The Midrash calls Korach a Pikei’ach, an astute person. In fact Korach truly understood the mood of the fledgling Jewish nation at that point. He knew that the nation had just gone through an historical transformation from a slave nation with an entrenched idolatrous and immoral outlook to a nation so holy that G-d Himself “descended” to speak to them. They accomplished the unheard of task of transforming themselves from the status of being in the 49th lowest level of spiritual contamination to the 49th highest level of holiness; all that in the 49 days from the Passover exodus to their spiritual Epiphany at Mount Sinai. Korach knew that the basis for this ability to undergo such a drastic change came from the innate holiness of the Jewish people, the "Pintele Yid", and he also knew that the Jewish people knew that too. And therefore when he told Moshe “Kol hoam kulom kedoshim”, the entire nation is holy, Korach knew that the people would buy into this challenge to their leader.
What did Korach actually mean when he said that? Many commentaries interpret this to mean that the collective nation isn’t just holy on a greater societal basis. Each individual Jewish person has an innate holiness, bolstered at that point in history through their complete immersion into a life of holiness. On a daily basis: they were led by G-d Himself in the form of a Cloud by day and a Pillar of Fire by night, they ate a heavenly food that was so purely spiritual that there was no corporeal waste, and they had Moshe and Aaron teaching them. No wonder that Korach could capture the minds of 250 of the nation’s top spiritual leaders into his revolution and challenge to Moshe’s leadership and Aaron’s priesthood. He couldn’t accept the idea of a Klal Yisroel, of a collective nature that binds each Jewish person to the societal whole. What Korach did not realize was that this individual holiness actually was anchored to the Jewish nation's collective attachment to Moshe Rabbeinu. And that if this anchor were detached, the individual's holiness would diasappear. The Gerrer Rebbe Bais Yisroel ztzl says that the reason that Korach was destroyed even though he was a great man was that his attachment to Moshe Rabbeinu was cut off. His spiritual life support was cut off.
What was Korach’s concept of individuality? How did his argument and challenge to Moshe express itself through that idea? Rashi tells us that the juxtaposition of the Mitzvah of Tzitzis to the Parsha of Korach teaches us that Korach challenged Moshe as to the rationale of one strand of Tzitzis, the blue Techeles strand, making the 4 cornered garment wearable. What if the entire garment was Techeles, would it not be wearable without actually attaching the full complement of Tzitzis? He also challenged the Mitzvah of Mezuza. Why do we need the single parsha of Krias Shema in a Mezuza to protect a home? What if the building was filled with holy tomes, would we still need one single parsha? The Jewish home and Jewish individual are naturally filled with holiness. This was Korach’s basic challenge. If the entire concept of home and individual is holy, why the need for a single holier than thou object? The whole nation is holy, why the need for Aaron as Holy of Holies? In fact, the Midrash and Zohar cite several areas of religious beliefs and practices, of a singularity representing a collective whole, that Korach argued against. Each one with the challenging rationalization by Korach that collectiveness with a separate representative singularity is not a necessary requirement. That a holy individuality is more important.
Let’s look at these areas and try to understand what it is that Korach challenged. Keep in mind that the underlying challenge was that each individual is holy with no need for a societal singularity to represent them or to lead them. Korach challenged the Mitzvah of separating a small chunk of bread dough and giving it to the Kohen. This piece was called Challah. What was he challenging? Flour is the ultimate concept of individuality. One small blow at a pile of flour and it all separates quickly into individual particles of dust. However, add water and it becomes dough, the ultimate concept of togetherness. On a theological level we can homiletically interpret this to mean that through the actions of Torah living, which Chazal liken to Water, do the Jewish people have a collective holy national character. Korach argued that there is no need for a holy national character; we are individually and innately holy. We don’t require physical expressions and actions to make us holy.
Korach challenged the concept of an Eiruv, the idea that individual homes can become part of a collective by placing a single meal in the home of one member of the collective. Again his challenge was that there is no need for a singularity to represent the collective nature of society. Each holy Jewish home can individually stand on its own.
