The Torah and Egalitarianism
And they gathered against Moshe and against Aharon and they said to them: It is much for you! For all the congregation, in its entirety, is sacred. And Hashem is among them. Why do you elevate yourselves above the assembly of Hashem? (Sefer BaMidbar 16:3)
I. Korach’s attack against the priesthood
Parshat Korach describes the rebellion of Korach and his followers against Moshe. Korach challenged Moshe’s establishment of a priesthood. Moshe had appointed Aharon and his sons as the Kohanim – the priests. The Kohanim were assisted by the other members of their tribe – the tribe of Levi. Korach argued that the entire nation is sacred. Why should only Aharon, his sons, and his tribe serve in the Mishcan – the Tabernacle?
What alternative was Korach suggesting? Ramban – Nachmanides – observes that Korach seems to be promoting the abolition of the institution of Kehunah – priesthood. The apparent meaning of Korach’s protest is that every individual should be permitted to offer his or her own sacrifices and serve in the MIshkan.
He notes that the Sages did not adopt this understanding of Korach’s position. According to the Sages, Korach’s proposal was that institution of Kehunah should be preserved. However, rather than Aharon, his sons, and tribe serving as the Kohanim and their assistants, the firstborn should fill these roles. In other words, the authority to perform Divine service should not be given to a specific family or tribe. All families and tribes should participate in Divine service – represented by their firstborn.[1]
II. Korach’s attitude toward halachah
These two views represent fundamentally different interpretations of the rebellion. The apparent meaning of the passages is that Korach wished to return all aspects of Divine service to the people. The full significance of this proposal becomes evident through contrasting the vision promoted by Korach to the institution established by Moshe. Rambam – Maimonides – explains that a Leyve enters into service only after completing five years of study.[2] These five years of study and training reflect on the nature of Divine service. It is governed by a comprehensive system of halacha – Torah law. Only after devoting years to its study and mastering this system may one enter into the ranks of those performing Divine service.
Korach proposed abolishing this system and democratizing Divine service. Every individual will offer his or her own sacrifices. In this system, there is no onerous requirement of expertise and the years of attendant training. Instead, the lay person replaces the expert. Consequently, adherence to a complex and comprehensive system of halacha is replaced by the commonsense notions of the layperson.[3]
III. The meaning of the tzitzit incident
Our Sages agree that Korach’s initiative reflected a rejection of the role of halachah in Divine service. This is reflected in their remarks in the midrash as quoted by Rashi:
“What did he do? He arose and brought in two hundred fifty judges of the higher courts. Most of these were from the tribe of Reuven, his neighbors… He dressed them in talitot (four cornered cloaks) that were made completely of techelit-blue wool. They came and stood before Moshe. They said to him: Consider a cloak composed completely of techelit-blue wool, does it require tzitzit-fringes or is it exempt? He (Moshe) responded: It requires (tzitzit). They began to mock him: Is it possible that a garment of some other material is satisfied by a single techelit-blue woolen thread and that this garment that is entirely of techelet-blue wool does not satisfy itself?”[4]
Korach’s challenge concerned a mitzvah discussed at the end of Parshat Shelach. When one wears a four-cornered garment, it must feature tzitzit – fringes at each of its corners. One of the fringes at each corner must be techelit-blue wool. Techelit is a specific blue dye.[5] Korach’s demonstration was intended to establish that halachah does not correspond with commonsense. What sense does it make that a garment’s requirement of techelit can be satisfied by tying a single thread to each of its corners but that a garment composed entirely of techelit does not include enough techelit to satisfy its requirement? Certainly, common sense revolts against requiring that techelit be tied to the corners of such a garment!
Korach’s proposal for democratization of Divine service implicitly endorses the replacement of the structured and complex system of halachah with this commonsense standard. In authorizing every individual to perform Divine service, regardless of his knowledge and training, halachah is inevitably replaced by the commonsense standard.
IV. Korach’s proposal for a representative priesthood
According to the Sages, Korach was not campaigning for abolishment of the priesthood. He wanted to replace Moshe’s appointees with the firstborns. This proposal accepts that the sanctity and dignity of Divine service requires that it be performed by those most distinguished – the firstborn. Therefore, the proposal accepts the necessity of the priesthood. Its objective is to distribute it among all families and tribes. Instead of a single tribe serving as the Kohanim and as their assistants, every tribe will participate, through its firstborn, in Divine service. This proposal creates a priesthood representative of all the people.[6]
According to this interpretation of his rebellion, Korach’s proposal decries the injustice of elevating one tribe from among the others and assigning prominence to a single family – Aharon and his children. The proposal seeks to reduce distinctions among members of the community to a minimum and to distribute any positions of distinction – such as priesthood – among the people. The emphasis is not on overturning halachah. It is upon minimizing distinctions between the members of the community.
