test - Datan and Aviram's punishment

The opening of the ground to swallow Datan and Aviram is a strange episode. This is of course not the first time the people sinned and were punished. Generally speaking, however, the form of punishment (fire, plague etc) was a means to an end and not a particular point of focus. In the case of Datan and Aviram, on the other hand, the punishment appears to an integral part of the wider story:o

וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה בְּזֹאת תֵּדְעוּן כִּי־ה’ שְׁלָחַנִי לַעֲשׂוֹת אֵת כָּל־הַמַּעֲשִׂים הָאֵלֶּה כִּי־לֹא מִלִּבִּי׃ אִם־כְּמוֹת כָּל־הָאָדָם יְמֻתוּן אֵלֶּה וּפְקֻדַּת כָּל־הָאָדָם יִפָּקֵד עֲלֵיהֶם לֹא ה’ שְׁלָחָנִי׃ וְאִם־בְּרִיאָה יִבְרָא ה’ וּפָצְתָה הָאֲדָמָה אֶת־פִּיהָ וּבָלְעָה אֹתָם וְאֶת־כָּל־אֲשֶׁר לָהֶם וְיָרְדוּ חַיִּים שְׁאֹלָה וִידַעְתֶּם כִּי נִאֲצוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים הָאֵלֶּה אֶת־ה’׃ וַיְהִי כְּכַלֹּתוֹ לְדַבֵּר אֵת כָּל־הַדְּבָרִים הָאֵלֶּה וַתִּבָּקַע הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר תַּחְתֵּיהֶם׃ וַתִּפְתַּח הָאָרֶץ אֶת־פִּיהָ וַתִּבְלַע אֹתָם וְאֶת־בָּתֵּיהֶם וְאֵת כָּל־הָאָדָם אֲשֶׁר לְקֹרַח וְאֵת כָּל־הָרֲכוּשׁ׃ וַיֵּרְדוּ הֵם וְכָל־אֲשֶׁר לָהֶם חַיִּים שְׁאֹלָה וַתְּכַס עֲלֵיהֶם הָאָרֶץ וַיֹּאבְדוּ מִתּוֹךְ הַקָּהָל׃ וְכָל־יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר סְבִיבֹתֵיהֶם נָסוּ לְקֹלָם כִּי אָמְרוּ פֶּן־תִּבְלָעֵנוּ הָאָרֶץ׃ (במדבר טז:כח-לד)

וְאֵשׁ יָצְאָה מֵאֵת ה’ וַתֹּאכַל אֵת הַחֲמִשִּׁים וּמָאתַיִם אִישׁ מַקְרִיבֵי הַקְּטֹרֶת׃ (במדבר טז:לה)

At the outset it is striking that the Torah devotes 7 verses to the punishment of Datan and Aviram compared to just a single verse for the punishment of the 250 followers. Within the lengthy description are several unusual details such as Moshe's prediction of the punishment, the reaction of the bystanders, and the personification of the earth which is described as opening its 'mouth’ and ‘swallowing’ Datan and Aviram.

ירידה vs עלייה

The point picked up by Rashi is the emphasis on the 'descent' into the earth. After Moshe invites Datan and Aviram to dialogue, they respond as follows:

וַיִּשְׁלַח מֹשֶׁה לִקְרֹא לְדָתָן וְלַאֲבִירָם בְּנֵי אֱלִיאָב וַיֹּאמְרוּ לֹא נַעֲלֶה׃ הַמְעַט כִּי הֶעֱלִיתָנוּ מֵאֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבַשׁ לַהֲמִיתֵנוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר כִּי־תִשְׂתָּרֵר עָלֵינוּ גַּם־הִשְׂתָּרֵר׃ אַף לֹא אֶל־אֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבַשׁ הֲבִיאֹתָנוּ וַתִּתֶּן־לָנוּ נַחֲלַת שָׂדֶה וָכָרֶם הַעֵינֵי הָאֲנָשִׁים הָהֵם תְּנַקֵּר לֹא נַעֲלֶה׃ )במדבר טז:יב-יד)

Rashi explains that the descent is a punishment for their refusal to 'ascend' to Moshe:

לא נעלה. פִּיהֶם הִכְשִׁילָם, שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם אֶלָּא יְרִידָה

The significance of this observation should not be missed. Aside from opening and closing their speech, the refusal to ascend is central to understanding the cause of their ‘downfall’ and has multiple layers of interconnected meanings.

