Korach 5759

Parshat Korach 5759 “Perfidy” Rabbi Ari Kahn While the story of the rebellion of Korach is well known, the very idea of a rebellion against Moshe seems strange to us. Moshe was surely the greatest leader the Jewish people had ever known. More than that, he was our greatest teacher and to top it off Moshe was the most modest man to ever live. Adding these characteristics together should produce an extremely attractive package, a leader of unparalleled stature. How was Korach able to convince anyone to join him in a rebellion against Moshe? Undoubtedly, Korach was sly and devious. The Midrash stresses his manipulative demagoguery and deception. But how did this movement gain a foothold within the Jewish community? A number of the steps are clear (and were discussed in last year’s Notes). Korach gathers the disenfranchised, namely the tribe of Reuven who had lost their stature of eldest tribe and the rights and privileges thereof. The timing is also significant: the people had just been sentenced to wander in the desert for forty years. Although this was not Moshe’s doing, there most likely was whispered criticism Moshe’s mismanagement of the spies, murmuring which called Moshe’s leadership into question. All this being said, the seeds of the insurrection perhaps can be found in an unexpected quarter. The most important and debilitating attack on Moshe came from his own brother and sister, Aharon and Miriam. And Miriam and Aaron spoke against Moshe because of the Kushite woman whom he had married; for he had married a Kushite woman. And they said, ‘Has G-d indeed spoken only by Moshe? Has he not spoken also by us?’ And G-d heard it. And the man Moshe was very humble, more than any other man upon the face of the earth. And G-d spoke suddenly to Moshe, and to Aaron, and to Miriam, ‘Come out you three to the Tent of Meeting.’ And the three came out. (Bamidbar 12:1-4) Perhaps this talk against Moshe from such reputable people burst the bubble of Moshe’s unparalleled status in the eyes of the people. It is interesting that while Miriam was immediately punished, Aharon apparently escaped that episode unscathed.1 Ironically, when Korach wages his war against Moshe, he points his accusations at Aharon as the beneficiary of Moshe’s nepotism. Rabbi Yosef Dov Soloveitchik2 once pointed out a similar dynamic in relation to Ya’akov and his children. Where did the children of 1

See Midrash Rabbah – Devarim 6:11, where Aharon’s guilt is mentioned.

© 1999 Rabbi Ari Kahn, All Rights Reserved 1

Ya’akov get the audacity to contemplate killing Yosef, when it was obvious to them that their father would take any harm to Yosef in the most severe manner? The answer is-- from Reuven. Reuven acted in a manner which was almost too shocking to be understood. And it came to pass, when Yisrael lived in that land, that Reuven went and lay with Bilhah his father’s concubine; and Yisrael heard it. Now the sons of Ya’aacob were twelve. (Bereishit 35:22) The Talmud declares that Reuven was certainly not guilty of that nefarious crime; he merely moved his fathers bed from the tent of Bilhah to the tent of his mother: R. Shmuel b. Nachman said in R. Yonatan's name: Whoever maintains that Reuven sinned is merely making an error, for it is said, ‘Now the sons of Ya’acov were twelve’, teaching that they were all equal. Then how do I interpret, ‘and he lay with Bilhah his father's concubine’? This teaches that he transposed his father's couch, and the Writ imputes [blame] to him as though he had lain with her… He resented his mother's humiliation. Said he, If my mother's sister was a rival to my mother, shall the bondmaid of my mother's sister be a rival to my mother? [Thereupon] he arose and transposed her couch. (Shabbat 55b) It seems strange; how can moving furniture be associated with arguably one of the cardinal sins of Judaism? The answer is that had Reuven not committed this act, the other brothers would never have dreamt of selling Yosef. Once the brothers saw that Reuven was able to act in such an impertinent manner toward their father, the reins of awe and respect were loosened, and the brothers’ impudence surged. This is evident from the explanation offered by the Midrash for Reuven’s disappearance during the sale of Yosef. “And Reuven returned to the pit”. Where had he been? R. Eleazar said: He was taken up with his fasting and sackcloth, and when he became free he went and looked into the pit. Hence it is written, “and Reuven repented”. (a play on the word “returned”) (Midrash Rabbah – Bereishit 84:19) Apparently, at that point, Reuven understood the ramifications of his actions; his impertinence led directly to the sale of Yosef. His moving of furniture almost led to murder – one of the cardinal sins of Judaism.3 Similarly, the episode of Aharon and Miriam empowered Korah. Furthermore, an analysis of the substance of Aharon and Miriam’s 2

