The Israel Koschitzky Virtual Beit Midrash

Parshat HaShavua
Yeshivat Har Etzion

The story of Korach's rebellion is a fascinating drama, full of passion and intrigue. Although the Torah is grudgingly silent regarding the background and details of these events, Chazal, utilizing various nuances and hints in the biblical texts, managed to weave together a tale which reflects both human realities and philosophical dilemmas.

In sharp contrast to this narrative brevity, the aftermath of the rebellion, which at first glance appears insignificant, is treated with surprising detail. This epilogue is quite uncharacteristic of biblical narrative. The Torah records many stories which transpired in the wilderness. On various occasions the Jewish people failed, and were reprimanded and sometimes even punished. At that point the episode ends. However, the story of Korach seems to inexplicably linger on. After Korach and his followers are destroyed, the people complain repeatedly, bringing upon themselves disaster after disaster.

Let us consider one of the major points of contention - the authority of Moshe Rabbeinu. In response to the challenge presented by Korach, the divine sanction of Moshe's rule was clearly established when the earth opened up its mouth to swallow Datan and Aviram. If this issue has been resolved, how are we to understand the people's subsequent verbal assault on Moshe and Aharon: "YOU murdered Hashem's people" (17:6)? The use of the term "you" in this context indicates that Moshe and Aharon were being held personally responsible for the deaths of the insurgents. Did the people still believe that Moshe was acting out of personal vengeance? Were they totally oblivious to the most essential message indicated by the divine sign which they had just witnessed: "Hereby you will know that God sent me to perform all these acts, as they were not [done] of my own mind" (16:28)? Furthermore, we should not ignore the fact that most of the casualties occurred during the plague which took place only at this point, and not during the actual rebellion.

However the story does not end even at this point. The Korach saga continues, as the people once again turn to Moshe, complaining in the wake of the plague:

The meaning of this complaint is enigmatic. Did the people really believe that God killed at random? Were they unaware that Korach and his followers had committed a grave sin? Moreover, why do they continue to complain, after the tragic consequences of their initial complaint? Was one plague insufficient? Why don't they learn from their mistakes?

Based on the above, it seems obvious that far more emphasis should be placed on the events which followed the rebellion. The Torah is trying to draw our attention to this section of the story, and a complete understanding of the Korach rebellion cannot be attained without deciphering the significance of the epilogue.

In my opinion, these events implicitly address a basic problem raised by Korach which was never explicitly treated. "For the entire congregation is holy and God dwells in their midst; why then do you raise yourselves above the congregation of God?" (16:3). Regardless of the impurity of Korach's personal motives, the problem which he raised is that of equality. This question is never specifically addressed, nor adequately resolved. Although we trust Moshe's assertion that Korach was interested only in his personal status (see 16:10), we are nevertheless left to ponder the Jewish caste system which separates kohanim from the rest of the nation.

Let us take a closer look at the events which led to the plague. The people blamed Moshe and Aharon for the death of Korach and his followers. Does this mean that Moshe Rabbeinu was completely in error when he claimed, "Hereby you shall know that God sent me" (16:28)? As we mentioned before, it is difficult to assume that the people were totally oblivious to the divine proof indicating that Moshe and Aharon were merely implementing God's will.

I believe that the people WERE convinced by the divine sign. Korach's claim that Moshe was not representing the divine will was laid to rest when the earth miraculously swallowed the insurgents. The people's argument was not rooted in philosophical skepticism; rather, it was a human reaction generated by sorrow and pain. Devastated by the death of public leaders, friends and relatives, they turned to Moshe and Aharon full of grief: "Was there no other way to prove your point? Did all these Jews have to be destroyed? Are we short of orphans and widows?" It was a human emotional outburst, not a rational argument. However, if my interpretation is correct, the severity of God's response seems incomprehensible: "Remove yourselves from amongst this congregation and I will destroy them in an instant" (17:10).

It would be instructive to glance at a similar statement, which is the precursor of this one. When Korach goes to the sanctuary with his two hundred and fifty followers, he gathers the entire nation to witness the outcome. God's severe response to the nation's curiosity is startling: "Separate from amongst this congregation and I will destroy them in an instant" (16:21). Again we find God's response totally out of proportion with the severity of the infraction. It is true that the people should not have harbored even the slightest doubt regarding the divine nature of Moshe's authority, but is this curiosity punishable by death? Although in the end Moshe managed to deflect the danger of destruction, we are left to ponder the significance of the threat.

