We’re in the midst of a very heavy and destructive elections in France, last week and this week and probably the presidential elections in two years too. Although I don’t have the right to vote in France, and so don’t have any dilemma, I will feel the consequences like everyone else. Not only in the discourse that is increasingly hostile and suspicious of Jews, from both of the parties in different ways; and not only in the price of kosher food that will rise once it needs to be imported or smuggled into the country. There are also consequences on our community. I imagine that many people will be voting for parties they don’t fully support, and that some will abstain or cast a blank vote; and no matter who wins tomorrow, I imagine some people here will be pleased by the results and the majority will be upset. That’s not a good spiritual basis for a community. Like in Maslow’s pyramid, we need to have social and political stability in order to be able to focus on important things like Torah study and prayer. The other direction — learning Torah and praying in order to give us political and social stability — is much more difficult.
I want to read a commentary on our parasha that touches on the situation we’re in, without giving any clear answers. Obviously, the story of Korach, with populist rhetoric, bitter rivalry and internal fighting, and a destructive ending, seems to have something in common with our political situation. But there’s nuance here. Reading the parasha carefully, we see several overlapping conflicts happening at once. Datan and Aviram, for example, seem to just like conflict for its own sake - in the rabbinic imagination, wherever there’s an argument, they are the instigators. When Moses finds two Hebrews fighting in Egypt and tries to appease them, according to the midrash the two people are Datan and Aviram. So it’s not a surprise that they join Korach’s rebellion. Korach himself, though, is more tricky to parse. There seems to be something to his argument, even setting aside the demagogy, and the response of Moses to him is thus not angry, but disappointed.
I re-read this week the story of Korach as it appears in the mystical book of the Zohar. (I admit, I read it at midnight by the light of a candle.) The Zohar has a complex attitude towards Korach that sees it as a continuation of a cosmic development that started on the second day of creation, with the division of the waters into sea and sky. This first division brought machloket, divisive argument, into the world.
וַיֹּאמֶר אֱ-לֹהִים יְהִי רָקִיעַ בְּתוֹךְ הַמָּיִם וְגו', הָכָא בִּפְרַט רָזָא לְאַפְרָשָׁא בין מַיִין עִלָאִין לְתַתָּאֵין בְּרָזָא דִשְׂמָאלָא. ואתברי הָכָא מַחְלוֹקֶת בְּרָזָא דִשְׂמָאלָא. דְעַד הָכָא רָזָא דְּיָמִינָא הוּא, וְהָכָא הוּא רָזָא דִשְׂמָאלָא, וּבְגִין כָּךְ אַסְגִיאוּ מַחְלוֹקֶת בין בְּגִין דָּא לְיָמִינָא. יָמִינָא אִיהוּ שְׁלֵימָא דְכֹלָּא, וּבְגִין כָּךְ בְּיָמִינָא כְּתִיב כֹּלָּא דְּהָא בֵּיהּ תַּלְיָיא כָּל שְׁלִימוּ. כַּד אִתְעַר שְׂמָאלָא אִתְעַר מַחְלוֹקֶת. וּבְהַהוּא מַחְלוֹקֶת אִתְתַּקַּף אֶשָׁא דְרוּגְזָא וְנָפִיק מִנֵּיהּ מֵהַהוּא מַחְלוֹקֶת גֵּיהִנֹּם. וְגֵיהִנֹּם בִּשְׂמָאלָא אִתְעַר וְאִתְדָּבַּק.
“And God said, let there be a firmament within the waters.” This is the mystery of the division between the upper waters and the lower waters, and it is the mystery of the left side. Machloket, argument, was created, for the right now clashed with the left, and there was division between them. When the left arose, argument arose too. From it came the fire of anger, and this became Gehennom, hell… (Zohar Bereshit 17a)
I don’t want to focus too much on the left and the right here, which correspond to attributes of kindness and power in the kabbalistic system, and I don’t want to do a simplistic equivalence between the left and right in our political systems today. Both of them would be considered left or right with regards to the other party, because what’s important is that on the second day, there is now a duality in the world. This duality has the potential to become a fight, and when the relationship between the two is one of anger, both of them burn. What solves the argument? The third day. On the third day, the land and vegetation are created, and suddenly sense is given to the division. Both the sea and the sky are in relation to the land, and an equilibrium is reached.
