Midrash su Esodo 6:18

(Numb. 16:1:) “Now Korah betook himself.” This text is related (to Prov. 18:19), “A brother offended (rt.: psh') is more formidable than a fortified city; [such] contentions are like a castle bar.” The brother offended is Korah, in that he sided against Moses.¹Numb. R. 18:1, 14. So he rebelled and sank from whatever glory that he possessed. Now offended (rt: psh') can only imply rebellion, since it is stated (in II Kings 3:7), “The king of Moab has rebelled (psh') against me.” It also says (in II Kings 8:22), “then did Libnah rebel (rt.: psh').” (Prov. 18:19:) “[Such] contentions are like a castle bar.” [The earth raised its bars against him like a castle.] (Prov. 18:19:) “Like a castle bar.” [These words also refer to Korah,] who sided against Moses and against the Omnipresent.²See the commentary of Enoch Zundel on Tanh., Numb.5:1. This explanation is also given by Issachar Berman Ashkenazi in his commentary, Mattenot Kehunnah, on Numb. R. 18:1. (Numb. 16:1:) “[Now Korah …] took.”³In this and some of the following sections, the midrash is explaining the fact that the transitive verb, TOOK, has no object. Biblical translations offer solutions such as translating the verb intransitively, e.g., BETOOK HIMSELF, or by supplying an object, e.g., TOOK MEN. “Took” can only be a word for "attracting with persuasive words," in that he attracted all the leaders of Israel and the sanhedraot [to follow] after him.⁴Numb. R. 18:2. Concerning Moses it is written (in Numb. 1:17), “So Moses and Aaron took these men.” And similarly it is written (in Numb. 8:2), “Take Aaron and his sons with him.” And so does it say (in Hos. 14:3), “Take words with you and repent….” And so does it [also] say (in Genesis 12:15), “and the woman was taken to the house of Pharaoh.” Ergo (in Numb. 16:1) “Now Korah […] took,” in that he drew (i.e., took) their hearts with persuasive words. (Numb. 16:1:) “Now Korah […] betook himself.” Because of what did he dissent? Because of Elizaphan, the son of his father's brother, who had been appointed prince (nasi) over his clan. So it says (in Numb. 3:30), “And the prince of the ancestral house for the Kohathite clan was Elizaphan ben Uzziel.” Korah said, “Father had four brothers.” It is so stated (according to Exod. 6:18), “And the sons of Kohath were Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel.” “As for Amram, the first-born; his son Aaron and his sons attained the high priesthood, and his brother Moses [attained] the kingship. So who deserves to get second [place]? Should it not be the second [son]? Now I am Izhar's son. I deserved to be prince of my clan, but he has appointed the son of Uzziel. Should the youngest of father's brothers become superior to me? See, I am dissenting and declaring everything invalid, whatever he had done.” Therefore, there was dissent.

(Numb. 16:1:) NOW KORAH < … > BETOOK HIMSELF <….> {Over} [Because of] what did he dissent? {Over} [Because of] Elizaphan, the son of his father's brother, who had been appointed prince (nasi) over his clan. So it says (in Numb. 3:30): AND THE PRINCE OF THE ANCESTRAL HOUSE FOR THE KOHATHITE CLAN WAS ELIZAPHAN BEN UZZIEL. Korah said: [Daddy was <one of>] four brothers. (According to Exod. 6:18:) AND THE SONS OF KOHATH: AMRAM, IZHAR, HEBRON, AND UZZIEL. As for Amram, the first-born, his son, Aaron attained the high priesthood; and his brother, Moses, <attained> the kingship. So who deserves to get second <place>? Should it not be the second <son>. (Exod. 6:18:) AND THE SONS OF KOHATH: AMRAM, IZHAR, <HEBRON, AND UZZIEL>. Now I am Izhar's son. I deserved to be prince of my clan, but he has appointed the son of Uzziel. Should the youngest of father's brothers become superior to me? See, I am dissenting and declaring everything invalid, whatever he had done. Therefore, there was dissent.

