Divrei Korach
Strife
Sometimes it appears that our way of serving Hashem while in galus is to look at the ways of the people around us -- and do the exact opposite. Nowhere is this idea more apparent than in machlokes-strife. When elections feature candidates hurling nasty invective at one another (“negative campaigning”), and the airwaves are filled with vicious bouts loosely disguised as “talk shows” and “courtroom drama;” even if we minimize or eliminate our exposure, it is difficult to insulate ourselves from those who are affected by them and thereby keep them from affecting us. To “love peace and pursue peace,” as Chazal (Avos 1:12) urge us, requires unusual effort.
Every year, the Torah brings us this parsha, named after Korach, who lost everything – wealth, wisdom, family, and power -- due to strife.
In Shmiras HaLoshon (Sha’ar HaZechirah 15-17), the Chofetz Chaim outlines the pitfalls that come from machlokes. Citing the Rambam, he notes that this task is an endless job, saying, “If we tried to completely explain the tremendous destructive force of strife, time itself would end, and our task would not be finished.” Still, he does give an overview, writing, “Aside from the sin [of making strife], which on its own is an incredible wrong . . . it also causes one to fall into many more serious sins, such as senseless hatred, loshon hora, rechilus, anger, insulting another, embarrassing another, bearing a grudge, taking revenge, cursing another, withholding another’s parnoso, chillul Hashem, . . . false flattery, [and] leitzanus. . . . All these were the ways of the original ba’al machlokes, Korach.” In other words, if one becomes part of a machlokes, he risks throwing all his well-developed sechel and his finely-honed middos out the door, and letting every sin and bad middah roll all over him, like loose cannons on board a ship rocking to and fro, in the stormy ocean. He of course bears all responsibility for the carnage and damage he has caused.
What’s more, if one is foolish enough to pick a fight with a talmid chacham (who does not have to be the rav of the city, but can even be the local school principal, his children’s teachers, or any other talmid chacham), the Gemara (Sanhedrin 110a) tells us that he is in effect squaring off against Hashem Himself – a lopsided match, to say the least! The outcome is foregone; the Gemara (99a) states that anyone who disparages a talmid chacham is an apikorus, who has no share in Olam Haba. He also loses this world, as described in the Midrash (BaMidbar Rabbah 15:17) on the posuk, “’And you shall honor the face of an elder’ (Vayikra 19:32): And what “honor” is the posuk describing? One should not stand nor sit in the elder’s place, nor contradict his words, etc., for anyone who does not follow these guidelines is called evil before Hashem, his learning becomes forgotten, the years of his life become shortened, and in the end he falls into dire poverty.” Reasons the Chofetz Chaim: If such a fate awaits one who withholds honor from a talmid chacham, imagine the bitter end of one who incites others against a talmid chacham!
Nor is this terrible punishment limited to the instigator. The Gemara (Makkos 5b) states that one who aids a sinner is considered just as guilty as that sinner himself. The Torah warns us not to become “like Korach and his assembly,” all of whom lost their lives. Moreover, we are familiar with the Midrash (Bamidbar Rabbah 18:4): “Rabbi Berachiah says, ‘How awful is strife! The Heavenly court only punishes people above the age of 20, earthly courts start at 13, yet in the episode of Korach, even day-old babies were swallowed up!’” The Chofetz Chaim declares that even if one’s own father, who is a tzaddik, and in fact is in the right, commands one to join his quarrel with a rasha, one should not obey, but rather should attempt to end the debate.
Clearly, the Torah urges us to avoid machlokes at any cost. If this sin is so terrible, why does it seem such a constant part of our Jewish life?
Rabbi Yisroel Reisman shlit’a discussed this very issue. (M85) To explain why division persists throughout history, he cited the Maharal (Netzach Yisroel 33-34) who states that it is Klal Yisroel’s natural pre-Messianic state to be in machlokes. The only reason we were united under Shlomo was in order to build the Bais HaMikdash, a House of Hashem.
How could strife be “natural”? Says Rav Tzaddok HaKohen (in Ohr Zaruah LaTatzaddik): The Midrash (Osios D’R. Akiva) tells us that Hashem chose the letter Bais to begin the Torah, for it also began the word, “bracha.” When Hashem then utilized the Torah as a blueprint to create the world, Bais – with its gematria of two – became embedded in the foundation of the world to such an extent that the concept of “twoness” became an integral part of this world.
