פרשה: קרח · עלייה: ראשון (חסד)

ויקח קרח, Korach took, etc. What did the Torah mean when it wrote ויקח, "he took," without telling us what it was that Korach took? Our sages in Bamidbar Rabbah 18 say that he took himself to one side. This implies that he diminished himself thereby. [I have not found this quote in that chapter of the Midrash Rabbah Ed.] When we think of Korach, we automatically think of someone who separated himself from the main body and lost out thereby. If the Midrash meant the same as Onkelos who renders the word as meaning that Korach seceded or differed, this is not accurate, philologically speaking. Clearly, Onkelos did not translate the word but explained its intent. Whereas both the Midrash and Onkelos are correct, there is yet a way to explain the word both as philologically appropriate and as reflecting an acceptable meaning. Furthermore, why did G'd list such great men as Yitzhar, Kehat and Levi, thereby associating them with Korach, when there was no need for this? This is especially puzzling since our sages say in Bamidbar Rabbah 18,5 that Jacob prayed on his deathbed that his name not be associated with that of Korach? This proves that under ordinary circumstances his name should have been associated with Korach and that he was spared this only on account of his prayer. Personally, I am amazed at the list of outstanding ancestors of Korach whom the Torah did list. Thirdly, why did the Torah write ודתן ואבירם, in the same breath? What had they done to be lumped together with Korach? If the Torah meant to tell us that they too quarrelled, the Torah should have mentioned their names beside that of Korach, thus: ויקחו, "they took!" On the other hand, if the Torah meant that Korach took these men to join him in his quarrel with Moses, then their names should not have been preceded by the conjunctive letter ו. Fourthly, what did the Torah mean with the words "they rose up in the face of Moses and Aaron?" If it means that these people came to quarrel, the Torah has stated this already when it wrote ויקהלו על משה ואהרן, "they assembled themselves together against Moses and Aaron?" If the words merely mean that Datan and Aviram assumed an upright posture vis-a-vis Moses and Aaron, why did the Torah write the two verbs ויקהלו and ויקמו in separate verses and separate them from the other 250 men?

The Torah wanted to tell us about the root cause of the quarrel. Anyone who reads the Torah must ask himself how Korach could even have imagined that his uprising could succeed? Moses' stature as an outstanding prophet had been proven over and over again so that it is strange for Korach to have imagined that he could succeed before the people would simply stone him to death for his impertinence! This is why the Torah tells us that Korach, a very clever man "took," i.e. he took stock of the factors which would give him a chance to rally the people around him. First, the Torah tells us that he was a son of יצהר older than his younger brothers Chevron and Uzziel. Kehat's younger sons could not present a claim against Korach seeing he was the oldest one surviving. [Amram was the oldest son of Kehat but may have died prior to the Exodus. Ed.] Secondly, he was a son (grandson) of Kehat the most illustrious of the sons of Levi, the ones entrusted with carrying the Holy Ark. Our sages say that Korach personally was one of the bearers of the Holy Ark. Thirdly, he was a descendant of Levi the most illustrious of the twelve tribes.

The Torah goes on to say ודתן ואבירם, to tell us that Korach took them with him in order to challenge Moses also on their behalf seeing that they were the most important members of the tribe of Reuven, Jacob's first born son. These were the factors which encouraged these three men ויקמו, to claim a superior status vis-a-vis Moses and Aaron who were descended only from the third of Jacob's sons. Datan and Aviram based their assessment on the fact that they were the foremost dignitaries of the tribe of Reuven, which itself was descended from Jacob's firstborn son. The word ואנשים means that they took with them other dignitaries as support by such dignitaries strengthened their case in the eyes of the people. This is the reason why the line starting with ויקמו had to precede mention of the other 250 rebels.

