The Arizal on the Torah

Taking The Way Of Dispute And Division

(from Parashat Korach in the writings of)

Rabbi Yitzchak Luria of Safed

translation and commentary by Avraham Sutton

Numbers 16:1-3

Rabbi Chaim Vital writes in Shaar HaPesukim and Likutei Torah (Chumash HaAri, Bamidbar, pp. 133-134):

 "Vayikach Korach ben Yitzhar ben Kehat ben Levi" (Numbers 16:1) –The sages, of blessed memory, were hard pressed to explain the meaning of Vayikach Korach ["And Korach took"]. [On the surface, the verse itself does not indicate what he took.] They therefore interpreted the expression figuratively: "He took/made a bad acquisition for himself."

Korach "took" it upon himself to question Moses and Aaron's authority. And although he tried to camouflage his real intentions and fool others that his complaint was for the general good, it was really selfish, i.e. only in order to "take" glory for himself.

Sanhedrin 109b: "Vayikach [Korach]" – Reish Lakish said: sh'lakach mekach ra le'atzmo – he [figuratively] took/made a bad acquisition for himself." [Rashi: he started a ketata (argument, disagreement).]

Rashi (on Numbers 16:1): "Vayikach Korach" – He "took" himself to the other side… to stand in opposition against the rest of the congregation in order to encourage machloket [dispute][1]… Another interpretation: He took/drew the heads of the Sanhedrin with words, similar to "Kach et Aaron – Take Aaron [i.e. draw him with words of consolation]" (Num. 20:25, Rashi there), and "Take words with you [i.e. pray] and return to Hashem" (Hoshea 14:3)… Why did Korach dispute Moses? Korach was jealous of the appointment of Eli'tzaphan ben Uzziel as prince of the tribe of Kehat (by Moses, according to Divine command) (Bamidbar 3:30). Korach thus thought to himself: my father was one of four brothers, as it is written, "The sons of Kehat were Amram, Yitzhar, Chevron and Uzziel" (Ex. 6:18). Amram was the firstborn; his two sons appointed themselves to greatness; Moses took kingship, and Aaron took the high priesthood. Who is next? Not I? Wasn't my father, Yitzhar, the second son after Amram! Nevertheless, Moses went and appointed Eli'tzaphon, the son of Uzziel, the youngest of my father's brothers, as prince of Kehat. Behold, I will rise up against him (see Tanchuma, Korach 1).

Zohar Korach (3:176a): "Vayikach Korach" – He took evil counsel for himself. He who chases after that which is not his – not only will he lose the very thing he pursues, but what he has will be taken from him. Korach chased after that which was not his [the high priesthood]. He therefore not only did not get what he wanted, but he also lost what he had. Korach went in the way of machloket, dispute and division. He caused division above, and he caused division below. He who seeks to cause a division in the tikun of the world [i.e. the divine order] – he will perish from all the worlds. Machloket is the opposite of Shalom, Peace. He who opposes shalom, opposes the Holy Name, for the name of the Holy One is Shalom…

Pirkei Avot (5:16): Any dispute that is for the sake of Heaven will ultimately endure; whereas any dispute that is not for the sake of Heaven will not ultimately endure. What dispute was for the sake of Heaven? The dispute of Shammai and Hillel. What dispute was not for the sake of Heaven? The dispute of Korach and his entire congregation.

Malbim: In providing an example of a dispute not for the sake of Heaven," the Mishna should have said "The dispute of Korach and Moses." [Rather, the sages were precise in their use of words.] In calling it "the dispute of Korach and his entire congregation," they were teaching us that, in a dispute for the sake of Heaven, both sides ultimately unite because their sole intention is to reveal the truth. On the other hand, a dispute that is not for the sake of Heaven is motivated by a desire for honor and self-aggrandizement. The side that instigates the dispute is thereby plagued by divisiveness among its own members, for each of them is interested solely is his own personal benefit. [As indicated in the very words of the verses] this is exactly what happened with Korach and his congregation. Each one of them had his interests in mind. Korach, for instance, wanted the High Priesthood. And if you should counter with the sages' statement that Korach was jealous of the appointment of Eli'tzaphan ben Uzziel as prince of the tribe of Kehat – this is what first aroused him to argue against Moses. After he entered into the thick of it, however, he wanted nothing less than Aaron's High Priesthood… On the other hand, Datan and Aviram, and On ben Pelet, all from the tribe of Reuven, had an entirely different motivation to oppose Moses. They questioned the fact the the right of the firstborn] had been taken away from Reuven. As the true firstborn son of Jacob, he should have received kingship and priesthood… This then is the meaning of the verses: "And Korach took" – he took words of argumentation to oppose Moses. [What argument did he take?] "Ben Yitzhar, ben Kehat, ben Levi" – i.e. that since Yitzhar was the second son after Amram, he (Korach) should have received the High Priesthood. "Ve'Datan ve'Aviram, sons of Eli'av, and On ben Pelet" – they took part in the dispute because they were – "sons of Reuven" – who considered themselves the rightful heirs to the priesthood, since Reuven was Jacob's firstborn…