And finally says the Zohar, Korach challenged the very holy concepts of Shabbos and Shalom, both holy Names of Hashem. Why do we need a single day to represent the whole week? If we fill our entire weekly endeavors with holiness, why the need for a separate holy Shabbos day? Korach actually challenged only Shabbos, he did not challenge the Festivals. Why, because the Festivals were declared Holy by Beis Din and therefore was accepted by Korach. With this challenge he used the concept of Shabbos and Klal Yisroel being intimately connected and argued that both have no need for a singularity to represent the whole. Friday night between Kabolas Shabbos and Maariv we say a piece of Zohar, Kegavnoh, that expresses the idea that on a spiritual level Hashem, Shabbos, and Klal Yisroel are intimately connected and equated in some way. The Zohar calls this "Rozoh D'Shabbos and Rozoh D'Echod", the Secret of a Singularity. Chazal tell us that when G-d was planning the creation of the world He planned a conceptual week of 6 days of 28 hours each day. The 6 days presented themselves to G-d and expressed the idea that the week needed a leader, a singular representative of what a weekly cycle should accomplish. G-d agreed and told the 6 days that in order to accomplish this He would have to take 4 hours out of each day and in this way create a single day that would not only represent the 6 weekdays but actually come from within them.
This was Korach’s challenge and his mistake. He challenged the idea of a singularity arising from within the collective whole and representing the collective whole. He challenged the concept of Sholom, peace and uniting individuals and concepts. He argued that we don’t need a single strand of Tzitzis, or a single Mezuzah, or a single home with an eiruv, or a single small piece of challah, or a single day of the week. And we as a holy nation of holy individuals don’t need a single holy person who will represent our collective prayers and requests to G-d. Korach challenged wherever the Jewish religion had a singularity concept representing the collective whole. His mistake was that the underlying rationale of a singularity concept representing the collective whole was because that singularity in fact originated from within the whole and as such actually incorporated in itself the entire spiritual core of the whole.
True that each individual is holy and that each individual must accomplish their own goals in life. Each weekday has a purpose and goal in the work of the weekly cycle. But the total efforts of the week come to fruition through the Shabbos day and its special holiness. And in turn, by observing the Shabbos day properly, do the ensuing weekdays receive their spiritual strength to further accomplish their weekly goals. The Jewish nation is represented spiritually by the Kohen Godol, the High Priest, culminating in his once a year rituals in the Yom Kippur services. On a spiritual level, the leaders of the nation actually receive their spiritual status from the nation as a whole because the leaders arise from within the nation. Korach had the right idea of individual holiness. What he missed was that just like flour has its individuality but is worthless unless formed into dough and subsequently into bread, so too is the Jewish nation’s strength from the collective nature of our total society, bound by the actions of Torah living.
What did Korach actually mean when he said that? Many commentaries interpret this to mean that the collective nation isn’t just holy on a greater societal basis. Each individual Jewish person has an innate holiness, bolstered at that point in history through their complete immersion into a life of holiness. On a daily basis: they were led by G-d Himself in the form of a Cloud by day and a Pillar of Fire by night, they ate a heavenly food that was so purely spiritual that there was no corporeal waste, and they had Moshe and Aaron teaching them. No wonder that Korach could capture the minds of 250 of the nation’s top spiritual leaders into his revolution and challenge to Moshe’s leadership and Aaron’s priesthood. He couldn’t accept the idea of a Klal Yisroel, of a collective nature that binds each Jewish person to the societal whole. What Korach did not realize was that this individual holiness actually was anchored to the Jewish nation's collective attachment to Moshe Rabbeinu. And that if this anchor were detached, the individual's holiness would diasappear. The Gerrer Rebbe Bais Yisroel ztzl says that the reason that Korach was destroyed even though he was a great man was that his attachment to Moshe Rabbeinu was cut off. His spiritual life support was cut off.
What was Korach’s concept of individuality? How did his argument and challenge to Moshe express itself through that idea? Rashi tells us that the juxtaposition of the Mitzvah of Tzitzis to the Parsha of Korach teaches us that Korach challenged Moshe as to the rationale of one strand of Tzitzis, the blue Techeles strand, making the 4 cornered garment wearable. What if the entire garment was Techeles, would it not be wearable without actually attaching the full complement of Tzitzis? He also challenged the Mitzvah of Mezuza. Why do we need the single parsha of Krias Shema in a Mezuza to protect a home? What if the building was filled with holy tomes, would we still need one single parsha? The Jewish home and Jewish individual are naturally filled with holiness. This was Korach’s basic challenge. If the entire concept of home and individual is holy, why the need for a single holier than thou object? The whole nation is holy, why the need for Aaron as Holy of Holies? In fact, the Midrash and Zohar cite several areas of religious beliefs and practices, of a singularity representing a collective whole, that Korach argued against. Each one with the challenging rationalization by Korach that collectiveness with a separate representative singularity is not a necessary requirement. That a holy individuality is more important.