See the comments of the Beis Halevi on Bereshit 37:29 – perhaps this is the source of the Rov’s teaching 3 According to the Zohar Reuven did not know about the sale: Zohar Berishit 185b AND HE RENT HIS CLOTHES. AND HE RETURNED UNTO HIS BRETHREN AND SAID: THE CHILD IS NOT, ETC . For even Reuben did not know that Joseph had been sold. As already said, the brothers associated the Shekinah with them in the oath of secrecy,

© 1999 Rabbi Ari Kahn, All Rights Reserved 2

criticism of arguments.

Moshe will yield greater understanding into Korach’s

Rashi, based on the Midrash Tanchuma, explains the sin of Miriam. The Torah had said “And Miriam and Aharon spoke against Moshe because of the Kushite woman whom he had married; for he had married a Kushite woman.” According to Rashi the problem was not the marriage, but Moshe’s decision to separate himself from his wife. In the opinion of Miriam and Aharon this was undue, excessive asceticism.4 After all, G-d had spoken to them as well and never made such demands. This separation is arguably one of the decisions Moshe had taken on his own: This was one of the three things which Moshe did of his own accord, but which received the full approval of G-d. He separated himself from his wife, because- said R. Shimon ben Yochai--Moshe thus reasoned to himself: ' If in connection with Mount Sinai, which was hallowed only for the occasion [of Revelation], we were told: ‘Come not near a woman’ (ib. 19:15), then how much more must I, to whom He speaks at all times, separate myself from my wife?’ R. Akiva said: [No!] it was G-d Himself who told him [to separate himself from his wife], (Midrash Rabbah – Sh’mot 46:3) Whether G-d had actually told Moshe to separate from his wife or merely agreed ex post facto, it is clear that Aharon and Miriam had not known that Moshe’s actions enjoyed the Divine blessing (at least). This opened the door for Korach’s insidious claim that Moshe was “making things up” and not acting within the Divine mandate. It was the same with Korach. He contended with Moshe, and said that the latter had invented all these things from his own mind and on his own initiative. (Midrash Rabbah - Bamidbar 18:12) Korach would never have been able to make such a claim had Aharon and Miriam not said as much before him. Interestingly, all three decisions mentioned in the Talmud as independent decisions by Moshe may be connected to the insurrection and demagoguery of Korach: For it was taught, Three things did Moshe do of his own understanding, and the Holy One, blessed be He, gave His approval: he added one day of his own understanding, he separated himself from his wife, and he broke the Tablets. ‘He added one day of his own understanding’: what [verse] did he interpret? Today and tomorrow: ‘today’ [must be] like ‘tomorrow: just as tomorrow includes the [previous] night, so ‘today’ [must] include the [previous] night, but the night of today has already passed! Hence it must be two days exclusive of today. And how do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, gave his approval? — Since the Shechinah did not rest [upon Mount Sinai] until the 4

The Midrash connects her comments with the news that Eldad and Medad were prophesizing in the camp. Miraim overhears Zippporah lament the future of the wives who would now suffer the fate of separation that Zipporah herself has experienced.

