Our Parsha is centered on the destructive dispute led by Korach and his encampment, a dispute for which פִּי הָאָרֶץ – the mouth of the earth, was created in the final moments of Creation, during twilight on Erev Shabbat. We learn this in Pirkei Avot (5:6), where a few Mishnayot later we’re taught of the difference between disputes that are the sake of Heaven and disputes not for the sake of Heaven. The example given for the latter is that of Korach and his followers. In one chapter of Mishna we find two references to the main story of our Parsha. Next week, we’ll read about the פִי הַבְּאֵר – the mouth of the well referenced, and the following week contains reference to the פִי הָאָתוֹן – the mouth of the donkey. Three Parshiot in a row with a connection to the mouth.
I’d like to introduce our main topic by bringing forth a few ideas regarding Rashi’s short but shocking comment on our Parsha’s opening Pasuk:
ויקח קרח. פָּרָשָׁה זוֹ יָפֶה נִדְרֶשֶׁת בְּמִדְרַשׁ רַבִּי תַנְחוּמָא:
This section is beautifully expounded in the Midrash of Rabbi Tanchuma.
Many wonder, and some like the Taz ask b’kol ra’ash gadol, why and how is Rashi suddenly handing out evaluations and grades here? We learn in the Gemara (Eruvin 64a):
כׇּל הָאוֹמֵר שְׁמוּעָה זוֹ נָאָה, וְזוֹ אֵינָהּ נָאָה — מְאַבֵּד הוֹנָה שֶׁל תּוֹרָה!
Anyone who says: This teaching is pleasant but this is not pleasant, loses the fortune of Torah.
If so, how does Rashi give this compliment? Sefer Pri Megadim quotes the commentary Tevat Gomeh in explaining why Parshat Korach and its main topic are unlike any other.
דָבָר בְּעִתּוֹ מַה־טּוֹב – How good is a word rightly timed (Mishlei 15:23). There are some sermons and drashot which have designated places and times. An example is Shabbat HaGadol and speaking about Hilchot Pesach or speaking about Teshuva on a Shabbat afternoon in Elul. If I were to deliver a shiur today on Tekiat Shofar, you’d likely scratch your head and wonder why, even though I can tie it to our Parsha by way of the chapter of Tehillim (47) we recite seven times before sounding the Shofar: לַמְנַצֵּחַ לִבְנֵי־קֹרַח מִזְמוֹר.
Nonetheless, it would be out of place, just as there is plenty of time before we need to dive into the symbolism and particular details of schach for the Sukkah. This Parsha and the topic of machloket (dispute) is not time specific, however. Every year, every month, every day – it is a very relevant topic, and therefore Rashi gives it its special grade, because there isn’t a single day, Rachmana litzlan, where we’re not touched and impacted by machloket.
Another explanation is provided by Siftei Chachamim, who raises Rashi’s comments in Parshat Bereshit that seem to indicate a different philosophy in quoting Midrashim:
וישמעו. יֵשׁ מִדְרְשֵׁי אַגָּדָה רַבִּים וּכְבָר סִדְּרוּם רַבּוֹתֵינוּ עַל מְכוֹנָם בְּבְרֵאשִׁית רַבָּה וּבִשְׁאָר מִדְרָשׁוֹת; וַאֲנִי לֹא בָאתִי אֶל לִפְשׁוּטוֹ שֶׁל מִקְרָא וּלְאַגָּדָה הַמְיַשֶּׁבֶת דִּבְרֵי הַמִּקְרָא דָבָר דָּבוּר עַל אֳפַנָּיו:
AND THEY HEARD — There are many Midrashic explanations and our Teachers have already collected them in their appropriate places in Bereshit Rabbah and in other Midrashim. I, however, am only concerned with the plain sense of Scripture and with such Agadoth that explain the words of Scripture in a manner that fits in with them.
Rashi says he is only concerned with the meaning of the words in the Torah, but if so, why is he pointing to the Midrash Tanchuma and noting that our Parsha is יָפֶה נִדְרֶשֶׁת – beautifully expounded there? Why deviate here and highlight the Midrash? The question is even stronger when factoring in the above Gemara, mentioning the fate of one who says a section of Torah is pleasant whereas another is not.