(Exod. 23:20:) BEHOLD, I AM SENDING AN ANGEL <BEFORE YOU TO GUARD YOU ON THE WAY>…. This text is related (to Jer. 3:19): THEN I SAID: HOW WOULD I⁴¹This translation fits the context of the midrash. PUT (rt.: ShYT) YOU AMONG THE CHILDREN,… !⁴²Tanh., Exod. 6:17; see below, Tanh. (Buber), Numb. 4a:15. R. Eleazar ben Pedat says: What is this <expression>: WOULD I PUT (rt.: ShYT) YOU? It had occurred to me that we, I and you, would be < alone > in the world.⁴³Tanh., Exod. 6:17, adds, “I as father and you as children.” How did you manage for me to bring the peoples of the world in among you?⁴⁴Cf. Tanh., Exod. 6:17: “How did you manage to bring the peoples of the world in between me and you?” This expression is nothing but an expression of setting apart (as in Gen. 30:40): AND HE PUT (rt.: ShYT) HIS OWN FLOCKS <APART>…. R. Hama bar Hanina said: What is the meaning of WOULD I PUT (rt.: ShYT) YOU?⁴⁵Cf. Exod. R. 32:2. There was a great love between me and you.⁴⁶Below, Tanh. (Buber), Lev. 7:12; Numb. 4a: 15; Exod. R. 32:2. How did you manage that I should hate you? (Jer. 3:19:) HOW WOULD I PUT (rt.: ShYT) YOU AMONG THE CHILDREN! This expression is nothing but an expression of hatred, as used (in Gen. 3:15): I WILL PUT (rt.: ShYT) ENMITY <BETWEEN YOU AND THE WOMAN>. Another interpretation (of Jer. 3:19:) HOW WOULD I PUT (ShYT) YOU AMONG THE CHILDREN ! R. Joshua ben Levi said: I spoke in <your> defense.⁴⁷Gk.: synegoria. You behaved toward me so that I denounced you and pronounced you guilty (rt.: HYB). The expression (rt.: ShYT) is nothing but an expression of guilt (rt.: HYB), as used (concerning one guilty of negligence in Exod. 21:30): IF A RANSOM IS PUT (rt.: ShYT) UPON HIM, <HE SHALL GIVE WHATEVER IS PUT (rt.: ShYT) UPON HIM TO REDEEM HIS LIFE>. Another interpretation (of Jer. 3:19:) HOW WOULD I PUT (ashit; rt.: ShYT) YOU AMONG THE CHILDREN! R. Berekhyah the Priest said: You were as dear to me as someone who has a single field, which he fertilizes, cultivates, and weeds. So dear were you to me. Your behavior toward me was for you to commit lawlessness. Now this word (ashit) is nothing but an expression for lawlessness, as used (in Is. 5:6): AND I WILL MAKE (ashit) IT (i.e., the Holy One's vineyard) A DESOLATION. (Jer. 3:19, cont.:) AND GIVE YOU A DESIRABLE LAND, a land that the great ones of the world (i.e., the patriarchs) desired.⁴⁸Below, Tanh. (Buber), Numb. 4a: 16. Abraham said to the Hittites (in Gen. 23:4): GIVE ME A BURIAL SITE. The Holy One also endeared it to {the children of} Isaac, as stated (in Gen. 26:3): RESIDE IN THIS LAND, <AND I WILL BE WITH YOU AND BLESS YOU>…. Jacob said (according to Gen. 50:5): IN MY GRAVE WHICH I DUG FOR MYSELF <IN THE LAND OF CANAAN, THERE YOU SHALL BURY ME>. Ergo (in Jer. 3:19): A DESIRABLE LAND. (Ibid., cont.:) <THE MOST> [BEAUTIFUL HERITAGE] <OF ALL THE NATIONS>. What is the meaning of <THE MOST> BEAUTIFUL (tsevi) HERITAGE? Just as in the case of a deer (tsevi), when one slaughters it, strips off its hide, and tries to return the flesh into the hide, it does not contain it, so the land of Israel does not contain its produce. What is written (in Is. 30:24)? AS FOR THE OXEN AND ASSES THAT WORK THE GROUND, THEY SHALL EAT FERMENTED FODDER, WHICH HAS BEEN WINNOWED WITH SHOVEL AND PITCH FORK. First they winnow with the SHOVEL and after that with the PITCH FORK. Why? Because there was more grain than straw. Even so there was produce in <further> winnowing the straw. Where is it shown? Where it is stated (ibid.): FERMENTED MASH, WHICH HAS BEEN WINNOWED WITH SHOVEL AND PITCH FORK. Mashes are from produce. Ergo (in Jer. 3:19): [A DESIRABLE LAND,] <THE MOST> BEAUTIFUL (tsevi) HERITAGE (understood in the sense of THE MOST DEERLIKE HERITAGE), a land which does not contain its produce, a land which was so good that all the kings of the world desired it. It is written (in Josh. 12:9): THE KING OF JERICHO, ONE; THE KING {FOR AI} [OF AI WHICH IS BESIDE BETHEL], ONE. Now there are only three miles⁴⁹Lat.: mille. between Jericho and Ai; yet it says: THE KING OF JERICHO. It is simply that whoever has a possession outside of the land without having a possession in the land of Israel was not called a king.⁵⁰Sifre, to Deut. 7:12 (37); Gen. R. 85:14. Why? Because they longed for the land of Israel. R. {Isaac} [Johanan] said: What is written (in Josh. 7:21): I SAW AMONG THE SPOILS A <FINE> SHINAR MANTLE, <i.e.> a Babylonian⁵¹Gk.: Babylonikon; Lat.: Babylonicum. robe of royal purple,⁵²Gk.: porphura; Lat.: purpura. which the king of Babylon wore to rule in Jericho. Ergo (in Jer. 3:19): THE MOST BEAUTIFUL HERITAGE OF THE NATIONS.