DEMOCRACY
AND DISTINCTION Korach’s
opening challenge against Moshe Rabbeinu
and Aharon Hakohein – that the entire
eidah, assembly, was holy and
therefore Moshe and Aharon had no right to place themselves over the kahal Hashem, the Congregation of God1
– immediately may remind one raised within the ethos of Western society of the
basic Jeffersonian principle upon which the very concept of democracy is built,
that “all men are created equal.” Forging a connection between the position of
Korach and the values of democracy would though, for many people, no doubt
yield a powerful conflict; to maintain that Korach stood for the principles of
democracy, it would seem, must necessarily result in the conclusion that Moshe,
Torah and God strongly maintained an opposing perspective. Could this scenario
possibly be true? . Rabbi J.B. Soloveitchik, Shiurei HaRav, The
First Rebellion Against Torah Authority, points out that Korach’s argument
was not exactly that all Jews are created equal but, rather, that all Jews are
chosen equal. The contention of Rashi,
Bamidbar 16:32 effectively concluding that the Jews were
all equal for they were all chosen to be part of the unique Revelation at Sinai,
would seem to support this assertion.3
Is this difference, though, enough to distinguish Korach’s argument from the
basic principles of American democracy? Of course, it is not inherently
problematic for the Torah to maintain value positions that are contrary to
those maintained within the secular world. If Korach indeed is an advocate of
Jeffersonian democracy and the Torah, in strongly condemning Korach, is
declaring its opposition to this value structure, so be it. We are still,
though, called upon to understand and internalize the Torah teaching. If the
Torah, as such, seems to be critiquing a value structure which, practically,
has had positive consequences for our people and to which we have a positive
reaction,4 we cannot ignore the challenge this presents to us. We have
a duty either to identify and correct the weaknesses within our internal
thought system that led us to look upon this value in a positive light, or to
rectify our misunderstandings of Torah that have yielded a conclusion that the
Torah looks negatively upon this value (or sometimes, in some measure, both),
That is the challenge that is before us. It
may be that Korach’s contention was not simply about equality. Mizrachi, Bamidbar 16:3 is perplexed by
Rashi’s reference to Sinai. While there may be a variety of sources that could
be used to assert an absolute equality amongst all Jews; the problem is that
this event, the Revelation at Sinai, is not really one of them. It actually
confirms Moshe’s distinctiveness for, while the people did indeed hear a part
of the Divine message, it was only Moshe who heard its entirety. The fact is
that there were many episodes in the Desert that clearly showed that Moshe was
unique and that, clearly, his relationship with God was unique.6
It is thus difficult to assert that Korach’s argument was solely about
equality; Moshe was unquestionably distinct. It may, however, be concerned with
how we are to balance equality and distinctiveness. Even within Western
democracies, we recognize that there is a limit to the principle that “all men
are created equal,” and, indeed, there is much distinctiveness between people
even at birth. The question is how we balance and apply the two. It is within
this context that Rashi’s reference to Sinai may be most significant. Korach’s
argument was that Sinai represented the proper balance. What
occurred at Sinai? God wished to speak to the entire nation and indeed the
nation as a whole participated to some extent in this Revelation. The people,
though, then felt that they could no longer endure this powerful presence of
the Almighty and requested from Moshe that he continue the process. For the
nation to have asked Moshe to act for them they must have recognized his
distinctiveness – but this may have been precisely Korach’s point. Indeed
Korach knew that Moshe was distinct. They all knew of Moshe’s distinctiveness.
The question was when and how to manifest this distinctiveness within the
nation. At Sinai, it was the nation that called upon Moshe to assume a unique
role. This was Korach’s argument. The starting point of Jewish nationhood is
that we are all equally chosen. It is then the nation that must determine when
the distinct individual has to assume a position within the nation that
reflects this distinctiveness. This was
Korach’s question. Indeed, Moshe and Aharon were distinct but, given, also, an
inherent equality within the nation, what gave Moshe and Aharon the right to
impose their distinctiveness upon the nation? The
simple answer to Korach is that it was not Moshe and Aharon who imposed their
distinctiveness upon the people but rather it was God. Within a broader
context, it is Korach’s assertion that any communal application of individual
distinctiveness must emerge from the will of the people that is also being
challenged. The nation also has the responsibility to respond to individual
distinction, not only by giving authority to distinct individuals but also by
allowing such distinct individuals to assume their rightful place of authority.
It was this symbiotic relationship between the nation and its leaders that
Korach did not understand or, more correctly, did not want to understand. Indeed
the collective will of the nation must play a role in any assumption of
position due to individual distinction but individual distinction also has a
weight in imposing a position of leadership upon the people. We cannot just
choose when we want a leader to act for us and which individual of distinction
we wish to choose. The very fact of a person’s distinctiveness may demand of us
to respond appropriately. Rabbi
Benjamin Hecht Footnotes 1 See Bamidbar 16:3. 2 Rashi maintains that Korach’s argument of equality was based on the fact that
all Jews heard words at Sinai from the mouth of God. 3 It may be interesting to further note that in
presenting this reason, Rashi can also be understood as specifically rejecting,
at least in this context, an argument of Jewish equality at birth in that all
Jews are born with the unique Jewish soul. See, for example, Kuzari
1:95 and Tanya, Chapter 1. Of course, the introduction of
the concept of the Jewish soul also introduces the issue of Jewish
distinctiveness which clearly does challenge the idea that all men are created
equal. This issue and indeed an investigation of the very concept of a Jewish
soul including the differing opinions regarding its nature, even amongst those
who maintain its existence, and the divergent opinions on whether there even
exists a Jewish soul distinct from other human souls, is clearly beyond the
parameters of this Insight. Our issue is specifically equality and
distinctiveness within the Jewish People. 4 Rabbi Moshe Feinstein,
Iggrot Moshe Choshen Mishpat 2:29, for example, refers to the 5 See Shemot
20:16, 6 Hashem, in fact, in Bamidbar
12:6-8 clearly describes Moshe’s uniqueness yet it could be contended that this
was not public knowledge. © Nishma 2010 Return to top |
© 2010 NISHMA