חָכְמְתָא דְמשֶׁה בְּהָא אִסְתַּכַּל וּבְעוֹבָדָא דִּבְרֵאשִׁית אַשְׁגַּח. בְּעוֹבָדָא דִּבְרִאשִׁית הֲוָה מַחְלוֹקֶת שְׂמָאלָא בְּיָמִינָא, וּבְהַהוּא מַחְלוֹקֶת דְּאִתְעַר בֵּיהּ שְׂמָאלָא נָפַק בֵּיהּ גֵּיהִנֹּם וְאִתְדְּבַק בֵּיהּ. עַמּוּדָא דְאֶמְצָעִיתָא דְאִיהוּ יוֹם תְּלִיתָאי עָאל בֵּינַיְיהוּ וְאַפְרִישׁ מַחְלוֹקֶת וְאַסְכִּים לִתְרֵין סִטְרִין. וְגֵיהִנֹּם נָחִית לְתַתָּא. וּשְׂמָאלָא אִתְכְּלִיל בְּיָמִינָא וְהֲוָה שְׁלָמָא בְּכֹלָּא.
In his wisdom, Moses looked into this and learned about the work of Creation. In the work of Creation, there was a dispute between the left and the right, and Gehenom was created... The central pillar, entered between them on the third day, ending the dispute and bringing the two sides to an agreement. So Gehenom removed itself from the left and descended below. The left joined the right, and there was peace everywhere.
It’s not that one side defeats the other, but that their dispute is harmonious and ultimately constructive. The dispute continues, but without the angry fire. Moses is seen here as the wise sage who looks at the way the world is created and learns how to apply it to the situations around him. Conflict can be good, when it’s balanced. Anyone who really believes in the democratic system knows that there’s no winner. In a thousand years from now, some say, there will still be republicans and socialists, there will still be left and right, and so it should be. Some arguments are not meant to be resolved. So when Korach starts his rebellion, initially Moses is optimistic.
כְּגַוְונָא דָא מַחְלוֹקֶת קֹרַח בְּאַהֲרֹן שְׂמָאלָא בְּיָמִינָא. אִסְתַּכַּל משֶׁה בְּעוֹבָדָא דִבְרֵאשִׁית. אָמַר לִי אִתְחַזֵּי לְאַפְרָשָׁא מַחְלוֹקֶת בֵּין יָמִינָא לִשְׂמָאלָא. אִשְׁתַּדַּל לְאַסְכָּמָא בֵּינַיְיהוּ. וְלָא בָּעֵי שְׂמָאלָא וְאַתְקַף קֹרַח בְּתוּקְפֵיהּ.
A similar dispute occurred between Korach and Aaron, the left against the right. Moses studied the Creation and said, 'I am one able to eliminate the dispute between right and left.' Moses tried his best to reconcile them, but the left did not want to be reconciled, and Korach become powerful.
Korach, from the tribe of Levi, represents power and Aaron the priest represents kindness. There is a tendency for the two of them to clash, but there’s also a possibility for the two to exist in harmony and reinforce each other. Moses is from the tribe of Levi, but he also functioned as a priest during the construction of the Tabernacle, so he thought that he could mediate between them. But it turned out that Korach didn’t want argument to be harmonious, he didn’t want to play the game of balance and dialogue. (“I’ll only govern if I have an absolute majority.”) Difference and division could have been a catalyst for spiritual development, but we all know how difficult that is. So he chose the easy option, being Against, no matter what. The end of this story is that Korach descends to the fiery hell that he himself brought into the world. [וַדַּאי יֵחוֹת לְתַתָּא בְּתוּקְפָא דְרוּגְזָא דִילֵיהּ] . But the Zohar, drawing on Pirkei Avot, gives us an alternative positive model: the disagreements of the rabbis, which are at the heart of the Jewish people.