At this point, I would like to suggest an approach radically different to the one assumed till now. Accordingly, the plague was not the deserved punishment for a specific sin. Rather, it was the almost inevitable result of a new situation created by the rebellion. Korach attacked the institution of kehuna (priesthood). He claimed that the entire nation was holy and therefore there was no need for a separate priestly class. According to his argument, anyone could enter the sanctuary and bring the incense offering. Although Benei Yisrael did not challenge Moshe's authority, they nonetheless identified with Korach's argument. They did not understand why they could not fully participate in the sanctuary worship. After all, weren't they a "kingdom of priests" (Shemot 19:6)? Why should they be considered a "zar" (stranger), who may not enter the temple? Why should a barrier separate them from the sanctuary?

However, this barrier was not unilaterally imposed upon Benei Yisrael by God. It was erected with the implicit consent of the people. Therefore, once Benei Yisrael accepted the premise of Korach's argument and rejected the barrier separating the sacred and the mundane, they found themselves faced with a new situation. The barrier was abolished. There was no longer any division between the people and the sanctuary. The line separating "the camp of the Shekhina" from "the Levite camp" and "the Israelite camp" became blurred. The entire camp became enveloped within the context of the temple and the presence of the Shekhina.

Of course, being in the presence of the Almighty, as it were, is quite demanding. Behavior which under usual circumstances is acceptable, becomes intolerable within the context of the sanctuary. Normal human reactions of anger and grief must be suppressed (see Vayikra 21:11-12). Emotional outbursts are unacceptable.

When the people gathered to witness the outcome of the Korach-Moshe controversy, they did not necessarily harbor deep-rooted doubts regarding the divine nature of Moshe's authority. Perhaps they were driven by simple human curiosity. It is even possible that they were rooting for Korach, notdue to wavering faith, but merely because he was the underdog. Furthermore, we already noted that Benei Yisrael identified with Korach's popular campaign slogan. Nevertheless, these human frailties are inexcusable within God's presence. While standing within the framework of the mishkan, which now enveloped the entire camp, human behavior must be impeccable. Had Moshe not pleaded on behalf of the nation, a lethal plague would have devastated the camp.

Mourning the death of Korach and his followers, the people approached Moshe and complained. Their reaction was a human one, an emotional outburst of grief, sorrow and pain. They did not challenge Moshe's authority; they merely let off steam. Such a reaction, although acceptable under normal situations, was intolerable once the barriers had collapsed. The presence of the Shekhina demands restraint and self-control (see Vayikrah 10:3). There is no room within the mishkan for such passionate outbursts of anger. Once the people protested, there was nothing left for Moshe to do but to send Aharon to stop the spread of the plague.

In sharp contrast to the argumentative tone of the emotional outburst which led to the plague, the complaint which followed is a pathetic whimper. Frustrated and desperate, the people return to Moshe and say: "Behold, we are all dying!" (17:27). After the plague, they finally understood the severity of their situation. They realized that the plague was not a punishment for sin, but a result of the total breakdown of barriers which they had brought upon themselves. "Everyone who approaches the sanctuary of God dies; have we stopped dying?" (ibid. 28).

After initially identifying with Korach's campaign and rejecting the barriers separating the sanctuary from the nation, the people are now ready to appreciate why division is necessary. They understood that, to a certain extent, "a holy nation" is a contradiction in terms. Sanctity demands separation, a departure from the mundane. Frailties typical of the human condition are incommensurate with holiness. Normal societal conditions are replete with passion and competition, arguments and jealousy. Although these are unavoidable within a normal national framework, they are intolerable within the presence of God. Nationhood and holiness appear to be mutually exclusive.

Now the time was ripe to re-introduce the institution of kehuna. A sanctuary for the entire nation can be established within their midst on one condition: that there are barriers. A mishkan can be established within a human context; however, the priests who are to serve within it must be separated from the mundane routine of life, which is full of tension and strife. The remainder of the nation can continue to lead a normal life, and nevertheless the mishkan in their midst becomes the focus which invests their life with direction and meaning.

This, in fact, is God's response to the people's second complaint:

Benei Yisrael finally appreciated the institution of kehuna. They finally understood why barriers were necessary for the realization of that great vision - to become a kingdom of priests and a holy nation. At this point, kehuna could be re-established, and the barriers which were rejected due to Korach's rebellion were rebuilt with the entire nation's consent. A harmonious community based upon separation of roles and mutual respect was built upon the ruins of a fragmented society divided by a sense of inequality.

Thus our parsha is a continuation of the disintegration of the machane which was established at the beginning of Sefer Bemidbar. This process, which began in ch. 11, and peaks with the miraglim episode, continues with the rejection of kehuna and leviya. However Parashat Korach is also the turning point. Kehuna and leviya are re-established, and the process of rebuilding has begun.

This shiur is provided courtesy of the Virtual Beit Midrash, the premier source of online courses on Torah and Judaism - 14 different courses on all levels, for all backgrounds.

Make Jewish learning partof your week on a regular basis - enroll in the
Virtual Beit Midrash

Yeshivat Har Et
Alon Shvut, Israel, 90433
office@etzion.org.il