Parashat Korach

In response to Korach’s insurrection, Moshe Rabbeinu attempts to persuade both him and his followers from assuming so much power. He reminds them that only one man is fit to bring Ketores, for Nadav and Avihu had attempted so and were immediately incinerated. Moshe reasons that even were Aharon not the chosen representative of HaKadosh Baruch Hu, only one man could survive the next day’s challenge, Rav Lachem Bnei Levi, and so they are each guilty of assuming too much power, for the odds were against each one of them.

But Moshe isn’t finished arguing, he then turns to Korach, the Pikei’ach, as described by Rashi, who truly believed – and for good reason – that he was chosen above Aharon and the other challengers.

“VaYomeir Moshe El Korach, Shimu Na Bnei Levi”

BaMidbar, 16:8

This short pasuk poses a confusing transition; at first Moshe turns to talk to Korach, but then he addresses his words towards Sheivet Levi. Rashi explains that Moshe recognized there was no hope in compromising with Korach, for the man was simply too obstinate. So as to prevent the rest of the Shvatim from joining in his rebellion, Moshe turned towards the others present, and addressed them instead.

However, Rashi’s explanation too is not without its difficulties. The preceding pasuk itself closes with the words “Rav Lachem Bnei Levi;” whom did we think Moshe was addressing then? If he has already spoken to the Bnei Levi, why does he need to readdress them? Additionally, if Moshe gave up speaking to Korach because of his obstinacy, whom do we think Moshe addresses in the very next pasuk when he says”ViYakreiv Osichah, ViEs Kol Achechah Bnei Levi Itach?” This certainly cannot be directed towards Sheivet Levi; they are referred to in the third person!

Altogether, Rashi’s assessment of our pasukim is rather inexplicable. He claims Moshe refused to address Korach and instead directs his plea to the rest of his Sheivet. But clearly Moshe has already spoken to Sheivet Levi, and clearly he does not back down from a conversation with Korach! What sense can we make of Rashi’s comments?

It is additionally strange that Moshe should direct his instructions and ensuing warning regarding the Ketores towards Sheivet Levi altogether. The Ketores was offered exclusively by the 250 leaders that enjoined with Korach, not by the masses, and Rashi writes that the majority of these leaders hailed from Sheivet Reuvein. If anything, Moshe should beckon “Rav Lachem Bnei Reuvein.”

Perhaps we should approach Moshe’s rebuke from an alternate angle. In Sefer Devarim, Moshe reprimands the people for such sins as the Cheit HaEigel and sending the Meraglim, but the generation guilty of these offenses had already died out! Moshe wisely demonstrates that rebuke is always more effective if instead of directing ones derogatory remarks at the party in concern, one can direct the comments at another, and the let the true intended audience infer their own rebuke. Such a method allows the listener to be critical of himself without putting himself on the defense. It is not unlikely that Moshe employs this same approach towards rebuke in our parasha.

When Moshe first states Rav Lachem Bnei Levi towards the 250 leaders, he is indeed aiming his rebuke at Sheivet Reuvein. But in order for the leaders to be receptive of his remarks, he cannot directly attack them; therefore, he vocally limits his audience to the few leaders from Levi. Sheivet Reuven is left to draw their own conclusions, and Moshe reminds them of Levi’s greatness; therefore, it is likely each non-Levi leader would consider the likeliness of his Ketores being accepted, as opposed to that of a Levi’s, and realize how unlikely his chances of surviving the next day’s challenge truly were. And the very effectiveness of Moshe’s warning comes from its indirect nature, but the words nonetheless set up an implicit Kal ViChomeir.

Likewise, when Moshe prevents all the Shvatim from joining with Korach, he begins his speech Shimu Na Bnei Levi. Note how Rashi does not specify that the speech comes to keep the Levi’im from joining with Korach, but rather to persuade all the Shvatim – had Moshe wished to influence the Levi’im, he never would have directly addressed them. Instead, Moshe makes mention of how Hashem “separated” the Sheivet from the rest of Yisrael, a reference to the aftermath of the Cheit HaEigel. The nation was reminded that they indeed are more distant from Hashem then the Levi’im are, and so they infer their own rebuke, and hesitate to join Korach’s side.

But when does Moshe ever address Sheivet Levi? If all the direct reproving is to no avail, then when can the Levi’im learn their lesson? For this reason, Moshe ends his speech in direct dialogue with Korach, not to win over his overly obstinate heart but rather to beat some sense – and a little compassion – into his own Sheivet. Moshe ends, “ViAharon Ma Hu Ki Salinu Alav,” what is it worth to you to pick on Aharon, he has never caused you any harm. The logic in Korach’s argument, as Rashi explained in opening pasuk of the parasha, lay solely in his claim to the Nissius of Mishpachas Kehas. He stood at the front of the paternal line of leadership – and not Eltzafan Ben Uziel – and so he felt wronged and shorted by Moshe. But for the rest of Shevet Levi, and even for Korach, Aharon Ma Hu Ki Salinu Alav, there was no logical argument to be made for the dethronement of Aharon, and so the rest of Sheivet Levi was dissuaded from Machlokes.

Ultimately, Dassan, Aviram, and Korach stirred the camp back into dissent with their overnight rallies, but Moshe’s rebuke, for the time being, worked effectively. We see from the nuances in Rashi’s assessment of this story that Moshe did not simply lash back at his aggressors, even in the heat of the moment, but rather calculatedly persuaded and abated his opposition. While Aharon may have been the idyllic and ideal Rodeif Shalom, it is Moshe who most effectively meted Hochacha, time after time, and kept Klal Yisrael at large on its proper path.