© 1999 Rabbi Ari Kahn, All Rights Reserved 3

morning of the Sabbath. And ‘he separated himself from his wife’: What did he interpret? He applied an a minori argument to himself, reasoning: If the Israelites, with whom the Shechinah spoke only on one occasion and He appointed them a time [thereof], yet the Torah said, ‘Be ready for the third day: come not near a woman’: I, with whom the Shechinah speaks at all times and does not appoint me a [definite] time, how much more so! And how do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, gave his approval? Because it is written, ‘Go say to them, Return to your tents’, which is followed by, ‘But as for thee, stand thou here by me’. There are some who quote, ‘with him [sc. Moshe] will I speak mouth to mouth’. ‘He broke the Tables’: how did he learn [this]? He argued: If the Passover sacrifice, which is but one of the six hundred and thirteen precepts, yet the Torah said, there shall no alien eat thereof: here is the whole Torah, and the Israelites are apostates, how much more so! And how do we know that the Holy One, blessed be He, gave His approval? Because it is said, ‘which thou break’, and Resh Lakish interpreted this: ‘All strength to you that thou breaks it’. (Talmud - Shabbath 87a) The initial claim which Korach makes is that the “entire people are holy” You take too much upon you, seeing all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and G-d is among them. Why then do you lift up yourselves above the congregation of G-d? (16:3) What is the import of this “holiness”? The Midrash connects the holiness with the theophany at Sinai: And they assembled themselves together against Moshe and against Aharon (16, 3). Korach said to them: all the congregation are holy, every one of them (ib.) and they have all heard at Sinai the commandment: I am G-d thy God (Shmot 20, 2); Wherefore, then, do you lift yourselves above the assembly of G-d? (Midrash Rabbah – Bamidbar18:6) This claim echoes the claim of Miriam that “we too are prophets”, Moshe is not the only one to have been privileged to hear the Divine word. Now Korach takes the same claim from the micro to the macro: “You, Moshe, are not the only prophet – we all experienced G-d at Sinai”. On the other hand, perhaps there is a deeper, more cynical statement being articulated. As we saw, the substance of the slander of Miriam was Moshe’s separation from his wife. In preparation for Sinai, Moshe had instructed all of Israel to practice abstinence. We know that the phrase “holiness” is at times a catchword for separateness.5 Perhaps Korach is making reference to the other action Moshe took on his own initiative: calling the entire community to separate. Hence “all the congregation is holy”, which is proof that Moshe is playing “fast and free” with the Divine decree. 5

See Rashi On Vayikra 19:2

© 1999 Rabbi Ari Kahn, All Rights Reserved 4

The third action Moshe arguably took on his own was the breaking of the Tablets when he descended from the mountain and saw the Golden Calf. Perhaps more than anything else the Golden Calf symbolizes the argument of Korach. His stated goal was to usurp the High Priesthood, a position of which he felt more deserving than Aharon. One can imagine his argument: If Aharon was guilty regarding the Golden Calf, why is he worthy to be Kohen Gadol? Alternatively, if Aharon was innocent, why did Moshe break the Tablets, especially when we recall that the tribe of Levi, Korach’s tribe, did not sin with the Golden Calf? There is another way to understand the argument regarding the breaking of the Tablets. One of the ways of understanding Moshe’s action is based on the rules of marriage. The people of Israel are considered to be a bride to G-d. When we stood at Mount Sinai and said “we will listen we will obey”, it was analogous to accepting vows of matrimony. When the Jews sinned with the Golden Calf it was analogous to adultery. So what did Moshe do? He took the Tables from the hands of G-d in order to appease His wrath. It can be compared to a king who sent a marriage-broker to betroth a wife unto him, but while the broker was on his way, the woman corrupted herself with another man. What did the broker, who was entirely innocent, do? He took the marriage document which the prince had given him wherewith to betroth her and tore it, saying: ‘It is better that she be judged as an unmarried woman rather than one married.’ This is what Moshe did; when Israel perpetrated that act, he took the Tables and shattered them, as if to imply that had Israel foreseen the punishment awaiting them, they would not have thus sinned. (Midrash Rabbah Sh’mot 43:1) Moshe hoped to extricate the Jews from their precarious position, and broke the Tablets, which would be analogous to the wedding band. If the band is broken and undelivered, the Jews are still unwed and technically innocent. Korach argues that the entire congregation is holy – and married to G-d. How dare Moshe break the tablets on his own authority and go against the will of G-d!6 The marriage theme may also be discerned in Moshe’s making the Jews drink the water with the dust of the Golden Calf. If G-d will judge them as married then they will prove their innocence: And he took the calf which they had made, and burned it in the fire, and ground it to powder, and scattered it upon the water, and made the people of Israel drink of it. (Sh’mot 32:20) ‘And he shall blot them out into the water of bitterness’; for, on account of Israel's iniquity, he broke the Tables and the writing flew away from them; and 6

