קרח
Dedicate a Shiur in Parshas Korach
L'ilui nishmas a loved one. In honor of a simcha or yahrzeit. As a zechus for a refuah sheleimah. Your dedication helps carry Rabbi Zweig's Torah to learners around the world.
62 shiurim for Parshas Korach
Why does the Torah emphasize Korach's lineage back to Levi? The shiur develops that Korach inherited Levi's mistaken philosophy that Klal Yisrael could function with fewer than twelve tribes. While Levi's separation was meant to elevate and connect to the whole through closeness to Hashem, Korach perverted this by separating outward rather than upward, creating destructive machloket instead of unity.
Why does Rashi emphasize that a particular Midrash is "beautifully expounded"? The shiur develops that validating someone's Torah perspective is always permitted and encouraged, unlike evaluating the mitzvos themselves. This principle teaches how to engage in constructive disagreement rather than destructive machlokas — by respecting the other person's contribution to understanding.
Why did 250 gedolei Yisrael join Korach's rebellion against Moshe? They weren't questioning Moshe's nevuah but rather his understanding of leadership. Korach believed that once someone earns a Divine position, they own it and can redistribute roles, while Moshe maintained that all positions are functional appointments from Hashem.
Why did Korach's call for equality resonate with so many followers? The shiur develops a fundamental distinction between Jewish unity and Western equality. Korach's premise that "we're all separate and equal" contradicts the Torah's vision of the Jewish people as one unified entity where different roles benefit everyone.
What was Korach's fundamental error in challenging Moshe's appointment of Aharon? The shiur develops the thesis that Korach saw Klal Yisrael as separate individuals who chose to be unified, while Moshe understood them as organically one — a reflection of Hashem's oneness. This explains Korach's tzitzis and mezuzah arguments and why Aharon's appointment elevates every Jew.
Why does Jewish law derive the requirement for minyan from two groups of evil people - the spies and Korach's followers? The convoluted Talmudic derivation reveals that community isn't just about righteous people connecting personally. Even those who disagree can form a valid community when unified around a common purpose or value.
Why did brilliant leaders like Korach rebel against Moshe despite witnessing Sinai? The shiur argues Korach represented a fundamental misunderstanding of Judaism's purpose. While Korach sought personal spiritual elevation for all Jews, true l'shem shamayim means building God's presence in the world through maintaining distinct roles that create shalom.
Why does the Mishna call machloket l'shem shamayim enduring while we view all conflict as destructive? The shiur argues that true shalom isn't uniformity but appreciation of diversity. Building on Chazal's explanation of why Hashem scattered Dor HaFlaga rather than destroying them, it shows that healthy communities thrive when different perspectives contribute to common goals.
What does "vayikach Korach" mean when there's no object to the verb? The shiur develops that Korach and his followers separated themselves from all communal resources - manna, water, and utilities - financing their own provisions to create a breakaway community. This physical separation preceded their challenge to Moshe, revealing that their motivation was power, not principle.
How can we distinguish genuine disputes from power grabs when everyone claims noble motives? The Torah reveals that Korach's faction first separated themselves before raising issues with Moshe's leadership. True machloket l'shem shamayim requires discussing issues first, not marshaling political support to justify predetermined conclusions.
Why does the Torah begin Parshas Korach with "Vayikach" (he took) without stating what was taken? The shiur explores Rashi's interpretation that Korach separated himself first, then made arguments against Moshe's leadership. This pathology reveals why Chazal called it machloket she'lo l'shem shamayim - the rebellion preceded any legitimate grievances.
Why did Moshe engage with Korach's rebellion when both leaders foresaw their outcomes? Rashi reveals that Korach acted because he saw Shmuel would descend from him, while Moshe only fought because he knew he would win. Being right doesn't automatically justify engaging in conflict.
Why does Hashem give the kohanim twenty-four gifts in the aftermath of Korach's rebellion rather than simply certifying Aharon's authority for Temple service? The analysis reveals that kehuna is not a position or job but a relationship - the kohen uses Hashem's property rather than receiving wages. This ongoing relationship creates constant reaffirmation of divine love rather than a one-time payment.
Why does the Mishna say that disputes for the sake of heaven will endure forever? The shiur explains that proper machlokes doesn't aim to eliminate disagreement but to empower both parties through constructive communication that puts ideas forward rather than imposing them.
Why would Hashem want to destroy everyone when only Korach's group sinned? The shiur develops a fundamental yesod: machlokes (divisiveness) isn't just wrong—it makes marriage between Hashem and Klal Yisrael impossible. Since that marriage is the entire purpose of creation, machlokes threatens the world's very existence and must be eradicated.