We may also explain the whole verse in terms of the opinion offered in Bamidbar Rabbah 18,2 that Korach's main quarrel concerned Elitzafan the son of Uzziel upon whom Moses had bestowed the honour of being the prince, i.e. the chief dignitary of the Kehatites (Numbers 3,30). According to this view Korach "took" a string of arguments to prove that Moses had acted in a high-handed and arrogant manner when he appointed Elitzafan. He pointed out that 1) he was the son of Yitzhar who was senior to Uzziel the youngest of Kehat's sons. If Moses considered seniority of birth as important and this is why he had appointed Aaron as High Priest seeing he was the son of Amram, Kehat's oldest son, then the office of prince of the Kehatites should have been given to him inasmuch as his father was second to Amram in order of seniority of birth. Seeing that this is not what Moses did, Korach construed this as evidence that Moses had not been influenced by considerations of seniority of birth. This raised the question why Aaron had been chosen to be the High Priest? Seeing Moses had not explained the rationale of appointing Aaron as High Priest, Korach challenged that appointment. He claimed that all the Levites were of equal status. The Torah alluded to this when it described Korach as a "son" of Levi.

Korach was afraid that the only one of his arguments which might succeed was his challenge to the position of Elitzafan, whereas no one would take seriously his argument against giving preference to the sons of Amram over the descendants of Kehat as it was accepted that seniority of birth was a reason to accord someone precedence in rank. This is why he looked for allies among the members of the tribe of Reuven whose claims to superior status based on seniority had been ignored. This then justifies the letter ו preceding mention of Datan and Aviram, i.e. ודתן ואבירם…בני ראובן. He challenged Moses that if he would defend Aaron's appointment as based on seniority, why had he ignored similar claims to senior positions by members of the tribe of Reuven and had not given the position of High Priest to a member of that tribe? When the Torah wrote ויקמו לפני משה ואהרן this means that they rose up in order to present their arguments before Moses and Aaron. They took with them other dignitaries from various segments of the people to ensure that Moses would not dismiss his arguments based on his self-appointed status of authority.

Sanhedrin 109 offers another reason why the Torah lists the various ancestors of Korach. The Talmud says that the name קרח is a description of the man, i.e. he made a קרחה, "a bald spot" i.e. a depopulation in Israel. בן יצהר, is a reference to midday, צהרים. Korach caused the world to become even hotter at midday, i.e. to become angry at him during the normally hot part of the day. בן קהת, he kiha i.e. "blunted" or caused his ancestors to gnash their teeth," by making them ashamed of having such a grandson. בן לוי, "he made himself a companion to Gehinom, to hell. The Talmud asks that if we adopt this approach why was יעקב not also mentioned in Korach's genealogy and the meaning would be that Jacob produced a descendant who was "hell-bent," עקב עצמו לגיהנם? The answer given is that Jacob prayed that his name should not be associated with that of Korach. I fail to understand why the Talmud was at pains to associate negative connotations with the names of these righteous men who were Korach's ancestors, even going as far as trying to find negative connotations in the name of our patriarch Jacob? Besides, what point was there in trying to show that the fact that Korach was descended from Jacob paved the way to Gehinom, when the sage in the Midrash told us the same thing already when he explained why the Torah had associated Korach's name with Levi? Why did this association have to be repeated twice?

Before answering these questions I must reveal two or three grains of the mystical dimensions of the Torah. 1) The branches of holiness which G'd confers upon the Israelites by means of the Torah are the paths [moral guidelines. Ed.] and the judicial elements of the Torah which G'd legislated and inscribed in the Torah by the hand of His servant Moses. Anyone who tampers with even the precise order in which these details have been recorded in the Torah is as if he were uprooting that particular branch of holiness associated with the nature of his soul, thereby turning this particular branch of holiness into something evil. This is so because he deprived this branch of its power to confer sanctity. This is also the reason why if someone had the wrong thought-association as to when or where he would eat the sacrificial meat of his animal-offering the entire sacrifice is considered impure, unfit and the person who eats from it is guilty of the Karet penalty.

2) The very branch against which the person committed a wrong is the first to exact retribution from the sinner, as we know from Jeremiah 2,19 "that the very evil you are guilty of will act as the instrument which disciplines you." The prophet tells us that the source of sanctity once perverted will turn into a source of harm, G'd forbid.

3) The very letters in the written Torah represent the various souls G'd has planted in His people. [This is the reason that Kabbalists insist that there are 600.000 letters in the Torah, something at variance with the count that we arrive at when checking the letters in the Torah. Obviously, Kabbalists use a different method of deciding what constitutes a "letter." Ed.]

