Parashas Korach
5 Tammuz 5769
June 27, 2009
Daf Yomi: Bava Metzia 63
Guest Author:
Alan Betsalel Friedlander
National Council of Young Israel
“…Thou shalt not be like Korach and like his assembly…” (Bamidbar 17:5)
Let’s address three questions on this week’s Torah portion:
1) How could Korach succumb to performing such a dastardly deed against his own cousins?
2) How did Moshe Rabbeinu (Moses our teacher) justify the violent punishment that he demanded from G-d against Korach?
3) Why was the sin that Korach perpetrated considered so very offensive as to deserve a death penalty?
1) How could Korach succumb to performing such a dastardly deed against his own cousins?
Rabbi Yehoshua says in the third chapter of Pirkei Avos, three things take a person out of the world: jealousy, lust, and honor. Korach’s reason for his rebellion was based on a desire for increased prestige and also a deep jealousy of his cousins, the descendents of Amram (Moshe, Aharon, and Aharon’s children), who had many special and prestigious honors that no other family received.
Thus, if Korach focused on not being overwhelmed by any one root sin as the main proof of his ethical integrity, he was sadly mistaken. The Satan is not limited to using only one vice at a time. For example, an adulterer may never be overwhelmed by mere attraction to another until he also feels dishonored by his wife. As if with sleight of hand, or to use an example out of military strategy, like a pincer movement, the Satan may toss one core transgression out in front of a person as a distraction while, he petitions the Heavenly court to bring the test of a second root sin as the true targeted temptation.
The truly righteous are born when they face an onslaught of more than one root sin at a time and overcome them. By spiritually weathering that perfect storm of temptation, they become the thing that legends are made of. Thus, we find in the Talmud (Sanhedrin 19b-20a) where Paltiel Ben Layish’s rejection of immorality is considered greater than Yosef’s test in Egypt and that of Boaz. This was because in Paltiel’s case it was not a single test, but a nightly test on many occasions (as per Rashi, ibid. 20a). To my limited understanding, it seems that we could also draw a conclusion about the societal pressures Paltiel must have endured. Remember that King Saul’s society supported his rights to cohabit with Princess Michal, even if in his heart, Paltiel held himself to a higher moral standard in order to reserve her for her destined husband, David HaMelech. Thus, Paltiel had to stave off lust, jealousy and honor: lust is obvious and implicit in the language of the Talmud; jealousy, because he denied himself what every other husband did not; honor, for by consummating the marriage he would have solidified his place as a prince of Israel. Despite all this, Paltiel did no wrong.
2) How did Moshe Rabbeinu justify the violent punishment that he demanded from G-d against Korach?
True leaders do not use strife as a weapon against their enemies, even when they have the opportunity.
Moshe Rabbeinu did not wait for Dasan and Aviram to cultivate thoughts of penance and seek Moshe out in order to negotiate a path to peace. Rather, Moshe put aside his dignity for the sake of peace and sought them out (Rashi to Sanhedrin 110a & Bamidbar 16:12).
King David was in worse straights than Moshe Rabbeinu, and had opportunities to kill King Shaul before Shaul could kill him. Yet, he passed up those opportunities, not even viewing them as options. (I Shmuel, chapters 24 & 26)
Given that this is so, why did Moshe act so strictly and demand such a violent end to Korach and his assembly? Shouldn’t he have performed further acts of self-abnegation? Is this choice that Moshe made truly the path of peace? After all, it must be that the giver of the Torah acted in a peaceful manner, for of the Torah it is stated, “Its ways are pleasant and all its paths are peaceful.” (Mishley 3:18)
Actually, the harsh punishment against Korach is good leadership, for it is the only path to peace that still remained available after the contentious rebellion broke out. Moshe forsook his own dignity in pursuit of peace, but Dasan and Aviram refused to even negotiate. They left no room for compromise. Their plan was that Moshe and Aharon, the prophets of HaShem, had to be completely humiliated, which would have desecrated HaShem’s Holy Name, the gravity of which is even more severe than bloodshed (Rambam, Teshuvah 1:4).
HaShem’s navi, Moshe Rabbeinu, being utterly fair minded, made certain that the rebels received exactly that which they had purchased. In the language of the Talmud, “All the ways of the Holy One Blessed be He are measure for measure”(Sanhedrin 90a). Such is not vengeance, but justice. Indeed, such was the very form of justice that the rebels demanded through their virulent words and deeds. As it says, (Mishley 3:30) “Do not quarrel with anyone without cause, if he did you no wrong.”
3) Why was the sin that Korach perpetrated considered so very offensive as to deserve a death penalty?
The story of Korach is the archetypical example of what a leader should not try to do. The poor leadership that Korach pursued did not begin with the deaths of 250 of his followers, but from the very path to power that he chose. By examining the chosen tools that Korach used in pursuit of his rebellion, we can learn what a leader should not do.
There are several applicable Talmudic statements on this (Sanhedrin 110a):
“Whoever pursues a quarrel transgresses a prohibition. As it says, “One should not be as Korach and as his congregation.”
“Whoever disagrees with his Torah teacher is like one who disagrees with the Divine Presence (unless he has a higher source to back up his claim).”
“Whoever causes strife against his Torah teacher is like one who causes strife against the Divine Presence.”
“Whoever disgraces his Torah teacher is like one who disgraces the Divine Presence.”
Of the above quotes, the one that stands out the most as the foundation of all the trouble in this matter is strife. It was via the vice of strife that Korach challenged the authority of Moshe Rabbeinu. That means, before Korach opened his mouth, there was great deal of peace amongst the people. And that means that the main vehicle of determining what good leadership is would be the level of peace among the followers of the leader, as it is the antithesis of the path of Korach.
Peace? But there was no war, so why do we call the opposite of strife, peace. Unlike the United Nations, the Torah does not define peace exclusively as the absence of hostility, but as the absence of anything that can detract from the pursuit of spirituality. So we find in Mishley (3:1-2) “My child, My Torah do not forget, and let your heart safeguard My commandments. For length of days and years of life and peace they add to you.”
Good Shabbos.
The National Council of Young Israel's Divrei Torah Bulletin is a weekly newsletter. If you'd like to receive our weekly e-newsletter with the Parshat Hashavua, Click here to sign up!
