[Index of all Weekly Divrei Torah pages]
Parshat Bamidbar describes the census of the Jewish People and the arrangement of the camps of the tribes around the mishkan (tabernacle). Rashi, Midrash Tanchuma and Midrash Rabba discuss how the location of the camps helped determine which tribes became involved in Korach’s rebellion. Korach came from the tribe of Levi and didn’t think it was fair that Moshe was the leader of the Jewish people and Aaron and his sons had the privilege of serving as priests. Korach’s rebellion met with stunning defeat, and those involved in the rebellion were punished.
Rashi notes the flag of Reuven and Kehot were located at the South side of the mishkan (tabernacle). Concerning their involvement in the rebellion, Rashi commented “Cursed be the rasha (wicked man), Cursed be his neighbor.” He comments that the entire tribe of Reuven was not punished, but focuses on Datan, Aviram and 250 others who were dragged into Korach’s rebellion. Midrash Tahuma’s account is slightly different; he commented that the tribes Shimon and Gad got lost with Korach and his machloikis (dispute), and the land opened up its mouth and swallowed them along with their houses and all of their possessions. This implies the tribes were swept away by the controversy and were helpless to stop it. However, the Midrash Rabba states the three tribes in the south were “baalei machloichis” (the type of people who by nature look for fights).
There are several ways one can be said to be influenced by his neighbor. A person may be affected only in an external way by the neighbor’s deeds. The Gemarah at the end of Tractate Sukka describes the way in which guardians in the mishkan were punished because of a bat Kohein (daughter of a priest) who converted to another religion. They were punished along with the woman, although they were not internally affected by her deeds. Second, a neighbor may be transformed to some extent by living next to an evil neighbor and exhibit traits resulting from this influence. Third, the fact that a man may have the same traits as his neighbor may be an indication that he was placed next to him by hasgocha protis (Divine Providence) because he has a similar personality. The neighbor brings out certain traits that existed as potential.
These three ways of being a neighbor are illustrated by the laws concerning leprosy when it strikes houses. There are three opinions regarding a person’s responsibility when his neighbor discovers leprosy on the wall they share. One opinion, according to Torat Cohanim, states that while the neighbor is not responsible for the leprosy, he is affected by its presemce and should help his neighbor remove the stones. Rashi’s opinion is that if the leprosy is discovered on a cornerstone (which the two of them have in common), then both are affected by the leprosy and one must help his neighbor remove the stones. Finally, there are those who explain that the neighbor is responsible if the leprosy occurs on any part of the wall, meaning that the existence of leprosy indicates something about his character too, and he should also remove the stones from his wall.
Returning to the subject of Korach’s rebellion, we can better understand the the three opinions concerning Korach’s neighbors and how they were affected by the dispute. Tanchuma’s opinion is that Korach’s “neighbors” were affected merely externally. They “got swept up” in Korach’s machlochet (his controversy.) and were punished. Rashi uses the plural, machloichtam, implying collective responsibility and says they were “dragged along” by Korach’s rebellion. They were not just swept away in the fury, but were persuaded and affected internally by Korach’s influence. Midrash Rabba holds the neighbors entirely responsible and says they were “baalei machlochis,” of the type that always sought a fight. There was something in their nature that craved fighting, and therefore they were fully responsible for the dispute.
The influence of good neighbors is even more powerful than the influence of evil neighbors, and Tanchuma, Rasi and Midrash Rabba express this fact. On the East side of the mishkan, Yehuda, Zevulun and Issachar camped alongside Moshe and Aaron. Tanchuma comments “Asrei l’tzaddik, ashrei shecheno” (Happy is the righteous man and happy is his neighbor.) While Tanchuma saw the negative influence of a bad neighbor as being mainly external, he describes the positive influence as having a greater affect. He added, “Leadership will not be removed from the Tribe of Yehuda,” which describes Yehuda’s future greatness. Rashi quotes tehillim and refers to Yehuda as “my lawgiver,” which expresses his actual merit that was realized through the influence of his righteous neighbors. While he mentioned that only Datan, Aviram and 250 people were punished along with Korach, he indicates that the positive influence of Moshe and Aaron is more extensive than the negative influence of Korach, and includes the tribes of Zevulun and Issachar among those who were influenced by the tzadikim. He adds “Tov L’ Tzaddik, tov l’shencho” (Good for the tzaddik, good for his neighbor.) Midrash Rabba says the nature of the tribes was good to begin with, and living next to Moshe Rabbienu and Aaron brought out their positive traits.
We can learn from this that the way to avoid machloichet is to be occupied in Torah, and person can be great in Torah only when a person avoids disputes. We read Bamidbar before Shavuos, the holiday commemorating Mattan Torah (the giving of the Torah, to understand the effect of Torah, since the Torah was given to bring peace to the world. The Tzaddik who learns Torah l’shem shamaim (for the sake of heaven) influences those around him, brings peace and unity to the world through his Torah study, and ushers in the coming of Moshiach.
Adapted from Lukkutei Sichos, Bamdibar, Volume 33, pp 10-18