Ramban on Korach

── Shiur Outline ──
(0:00) Rashi, Midrash and the meaning of Vayikach Korach
(1:00) Location of Yad Avshalom and its significance
(4:43) Ramban on timing after the meraglim rebellion
(6:02) Rashi on lineage and Korach's complaint
(10:01) Ketores proposal: Moshe’s initiative or divine inspiration
(14:55) Rabbeinu Chananel’s view on hibadlu and Ramban’s response

AI-Generated Summary (AI can be inaccurate. Check important information):

1. The timing of Korach's rebellion — Unlike the Ibn Ezra who places the rebellion earlier, the Ramban maintains the chronological order of the Torah, explaining that the rebellion occurred only after the Meraglim (Spies) caused a national shift in mood toward despair.
2. Lashon lekicha as initiative — The term Vayikach ("and he took") indicates that Korach took the initiative and woke up to act, similar to how Avshalom took action in his rebellion.
3. Collective guilt vs. the instigator — While the Eidah (congregation) was technically guilty for being swayed by Korach, Moshe and Aharon acted as melamdei zechus (defenders) by arguing that the punishment should focus on the single instigator who misled them.
4. The sin of building the Mikdash — A parallel is drawn to the time of David HaMelech, where the nation was punished for their lack of initiative (his'orerus) in seeking the building of the Beis HaMikdash.
5. Priesthood as a gift — The term Avodas Matana teaches that the Kehuna (priesthood) and mitzvos in general should not be viewed as a burdensome shibud (yoke) but as a precious gift from Hashem.
6. Self-deception in holiness — The machtos (fire-pans) became kodesh because the 250 men sincerely believed they were acting leshem shamayim (for the sake of heaven), proving that subjective sincerity does not always equal objective truth.
7. Eating in a holy fashion — The instruction to eat "in the Kodesh HaKodashim" is interpreted by the Ramban as a requirement to eat the kodshei kodashim with specific holiness and appropriate conduct.
8. Scope of the rebellion — Moshe realized Korach's populist rhetoric about "the whole congregation is holy" was a facade for his personal grievance over Elizaphan being appointed Nasi.

What is Ramban on the Parsha | Rabbi Shlomo Friedman (Yeshivat Kerem B'Yavneh)?

Shiurim by Rabbi Shlomo Friedman in KBY.

Enjoyed? Your feedback means a lot to us. Click here to email us: https://tinyurl.com/thanksEN

Donations: https://www.kby.org/english/support-us/?id=46

ויקח קרח,

רש''י and the מדרש they discuss at some length what does what's the connotation

of the ויקח over here.

But the רמב''ן after citing some of those sources says that he doesn't think

there's great significance to this.

He says that לפי דעתי אין צורך.

He says about a third of the way through the whole piece לפי דעתי

אין צורך תתמהו לשון שאמר ויקח קרח ודתן ויקומו ויקחדו על משה ועל אהרן

כי בכל תחילת מעשה תבוא לקיחה.

That when somebody's taken the initiative and doing something then לשון לקיחה is used.

ולשון התעוררות במעשה הוא וכן אבשלום לקח ויצב לו בחייו את מצבת.

And he built some מצבה that is known as יד אבשלום which is found

where?

Where's יד אבשלום?

What?

At the base of Har Ha-Zeisim?

In ירושלים when you pass now,

it used to be somewhat safe to go there,

but there on the east side of the wall of Jerusalem,

there in the עמק there where you have the קבר יחזקאל,

whatever.

If you look out the window of the number one bus and you're on

your left side towards the כותל you could see it.

But in any case,

if you look at the אם תחפוץ לפרש כי הלקיחה על דבר שהזכיר אח''כ

ויקח אבשלום וכולי.

So also ויקח קרח could refer to the אנשים.

Okay.

In any case,

as the רמב''ן discusses the following:

when did this event take place?

So the אבן עזרא says,

well,

it didn't take place now after the מרגלים,

it took place earlier when the בכורים were phased out and לויים were phased

in.

כאשר נחלפו.

There's a line at the end of בראשון ה in this printing:

ואמר רבי אברהם כי זה הדבר היה במדבר.

