Parashas Korach: Lessons in Hashgachah

Originally published in June, 2012. God willing, there will be a new dvar Torah for Parashas Korach on Friday.

Artwork: Yawning Vissure, by Veronique Meignaud

Parashas Korach: Lessons in Hashgachah

Preface

Many of my students seem to feel that they more or less know the particulars of how Hashem is involved in the lives of individuals. They feel comfortable making statements about how Hashem operates in their own lives, and in the lives of those who are close to them. I attribute this to the popular view of hashgachah pratis (individual providence), and I do my best to present to my "the classical view" of hashgachah pratis, as taught by the Rishonim.

Oftentimes, this provokes the opposite reaction. Students feel that they can't know anything about how Hashem operates. They feel completely in the dark about hashgachah pratis and conclude that they will never be able to understand anything about how Hashem relates to them. Consequently, they either feel that hashgachah pratis is not real, or that it is out of reach, or that it is arbitrary - for, in the darkness of ignorance, unknown lawfulness and pure arbitrariness are often indistinguishable. This reaction is also not good. 

I see only one solution to this problem: to show my students that we can gain some understanding (however minute) of hashgachah pratis by learning from the occurrences of hashgachah throughout Tanach. This is easier said than done, but I can testify that the more I learn about hashgachah, the more real it is to me.

In this post I hope to provide an example of that. Even if you disagree with what I write, I hope this post can provide an illustration of the derech of learning about hashgachah pratis from the dvar Hashem.

The Facts

In the midst of the Torah's account of the Korach rebellion we are confronted with a short but troubling exchange between Hashem and Moshe Rabbeinu:

Hashem spoke to Moshe and Aharon, saying, "Separate yourselves from amid this assembly (i.e. Bnei Yisrael), and I shall destroy them in an instant!" They fell on their faces and said, "O God, God of the spirits of all flesh, shall one man sin, and You be angry with the entire assembly?" (Bamidbar 16:20-22).

Apparently, their tefilah (prayer) did the trick. Immediately thereafter ...

Hashem spoke to Moshe saying, "Speak to the assembly, saying, 'Get yourselves up from all around the dwelling places of Korach, Dasan, and Aviram.'" So Moshe stood up and went to Dasan and Aviram, and the elders of Israel followed him. He spoke to the assembly, saying, "Turn away now from near the tents of these wicked men, and do not touch anything of theirs, lest you perish because of all their sins." So they got themselves up from near the dwelling of Korach, Dasan, and Aviram, from all around. Dasan and Aviram went out brazenly at the entrance of their tents, with their wives, children, and infants (ibid. 23-27).

We know what happens next. Moshe Rabbeinu announces that if Hashem creates a miraculous phenomenon, causing the earth to swallow up the evildoers, then it will be manifestly clear to everyone that"these men provoked Hashem," and that Moshe Rabbeinu is truly Hashem's emissary. Sure enough ...

When he finished speaking all these words, the ground that was under them split open. The earth opened its mouth and swallowed them and their households, and all the people who were with Korach, and the entire wealth. They and all that was theirs descended alive to the pit; the earth covered them over and they were lost from among the congregation (ibid. 31-33).

Korach and his followers are punished, Moshe Rabbeinu's authority is reinstated, and Bnei Yisrael are safe (for now, at least).

The Questions

The story of Korach’s rise and fall is so enthralling; it's easy to gloss over the fact that Hashem would have destroyed the entire Jewish nation were it not for Moshe’s tefilah! Not only does Hashem’s initial decree seem unjust, but as soon as Moshe points out the injustice, Hashem relents and changes His plans. 

In order to understand this sequence of events, we will ask and attempt to answer four questions:

1. What was the basis of Hashem's initial decree? Hashem is the Melech ha'Mishpat (King of Justice), and we maintain that kol derachav mishpat (all of His ways are just). What insight into mishpat Hashem are we lacking which would explain how it is in line with justice to wipe out an entire nation on account of a few evildoers?
   
2. How, exactly, did Moshe Rabbeinu's tefilah address Hashem's position? Moshe Rabbeinu's tefilah intuitively makes sense to us. However, this intuitive understanding must - of necessity - be incomplete. If we do not understand the basis of Hashem's decree, then we cannot possibly understand Moshe Rabbeinu's tefilah, since his tefilah was formulated specifically as a response to that decree.
   