* * *

One more introduction before we bring the words of the Arizal: It is a basic principle of Torah (and all the prophetic writings) that the "names" of the characters in the Bible are not only "proper names" that refer to specific individuals who lived at particular times in history. If this were the case, the Bible could rightly be seen and read as a history book. But it isn't. Rather, names are descriptive. That is, in addition to referring to a particular individual or individuals, the names of the characters also reveal the archetypal or spiritual level that is always operative behind the scenes of the drama, in which people are seen as embodiments of cosmic forces (spiritual qualities). Seen in this way, the "stories" of the Bible become a mirror of sorts, through which any society (or individual) (or even any dynamical system), at any time, in any context, may recognize itself in terms of the larger plan of history, and most importantly, bring itself into alignment with that plan. As such, the "characters" in the first verses of our weekly portion are not just people who lived once, long ago. On the contrary, they are parts of ourselves, or more correctly, we are parts of them (their souls). In Kabbalistic terminology, we are reincarnations of those "root" souls.

We can now understand how and why the Oral Tradition (the Talmud, Zohar, Midrash, etc.) can state so many varied "opinions" about any one situation or character. The sages had special "glasses" with which to penetrate behind the superficial level of the Text and enter into its spiritual meaning. This doesn't mean that they cast the simple, outer, narrative layer of the text, aside, G-d forbid. On the contrary, they saw it as an extremely important outer garment, without which we could never even approach the inner soul level.

Read with the above in mind, we can now understand the way the sages of the Talmud (Sanhedrin 109b) dealt with the "characters" in this week's portion:

 "Vayikach [Korach]" – Reish Lakish said: sh'lakach mekach ra le'atzmo – he [figuratively] took/made a bad acquisition for himself." [Rashi: he started a ketata (fight, disagreement).] "Korach" – she'asah korcha be'Yisrael – he made a bald spot in Israel. [Rashi: he caused himself and his people to be swallowed in the ground.] "Ben Yitzhar" – a son who heated the whole world up like tzaharayim [the noonday sun]. "Ben Kehat" – a son who hik'hah sheenei molidav [caused the teeth of his parents to grind]. "Ben Levi" – a son whose levayah [mourner's procession] went through/in Gehinam… "Datan" – for he transgressed the dat [spiritual teaching] of G‑d. "Aviram" – for he eever [hardened] his heart from returning in teshuvah. "On" – for he sat in aninut [mourning]. "Pelet" – for pela'ot [wonders] were done for him. "Ben Reuven" – a son who ra'ah [saw] and understood… "And they [came and] stood before Moses; [they,] along with men from the children of Israel, fifty and two hundred community leaders" – they were outstanding members of the congregation. "Who declare the time" – for they knew how to intercalate the years and establish the new moons [in order to determine when the major holidays occur]. "Men of renown" – for their names were known far and wide…

All that the sages said about Korach and his followers will be understood in the light of what we will say here.

How? By revealing the archetypal level beneath and behind the outer level of the narrative.

Know that Moses was born with the good aspect of the nefesh [soul] of Hevel.

Rav Chaim now gives a number of cross-references to places in which he has already developed this idea:

See above where we explained this on the verse, "A new king arose over Egypt" (Ex. 1:8, in Shaar HaPesukim, s.v. Ve'hinei bechinat Balaam, Chumash HaAri, Ex., p. 16). [The souls of] the entire Generation of the Desert are extensions of Moses' soul, as alluded to in the verse, "The nation in whose midst I am [number 600,000 men on foot]" (Num. 11:21) [he was literally the central soul in their midst that contained all of them, and they were his extensions].