One could argue that Rashi’s comment doesn’t exactly follow the model laid out in the Gemara, in that he is only noting a pleasant piece and not making any mention of an unpleasant one. However, even if just saying one piece is nice, there is clear implication that the other is not as nice. This reminds me of a story that took place in the Knesset, where a Member of Knesset said, “50% of the MKs here are not normal.” I do not recall if he said לֹא נוֹרְמָלִים or מְשׁוּגָעִים, but both are quite accurate. The Speaker of the Knesset immediately interjected, “That’s inappropriate. Please take back what you just said.” The MK did exactly that, continuing his remarks by saying, “I’m sorry. I will take back my words and instead say 50% of the MKs here are normal.” Same result.
According to the Taz, Rashi is coming to say one thing here: That he is a simple man who speaks peshat, but in this case he cannot explain the peshat, and without the derash (Midrash) there is no explanation for the opening words of our Parsha: וַיִּקַּח קֹרַח – And Korach took. What did he take? A glass of water? An animal? Rashi cannot stick to the peshat and still have the Pasuk make sense.
In sefer Or Moshe, Rav Chaim Palagi doesn’t mention Parshat Korach by name, instead referring to it as Parshat ben-Levi or Parshat ben-Kehat. The name of Parshat Korach didn’t come from Chazal in the Gemara, nor in the Midrashim, as the names, or titles, we see on the top of our pages weren’t referenced when Chazal discussed what is read on a specific day or holiday. Regardless of who decided on the name Korach for this Parsha, and why, Rav Chaim Palagi doesn’t want to reference the name of a rasha who sought to harm Bnei Yisrael. (Of note, R’ Chaim Palagi didn’t refer to Parshat Metzora by that name either, instead calling it Parshat Tahara.) R’ Nissim Avraham Ashkenazi, who sat in same Beit Din in Izmir, wrote in Darash Avraham, that he too referred to it as Parshat Ben Levi, preferring to abolish Korach’s name from the world: שֵׁם רְשָׁעִים יִרְקָב – the name of the wicked will rot. But we do find Rashi, the Ramban, and other commentators who do refer to this Parsha by the name Korach in their works.
Similarly, the Tur is uncomfortable with the sons of Yitzhar being referred to as מִשְׁפַּחַת הַקָּרְחִי – the family of Korach, within the census recounted in the Torah. On the name Korach itself, the Chatam Sofer expresses shock that the tzaddikim Bnei Levi, and Yitzhar in particular, would give his child the name Korach. How can you use such a name when the original Korach was one of אַלּוּפֵי בְנֵי־עֵשָׂו (Bereshit 36:16). He was the son of אָהֳלִיבָמָה, and a mamzer according to Rashi. The Chatam Sofer adds, everything that occurred with Korach challenging Moshe and Aharon was a result of him being named for a rasha. In the midst of his words, he also states that he’s shocked by people calling their daughters Yehudit, who was the wife of Eisav. With regards to that name, he is also reminded of a Chashmonaite daughter (of Yochanan Kohen Gadol) named Yehudit, a heroine who killed the wicked Assyrian general Holofernes. Perhaps the answer is, he suggests, when it says Eisav took יְהוּדִית בַּת־בְּאֵרִי הַחִתִּי (Vayishlach), it was before the sons of Yaacov were born. But once Yehuda was born, the name Yehudit reflected him, and the nation of Yehudim, rather than the original Yehudit.
Related, the Maharsha (Sanhedrin 109b) says nobody should name their child Korach, and you will not find that name anywhere – שֵׁם רְשָׁעִים יִרְקָב. Of note, family names are not included in this rule or practice, as they are a modern invention only a few hundred or so years old, often based on a person’s trade at the time. The Rishonim don’t have family names, as they are referenced by their name along with their father’s name. But you will actually find the family name Korach in the Yemenite community, such as Rav Shlomo Korach, a well-known rav here in Bnei Brak.
We now turn our attention to the key word in Rashi’s first comments: יָפֶה. Let’s see how we can make an entire drasha – a nice one – from this word yafeh. When I first saw this Rashi and saw the questions asked on his unusual handing out of grades, I immediately wondered whether Rashi meant something entirely different. How many Pesukim are there in the Parsha? The answer is 95. 95 is also the numerical value of יָפֶה. Maybe that is what Rashi meant, rather than a comment on the first Pasuk and the merits of its Midrashim.
There is a sefer, Pnei HaChama, that expands on the number of Pesukim and associated remazim listed at the end of each Parsha. Pnei Chama gives his explanation and lists additional explanations afterwards. If you look at the end of our Parsha, you’ll find the number 95 (צ"ה) listed in a small font, along with the siman “Daniel”.