In the new printing,

ואמר רבי אברהם כי זה הדבר היה במדבר.

Anybody?

כי זה הדבר היה במדbar,

כאשר נחלפו הבכורים ונפדו הלוויים כי חשבו ישראל שאדוננו משה עשה זה מדעתו לעשות

גדולה לאחיו וגם לבני קהת שהם קרובים אליו.

Nepotism.

ולכל בני לוי שהם ממשפחתו.

So that's why the בכורים were upset.

והלויים,

and why were the לויים upset?

Says the אבן עזרא,

בעבור ששם נתונים לאהרן ובניו.

After all,

there were לויים perhaps involved,

רמב''ן himself plays this down,

but after all שמעון הם בני לוי,

sounds like they're also לויים rebelling and says the אבן עזרא,

they're rebelling because they didn't want to have to be under אהרן.

ודתן ואבירם,

says the אבן עזרא,

were upset because after all they're from ראובן who's a was the בכור and

משה רבנו was playing down the role of the בכורות.

And also קרח was the בכור.

Okay.

In any case,

that's the אבן עזרא who is very quick to invoke אין מוקדם ומאוחר בתורה.

But the רמב''ן says you already know my שיטה,

that things in the תורה are generally speaking written in chronological order.

And also over here the רמב''ן will explain that's the case.

But parenthetically the רמב''ן does point out that על פי דרוש it is not

correct precisely the way the אבן עזרא presented the complaints of the Jewish people.

He says that the complaint of קרח,

from the מדרש it sounds like the complaint of קרח was on the fact

that אליצפן was the נשיא of קהת,

and קרח also wanted the כהונה.

And the two hundred and fifty איש they were בכורים and they were uncomfortable

with משה רבנו taking away the בכורה.

ודתן ואבירם,

whereas רמב''ן says their problem was that the בכורה was taken away from ראובן,

the רמב''ן says they complained about להמיתנו במדבר.

In any case,

but the main נקודה and the very beautiful approach of the רמב''ן concerning when

this story took place is that he says the story took place where it

is written after מרגלים.

But the question arises so why all of a sudden now after מרגלים does

this rebellion end.

come up?

If the complaint has to do with the בכורים,

so why exactly now?

So הרמב"ן very simply,

he says that till now,

till the story of the מרגלים and the recent events of תבערה and קברות

התאווה,

then the Jewish people had a great love for and a great respect for

משה רבנו and if anybody would start up,

they would kill him.

They wouldn't accept such a thing.

But now people were in a very kvetchy mood,

they were very upset.

After all,

you had people that died in תבערה and קברות התאווה,

and now they were told they're all going to be in the מדבר.

Now is the good time to rebel.

Now is the time when people are going to be fertile grounds,

fertile political atmosphere to hear complaints about משה רבנו,

and therefore קורח now felt it was a good time for a rebellion.

Okay.

In terms of the רש"י basically points out,

as far as the נשיאות,

so you have over here עמרם יצהר חברון עוזיאל.

משה and אהרן,

sons of עמרם of course.

יצהר,

son of קורח,

and אליצפן son of עוזיאל.

And אליצפן was appointed the נשיא of קהת if I'm not mistaken.

So קורח complained,

he says,

well hey,

I understand that עמרם is the בכור so he has some special status,

but why skip me?

Why are you going to אליצפן,

making him the נשיא?

I'm the next in line,

so I should be in that position of importance.

Okay.

Now the רמב"ן in the next piece addresses the following issue.

He quotes here it's in square brackets:

וכתב רבנו חננאל כי אלה הנקהלים כולם,

these 250 people were לויים.

And the indication that that's the case is רב לכם בני לוי,

שמעו נא בני לוי.

And perhaps they thought that all of the שבט was meant to be כהנים

and משה רבנו wanted his brother to be special and therefore he gave it

דווקא to אהרן.

But the רמב"ן says:

חלילה שיהיו בשבט משרתי אלוקינו מאתיים וחמישים קרואים נשיאי בני מרי מבעטים ברבם ובגדול

שבטם ועל פניהם על השם.

No way you had so many sinners from בני לוי.