⁵³According to this reasoning, the various kingships were so close to each other in Israel because every king needed a seat in Israel in order to be regarded as a king. (Ibid., cont.:) AND I SAID YOU SHALL CALL ME FATHER. Just as a father is obliged <to provide > for his daughter's enjoyments, so did I bring down rain for you. (Exod. 16:14:) WHEN THE LAYER OF DEW HAD GONE UP, <THERE ON THE FACE OF THE EARTH LAY SOMETHING FINE AND FLAKY>…. (Jer. 3:20:) SURELY AS A WOMAN BREAKS FAITH WITH HER LOVER <SO YOU HAVE BROKEN FAITH WITH ME, O HOUSE OF ISRAEL>. R. Judah bar Simon said: Oh that <you were> like an unfaithful wife. This <kind of> a woman, who has a lover, gives him food, drink, and love. When his power is diminished, she leaves him and goes away. SURELY AS A WOMAN BREAKS FAITH WITH HER LOVER. I have not done so to you. The manna came down for you, and the well rose up. I did not deprive you of anything when you were unfaithful with me. See, I gave you an angel who watched over you. (Exod. 23:20:) SEE, I AM SENDING YOU AN ANGEL <TO WATCH OVER YOU>. When you became worthy and received the Torah, I went before you in person. But now, when you have been found guilty, here I am <merely> (ibid.:) SENDING AN ANGEL BEFORE YOU. [Another interpretation:]⁵⁴Tanh., Exod. 6:18. The Holy One said to Moses: I am sending <an angel> before you but not before them. He said: If you send <him> out before me, I do not want <him>; but Joshua saw the angel and fell down before him. What did he say to him (in Josh. 5:13)? ARE YOU FOR US OR FOR OUR ADVERSARIES? When he said to him: ARE YOU FOR US? he began to cry in great anguish.⁵⁵Literally: “From under the nails of his feet.” (Ibid., vs. 14:) Then he said: NO, BUT [I] AM THE CAPTAIN OF THE LORD'S HOST. NOW I HAVE COME.⁵⁶Gen. R. 97:3 (traditional text only). Here are two times that I have come to give Israel an inheritance. I am the one who came in the days of your master, Moses; but he rejected me. (Ibid., cont.:) NOW I HAVE COME. THEN JOSHUA FELL ON HIS FACE. He saw him and fell on his face, but when Moses saw <him>, he rejected him. The Holy One said (in Exod. 23:20): SEE, I AM SENDING AN ANGEL BEFORE YOU, to you and to whomever observes the Torah [as you <do>. Resh Laqish said: It is written (in Ps. 91:4): HE WILL COVER YOU WITH HIS PINIONS AND YOU WILL FIND REFUGE UNDER HIS WINGS, <i.e.> all who observe the Torah.] (Ibid., cont.:) HIS FIDELITY IS A SHIELD AND BUCKLER. Therefore (in Exod. 23:20): < I AM SENDING MY ANGEL BEFORE YOU > TO GUARD YOU ON THE WAY….

(Exod. 23:21, cont.:) FOR MY NAME IS WITH HIM. The name of the Holy One is associated with each and every angel.⁵⁸In other words the name of each angel contains the name of the Holy One, e.g., Michael, Rafael, and Gabriel, all of which contain the name, El. Moses said to him: I do not want an angel to go with us.⁵⁹Tanh., Exod. 6:18, reads more clearly: “I do not want an angel to go with us but you.” He said to him: If you <yourself > do not go with us, we are not moving from our place. The Holy One said to him: By your life, even though I will not send an angel before you, I will send the hornet before you, as stated (in Exod. 23:28): I WILL SEND THE HORNET < BEFORE YOU TO DRIVE OUT THE HEVITES, THE CANAANITES, AND THE HITTITES FROM BEFORE YOU>. How did the Amorites die? R. Levi said: He wedded two hornets to each and every one <of them>. Then when each and every hornet poured out its venom right into <an Amorite's> eyes, he died immediately. R. Hiyya bar Abba said: How did they die? A poison entered them, they {became saturated} [contracted diarrhea], and they died in the presence of Israel. R. Berekhyah said: The Holy One bound them before Israel. Then they came and killed them, as stated (in Deut. 3:3): SO THE LORD OUR GOD GAVE OG, KING OF BASHAN, INTO OUR HANDS…. <The Holy One acted> like someone who binds his child's enemy and sets him before his child. In case you say the Amorites were small, the Holy One exalts them (in Amos 2:9): [YET I DESTROYED THE AMORITES BEFORE THEM,] WHOSE STATURE WAS LIKE THE CEDARS IN HEIGHT. And what did I do to them? (Ibid., cont.:) I DESTROYED THEIR FRUIT ABOVE, i.e., their prince; AND THEIR ROOTS BELOW, i.e., the <rest of the> Amorites. The Holy One said: In this world I sent an angel before them, and he destroyed the peoples of the world; but in the world to come, I am sending you Elijah, may his memory be blessed. It is so stated (in Mal. 3:24 [4:5]): LO, I AM SENDING YOU THE PROPHET ELIJAH BEFORE THE COMING OF THE GREAT AND AWESOME DAY OF THE LORD.

