In Memory of our beloved David Schwartz, who fell in battle sanctifying God’s name, on 27 Tevet, 5784 (8 January 2024).

“Le’David Barchi Nafshi” is a compilation of essays written on the weekly Torah reading by David Schwartz, of blessed memory. First published on the occasion of his marriage to Meital, David’s unique Torah thoughts that delve into the depths of the Torah are shared now to elevate his memory and sanctify his soul.

“They gathered against Moshe and Aaron and said to them, ‘You have gone too far! For all the community are holy, all of them, and God is in their midst. Why then do you raise yourselves above God’s congregation?’”

Reb Yitzchak Meir Alter in his Chiddushei HaRim has noted the obvious question that arises on Korach from this. It is nonsense to claim that Moshe was guilty of condescending leadership, as God has testified about him: “And the man Moshe was the most humble man in the entire world” (Num. 12:3). Additionally we recently saw that the rabble complained about Moshe, and then Moshe asked: “Did I give birth to this nation? Was it me who brought them to be?” (Num. 11:12). Thus, it was God who chose Moshe and Aaron to be the representatives of the people. Moshe in his humility had resisted in every way taking the mission upon himself.

Our sages tell us in Tractate Hullin (89a): “Greater is that which is stated with regard to Moshe and Aaron than that which was stated by Abraham. By Abraham it was written, “But I am only dust and ashes.” However, regarding Moshe and Aaron, it is stated, “And what are we?” (Ex. 16:7) [i.e., we are not even dust and ashes]. Although Moshe was the greatest among the giants of our history, Korach still questions his authority, asking: “Why did you raise yourself above the congregation?” How did Korach invent this nonsense? Furthermore, why drove Korach to challenge Moshe at that moment?

In the Ethics of our Fathers our sages tell us: “Any dispute that is for the sake of heaven will endure, but a dispute that is not for the sake of heaven will not endure. What type of dispute is for the sake of heaven? That is the dispute of Hillel and Shammai. What type of dispute is not for the sake of heaven? That is the dispute of Korach and his followers” (Avot 5:17). Rabbi Kehati explains in his commentary on Avot that a dispute for the sake of heaven is a dispute that is based on facts which is for the purpose of determining truth. An argument that is not for heaven is focused only on arguing for personal power. The Mishnah brings the example of Korach and his followers as an example of an argument for personal privilege and power.

There is a midrash, or legend, that relates that Korach would ask Moshe annoying questions with regard to tzitzit. He asked if it was all the color of blue Tekhelet, do we still need blue fringes on the Tallit, and he harassed him about the significance of the mezuzah if one lived in a house filled with holy books.

In another unrelated midrash, it is related that the words “Korach took” means that Korach had lasting resentment from the time when his cousin Eltzaphan his cousin for the leadership over the family in place of him.

In any case, it is possible to see that the essence of the dispute was not only about a search for truth, but originates in his pride and stands in stark contrast to the dispute between Hillel and Shamai as the Mishnah in Avot stated above. It seems to me that the dispute was specifically about accepting privilege and power, and not for clarifying any truth. The whole basis of the argument was fundamentally not sound. The very question of “why did you raise yourself up” was only asked for the purpose of beginning a conflict that was not for the purpose of heaven. In reality, as was stated, there was no foundation for the matter, as it was written above, “And the man Moshe was the most humble of all men.” His pride and hunger for power brought Korach to make a claim that lacked any logic, as it is stated that its essence was conflict for the sake of argument alone.

Rav Asher Weiss explains that Korach succeeded in disturbing the people with these futile claims, since that is the nature of conflict. In a time of argument, even preposterous words settle into the hearts of man and kindle the fire of conflict. During an argument, a person’s heart does not distinguish between good and evil, or truth and falsehood.

Now we have to come to the timing of the debate, that is, what caused Korach and his party to be angry at this particular time. The answer to this question may be found in God's response to the sin of the spies, and the consequences of the sin. The people of Israel had been only a few days before entering the land, but after the sin of the spies in Shelach, the people of Israel were sentenced to a very severe decree.

As it was stated in Numbers 14:29-31: “In this very wilderness shall your carcasses drop. Of all of you [men] who were recorded in your various lists from the age of twenty years up, you who have muttered against Me … Your children who, you said, would be carried off—these will I allow to enter; they shall know the land that you have rejected. But your carcasses shall drop in this wilderness, while your children roam the wilderness for forty years, suffering for your faithlessness, until the last of your carcasses is down in the wilderness (Num. 14:29-31)

This hard news brought despair, resentment and frustration to the people of Israel. It seems to me that this grumbling brought Korach to resentment precisely at this time, immediately after the punishment for the sin of the spies. The resentment can also be seen in a careful reading of the language of Datan and Aviram’s response to Moshe. The disenchantment rose up from the people's feeling that immigrating to the Land of Israel was now further away than ever.

As it states (16:12-14) “Moshe sent for Dathan and Abiram, sons of Eliab; but they said, ‘We will not come. Is it not enough that you brought us from a land flowing with milk and honey to have us die in the wilderness, that you would also lord it over us? Even if you had brought us to a land flowing with milk and honey, and given us possession of fields and vineyards, should you gouge out the eyes of those involved? We will not come!’”

I will conclude with the commentary of Rashi (Num. 16:27), who emphasizes the great harm that may come from arguments. “From this we see how an argument may be such a severe matter. The courts on earth don’t penalize children until they reach maturity, and the heavenly court does not punish children until they reach twenty years. But here it is written that even those who suckled at the breast were punished.”

After all this discussion of conflict, it is appropriate to conclude with a teaching about peace from the Mishna, Tractate Uktzin 3:12. Rabbi Shimon ben Halafta said: “The Holy One, Blessed be He, found no vessel that could contain blessing for Israel save that of peace, as it is written: "The Lord will give strength unto his people; the Lord will bless his people with peace.’” (Psalms 29:11)