Korach (Part 4) - Numbers 16:1-18:32

We Need to Talk about Reuben

When you study ancient folklore, you start to see patterns emerge, and one of these patters are political alliances. If you are friendly with another group, you create a story about how, a long time ago, each of your ancestors were good friends. And if you were unfriendly with another group, you would create a story about how the other's ancient ancestor was a jerk, or was born of a bad seed, or something like that. And if you once had a bad relationship with a group and it improved (or the other way around), you created new stories that showed a new status.

One of these examples is the kingdom of Moab. Using a play on words, the ancient Israelites told a story how "Moab" means "from daddy", but not from God, but from a human incestuous act between Lot and his daughter. And later, God forbids the Israelites from having any relationship with a Moabite with a caricature of the people as uncaring and selfish. And yet, centuries later, that relationship changed and Moabites became acceptable to marry, as in the Book of Ruth.

This brings us to this week's Torah portion and the Reubenites attempted coup against the existing priesthood (Aaron) and ruler (Moses).

In verse 16:1 we read:

"...Dathan and Abiram, the sons of Eliab, and On, the son of Peleth the sons of Reuben..."

There are problems with this verse, of course. Eliab was not a descendant of Reuben, but of Zebulun, and so this is read as Dathan, Abiram, and On were all from the tribe of Reuben. This implies a cooperative relationship between the Mediterranean seafaring group, Zebulun, and the Dead Sea group, Reuben. Although, clearly, Reuben was the most represented, and so the focus of this story.

Now, what does the Book of Genesis tell us about Reuben?

Who was Reuben?

First, there are two possible reasons for the name, depending on which story you are reading. One is that it means "God has seen my misery" (named by his mother, Leah, who was not the favorite), or "he will love me", where "he" is her husband, Israel.

In other words, a positive and a negative view.

As the status of the first-born, Reuben should have been the leader of the other tribes. And yet, after Israel's favorite wife dies (Genesis 35:19), Reuben takes Bilhah as his own to his bed (Genesis 35:22). Israel hears of it, and does nothing. End of story.

The next story is when Reuben, with his brothers are in Dothan (which is spelled the same as Dathan in the coup story) decide to get rid of Joseph. Reuben stops them from shedding blood, but recommends a different strategy - to put him in a position where he will be without food and water and would die from "natural causes". It is interesting to note that Judah is not in this story, which is part of the historical problem of Judah not being part of the original tribes.

And yet, later in the story, we read of a different Reuben, not the one who determined that it would be better to cause the death of Joseph through starvation and thirst, but one who tried to stop them entirely, the good guy! (Genesis 42:22)

And continuing on as the hero, Reuben tells Israel that he will go save his favorite, Benjamin, and if he fails, Israel can kill the sons of Reuben. If you take this story at face value, telling a grandfather that he could go kill his grandsons if his eldest son doesn't save the youngest is odd at best!

The last story of importance is the blessing that Israel gives to Reuben, which is really a warning about the future. In Genesis 49:3, Israel praises Reuben as being the firstborn, of being Israel's strength, and the first of his vigor. But in the next verse, he gives a warning:

"Haste like water, do not exceed. For you went up your father's bed, then you defiled. My couch, you went up."

"Haste like water" has been generally interpreted as "You are reckless", he exceeded his boundaries, took what wasn't his, defiling for his self-gratification.

A Bit of Folklore

The Genesis story of Reuben paints two different characters, which is likely from the changing relationship between that tribe, and Israel. According to the later portion of the Joseph story, Reuben was the strong leader who tried to stop the other tribes from attacking Joseph, but was willing to sacrifice his own holdings in order to save the tribe of Benjamin.

It is interesting to note that there was a point where the tribe of Benjamin was nearly wiped out (See the Book of Judges, chapters 19-21) because one from that tribe raped a concubine from a Levite and collective punishment ensued. Perhaps that story in Genesis is referring to that period. After all, just as it is Judah who saves Benjamin in the end, Benjamin is eventually absorbed into the tribe of Judah.

The folklore reflects the views of the time. And as relationships change, so do the stories.

In another version of Reuben, which is carried through in the Book of Numbers, Reuben was the ambitious one, who sought to put himself as equal to the leadership of all the tribes by taking Bilhah ("unworried"), and his act was not opposed until Israel at the end said, "you are overreaching".

And in the Book of Numbers, the sons of Reuben (descendants) are reaching out to take control of the priesthood and the leadership, and would be stopped by God, and would have lost many in this final confrontation, only to recede to the background, letting the tribe of Levi retain it's religious power, and, later, Benjamin, then Judah, to retain the governing power.

Summary

The story of the rebellion of the sons of Reuben is related to the story of Reuben in the book of Genesis. They all have the same thing in common: they are folklore created to speak positively or negatively about a relationship between the storyteller speaking for Israel, and the collective who is either friendly or has antipathy towards the nation as a whole.

The Torah isn't history. It's a collection of stories reflecting the views of the storytellers of their day, telling them over an evening campfire, where they would be remembered, embellished, and eventually be written down centuries later by those who felt that these stories should be remembered.