Korach: The Mystery of the Holy Fire-pans

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this blog post.

Korach: The Mystery of the Holy Fire-pans

The Question 

In response to Korach and his rebel alliance of Dasan, Aviram, and the 250 leaders, Moshe sets up a “test” to determine whose claim of the kehunah (priesthood) would prevail: 

[Moshe] spoke to Korach and to all his assembly, saying: “In the morning Hashem will make known who is His, and him who is holy He will bring close to Him, and him whom He chooses He will bring close to Him. [1] Do this: take your fire-pans, Korach and all your assembly, and place fire in them and put incense on them before Hashem tomorrow. And the man whom Hashem chooses, he is the kadosh (holy one). You have too much, sons of Levi!” (Bamidbar 16:5-7) 

The men do as they’re told. Korach [2] and his contingent are swallowed by the earth. As for the men who brought the incense on their fire-pans: “A flame came forth from Hashem and consumed the 250 men who were offering the incense” (ibid. 16:35). 

As soon as the rebellion is crushed, Hashem issues the following set of instructions: 

Hashem spoke to Moshe, saying: “Say to Elazar son of Aharon the Kohen and let him pick up the fire-pans from amid the fire – and he should throw away the flame – for they have become holy. As for the fire-pans of these sinners with their souls – they shall make them hammered-out sheets as a covering for the Altar, for they offered them before Hashem and they became holy; they shall be for a sign to the Children of Israel.” Elazar the Kohen took the copper fire-pans that the consumed ones had offered and hammered them out as a covering for the Altar, as a reminder to the Children of Israel, so that no strange man who is not of the offspring of Aharon shall draw near to bring up the smoke of incense before Hashem, that he not be like Korach and his assembly, as Hashem spoke about him through Moshe (ibid. 17:1-5). 

The two phrases underlined above – in Hebrew, “ki kadeishu” and “vayikdashu” – are the source of much puzzlement. The Abravanel [3] explicitly formulates the central question: 

How could He say: “for they (i.e. the fire-pans) have become kedoshim”? If these fire-pans were from men who sinned with their souls, how could they become kedoshim? 

The nature and origin of this kedushah [4] is a matter of contention among the meforshim (commentators), as we shall now see. 

The Answers 

The simplest explanation is offered by Rashi [5]: since the fire-pans were designated as klei shareis – “service vessels” for use in avodas ha’kodesh (the holy service in the Tabernacle) – they became kedoshim, and were assur b’hanaah (prohibited to derive personal benefit from). [6] The fact that they were used for a sinful purpose doesn’t negate their halachic kedushah. 

Other meforshim follow Rashi’s lead. Sforno [7] writes that the 250 men “sanctified [the fire-pans] as service vessels for use in other services aside from their invalid [incense] service.” In other words, even though the men used their service vessels for “incense of abomination,” their intent was to designate them for general use, and that is why they became kedoshim. 

Likewise, Ralbag [8] maintains that these vessels “became kedoshim even without anointment, [9] merely by placing into them that which would be utilized [in the divine service].” Unlike Sforno, Ralbag holds that these fire-pans took on their kedushah status once they came in contact with the substance of the incense. He then explains that “their service [with the illicit incense] did not sanctify them, because it wasn’t a [legitimate] service.” 

The Ramban [10] rejects this entire approach. After citing Rashi’s view, he writes: 

I don’t know the reason for this prohibition, for they offered a foreign (i.e. illegal) incense offering, and [if] a non-Kohen makes a service vessel in order to bring an offering outside [of the Tabernacle or Temple], it would not become kadosh. 

The Ramban then offers two answers of his own: 

Perhaps one can say that since [these 250 men] acted in accordance with [the instructions of] Moshe, [their fire-pans] became kedoshim, for they sanctified them for heavenly use thinking that God would response to them with [heavenly] fire which, in turn, permanently rendered these fire-pans into service vessels for the Tent of Meeting.  

But the correct [answer] in my eyes is that the pasuk (verse) states: “for they offered them before Hashem and they became kedoshim, and they shall be for a sign to the Children of Israel.” In other words: “I sanctified them from the time they were brought before Me in order that they should be as a sign for the Children of Israel.” 

The Ramban’s first answer is that the mere act of compliance with Moshe’s instructions for the purposes of the “test” of the incense was sufficient to permanently sanctify these fire-pans as service vessels. His second answer is based on the pasuk’s implication that Hashem, Himself, sanctified these vessels in order to subsequently make them into a sign for Bnei Yisrael. 