Its immediate meaning is literal and personal – refusal to ascend to Moshe’s location to engage in dialogue. The refusal to even meet Moshe directly undermines his authority and frames Datan and Aviram as rebels against Moshe’s leadership.

Beyond the literal, the refusal to ascend expresses their desire to entirely disassociate from the national enterprise (of which Moshe was leader). Their declaration of לא נעלה coupled with a cynical recollection of Egypt as the ‘land flowing with milk and honey’ stands as an utter rejection of Kalev’s עלה נעלה call to complete the mission to establish the new nation in the promised land.  Stuck in their slave mentality, Datan and Aviram had little interest in grand ideals of national independence and the mutual responsibility which comes with being part of a free and civilised society.[1]

Finally, Datan and Aviram's rejection of authority logically ends in a rejection of God as well. Recognition of the Creator requires a basic contemplation outside of oneself in the quest for an ultimate source. This mental freedom to see past one's immediate space and physical needs does not naturally reside in a slave consumed by the day-to-day and trained not to think beyond.[2] From this perspective the refusal to ascend alludes to a spiritual disconnect.

Datan and Aviram vs the 250 followers

The last point in particular, places Datan and Aviram at polar opposites to the 250 followers. The 250 followers who participated in the incense burning demanded that everyone be able to take part in the sanctuary service and the Mishkan should be accessible to all. In contrast, Datan and Aviram make no reference to God and seem to have no interest in ‘ascending’ at all. The former represents spiritual anarchy whilst the latter is a form of political anarchy - but this is where the connection ends. Crucially, whilst both may be sourced in self-interest and even facilitate a superficial alliance, the purported objective of the former is spiritual growth whilst the latter lacks any spiritual component whatsoever. 

The 250 followers are consumed by fire reminiscent of the punishment of Nadav and Avihu who also broke rank to offer a ‘strange fire’ of their own volition. The fire emanates from God and consumes them. In the case of Nadav and Avihu the punishment was a natural consequence of their actions. They drew too close so the heavenly fire which consumed the sacrifices also consumed them:

וַתֵּצֵא אֵשׁ מִלִּפְנֵי ה’ וַתֹּאכַל עַל־הַמִּזְבֵּחַ אֶת־הָעֹלָה וְאֶת־הַחֲלָבִים וַיַּרְא כָּל־הָעָם וַיָּרֹנּוּ וַיִּפְּלוּ עַל־פְּנֵיהֶם (ויקרא ט:כד)

וַתֵּצֵא אֵשׁ מִלִּפְנֵי ה’ וַתֹּאכַל אוֹתָם וַיָּמֻתוּ לִפְנֵי ה’ (ויקרא י:ב)

The same was true with the 250 followers:

וְאֵשׁ יָצְאָה מֵאֵת ה’ וַתֹּאכַל אֵת הַחֲמִשִּׁים וּמָאתַיִם אִישׁ מַקְרִיבֵי הַקְּטֹרֶת (במדבר טז:לה)

Datan and Aviram, on the other hand, were also ‘consumed’ – not by a fire from above, but from the earth below. The swallowing up and descent into the earth, carries the symbol of their being consumed by their own materialism.[3]

Link to the splitting of the sea

Complimenting the above, it seems to me that there are strong links between the splitting of the earth swallow up Datan and Aviram and the splitting of the sea to swallow up the Egyptians:

 

