CHAPTER XIV
MORE TRIALS OF MOSES
Numbers 16.1 to 17.26, also 20.1 to 13 and 21.5 to 9
Interpretation. The central idea that runs through all the important episodes of these chapters is the immensity of the problem of leadership that confronted Moses, and the contrast between the selfish and fickle passions of the people, passions that were constantly menacing the very existence of Israel, and the sublime patience and constancy of Moses, although on one occasion his sorely tried patience can stand the strain no longer and he commits the sin by which he forfeits his right to enter the Promised Land.
The difficulties against which Moses had to contend before the event narrated in the preceding lesson, were multiplied after that event. If the people before that time had been restive and discontented whenever confronted with a difficulty, though they could always console themselves by looking forward to their journey's end in the Land of Promise, it was but natural that thereafter their dissatisfaction would be greatly intensified. They had threatened to appoint another head to lead them back to Egypt, and though at the time this may have been nothing but an idle threat, the opposition to Moses soon found a leader in the person of Korah, the son of Izhar. Though he was himself a Levite, he coveted the higher office of the priesthood to which Aaron and his family had been appointed, but, with the instinct of the true demagogue, posed as the champion of the people against the arbitrary authority of the Levitical priesthood, and of Moses in appointing Aaron and his sons as priests. He said to Moses and Aaron, "Ye take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them and the Lord is among them; wherefore then do ye lift up yourselves above the assembly of the Lord "? (Numbers 16. 3.) Moses' reply to Korah shows that he saw through this pretentious championship of the people to the envy and ambition of Korah, which were his real motives. "Hear now, ye sons of Levi; is it but a small thing unto you that the God of Israel hath separated you from the congregation of Israel, to bring you near to Himself, to do the service of the tabernacle of the Lord, and to stand before the congregation to minister unto them; and that He hath brought thee near, and all thy brethren the sons of Levi with thee? and will ye seek the priesthood also? Therefore thou and all thy company that are gathered together against the Lord—and as to Aaron, what is he that ye murmur against him?" (Numbers 16. 8 to 11.) But Korah's championship of the claims of all Israel to the priesthood won him a large following among the other tribes, particularly among their ambitious leaders. Dathan and Abiram, sons of Eliab, and On, the son of Peleth, all of the tribe of Reuben, are his particular henchmen, and he had also succeeded in winning over to his cause two hundred and fifty of "the princes of the congregation, the elect men of the assembly, men of renown." The sedition had spread so far that nothing could have prevented the reversion to a complete state of anarchy, save the destruction of all those that took part, in a way so striking that it would reveal clearly the divine purpose. This was provided for by the ordeal that is narrated in the text. But the disaffection had spread so far that many of the people resented the death of Korah and his followers and were inclined to hold Moses responsible for it, until the miracle of the blossoming of Aaron's staff convinced them. It is necessary for the student of the Bible to understand the extent and purport of Korah's rebellion lest he conceive of the punishment of Korah and his followers as visited upon them merely because of an offense of "lèse majesté", and, consequently, as utterly disproportionate to the offense.
The narrative of the sin of Moses and Aaron for which they were prohibited from entering the Promised Land does not make very clear to the modern reader precisely what the Bible views as constituting their sin. One possible interpretation, however, is that Moses by his words, "Hear now, ye rebels, are we to bring you forth water out of this rock?" (Numbers 20. 10) which were followed by his striking the rock and his failure to speak to it as God had commanded prevented the providential character of the water's flowing from being apparent. The incident might have been interpreted by the popular mind as if Moses, by the magic of his staff, had himself caused the water to flow, as is suggested by his use of the first person, "Are we to bring you forth water," and by his failure to comply literally with God's command. He, thus permitted an opportunity of sanctifying God's name to pass by yielding to passion and thinking at the time of his personal grievance more than of his service to God. Inasmuch as this partook of the nature of the sins of that generation of Israel, he and Aaron were to take their share also in the punishment of Israel and were not to enter the Promised Land.
The thought suggested by the punishment of Nadab and Abihu recurs again in this connection, viz: that the greater the man and his responsibilities, the more circumspect must he be in his conduct.
The incident of the brass serpent must be interpreted in the light of the rabbinic comment on that subject to which we have called attention in connection with the holding up of Moses' hands during the battle with the Amalekites.
"Is it then in the power of a serpent to slay or to bring to life? But so long as the Israelites gazed heavenward and subjected their hearts to their Father in heaven they were healed, and, if not, they were destroyed." (Rosh ha-Shanah III, 8.) By looking up to the brass serpent that Moses had been instructed to make, the people testified, as it were, to their faith in God's power to heal them from the serpent's bites. It is interesting to note that when, at a later time in the history of the people the serpent itself became the object of reverence and of idolatrous worship, it was destroyed by order of King Hezekiah, in accordance with the teaching of the prophets (2 Kings 18. 4).
Aim. The aim of this lesson is to develop an appreciation of disinterested loyalty, steadfast faith and even temper, and a contempt for selfish ambition, uncontrolled passion and faithlessness.