The Abravanel sharply diverges from the all of the views mentioned above. He answers his own question by boldly asserting – contrary to the straightforward reading of the text – that the vessels didn’t become halachically sanctified at all. He writes: 

[The text] did not say “ki kedoshim heim” or “ki kadosh heim” (two phrases which both mean “because they were sanctified”) but rather “ki kadeishu” (“because they sanctified”), because Korach and his assembly sanctified them for the divine. However, in reality, they didn’t have any kedushah at all, for these fire-pans belonged to men who were “sinners with their souls,” and since their intent was evil and their plot was poisonous, how could it produce kedushah? … [Rather,] the statement “for they were brought before Hashem and sanctified” means that [these men] intended to sanctify them. [Alternatively,] it is possible to explain “ki kadeishu” and “va’yikdashu” in sense of “designation,” [11] in the sense of “heekdeesh keruav” (“He has designated His guests” – Tzephanya 1:7), for they designated [the fire-pans] for this test. 

Like the Ramban, the Abravanel maintains that the evil intent of these men made it impossible for their fire-pans to become sanctified through their incense offerings. He suggests that the term “ki kadeishu” (“because they sanctified”) describes the subjective intent of these men rather than the objective outcome of their actions. Alternatively, he theorizes that the root K.D.SH is not being used here in its primary sense of “to sanctify” but in its secondary usage of “to designate.” Both explanations allow him to read the pesukim in a manner which avoids attributing halachic kedushah to the fire-pans. 

Similarly, the Netziv [12] rejects the notion that these fire-pans became halachically sanctified and proposes an alternative explanation based on a somewhat shocking source: 

“ki kadeishu” is not to be explained in the sense of “sanctity,” because if this is what it meant, it would have needed to say “ki kedoshim heimah” implying that they had already become sanctified on the altar; also, based on precise Hebrew grammar, it should have said “ki nikdashu.” 

Rather, the meaning of “kadeishu” is like “there shall not be a kadeish (male prostitute) among the sons of Israel” (Devarim 23:18), the implication of “kadeish” meaning one whose prominence has been desecrated. Here, the fire of the altar which was sanctified became de-sanctified and desecrated. Therefore, it was neither proper for the altar nor for mundane purposes, just like the kedushah of any physical object which cannot be redeemed once it becomes blemished. 

On the basis of Hebrew grammar, the Netziv rejects the notion that the fire-pans became halachically sanctified. His interpretation relies on the fact that K.D.SH is a contronym – a word that means something and its opposite. K.D.SH can either mean “sanctify” or “de-sanctify.” In the case of a kadeish (male prostitute), it refers to someone who has “de-sanctified” through his debased behavior. In the case of the fire-pans “ki kadeishu” means that they had become “de-sanctified” through the illegitimate offerings of the 250 men. 

To sum it up, there are three basic approaches: 

(1) according to Rashi, Sforno, and Ralbag the fire-pans became halachically sanctified by these men in the usual manner, despite their sinful intentions and actions

(2) according to the Ramban the fire-pans became sanctified in an unusual manner

(3) according to the Abravanel and the Netziv the fire-pans did not become sanctified at all. 

The Significance 

After examining these answers we are left with a very basic question. To put it bluntly: Who cares? So what? Why did the Torah highlight the fact that these fire-pans became sanctified? 

Those who maintain that the vessels actually became halachically sanctified might be tempted to answer that it was necessary for the Torah point this out for “halachic context purposes.” If the Torah hadn’t mentioned this sanctity one might wonder why Hashem commanded Moshe to take these fire-pans, which were associated with sinfulness and rebellion, and make them into a covering for the Altar, which is used for legitimate divine service. Why couldn’t these fire-pans have been destroyed or used for mundane purposes? Accordingly, the Torah explains that since these vessels had become halachically sanctified, they had to be used for some holy purpose. Indeed, this type of explanation is given by the Malbim [13]: 

Since [the fire-pans] were hekdesh (sanctified property), maalin bakodesh v'ein moridin (“we [only] go up in sanctity, and we do not go down”), and since they were once used as accoutrements for the Altar, they became part of the Altar itself. 

There isn’t necessarily any problem with this answer … and yet, I still don’t buy it. If the pesukim only mentioned the sanctity of the fire-pans once? Maybe. But the fact that the pesukim mention this fact twice leads me to believe that the Torah is going out of its way to emphasize that these fire-pans had sanctity for a reason beyond mere halachic justification. 

Intuitively it would seem to make sense that the sanctity of these fire-pans is related to their repurposed function, namely: 

they shall be for a sign to the Children of Israel … a reminder to the Children of Israel, so that no strange man who is not of the offspring of Aharon shall draw near to bring up the smoke of incense before Hashem, that he not be like Korach and his assembly, as Hashem spoke about him through Moshe. 

I would like to suggest the following: since Korach’s rebellion was predicated on a false conception of kedushah, the memorial that would serve as a warning against future rebellions needed to intrinsically embody the true concept of kedushah to refute that false concept. 

