And [Moshe] said to them, “It is too much for you.”
Rashi renders the above accusation of Moshe to the Levites to mean: הרבה יותר מדאי לקחתם לעצמיכם גדולה, Far too much prominence have you taken for yourselves. Why the seemingly superfluous words “for yourselves”? Elsewhere, I explained this in light of a comment of the Chassid Yavetz to the mishnaic directive אל תבקש גדולה לעצמך, do not seek out greatness for yourself.* Who else would you seek it for? He explains that a Torah scholar ought to be receptive to being honored by others, for when the public sees the honor of Torah it inspires them to get involved with it. Hence, there is nothing wrong with seeking out honor, so long as it is not for one’s personal glorification. In what follows, I would like to propose another answer to this question.
ויחר למשה מאד וגו' לא חמור אחד מהם נשאתי ולא הרעתי את אחד מהם (טז, טו).
Moshe was exceedingly upset… “I did not seize a single donkey of theirs and I did not do bad to even one of them.”
Why the example of the donkey? And what is the precise connotation of הרעתי?
הבדלו מתוך העדה הזאת ואכלה אתם כרגע. ויפלו על פניהם ויאמרו וגו' האיש אחד יחטא ועל כל העדה תקצף. וידבר ה' וגו' העלו מסביב וגו' (טז, כא-כד).
Separate from the midst of this assembly and I shall destroy them in but a moment. [Moshe and Aharon] fell on their faces and exclaimed… “Shall one man sin and You are angered against the entire assembly?” Hashem spoke… “Ascend from around…”
Moshe and Aharon had clearly made a good point: The entire nation doesn’t deserve annihilation due to the infraction of an individual. It is so cogent that Hashem recanted and spared them. If so, what was Hashem initially thinking?
But let us turn the tables for a moment. Is the notion that the nation is responsible for the crimes of individuals so outlandish? It seems not. The mishnah in Avos states: אל תהי רשע בפני עצמך, Do not be wicked in your own eyes,** to which the Midrash Shmuel offers the following novel reading: Do not think that you are בפני עצמך, a man on his own island, the quality of whose deeds affect no one other than himself. Rather, you are a member of the Jewish People, all of whom are responsible for one another. If you sin, you can bring punishment upon everyone, as the incident of Achan demonstrated.*** As such, why was Moshe so astounded that the nation would be held accountable for Korach’s rebellion?
The answer is that, as the Talmud**** teaches, the concept of ערבות, mutual responsibility, only kicked in after the crossing of the Jordan. It would not have been in play during the incident at hand.
Another way of taking all of these sources is that aside from the culpability that the sin of the individual creates, it has a naturally pernicious effect upon the nation. Israel is one entity, and the deeds of every member influence the collective. As it says, הושיעה ה' כי גמר חסיד כי פסו אמונים מבני אדם, Save Hashem! For the pious one is gone! For the faithful have ceased from mankind!***** This is a cause and effect. Why has the pious gone? Because the faithful have ceased from mankind. The corruption of the masses dragged down the pious as well. This concept applied during the insurrection of Korach and would explain how it threatened to destroy the entirety of the nation. Thus, our question returns – what was the basis of Moshe’s astonishment?
In order to resolve these difficulties, let us throw fuel to the fire with some other observations about the sidra:
וכל ישראל אשר סביבותיהם נסו לקולם (טז, לד).
And all of Israel that were around them fled at the sound of their call.
As the Kli Yakar observes, it ought to have said מקולם, from their call. He suggests that it refers to the Talmud’s report that those swallowed perpetually call out “Moshe is true and his Torah is true!”****** It was this cry that the adjacent ran to hear. But, I would ask, what is the relevance of knowing this piece of information?
ולא יהיה כקרח וכעדתו כאשר דבר ה' ביד משה לו (יז, ה).
And there shall never be [another instance] like Korach and his assemblage, as Hashem spoke through Moshe, unto him.
This statement is belied by the facts of history. What must it really mean?
אתם המתם את עם ה' (יז, ו).
You have killed the nation of Hashem.
How could such a baseless accusation be leveled at Moshe and Aharon?
Let us cite the fantastic tale of Rabbah bar bar Channah.******* After an Arab guided him to the site of the swallowed assemblage of Korach, he inserted a soaked ball of wool upon a spear into two smoking cracks in the group from which they could be heard, emerging singed. Upon listening carefully, he could discern their cry of “Moshe is true and his Torah is true and we are liars!” The Arab informed him that this scene repeated itself once a month, with the punished party turned over like meat in a pot.