Why did Korach and the 250 leaders risk their lives challenging Aharon's priesthood when they had witnessed God's clear approval at the Mishkan's dedication? The challenge wasn't about Aharon's worthiness but about whether his appointment was permanent or temporary. They believed in a rotation system where all worthy leaders would serve, not a lifetime position that became permanent only after the decree of 40 years in the desert.
Why did Moshe proceed with the ketores test against Korach despite knowing he was right? Rashi reveals that Moshe's certainty about his own righteousness wasn't sufficient justification. He needed to foresee that Korach would actually die while his repentant children would survive—suggesting that being right doesn't automatically justify every course of action.
Why did the people blame Moshe after Korach's miraculous punishment, saying "you killed God's nation"? The Ketzos HaChoshen asks how Moshe could stake Torah's integrity on the miracle when Korach could do teshuvah. Moshe acted as king executing rebels (mored bamalchus), where teshuvah cannot overturn the death sentence.
Why does Moshe say "v'Aharon mah hu" when defending against Korach's rebellion? The phrase reveals that positions and talents are divine appointments, not personal achievements. True humility means recognizing that everything we have is how Hashem "dressed us up" — our worth comes from our choices and character, not our circumstances.
What made Moshe truly humble despite his extraordinary position and abilities? The shiur explains that genuine humility means recognizing that all talents, positions, and circumstances are simply God's assignments - not measures of personal worth. This perspective eliminates jealousy, sibling rivalry, and the corruption that comes from clinging to status.
How could great leaders like Korach legitimately challenge Moshe's appointment of Aharon? The shiur develops that Moshe's kingship was fundamentally different from later Jewish monarchy - he represented only Hashem's perspective, not the people's. Unlike future kings who balance divine will with popular representation, Moshe was purely "ohev es haMelech" - devoted solely to what G-d wanted.
Why does the Torah say "vayikach Korach" without an object? The shiur develops the insight that Korach didn't just complain — he took financial responsibility for himself and his followers, creating a separatist entity independent of Moshe's leadership. This explains why his lineage stops at "ben Levi" rather than connecting to Yaakov.
How can a giver maintain relationship while avoiding dependency or disconnection? The shiur explores Rashi's parable about a king who gives his friend access to his palace rather than ownership. This model applies to Aharon's priestly gifts - they remain God's property while Aharon has full access, preserving closeness.
Why was Korach's rebellion considered "not for heaven's sake" when his intentions were spiritual? The shiur reveals that while Korach and his followers wanted spiritual growth, they missed the crucial principle that Klal Yisrael must reflect God's unity (echad). Their desire for shared leadership would have destroyed the very oneness that gives God presence in this world.
Why does the Torah use the phrase "es bateihem" when describing how the earth swallowed Korach's group? Onkelos reveals that there were two distinct divine punishments - one for the leaders of the rebellion and another for their households who actively supported them.
What makes someone wicked if they haven't committed any actual sins? The shiur explores four categories of wickedness in Chazal that share a common thread: disconnecting from others rather than transgressing specific commandments. True machlokes leshem shamayim preserves relationships while maintaining disagreements, as demonstrated by Hillel and Shamai.
Did Hashem command Aharon's priesthood, or did Moshe initiate it and Hashem approve? The shiur uses Tosafos on Shabbos 87a to argue that Hashem sometimes supports our decisions rather than initiating them. This reframes Korach's rebellion as questioning not whether Hashem spoke, but who initiated the message.
Why does the Torah use the unusual phrase "vayikach Korach" when there's a proper Hebrew word for splitting off? The awkward phrasing reveals Korach's true motivation. Rather than seeking legitimate discussion, he was fundamentally a "taker" - someone who had internalized a pattern of not giving and therefore sought only to grab position and power for himself.
Why does the Mishna praise machlokes l'shem shamayim, saying it will endure forever? Using the Dor HaMabul versus Dor HaPlaga as a lens, the shiur reveals that true shalom isn't uniformity but rather people with different perspectives working together constructively. Korach's error was demanding sameness rather than embracing productive disagreement.
How can we distinguish between legitimate and illegitimate disputes when everyone claims righteousness? The Torah's phrase "Vayikach Korach" reveals that Korach separated himself before debating, showing he'd already reached his conclusion. True machloket l'shem shamayim requires genuine openness to changing one's position through dialogue.
Why does the Midrash label as wicked those who raise their hand to strike, borrow without repaying, disrespect elders, or create disputes when no explicit sin occurs? The shiur explains that these behaviors betray trust and sever human relationships essential for survival. True wickedness sometimes lies in destroying the interconnection and community bonds people need to flourish.