Rather says רמב"ן:

שמעו נא בני לוי is referring only to or mainly to קורח.

Just משה רבנו says שמעו נא בני לוי because he understood that if he,

משה רבנו,

doesn't act quickly,

then there's a possibility of other people from לויים joining the rebellion.

And therefore he addresses not only קורח but also בני לוי in trying to

appease them,

tell them,

hey you guys have a very important job and shouldn't look and try to

do somebody else's job.

So says the רמב"ן,

אבל טעם רב לכם בני לוי,

this is on page רנז,

two-thirds of the way down on the page,

first line is מכל.

אבל טעם רב לכם בני לוי בעבור כי קורח היה מפתה לכל השבטים כי

לכבודם רוצה להחזיר עבודה לבכוריהם.

קורח claimed,

after all,

if קורח would start a party that says that what I want is for

me to be important,

so he probably wouldn't get that many votes.

So what does קורח do?

Says,

me personally?

No,

that's not what's important.

What's important is everybody else.

So to get the other שבטים to join,

he says:

לכבודם רוצה להחזיר עבודה לבכוריהם כאשר אמר כי כל העדה כולם קדושים.

משה בחכמתו גילה מצפון מצפון לבו של קורח.

משה רבנו understood that קורח was interested in קורח and nothing else.

And so משה רבנו reveals that בכל עם כי הוא קורח על כהונתו צועק

ומה שדי לו בכבוד שבטו.

רב לכם בני לוי,

that be comfortable being a לוי.

וזהו שאמר שמעו נא בני לוי וכך גדולם וזה טעם ויאמר משה אל קורח.

After all,

it says ויאמר משה אל קורח שמעו נא בני לוי.

So who's he talking to?

קורח,

בני לוי.

So really he was talking to קורח:

אבל כלל בדברו עם בני לוי דברי משה בחכמתו פיוס לו ולכל השבט שלא

ימשך אדם מהם אחריו.

Okay,

now the רמב"ן addresses the following issue,

which is also relevant to the continuation of the פרשה.

The idea,

the suggestion of telling these 250 people they should bring קטורת.

So whose idea was this?

Was this something that משה רבינו was told by הקדוש ברוך הוא?

Or something משה רבינו thought of on his own?

So רמב''ן has a number of approaches.

והנה משה מעצמו חשב המחשבה הזאת.

Again we're still on page רנ''ז.

I don't know if there's a new paragraph in the new printing.

On page ש''כ''ו.

והנה משה מעצמו חשב המחשבה הזאת ורצה בקטורת יותר משאר הקרבנות כי ראה כבר

בנדב ואביהוא כי בהקריבם קטורת זרה לפני השם נשרפו ויתיר לאהרן להקטיר אותה לצורך

שעה או שהייתה קטורת הבוקר שהקטיר בהעלותו את הנרות כמשפט ובטח משה כי השם

מקים דבר עבדו ועצת מלאכיו ישלים.

משה רבינו felt that it was necessary to turn down this rebellion,

that there should be a serious punishment to the 250 people,

and therefore he suggested the קטורת,

which he knew would bring a punishment to those people that are not fit

to be bringing קטורת.

However,

alternatively suggested,

ויש אומרים כי בשמוע משה ויפול על פניו לדרוש את השם לדעת מה יעשה

ואז נאמר לו בוקר ויודע השם וגו'.

Even though the פסוק doesn't explicitly indicate it,

רמב''ן points out this is something very common to have some part of the

פרשה be מגלה the other part of the פרשה,

or the תורה to assume we're going to be able to figure out certain

things on our own by connecting the dots.

So says רמב''ן,

when משה רבינו is נופל על פניו לדרוש את השם,

that's when הקדוש ברוך הוא told him about the קטורת.

Okay,

in the continuation he also raised the possibility that הקדוש ברוך הוא revealed it

to him but something not on the regular level of נבואת משה רבינו,

rather some sort of level of רוח הקודש.

And since it wasn't regular נבואה,

therefore it doesn't say that הקדוש ברוך הוא told this to משה רבינו explicitly.

Okay.

Skipping to פסוק כ''א,

היבדלו מתוך העדה הזאת.