Punishment of the Egyptians	Punishment of Datan and Aviram
וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה אֶל־הָעָם אַל־תִּירָאוּ הִתְיַצְבוּ וּרְאוּ אֶת־יְשׁוּעַת ה’... וַיַּרְא יִשְׂרָאֵל אֶת־הַיָּד הַגְּדֹלָה אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה ה’ בְּמִצְרַיִם וַיִּירְאוּ הָעָם אֶת־ה’ וַיַּאֲמִינוּ בַּה’ וּבְמֹשֶׁה עַבְדּוֹ	וַיֹּאמֶר מֹשֶׁה בְּזֹאת תֵּדְעוּן כִּי־ה’ שְׁלָחַנִי לַעֲשׂוֹת אֵת כָּל־הַמַּעֲשִׂים הָאֵלֶּה כִּי־לֹא מִלִּבִּי	Introductory speech by Moshe. Purpose to authenticate Moshe as messenger of God.
וַיּוֹלֶךְ ה’ אֶת־הַיָּם בְּרוּחַ קָדִים עַזָּה כָּל־הַלַּיְלָה וַיָּשֶׂם אֶת־הַיָּם לֶחָרָבָה וַיִּבָּקְעוּ הַמָּיִם	וַתִּבָּקַע הָאֲדָמָה אֲשֶׁר תַּחְתֵּיהֶם	Splitting of the earth/water
וַיֹּאמֶר מִצְרַיִם אָנוּסָה מִפְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל כִּי ה’ נִלְחָם לָהֶם בְּמִצְרָיִם	וְכָל־יִשְׂרָאֵל אֲשֶׁר סְבִיבֹתֵיהֶם נָסוּ לְקֹלָם	Reaction and fleeing of the onlookers
וַיָּשֻׁבוּ הַמַּיִם וַיְכַסּוּ	וַתְּכַס עֲלֵיהֶם הָאָרֶץ	Covering over of the sinners
אֶת־הָרֶכֶב וְאֶת־הַפָּרָשִׁים לְכֹל חֵיל פַּרְעֹה... לֹא־נִשְׁאַר בָּהֶם עַד־אֶחָד (שמות יד:כח)   וַיְאַבְּדֵם ה' (דברים יא:ד)	וְאֶת־בָּתֵּיהֶם וְאֵת כָּל־הָאָדָם אֲשֶׁר לְקֹרַח וְאֵת כָּל־הָרֲכוּשׁ   וַיֹּאבְדוּ מִתּוֹךְ הַקָּהָל	Emphasis on complete obliteration""
תְּהֹמֹת יְכַסְיֻמוּ יָרְדוּ בִמְצוֹלֹת כְּמוֹ־אָבֶן	וַיֵּרְדוּ הֵם וְכָל־אֲשֶׁר לָהֶם חַיִּים שְׁאֹלָה	Descent of the sinners
נָטִיתָ יְמִינְךָ תִּבְלָעֵמוֹ אָרֶץ	וַתִּפְתַּח הָאָרֶץ אֶת־פִּיהָ וַתִּבְלַע אֹתָם	Swallowing up of the sinners by the ‘earth’

 

The Torah itself alludes to this connection when Moshe singles out these specific episodes when recalling demonstrations of God's 'mighty hand' (see Devarim 11:2-8).

If this is indeed correct, what is the purpose of this connection?

At its most basic level it appears that this is yet another aspect of the מידה כנגד מידה. The most inflammatory aspect of Datan and Aviram’s response reflecting their ungratefulness was in referring to the exodus from Egypt as being taken out of a land of milk and honey, the classic metaphor for the land of Israel. Having expressed such longing for Egypt it was only fitting that they shared a similar fate to that of the Egyptians.

However, the true meaning may lie in the one major difference. With the splitting of the sea, the miraculous element lay in the exposing of the earth beneath and enabling the Jews to cross on dry land. As such, the drowning of the Egyptians was a consequence of the sea returning to its natural state. The Egyptians died from their own foolishness in assuming that the waters which held firm to allow the Jews to cross would remain similarly suspended for them. It is indeed ironic that despite the ten plagues, what destroyed them once and for all, was in fact no miracle at all.

