Charles Ellicott Commentary Numbers 16

Now Korah, the son of Izhar ... — Some suppose that the copula before “Dathan and Abiram” should be omitted, and that the verse should be rendered this way: Now Korah, the son of Izhar, the son of Kohath, the son of Levi, took Dathan and Abiram, etc. The rebellion of Korah, Dathan, and Abiram is the only important event recorded in connection with the protracted wandering in the desert. The time and place of its occurrence cannot be positively determined. The circumstances from which it appears to have arisen make it probable that it took place during one of the early years of the wanderings in the wilderness, either during the stay at Kadesh or after the departure from it.

In favor of the supposition that the occurrence took place during the stay at Kadesh, it may be argued:

1. The history of the Israelites between the first and the second encampments at Kadesh appears to be intentionally regarded and treated as a blank.

2. During that interval, they appear to have been scattered throughout the wilderness, while the narrative of the rebellion of Korah seems to assume the concentration of the people in one place.

The whole of the narrative bears the clear mark of historical truth. The leaders of the rebellion, among whom Korah holds the most conspicuous place (Numbers 26:9; Jude 1:11), belonged to the tribes of Levi and Reuben.

Korah, as the descendant of Izhar, the brother of Amram—who was the father (or, as some maintain, the more distant ancestor) of Moses and Aaron—may well be supposed to have been jealous of the peculiar prerogatives of the priestly family. He may also have been jealous of the leadership of Elizaphan, the son of Uzziel (Numbers 3:30), who appears to have been the youngest son of Kohath, while the name of Izhar stands next to that of Amram (Numbers 3:19).

Dathan and Abiram, moreover, as the sons of Eliab, the son of Pallu, the son of Reuben (Numbers 26:5–9)—who was the eldest son of Jacob—may, for similar reasons, be supposed to have been discontented on account of the transfer of the birthright. They may also have been discontented with the resulting loss of the leadership that had been possessed by their tribe, and which was now held by the tribe of Judah.

It is possible that they may have regarded the priesthood also as among the prerogatives of the firstborn which should have passed to them. The proximity of the Kohathites to the Reubenites—for both were encamped on the south side of the Tabernacle—provided an opportunity for their joint deliberations. It has been inferred by some, from Numbers 16:24-27, that they had erected a tabernacle in rivalry with the Tabernacle of the Congregation. No further mention is made of the name of On, nor is he expressly included in the account of the final punishment.

And they rose up ... — that is, in rebellion.

Two hundred and fifty princes ... — It has been inferred from Numbers 27:3, where it is stated that Zelophehad, the Manassite, did not take part in the rebellion, that these princes, or chief men of the congregation, belonged to the other tribes of Israel as well as that of Levi. They are called Korah’s company because he was their leader, and it is probable from Numbers 16:8 that a large number of them belonged to the tribe of Levi.

Ye take too much upon you ... —Or, enough for you , i.e., you have held the priesthood and the government long enough; or, Let it be enough for you to be numbered among the holy people without usurping dominion over them. It is evident from the whole tenor of the address that Korah laid claim to a universal priesthood on behalf of the people, designing probably to secure the chief place in that priesthood for himself.

And he spake unto Korah and unto all his company—The words seem to have been addressed only to Korah and his company, not to Dathan and Abiram, who do not appear to have been present on this occasion. (See Numbers 16:12, where Moses is represented as sending for Dathan and Abiram.)

Even to-morrow—Literally, In the morning. It may be that On and also the sons of Korah profited by this suspension of the judgment which was about to overtake those who persisted in their rebellion.

Take you censers. —The offering of incense was the exclusive prerogative and the holiest function of the priesthood. The destruction of Nadab and Abihu ought to have served as a warning to Korah and his company not to provoke a similar exhibition of the Divine displeasure.