So here you have the following taking place:

הקדוש ברוך הוא tells משה רבינו and אהרן,

היבדלו מתוך העדה הזאת ואכלה אותם כרגע.

הקדוש ברוך הוא tells משה רבינו to separate themselves from the rest of the

עדה and I'll destroy them.

רמב''ן later will talk about why if הקדוש ברוך הוא wanted to destroy the

עדה,

why was there a need for משה and אהרן to separate themselves?

After all הקדוש ברוך הוא could see to it that משה and אהרן would

be saved and the rest of the people would be punished.

But in any case,

now what he's addressing is the following issue:

if הקדוש ברוך הוא tells משה רבינו that there's כאילו a plan to destroy

the עדה,

then obviously that means that they are guilty,

that they sinned.

But if that's the case,

that the rest of the עדה sinned,

how are we to understand that which משה and אהרן say,

האיש אחד יחטא ועל כל העדה תקצוף?

That if only one person sinned,

why are you punishing everybody?

So what do you mean,

only one person sinned?

But הקדוש ברוך הוא said העדה הרעה הזאת,

which implies that the others sinned as well.

So if only one person sinned,

then we don't understand הקדוש ברוך הוא'ס כאילו הוה אמינא.

If only a small number sinned...

if everybody sinned,

then we don't understand משה and אהרן,

האיש אחד יחטא.

And if everybody sinned,

then what's משה and אהרן saying?

So says the רמב''ן quoting רבנו חננאל.

He has a wild idea,

which רמב''ן understandably doesn't accept:

that when הקדוש ברוך הוא said היבדלו מתוך העדה הרעה הזאת,

it was only referring to קרח and company.

It wasn't referring to the rest of the Jewish people.

But משה רבינו wasn't aware of that,

he thought it was referring to also the rest of the Jewish people that

were there,

and therefore משה רבינו says,

האיש אחד יחטא ועל כל העדה תקצוף.

רמב''ן is very uncomfortable with that.

In effect what that approach of רבנו חננאל is saying is that משה רבינו

did not properly understand the נבואה,

and that can't be.

So let's see this inside.

פסוק כ''א:

היבדלו מתוך העדה הזאת.

יש לשאול,

אם ישראל לא חטאו ולא מרדו ברבם,

למה היה קצף עליהם?

למה ואכלה אותם כרגע?

ואם גם הם מרדו כקורח ועדתו,

איך יאמרו משה ואהרן:

האיש אחד יחטא ועל כל העדה תקצוף?

וכתב רבנו חננאל:

היבדלו מתוך העדה הזאת,

עדת קורח,

ולא עדת בני ישראל.

ויאמרו משה ואהרן אל אלוהי הרוחות לכל בשר.

מיד הודיע הקדוש ברוך הוא למשה כי לא לכל עדת בני ישראל ביקש לכלות,

אבל עדת קרח בלבד.

היכך פירש לו זה שאמרתי הבדלו,

העלו מסביב למשכן קרח דתן ואבירם.

הוא שאמרתי לכם.

Okay,

but says the רמב"ן for amongst other reasons,

skipping a number of lines,

וחלילה שלא יבין משה נבואתו ויטעה בה.

But rather the רמב"ן says something very beautiful and that is the following.

Certainly the main guilt over here was on the rabble-rousers on קרח and company.

What about the rest of the Jewish people?

Was there any guilt on their part?

Says רמב"ן,

yes there was.

After all,

when they,

after they saw all the miracles that were associated with משה רבנו and הקדוש

ברוך הוא's relationship with משה רבנו,

so then it should have been obvious to them that this קרח guy is

a quack.

So when קרח says,

"Hey,

I'm out for all you guys and משה רבנו has this elitist attitude and

really everybody's holy and everybody's special and there's this nepotism with משה רבנו," and

the people say,

"You know what?

Maybe he's right." So then there was some level of guilt and they were

deserving of punishment.

But משה רבנו and in general the way of מלמד זכות is to point

out in a situation like this that the rabble-rouser,

certainly he is guilty and needs to be punished.

