(3) 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?”
According to the Rabbis, the story of Korach demonstrates political ambition and a quest for raw power, both of which stem from feelings of profound entitlement. Korach protests that because he is the son of a firstborn Levite, he has a higher claim to leadership than his first cousins Moses and Aaron. Korach bands together with Dathan and Abiram descendants of Reuben, the eldest son of IsraeI-who believe that they are destined to the highest spiritual and political offices. Little unifies Korach, Dathan, and Abram other than their complaints against Moses and their disparate claims to power. This makes for the ugliest kind of family feud. Their attempted coup is not rooted in values but in the quest for personal gain, and their punishment is unsparing: God swallows them up into the earth.
The lesson from Korach is not to stifle values-based dissent, but rather to be wary of leadership pursued for the wrong reasons.
-Rabbi Ethan Bair
(ה) וְלָמָּה מַזְכִּירִין דִּבְרֵי הַיָּחִיד בֵּין הַמְרֻבִּין, הוֹאִיל וְאֵין הֲלָכָה אֶלָּא כְדִבְרֵי הַמְרֻבִּין. שֶׁאִם יִרְאֶה בֵית דִּין אֶת דִּבְרֵי הַיָּחִיד וְיִסְמֹךְ עָלָיו, שֶׁאֵין בֵּית דִּין יָכוֹל לְבַטֵּל דִּבְרֵי בֵית דִּין חֲבֵרוֹ עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה גָדוֹל מִמֶּנּוּ בְחָכְמָה וּבְמִנְיָן. הָיָה גָדוֹל מִמֶּנּוּ בְחָכְמָה אֲבָל לֹא בְמִנְיָן, בְּמִנְיָן אֲבָל לֹא בְחָכְמָה, אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לְבַטֵּל דְּבָרָיו, עַד שֶׁיִּהְיֶה גָדוֹל מִמֶּנּוּ בְחָכְמָה וּבְמִנְיָן:
(5) And why do they record the opinion of a single person among the many, when the halakhah must be according to the opinion of the many? So that if a court prefers the opinion of the single person it may depend on him. For no court may set aside the decision of another court unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number. If it was greater than it in wisdom but not in number, in number but not in wisdom, it may not set aside its decision, unless it is greater than it in wisdom and in number.
(יז) כָּל מַחֲלֹקֶת שֶׁהִיא לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, סוֹפָהּ לְהִתְקַיֵּם. וְשֶׁאֵינָהּ לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, אֵין סוֹפָהּ לְהִתְקַיֵּם. אֵיזוֹ הִיא מַחֲלֹקֶת שֶׁהִיא לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, זוֹ מַחֲלֹקֶת הִלֵּל וְשַׁמַּאי. וְשֶׁאֵינָהּ לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם, זוֹ מַחֲלֹקֶת קֹרַח וְכָל עֲדָתוֹ:
(17) Every dispute that is for the sake of Heaven, will in the end endure; But one that is not for the sake of Heaven, will not endure. Which is the controversy that is for the sake of Heaven? Such was the controversy of Hillel and Shammai. And which is the controversy that is not for the sake of Heaven? Such was the controversy of Korah and all his congregation.
-Rabbi Ethan Bair
וכבר היו משה ואהרן מהלכין בדרך ונדב ואביהוא מהלכין אחריהן וכל ישראל אחריהן אמר לו נדב לאביהוא אימתי ימותו שני זקנים הללו ואני ואתה ננהיג את הדור אמר להן הקב"ה הנראה מי קובר את מי
Apropos the deaths of Nadav and Avihu, an aggadic midrash on this subject is quoted: And it had already happened that Moses and Aaron were walking on their way, and Nadav and Avihu were walking behind them, and the entire Jewish people were walking behind them. Nadav said to Avihu: When will it happen that these two old men will die and you and I will lead the generation, as we are their heirs? The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to them: We shall see who buries whom.
-Rabbi Ethan Bair
Some have decided that Israel is beyond certain limits of reproach, and that position animates not only their defense of their own positions, but leads them to silence or ignore fellow Jews with a different point of view. The same is true for the other side. And too often, the reason for that silencing is because the future of the Jewish people at stake. It is an argument lo l'shem shamayim, they say. To which we can ask once more, who gets to decide when dissent is or is not for the sake of heaven?
The solution is not to decide which side you are on. The troubling story of Korach and its interpretation in the Torah is a warning that we should not stifle voices, no matter how radical they seem at first. Instead, we have to ask how we build coalitions that may be imperfect but that effectively lead to a common goal. How do we speak across chasms and create empathy for other people's perspectives without completely villainizing dissenting voices, even when we disagree?
-Rabbi Ethan Bair
-
What is the difference between saying “All the congregation is holy” and “All the congregation are holy”? How does Korach seemingly misunderstand the declaration of holiness?
-
What kind of dissent is accepted in Judaism, and what kind of dissent is discouraged? What are some examples of acceptable and unacceptable dissent?
-
Rabbi Bair offers that disagreement over Israel’s Occupation of the West Bank is an example of dissent that is either seen as acceptable or unacceptable depending on one’s own beliefs. Have you experienced this issue in your community? What are other examples of issues that can be seen as either acceptable or unacceptable depending on the individual person? What are some ways we can bridge the gap between what is “acceptable” and “unacceptable” to have empathy and compas- sion for others during disagreements?