Parshas Korach- Absorb Torah, Not Machlokes

We all understand the damaging force of unregulated strife. Inappropriate machlokes can easily lead to the total breakdown and destruction of relationships, social groups, and entire communities. It is an all-consuming fire, that has wreaked havoc on many levels. However, sometimes a healthy debate is necessary. This week’s Parsha contains a powerful lesson and clarification, in regards to this important topic.

Korach, a great man in his own respect, initiated a debate with Moshe Rabbeinu. He claimed that Moshe was delivering the positions of prestige to the people he desired. The complaint highlighted the fact that Aharon, Moshe’s brother, was the Kohen Gadol, and Elitzaphan ben Uziel was appointed prince over the children of Kehas. Korach argued that Moshe was misappropriating power, based on his personal self-interests. He managed to amass a significant following, including many great individuals as well. This riot was ultimately quelled, and Hashem indicated with an utmost clarity that Moshe was not the one empowering people into positions of authority. Hashem was the one calling the shots.

The Mishna (Avos 5:17) notes the stark contrast between an argument that is “for the sake of Heaven,” and one that is not. A debate that is altruistic will ultimately lead to resolution. The other kind will not. The Mishna explains that the classic machlokes l’shem shamayim was that of Hillel and Shamai. The example of the opposite was “Korah and all his congregation.”

This Mishna lacks symmetry. The obvious contrast to Hillel and Shamai, would be Korach and Moshe. Yet Moshe is not mentioned. Instead, the author highlight Korach’s followers. Why is this so? Furthermore, once mentioning the followers of Korach, the Mishna could have mentioned the Batei Midrashos of Hillel and Shamai (Beis Hillel and Beis Shamai) as well. They too argued on many occasions throughout Shas. Why are the students of these great men omitted from the Mishna?    

My Father, Rabbi Mordechai Shifman Shlita, relates the following story. Two Torah giants had a certain significant disagreement with each of other. A primary disciple of one of these Rabbi’s was the Rov in a committee Shul. A group of the other Rabbi’s students happened to be around, and the Rov of the Shul invited them to come to his house. They anticipated that a fierce debate would ensue, and prepared themselves accordingly. To their surprise, upon entering his home, they saw that the Rov possessed many of their Rabbi’s seforim. They could not understand how a prominent student of the other Rabbi would have their leader’s books. The Rabbi explained that he had a tradition from his Rebbi. One should learn his Rebbi’s Torah, and not his machlokes. Thus, he had no issue in learning the holy books written by the opposing Rabbi.

When two great Torah sages engage in debate, the argument could certainly be l’shem shamayim. The students of said sages would then sit quietly on the side, reveling in the glorious fire of the Torah. When one of the Rabbi’s would succeed in besting the other, all the talmidim would shift their positions to pasken like the victor. This would be a machlokes l’shem shamayim. However, if the students begin to intercede, the argument quickly devolves into one that is not altruistic. The two great leaders are in the same league, and can debate each other. The students have no right or place to get involved.

The Mishna leaves out Moshe, because he was indeed entirely l’shem shamayim. It was the opposition that was at fault. However, it highlights the people of Korach, as this was the indication that the debate was not for the sake of Heaven. Korach was a great man, fitting to debate Moshe Rabbeinu. Granted he was wrong, but his capacity to argue was acceptable. His followers were not fitting to debate Moshe at all. Once they interceded, it was evident that this was not altruistic. In stark contrast, the students of Hillel and Shamai listened to their Rebbeim’s debate, and accepted the truth that emerged. This was totally l’shem shamayim. In stating the names of the Rabbi’s and not their followers, the Mishna clarifies that their debate was entirely for the sake of Heaven.

This idea is of utmost importance today. Unfortunately, the fires of strife have burned deep scorch marks throughout our communities. Often, the catalyst of these archaic arguments, are followers who create issues that their leaders never intended. This can devolve into good people causing serious problems. “Learn you Rebbi’s Torah, and not his machlokes.”

A great note of appreciation to Rabbi Avraham Bukspan Shlita for the content of this write-up (Tosfos Yomtov, Metzach Aharon)

Please email yshifman1@gmail.com with questions, comments, or to be placed in the mailing list