sin of those who murmured, nor had he been in the congregation of Korah who incited the people against the Holy One, blessed be He (cf. Sifrei Bamidbar 133:3, Bava Batra 118b), but he had died through his own sin only, and had not made others to sin with him (Sifrei Bamidbar 133:3). — As regards what this sin was, R. Akiba said that he was the man who gathered sticks on the Sabbath day (Numbers 15:32); R. Simeon said that he was one of those who presumed to disobey God’s command (Numbers 14:44) (Shabbat 96b).

[OUR FATHER DIED IN THE WILDERNESS], AND HE [Zelophehad] WAS NOT [AMONG THE COMPANY OF THEM THAT GATHERED THEMSELVES TOGETHER AGAINST THE ETERNAL IN THE COMPANY OF KORACH]. “Since they came to say, but he died in his own sin, they had to say [that he did] not [die because of participating] in the sin of those who murmured,¹⁵⁸Ibid., 11:1. nor [because he was] amongst the company of Korach who incited [the people] against the Holy One, blessed be He; but [he died] in his own sin, and did not cause others to sin with him.” This is Rashi’s language. But he did not explain why they [the daughters of Zelophehad] came to say that he died in his own sin, when they should [only] have said: ‘Our father died in the wilderness, and he had no sons!’ For that was the fitting thing to say [since the cause of his death was not relevant, and it is not right for children to stress their father’s sin]! But in the opinion of our Rabbis¹⁵⁹Baba Bathra 118b. they had to say that he was not among the company of Korach, because the company of Korach did not receive a portion in the Land, and likewise the murmurers in the company of Korach, [and the daughters of Zelophehad knew this] because it had become known amongst the people from the court of Moses. And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra explained it in a similar manner, saying that the daughters thought that those who had gathered together against the Eternal¹⁶⁰Above, 16:11. would not inherit in the Land.
In my opinion, according to the simple meaning of Scripture, they spoke in this way because they thought that Moses our teacher hated the company of Korach more than all other sinners who died in the desert, because they had rebelled against him and had denied [the Divine approval of] all his deeds; therefore they thought that perhaps because he hated them¹⁶¹See Deuteronomy 9:28. [the company of Korach] he would say: Let there be none to extend kindness unto him; neither let there be any to be gracious unto his fatherless children.¹⁶²Psalms 109:12. Therefore they informed him that he [their father] was not one of them, and they furthermore hinted that he was not amongst those who died in one of the plagues [which came as a punishment for the sin of the people], but that he died [a natural death] in the wilderness in his bed. And the meaning of [the expression] but he died in his own sin is that they said that he had died in the wilderness in his sin, because he was not worthy to enter the Land [and this in itself is considered the punishment for a sin]. Or it may be as the poet Rabbi Yehudah Halevi, of blessed memory,¹⁶³This is the great Hebrew poet and philosopher of the Spanish Golden Era (1085-1142 Common Era). According to his interpretation, the daughters of Zelophehad were saying that “because of his sins, he died without any sons” and hence the problem arose what to do with his inheritance. This therefore answers Ramban’s question above, “why the daughters of Zelophehad found it necessary to mention their father’s death because of his sin.” This explanation is mentioned by Ibn Ezra, who remarks: “It is not remote, [it is indeed probable].” explained, that it is connected [in meaning] with [the phrase following it]: and he had no sons, as people say nowadays: “Such-and-such an event happened because of [certain] sins.”

והוא לא היה, he was not a member of the rebellious people who had made common cause with Korach. Those people had been banished by Moses, i.e. disinherited by him, deprived not only of potential property but even of all their actual belongings, as we have been told in Numbers 16,26. The words כל הרכוש in verse 32 of that chapter make clear that they had forfeited all claims to anything.