There is an idea from the Ropshitzer Rebbe, R’ Naftali Zvi Horowitz (Zera Kodesh, Vayeira), that we wish a newlywed couple שֶׁהַזִּיוּוּג יַעֲלֶה יָפֶה – May the pairing go well. Why such a blessing? Why יָפֶה and not נֶהֱדָר (magnificently), as we say about the Kohen Gadol’s appearance after he successfully performs the Avodah on Yom Kippur? Why not wish them the same glorious outcome as the Kohen Gadol? As a child, I heard from a darshan a short vort on the paragraph recited immediately after Shema in the morning: וְיַצִּיב וְנָכוֹן. The paragraph includes a total of fifteen descriptions, with the final one being וְיָפֶה. The darshan explained, instead of listing all fifteen in a lengthy blessing to the young couple, we use the final one include all the rest in it. This is a nice and simple explanation, but I believe there’s something incredibly deeper in that answer, perhaps hidden or not apparent to the darshan who presented it.
The number 15 is synonymous with marriage. We’ve heard many times that a man and woman are joined together – איש אשה – the Shechinah resides within them. The two letters they do not share in common, which join together to form the name of Hashem, are yud and heh, a numerical value of 15. Furthermore, when Egyptians mocked Bnei Yisrael that their wives were unfaithful as the men worked in the fields, and the children they left Egypt with may not be their own legitimate children, Hakadosh Baruch Hu gave Bnei Yisrael a sign that every last child was kosher. He placed a stamp of His name within theirs – adding a heh and yud to the family names recounted in the census of Sefer Bamidar. The offspring of Peretz became מִשְׁפַּחַת הַפַּרְצִי, and the offspring of Gilad became מִשְׁפַּחַת הַגִּלְעָדִי, as examples. Therefore, when we say שֶׁהַזִּיוּוּג יַעֲלֶה יָפֶה, it is also because marriage is represented by the number fifteen.
Returning to the Ropshitzer Rebbe, he says – and I relay this without fully understanding it – the Arizal says the name of Hakadosh Baruch Hu will change in the future. In the days of Mashiach that approach, there will be a name that takes the place of Yud-Heh-Vav--Heh, and we will refer to Hakadosh Baruch Hu as Yihiyeh, as the Pasuk says (in a purely literal sense): בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא יִהְיֶה ה'. The Arizal continues, there is a thing called Zivug Elyon, when we combine the two names of Hashem – Shem Havay-a and Shem Adnut – which produces the numerical value of 91. This is the same value as same as סוּכָּהּ (Sukkah), which serves as the shade of Hakadosh Baruch Hu (צִילָא דְּמֵהֵימָנוּתָא). Similarly, when we respond אָמֵן, we reflect the value of 91. All these elements are directly connected to one another. But if the name of Hashem once Mashiach arrives will be Yihiyeh, the numerical value will no longer be 91. It will instead be 95. And what is 95? יָפֶה. We wish a newlywed couple that they will help bring the Mashiach and that they will be together for his arrival.
In sefer Kedushat Tzion, the Second Bobover Rebbe brings in name of his father, R’ Shlomo Halberstam, an explanation as to why Daniel is the siman provided for the 95 Pesukim of Parshat Korach, and not יָפֶה, חֶלְבְּנָה (a Ketoret ingredient), or הָמָן (Haman) – all equal to 95. He answers brilliantly, that in Sefer Daniel we read about קֵץ הַיָּמִים – the end of days, and the Sefer ends with these words (Daniel 12:13):
וְאַתָּה לֵךְ לַקֵּץ וְתָנוּחַ וְתַעֲמֹד לְגֹרָלְךָ לְקֵץ הַיָּמִים׃
But you, go on to the end; you shall rest, and arise to your destiny at the end of the days.
The Geula is right there in Sefer Daniel! When that day arrives, according to the Arizal, Korach will return to fix his sins, as it says: צַדִּיק כַּתָּמָר יִפְרָח – The righteous bloom like a date-palm. The final letters of those words spell קֹרַח. The word יָפֶה hints to Korach having a full tikkun and assuming the role of Kohen he sought in our Parsha, albeit in the wrong way. B’ezrat Hashem, soon in our days. When exactly? In the times referenced in Sefer Daniel, a time where we will no longer see death: בִּלַּע הַמָּוֶת לָנֶצַח וּמָחָה אֲדֹנָי ה' דִּמְעָה מֵעַל כָּל־פָּנִים – He will destroy death for ever; and the Lord G-d will wipe away tears from off all faces. It is therefore very fitting that our Parsha closes with the final two words וְלֹא תָמוּתוּ – And you will not die, hinting at the Messianic era.