2 (Numb. 16:1) “[Now Korah …] took”:²In this and some of the following sections, the midrash is explaining the fact that the transitive verb, TOOK, has no object. Biblical translations offer solutions such as translating the verb intransitively, e.g., BETOOK HIMSELF, or by supplying an object, e.g., TOOK MEN. “Took” can only be a word for "attracting with persuasive words," in that he attracted all the leaders of Israel and the sanhedraot [to follow] after him. Concerning Moses it is written (in Numb. 1:17), “So Moses and Aaron took these men.” And similarly it is written (in Numb. 8:2), “Take Aaron and his sons with him.” And so does it say (in Hos. 14:3), “Take words with you.” And so does it [also] say (in Genesis 12:15), “and the woman was taken to the house of Pharaoh.” Ergo (in Numb. 16:1) “Now Korah […] took,” in that he drew (i.e., took) their hearts with persuasive words. (Numb. 16:1) “Now Korah […] betook himself”: Because of what did he dissent? Because of Elizaphan, the son of his father's brother, who had been appointed prince (nasi) over his clan. So it says (in Numb. 3:30), “And the prince of the ancestral house for the Kohathite clan was Elizaphan ben Uzziel.” Korah said, “Father had four brothers.” It is so stated (according to Exod. 6:18), “And the sons of Kohath were Amram, Izhar, Hebron, and Uzziel.” “As for Amram, the first-born; his son Aaron attained greatness, and his brother Moses [attained] the kingship. So who deserves to get second [place]? Should it not be the second [son]? Now I am Izhar's son. I deserved to be prince of my clan, but he has appointed the son of Uzziel. Should the youngest of father's brothers become superior to me? See, I am dissenting and declaring everything invalid, whatever he had done.” Therefore, (in Numb. 16:1) “Now Korah […] took.”

37) (Vayikra 10:4): "And Moses called to Mishael and Eltzafan, the sons of Uziel, the uncle of Aaron": From (Shemoth 6:18) "And the sons of Kehoth: Amram and Yitzhar and Chevron and Uziel" do I not know that Uziel is the uncle of Aaron? Why, then, need it be stated? The deportment of Uziel is being likened to the deportment of Aaron. Just as Aaron was a pursuer of peace in Israel, so, Uziel. Where is it seen that Aaron was a pursuer of peace in Israel? It is written (Bamidbar 20:29): "And the entire congregation saw that Aaron had died, and the entire house of Israel mourned Aaron thirty days." And in respect to Moses it is written (Devarim 34:8): "And the children of Israel mourned Moses, etc." Why is it that the entire house of Israel mourned Aaron for thirty days and the house of Israel (but not the entire house of Israel) mourned Moses? For Aaron never told a man or a woman: You have offended; but Moses, because he reproved them, it is written of him "And the children of Israel, (but not all) mourned Moses." And thus does Scripture apply (the following verse) to Aaron in the tradition (Malachi 2:5): "My covenant was with him, the life and the peace" — he pursued peace in Israel; "and I gave him fear and he feared Me" — he took upon himself all the words of Torah in awe and trembling and trepidation; "and before My name he cowered": What is the intent of this? When Moses spilled the anointment oil on Aaron's head, he recoiled and fell backwards, saying: Woe unto me for defiling the anointment oil! (He feared that too much of it had been spilled and that he may have derived benefit from it), whereupon he was reassured by the Holy Spirit (Tehillim 133:1): "Behold, how good and how pleasant is the dwelling of brothers together, (Tehillim 133:2) as the precious oil upon the head, running down upon the beard, the beard of Aaron, running down over his garments, (Tehillim 133:3) as the dew of Chermon running down upon the hills of Zion" — Just as the dew is not defiled, the oil of anointment is not defiled.