The cognitive dissonance of the Egyptians seems connected to their polytheistic worldview leaving them unable to see beyond the forces acting in their immediate realm of experience. In their perception, these forces can act independently and be manipulated to the extent that the uniformity of nature is lost and chaos reigns. In such a world, even great miracles such as the splitting of the sea can go undetected.

In the case of Datan and Aviram, on the other hand, the swallowing up by the earth was the nature-defying act itself. It is of note that the opening of the earth is the only reference we have to a new ‘creation’ after creation itself (though the impression is more of an anti-creation akin to a blackhole). As discussed earlier, the self-centred outlook of Datan and Aviram prevented them from acknowledging any source or authority beyond themselves. Moshe's outburst - 'not one donkey have I taken, nor have I wronged any one of them' – highlights their ingratitude as the core issue. The social chaos which derives from this attitude is the counterpart to the theological chaos of the Egyptian world. Datan and Aviram were guilty of ignoring any outside forces whilst the Egyptians worshipped the forces around them.

This adds yet another dimension to the punishment of Datan and Aviram. The swallowing up of Datan and Aviram suggests that nothing in the world, even the basic support structure of the earth itself, can be taken for granted. Their narrow worldview did not provide space for recognition of a creator, so creation did not provide space for them. The complete disregard of anything outside of their own sphere of existence was akin to the irrational assumption of the Egyptians that the waters suspended in mid-air would not come crashing down.

 

 

 

---

[1] עבדא בהפקירא ניחא ליה (גיטין יג.)

Chazal (Nedarim 64b) insightfully equate Datan and Aviram with the two quarrelling Jews in Egypt whom Moshe tried to split up.

וַיֹּאמֶר מִי שָׂמְךָ לְאִישׁ שַׂר וְשֹׁפֵט עָלֵינוּ הַלְהָרְגֵנִי אַתָּה אֹמֵר כַּאֲשֶׁר הָרַגְתָּ אֶת־הַמִּצְרִי וַיִּירָא מֹשֶׁה וַיֹּאמַר אָכֵן נוֹדַע הַדָּבָר

The impression is that these Jews would have preferred to fight it out to the death than subject themselves to any outside authority or system of government. This strongly resonates with the words of Datan and Aviram:

הַמְעַט כִּי הֶעֱלִיתָנוּ מֵאֶרֶץ זָבַת חָלָב וּדְבַשׁ לַהֲמִיתֵנוּ בַּמִּדְבָּר כִּי־תִשְׂתָּרֵר עָלֵינוּ גַּם־הִשְׂתָּרֵר

[2] See last week's post which explored this point in more detail

[3] As a point of contrast, consider Eliyahu who ascends to ‘heaven’ in a chariot of fire consumed by his own spiritual intensity.

 

Test

The original source in the Midrash

The parasha ends with the commandment of ציצית, the purpose of which is described as follows:

וְהָיָה לָכֶם לְצִיצִת וּרְאִיתֶם אֹתוֹ וּזְכַרְתֶּם אֶת־כָּל־מִצְוֺת ה' וַעֲשִׂיתֶם אֹתָם וְלֹא־תָתֻרוּ אַחֲרֵי לְבַבְכֶם וְאַחֲרֵי עֵינֵיכֶם אֲשֶׁר־אַתֶּם זֹנִים אַחֲרֵיהֶם (במדבר טו:לב)

A number of the words used in this verse recall the spy episode at the beginning of the parasha. The basic correspondence is summarised in the below table:

Rashi picks up on this correspondence in his comments on the above verse:

כְּמוֹ "מִתּוּר הָאָרֶץ" הַלֵּב וְהָעֵינַיִם הֵם מְרַגְּלִים לַגּוּף

R. Amnon Bazak points out that Rashi's use of מרגלים seems very deliberate as it deviates from the original source in the Midrash which does not use this specific term but rather says הלב והעינים הן סרסורין לגוף. Clearly Rashi went out of his way to adopt a word which links the ציצית back to the spy episode. The natural conclusion is that the ציצית are intended to counter or address the shortcomings of the spies. We will now consider how this is the case.