And Moshe said: With this you will know that Hashem sent me to perform these actions – that (they are) not from my heart. If these die in the manner of all humankind and the end of all humankind is brought upon them, Hashem did not send me. (But) if a creation is created by Hashem and the land opens its mouth and swallows them and all that is theirs and they descend alive to the grave, then know that these men strove with Hashem. (Sefer BaMidbar 16:28-30)
V. Korach sought to undermine the prophecy of Moshe
This is an appealing proposal. However, Hashem, in His wisdom, did select the tribe of Levi for a special role as His priests and their assistants. Hashem singled out a tribe and elevated it to this sacred role. In their rebellion, Korach and his followers denied Moshe’s prophecy. They accused Moshe of claiming for himself and his family privilege and honor. In other words, the proposal championed by Korach was not innately preposterous. Instead, it was inadmissible because it contradicted the prophecy of Moshe.[7]
Ramban suggests that this aspect of Korach’s rebellions explains the severity of their punishment. Korach and his followers forfeited their lives. A portion actively challenged Moshe’s appointment of Aharon, his sons, and tribe. They offered the incense that may be offered only by a true Kohen. A fire descended from heaven and consumed them. Another group did not participate in offering the incense. They were consumed by the Earth.
Ramban explains that this second group was punished with a unique miracle. The Earth opened and consumed them. This event should not be confused with a natural earthquake. In a severe quake, the Earth’s surface opens and an immense fissure may appear. When the quake ends the fissure remains as a new feature of the Earth’s surface. In this instance, a mouth opened in the Earth; it behaved as if animate. It opened, consumed its victims, and then closed.
Ramban asks why this rebellion elicited this remarkable punishment? Hashem responded to other rebellions with plagues or other more natural punishments. In this instance, Hashem responded by taking these lives with a manifest wonder.
He responds that this rebellion challenged the very legitimacy of Moshe’s prophecy. Korach contended that Moshe claimed to implement prophecy but really acted out of personal ambition. If Korach had succeeded in his rebellion, then every element of Moshe’s prophecy would be subject to doubt. No element of the Torah would be beyond suspicion.
VI. Contemporary adaptations
Both of these perspectives on Korach’s rebellion are relevant to us. We observe in our times the emergence within the observant community of a movement to replace the system of halacha with commonsense resolutions to contemporary challenges. We also observe the tendency toward selective observance. Some mitzvot are dismissed as irrelevant, outdated, or unenlightened. The underlying premise of this tendency is rejection of Moshe’s prophecy. The lesson of Hashem’s response to Korach is that the rejection of the authenticity of any component of Moshe’s prophecy – even a single mitzvah –inevitably undermines every element of the Torah.
[1] Rabbeinu Moshe ben Nachman (Ramban / Nachmanides), Commentary on Sefer BaMidbar 16:21.
[2] Rabbeinu Moshe ben Maimon (Rambam / Maimonides) Mishnah Torah, Hilchot Klai Mikdash 3:7.
[3] For an excellent and more extensive discussion of Korach’s view of halacha and his revolt see: Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, Vision and Leadership, “The Korah Rebellion”.
[4] Rabbeinu Shlomo ben Yitzchak (Rashi), Commentary on Sefer BaMidbar 16:1.
[5] If techelet-blue is not available, undyed fringes are required at the four corners of the garment. For centuries the practice of including a techelet-blue thread among the tzitzit was abandoned because of uncertainty regarding the derivation and manufacture of the dye. More recently, the practice of including a techelet-blue thread has been reintroduced based on research regarding its derivation and manufacture. Some authorities accept the validity and relevance of this research. Other authorities reject the research and its findings.
[6] See: Rabbeinu Moshe ben Nachman (Ramban / Nachmanides), Commentary on Sefer BaMidbar 17:6.
[7] In the context of this discussion it is not appropriate to include consideration of the rationale for selecting the tribe of Levi for service rather than adopting the more egalitarian system promoted by Korach. The point being made, here, is not the Korach’s social views were unreasonable. The point is that reasonable or not his views were inconsistent with the truth revealed through Moshe’s prophecy. Korach and his followers were not punished because their social views were innately wicked. They were punished because their views undermined the validity of Moshe’s prophetic status.