On the verse, "Ki shiv'atayim yukam Cain – If Cain will be revenged seven-fold, Lamech will be revenged seventy-seven-fold" (Gen. 4:24, in Shaar HaPesukim, Chumash HaAri, Bereshit, pp. 119-120), we have also explained how the evil in the ruach of Cain reincarnated in Korach.

There, he explains as well that the letters yod-kof-mem of yukam ["revenged"] are an acrostic for Yithro, Korach and Mitzri [the Egyptian that Moses killed]. All of these men were gilgulim of Cain. However, we have a problem. All of them were alive at the same time! The answer: Cain had nefesh, ruach and neshama. 1) His nefesh incarnated in the Egyptian. Wanting to fix and elevate the good aspect of his former brother's nefesh, Moses did not kill the Egyptian with a sword, but rather by pronouncing a Divine Name.  2) Cain's ruach incarnated in Korach. This is why Korach was jealous of Moses, and disputed his power. 3) Cain's neshama incarnated in Yithro. This is why he gave his daughter Tzippora to Moses as a wife. In Shaar HaGilgulim (36th Introduction, end; pp. 313-314 in Bnei Aaron edition), he explains further that, while the evil aspect of the nefesh of Cain incarnated in the Egyptian, the good aspect incarnated in Kenan and Mehalel. Similarly, while the evil aspect of the ruach of Cain incarnated in Korach, the good aspect incarnated in Samuel the Prophet (one of Korach's descendants). Finally, the good aspect of the neshama of Cain incarnated in Yithro after he converted. Again, this is why he gave Tzippora to Moses. For she had been his (Hevel's) twin sister whom he (Cain) "took" to be his own wife, in addition to his own twin sister. It took all this to repair the damage that Cain did by killing Hevel.

With this, you can now understand Korach's renewed argument with Moses, at this time.

In other words, Hevel and Cain [or at least specific aspects of each of these spiritual qualities] have returned in Moses and Korach.

Know that the nefesh of Hevel itself contained a number of nefashot [souls], as well as a number of nitzutzot [sparks]. [Both] consisted of an admixture of good and evil.

The relationship between these two usually depends on the context. The soul is thus considered a "whole" relative to the individual "sparks" that it contains. Sometimes these sparks will transmigrate together. Sometimes (usually as a result of sin) they will have to incarnate separately. It is in this way that one "soul" can be split up and incarnate into (many) different bodies. Sometimes (again, usually as a result of sin), these "sparks" themselves can also be broken down further into smaller "souls." As this can get a little confusing, it is obviously better not to sin. [Good and Holiness are thus always associated with Unity and Light, whereas Evil and Impurity are always identified with breakdown, disintegration and darkness.]

The good souls/sparks in Hevel numbered 37, the gematria of his name. Whereas the evil souls/sparks in him numbered 308 [the gematria of Korach]. [308 + 37 = 345, the gematria of Moses.] Moses was born with the fully rectified aspects of Hevel's soul. He was completely good, as we explained on the verse, "And she saw him, that he was good" (Ex. 2:2; Likutei Torah, in Chumash HaAri, Shemot, p. 43).

This is why the gematria of Hevel (37) plus the gematria of Korach (308) totals Moses (345). It alludes to the fact that all the nitzutzot in Moses were good, whereas the remaining 308 evil sparks in Hevel constituted the basic nefesh makeup of Korach.

In addition to this, the evil aspect of the ruach of Cain also entered Korach through ibur (gestation).

This didn't just "happen." Rather, by constantly dwelling in his thoughts on his plan to undermine Moses (who was really Hevel), he attracted these aspects of Cain to himself.

Adding evil to evil, this caused him to perish from the world.

This then is the mystery of the phrase, "Vayikach Korach – And Korach took," wherein we are not told what it is that he took. As we have said, however, this refers to his taking the evil aspect of the ruach of Cain. This is alluded to in the sages' statement (Sanhedrin 109b): "Sh'lakach mekach ra le'atzmo – he took/made a bad acquisition for himself."

Seeing, that is, that the evil aspect of Cain's ruach had now entered him, he thought: "Until now, I was from the evil aspect of Moses/Hevel, and I was therefore subject to him. Now that I have the ruach of Cain, he can no longer dominate me." Korach sought to escape Moses' dominion.