Why did Moshe tell Korach's followers "Rav lachem bnei Levi" and later receive the same response from Hashem about entering Eretz Yisrael? The Midrash teaches that telling someone to stop expressing their desires - even unreasonable ones - constitutes abuse in a loving relationship. Healthy relationships require patience to hear repeated requests rather than shutting down communication.
Why does Korach's call for equality seem reasonable while Moshe's leadership appears nepotistic? The shiur distinguishes between partnerships (where everyone has veto power) and mergers (where parties submit to each other's expertise). Korach's error was treating the Jewish nation as an association rather than a merged entity, creating the same dynamic that destroyed Jerusalem through sinat chinam.
How can a hierarchical system create more unity than Korach's egalitarian message of 'kulam kedoshim'? The Maharal's analysis reveals that Korach wasn't seeking truth through disagreement but establishing permanent division ('vayikach Korach'). True machloket l'shem shamayim occurs when each party believes the other acts for Heaven's sake, seeking unified conclusions rather than perpetual separation.
Why did On Ben Pelus's wife get him drunk before the rebellion against Moshe? The shiur develops the principle that women excel at giving reality checks about identity and capability. Her wisdom wasn't just saving his life — it was helping him recognize he wasn't Kohen Gadol material.
Why does Hashem say "please listen" when criticizing Miriam and Aharon for speaking about Moshe? The shiur develops that true criticism expresses pain rather than attacking behavior. When you tell someone "I am hurting" instead of "you did something wrong," they cannot defend themselves—they can only empathize.
Why did Korach feel entitled to challenge Moshe? The Midrash identifies Korach as an "אח נפשה" (rebellious brother), suggesting brotherhood gave him a perceived right to dispute Torah leadership. Brothers feel what belongs to one is somehow connected to the other, making Korach's challenge fundamentally different from an outsider's rebellion.
Why was On Ben Pelet willing to die to avoid embarrassment by his peers but not for the principle he claimed to believe in? The analysis reveals how peer pressure can override moral judgment, showing that our friends' opinions often matter more to us than truth itself. The lesson: choose friends based on values, not group dynamics.
How can we distinguish between constructive disagreement and destructive fighting when everyone convinces themselves they argue for the sake of Heaven? The shiur develops a yesod that healthy machlokes requires differences giving each person their own space, while destructive machlokes stems from jealousy where people compete for the same position.
How can machloket be both prohibited (like Korach) and praised (like Shammai and Hillel)? The distinction lies in methodology: healthy disputes address substantive issues while maintaining respect for opponents, whereas destructive machloket attacks the person to avoid engaging their position. When anger emerges during disagreement, it signals personal agenda rather than truth-seeking.
Why does Rashi say God gives priestly gifts with joy when Korach's complaint merely required official confirmation? The shiur develops that Aharon possessed an "ayin tov" - a good eye that genuinely rejoices when others surpass him. This rare quality explains why God gives gifts gradually rather than lump-sum, allowing ongoing relationship and pleasure in giving.
Why would God destroy innocent people along with the guilty in Korach's rebellion? The shiur develops the principle that rebellion (merida) differs fundamentally from sin - rebellion is secession that warrants war, not judicial punishment. God's willingness to spare innocents reflects His unique relationship with Klal Yisrael.
Why do children feel controlled even when we teach them what's genuinely good for them? The shiur draws from Korach's rebellion to show that true freedom comes not from escaping rules, but from understanding that mitzvah observance connects us to absolute truth rather than arbitrary human preferences.
When did Avram become Avrohom and Sarai become Sarah? The Midrash reveals that while Hashem commanded the name changes before the bris milah, the actual transformation occurred only at the moment of circumcision. This creates a fascinating halachic framework where the prohibition against using the old names preceded the actual acquisition of the new ones.
How could Korach challenge Moshe after witnessing Sinai? Korach accepted Torah's divine origin but saw Aharon's appointment as nepotism, believing God merely accommodated Moshe's personal desire. The key insight: Moshe was God's representative to the people, not their representative to God—making Kehunah about divine representation, not human employment.
Why does the Talmud derive bikur cholim from Moshe's warning to Korach about dying an ordinary death? The shiur distinguishes between machloket l'shem shamayim and shelo l'shem shamayim: those arguing for principle maintain community bonds despite disagreements, while ego-driven rebels like Korach isolate themselves. People's willingness to visit you when sick reveals whether your disagreements stem from genuine conviction or selfish ambition.
How could 250 Torah leaders challenge Moshe's appointment of Aharon as Kohen Gadol? Korach argued that Hashem only endorsed Aharon because Moshe wanted his brother, following the principle that God supports human free will choices without necessarily approving them. This teaches that success or favorable outcomes don't validate our decisions — we must evaluate choices on their merit before acting, not rationalize them afterward.