 

Rashi picks up on this correspondence in his comments on the above verse:

כְּמוֹ "מִתּוּר הָאָרֶץ" הַלֵּב וְהָעֵינַיִם הֵם מְרַגְּלִים לַגּוּף

R. Amnon Bazak points out that Rashi's use of מרגלים seems very deliberate as it deviates from the original source in the Midrash which does not use this specific term but rather says הלב והעינים הן סרסורין לגוף. Clearly Rashi went out of his way to adopt a word which links the ציצית back to the spy episode. The natural conclusion is that the ציצית are intended to counter or address the shortcomings of the spies. We will now consider how this is the case.

 

Rashi picks up on this correspondence in his comments on the above verse:

כְּמוֹ "מִתּוּר הָאָרֶץ" הַלֵּב וְהָעֵינַיִם הֵם מְרַגְּלִים לַגּוּף

R. Amnon Bazak points out that Rashi's use of מרגלים seems very deliberate as it deviates from the original source in the Midrash which does not use this specific term but rather says הלב והעינים הן סרסורין לגוף. Clearly Rashi went out of his way to adopt a word which links the ציצית back to the spy episode. The natural conclusion is that the ציצית are intended to counter or address the shortcomings of the spies. We will now consider how this is the case.

 

Rashi picks up on this correspondence in his comments on the above verse:

כְּמוֹ "מִתּוּר הָאָרֶץ" הַלֵּב וְהָעֵינַיִם הֵם מְרַגְּלִים לַגּוּף

R. Amnon Bazak points out that Rashi's use of מרגלים seems very deliberate as it deviates from the original source in the Midrash which does not use this specific term but rather says הלב והעינים הן סרסורין לגוף. Clearly Rashi went out of his way to adopt a word which links the ציצית back to the spy episode. The natural conclusion is that the ציצית are intended to counter or address the shortcomings of the spies. We will now consider how this is the case.

מרגלים	ציצית
וּרְאִיתֶם אֶת־הָאָרֶץ מַה־הִוא (במדבר יג:יח)	וּרְאִיתֶם אֹתוֹ וּזְכַרְתֶּם אֶת־כָּל־מִצְוֺת ה'
שְׁלַח־לְךָ אֲנָשִׁים וְיָתֻרוּ אֶת־אֶרֶץ כְּנַעַן אֲשֶׁר־אֲנִי נֹתֵן לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל (במדבר יג:ב)	וְלֹא־תָתֻרוּ
אָנָה אֲנַחְנוּ עֹלִים אַחֵינוּ הֵמַסּוּ אֶת־לְבָבֵנוּ (דברים א:כח)	אַחֲרֵי לְבַבְכֶם
וַנְּהִי בְעֵינֵינוּ כַּחֲגָבִים וְכֵן הָיִינוּ בְּעֵינֵיהֶם (במדבר יג:לג)	וְאַחֲרֵי עֵינֵיכֶם
וְנָשְׂאוּ אֶת־זְנוּתֵיכֶם (במדבר יד:לג)	אֲשֶׁר־אַתֶּם זֹנִים

 

Rashi picks up on this correspondence in his comments on the above verse:

כְּמוֹ "מִתּוּר הָאָרֶץ" הַלֵּב וְהָעֵינַיִם הֵם מְרַגְּלִים לַגּוּף

R. Amnon Bazak points out that Rashi's use of מרגלים seems very deliberate as it deviates from the original source in the Midrash which does not use this specific term but rather says הלב והעינים הן סרסורין לגוף. Clearly Rashi went out of his way to adopt a word which links the ציצית back to the spy episode. The natural conclusion is that the ציצית are intended to counter or address the shortcomings of the spies. We will now consider how this is the case.

