Korach’s Sons and Honoring Torah Scholars

Advertisements
Advertisements
July 17, 2022

6 min read

FacebookTwitterLinkedInPrintFriendlyShare

Pinchas (Numbers 25:10-30:1 )

Bamidbar, 26:11: And the sons of Korach did not die.
Rashi, 26:11, Dh: And the sons of Korach did not die: They were in the counsel [of Korach] originally, and at the time of the dispute, they had thoughts of repentance, therefore a high place in Gehinnom (hell) was made for them and they stayed there.

In the midst of discussing the various punishments of the people involved in Korach’s rebellion, the Torah briefly notes that Korach’s sons did not die. Rashi, citing the Sages, adds that they were originally party to the rebellion but at some point, had thoughts of repentance. As a result, they were spared the fate of the rest of Korach’s family and were not swallowed up in the ground, rather they were left in some kind ledge on the edge of the pit.1

The Yalkut Shimoni elaborates on the events leading up to their thoughts of teshuva, repentance. At one point, Korach’s sons were sitting with him and they saw Moshe Rabbeinu walk past. They had a dilemma – if they would stand up for Moshe, then they felt they would be failing in the Mitzva of honoring one’s parent, and would be degrading their father, who was against Moshe. On the other hand, if they would not stand up for him, then they would be failing in the Mitzva to honor a Torah Scholar. They decided that they should stand up for Moshe even though it would degrade their father, and from that time they began to have thoughts of teshuva.

Rabbi Aharon Yehuda Leib Shteinman2, cites a Midrash that the reward for honoring Torah Scholars is that one merits fear of Heaven, and suggests that in reward for their standing up for Moshe, they were immediately imbued with fear of Heaven - this caused them to have thoughts of repentance.

Rabbi Shteinman then points out that in truth, the sons of Korach were incorrect in their thought process – they felt that by standing up for Moshe, they would be failing in the mitzvah of honoring one’s parents, because it would upset their father. Even though this was surely the case, in truth they were not obligated to follow their father in his dispute with Moshe - indeed it was forbidden to join him. He bases this on a responsa of the Rosh3 where the Rosh rules that if a father commands his son not to speak to a certain Jew, or to not forgive a fellow Jew, then the son is forbidden to listen to his father. This ruling is based on the principle that even though one must honor his father, his father must also honor God by keeping the mitzvot, therefore a parent cannot command a child to go against God’s commands.

However, this explanation leads to a question – it is very likely that the sons of Korach were learned men, and they were surely aware of the halacha that one may not listen to his father if his father commands him to sin, and consequently, that they were obligated to stand up for Moshe even if would upset Korach. Accordingly, why was it such a difficult decision for them as to whether or not they should stand up for Moshe?

It would seem that the answer is that they did not believe that their father was sinning – they believed that he was correct in his attitude and actions, and that they also agreed that Moshe was not leading the Jewish nation correctly. Consequently, they believed that if they would honor Moshe, they would be transgressing the mitzvah of honoring one’s parents. However, their conclusion was, that even though they would be failing in this mitzvah, it was more important to honor a Torah Scholar and not denigrate him by refusing to stand. This was the decision that began their path to repentance and saved their spiritual and physical lives.

This teaches us an essential lesson. There are times when there are disagreements among Torah scholars. Even if a person follows one side in such a disagreement, this does not take away from the fact that the Torah scholars on the other side, are still great people who deserve honor and it is certainly forbidden to speak badly about them or degrade them.

The following story demonstrates the seriousness of this issue.

A young man came to Rabbi Chaim Kanievsky and cried to him for help. This man’s father had been diagnosed with a brain tumor and the doctors gave him little hope. The man asked Rabbi Kanievsky if there was anything he could do. Sitting with Rabbi Kanievsky was Rabbi Chaim Kreiswirth.4 Rabbi Kreiswirth asked if he could suggest something, and Rabbi Kanievsky immediately gave him the floor:

“I think that it would be a wonderful idea for you to get involved in the publishing of the book, Sho’el U’Meishiv, by Rav Nathanson.5

The suggestion came as somewhat of a shock. It seemed to be so random, but if Rabbi Kreiswirth had suggested it, there must have been a reason for it. After the man, left the room, Rabbi Kanievsky asked Rabbi Kreiswirth what had prompted him to make such a suggestion.

“I know the father, and I have heard him speak disparagingly about the book. I know that the Gemara says that if one speaks disparagingly about a Torah scholar, ‘ein lo reufah le’makato’ – there is no healing for his wound’. But perhaps he can do teshuva (repentance) by investing time and money in beautifying and giving the proper honor to the book.” The son followed the instructions and after a few months the father had a complete recovery.6

This story teaches two very important points: Firstly, that even if a person does not join a full-fledged dispute against a Torah scholar, any form of negative speech is considered degrading Torah scholars and is treated with great severity – we also see from the story that this even applies if the Torah scholar is no longer alive.

Secondly, this story also illuminates a way to rectify any lack of respect one may have given to Torah Scholars, by doing actions that give honor to the Torah scholar. May we all merit to give the appropriate honor due to our Sages and all Torah scholars.

  1. Needless to say, it is hard to understand exactly what this means. Moreover, the commentators note that Korach’s sons had descendants so it seems that at some point they must have emerged from their place in this pit. See Shaarei Aharon, Volume 12, p.978 for discussion of this issue.
  2. Ayelet HaShachar, Bamidbar, 26:11.
  3. Shu”t HaRosh, Klal 15, Os 5.
  4. He was a great Gaon – he was the Av Beit Din of Antwerp and Rosh Yeshiva of Merkaz Hatorah.
  5. One of the great Rabbis who lived in the 19th century.
  6. Rabbi Yechiel Spero, ‘Touched by their Tears’, pp.90-91.
Click here to comment on this article
guest
0 Comments
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
EXPLORE
LEARN
MORE
Explore
Learn
Resources
Next Steps
About
Donate
Menu
Languages
Menu
Social
.