2020/5780

In the process of chastising Moshe Rabbeinu, citing many inflated and seemingly overblown infractions of the rights of the Bnei Yisrael in this week’s Parashah, we see Korach raise a single valid and logical argument. “Kol Ha’Edah Kulam Kedoshim UBitocham Hashem UMadu’ah TitNasu Al Kehal Hashem,” “The entire congregation are all holy, and Hashem is in their midst. So why do you raise yourselves above Hashem’s assembly?” (BeMidbar 16:3). The obvious response that we may pose to Korach’s barrage upon Moshe Rabbeinu is that he misses the point of Moshe and Aharon’s leadership. Of course, the beginning of Korach’s statement is logical and holds some truth to it, it is the very nature of Am Yisrael that we are holy. In hindsight, there is no distinction in Kedushah between Moshe and a simpleton. Thus, Korach raises the age-old argument of “Who died and left you in charge?”, citing the equality in the Kedushah of Am Yisrael.

We understand, as evidenced by the Parashah and many commentators, that Korach was wrong in his assumptions, using arguments that were half-truths. Rav Hershel Shachter likes to compare Korach to simpletons who are not attuned to the Halachic process and oftentimes complain that the ruling of a Rabbi makes “no sense.” (See Rav Schachter on the Parsha, pp. 192-196). Not only did Korach call Moshe out on account of his Kedushah, which was supposedly equal to that of everyone else, but to his Halachic rulings as well. Both Rashi (BeMidbar 16:1 s.v. Vayikach Korach) and the Midrash (BeMidbar Rabbah 18) point out that Korach had brought various trivial Halachic questions to Moshe to hear his ruling, waiting for him to give a ruling that he could use as fuel for his criticism. We see from both our original Pasuk and these two commentaries that Korach was certainly aiming to attack Moshe and Aharon on all fronts, but we Still must try to explain why this is the case.

Rav Soloveitchik presents a thorough explanation of this argument, citing our original point made concerning Korach’s “everyone is equally holy” argument (Chumash Mesorat HaRav pp. 130-131, See Vision and Leadership pp. 194-196). There is a twofold character of Kedushat Yisrael. The Rav cites a Rashi seen in Parashat Re’eh, questioning the duplication of the Pasuk: “Ki Am Kadosh Atah LaHashem Elokecha Uvecha Bachar Hashem LiHiyot Lo Li’Am Segulah MiKol Ha’Amim Asher Al Pnei Ha’Adamah,” “For you are a holy people to Hashem, your G-d, and Hashem has chosen you to be a treasured people for Him” (Devarim 14:2). Rashi (ibid) explains that the statement “Ki Am Kadosh Atah” indicates that the holiness of Am Yisrael is an inheritance to us from our forefathers. This is logical, given that upon waking up every morning we say, “Torah Tzivah Lanu Moshe Morashah Kehillat Ya’akov.” We are the Kehillat Yaakov who has inheritedTorah, and subsequently, we have inherited a sense of Kedushah as well. In addition to this first point by Rashi, he also points out that “Bachar Hashem LiHiyot Lo” indicates that Hashem has chosen us all to be a cherished people to Him.

The Rav then explains the two separate aspects of Kedushah which in turn may show from where Korach’s misconception emerges. Knesset Yisrael, the community of Israel, is not simply a multitude of people or Neshamot, it is an individual personality. The Kedushah of Knesset Yisrael is inherited through our ancestors, and in order to claim such Kedushah, one is charged with drawing from the available resources of the community to aid oneself in deriving this. While a profound statement and understanding which can certainly lay claim to the validity of Korach’s statement, this interpretation instead leaves room for error in thought. Korach’s claims of community equality would certainly fit this typological description, but there is an issue to this statement that does not fulfill the message of Rashi from hiscommentary on Parashat Re’eh. This variant of Kedushah is neither personal nor intimate, and can be rooted only in the community as an ancestral inheritance rather than an individualistic aspect of Kedushah.

The Rav then offers a solution to this by noting that this cannot be the only source of Kedushah, as it would deprive man of his creativity, originality, and uniqueness. There would, in practicum, be no room for the growth of a simple individual into a great leader. As such, there is an obvious second resource of Kedushah which presents itself only to the individual. This is a Kedushah that cannot be shared or accessed by others. The Rav even invokes such an idea through the Ma’Amarei Chazal (see Berachot 58a for example), citing that in the same sense that people hold different ideas and interpretations of ideas, the same is true of their Kedushot.8 Finally, the Rav ties this idea together with our first resource, the community aspect. Logically, it can be said that there is a communal Kedushah given the conglomerate of individuals that constitute the community, but this is only true through the integration and application of the individual’s Kedushah which subsequently contributes to the community. With this in mind, it is well understood what the Pasuk is saying in mentioning, “Ki Am Kadosh Atah LaHashem Elokecha,” “For you are a holy people to Hashem, your G-d.” Your holiness is because you are a member of a holy nation. “Am Kadosh Atah” indicates that the nation precedes the individual, but is immediately followed by “Uvecha Bachar Hashem LiHiyot Lo Li’Am Segulah MiKol Ha’Amim,”indicating that you, the individual, has been chosen by Hashem to create/form a treasured people for Hashem. In this statement, Hashem has stressed the individual before the nation, “Uvecha” before “Am Segulah.” From this, we may take into full consideration what Korach missed in his questioning the Kedushah of Moshe and the nation.

From the arrangement of the words in the Pasuk in Re’eh, we may better understand the nature of Kedushat Yisrael. In essence, no one individual can be endowed with the same level of Kedushah. Instead, we may suggest, based on the Pesukim and Rashi’s interpretation (with the philosophical aid of the Rav), that each individual is endowed with a unique sense of Kedushah that reflects his or her individual personality. Such Kedushah is an expression of the individual, and thus not comparable to that of others. How this Kedushah is attained is a story for a different time. What can be concluded,, is that Korach was mistaken in hisassumptions made at the beginning of this week’s Parashah. Yes, there is a sense of kedushah imbued in all of the Bnei Yisrael, it is exactly what constitutes us as the Bnei Yisrael. However, we are each endowed with a unique sense of Kedushah which cannot be accessed by others. Such individual Kedushot allow the individual to reach very high places in the community, but should be understood to also be unique to each individual. Moshe Rabbeinu’s Kedushah is not to the same degree, or maybe in the same realm of the Kedushah that Korach possessed, and this is where Korach fell short. Korach saw the fact of Am Yisrael’s Kedushah as a means of creating social equality, but misinterpreted the meaning of “Am Kadosh'' in doing so. If Korach had possessed a proper understanding of the individual versus community Kedushah, he would have realized this. Instead, it can be inferred that Korach strove too much for power (Chumash Mesorat HaRav pp. 130-131) or simply misunderstood the meaning of “Am Kadosh,” making him just another of the misguided simpletons, as suggested by Rav Schachter, leading to the quashing of this rebellion.