4) When G'd created man He thereby created a single "plant" which comprised all branches of holiness. When man sinned, all the souls which were part of him became defective, flawed, and this is why all of Adam's descendants had flawed souls. This process was not reversed or even halted until the soul of Abraham emerged. His soul underwent ten trials, i.e. a tenfold process of refinement. The flawed parts of his soul departed from him through the birth of Ishmael. When Isaac's soul emerged, it was refined by means of the עקדה, his preparedness to give his life for G'd at his father's bidding. Any residue of the flawed parts of his soul departed from him with the birth of Esau. As a result, when Jacob's soul emerged it no longer contained flawed parts. This is the meaning of Baba Metzia 84: "The spiritual beauty of our patriarch Jacob was akin to the spiritual purity of original man." Clearly, what the Talmud meant was the spiritual beauty of Adam before he sinned.

From the foregoing it becomes clear that Jacob was perceived as a tree from which twelve branches emerged, one of which was Levi. This branch in turn produced three new branches, Gershom, Kehat and Merari. Kehat himself produced four branches, Amram, Yitzhar, Chevron and Uzziel. The branch produced by Yitzhar was Korach. As soon as Korach tried to tamper with the order of holiness which the Torah had laid down and tried to interfere with who was accorded the priesthood, all the branches of holiness going right back to the root of his soul became flawed. Up until this time all these "branches" had contributed positively to Korach's stature as a distinguished person. The process of these sources of Korach's stature (holiness) becoming flawed commenced with Korach himself and proceeded further and further into his ancestry. Originally, the name Korach (קרח=ice) stood for purity. The name Yitzhar (צהר) symbolised the light of the world when it is at its brightest, i.e. at noon. The name Kehat stood for people gnashing (קהה) their teeth in envy when they beheld the splendid stature of that man. The name "son of Levi" conjured up the image of a person equipped (לוה) by G'd with numerous advantages since birth. Now the branch itself which had borne a complimentary name קרח, had become defective so that its wearer had made a "bald spot," depilation, on this branch. Not only had he caused his own branch to become flawed but also the immediate root that he came from had become flawed, i.e. the name Yitzhar now represented something negative, causing fiery anger in the world. Not only this one immediate root of Korach's soul had become flawed but even that of the previous generation, i.e. בן קהת had become defective so as to cause the teeth of those who had sired them to gnash in anger at their being embarassed by their offspring. Even the root of the first branch which Jacob had produced, the root of Korach's soul, Levi, had become defective and flawed so that it turned on its descendant consigning him to Gehinom instead of afffording him the presence of the Divine. The reason that Jacob is not mentioned was that Jacob had not become aware of Korach's behaviour although Korach's flawed soul affected Jacob's soul also and it was doubtful if Korach's entire soul [his link with the holy soul of Jacob, Ed.] had thereby become irreversibly flawed or not.

Remember that there is a disagreement amongst the sages in Sanhedrin 108 as to whether Korach and those who made common cause with him have a share in the hereafter or not. According to the view that through his action Korach's link to Jacob's soul had been irrevocably damaged, these people have no share in the hereafter. This is why the sage in the Talmud asked that if that is indeed so [that Korach and company have no share in the hereafter, Ed.] the Torah should have mentioned Jacob as an antecedent of Korach so that we would have known why he has no share in the hereafter. That sage was very precise in the wording of his question since he added the words שעקב עצמו לגיהנם, "he made himself travel to Gehinom." The word עקב must then be understood as derived from the root "heel," i.e. Korach backtracked morally all the way, winding up in Gehinom as a result. He reached moral rock bottom. We find that our sages employ this kind of terminology in Sotah 49 when speaking of בעקבות משיחא, "at the tail end of the exile." When the sage in the Talmud answered that Jacob offered a prayer that his name not be associated with that of Korach this meant that but for that prayer Korach would have forfeited all claim to the hereafter. G'd did Jacob a favour, however, and the fact that the Torah does not mention Jacob as being an ancestor of Korach indicates that he had not been completely cut off from his holy root, i.e. Jacob. Alternatively, Jacob's prayer was concerned about what damage could happen to his own soul if he was connected to Korach and he prayed to be spared this negative fallout from Korach's rebellion. Clearly, Rabbi Eliezer who quoted Samuel I 2,6: "G'd consigns to Sheol and has raised them," used this verse to substantiate his opinion that Korach and company did not lose their share in the hereafter, as opposed to Rabbi Akiva (Sanhedrin 109). I believe that we must pay very careful attention to the wording used in the verse in Samuel, i.e. ויעל, in the past tense as opposed to the first half of the same verse which describes G'd as ממית ומחיה, "killing and reviving" in the present tense. Also the verse following the one we quoted from Samuel states ה׳ מוריש ומעשיר, "G'd disinherits or makes wealthy," is in the present tense. Why did Hannah change the tenses in this one instance where she referred to someone who had already been raised from Gehinom while still in the process of descending there? It appears clear that she must have referred to Korach who is the only instance of someone who had descended to Sheol while alive. Rabbi Eliezer felt that the verse proves that Korach's place in the hereafter had already been secured prior to his descent to the regions of Gehinom. This was in answer to Jacob's prayer that he not be associated with Korach.

