The Torah deliberately traces Korach’s lineage back to Levi, stopping there. Why is Yaakov Avinu not included in Korach’s pedigree? Rashi explains that when Yaakov was reproving his two sons, Shimon and Levi, for their deplorable actions regarding the people of Shechem, he said, “Bi’kehalam al teichad kevodi,” “In their conspiracy may my soul not enter.” Yaakov Avinu did not want his name connected to the evil that their descendants would eventually generate. Rashi adds, however, that when the Torah mentions in Divrei Hayamim that a descendant of Korach was among the Leviim who sang in the Bais Hamikdash, it…
Back to Home -> Korach ->
The Torah recounts a number of controversies that occurred during Klal Yisrael’s forty year sojourn in the desert. They complained and complained. They complained about water and about meat. There were spies who slandered Eretz Yisrael. Yet, after all is said and done, the one dispute that has been recorded in history as the paradigm of machlokes, controversy, is the machlokes of Korach. Why? At least Korach’s dispute had a spiritual dimension to it. They questioned the Kehunah. They sought to serve in the Bais Hamikdash and offer korbanos. They even made use of lomdus, logic, using a Tallis made…
As part of Korach’s rebellion, the two hundred and fifty men who were part of Korach’s group were to offer incense in fire pans. They received their due punishment in that they were being consumed by a fire from Hashem. Their fire pans, instead of being discarded, were melted and shaped into a covering for the Mizbayach. Until now the Altar had been a hollow frame which was filled with dirt every time Klal Yisrael camped. Now, the outside surface was to be covered with a thin mass plating composed of the sinner’s fire pans. This is enigmatic! Is it…
The Levi who receives his portion of Maaser from the Yisrael must, in turn, give Terumah to the Kohen. The Torah tells us that this Terumas Maaser is considered the same as Terumah Gedolah, which is offered by the Yisrael. Imrei Yosef cites the Zidetchoiver Rebbe, zl, who claims that this pasuk alludes to an ethical lesson for he who has been raised above his peers to be selected for spiritual leadership. One might think that it is his virtue and scholarship, his good deeds and meticulous mitzvah observance, that effected this “promotion”. The Torah tells him not to permit…
Korach was not simply another hatemonger who sought to usurp Moshe and Aharon as a result of intense feelings of envy. Korach was among those who “carried” the Aron Ha’kodesh. He was obviously sensitive to the fact that the Aron was in reality carrying those who attempted to carry it. It would be unrealistic to think that an individual who was so aware of Hashem should stoop to such machlokes, controversy, unless something “noble” motivated him. The Kotzker Rebbe, zl, explains that Korach sought Kehunah, He felt that he could serve Hashem better if he were a Kohen. His complete…
Moshe, acting atypically, implored Hashem not to accept any form of offering whereby Korach and his henchmen could expiate their sin of rebellion. Sforno interprets Moshe Rabeinu’s demand in the following manner. Had they sinned against Hashem, then He would have pardoned them after they had atoned for their actions. Sins committed against one’s fellow man are not atoned even on Yom Kippur, unless the sinner has appeased the one whom he has wronged. Moshe disclaims receiving any benefit from them. Thus, his leadership over them was entirely for their benefit, to attend to their affairs and needs. Their criticism…
Korach is recorded in history as the archetype of the baal machlokes, one who generates strife and contention. We may wonder what distinguished Korach in this area. After all, he was not the first person in the Torah who was involved in strife. Did not Kayin fight with his brother? And the list goes on from there. We suggest that while Korach was not the first person to argue with others, he was the first to start a movement founded in contention, whose goal was to usurp the leadership of Klal Yisrael. It is one thing to disagree, even to…
All those who joined Korach in his conflict met their end tragically. Korach’s sons, however, did not die. As Sforno comments, “They were not drawn after him in the matter.” It seems strange that such a charismatic demagogue as Korach had no permanent influence upon his children. Chazal assert that Korach was imbued with the ability to see the future. Therefore, he was secure in his success, since he foresaw his noble descendants. Ostensibly, Korach’s ability was limited. He saw the tzaddikim that would be his progeny, but he did not see his own disaster. In any event, what happened…
Finally, the people were privy to clear, unequivocal truth – Aharon was Hashem’s choice for Kohen Gadol. Alas, the miracle of Aharon’s staff occurred after Korach and his followers met their terrible end — and over fourteen thousand Jews perished in a plague. Would it not have been more advantageous that the miracle of Aharon’s selection take place in the presence of his detractors, so that they could witness the truth? Perhaps it would have inspired them to repent. Such action might have circumvented the ensuing tragedy. Obviously, proof would have had little or no effect upon Korach and his…
What incited Korach to challenge Moshe and Aharon? Indeed, Chazal characterize his behavior as “shtus,” an act of sheer stupidity. They say that he had a vision of his future descendants, among whom was Shmuel Ha’Navi. This was the source of his downfall. He assumed that if such virtuous scholars would descend from him, then he himself must be intrinsically virtuous. Chazal state that his mistake stemmed from his lack of awareness that his sons had repented during the last few moments. What lesson can we derive from Korach’s error? Horav Baruch Ezrachi, Shlita, cites the Midrash in Vayikra that…