Korach’s infamous rebellion was based on his claim that Moshe and Aharon had conspired to take all the best leadership positions for themselves. He did not accept that all of Moshe’s appointments were by Hashem’s command.
It is difficult to understand how any reasonable person could take such a stand. The Torah itself testifies to Moshe Rabbeinu’s extreme humility. How could Korach make such an obviously absurd accusation and expect to be believed?
This illustrates the destructive power of machlokes. Even if there is no rational basis to what they are saying, people are totally blinded by their involvement in disagreements, and are not capable of recognizing obvious truths.
The Yalkut Shimoini gives us some insight into the origins of this dispute. Korach gathered the people together, for the express purpose of mocking Moshe and Aharon and weakening their influence. He told the people about a widow who lived in his neighborhood, together with her two orphan daughters. This woman owned a single field from which she tried to eke out a living. When she began to plow it, Moshe approached her, and informed her that it is forbidden to plow with an ox and a donkey together. Later, when she came to sow it, Moshe cautioned her not to plant mixed seeds. Despite these difficulties, she managed to grow a crop. When the time came to harvest it, Moshe told her to leave over leket, shikcha and pei’ah, giving certain parts of the field for the poor. Finally, she was ready to harvest the grain, when Moshe instructed her to separate teruma and maser. She decided that the entire endeavor was not worth her effort, so she sold the field and purchased two sheep with the proceeds. However, as soon as they gave birth, Aharon arrived to demand the first-born for himself. Then, when it was time to shear the wool, Aaron came to collect the first shearing. The widow despaired of profiting from the animals, so she slaughtered them, thinking she would at least have some meat. And, wouldn’t you know it - Aharon was there once more, claiming the kohein’s share of the animal. She gave up, and just consecrated the meat as a cherem. Triumphantly, Aharon explained to her that a cherem goes to the kohein, and it was now all his. He took the sheep, and left the widow and her orphaned children crying, until they died of hunger.
There are so many ways to prove that this story never actually happened. First, there was no fields or plants to harvest when klal yisroel was in the midbar. Furthermore, these mitzvos would not apply until they entered Eretz Yisroel. Additionally, everyone had mun to eat, and no one died of hunger in the midbar.
Despite the many glaring inconsistencies, the tale wrought its damage, and drew people to Korach’s side. This is the power of machlokes. Even though something is clearly false, it can still have a strong effect on a person, and he can become embroiled in a dispute needlessly.
The Gemara (Gittin 52) tells of two people who used to fight every Erev Shabbos. Rav Meir visited their town and attempted to establish a peaceful relationship. After three weeks, he was successful, and they reconciled, whereupon he heard the Satan saying, “Woe to me that Rav Meir threw me out of my house.” What type of expression is this? The Satan might have instigated the fights, but what made it HIS house?
Rav Chaim Shmulevitz explains that the Satan dwells wherever there is machlokes, but he has no place where there is shalom. A house whose residents are constantly bickering is truly a home of the Satan. Therefore, he continues, even if klal yisroel would worship avoda zara, they are protected from the Satan, as long as they maintain peace. This shows us the true greatness of the midah of shalom and the destructiveness of machlokes.
By studying the punishment that befell Korach and his family, we can begin to appreciate the severity of machlokes. We know that beis din only punishes a gadol, a 12- or 13-year-old. Beis din shel ma’alah, the Heavenly court, only punishes after the age of twenty. However, Rashi (16:27) points out, Korach’s entire family was swallowed up alive in the ground. Machlokes is such an enormously negative force that it harms everyone it encounters, even innocent babies.
In fact, the Shevet Mussar proves that the machlokes can be more harmful than avoda zara. The mun fell every day in the midbar, even when klal yisroel worshipped the Eigal. However, Chazal tell us that the mun did not fall on the day when Korach initiated his machlokes.
The Mishnah comments (Avos 5:17) that the machlokes between Hillel and Shamai was a prime example of a machlokes l’shem shamayim, a dispute purely for the sake of heaven. On the other hand, the dispute of Korach v’adasoi, of Koraach and his followers, is a machlokes shelo l’shem shamayim, their true intentions were selfish, not only to increase k’vod shamaim.
There are two interesting expressions in this Mishnah which teach us invaluable lessons about the proper way to disagree.
Firstly, we do not refer to the disputes between Bais Shammai and Bais Hillel, between the talmidim, which constitute the bulk of their Halachic discussions. Rav Moshe Shternbuch explains that the machlokes did not involve competition or rivalry between two opposing camps. Rather, it was about two great individuals – and their students – who were genuinely seeking the truth. Thus, they continued to love and respect each other throughout their argument.
Furthermore, we do not refer to the dispute between Moshe and Korach. Rather, we mention Korach v’adasoi, even though together they comprise only one side of the disagreement.
Rav Schwab explains that when people argue l’shem shamayim, they are truly interested in hearing what the other party is saying, since they are both occupied with discovering the truth. Even if I disagree, perhaps vehemently, with the other opinion, I recognize the validity of other ways of thought, and I try my best to understand the other perspective. “Perhaps there’s something I overlooked? Maybe he is right, after all.”
On the other hand, if they are arguing for ulterior motives, they do not concern themselves at all with the other side. As far as they’re concerned, there’s only one proper way to view the situation.
This machlokes consisted of Korach v’adasoi, because they didn’t even reckon with Moshe and his version of events. From their viewpoint, there was no other opinion to take into account.
Another terrible aspect of machlokes is its nature to overwhelm a person’s life and become an inexplicable obsession. A story is told of two people who become entangled in an argument, until it grew entirely out of proportion. Then, their began to die, one after the next. The Chofetz Chaim tried to intervene, and he asked one of the parties, “Don’t you think it’s time to stop the senseless fighting? Don’t you see what’s happening to your family?” Incredibly, the fellow answered, “I will bury all of them, but I am going to win.” That is the power of machlokes, and that is exactly the lesson we must learn when we study what happened to Korach. Are we really prepared to destroy our families, our health and our parnassa just for the sake of winning? The bitter truth is that whenever there is machlokes, both parties end up losing.
Let us conclude with a beautiful vort from the sefer Imrei Shamai.
Rashi poses the question: Korach shepikeach haya, mah ra’ah l’shtus zeh? We know that Korach was a wise and learned person. What led him to launch this ridiculous campaign?
Korach was certainly wrong. But why was his decision so foolish? If he wanted a chance at being the Kohein Gadol, why wasn’t it a smart choice to try to achieve this goal?
To answer this question, the Imrei Shamai cites the famous Gemara (Brachos) regarding the dispute between the nasi Rav Gamliel and Rav Yehoshua whether davening ma’ariv is a choiva, an obligation, or a reshus, a voluntary tefilla. During their argument, Rav Gamliel caused Rav Yehoshua to stand during his entire shiur. As a result, Rav Gamliel was removed from his post as nasi. However, they refrained from appointing Rav Yehoshua in his place because this would be too great an insult to Rav Gamliel.
The same principle can be applied to Korach’s situation. Even if he managed to oust Aharon, he would never be appointed in his place, since he was the one who instigated the mutiny in the first place. He should have thought of this and realized that his endeavor was futile.
May Hakadosh Baruch Hu help us promote shalom amongst us. If we avoid seeking our own honor and igniting the fire of machlokes, we will be zoiche to the geula sheleima.
