This week's Torah portion continues the narrative of the Book of Numbers (Bamidbar). It is, for at least the first half, a powerful, compelling narrative, full of rebellion against Moses and Aaron, numerous deaths, and timeless questions of who or what makes a leader. It follows the events of Parshat Shelach Lecha, where the 12 Spies went out and ultimately convinced the Children of Israel not to invade Canaan (well, 10 of the 12, anyways). This has already called into question the leadership of Moses, as did the subsequent (and failed) invasion. Read on to see how those within and without the weekly portion deal with such crises.
Torah portion: Numbers, 16:1-18:32
Haftorah portion: I Samuel, 11:14-12:22
The Parsha, as mentioned above, begins with the rebellion of Korach. Korach is a member of the Levite tribe, which is the same group as Moses and Aaron. In fact, he's closely related to them, and is quite upset that he has been denied his due. Korach confronts Moses, saying in verse 3: "You have too much!" Yes, that's right, he's engaging in that time honored tradition of suggesting that the leaders have too much, which of course is sometimes true and sometimes isn't (we'll take a look later at what the Rabbis think he's saying). Korach continues saying that the entire camp (by which he may mean just the Levites) are holy, and why should Moses raise himself above them?
Moses needs to respond. After all, he's just been called out, with his leadership questioned. This occurs after the terrible failure of the spies, and it's totally reasonable to call out Moses. In fact, much of Moses' leadership has been pretty ineffective recently. David Plotz made this point in his Blogging the Bible series at slate.com: by Numbers, Moses' leadership has been challenged and weakened repeatedly, to the point that Phineas, who quarkstomper mentioned last weak, basically takes matters into his own hands later in the Book of Numbers. But in this case, Moses does have a response. He replies to Korach, telling him to come the next day, so that he can have something of a God-off, with the winner being the leader.
Before he lets the followers of Korach go off, he delivers one last, stunning riposte. He points out that the Levites (and specifically Korach) also have quite a lot. In effect, he's just called out the Levites for being the God favored and the honored people who are upset at the fact that their leader seems to have more power than them. Moreover, he points out that they are already separate from the rest of the Israelites, already have more than them, already serve God directly, and that what they really seem to want is power.
When Korach returns, God has Moses warning everyone to stay away from Datan and Aviram, and pretty much everyone does. He then warns everyone that God is going to create a giant pit, and drop Korach and his friends down to Sheol (some sort of equivalent of Hell). This does a pretty good job of terrifying everyone, and to top it off, a flame from heaven strikes Korach's followers.
This, of course, isn't enough for the people, who are now upset that "God's people" have been struck down. They're struck with a plague, which Moses rushes to have quenched...though with 14,000 dead before it can be stopped. Apparently questioning the leadership is a serious deal.
That brings us to the second part of this diary: what the ancient and medieval Rabbis made out of this. In the 5th chapter of the Mishnaic tractate of Avot (known as Ethics of the Fathers), the Rabbis say:
All disputes that are in the name of heaven will be brought to a close at the End (of days). And all that are not in the name of heaven will not be brought to a close at the End. What is a dispute that is in the name of heaven? The dispute between Hillel and Shammai.
They are referring to a dispute that appears in Tractate Eruvin, 13b, where the House of Hillel and the House of Shammai, the two great rabbinic schools, are arguing for 3 years on a particular point of Jewish law. Finally (and I can only imagine God's exasperation here), a voice from heaven cries out:
These and these are the words of the Living God! (But the law is like the House of Hillel).
These are exceptionally powerful words. Two sides, both arguing from a logical, reasonable point of view, both with
valid points of view. In fact, either one would have been acceptable, had Beit Shammai won the debate, but they did not. The reason why Beit Hillel wins (and they almost always win) is because of their humility: they teach both opinions, and even teach Beit Shammai's first, while Beit Shammai doesn't teach Beit Hillel's opinion.
"But wait!" You cry. "How does all of this relate directly back to our weekly section!" In fact, this kind of interruption is exactly what the Talmud does, as it brings in discussions that tangentially relate to the subject. In our case, we continue from Avot. We last left off a few paragraphs ago, describing a dispute that is in the name of heaven. But there are also disputes not in the name of heaven. The rabbis continue:
A debate that is not in the name of heaven, that is the debate of Korach and his camp.
This language is exceptionally striking. The first debate, the debate which was in the name of heaven, was the debate of Beit Hill and Beit Shammai, both parties to the argument. The debate that was not in the name of heaven, however, is the debate of
Korach and his camp. Note that the rabbis do not see this as a debate between Korach and Moses. The complaint of Korach, according to the Medieval commentator Rabbi Shlomo Yitzchaki (better known as Rashi), was about honor and the power of making decisions. That is, it wasn't about who could be a better leader. It wasn't about who could be a leader that would bring the Israelites into the land of Canaan. It wasn't even a debate about who could lead the Jews better in the desert, now that they seemed stuck there. Rather, it was about power and honor: Moses had it due to his extensive (if not perfect) leadership, and Korach wanted power and honor for himself. The complaint was Korach should have been equal to Moses, by dint of birth, rather than by actions and deeds. And that, in turn, was not a debate for the same of what's right or even what God wants, but rather a debate of pettiness.
Thus, the Rabbis see a strong lesson from this week's parsha in the matter of disputes: healthy dispute is ok, so long as it's for a genuine reason. Questioning leadership or rightness might even be healthy. But it needs to be done for reasons of the public good, not for reasons of selfishness. In the end, Korach and his camp do not represent God; rather, they only represent themselves. And that's a dispute which, at least in the Bible, will get resolved well before the end of days.