Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

Category

Back to Home -> Korach ->


ואני הנה נתתי לך את משמרת תרומתי לכל קדשי בני ישראל

And I – behold! I have given you the safeguard of My heave-offer was of all the sanctities of Bnei Yisrael. (18:8)

The offerings Korach controversy had concluded (veritably, it never ends; a new one will unfortunately rear its ugly head to replace the former debacle), and the Torah now lists the twenty-four various gifts, matnos Kehunah, that were allotted to the Kohanim. In Pirkei Avos (6:6), we are taught that the Priesthood is acquired through twenty-four procedures. Horav Shlomo Wolbe, zl, observes that this is no coincidence. A corollary must exist between these two “twenty-fours.” He quotes the Chovos HaLevavos, who teaches that everything which Hashem grants us comes with an obligation for reciprocity. Hashem shows His kindness to us. We…

Continue Reading

כי כל העדה כלם קדשים

For the entire congregation – all of them – are holy. (16:3)

Korach crossed the line when he debated Moshe Rabbeinu. One does not impugn the integrity of the gadol/gedolim, Torah giants, of their generation. His statement, “The entire congregation, all of them, are holy,” is the basic argument of those who reject the Torah leaders, claiming that they are as well-versed in Torah as the gedolim. They do not require a teacher or a leader. Horav Moshe Feinstein, zl (who was the posek ha’dor, undisputed halachic arbiter of his generation), explains that without the mesorah, tradition, of the great men of the generation, one can easily err – just as Korach…

Continue Reading

ויקח קרח בן יצהר בן קהת

Korach ben Yitzhar ben Kehas took (himself). (16:1)

In his commentary (Shaar HaPesukim) to Parashas Korach, the Arizal makes a somewhat cryptic statement. “The gematria, numerical equivalent, of Moshe (Rabbeinu, our quintessential leader) is 345. If one were to deduct the gematria of the name Hevel (son of Adam and Chavah, who was killed by Kayin), which is 37, the sum would equal 308, which is the gematria of Korach.” This implies much more than mere numbers. Ostensibly, removing “Hevel” – or whatever characteristics he has in common with the personality of Moshe – can produce a Korach. Conversely, “Moshe” and “Hevel” together seem to create a cure…

Continue Reading

ויקומו לפני משה ואנשים מבני ישראל חמישים ומאתים נשיאי עדה

They stood before Moshe with two hundred and fifty men from Bnei Yisrael, leaders of the Assembly, those summoned for the meeting, men of renown. (16:2)

Perhaps we do not give enough credit to the average Jew. People are capable of deciding between right and wrong. Those who err do not necessarily lack astuteness; rather, the decision might have been more difficult than we think. Let us take the Korach controversy as an example. I say Korach, rather than Korach/Moshe, because Moshe Rabbeinu was passive. He did not enter the fray. He responded to the vitriol, but did not become a partner with Korach in the dispute. It was Korach against Moshe. It takes two participants to make a full-scale controversy. The Korach dispute had one…

Continue Reading

רב לכם בני לוי

It is too much for you, O offspring of Levi. (16:7)

Korach was no fool (or, at least, that was not his reputation). Chazal say that Korach was a pikeiach, quite astute and wise. Rashi quotes the well-known baffling question: Mah raah l’shtus zeh? “What did he see that possessed him to undertake such a foolish endeavor?” He saw prophetically that among his descendants, would be: the Navi Shmuel, who was as great in his time as Moshe Rabbeinu and Aharon HaKohen combined; and the twenty-four groups of Leviim who would prophesy with Divine Inspiration. Korach rationalized that with such illustrious lineage descending from him, how could he go wrong? The…

Continue Reading

וישלח משה לקרא לדתן ולאבירם בני אליאב ויאמרו לא נעלה

Moshe sent forth to summon Dassan and Aviram, bnei Eliav, but they said, “We shall not go up!” (16:12)

Two words: discord and disagreement, both begin with the same letter – “D,” but the words could otherwise not be further apart. Discord is the result of a disagreement in which one or both factions take it personally. Our parsha presents a classic case in which one side made every attempt to ameliorate a disagreement but did not succeed, since the other side was insistent on taking it to the next level. When Korach rebelled against Moshe Rabbeinu, he was joined by Dassan and Aviram, Moshe’s nemeses. Our leader did everything to appease them to the point that he sent a…

Continue Reading

ויקם משה וילך אל דתן ואבירם

So Moshe stood up and went to Dassan and Aviram. (16:25)

Why did Moshe Rabbeinu denigrate himself to go to such miscreants as Dassan and Aviram? He was the quintessential leader of Klal Yisrael, the Rabban Shel Kol Yisrael, the nation’s Rebbe. They were nothing. Yet, he went to them. Why? Chazal (Sanhedrin 110a) derive from here that one does not sustain a dispute. If he can diffuse a controversy from growing, spreading, he should do everything possible to extinguish the flames of discord. Furthermore, one who supports a machlokes, controversy, transgresses the prohibition’ of V’lo yiheyeh k’Korach v’chaadaso, “that he not be like Korach and his assembly” (Bamidbar 17:5). Simply…

Continue Reading

ויקח קרח

Korach took, (separated himself). (16:1)

Korach had it all, but, it was not enough for him. He wanted more, or he simply did not want Moshe Rabbeinu to have it. Korach was a clever dissident who was able to attract a powerful following of supporters. First, he told the people that he was acting on their behalf. Since he already had it all, he had no need for personal leadership. He was taking a stand for “others.” He felt that the people were being exploited, and he was coming to their rescue. Kol ha’eidah kulam kedoshim, “The entire congregation is holy”; “Hashem is in their…

Continue Reading

ויקח קרח

Korach took (separated himself). (16:1)

Korach was the first prominent demagogue to create a rift in Klal Yisrael when he impugned Moshe Rabbeinu’s leadership, and, by extension, created a mutiny against Hashem. Targum Onkeles defines machlokes, controversy, as: pilug; a split; a breach; a rift. Klal Yisrael is supposed to live in harmony. We must strive to emulate Hashem, Who is Echad, One. Thus, when we live together as one, we give satisfaction to Hashem. Chazal distinguish between a machlokes, which is l’shem Shomayim, for the sake of Heaven, and one which is not. A machlokes l’shem Shomayim is a dispute in which each party…

Continue Reading

ויקח קרח בן יצהר בן קהת בן לוי

Korach ben Yitzhar, ben Kehas, ben Levi, took (separated himself). (16:1)

Noticeably, Yaakov Avinu’s name is omitted from Korach’s lineage. Rashi comments that it was the Patriarch himself who prayed that his name be deleted from anything connected to Korach. Simply, Yaakov wanted no association whatsoever, even by name, with Korach. This, of course, does not deny the fact that everyone knows that Yaakov was Levi’s father, and, in turn, the Patriarch of Korach’s lineage, but the deletion of Yaakov’s name declares that no part of Korach’s nefarious behavior had its source in Yaakov. Yaakov is the epitome of emes, truth. Machlokes, controversy, by its very nature, is founded in sheker,…

Continue Reading

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

You have Successfully Subscribed!