Meaning of ציצית

The term ציצית relates to 'seeing' alluding to the objective of וראיתם אותו.[1] In its immediate sense the object of the וראיתם אותו appears to be the ציצית. However, the odd use of the masculine (whereas ציצית is feminine), appears to hint at a more profound 'seeing', namely a 'seeing' of God.[2]

The Midrash illustratively depicts the stream of consciousness which can be generated:

שֶׁהַתְּכֵלֶת דּוֹמֶה לְיָם, וְיָם דּוֹמֶה לָרָקִיעַ, וְהָרָקִיעַ דּוֹמֶה לְכִסֵּא הַכָּבוֹד. וּמִתּוֹךְ שֶׁהוּא רוֹאֶה אוֹתוֹ, זוֹכֵר אֶת קוֹנוֹ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: וַיִּרְאוּ אֶת אֱלֹקי יִשְׂרָאֵל (שמות כד, י)[3]

The principal idea is that the sight of the ציצית should lead to a deeper awareness of God himself. The notion of seeing God in a figurative sense should not surprise us as the above Midrash demonstrates through its prooftext that the elders "saw the God of Israel…". Elsewhere, we are told that Moshe asks to 'see' God's glory (הראני נא את כבודך), and on the festivals we are invited to 'see' God's face (יראו פני).

Returning to the spies, as discussed in the last post, it was their impulsive reaction to what they saw which led to widespread mutiny and to the tragic consequences which followed. Their report exposed a narrow worldview in which only physical size matters (note how their fear was driven by the sight of exceptionally large fruit and supposed 'giants' etc). The central idea of the ציצית is to engage a deeper vision in order to curb one's more animalistic instincts and base outlook.

Comparison to Kohen Gadol

A number of commentators have pointed out that the ציצית themselves parallel the Kohen Gadol's ציץ.[4] Aside from the similarity in name, the ציץ of the Kohen Gadol was the holiest item worn by the Kohen Gadol on which it was engraved קדש לה'. This corresponds to the function of ציצת to effect a state of והייתם קדשים לאלהיכם. Both items also had a special פתיל תכלת attached to them. This is particularly significant as the only other mention in the Torah of פתיל תכלת relates to the breastplate worn by the Kohen Gadol. Finally, the role of ציצית as explained above is to expand one's vision beyond the physical dimension, whilst the ציץ of the Kohen Gadol was similarly intended to focus the Kohen Gadol's mind exclusively on God as he carried out the Avodah.[5]

As with our discussion on Nazir, the underlying idea appears to be that the holiness vested in the Kohanim needs to penetrate the entire nation. This is in fact the central theme of sefer Bamidbar as we discussed. Holiness is not the exclusive domain of the Kohanim, it can and needs to be created by each individual in every walk of life. Only then can the nation meet the challenge of becoming a ממלכת כהנים וגוי קדוש. The Kohen Gadol wears the ציץ on his forehead whilst carrying out the Avodah whereas the ציצית are worn by everyone, attached to regular clothes, and worn at all times. The message is that holiness is a continual mindset and not limited to specific people, places, or times. This creates somewhat of a paradox given the detailed attention paid to the Mishkan and the exclusivity of its services.

Connection to Korach

The episode of Korach which follows immediately after the parasha of ציצית illustrates this inherent tension. Korach's summarises his argument as follows:

כִּי כָל־הָעֵדָה כֻּלָּם קְדֹשִׁים וּבְתוֹכָם ה' וּמַדּוּעַ תִּתְנַשְּׂאוּ עַל־קְהַל ה' (במדבר טז:ג)

Korach purports to wholly embrace the ideal of spiritual equality represented by the ציצית and attempts to use it as the moral high ground from which to challenge the position of the Kohanim. This is eloquently captured in the midrash:

מַה כְּתִיב לְמַעְלָה מִן הָעִנְיָן, דַּבֵּר אֶל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל וְאָמַרְתָּ אֲלֵיהֶם וְעָשׂוּ לָהֶם צִיצִת (במדבר טו, לח). קָפַץ קֹרַח וְאָמַר לְמֹשֶׁה, אַתָּה אוֹמֵר, וְנָתְנוּ עַל צִיצִת וְגוֹ' (שם). טַלִּית שֶׁכֻּלָּהּ תְּכֵלֶת, מַה הִיא שֶׁיְּהֵא פְּטוּרָה מִן הַצִּיצִית. אָמַר לוֹ מֹשֶׁה, חַיֶּבֶת בְּצִיצִית. אָמַר לוֹ קֹרַח, טַלִּית שֶׁכֻּלָּהּ תְּכֵלֶת אֵינָהּ פּוֹטֶרֶת עַצְמָהּ[6]

