A Taste of Torah in Honor of Shabbat

Shabbat Korach 5757

30 Sivan, 5757

Rabbi Avi Weiss, Hebrew Institute of Riverdale

The controversy of Korach and his congregation--unlike the controversy of Hillel and Shammai--is a controversy not pursued in a Heavenly cause, and, therefore, does not endure. (Ethics 5:17) Why is Korach's disagreement with Moshe (Moses) so tainted?

Malbim, the 19th century commentary writes: "In a controversy pursued for unholy ends...even those who have come together on one side are not really united. Each is out to cut the other's throat."

Note, the text in Ethics speaks of the controversy between Korach and his congregation, not Korach and Moshe. In other words, Korach's group was racked by dissension from within, each wanting the priesthood for himself.

A lesson borne out in Israel politics. In recent elections, victory has gone to the party most united. The party beset by division always lost as it conveyed a message to the electorate--those running for office are less sincere, they're out for themselves, and not deserving of support.

Another thought comes to mind. Korach refused to dialogue with Moshe. (Numbers 16:12) An essential principle of controversy for the sake of Heaven is the recognition that no single person has the monopoly on truth. Although one may be committed to a particular position, he or she must be open and respectful of dissenting views.

Here again is a lesson for Israeli politicians to think about.

Hearing-listening to the other is essential. The real challenge is not listening to those who agree with us, but listening to those who do not.

Rabbi Eliezer Ashkenazi, a 16th century commentary offers a final idea. He notes that the text in Ethics states a controversy for Heaven will in the end--"sofah"--endure. The word "end" does not only mean "finish"; it can also mean "purpose," as in means and ends. In other words, when Hillel and Shammai disagreed they still wanted the halakhic system to endure, hence, their controversy was for the sake of Heaven. This, unlike Korach, whose purpose in disagreeing with Moshe was to destroy the system of the priesthood.

So too in Israeli politics. Rav Kuk states that the duly elected government of Israel has the status of malkhut, the biblical status of king. (Mishpat Kohen 144:14-17) Thus, an individual has the right to disagree with government policy, but can never regard those policies as null and void. Dissent is acceptable; delegitimation is not.

If this distinction is blurred, if the government is declared illegitimate, the consequences are grievous. Citizens would then be able to take the law into their own hands and carry out their own conception of what they believe Jewish law demands. This, as we have witnessed in recent years, is ominous for the future of Israel.

SHABBAT SHALOM

VISIT THE BAYIT'S NEW WESITE AT

http://www.ou.org/network/shuls/hir

This Dvar Torah page created and hosted courtesy of OU Online - The Cyber Home of Torah
No responsibility for its contents may be implied or taken by the OU