Why would Hashem have implanted machlokes into this world? Rav Tzaddok answers that the purpose of this world is for us to use our free will to perfect ourselves. In order for us to do so, we must confront and conquer challenge after challenge. These struggles must be fair; if we were either much stronger or much weaker than these challenges, there would be no growth. Now, the power of unity is so great, that if Hashem had allowed a state of unity to define the world, no challenge would be strong enough to test us and so enable us to grow. Therefore, He implanted a force of machlokes in the world, in order that we overcome it and by doing so bring ourselves to perfection.
This concept also explains why some ba’alei madrega are accustomed to avoid zugos – twos of anything, as described by the Gemara (Pesachim 110a), Twoness brings out this power of machlokes, which they are trying to resist.
The Torah itself fights machlokes. That Midrash states that to comfort a disappointed Aleph, Hashem placed it at the beginning of the Aseres HaDibros – at Matan Torah, when the Jewish nation was “ish echad, b’lev echad” – in an incredible state of unity, which brought every Jew to the highest level he or she could reach, artificially fulfilling everyone’s own tachlis in life. Therefore, our neshamos left our bodies. Likewise, as Rabbi Akiva died, Chazal (Berachos 61b) tell us that he drew out the word “echad.” Says Rav Tzaddok: they are indicating his achievement of perfection.
Rav Tzaddok also notes that Chazal do not call machlokes evil in itself, nor shalom good in itself. Rather, machlokes brings evil, and shalom is “the vessel that holds goodness.” (See the end of the Mishnah, Mascehte Uktzin) Why? Hashem does not “create evil;” rather, He gives us the ability to choose good and thereby quash the potential for evil. The potential for strife is always there for us, in shul, school, home, or office. We are to prevent that potential from becoming reality, either by not starting a machlokes, or, if one already exists, by rising above the fray.
One who chooses to make machlokes can expect a test in return, middah-k’neged middah. For example, Yeravam upbraided Shlomo for closing the Millo area and thereby making pilgrimages to the Bais HaMikdash more difficult. Chazal tell us that Yeravam was right. However, because he spoke up in public, he created a machlokes. Hashem therefore tested Yeravam. In effect, He said, “I will make you a king, too. However, only a king from Bais Dovid can sit in the Temple courtyard. You will have to stand in public, looking like a commoner.” What did Yeravam do? He closed off the pilgrimage routes even more than Shlomo! We see this concept in practice. Parents who criticize a school to their children should expect that some time in the future, when that very school does something they like, their children are going to criticize it. They will find themselves defending that very school against their children’s criticism!
In our fight-loving society, our fight should be to avoid a fight.
Reaching Out
Moshe went out to appease
Dasan and Aviram, even though he was the leader, and he was in the right. This
is an eternal lesson, says Rav Reisman, who notes that the Ben Ish Chai said
that as a general rule, whenever we have a machlokes among poskim, we tend to go
with the side that was most accommodating to criticism. Bais Hillel would tell
Bais Shammai’s arguments before their own, and the halacha normally goes
according to Bais Hillel. The Rambam in his letters states that the withering
criticism he often received from others did not bother him. His writings remain
essential guides to Jewish law, often overruling those of his ardent critics.
Sometimes reaching out to those below oneself brings other benefits, as this
ma’aseh from Rav Wallach demonstrates.
Two wealthy Kovno Jews disagreed over some issue and came to HaRav Yitzchok Elchonon Spector zt”l, who ruled in one’s favor. The angered loser cut his ties to the community. Everyone turned their backs to him, giving him an unofficial “excommunication.”
At one public simchah, this man came, but sat to the side, as had become his sad habit. Suddenly, Rav Spector rose from his place of honor, walked over to the surprised man, and extended his hand in friendship. As onlookers fumed, the Rav led the man to the dais and sat him next to himself. After the pleased man left, others peppered the Rav: “How could you? What about kavod haTorah?” Rav Spector said nothing.
A very short time later, desperate leaders of a neighboring city’s community came to Kovno. The Jews there had been slandered to the authorities, who had decreed a mass expulsion. As Rav Spector paced back and forth, someone remembered that that very man had connections to the mayor of that very city. Immediately, Rav Spector penned a letter to him. When the man received it, he joyfully exclaimed, “The decree will be annulled within a day!” And so it was.
Rav Spector later said, “So who was right – those who did not want me to forego my honor, or me? What did I lose by approaching him, and what would have happened to thousands of innocent Jewish families in that city if I had not?”