Parashat Korah – 5786

A D’var Torah for Parashat Korah

By Rabbi Dorit Edut (AJR 2006)

“Jewish tradition cherishes free speech. ‘When a person refrains from speech, the ideas die, the soul stops, and the senses deteriorate,’ said Moses ibn Ezra, insisting on respect for honest differences of opinion. (Shirat Yisrael, 12c). If one reads the classic texts of the rabbinic era, the Mishnah and the Gemara, every page brims with the arguments both of the majority and of those who dissented from them, recognizing that each reflected aspects of God’s truth. ‘These and these are the words of God,’ the Talmud observes about these disputes (Eruvin 13b).”[1]

Yet while Jewish law encourages robust debate and respectful dialogue, it strictly prohibits malicious speech, such as gossip, public shaming, and slander. The strongest moral disapproval is expressed in Jewish teachings of slander in all its forms. The prohibition against going around as a talebearer is stated in the Holiness Code in Leviticus 19:16. And gossiping about another can have mortal consequences for more than just the gossiper. As the Talmud states in Tractate Arakhin 15b: “Evil gossip kills three: the one who says it, the one who listens, and the subject of the gossip.”

One of the most difficult subjects in our day and age is defining just where the borders of free speech lie, when there is a serious violation that can cause significant harm to others – either emotionally or physically.   While we like to rely on our American Constitution’s right of free speech, it seems lately to be often stretched so far as to allow “hate speech” to enter its boundaries.  As we see from this week’s Torah portion, this subject is really an ancient one. Korah, Dathan and Abiram all speak out against the governing powers of Aaron and Moses – and, by implication, question whether their leadership is even Divinely ordained. Coming on the heels of the fear-inducing report of the 12 Spies, these challenges bring about a major uprising which the Bible vividly describes. Korah, first cousin of Moses and Aaron, from the Kohat branch of Levites, uses the principle of the entire nation being holy (as stated in Exodus 19:6) to question why then Moses and Aaron have ‘raised themselves’ above everyone to become the leaders.

The charges of Dathan and Abiram, who refuse Moses’ overture to discuss matters, revive old fears – that Moses has really taken them into this barren wilderness to die and that it would have been better not to have left the ‘comfortable’ life in Egypt. Their mention of a “land flowing with milk and honey” only reminds the Israelites of the still unfulfilled promises of Moses (Exodus 13:5) to lead them to such a place; further, by associating this expression with Egypt, they purposely build on the people’s frustrations and attempt to breakdown any trust in Moses and Aaron’s leadership.

This leads many of the Biblical commentators to suspect the motives of these anti-establishment leaders. In Midrash Bamidbar Rabbah 18:1-4, Korah is said to have been angry that he, as the eldest son of the second eldest uncle of Moses, has been passed over for a priestly position by Elitzaphan, eldest son of the youngest uncle.  Medieval commentator Abraham Ibn Ezra in his commentary on Bemidbar 16:1 sees Dathan and Abiram also as angry  that Moses has taken away privileges from their  first-born Reubenite tribe and given these to the tribes of Menashe and Ephraim (representing Joseph, Jacob’s second youngest son) – especially favoring Joshua who was from the tribe of Ephraim.

But then this rebellion is dealt with rather harshly – God causes a massive earthquake and then a plague that kills all the families and followers of these three outspoken rebels. While most Biblical commentators saw this action as justified, we are troubled today because of our historical hindsight.  For centuries we Jews were persecuted and denied the rights of free speech and worship. Yet when the Enlightenment came, we were invited into conversation that helped to create the governments and societies of the Western Hemisphere as we know them today. But in the 20^th century came the fall of the Weimar Republic, the rise of Nazi Germany, and the Communist Revolution. We Jews experienced first-hand what promoting unrestricted free speech for ALL could lead to – dictatorship, suppression of all but one kind of speech, exploitation, and death.

Now in this age of cyber-space, global, instant communications we can learn from Parashat Korah.  Trusting and encouraging others to engage in open and honest communication is the best way to resolve our differences, make necessary changes in our society, build mutual respect and cooperation. If, however, one side refuses, like Dathan and Abiram, to discuss matters, and only wants to promote hatred and suspicion, or, like Korah, clearly wants to overthrow the democratic government for their own selfish reasons, then we must set some clear limits to their power and freedom of expression. This may be the compromise that we must make if we are to guarantee that the intention of our First Amendment free speech rights is viable and not used to undermine the democratic society we are continuously building here in the USA and elsewhere in the Western world.   What these restrictions should be and how they would be implemented is the subject of further discussion. But one thing we must always remember is what our tradition teaches about free speech, as it says in Proverbs 18:21 “Mavet v’hayyim b’yad halashon – death and life are in the power of the tongue.”

[1] https://rac.org/jewish-values-and-civil-liberties