Why was Moshe angry?
Rashi and Hadar Zekenim (in Pasukf 6): He wasn't angry. 1 He was deeply pained 2 (because he had no answer to their accusation that he did not keep his word about bringing them to Eretz Yisrael - Rashi in the original text and Hadar Zekenim citing the Tanchuma). 3
Ramban #1 (in Pasukf 16): Moshe was furious - (as Targum Onkelos and Targum Yonasan explain) - because Dasan and Aviram said "Lo Na'aleh". 4
Ramban #2: Refer to 16:29:1:1**.
Oznayim la'Torah: Because even Korach had claimed that the entire congregation was holy - including Moshe, whereas Dasan and Aviram denigrated and accused him of being a fraud, 5 and lied outright when they claimed that he dominated them.
Which Minchah was Moshe referring to?
Rashi #1 and R. Bachye #1: He Davened that Hashem should not accept the Ketores that they would bring the following day. 1 2
Rashi #2 and R. Bachye #2 (citing the Tanchuma): He was referring to the individual portion that each person has in the Korban Tamid 3 and he Davened that the fire on the Mizbe'ach should not burn it.
Ramban (citing Targum Onkelos) and Seforno: Seeing as they wanted the Kehunah and to sacrifice the Korbanos, Moshe Davened that Hashem should decline to accept any Korban 4 that they might bring on the Mizbe'ach 5 (as an atonement - Seforno) 6 and any Tefilah that they might offer.
R. Bachye #3: He Davened that Hashem should not give them a chance to bring a Korban - which stands even Rasha?im in good stead - bu should punish them straightaway.
R. Bachye #3: With reference to the Nesi?im - the most important of the two hundred and fifty men - he Davened that Hashem should not accept the beautiful Minchah that they brought for the Chanukas ha?Mizbe?ach. 7
Just as he did not accept the Korban of Kayin, whose reincarnation Korach was - See Oznayim la'Torah who elaborates.
See Ramban's objection to this explanation.
See Ramban's objection to this explanation.
Seforno: "Minchah" in this context is synonymous with 'Korban', as we find on Shmuel 1, 26:19.
Ramban: Refer to 16:15:2:4*.
Seforno: Because he (Moshe) did not forgive them, and, as we learned in Yoma, 85b, 'Even Yom Kipur will not atone for a sin that one transgresses against one's friend, unless the friend pardons the sinner'. See also Yirmiyah, 18:20 & 23.
See R. Bachye as to why the Tefilah must have referred to the Nesi?im and not to Dasan and Acviram. On the other hand, Moshe was confronting Dasan and Aviram and not the Nesi?im.
What was Moshe referring to when he said "Lo Chamor Echad meihem Nasasi"?
Rashi (citing Targum Onkelos) 1 : He was referring to compensation for transportation, with regard to when he traveled from Midyan to Egypt to redeem Yisrael, leading his wife and sons on a donkey, he was entitled to claim the donkey from the people, but in fact, he used his own donkey. 2
Seforno: He meant that he never benefited from any of them, even with regard to borrowing a donkey from one of them. 3
Ramban (citing Targum Onkelos) Rashbam and Targum Yonasan: He meant that he never acted highhandedly 4 , in the way that other rulers do, 5 by demanding from them even one donkey. 6 (how much more so had he not ruled over men - R. Bachye).
Nedarim, 38a: He meant that he never took a donkey from any one of them, even for payment - a proof that he was wealthy 7 and did not need to come on to anybody for anything. 8
Oznayim la'Torah #1: "Nasa'si" refers to a tax that a king claims from his subjects, which he waived.
Oznayim la'Torah #2: He was referring to the way of kings, as described in Shmuel (who was a descendent of Korach) - to take the people's donkeys for their own use and to treat the people themselves as their slaves. 9 Hence he responded to Dasan and Aviram's accusation "Lo Chamor Echad meihem Nasasi ve'Lo Hare'osi Achad meihem"!
According to Rashi's interpretation of the word "Shecharis" in Targum Onkelos.
See Oznayim la'Torah's objection to Rashi's explanation.
Seforno: Something that people commonly do - and this was a sure proof that whatever he did as a leader was for the people's sake and that their claims stemmed from a lack of Hakaras ha'Tov.
According to the Ramban's interpretation of the word "Shecharis" in Targum Onkelos.
Ramban: As described in Shmuel 1, 8:15.
Rashbam: So why do they accuse him of dominating them?
See Torah Temimah, note 11.
This implies that Moshe was wealthy aleady in Egypt. This seems to clash with Chazal, who say that he became wealthy from the carvings of the Luchos - Refer to Sh'mos, 34:1:2:1* and see Torah Temimah there, note 1.
See Shmuel 1, 8:11-17.
"Lo Chamor Echad meihem Nasasi". Does this mean that he took other things from them?
What did Moshe mean when he concluded "ve'Lo Hare'osi es Achad meihem"?
