Holiness and Difference

Parashat Korach, Numbers 16:1–18:32

Dave Nichol, Congregation Ruach Israel, Needham, MA

Our parasha, Korach, is named for the man whose actions precipitate its primary drama.

Now Korah, son of Izhar son of Kohath son of Levi, betook himself, along with Dathan and Abiram sons of Eliab, and On son of Peleth—descendants of Reuben—to rise up against Moses, together with two hundred and fifty Israelites, chieftains of the community, chosen in the assembly, men of repute. (Num 16:1–2)

On its face, the narrative seems simple, an old-fashioned rebellion against Moses and Aaron. Korach and his allies can be cast as bad dudes who cause trouble—for whatever reason—and are dealt with. A careful reading of the story, however, leaves questions. And our tradition is all about careful readings—and questions!

The firstborns take a hit

As for these challengers of Moses and Aaron, what is the nature of their beef? Korach and the other Levites seem to be focused on the priesthood:

They combined against Moses and Aaron and said to them, “You have gone too far! For all the community are holy, all of them, and the Lord is in their midst. Why then do you raise yourselves above the Lord’s congregation?” (Num 16:3)

According to the commentator Ibn Ezra (Spain, 1089–1167), part of what’s going on here is the transition from a system where firstborn sons were dedicated to God and had the privilege of bringing offerings on behalf of their family, to a system where the priesthood is consolidated within a single family, the descendants of Aaron.

In Exodus 13:2 God commands, “Consecrate to me every first-born,” but then later he switches them out for the tribe of Levi: “The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Take the Levites in place of all the first-born among the Israelite people . . . and the Levites shall be Mine, the Lord’s” (Num 3:44–45). Korach is himself a firstborn (Exod 6:21). Ibn Ezra believes that Dathan and Abiram are involved because their tribe of Reuben lost its firstborn status to Joseph. 

Whatever his motivations, Korach’s rhetoric is brilliant: “All Israel is holy!” he says. Why should one group, Aaron’s descendants, be “more holy”? The boundaries don’t make sense to him.  

Moses doesn’t buy it. Korach himself, as a Kohathite like Moses and Aaron, is benefiting from these very boundaries. You may remember that their clan was given special roles in carrying the mishkan (Num 4:1–20). Moses rebukes Korach and his followers: 

Hear me, sons of Levi. Is it not enough for you that the God of Israel has set you apart from the community of Israel and given you access to Him, to perform the duties of the Lord’s Tabernacle and to minister to the community and serve them? Now that He has advanced you and all your fellow Levites with you, do you seek the priesthood too? (Num 16:8–10)

This language of “giving access”—hiqriv, perhaps better translated “bringing near”—is repeated at various points in the dialog. The debate is over who will have access, be close to God. Forgotten is that it is God who is doing the bringing near: “He will grant access to the one He has chosen” (Num 16:5). 

The fundamental point here is that to undermine the holiness of the priests is to undermine the very election of Israel. The idea that God has a special relationship with a “chosen” people is deeply challenging to some. Even Korach, a Levite—the elect of the elect!—struggles with the idea that God’s mode of redeeming the world is through calling out certain people and not others.

Only last week in Parashat Shelach we read of the mitzvah of setting aside a part of the bread we bake “as a gift for the Lord” (Num 15:19–21). When Paul references this commandment, he is applying it to a chosen segment of the people of Israel: “If the firstfruit is holy, so is the whole batch of dough; and if the root is holy, so are the branches” (Rom 11:16 TLV).

Recall that holiness means “separateness.” Rabbi Jonathan Sacks sees the Bible’s focus on a single people as one of its essential ideas: 

God, the creator of humanity, having made a covenant with all humanity, then turns to one people and commands it to be different, teaching humanity to make space for difference.” God may at times be found in human other, the one not like us . . . the unity of God is to be found in the diversity of creation.” (The Dignity of Difference, p. 53, emphasis original)

Israel must reflect this idea of holiness and redemptive difference both in its relationship to other nations (Num 23:9), and internally. But Korach is not on board with this vision . . . and he’s not the only one.

Moses’ change management problem

Moses is implementing (part of) God’s plan for redeeming the world throughout the middle books of the Torah. In Exodus a people is made separate and pulled out from captivity, and a physical mishkan is built. In Leviticus a sacrificial system is arranged. In Numbers the people themselves are ordered, structured in a way appropriate to their calling. Just as any organization’s structure needs to fit its mission, so Israel needs to be reshaped.

Lest we think that Korach was just a bad egg, we find that even after the ground swallows Korach and his allies, the Israelites continue the revolt, though their complaint has changed:

Next day the whole Israelite community railed against Moses and Aaron, saying, “You two have brought death upon the Lord’s people!” (Num 17:6)

The Israelites’ response angers God, who sends a plague that kills more than 14,000. But even that doesn’t seem to convince everyone, because afterwards we still need a miracle: each tribal chieftain hands over his staff, and only Aaron’s buds and blooms, confirming that God, not Moses, is choosing him (Num 16:21–24).

Indeed, looking for a motive or primary complaint of the rebels may be a fruitless endeavor: it may be simply that people don’t like change. Wikipedia’s article on change management puts it succinctly: “One of the major factors which hinders the change management process is people’s natural tendency for inertia. Just as in Newton’s first law of motion, people are resistant to change in organizations because it can be uncomfortable.”

So as Moses attempts to reshape Israel into a holy nation, one that is even structured in these concentric circles of escalating holiness, he is colliding with established interests and asking the people to change, which, as noted above, people are not always good at. Maybe he would benefit from a crash course in change management.

The most patient CEO

In my experience, the most important characteristic for anyone attempting to make change, is patience. It could be making a company more customer-focused, or addressing systemic injustice in society. Change always takes time. We can imagine Martin Luther King, Jr. and the prophet Elijah commiserating this fact right now—“Man, the moral arc of the universe is even longer than I expected!” “Bro, you have no idea.”

How will it end? When will there be justice, or peace? At some point there’s little difference between having patience and having faith! 

To use corporate-speak, Korach is not aligned with the vision God has for Israel. The big question for us reading his story today is, are we aligned with God’s vision for Israel? If becoming aligned requires us to change, or to forgo privilege that we are accustomed to, can we do it? Do we have the humility to adjust if we suspect we might be missing a part of God’s vision? What if our goals aren’t lined up with His as much as we thought? On the other hand, can we be patient for change, recognizing how rare it is for meaningful change to be achieved in only a generation or two? 

We will be part of this story regardless, for good or ill, with the grain or against it. Whatever our part, the Holy One is still at the work of completing creation, and while we cannot see the end, change is happening. It is not required of us to complete the work, but only to play our part (Pirkei Avot 2:16). Let’s get on board with the vision and do what we can.

Unless otherwise noted, all Bible citations are from the JPS Tanakh translation.