3. What is the meaning of, "God of the spirits of all flesh" and why did Moshe choose to address Hashem in this manner? This is a very unusual way to address Hashem. What do these terms mean, and why does Moshe Rabbeinu choose to utilize this appellation in his tefilah?
   
4. What do we learn from this? Here we have an instance of mishpat Hashem, a tefilah of Moshe Rabbeinu, and a miraculous onesh (punishment). All of this provides us with a valuable opportunity to increase our knowledge of Hashem. What general principles can we derive from this incident? Moreover, what practical insights can we gain from this new understanding? How does this knowledge affect the way we live, or the way we view ourselves? 

Thankfully, Ralbag provides us with an enlightening interpretation of these pesukim which, if understood correctly, unlocks the answers to all of our questions.

Step #1: The Law of Collective Hashgachah

Ralbag begins by explaining the basis of Hashem's initial decree. Hashgachah pratis (individual providence), like hashgachah klalis (laws of nature), operates in accordance with a lawful system. The laws of nature are not arbitrary or capricious, and neither are the laws of hashgachah pratis. Even when Hashem intervenes in human affairs with a miracle, His intervention is governed by systematic principles - exactly like the laws of thermodynamics and the laws of motion. In other words, hashgachah pratis is not an exception to lawfulness, but an expression of lawfulness.

Ralbag explains one of these laws of hashgachah pratis as follows: if a unified group of people (e.g. a nation, a city, an army) merits a certain level of hashgachah pratis, then that hashgachah will relate to the entire group as a single entity. Consequently, if even one member of that group sins, then the entire group will lose its hashgachah pratis and will either be subject to hashgachic onesh (Divine punishment) or abandoned to the laws of nature, depending on the circumstances and the individuals involved. For the sake of brevity, we will refer to this phenomenon as "The Law of Collective Hashgachah."

To illustrate this concept, Ralbag uses the following mashal: a unified group of people can be compared to a single body, and a chotei (sinner) within that group can be compared to a diseased organ. That diseased organ will impair the function of the entire body, simply by virtue of the fact that they are all part of the same entity. So too, the cheit (sin) of a single individual is likened to an infection within the collective body of the group, and the hashgachah over the entire group will be affected by that one cheit.

Ralbag cites an example from Sefer Yehoshua. Yehoshua led an army of Bnei Yisrael to invade and conquer the city of Ai. Bnei Yisrael's army consisted of several thousand men. Much to Yehoshua's surprise, these thousands of men fled from before the inhabitants of Ai, who pursued them and began killing them off. That night, Yehoshua - perplexed at the apparent lack of hashgachic protection - entreated Hashem, saying: "Alas, Hashem-Elokim, why have You brought this entire people over the Yarden to deliver us into the hands of the Emori, to destroy us! Would that we had been content and dwelt beyond the Yarden!" (Yehoshua 7:7). Hashem responded:

Israel has sinned; they have also violated My covenant that I commanded them; they have also taken from the consecrated property; they have also stolen; they have also denied; they have also placed it in their vessels. The Children of Israel will not be able to stand before their enemies; they will turn the back of their necks to their enemies because they have become worthy of destruction. I will not continue to be with you if you do not destroy the transgressor from your midst (ibid. 7:11-12).

Hashem condemned Israel as a group, but concluded by acknowledging that there is only one transgressor who has made them all worthy of destruction. In strict accordance with the "Law of Collective Hashgachah," the entire army lost its hashgachic protection on account of the cheit of a single man. So too, at the incident of Korach, the entire congregation of Klal Yisrael became liable for destruction on account of Korach and his small group of followers.

This is the first step in answering our first question and understanding the basis of Hashem's decree. Although we haven't yet understood how the Law of Collective Hashgachah is in line with justice, we at least know that such a law exists. We have answered the "What?" question ("What was the basis of Hashem's decree?") but we still need to answer the "Why?" question ("Why does Hashem's hashgachah relate to the group as a whole?"). That question will be answered later. First, let's understand Moshe Rabbeinu's side of the story.

Step #2: Moshe Rabbeinu's Tefilah

Moshe Rabbeinu's tefilah was formulated as a response to the Law of Collective Hashgachah. He began by invoking Hashem as "God of the spirits of all flesh." Ralbag interprets this as follows:

You, Hashem, are the God Who has particular knowledge of each and every human being and extends His hashgachah pratis to every individual, based on his intellect, in accordance with that individual righteousness and wickedness. In light of this, how can You decree punishment upon the entire congregation when only a few of them sinned?