Rav Yonatan Eybeshitz in his Tiferet Yonaton Bamidabar 16:4 makes a similar observation.

© 1999 Rabbi Ari Kahn, All Rights Reserved 5

for that obliteration of the writing Israel drank the water as their punishment. “And he shall make the woman drink” (Bamidbar 5, 24) alludes to what you read, “And made the Children of Israel drink” (Shmot 32, 20); he tested them like suspected wives. (Midrash Rabbah - Bamidbar 60:48) The theme of marriage and fidelity of the nation of Israel leads to an even more bizarre and shocking claim by Korach: And when Moshe heard it, he fell upon his face. What news did he hear? — R. Shmuel b. Nahmani said in R. Yonatan's name: That he was suspected of [adultery with] married women, as it is written, ‘They were jealous of Moshe in the camp,(Tehilim106:16) which teaches that every person warned his wife on Moshe’s account, as it is written: “And Moshe took the tent, and pitched it outside the camp (Sh’mot 33:7). (Sanhedrin 110a) It seems difficult to fathom that the people could have suspected Moshe of so heinous a crime. The verse which is referred to comes right after the Golden Calf episode; it was then that Moshe moved his tent outside the camp. We know that the women did not heed the men during the Golden Calf episode. Quite the opposite, the women refused to be a part of that sin: In that generation the women built up the fences which the men broke down. Thus you find that Aharon told them: Break off the golden rings, which are in the ears of your wives (Shmot 32, 2), but the women refused and checked their husbands; as is proved by the fact that it says, “And all the people broke off the golden rings which were in their ears” (ib. 3). The women were not participating with them in making the Calf. (Midrash Rabbah - Bamidbar 21:10)7 This had actually been part of the strategy employed by Aharon: He knew that the women would not listen to their husbands 8. The fact that the women were more dedicated to Moshe and G-d than to their own husbands certainly caused strife in the camp. Korach’s claim that Moshe had unnatural control over the women was articulated as “suspicion” vis a vis Moshe.9 Therefore, the men warned their wives not to be secluded with Moshe. This insight will also provide an explanation for additional intrigue in the Parsha. In the very beginning of the rebellion the names of some of the leaders are singled out: Now Korah, the son of Yizhar, the son of Kehath, the son of Levi, and Dathan and Aviram, the sons of Eliav, and On, the son of Pelet, sons of Reuven, took 7

According to the Midrash in Pirkei D’Rebbi Eliezer, the reward of the women was that they would not have to work on Rosh Chodesh. 8 Zohar 2:192a “AND AHARON SAID TO THEM, BREAK OFF THE GOLDEN EARRINGS (Ex. XXXII, 2). Did they have no other gold? Aaron's idea, however, was that while they were arguing with their wives and children time would be gained and Moses might return before harm was done.” 9 See Margoliot Hayam Sanhedrin 110a note 5

