Parshat Korach

Parshat Korach

This week's parsha features the rebellion of Korach and his followers against Moshe. Korach's main point of contention was Moshe's appointment of Elizafan Ben Uziel as a Prince, even though, in terms of age, Korach was next in line. Korach, perceiving this to be a fabrication of the will of HaShem, gathered together two-hundred and fifty heads of the assembly to challenge Moshe's leadership.

The Medrash Tanchuma asks a deeply penetrating question regarding the motives of Korach. "Korach was a clever man; what did he see that brought him to such foolishness? His eyes misled him, for he saw a great chain of descendants emerging from him: Shmuel Hanavi, who was as important as Moshe and Aharon, as it says in Tehillim (99:6) 'Moshe and Aharon were among his priests and Shmuel was among those who invoke his name.'" Korach saw from the fact that Shmuel is mentioned in the same sentence as Moshe and Aharon, that Shmuel is just as important as them.

Korach's line of reasoning is very difficult to understand. He feels that he is justified in replacing Moshe and Aharon as leader because he saw that one of his descendants will a very important person. How does his offspring prove that he is fitting to be a leader? If Shmuel himself was leading this rebellion, then the argument would make sense: Shmuel is just as important as Moshe and Aharon, so perhaps he could be fitting to lead in their place. But what does Shmuel's greatness say about Korach's own worthiness? Furthermore, this thought process only proves the very opposite Korach's entire goal. Inherent in his line of reasoning is the assumption that Moshe and Aharon are men of spiritual greatness. Korach deduces that since Shmuel is just as important as them, Korach himself deserves to lead. But yet, he claims that Moshe and Aharon are unfitting, and that they are fabricating the will of HaShem. How can they be great enough to prove his own greatness, yet not great enough to be the rightful leaders? How can Korach make such an illogical argument?

From here we can learn a tremendous lesson what personal biases can do to a straight-thinking person. When one has a bias – a negiah – even a minutely subconscious one, he can skew reality with an absolutely newfangled interpretation, just in order for it to fit into his desired goal. Korachs main thrust to overtake Moshe and Aharon was his desire for honor. This negiahled him so far astray: he came to the ridiculous conclusion that he was fitting to be a leader, even though the progeny that would have actually been fitting for the job would not be born for generations. Additionally, it caused him to mount a rebellion against leaders which he himself inherently believed were great and holy men!

We see further proof to this idea in the very words of the Medrash. It says, "His eyes mistook him for he saw a great chain of descendant's emerging from him." Why does the Medrash use the "eyes" to connote his mistake? Why not say simply "he made a mistake"?

The pasuk in Kriat Shema says "You shall not stray after your heart and after your eyes." Here, HaShem warns us not to desire that which we see with our eyes. From this we learn that the "eyes" imply desire. Perhaps according this explanation, the Medrash is telling us that Korach's personal desire for kavod is what led him to skew and misinterpret reality.

May we merit the strength to realize and overcome our biases, and may we be able to see reality in a pure form that will allow us to fulfill the true will of HaShem.

Shabbat Shalom

--
Naftali Kassorla

Parshat Shelach

Parshas Shelach

Parshat Shelach This week's Parsha contains the episode of the spies. The spies were sent to scout the land for the future conquering and settling of Israel. Rashi explains that the sending of the spies was not a commandment from Hashem, rather it was Bnei Yisrael's choice to do so; as the pasuk says: “Shelach Lecha” – “Send for you” “I am not commanding you, but if you want to, send.” As we can see from what pccurs later in the parsha, this desire of the people to send spies on their own was very harmful.


When the spies come back, all of them (aside from Yehoshua Bin Nun and Calev Ben Yefuneh) return with negative reports of the land. Among these reports is a reference to Amalek: “Amalek dwell in the south land.” Rashi brings the Midrash Tanchuma to explain their mentioning of Amalek: “Since they had already been ‘burned’ by Amalek, [i.e. previously having had a war with them] the spies mentioned it in order to strike fear in them.”

This Midrash is at first glance very troubling. Where do we see in the mentioning of Amalek that the spies had ulterior motives? Is it not logical that spies sent to scout out the land would mention that the nation’s sworn enemy is in the vicinity? Is this not a very pertinent piece of intelligence for the nation before entering the land in order to conquer it? The very fact that Klal Yisrael “got burned” and had past issues with Amalek makes it so much more important to mention this! It seems that the spies are simply fulfilling their mission to provide the necessary information to conquer the land.From here we can learn a tremendous lesson in the power of proper speech. There are times when a person needs to bring up a sensitive issue or give someone a piece of constructive criticism. In order for his message to be heard, not only must the words be weighed carefully, but so too, the tone in which he says it. While he may have the best of intentions, if he uses the wrong words, speaks in the wrong tone, or brings it up at the wrong time, his remarks will not only be ignored, they will have a very damaging effect, and he will send scuttling any chances of helping his fellow Jew. When stated incorrectly, even the most crucial information can become unhelpful and deterrent.

With this in mind, we can now begin to understand the Midrash. It could very well be that the mentioning of Amalek was in essence correct, given the circumstances. Yet, the Midrash is telling us that the spies delivered this information in a way that would instill fear in the hearts of Klal Yisrael, therefore it was considered an evil statement, and from that we can see what their underlying intentions were. There are many opinions given as to what were the true motives of the spies, and according to many, they actually had good intentions. However, even if they did not purposely want to scare Klal Yisrael, we can learn from our explanation of this Midrash that just wanting to say the right thing is not enough. We need to think carefully before we speak and make sure the way we say our words will deliver the exact message we want to relay.

The pasuk in Mishlei (3:17) tells us that the Torah is “Deracheha darchei noam v’chol nitivoteha shalom”- “Its ways are of pleasantness and its paths are peace.” Although there are times when peace and appeasement alone will not suffice, still the Torah compels us, even in those instances, to speak pleasantly in order for our message to be heard. The Gemara in Gittin (7a) also tells us that in order for our words to be heeded we must speak in a pleasant tone.

It is not always easy to make sure our message is heard; there can be many factors involved that are beyond our control. But, we can at least try to do our best to think before we speak. And because of our effort and honest intentions, hopefully Hashem will help us to say things a way that will be un-hurtful and beneficial to our family and friends.

Shabbat Shalom

--

Naftali Kassorla