In effect, Moshe Rabbeinu appealed to Hashem to switch mishpat (justice) frameworks: instead of judging Klal Yisrael as a group - as a unified entity, subject to the Law of Collective Hashgachah - He should judge Klal Yisrael as individuals, based on the zechuyos (merits) and avonos (iniquities) of each and every person.

We see from Moshe Rabbeinu's tefilah that the "Law of Collective Hashgachah" is not the only framework for mishpat. There is also a "Law of Individual Hashgachah." We know from the Torah's accounts of tzadikim (e.g. Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov) that hashgachah pratis can and does relate to the individual, irrespective of his society.

However, this reveals one major insight into Divine justice: apparently, the "Law of Collective Hashgachah" is the default framework for mishpat. It is for this reason that Hashem decreed destruction upon the entire Jewish nation. Were it not for Moshe Rabbeinu's intercession to judge Klal Yisrael as individuals, Hashem would have judged them as a collective, because that is how the hashgachah operates.

We have answered the question of, "How, exactly, did Moshe Rabbeinu's tefilah address Hashem's position?" but we are now confronted with a more pressing question: "Why does the Law of Collective Hashgachah take precedence over the Law of Individual Hashgachah? What accounts for the fact that it is the default framework for mishpat?" Although we have begun to build a case for Hashem's mishpat (as it were), it is still difficult to see His decrees as justice. In order to do this, we must take one more step.

Step #3: Hashem's Response

This is where things begin to get interesting. Hashem accepted Moshe's tefilah and didn't wipe out all of Klal Yisrael. However, He didn't "simply" punish Korach and his followers, as it might seem at first glance. Instead, He instructed Moshe to tell Bnei Yisrael to remove themselves from the vicinity of the reshaim (evildoers) and to be careful not to touch any of their belongings, lest they be destroyed. Only then did He cause the earth to open and swallow up Korach and his followers.

This is problematic for at least two reasons. First of all, why were the non-sinning members of Bnei Yisrael required to distance themselves from the reshaim? One might be tempted to respond, "This was a practical measure to ensure that none of the innocent members of Klal Yisrael were destroyed along with the reshaim." This answer is difficult. We know that Hashem is fully capable of "targeted onesh." This was demonstrated in Mitzrayim, when many of the makkos afflicted only the Egyptians and not the Jews. The greatest instance of targeted onesh was makkas bechoros, in which Hashem struck down every individual firstborn, but spared all others. That being said, why did Hashem command Bnei Yisrael to move away from the reshaim? Why didn't He simply "zap" Korach and his followers on the spot?

Secondly, why did the non-sinning members of Bnei Yisrael have to be warned, "do not touch anything of theirs, lest you perish because of all their sins"? Didn't Moshe Rabbeinu's tefilah succeed in achieving a shift in mishpat frameworks from Collective Mishpat to Individual Mishpat? One would think that the decree of destruction upon the non-sinners was revoked - yet, if that's the case, then why are they still in danger of "perishing" on account of the sins of Korach and his followers? And why is this threat of perishing contingent on touching the belongings of the reshaim? It is difficult to understand how a person can be liable for death simply for touching the possessions of a sinner.

Ralbag gives a very interesting answer. He explains that Hashem could not carry out Moshe's request to judge Bnei Yisrael as individuals unless they severed their identity as part of the group. In order to do this, they needed to physically separate themselves from the group, and to cut off any remaining connection with the members of that group. Even to retain possession of a material object belonging to the group would be to preserve one's identification with the group. So long as that identification is maintained, Hashem cannot judge that person as an individual, and his or her fate would be bound to the fate of the group.

This explanation answers the last two questions we raised, but it presents us with an even bigger problem, which will be the final - and key - question in our investigation: Why didn't Hashem simply judge the members of Bnei Yisrael as individuals in their present state? Why was it necessary for them to break their connection with the group?

In answering this question, we will gain a fundamental insight not only into hashgachah pratis and mishpat Hashem, but into how we live our daily lives.