Indeed, it seems strange that if a garment is all תכלת that a specific תכלת thread is still required. If we are really aממלכת כהנים  (represented by the טלית שכולה תכלת) then why do we need to have Kohanim (represented by the פתיל תכלת).[7] Korach's reference to the פתיל תכלת is significant as this is the element most closely associated with the ציץ – the holiest item worn by the Kohen Gadol.

However, quite aside from Korach's own dubious motives, there is a difference between equality and anarchy. In this case, the unholy alliance with Dasan and Aviram represents nothing more than a coalition of spiritual and political anarchists. The fallout from Korach's rebellion demonstrates why, notwithstanding the universalistic ideal expressed through ציצית, a centralised and stable system including a dedicated tribe of priests is still required.

Interestingly, whilst the parasha introduces the episode of Korach through its call to holiness for every individual, it is specifically the staff of Aaron (the Kohen Gadol) which closes the debate once and for all when his staff and only his staff blossoms described in the verse as ויצץ ציץ. This appears to be a veiled reference to the ציץ of the Kohen Gadol suggesting it belongs exclusively to the family of Aaron. However, in view of the interplay between the ציץ of the Kohen Gadol and the ציצית worn by all, the expression elegantly conveys the tension which lies between these two concepts of ציץ and ציצית.

---

[1] See Rashi's second explanation. Rashbam distinguishes between its basic meaning (strands) in the earlier verse and the enhanced meaning in the second verse: "הציצית הזה יהי לכם לראייה שתראו אותו, כמו "מציץ מן החרכים". וכן מצאתי בספרי"

[2] Possibly the אותו refers to the פתיל (which is masculine), however it would seem the more natural object is the ציצית which is the immediately preceding noun.

[3] מדרש תנחומא, שלח טו

[4] See for example R. Moshe Shamah – Recalling The Covenant p.757-761. Whilst not specifying the connections, the Zohar (Sh'lach 175) also intimately connects them:

צִּיצִּית אִיהוּ נוּקְבָא, רָזָא דְּעַלְמָא תַּתָּאָה. אִסְתַּכְּלוּתָא לְאַדְכְּרָא. צִּיץ דְּכַר, צִּיצִּית נוּקְבָא, וְדָא לְכָל בַר נַשׁ. צִּיץ לְכַהַנָא

[5] From a halachic perspective as well, it is noteworthy that both the ציצית and the בגדי כהונה in general, are not subject to the prohibition of שעטנז.    

[6] תנחומא, קורח ב:א

[7] It is fascinating that the Me'il worn by the Kohen was indeed all techelet - ועשית את מעיל האפוד כליל תכלת. This description echoes the words used by Korach who inquired about a טלית שכולה תכלת. According to the Rambam (Klei Ha'mikdash 9:3) the Me'il did indeed have four corners yet did not require ציצית. The Radvaz and Minchat Chinuch provide suggestions of their own, but perhaps Korach had the best answer. The פתיל תכלת against the לבן, represents the seeing of the sacred within the mundane. The Me'il, on the other hand, is one of the special garments worn by the Kohen Gadol who was surrounded by holiness. This constant state of holiness is represented by the Me'il which was כולה תכלת making the need for a special פתיל תכלת as a point of spiritual meditation, effectively redundant. Korach assumed this holiness was a fundamental state of being for everyone (כי כל העדה כולם קדושים) thus dispensing with the need for any meditative contemplation or effort represented by the פתיל תכלת. However, that was the major mistake. Holiness is an aspiration requiring continuous effort. Whilst the Kohanim had the necessary benefit of a sterile environment, the symbolism of the מעיל which Korach was attempting to appropriate is fundamentally incompatible with the life of the regular Israelite who must seek God within the mundane.