Let’s look at these areas and try to understand what it is that Korach challenged. Keep in mind that the underlying challenge was that each individual is holy with no need for a societal singularity to represent them or to lead them. Korach challenged the Mitzvah of separating a small chunk of bread dough and giving it to the Kohen. This piece was called Challah. What was he challenging? Flour is the ultimate concept of individuality. One small blow at a pile of flour and it all separates quickly into individual particles of dust. However, add water and it becomes dough, the ultimate concept of togetherness. On a theological level we can homiletically interpret this to mean that through the actions of Torah living, which Chazal liken to Water, do the Jewish people have a collective holy national character. Korach argued that there is no need for a holy national character; we are individually and innately holy. We don’t require physical expressions and actions to make us holy.
Korach challenged the concept of an Eiruv, the idea that individual homes can become part of a collective by placing a single meal in the home of one member of the collective. Again his challenge was that there is no need for a singularity to represent the collective nature of society. Each holy Jewish home can individually stand on its own.
And finally says the Zohar, Korach challenged the very holy concepts of Shabbos and Shalom, both holy Names of Hashem. Why do we need a single day to represent the whole week? If we fill our entire weekly endeavors with holiness, why the need for a separate holy Shabbos day? Korach actually challenged only Shabbos, he did not challenge the Festivals. Why, because the Festivals were declared Holy by Beis Din and therefore was accepted by Korach. With this challenge he used the concept of Shabbos and Klal Yisroel being intimately connected and argued that both have no need for a singularity to represent the whole. Friday night between Kabolas Shabbos and Maariv we say a piece of Zohar, Kegavnoh, that expresses the idea that on a spiritual level Hashem, Shabbos, and Klal Yisroel are intimately connected and equated in some way. The Zohar calls this "Rozoh D'Shabbos and Rozoh D'Echod", the Secret of a Singularity. Chazal tell us that when G-d was planning the creation of the world He planned a conceptual week of 6 days of 28 hours each day. The 6 days presented themselves to G-d and expressed the idea that the week needed a leader, a singular representative of what a weekly cycle should accomplish. G-d agreed and told the 6 days that in order to accomplish this He would have to take 4 hours out of each day and in this way create a single day that would not only represent the 6 weekdays but actually come from within them.
This was Korach’s challenge and his mistake. He challenged the idea of a singularity arising from within the collective whole and representing the collective whole. He challenged the concept of Sholom, peace and uniting individuals and concepts. He argued that we don’t need a single strand of Tzitzis, or a single Mezuzah, or a single home with an eiruv, or a single small piece of challah, or a single day of the week. And we as a holy nation of holy individuals don’t need a single holy person who will represent our collective prayers and requests to G-d. Korach challenged wherever the Jewish religion had a singularity concept representing the collective whole. His mistake was that the underlying rationale of a singularity concept representing the collective whole was because that singularity in fact originated from within the whole and as such actually incorporated in itself the entire spiritual core of the whole.
True that each individual is holy and that each individual must accomplish their own goals in life. Each weekday has a purpose and goal in the work of the weekly cycle. But the total efforts of the week come to fruition through the Shabbos day and its special holiness. And in turn, by observing the Shabbos day properly, do the ensuing weekdays receive their spiritual strength to further accomplish their weekly goals. The Jewish nation is represented spiritually by the Kohen Godol, the High Priest, culminating in his once a year rituals in the Yom Kippur services. On a spiritual level, the leaders of the nation actually receive their spiritual status from the nation as a whole because the leaders arise from within the nation. Korach had the right idea of individual holiness. What he missed was that just like flour has its individuality but is worthless unless formed into dough and subsequently into bread, so too is the Jewish nation’s strength from the collective nature of our total society, bound by the actions of Torah living.
