Parashas Korach: Judaism's Take on Egalitarianism

Originally published in June 2015 under the title: "Parashas Korach: Divinely Chosen - Nothing Personal." 

Click here for a printer-friendly version of this blog post.

Artwork: Commander's Authority, by Johanes Voss

Parashas Korach: Judaism's Take on Egalitarianism

Korach spearheaded his movement by preaching a grandiose populist ideology: "It is too much for you! For the entire assembly - all of them - are holy and Hashem is among them; why do you exalt yourselves over the congregation of Hashem?" (Bamidbar 16:3). 

However, according to Rashi (Bamidbar 16:1), Korach's entire rebellion was fueled by a personal vendetta against Moshe Rabbeinu: 

What made Korach decide to quarrel with Moshe? He envied the chieftainship of Elitzaphan the son of Uziel whom Moshe appointed as chieftain over the sons of Kehas by the [Divine] word. Korach claimed, “My father and his brothers were four [in number]” as it says, “The sons of Kohath were [Amram, Yitzhar, Chevron, and Uziel]” (Shemos 6:18). Amram was the first, and his two sons received greatness - one a king and one a kohen gadol. Who is entitled to receive the second [position]? Is it not I, who am the son of Yitzhar, who is the second brother to Amram? And yet, he [Moses] appointed to the chieftainship the son of his youngest brother! I hereby oppose him and will invalidate his word (based on Tanchuma Korach 1, and Bamidbar Rabbah 18:2).

Korach felt cheated out of the position to which he believed he was entitled, but he masked his personal jealousy by espousing a democratic ideology. Moshe Rabbeinu (being Moshe Rabbeinu) saw right through Korach's ruse, and called him out on his true motives: 

"Is it not enough for you that the God of Israel has separated you from the assembly of Israel to draw you near to Himself, to perform the service of the Tabernacle of Hashem, and to stand before the assembly to minister to them? And He drew you near and all your brethren, the offspring of Levi, with you - yet you seek priesthood as well?" (Bamidbar 16:9-10).

We know how the story ends: Hashem makes it abundantly clear whom He has chosen, and the interlopers are punished harshly. Aharon's divine designation as the Kohen is further solidified by the miracle of the blossoming staff, which is memorialized in the Kodesh ha'Kodashim (Holy of Holies) for all time. The take-away lesson is loud and clear: Hashem is the One who assigns and regulates roles in Judaism, and those who challenge these divinely ordained assignments are opposing His will.

Later on in the parashah, several mitzvos are given which reinforce this message. One of these mitzvos is the mitzvas lo taaseh (Biblical prohibition) against a non-Kohen doing the avodah (service) in the Beis ha'Mikdash (Holy Temple). The Sefer ha'Chinuch (Mitzvah #394) explains the reason for this prohibition as follows:

At the root of this mitzvah lies the reason that it is to the glory of the [Divine] King and the place that there should be a certain people there from the certain, known tribe, permanently appointed to minister, and an outsider should not enter among them for the service - in keeping with [the practice of] royalty on earth: they appoint known honorable men, that all the work of the palace should be done by them. For it is not fitting for a king that he should change the ministering servants before him every day, and that all should thus make use of the crown of ministry to the king. This is something quite clear. 

The parashah also teaches a separate mitzvas lo taaseh which prohibits the Leviim from doing the tasks of the Kohanim (i.e. the avodah), and against the Kohanim doing the tasks of the Leviim (i.e. guarding the Mikdash and providing the musical accompaniment for the avodah of the korbanos). This prohibition extends even to the division of labor within the Leviim: a designated Levi singer is not permitted to guard the Mikdash, nor is a Levi who guards the Mikdash permitted to sing. The Sefer ha'Chinuch (Mitzvah #389) provides a different kind of rationale for this prohibition:

At the root of this mitzvah lies the reason that the service of these two groups is precious, consecrated service; therefore, this work must be strongly guarded from abdication, laziness, and forgetfulness. Now, there is no doubt that with any work imposed on two people or more, forgetfulness happens more frequently than with a task imposed on one alone. For in many cases, the two of them will rely on each other, and the work will be left undone between them. This is something which is obvious to every person. 

In other words, if people were allowed to do each other's tasks, this permission would lead to laxity, forgetfulness, and neglect - which, in turn, would result in diminishing the kavod (glory) of the Mikdash, and the King Whom we honor therein. 

According to the Sefer ha'Chinuch, there is a common denominator which underlies these two prohibitions: neither of them bar people from these roles because they are unqualified; both prohibitions stem from systemic considerations. In other words, the Torah doesn't regard a Kohen to be inherently superior or more capable of doing the avodah than a non-Kohen; rather, by limiting the avodah to one specific tribe, the kavod of the Mikdash and the Melech is preserved and enhanced. Likewise, Kohanim are certainly capable of doing the tasks of the Leviim (and vice versa), but the Torah wants to take measures against diffusion of responsibility which would result in neglect of the all-important duties of the Mikdash. 

The juxtaposition of Korach's rebellion and these mitzvos teaches a lesson which is relevant at all times, but is especially relevant for those of us who live in a democratic culture which continues to move towards universal egalitarianism. That lesson may be summed up as follows: when God assigns you a certain role in life, do not take it personally. Judaism's role assignments are determined by what is best for the system - not by what is best for you. 

Korach made this mistake. He was so caught up in his own delusions of entitlement that he denied Hashem's role in designating Aharon and his descendants as Kohanim, and accused Moshe of flagrant nepotism - a move which ultimately proved to be his own undoing. 

Bnei Yisrael - or at least, a portion of Bnei Yisrael - made this mistake insofar as they believed in Korach's rallying cry of "the entire assembly - all of them - are holy and Hashem is among them." This may be true, but it doesn't mean that Judaism is an equal-opportunity enterprise. 

Many Jews today make this mistake when they criticize Judaism for assigning different roles to men and women. They take these role-assignments personally because they assume that they stem from misogyny or other forms of prejudice. They are often so entrenched in these assumptions that they don't even bother to investigate the halachic and philosophical reasons for these restrictions. 

Now, this isn't to say that there aren't divinely ordained roles which are merit-based. For example, one must be a great talmid chachamim to serve as a dayan (judge) on a Sanhedrin, and no matter how much an am ha'aretz (ignoramus) wants that position, he is simply unqualified. 

Judaism is not egalitarian. There are hierarchies of roles and positions, and many of them are inflexible. Non-kohanim can't do avodah. Kohanim can't be musicians in the Mikdash. Kohanim with physical blemishes can't participate in the public avodah. Women and geirim are barred from certain positions of authority. No one but the descendants of David ha'Melech are permitted to be anointed as king. And the list goes on.

Although some may find this concept to be basic, it is often the most basic concepts which bear repetition.