Koraj 5776 - English

By Rabbi Dario Feiguin

B´nei Israel Congregation, Costa Rica

The rebellion of Korach was engraved in the collective unconscious as the prototype of an empty argument just for the sake of power.  The tale ends with what I think is a tremendous metaphor: the Earth swallowed Korach and his followers, as if suggesting that the search for power for the sake of power itself leads us to be swallowed by Life, without any chance to enjoy it, to leave our mark on this world, to find meaning in the adventure of living.  

The point made by this episode in the desert reached so deep into our collective unconscious that Rabbinical Judaism will never have just one legal authority, precisely because of the stigma associated with authoritarianism and the legitimacy of pluralism.   

During the time of the Mishnah, each generation would always have not one but two teachers, known as “zugot” = couples.  And anyone who has ever studied the Talmud knows that on any given page from the 64 volumes of this Life Encyclopedia, he will find several different opinions and all of them are valid.  

In Pirkei Avot, the Treaty of Principles, it says (Chapter 5, Mishnah 17):

“Any dispute that is for the sake of Heaven is destined to endure; one that is not for the sake of Heaven is not destined to endure. Which is a dispute that is for the sake of Heaven? The dispute(s) between Hillel and Shamai (the first two great teachers of the first generation of the Tanaim). Which is a dispute that is not for the sake of Heaven? The dispute of Korach and all his company.”

This statement has important consequences regarding our attitude towards dialogue and differences.

1. It recognizes the importance of differences and diversity.  To have just one valid opinion is the key towards fascism.

2. When the motive is only the search for power it will not work.  Sometimes I wonder how Nietsche understood it better than Freud, by warning that power is even stronger than the intuitive need to satisfy the instincts.  

3. An argument does no good when it is just to find out who is right or who is the best.  It is not about convincing the other, and even less about trying to beat him like in Medieval times.  

4. An argument will be constructive and must be mantained when we recognize that the only Truth is G’d.  This implies that Men can only access half truths.  Therefore, we must not only declaim, but also defend pluralism and respect for all differences. 

5. An argument is useful when it comes from an attitude of humility and learning.  In other words, when dialogue promotes appreciation aside from respect, when it transforms into complementing each other, when it recognizes and legitimizes the other.  

To have a conversation, one requires the other.  Otherwise, we fall into the trap of believing we are talking, cuando we are only reciting monologues.  

Along with the practical implications of talking, I would like to add 3 theologic ideas which are fundamental to express my feelings.  

The first has to do with the supremacy of Values.  To have a constructive conversation, it is essential to start from a set of common values, such as the sanctity of human life, liberty, justice and peace.  

As the prophet Micah says, Chapter 6, verse 8:

“He has shown you, O mortal, what is good.  And what does G’d require of you?  To act justly and to love mercy and to walk humbly with your G’d.”

It does not matter what type of G’d you believe in.  What matters most is what supreme values we receive as a challenge and we devote ourselves to develop, to feel that we are making room for G’d in our lives. 

The second idea has to do with how universal His message is.  Like Issaiah 56:7 says:

 “KI BEITI BEIT TEFILA IKARE LECHOL HAAMIM”

“because the house of G’d will be named house of prayer for every people”

The House of G’d will be the house of prayer, whenever, not just for one people, or one Nation, or one culture or language.  

The prophet says: it will be home to every people.  It will be home for all Men.  Because beyond the differences, controversies and pluralism, we are all brothers and sons of one father.  Without privileges.  Without discrimination.  

Thirdly, let me share a theologic idea born from the Spanish Kabbalah.  The Zohar (the most important book in Jewish mysticism) says that no human being is able to perceive the divine light directly. 

That Light refracts like a sapphire and reaches us in 10 emissions, each of them reflecting an aspect of the fundamental light.  The 10 emissions or Sefirot are connected to our vital organs, our energy chakras, our genetic codes, our names, our ancestors, and our stars.  No Sefirah by itself can cover the totality of Existence.  Not even all 10 of them together. 

It must be a question of trying to see how the divine light is refracted from the different perspectives of Being.  How each of them adds meaning.  How each of them give us balance.  

We can try to present an argument like Korach: for power, to win, to be acknowledged, or because we think we hold the absolute truth.  But we will be swallowed by our ambition.  

True dialogue happens when I can open my soul and disagree with respect and humility, when I share values that do not belong to me but to all Humanity, and when I recognized that I am only a small spark of divine light adding clarity from my own particular perspective. 

What about us?  How do we talk?  Like Korach or like Hilel and Shamai?  How do we express our disagreements?  By pressing, yelling, explaining, holding our words, lowering our arms, embarking in monologues?  How do we communicate?  Facing forward or through the back?  Do we respect each other?  Do we appreciate each other?  Do we feel complementary?

G’d willing, may this week´s Torah reading speak to us not only of a rebellion in the desert from 3.500 years ago, but also confront us with the problems with communication and the nature of dissent.

G’d willing, may we know how to choose to engage in creative and fruitful controversies.  May we not drown in our own ego, and may we be allowed to recognize that we are searching for something bigger than ourselves, to meet other human beings, other lights, other sparks, and may we receive wings of wisdom and sensitivity to fly higher and, maybe, reach the sky.  

Shabbat Shalom,

Rabbi Darío Feiguin

Congregation B´nei Israel, Costa Rica