במדבר, פרק ט״ז, פסוק י״ג

The confrontation orchestrated by Dathan and Abiram is a deeply cynical attack that weaponizes Moses's own rhetoric against him. In a defiant display of sarcasm, they ask if it is a trivial matter that he removed them from Egypt, directly echoing a rebuke Moses had previously directed at the Levites [רבנו בחיי, בעלי ברית אברם]. In a sharp twist, they describe Egypt, rather than the Promised Land, as a place flowing with milk and honey, claiming it was a land of true abundance and wealth [ביאור שטיינזלץ, ביאור יש״ר]. Interestingly, their description of being brought up from Egypt remains geographically accurate, as the journey toward the Land of Israel is indeed an ascent [אבן עזרא, רבנו בחיי]. This longing for Egypt makes sense coming from Dathan and Abiram, who belonged to the tribe of Reuben. Unlike the Levites who suffered under harsh slavery, the Reubenites enjoyed respectable social standing and owned fields and vineyards in Egypt, all of which they lost upon their departure [שפתי כהן].

They accuse Moses of orchestrating the exodus solely to let them die in the wilderness. Because the nation is now condemned to perish in the desert, they argue that Moses's leadership serves no practical benefit to the people, existing only to satisfy his own thirst for power [קונטרס חיבה יתירה]. A darker suspicion emerges as they claim Moses intentionally prayed to God to delay their journey for forty years. Knowing that Joshua was chosen to lead the conquest of the land, Moses allegedly sought to prolong the wandering to secure his own life and extended rule at the people's expense [העמק דבר]. Typically, a leader who liberates a nation earns the right to govern, but because Moses led them away from prosperity to certain death, he forfeited any moral authority [מלבי״ם, בכור שור]. They view his governance as an arbitrary, dictatorial regime unbound by law [רש״ר הירש], driven by personal arrogance [אוהב גר]. They point out that a new leader lacking inherited royal authority should govern with gentleness and humility to win the public's affection. Moses, however, behaved with dominance and superiority from the very beginning [אדרת אליהו]. Even his simple act of summoning them to speak is perceived as the arrogant command of a king [שד״ל].

Their accusation that Moses lords over them carries multiple layers of resentment. One perspective suggests a compounding grievance: not only did Moses ruin their lives, but he also demands to rule over them as a monarch [רשב״ם, חזקוני, ביאור יש״ר]. Another view interprets their anger as utter outrage at his audacity. In their minds, Moses deserved to be stoned for leading them to their deaths; therefore, his attempt to exercise even the minor authority of summoning them, let alone ruling over them, is deeply offensive [רמב״ן, הטור הארוך].

Furthermore, the repeated accusations of dominance point to a deep-seated anger over nepotism. They charge Moses with expanding his power by appointing his brother Aaron and other family members to high positions [אבן עזרא, רבנו בחיי, חזקוני, הכתב והקבלה, נחל קדומים]. This was especially painful for Dathan and Abiram, who had been close to the royal court in Egypt and now watched Moses and Aaron usurp their former prestige [שפתי כהן]. Adding insult to injury, they are infuriated by the priestly gifts and tithes allocated to Aaron. They view these agricultural laws as a cruel mockery: Moses legislates the separation of tithes from fields and vineyards, while the people are condemned to die in the barren desert without ever seeing their promised inheritance [אלשיך].