© 1999 Rabbi Ari Kahn, All Rights Reserved 6

men. And they rose up before Moshe, with certain of the people of Israel, two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly, regularly summoned to the congregation, men of renown. (16:1,2) Of these leaders, one is mentioned only in this first verse and never mentioned again in the Torah: On the son of Pelet. While the text returns to the other leaders and their respective ignominious fates, On’s fate based on the biblical narrative remains enigmatic. The Midrash tells how On’s wife saves him from the counsel of the manipulative Korach: Rav said: On, the son of Pelet, was saved by his wife. Said she to him, ‘What matters it to thee? Whether the one [Moshe] remains master or the other [Korah] becomes master, you are but a disciple.’ He replied, ‘But what can I do? I have taken part in their counsel, and they have sworn me [to be] with them.’ She said, ‘I know that they are all a holy community, as it is written, “seeing all the congregation are holy, everyone of them.” She proceeded, ‘Sit here, and I will save you.’ She gave him wine to drink, intoxicated him and laid him down within [the tent]. Then she sat down at the entrance thereto and loosened her hair. Whoever came [to summon him] saw her and retreated. Meanwhile, Korah's wife joined them [the rebels] and said to him [Korah], ‘See what Moshe has done. He himself has become king; his brother he appointed High Priest; his brother's sons he has made the vice High Priests. If terumah is brought, he decrees, ‘Let it be for the priest’; if the tithe is brought, which belongs to you [i.e., to the Levite], he orders, ‘Give a tenth part thereof to the priest’. Moreover, he has had your hair cut off, and makes sport of you as though you were dirt; for he was jealous of your hair.’ … Thus it is written, “Every wise woman builds her house” — this refers to the wife of On, the son of Pelet; “but the foolish plucks it down with her hands” — to Korah's wife. (Sanhedrin 109b-110a) (See Midrash Rabbah - Bamidbar 18:20)

The heroism of On’s wife saved him, while the wickedness of Korach’s wife led him to be swallowed into the abyss.10 On’s wife employed the same logic as Korach, but in a reverse: The entire congregation is indeed holy, she says, yet the conclusion is not that they therefore have a right to lead. Instead, she concludes that no member of such a holy congregation will enter a house where a woman’s hair is uncovered. Her uncovering of her hair may also be symbolic of the woman suspected of adultery, who is forced to uncover her hair as part of the trial of the Sotah. Perhaps by uncovering her hair in the doorway the wife of On is stating that she is innocent11, that her home is 10

The Midrash blames Korach’s wife for instigating his rebellion. Midrash Rabbah - 18:4 NOW KORAH... TOOK implies that he took his cloak and went to take counsel with his wife. Also see Midrash Rabbah 18:15 11 It is also noteworthy that she gets On drunk, which is also related to the Sotah. See my shiur Naso 5759

© 1999 Rabbi Ari Kahn, All Rights Reserved 7

untainted, that the community is indeed holy,12 and, of course, Moshe is innocent as well. The tragedy of the episode of the Korach is how one man with a grudge, encouraged by one woman, could lead an entire community to death and despair. Additionally, it is frightening how a “minor” comment by Miriam and Aharon could be escalated into a full-scale rebellion. When speaking about a man like Moshe, extreme caution must be exercised, for the slightest disrespect could have severe implications. According to the Zohar, Moshe did not make any decisions independently: But, in fact, there is no word in the Torah which Moshe spoke on his own authority. Hence it says, “Moshe spoke” with his own voice, “and G-d answered him with that mighty Voice”, confirming what he said. (Zohar, Vayikra Page 7a) The anonymous heroine of the Parsha is the wife of On who gallantly took her husband’s destiny in her own hands, and forced him back to Moshe’s side.13 In the tradition of all the women who refused to sin throughout the years in Egypt, in the desert14 – and ever since. They preserved their families and the community through their dedication to G-d, Moshe and Torah - very much unlike Korach.

12

It is interesting, that the following passage in the Talmud is the one which refers to the people of having accused Moshe of a relationship with married women. 13 According to the Midrash On spends the rest of his life repenting: Midrash Rabbah - Bamidbar 18:20 AND ON, THE SON OF PELETH. Why was he called by the name of On? Because he spent all the rest of his days in mourning. Why THE SON OF PELETH? Because he was a son for whom miracles (pela'oth) were wrought. 14 See Midrash Rabbah - Numbers XXI:10 where it delineates many episodes in the desert where the women remained steadfast to G-d, Moshe and Torah.

© 1999 Rabbi Ari Kahn, All Rights Reserved 8