Korah 5773

By Rabbi Daniela Szuster,

B´nei Israel Congregation, San Jose, Costa Rica

Korah: a leader who placed his personal interests before those of his community

“Now Korah, son of Izhar son of Kohath son of Levi, betook himself, along with Dathan and Abiram sons of Eliab, and On son of Peleth — descendants of Reuben — to rise up against Moses, together with two hundred and fifty Israelites, chieftains of the community, chosen in the assembly, men of repute” (Num. 16:1-2).

Thus begins this week’s parashah.  Korah, Dathan and Abiram, along with two hundred fifty other men, revolted against Moses.  Different commentators have wondered about the identity of these two hundred fifty people, and why they chose to rebel against Moses, the great leader who had redeemed them from slavery.

According to Ibn Ezra, there were many dissatisfied and unhappy people among the group, for different reasons.  The motivations for their complaints were heterogeneous, but the goal of their uprising was homogenous.  They were united by their complaints, though these were caused by different reasons.  Ibn Ezra, somehow, managed to travel to those times, in an attempt to understand the position, emotions, and angers that moved the different groups involved in this revolt.  In this manner, he identified certain possible dissenting groups:

• Levites: perhaps they felt unhappy for their having to serve the Priests, instead of playing a more leading role.
• Reuben’s tribe (Dathan and Abiram): perhaps they felt discriminated against, because at some point, they were dispossessed of their birthright, in favor of Joseph’s descendents.
• First-born sons of all the tribes of Israel: perhaps they felt discriminated against, for having been stripped of the honor of performing the sacrifices to God, which were transferred to the tribe of Levi (this event following the building of the golden calf).
• Korah: according to Rashi, he rebelled against Aaron’s investiture as Cohen Gadol, High priest.  He wanted to replace Elzaphan Ben Uzziel, whom Moses appointed as chief of the children of Kehat.  In Rabbeinu Bechaye ben Asher’s opinion, he was strongly jealous of Moses leadership.  He was also from the tribe of Levi and, therefore, he had a chance to occupy a leading position.

Here we have at least four different motives for complaint from different people.  And surely, we could find much more.

Now, the question is why they all chose precisely this time to uncover all those complaints.  Maybe they emerged at this time, or were they flowing around beforehand?  Why didn’t each of them complain when they felt directly affected: the Levites, when they were assigned their functions; Reuben’s tribe, when the right of the first-borns was transferred to Joseph; the first-born sons, immediately after the event of the golden calf; etc.

Rambam, in his very discerning way, answered that it was not by chance that this demonstration was organized precisely at this historical time.  If the same had happened at some other time, the majority of the people would not have allowed it, taking instead Moses’ and Aaron’s side, for them being their loved and admired leaders.  In other situations, the people who were in disagreement had to keep quiet and hide their discomforts.   At this time, however, following the episode of the Moraglim (scouts), which preceded a very deep crisis and division among the people, was when these groups decided to give voice to their unease, with no feelings of embarrassment for their protests.  Korah realized that this was the ideal time for him to achieve his goal.

And perhaps this was Korah’s biggest mistake: to take advantage of the situation of vulnerability, confusion and crisis that the people were living, to rebel and attempt to obtain his own interests.  Korah did not think about the general consequences of this revolt, but rather on how to destitute the leaders of the moment, in order to acquire power for himself.  We have witnessed this kind of incident in many periods throughout human history.

And reflecting on Korah’s followers, it would seem that dissent can always be found in its latent form.  Freud spoke about “man’s discomfort in culture”.   If you ask anyone, he/she is likely to present some discomfort associated with the different human groups to which he/she belongs.  This is nothing new.  The purpose is to take advantage of this in favor of your own interests, causing a general social disintegration.  With interests, ambition, and power itself in mind, instead of general welfare.

The parashah begins with the words “Vayikach Korah”, which Rashi interprets as “lakach et atzmah” (he took himself to one side).  Korah belonged to a prestigious family, he was wealthy, he was a talmid chacham (sage) and very intelligent.  He had all the qualities needed to eventually become a leader of the people of Israel.  Why couldn’t he do it?  Because “lakach et atzmah” (he took himself to one side); by trying to accelerate the process, he himself lost the opportunity.  He couldn’t wait for the day when the people would choose him for having acknowledged his qualities; he rather chose to elect himself as a leader, through quarreling, discussion, and social destabilization.  Following Rashi, having the best qualities for leadership is not enough; it is also necessary to wait for the perfect timing in which to do it.

In the words of Pirkei Avot (4:21): “Envy, desire, and honor take a person out of the world.”  In Korah’s case, all these things took from him his chance of leadership, and he was punished for eternity.

So, according to one of the messages of this parashah, it is not bad to complain, it is understandable to sometimes feel dissatisfied or annoyed; the problem occurs when people take advantage of the general unrest, to augment crisis, disorder, and chaos, instead of trying to promote social consolidation, the recovery of hope, and the wishes for a common successful future, beyond whomever is leading the game.

Shabbat Shalom!