Korach challenged the authority of Moshe and Aharon with the famous words: “For all the assembly, they are all kedoshim” (Bamidbar 16:3). Regardless of how one understands this statement, Korach clearly believed that he had the authority to declare who is and isn’t kadosh. In reality, there is only One Being Who has the ability to determine kedushah: Hashem, Ha’Kadosh Baruch Hu, Ha’El ha’Kadosh, ha’mavdil bein kodesh l’chol. [14] Indeed, this message was underscored in Moshe’s initial response to Korach in his explanation of the fire-pan test: “the man whom Hashem chooses, he is the kadosh.” This was clearly intended as a direct retort to Korach’s assertion that “they are all kedoshim.” 

In this vein, the kedushah of the fire-pans was intended to reinforce the message that when it comes to kedushah, Hashem is the sole determiner. How so? It depends on the approach: 

According to Rashi, Sforno, and Ralbag, the message was reinforced by the fact that these men, who brought their incense offerings with the intention of asserting themselves as being kedoshim, were burned to death as a punishment for opposing Hashem’s will – and yet, their fire-pans nevertheless became kedoshim precisely because they conformed to the halachos procedures governing the sanctification of service-vessels. What better way to demonstrate that kedushah only comes about as a result of conforming to Hashem’s will! 

According to the Ramban, who rejected the idea that the fire-pans became kedoshim in the usual manner, the message was reinforced specifically by the fact that the fire-pans became kedoshim in an unusual manner. The Ramban explained that Hashem directly sanctified the fire-pans, contravening His own laws of service-vessel sanctification, specifically in order to demonstrate that kedushah is endowed on His terms, as He chooses. 

And according to the Abravanel and the Netziv, who refuse to acknowledge that the fire-pans had any halachic kedushah whatsoever – this fact itself demonstrated Hashem’s absolute authority over kedushah. When these men attempted to usurp the position of kedushah held by the Kohanim, perform a service of kedushah with the incense, and endow their service vessels with kedushah, all of their efforts utterly failed without producing one iota of kedushah. Instead, their bodies were incinerated, their offerings were thrown out like garbage, and the fire-pans they used to bring those offerings were not successfully sanctified by them (as they would have been if brought by the Kohanim ha’kedoshim), but were destroyed and remade into a warning to not attempt to encroach on Hashem’s kedushah authority. 

Thus, the kedushah of the fire-pans was integral to the message they were repurposed to convey. Perhaps this is why the Torah goes out of its way to call attention to this kedushah. 

Footnotes:

[1] I know it looks like that sentence was either poorly translated or grammatically incorrect. I’m pretty sure the grammar is fine, and you can blame the lack of poetry in the translation on Robert Alter. 

[2] Actually, it’s unclear what happened to Korach himself, as I wrote about in my article: What Happened to Korach? 

[3] Don Yitzchak Abravanel, Commentary on Sefer Bamidbar 17:1, Question #1 

[4] I have decided to transliterate much of the terminology having to do with the Hebrew root K.D.SH. rather than committing to specific translations as “holy,” “consecrated,” or “sanctified” – partially because these translations carry connotations which are somewhat at odds with the Torah’s concept of kedushah, and partially because the nature of the kedushah in this context is part of the question that this article aims to answer. 

[5] Rabbeinu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer Bamidbar 17:2 

[6] In the world of Mishkan (the Tabernacle) and the Beis ha’Mikdash (Holy Temple), halachic sanctity is synonymous with an issur hanaah – a prohibition to use the sanctified object for mundane purposes. 

[7] Rabbeinu Ovadiah Sforno, Commentary on Sefer Bamidbar 17:3 

[8] Rabbeinu Levi ben Gershon (Ralbag / Gersonides), Commentary on Sefer Bamidbar 17:2-5 

[9] According to halacha, all of the service vessels that were made by Moshe Rabbeinu in the Wilderness only became sanctified through the shemen ha’mishchah (anointing oil). In contrast, service vessels in the Beis ha’Mikdash became sanctified through their usage in the avodah. See Rabbeinu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides), Mishneh Torah: Sefer Avodah, Hilchos Klei ha’Mikdash ve’ha’Ovdim Bo 1:12. 

[10] Rabbeinu Moshe ben Nachman (Ramban / Nachmanides), Commentary on Sefer Bamidbar 17:2 

[11] “hazmanah” which can also be translated as “invitation” or “preparation.” 

[12] Rav Naftali Tzvi Berlin (Netziv), Commentary on Sefer Bamidbar 17:2 

[13] Rav Meir Leibush ben Yechiel Michel Wisser (Malbim), Commentary on Sefer Bamidbar 17:3 

[14] Translation: the Holy One, Blessed is He; the Holy God; He Who separates between the holy and the mundane.