רב לכם כי כל העדה כלם קדושים, "a great deal for you, for the whole community is holy." They meant that Moses and Aaron had arrogated too much authority to themselves. In the event that Moses and Aaron would ask wherein precisely they had arrogated to themselves too much authority, Korach and company said that in view of the fact that the entire community was holy having experienced direct communication from G'd something not granted to any other nation, plus the fact that G'd remained within its midst, Moses and Aaron had placed themselves above such a holy nation. By saying ובתוכם השם, "and G'd is in their midst," they hinted that the presence of G'd was due to the people and not to the merit of Moses and Aaron.

In view of this, מדוע תתנשאו "why do you raise yourselves above the community of G'd?" Korach and company referred specifically to the domain of the Tabernacle and the Sanctuary which Moses had declared out of bounds to ordinary Israelites on pain of death. They accused Moses and Aaron of having insulted the community as a whole by denying them access to the Sanctuary and the opportunity to perform sacrificial service there.

וישמע משה ויפל על פניו. When Moses heard this he fell upon his face. Why did the Torah have to tell us that Moses heard what Korach said? Korach and company had been described as addressing Moses; it is obvious that he heard what they said. Furthermore, what precisely is the meaning of Moses "falling?" It appears that inasmuch as the scoffers had not yet completed what they came to say the Torah wanted to inform us that Moses already understood their meaning even though they had not spelled it out as yet. Accordingly, we may assume that Moses "fell" already as soon as Korach accused him of having raised himself above the people. He wanted to demonstrate that far from raising himself above the people he humbled himself and made himself equal to the dust of the earth like a slave prostrating himself before a master. As far as the second accusation was concerned, i.e. the fact that Aaron was the High Priest, he told the rebels that already on the morrow G'd Himself would demonstrate whether Aaron's appointment was an act of nepotism or any other form of autocratic behaviour, or if he had been appointed at the command of G'd Himself.

בקר וידע ה׳ את אשר לו, "In the morning G'd will make known who is His, etc." The reason Moses said that the proof would come on the morrow and he did not offer to provide the proof immediately may either have been due to the fact that the incense offered every afternoon had already been offered on that day, or it may have been so that they could not accuse him of having chosen a time of day when G'd is not particularly well disposed towards the people. According to the Zohar second volume page 39 the late afternoon is a time when the attribute of Justice is in the ascendancy. In addition, Moses may have wanted to give Korach and associates time to reflect on the enormity of their challenge so that they could desist and repent before dawn. Our sages in Bamidbar Rabbah 18,7 suggest additional reasons why Moses delayed until the next morning.

את אשר לו ואת הקדוש, "who is His and who is holy, etc." Why did Moses have to repeat this statement (although he changed the wording somewhat)? The Zohar says that the words אשר לו refer to the status of the Levites, whereas the word קדוש refers to the status of the priesthood. If so, we must still understand why Moses had to mention the Levites altogether seeing that Korach had only challenged the appointment of the priests. If you consider that I have explained that Korach took the elders of Reuven in order to buttress his arguments that Moses had ignored the privileges due to people of seniority, we can understand that Korach had argued that the privileges of seniority should be restored to the members of the tribe of Reuven. In that event Moses also had to defend the appointment of the Levites to their respective positions.