Step #4: Insight into Hashgachas Hashem

The answer to our last question can be found in a principle set forth by the Rambam in Hilchos Deos 6:1:

Man, by nature, is influenced in his character traits and his actions by his friends and colleagues, and behaves in the manner of the members of his society. Therefore, it is incumbent on man to befriend tzadikim (men of justice) and to continually sit near chachamim (wise men) so that he will learn from their actions, and he should distance himself from reshaim (men of injustice) who walk in darkness so that he will not learn from their actions. This is what Shlomo says: "One who walks with the wise will become wise, but one who befriends ksilim (fools) will be broken" (Mishlei 13:20); and [David] says: "Fortunate is the man [who has not walked in the counsel of the wicked, nor has stood in the path of sinners, nor sat in the seat of the scornful]" (Tehilim 1:1). 

According to this halacha in the Rambam, most people - by nature - are products of their society. If you dwell among tzadikim and chachamim, your character traits and actions will be influenced by them; you will learn from them and become like them. The reverse is also true: if you dwell among reshaim and ksilim, your character traits and actions will be influenced by them, and you will learn from them and become like them.

This law of human nature is so overwhelmingly powerful that the Rambam prescribes a seemingly austere command in the very next paragraph:

Likewise, if a person finds himself in a society whose behavior is bad and whose members do not walk on the upright path, he should move to a location whose members are tzadikim and who conduct themselves on the path of the good. And if all of the societies he knows and has heard about conduct themselves in a path which is not good (as is the case in the present time) or he is unable to go to a society whose conduct is good - on account of the bands of thieves or for health reasons - he should dwell alone and in seclusion, as it is stated, "Let him sit alone and be silent" (Eichah 3:28). And if [the members of all societies] are bad people and sinners, who do not allow him to live in the society unless he mingles with them and participates in their bad behaviors, then he should go out to caves, thickets, and deserts rather than behave in the manner of sinners, as it is stated, "Who will give me a lodging place for wayfarers in the desert" (Yirmiyahu 9:1). 

Leaving aside the question of how this halacha ought to be implemented in practice, one thing is clear: the Torah has a grim outlook on the ability of an individual to rise above his or her society. To put it bluntly: the average human being does not, by default, exist as an individual, but only as a member of the group. 

I am not going to explain what I mean by that. Instead, I will clarify what I mean by quoting a beautiful and profound excerpt from Halakhic Man, by R' Yosef Dov Soloveitchik in which he explains the basis and implications of the Rambam's view of hashgachah pratis; I've underlined certain parts for emphasis:

The gist of Maimonides' view is that man occupies a unique position in the kingdom of existence and differs in his ontological nature from all other creatures. With reference to all other creatures, only the universal, not the particular, has a true, continuous existence; with respect to man, however, it is an everlasting principle that his individual existence also attains the heights of true, eternal being. Indeed, the primary mode of man's existence is the particular existence of the individual, who is both liable and responsible for his acts. Therefore, it is the individual who is worthy of divine providence and eternal life. Man, in one respect, is a mere random example of the biological species - species man - an image of the universal, a shadow of true existence. In another respect he is a man of God, possessor of an individual existence. The difference between a man who is a mere random example of the biological species and a man of God is that the former is characterized by passivity, the latter by activity and creation. The man who belongs solely to the realm of the universal is passive to an extreme - he creates nothing. The man who has a particular existence of his own is not merely a passive, receptive creature but acts and creates. Action and creation are the true distinguishing marks of authentic existence. 

However, this ontological privilege, which is the peculiar possession of the man who has a particular existence of his own, a privilege that distinguishes him from all other creatures and endows him with individual immortality, is dependent upon man himself. The choice is his. He may, like the individual of all the other species, exist in the realm of the images and shadows, or he may exist as an individual who is not part of the universal and who proves worthy of a fixed, established existence in the world of the "forms" and "intellects separate from matter" [Maimonides, Laws of the Foundations of the Torah 4:9]. Species man or man of God, this is the alternative which the the Almighty placed before man. If he proves worthy, then he becomes a man of God in all the splendor of his individual existence that cleaves to absolute infinity and the glorious "divine overflow." If he proves unworthy, then he ends up as one more random example of the biological species, a turbid and blurred image of universal existence ...