Another source to consider is the well-known passage in Rosh HaShanah that the victory of the Jews over Amalek in the aftermath of the Exodus was proportionate to the former’s focus on Moshe’s hands outstretched in prayer, which rallied their focus on Hashem.********
I would suggest that the meaning of this passage lies in the Talmud’s explanation of the enigmatic ויקח קרח, that Korach acquired a bad acquisition for himself.********* What does this mean? If we look a bit further in that gemara,********** we find a dispute over the meaning of the words ופערה פיה לבלי חק, and [Gehinnom] opens its mouth without measure.*********** One opinion is that לבלי חק means that one who omits the performance of even a single law deserves to descend there. Another demurs, that its target is one who has not fulfilled even a single law. It is possible that the two parties do not disagree, rather each is speaking of a different circumstance. And that has to do with the resolution of a long-asked question: How is it possible for an individual Jew to fulfill all 613 mitzvos – which, we are taught, is necessary to achieve perfection – if no individual Jew is even commanded in them all? One answer given is that, indeed, only the Jewish People as a collective can fulfill all of the mitzvos, applicable as they are to the variety of types that it contains. When an individual Jew associates with the nation as a whole, he shares in that collective perfection. The only requirement is that he be a member in good standing, in harmony with his fellow Jews. The first opinion cited above speaks of when the individual is in discord with his peers; as such, he is deprived of the collective benefits and the personal failure to accrue a single, particular mitzvah is to his detriment. The second opinion speaks of where there is harmony; so long as he has contributed but one mitzvah for the pool he shares in it all. ************
Thus, one of the personal detriments of Korach’s insurrection is that the Torah – which was heretofore a לקח טוב, a goodly acquisition,************* for him as it is for all Jews – became a מקח רע, a bad one. By taking himself out of the community, he shut himself off from its collective mitzvah performance, leaving himself to his personal, deficient devices.
It emerges that peace has two benefits: access to the mitzvah pool, and protection from punishment for one’s misdeeds. For as the Yerushalmi famously says, the wicked generation of Achav was successful in battle due to the harmony that prevailed within it.**************
With the absence of harmony amongst Jews, the damage is twofold: the inability to pool mitzvos, opening them up to the aforementioned punishment;*************** and the inherent Divine anger at the very discord.
What is the key to developing this crucial harmony? Humility. When people are arrogant it is nigh impossible for them to compromise and work with others. As the Midrash**************** relates, Moshe told the nation that their redemption from Egypt hinged on the bundle of hyssop with which they applied the blood of the Pesach offering. Hyssop is a low-lying plant, symbolizing humility. Only by adopting that quality can the people be united into a bundle and achieve salvation.
Another detriment of the disunity prompted by Korach was the disconnect between the nation and Moshe. Typically, as their leader, Moshe was able to rally the people. That is the meaning of the victory over Amalek being dependent on Moshe’s hands. When those hands faltered, the people lost the focal point that drew them together, allowing Amalek – the antithesis of harmony – to gain sway.
Now that Moshe was abandoned by the nation in favor of discord, he complained, לא חמור אחד מהם נשאתי, I have been rendered incapable of elevating the men of chomer, materialism. Consequently, if they complain that it is my sins that have filtered down to them, it cannot be so – לא הרעתי את אחד מהם, I have not done a disservice to any of them, for I am spiritually disconnected from them.
We can now understand the dialogue between Hashem and Moshe. Initially, Hashem declared that the entire assembly would perish, owing to the fact that as one entity, all are responsible for individual sins. To this Moshe responded that this should only apply when the individual is part and parcel of the community. In this instance, however, where Korach had removed himself from it, his actions ought to be irrelevant to others. האיש אחד יחטא, if a lone man sins, ועל כל העדה תקצוף, is there any reason for the assembly to bear his guilt?
We can now return to the passage in Bava Basra. The significance of this tale for posterity is to instruct us on how to avoid the pitfall that befell Korach (no pun intended). It was for this reason that Rabbah bar bar Chanah was bidden to listen in on their fiery punishment, so as to take the lesson to heart. The two smoking cracks in the ground allude to the two causes of Hashem’s wrath in this matter prompted by the “cracks” within the nation’s unity. As we described above, the schism between Moshe and the nation prevented him from elevating it. Furthermore, the nation itself was beset with discord, preventing them from pooling their mitzvos and thus depriving them of their mitzvos’ protective powers.
What emerges is that the surest way to prevent this disaster from repeating itself is to promote peace and harmony at every level of the nation.
_________________________________________________
* Avos 6:5. ** 2:13
*** Yehoshua 7. This is also the meaning of the verse: ומת האיש ההוא ובערת הרע מישראל, and that man [the rebellious sage] shall be put to death and you shall purge the evil from Israel (Devarim 17:12). The “evil” in question is the punishment that was prone to befall the entirety of Israel due to his sin. This may also be the meaning of Tehillim 119:136: פלגי מים ירדו עיני על לא שמרו תורתיך, My eyes shed streams of water for that which they did not safeguard your laws. “They” may refer to other people – it is appropriate to weep over the sins of other people, as the punishment will affect everyone. **** Sanhedrin 43b. ***** Tehillim 12:2. ****** Bava Basra 74a. ******* Ibid.
******** 29a.
********** Sanhedrin 109b. ********** Ibid., 111a. *********** Yeshayah 5:14. ************ This is the meaning of Tehillim 29:11: ה' עוז לעמו יתן, Hashem has given strength (the Torah) to His nation, but how can it fulfill all of its mitzvos? ה' יברך את עמו בשלום, Hashem has blessed His nation with peace, through the harmony that exists within it, its members can pool them.
************* Mishlei 4:2.
************** Pe’ah 1:1.
*************** As Esther 3:8 states: ישנו עם אחד מפזר ומפרד בין העמים, when there is splintering amongst the people, .they are crippled in their mitzvah performance ,את דתי המלך אינם עושים **************** Shir ha-Shirim Rabbah 2:11.