We must also try and understand why Moses repeated that G'd would bring close to Him the one whom He considered holy, i.e. ואת הקדש הקריב אליו, ואת אשר יבחר יקריב אליו. Perhaps we can understand this by analysing the nature of Korach's complaints. Firstly, he claimed that Aaron was not specifically suited to be High Priest seeing there were people more qualified than he. Secondly, Korach argued that even if he granted Aaron's qualifications to be High Priest, there were others equally qualified to perform the sacrificial service with him. Why should he enjoy an exclusive? Concerning the argument that there were people better qualified than Aaron, Moses said את אשר לו, that G'd would demonstrate whom He had chosen, i.e. who had been designated for this task since creation. We have a parallel situation in Jeremiah 1,5 where G'd told Jeremiah that He had selected him for his task already before he was born. The words ואת הקדש mean that after having come into the world Aaron had sanctified himself in order to be worthy to occupy the position for which he had been destined. Moses carefully chose the expression והקריב to make it plain that Aaron had already been divinely approved and that G'd had seen fit to make His שכינה come to rest on him. Concerning the claim that others were just as worthy as Aaron to perform the service in the Tabernacle, Moses said ואת אשר יבחר בו יקריב אליו, "if G'd chooses anyone in addition He will bring him close to Him, i.e. they too will be allowed to enter the Tabernacle, etc."

ויקרב אתך ואת כל אחיך בני לוי, "He has brought you close together with all your brethren the sons of Levi." What is the meaning of the הבדלה, separation, of which Moses spoke in the previous verse and the הקריבה, the bringing near, of which he speaks in our verse? Maybe Moses referred to two different levels of spiritual elevation. The הבדלה, is the lower level of elevation which all the members of the tribe of Levi participated in and which resulted in their elevation vis-a-vis עדת ישראל. The הקריבה referred to the special status conferred on the Kehatites, whose task of transporting the Holy Ark, etc. reflected their superior status even amongst the Levites. Moses used the word אתך, "especially you personally," indicating that all his brothers depended on Korach and looked up to him.

לכן אתה וכל עדתך, "Therefore, you and your whole congregation, etc." The word לכן is equivalent to an oath. Moses swears that Korach and associates are gathered against G'd (not against Moses). Moses did so in the hope that when they realised this they might yet become afraid to continue this quarrel and not go through with the test to determine who was fit to be a priest.

וישלח משה לקרא, Moses despatched a messenger to call, etc. Moses was clever in trying to speak to Datan and Aviram individually, not when all the rebels were together, hoping thereby to persuade them to adopt a more receptive attitude. He also hoped that the honour he paid them by inviting them individually might cause them to at least listen to what he had to say. The Torah uses the word משה although there was no need to tell us who invited Datan and Aviram. The Torah emphasised that these people received an invitation from the king for a private audience.

לא נעלה; המעט כי העליתנו מארץ זבת חלב ודבש, "we will not go up; is it not enough that you have taken us away from a land flowing with milk and honey, etc.?" By saying לא נעלה, Datan and Aviram made it clear that seeing they did not consider Moses fit to be their leader, they also did not consider it an honour to be secluded with him in a private audience. They spurned any honour which emanated from Moses.

They justified their attitude vis-a-vis Moses by citing Moses' track record as a leader. They ridiculed what Moses had portrayed as an ascent from Egypt, saying: "is this what you call an ascent that you took us from a land flowing with milk and honey and now we are stuck in a desert, a place only fit to die? If this is your idea of an עליה, ascent, improvement in our lot, then no thank you, we do not want any part of it." They added כי תשתרר עלינו, "your sole purpose is to make yourself a prince over us." They did not even give Moses credit that his invitation was designed to provide them with a "soft landing," a face-saving opportunity to climb down from the limb they were on. By repeating the words גם השתרר, they added insult to injury claiming that Moses was not content with his status as leader prior to the Exodus, but that he wanted to consolidate his position. They hinted thereby that it suited Moses' purpose for the Israelites to remain in the desert for a long time as they were dependent upon him and this strengthened his positon as autocrat. We do know from Shemot Rabbah 5,23 that Moses' position as king was in effect only while the Jewish people were in the desert.