מַחְלוֹקֶת דְּאִתְתָּקַּן כְּגַוְונָא דִלְעֵילָא וְסָלִיק וְלָא נָחִית וְאִתְקְיַּים בְּאֹרַח מֵישָׁר, דָּא מַחְלוֹקֶת דְּשַּׁמַּאי וְהִלֵּל. וְקוּדְשָׁא בְּרִיךְ הוּא אַפְרִישׁ בֵּינַיְיהוּ וְאַסְכִּים לוֹן. וְדָא הֲוָה מַחְלוֹקֶת לְשֵׁם שָׁמַיִם. וְשָׁמַיִם אַפְרִישׁ מַחְלוֹקֶת. וְעַל דָּא אִתְקְיַּים עלמא. וְדָא הֲוָה כְּגַוְונָא דְּעוֹבָדָא דִבְרֵאשִׁית. וְקֹרַח בְּעוֹבָדָא דִבְרֵאשִׁית אַכְּחִישׁ בְּכֹלָּא. וּפְלוּגְתָּא דְּשָׁמַיִם הֲוָה. וּבְעָא לְאַכְּחָשָׁא מִלֵּי דְאוֹרַיְיתָא. וַדַּאי בְּאִתְדַּבְּקוּתָא דְּגִיהִנֹּם הֲוָה. וְעַל דָּא אִתְדָּבַּק בַּהֲדֵיהּ… קֹרַח הֲוָה שֵׁירוּתָא דְמַחְלוֹקֶת כְּפוּם רוּגְזָא וְתוּקְפָּא וְאִתְדָּבַּק בַּגֵּיהִנָּם. שַׁמַּאי סוֹפָא דְמַחְלוֹקֶת כַּד רוּגְזָא בִּנְיָיחָא אִצְטְרִיךְ לְאַתְעָרָא מַחְלוֹקֶת דִּרְחִימוּ וּלְאַסְכָּמָא עַל יְדָא דְשָׁמַיִם.
Another dispute was settled like above. A dispute that rose and did not come down and was based on decency was that between Shammai and Hillel. Shammai was the aspect of the left on high, while Hillel was the aspect of the supernal right. And the Holy One, blessed be He, intervened between them and approved of them. This was a dispute for the sake of heaven, and because of this, their illuminations continue to exist. This dispute is like the work of Creation… Shammai was also the aspect of the left, but at the end of the dispute between the right and the left, anger was forgotten and the dispute of love was set in motion so as to receive approval from the heavens.
Our tradition records hundreds of arguments between the school of Shammai and the school of Hillel. One of the things that made rabbinic Judaism different to all the other Jewish sects at the end of the Temple era is the inclusion of multiple opinions and the encouragement of debate. We sometimes glorify this too much, these debates haven’t always been beautiful and polite, but it’s perhaps this culture of constructive conflict that has allowed the Jewish people to survive this far. Machloket leshem shamayim , argument for the sake of Heaven; in the reading of the Zohar, it’s literally for the sake of heaven because it allows the world to continue. There’s a difference between arguments that are rooted in anger, which are hell, and what the Zohar calls mahloket dirchimu, arguments rooted in love and respect.
I say all this not because I think the French politicians are listening to my drasha or reading the holy book of the Zohar (although some of them should)! I’m not voting tomorrow, and mathematically anyone’s single vote is more symbolic than anything else. I care about our community in the weeks and months and years to come. If outside the atmosphere is one of destructive debate; inside, we need to prioritise an opposite Jewish model. One that encourages freedom of thought, healthy discussions, deep respect and care for a common future. I know that on almost every essential issue, we have a community that cares for these values, and that that will prove essential for the difficult months and years to come. That’s why it’s so important to have safe spaces, like our synagogue, and holy times, like this Shabbat, to strengthen our wonderful and unique community.
Shabbat shalom.