Home Home / The Rebel Within Each of Us (1975)

Synagogue Sermon

June 17, 1961

The Rebel Within Each of Us (1975)

Korach
View The Text

This content is currently available in its original PDF format. As we expand the library, we plan to add a text version as well.

RELATED CONTENT

Synagogue Sermon

Rebel and Revolutionary: The Power of a Positive "No" (1964)

The rebellion against the leadership of Moses and Aaron (Numbers, ch. XVI) is one which had tragic consequences and which left an indelible impression upon the collective Jewish memory. The Torah lists the names of those involved in the conspiracy in the desert. But who indeed were the members of this conglomeration of the displaced, the dissatisfied, and the disaffected? What motivated them, and what was their relation to each other?Rabbi Naftali Zvi Yehudah Berlin, known as the Netziv, finds three distinct groups in this mutiny of malcontents, and he describes them to us in his commentary Haamek Davar. The first consists of the two hundred and fifty princes of the congregation. These community leaders were not at all malicious people. They were well-intentioned, but misguided. They were great Jews, great even in their piety. That is why the Torah refers to them as “princes of the congregation, the elect men of the assembly, men of renown.” They were Levites who desired to be Kohanim not because the priesthood offered them positions of influence and status, but because it represented an opportunity to come closer to God in the course of serving Him in the Sanctuary.The second group consisted of two brothers from the tribe of Reuben: Dathan and Abiram. These two were known as trouble-makers even before the exodus from Egypt. They were not at all people of ideals or convictions. They were merely power-hungry schemers – nothing more, nothing less.The third element in this mutiny was Korach himself. He was a man of great fame in Israel and yet was, in a way, the worst of all. For he tried to appear to the people a man of sincerity and genuineness, who had legitimate and selfless complaints, like the two hundred and fifty princes; but in fact he had the same base ends as Dathan and Abiram: the usurpation of the authority of Moses and Aaron.This analysis – of which we have mentioned but the bare outline – is not only brilliant exegesis, but also a valid insight into cha…
Korach

Synagogue Sermon

Re-enacting an Old Drama (1963)

The rebellion of Korach and his co-conspirators against Moses and Aaron, of which we read this morning, is the first great, direct test of the leadership of Moses. The quelling of the rebellion of this band of malcontents re-establishes and re-affirms the leadership of Moses of his people in the desert. And yet, according to “Yalkut Reuveni” the hahkhmei ha-emet – that is, the Sages of the Kabbalah – have taught that this great battle between Moses and Korach had ancient roots. The struggle between these two, they say, was merely the re-enactment of the old drama of the strife between Cain and Abel. They identify Moses with Abel and Korach with Cain.The detailed kabbalistic analogy is beyond our limited comprehension. Nevertheless, it is obvious to all of us that the Sages of the Kabbalah have here enunciated a great truth. For indeed, as we analyze the two dramas, we find confirmed the similarities between these two sets of biblical characters.Thus, for instance, we can detect at least three elements which unite Moses with Abel and Korach with Cain. The first of these is: kinah, jealousy or envy. The fratricide committed by Cain against Abel had its roots in Cain’s envy of Abel: the Lord accepted the offering of Abel, but v’el Kayin v’el minhato lo sha’ah – God did not accept the offering of Cain. The same feelings provoked Korach to his abortive insurrection. Both Moses and Korach were brothers in the sense of being members of the same tribe of Levi. Yet Moses was the undisputed leader of the people, while Korach was not. He was consumed by the fieriest of jealousy even as later he was consumed by the fires of the Lord when he met his end.The second observable element that unites these two pairs is: ta’avah, concupiscence, desire, a ravenous appetite for more and more. In the story of the sons of Adam, the Sages tell us that they divided the world between the two of them. Cain owned a full half of the world – yet he begrudged his brother the other half and desire…
Korach

Synagogue Sermon

The Makings of a Man (1961)

​This morning, I wish to take exception to the tenor of sermons customarily delivered on the Sabbath we read of Korah and his insurrection. The pulpit, on this day, usually expounds on the vice of rebelliousness, and regards the rebel as an absolutely evil person. I do not want to plead in his defense. But I do believe the accusation should be modified. The rebel is sometimes but not always a rogue. Rebelliousness is not necessarily at all times an unmitigated evil. ​Actually, there are two strains of personality that are opposed to each other, and that characterize most human behavior. They are: conformity and rebelliousness. Every human being has both tendencies within him. Some of us express more one quality than the other. There are some people who are almost completely the conformist, others completely the rebel. ​The conformist is the dedicated bourgeois. He submits to the majority, the popular, and finds security in being part of the nameless mass and the faceless crowd. He has suppressed whatever independence of judgment he might have possessed. He is a self-righteous person who has largely ceased to think for himself. ​The rebel is the bohemian, the anarchist, the outsider. He worships at the shrine of protest. He proclaims the holiness of defiance. School, family, religion, society – all forms of authority are considered by him the enemy and he is dedicated to overthrow them.​ Which of these two is the better man? Which is the midah, the attribute of character or personality that Judaism prefers and recommends to us? Shall we be the conformist or the rebel?​The answer is that the spiritually and psychologically mature personality must have elements of both, never only one. The authentic Jew must be neither “square” nor “beat,” neither reactionary nor radical. He is, however, to have the capacity and the experience of both. For either one, by itself, is odious. When combined in one person, each has much to contribute to the growth of his character, to the …
Korach