Why did Hashem criticize Moshe for saying 'rav lachem' to Korach and his followers? The shiur develops a principle that proper criticism (tochacha) must address observable actions, never motives. Attacking someone's motives is invasive and presumptuous—only Hashem knows true intentions—and leads to defensiveness rather than growth.
Why did Moshe criticize Bnei Levi's motivations rather than just their actions? The Midrash reveals that criticizing someone's inner motives is like hitting them with a stick - it's invasive and potentially wrong since only Hashem knows true intentions. Measure Hashem's response teaches this very lesson about proper rebuke.
Why does the Mishna say that machlokes l'shem shamayim will 'forever endure'? This suggests disagreement is positive, not negative. True machlokes comes from insecurity about one's unique identity, not from having different opinions - which actually strengthen relationships and communities.
Why does the Gemara derive minyan requirements from negative examples like the spies and Korach's rebellion? The shiur develops that communal prayer requires true unity, not just ten individuals, and that a minyan represents all of Klal Yisrael. This framework explains the power of individual influence to sway entire communities for good or evil.
How could people who stood at Mount Sinai challenge Moshe's prophecy and violate a cardinal principle of faith? Korach wasn't disputing God's commands directly, but applying human logic to interpret halachic matters while Torah was still 'bashamayim' - requiring all questions go through Moshe. The sin was being a 'baal machloket' by setting himself up as God's equal in wisdom.
Why does the Torah use both 'melach' and 'olam' to describe the eternal covenant with kohanim? Salt creates barren land where nothing else grows, symbolizing how true bris means cutting off other relationships to create exclusivity with Hashem. The kehunah represents a unique bond of simcha - divine joy in giving - that parallels how yissurim also purify by eliminating competing influences and connecting us to our essential selves.
How could people who stood at Har Sinai challenge Moshe's nevuah and Aharon's kehunah? Korach's rebellion stemmed from viewing kehunah as a transferable position rather than a unique spiritual reality. The earth swallowing them represents creation itself rejecting the philosophy that denies different spiritual realities and reduces everything to interchangeable roles.
How could Korach and 250 leaders dispute Moshe despite Hashem's promise that Israel would believe in him forever? Unlike other prophets who received incomprehensible messages while unconscious, Moshe uniquely combined maximum divine revelation with complete intellectual understanding. Korach's fatal error was thinking he could accept direct mitzvos while challenging Moshe's interpretations, not realizing that Moshe's understanding was as infallible as the original commands.
Why does Moshe's test for Korach mention visiting the sick, seemingly irrelevant to their dispute? The shiur identifies two types of bikur cholim: practical help and empathetic connection that literally removes one-sixtieth of suffering. Empathy serves as the litmus test for community membership - true revolutionaries cut themselves off entirely, while those who can still feel others' pain remain within legitimate disagreement rather than destructive rebellion.
Why does the Korach story mention visiting the sick as part of natural death? The shiur explores how bikur cholim involves taking on one-sixtieth of a person's emotional pain. Korach's demand for equality actually represents divisiveness, while true unity means using our differences to complete each other.
How could Korach's demand for equality represent division while Moshe's insistence on hierarchy represents unity? The shiur reveals that genuine unity emerges when diverse parts serve one Master, like organs in a body. Korach's error was treating Klal Yisrael as competing individuals rather than an organic whole with divinely-ordained structure.
Why must even Leviim give maaser to Kohanim if matanos kehuna are just payment for Temple service? The shiur reveals that priestly gifts create spiritual connection, not mere compensation. Kohanim possess kedushas haguf that enables others to attach to kedusha by supporting them—a principle extending to Talmidei Chachamim today.
How could Korach, described as a great tzaddik, make such a grave error that warranted divine punishment? The shiur reveals that Korach's real grievance was personal (losing out on leadership), but he argued peripheral issues instead of addressing his core complaint directly. This defines a destructive baal machloket: someone who creates irreconcilable separation by hiding their true hurt while publicly advocating for seemingly noble causes.
Why was Korach's complaint the first called 'machloket' when there were previous arguments with Moshe? True machloket occurs when people argue about who should have privilege rather than how to serve the collective good. Korach's rebellion stemmed from having honors he hadn't earned, creating a taste for 'more' that bred jealousy and destroyed his natural Levite trait of self-nullification.
How could Korach and his followers, who witnessed Har Sinai, challenge Moshe's authority and divine appointment? The shiur explains that they misunderstood Moshe's unique madreiga of nevuah - believing Hashem spoke to Moshe who then conveyed messages, rather than grasping that Hashem spoke through Moshe as a completely nullified vessel. The miracle of pi ha'aretz demonstrated that everything operates as pure ratzon Hashem, paralleling Moshe's role as divine conduit.