Suggestions to the teacher. The method to be used in accomplishing this aim is not that of drawing an abstract moral from the events of the narrative, but one must tell one's story with feeling for its hero, Moses, in such a way that the pupil identifies himself with his hero and feels toward the enemies of Moses an almost personal hostility. Before the child reaches adolescence, analysis of character is not natural to him, and the discussion of men's virtues and vices fruitless, but imitation of character is natural, and hero-worship is the lever by which he may be moved to acquire a love for virtue and a disgust with vice.
In order to put the character of Moses in a heroic light make the class appreciate the depth of the ingratitude and treachery against which Moses had constantly to contend, and how difficult this made his task of leadership. Begin by calling on a child to tell the story of the preceding lesson. Then call attention to how sad Moses must have felt when after all he had done for the people they were ready in the face of every difficulty to disobey and rebel, and how much Moses must have loved and pitied them to have prayed to God for their forgiveness rather than simply accept from God the promise of a happy future for himself and his descendants. Call attention to the fact that this was not the first time that the people had disobeyed Moses and rebelled or murmured against him, and ask the children to tell other instances. Draw from them as many instances as possible since this not only helps in an interesting way to refresh the children's memory of what they had already learnt, but also to understand what is to follow. Then continue:
"Just as the murmuring of the people against Moses, when they heard the report of the ten spies was not the first instance of their rebellion against their patient leader, so it was not the last. In fact, it became harder for Moses to lead the people now than ever."
The reason for this can best be explained by an analogy drawn from the experience of children, as for example:
"You know that when a baseball team wins one game after the other everybody praises the captain and all the members of the team are ready to obey him, but if he loses one game after the other, they all begin to criticise and find fault and everybody feels that he himself would have made a better captain than the one who had been chosen, although it may not at all have been the captain's fault that the team was unsuccessful. So it was with the Israelites. So long as they still hoped that Moses was going to lead them to a land flowing with milk and honey, they were ready in the main to obey him, except when they were afraid on account of some special hardship and feared that he would never get them there after all; but when Moses himself told them that they would have to wander about for forty years in the wilderness until all the grown men of that day should have died, they were very bitter against him. Instead of blaming themselves, and their own cowardice and lack of faith in God, they blamed Moses, like the losing team that blames its captain instead of its own poor playing. And so they thought of appointing a new captain, another man than Moses, to act as their leader."
At this point introduce the character of Korah to the class and tell them of his envy of Moses, of his coveting the position of Aaron, and of his subtle attempts to secure the leadership by telling the people that they were all everyone as good as Moses and Aaron, for they were all members of a "kingdom of priests and a holy nation."
After describing success of Korah's propaganda, and pointing out the helplessness of Moses and the extreme danger of his position, tell of Moses' decision to entrust his vindication to God. If Korah and his followers wished to claim the priesthood, let them act as priests, each burning incense in the censer that he held in his hand, and God would show whether he wanted to accept them as priests or not.
The judgment that was pronounced upon Korah and his followers will then mean for the child the just punishment of disloyalty and will reinforce his detestation of the qualities displayed by Korah and his like, but if the teacher fails to prepare the way by enlisting the child's interest in the situation as it developed between Moses and the people, by some such method as we have suggested, the story will mean little more to him than the account of an earthquake. From the point of view of religious education, a knowledge of the manner of Korah's punishment is not of so much consequence as an understanding of the sin for which he was punished.
In telling the story of the sin of Moses and Aaron, guard against appearing to detract from the character of Moses. If the previous lessons have been properly taught the child should by this time have developed an intense admiration for Moses and would be inclined to resent any disparagement of his hero, even to the point of secretly feeling that the sin of Moses was no real sin and that his teacher's treatment of him was quite unfair and was merely an attempt to apologize for God's not letting him enter Canaan. The rabbis say that the reason for God's mentioning the sin of Nadab and Abihu was to keep us from inferring that their death was a punishment for other and more grievous sins. One cannot help feeling that the narrative of the sin of Moses had a similar purpose, the very fact that Moses was so severely punished for so apparently slight an offense, being meant to show the esteem in which he was held and how much God expected of him, in consequence. At any rate, this is the spirit in which it were best to approach this subject. The emphasis should be on the provocation to sin and on Moses' pious acceptance of his punishment and his readiness to continue leading the people to the Promised Land even after he could not expect to share in their final triumph. The liturgy for Simhath Torah contains the words, "Moses died. Who shall not die?" The sentiment that the teacher should seek to arouse by this lesson is somewhat similar. "Moses sinned, who can be sinless?" If Moses, who is described as the meekest of men, could sin in a moment of passion, how much more should we guard ourselves against sin and especially when under the influence of passion.
In telling of how the people who had been bitten by the serpents were healed when they looked up to the brass serpent that Moses had made, guard against letting the child attribute any magic to the image of the serpent itself. This can best be done by telling them the explanation of this episode suggested above in our interpretation. One might also associate the incident with what they had learnt of the influence of the hands of Moses in the battle with the Amalekites. Moreover, it might be well to tell them of how the people's false conception of its significance in later times led to its destruction by a pious king of Judah.