Thoughts on parashat Korach.

This week’s Torah portion includes one of those not entirely clear stories, which are typically difficult to translate into modern language and modern mentality – the story of Korach and his dissent: 

Now Korah, son of Izhar son of Kohath son of Levi, betook himself, along with Dathan and Abiram sons of Eliab, and On son of Peleth — descendants of Reuben — to rise up against Moses, together with two hundred and fifty Israelites, chieftains of the community, chosen in the assembly, men of repute. They combined against Moses and Aaron and said to them, “You have gone too far! For all the community are holy, all of them, and יהוה is in their midst. Why then do you raise yourselves above יהוה’s congregation?” When Moses heard this, he fell on his face. Then he spoke to Korah and all his company, saying, “Come morning, יהוה will make known who is [God’s] and who is holy by granting direct access; the one whom [God] has chosen will be granted access. Do this: You, Korah and all your band, take fire pans, and tomorrow put fire in them and lay incense on them before יהוה. Then the candidate whom יהוה chooses, he shall be the holy one. You have gone too far, sons of Levi!” Moses said further to Korah, “Hear me, sons of Levi. Is it not enough for you that the God of Israel has set you apart from the community of Israel and given you direct access, to perform the duties of יהוה’s Tabernacle and to minister to the community and serve them? Now that [God] has advanced you and all your fellow Levites with you, do you seek the priesthood too? (Num 16:1-10)

The whole rebellion of Korah and his entourage against Moses ends tragically for them, and it is one of these spectacular, biblical images of disaster:

[…] The earth opened its mouth and swallowed them up with their households, all Korah’s people and all their possessions. They went down alive into Sheol, with all that belonged to them; the earth closed over them and they vanished from the midst of the congregation. (Num 16:32-33)

What motivated Korah’s rebellion, according to the rabbis? The most credible interpretation of this story, which gives us also the most credible reasons for dissent and ensuing punishment, is brought by Nahmanides, according to whom the rebellion was a result of circumstance. While he agrees with Ibn Ezra and his adherents that for Korach himself the basis of his dissent was his “ignored” birthright (and chieftainship resulting from it that should guarantee him priesthood and leadership position in the Israelite community,) Nahmanides believes that the reasons for the rebellion were much more complex than that. According to his view the cause of the dissent was the spies’ severe punishment, which brought death to the generation of the desert and plague to its princes. This, in turn, brought to the surface all the accumulated bitterness of the dissatisfied, who until now had not dared to come out against Moses.  

Korach was embittered because of Elitzafan’s selection as prince, and he envied Aharon’s priesthood as well. This made him side not only with the frustrated Israelite crowd but also with Datan and Abiram, who could be called extremists, to use modern language: these two individuals openly claimed that Egypt was ‘a land of milk and honey’ and harped about the very Exodus from Egypt, which, to their mind, was just a plot to kill the Israelites in the desert (Num 16:13). That kind of position is an absolute reversion, an antithesis of what was revealed to Moses throughout the entire exodus from Egypt, and thus an absolute rebellion against God himself – a denial of his goodness and perhaps even divinity. All these people joined together in a howling chorus, consumed with bitterness and hatred. Their revolt was brought to a boil by the despair which struck the nation after the punishment of the spies and their supporters.

The explanation above is not only precious because it helps us to better understand one of the somewhat obscure biblical stories. It is precious because it portrays a social dynamic of a revolt, with its consequences. The rebellion is led by a resentful, angry individual who utilizes social unrest and frustration, teaming with poor, disadvantaged people, malcontents and extremists. Sounds familiar? I bet it does.  

But in this story, the rebellion fails, while truth and the Divine order prevails. It happens  because of the profound errors and faults of the rebellion’s leadership, expressed in its egocentrism and extremism. Had Korach been humble and open to a peaceful debate with Moses and Aaron he would probably have achieved some version of what he wanted to gain. He had some legitimate reasons for his claim that could have been heard. But because he chose the way of rivalry and rebellion, denigrating Moses, Aaron and the entire Israelite leadership, he lost. It seems that Korach completely failed to understand what Moses’ role really was: focusing on his own birthright / identity he ignored something that was incomparably more important: the merit Moses gained by bringing the Divine revelation to the Jewish people. Instead, he built a platform for all that is negative, siding with the frustrated, angry mob and extremists.  

There is a view that anger is sometimes good and justified, and therefore it should never be completely eliminated from our life, because it sometimes helps to bring or to restore justice. Even if, at times, an anger-fueled dissent has a positive effect, in my opinion this is usually due to a fortunate combination of circumstances or the numerical / force superiority of the rebels. Personally, I believe that stoking your own arguments with anger, even if it seems right, is not an appropriate method that would guarantee positive results: it is always walking on thin ice. Therefore, let us not be fooled: even if we are motivated by a righteous cause in which we very strongly believe, if we overdo it with “justified anger”, we can lose it all. 

Shabbat shalom!

Menachem Mirski 

It would really be appreciated if you could share this article and spread the word. Toda raba