Perashat Korah 5778

Perashat Korah 5778

In this week's perasha, we read the story of the rebellion of Korah. Along with two hundred and fifty men of the Israelite assembly, Korah challenged the leadership of Moshe and Aharon. In Pirke Abot, the Mishna states that the only disputes that will result in long-lasting value are those intended for the sake of heaven, leshem shamayim. The examples given as evidence are those between Hillel and Shammai, whose different interpretations of the Torah often lead to zealous disagreements, and are now a constructive source of learning. To the contrary, the incident of Korah and his company is the paradigm of negativity.

In Yaarot Devash, Rabbi Yonatan Eybeschutz's work of Mussar, it says that the Yesser Hara convinces the parties of every mahloket, disagreement, that what they are doing is for the sake of heaven. It is a concept that could be easily distorted and used cynically. How then do we know if an argument is made with good intentions? Rabbi Eybeschutz provides the golden rule: If the disagreeing parties respect and care for each other, then the disagreement is leshem shamayim. However, if it is determined that the conflict is more about ego, asserting superiority or leads to divisiveness, then surely it is not in heaven's name. The intention should be about truth and not merely victory.

The Houses of Shammai and Hillel had sharp disagreements. Yet the Gemara relates that they succeeded in maintaining close relationships, eating in each other's homes and marrying one another. The mahloket of Hillel and Shammai was conducted in a healthy and constructive manner, unlike the rebellion of Korah and his people who were full of hate and attacked Moshe and Aharon on a personal level. 

Furthermore, most cases of halakha were decided according to Beit Hillel. As the Gemara in Erubin 13b says: "Why was the halakha established to follow the opinion of Hillel? It is because the students of Hillel were kind and gracious. They taught their own ideas as well as the ideas from the students of Shammai. Furthermore, they even taught Shammai's opinions first." We learn from this that when in conflict it is meritorious to hear the other side's position first and be open to changing one's mind if presented with properly supported evidence. 

If we all manage our disagreements by maintaining respect for our opponent, being clear that our motivations are not just about winning the argument and being open to admit that we may be wrong, then we can be assured that we are arguing for the sake of heaven.

Shabbat Shalom,
Rabbi Mimoun Miller