Man, at times, exists solely by virtue of the species, by virtue of the fact that he was born a member of that species, and its general form is engraved upon him. He exists solely on account of his participation in the idea of the universal. He is just a member of the species "man," an image of the universal. He is just one more example of the species image in its ongoing morphological process (in the Aristotelian sense of the term). He himself, however, has never done anything that could serve to legitimate his existence as an individual. His soul, his spirit, his entire being, are all grounded in the realm of the universal. His roots lie deep in the soil of faceless mediocrity; his growth takes place solely within the public domain. He has no stature of his own, no original, individual, personal profile. He has never created anything, never brought into being anything new, never accomplished anything. He is receptive, passive, a spiritual parasite. He is wholly under the influence of other people and their views. Never has he sought to render an accounting, either of himself or of the world; never has he examined himself, his relationship to God and his fellow man. He lives unnoticed and he dies unmourned. Like a fleeting cloud, a shadow, he passes through life, and he is gone. He bequeaths nothing to future generations, but dies without leaving a trace of his having lived. Empty-handed he goes to the grave, bereft of mitzvah performances, good deeds, and meritorious acts, for while living he lacked any sense of historical responsibility and was totally wanting in any ethical passion. He was born involuntarily, and it is for this reason and this reason alone that he, involuntarily, lives out his life (a life which, paradoxically, he has "chosen!") until he dies involuntarily. This is man as the random example of the biological species. 

But there is another man, one who does not require the assistance of others, who does not need the support of the species to legitimate his existence. Such a man is no longer a prisoner of time but is his own master. He exists not by virtue of the species, but solely on account of his own individual worth. His life is replete with creation and renewal, cognition and profound understanding. He lives not on account of his having been born but for the sake of life itself and so that he may merit thereby the life in the world to come. He recognizes the destiny that is his, his obligation and task in life. He understands full well the dualism running through his being and that choice which has been entrusted to him. He knows that there are two paths before him and that whichever he shall choose, there must he go. He is not passive but active. His personality is not characterized by receptivity but by spontaneity. He does not simply abandon himself to the rule of the species but blazes his own individual trail. Moreover, he, as an individual, influences the many. His whole existence, like some enchanted stream, rushes ever onward to distant magical regions. He is dynamic, not static, does not remain at rest but moves forward in an ever-ascending climb. For, indeed, it is the living God for whom he pines and longs. This is the man of God. 

The fundamental of providence is here transformed into a concrete commandment, an obligation incumbent upon man. Man is obliged to broaden the scope and strengthen the intensity of the individual providence that watches over him. Everything is dependent on him; it is all in his hands. When a person creates himself, ceases to be a mere species man, and becomes a man of God, then he has fulfilled that commandment which is implicit in the principle of providence.

The Rav said it all, and I have nothing to add.

Now we can understand Hashem's response to Moshe's tefilah on a deeper level. Hashem's commandment to Bnei Yisrael to physically move away from Korach and his followers was not merely a practical way to distance them from the disaster zone, nor was it only a means of breaking their identification with the sinners. Rather, Hashem was giving each member of Bnei Yisrael an opportunity to actualize himself as an individual, thereby enabling the hashgachah to relate to him.

Since, as the Rav said, "it is the individual who is worthy of divine providence," and since Bnei Yisrael were, at the time, a single group whose identity had been tainted by its sinful faction, the only way the non-sinning members would be saved through hashgachah pratis is if they used their bechirah (free will) and chose to act as individuals. This is why Hashem couldn't judge Bnei Yisrael as individuals in their present state: they did not exist as individuals in their present state. The only way to judge them as individuals was to enable them to actualize themselves as individuals, which is exactly what He did.

Concluding Summary

Now the dialogue between Hashem and Moshe makes perfect sense. To summarize:

• Man, by nature, is a component and a product of his society. This is why Hashem's default mode of mishpat is the Law of Collective Hashgachah.
• Therefore, when a significant number or significant members of a society sin, the hashgachic status of the entire group is affected. For this reason, Hashem decreed destruction upon the entire nation in response to the sin of Korach and his followers.
• Moshe Rabbeinu appealed to Hashem, asking Him to judge Klal Yisrael as individuals, not as members of the group.
• Hashem responded by saying that He could only judge Klal Yisrael as individuals if they actually became individuals.
• In His mercy, He facilitated this by commanding every member of Klal Yisrael to make an individual decision whether to remain associated with Korach's group or to redefine themselves as separate from that camp. This process of separation was completed by physically distancing themselves from the camp and not maintaining any connection - even by holding on to their property.
• Bnei Yisrael seized this opportunity, and were saved from Hashem's wrath.

In addition to having gained a valuable insight into what it means to live as a human being, I hope this post has shown that there is a way to gain insight into the ways of hashgachas Hashem, even if that insight is small.