But the rest of the people,

so hey,

they're,

you know,

they were just drawn after this evildoer,

so get rid of the rabble-rouser and then everybody else will fall back in

line.

That's what's going on over here.

So take a look at this inside.

אבל הטעם כי מתחילה היה לב העם אחרי משה ואהרן.

וכאשר לקחו—we're about ten lines from top on רס"א—כי מתחילה היה לב העם אחרי

משה ואהרן וכאשר לקחו קרח ועדתו איש מחתתו וישימו עליהם קטורת ויעמדו פתח אהל

מועד עם משה ואהרן אז קרא קרח לכל העדה ואמר להם כי כבוד כולם

הוא מקנא וייטב הדבר בעיניהם ויקהלו כולם,

they were flattered,

לראות באיש המופת אלוקים ותשוב העבודה לבכוריהם וזה טעם ויקהל עליהם קרח את כל

העדה כי נחשבו כולם שהיו מהרהרים אחרי רבם והם כמהרהרים אחרי השכינה ומבטלים,

relinquishing,

על נבואת נביא בליבם וחייבי מיתה בידי שמיים.

משה ואהרן לימדו עליהם זכות שלא חטאו במעשה אלא קרח והוא הגורם והוא המפתה

אותם וראוי הוא שימות לבדו לפרסם ולהודיע עונשו לרבים.

And says רמב"ן,

וזה דרך מבקשי רחמים שיקלו החטא מעל העם ונותנים אותו על היחיד הגורם מפני

שהוא חייב על כל פנים.

And now the רמב"ן goes on somewhat of a tangent concerning at the end

of ספר שמואל ב' where you have the story with the counting of the

Jewish people and then there's some מגפה.

And דוד says,

well,

he should be punished and not the rest of the Jewish people.

So רמב"ן says also over there,

there was some sin on the part of the rest of the Jewish people

as well,

but nevertheless דוד says,

well,

only he should be punished and not the rest of the Jewish people.

What was the sin on the part of the rest of the Jewish people?

So רמב"ן has a couple of possibilities.

One possibility is that they should have given their שקלים instead of allowing to

be counted.

After all,

although דוד didn't want the Jewish people counted,

he didn't say explicitly that you can't do it ע"י שקלים,

so they should have given their שקלים.

I'm not sure exactly how that would work because unless everybody would give a

שקל,

then there wouldn't be anything served.

The census guy comes to me,

I'll say,

okay,

I'll give a שקל.

But you know,

probably my next-door neighbor is not going to necessarily give a שקל,

so I'm not sure how that,

but in any case,

that's one possibility.

Another possibility,

says רמב"ן,

is that the Jewish people were guilty of not being expressing interest earlier on

the building the בית המקדש.

After all,

this was a significant amount of time,

hundreds of years after the Jewish people entered the Promised Land and in theory

they would have been able to build the בית המקדש already in the time

of the שופטים,

which is interesting because after all,

before you build the בית המקדש,

what do you need to do?

You have to have a מלך and you have to get rid of זרעו

של עמלק.

I'm not sure if this might be one of the ראיות Rav Schachter points

out that the מצוה of appointing a מלך in order to build the בית

המקדש is לאו דווקא a מלך,

rather Jewish government,

so maybe the שופטים did have such a status.

In any case,

so the...

The רמב"ן points out that's why when did the מגפה stop?

What stopped the מגפה when דוד המלך buys the מקום המקדש from ארונה היבוסי?

Okay.

The רמב"ן interprets those פסוקים that we read about in the הפטרה—which הפטרה is

it?

I don't remember—about דוד המלך expressing an interest in building the בית המקדש,

but הקדוש ברוך הוא says no.

And there's some פסוק over there that hey,

you know,

till now sounds like the שכינה was doing fine in אוהל and in...

the רמב"ן דוקא understands those פסוקים in a fashion that הקדוש ברוך הוא through

the נביא is כאילו complaining,

saying this is not proper that the Jewish people till now did not express

interest in the בית המקדש.

And that was the sin of the Jewish people which was associated with the

מגפה.

So says רמב"ן,

ואני אומר בדרך סברא שהיה עונש על ישראל בהתאחר בניין בית הבחירה שהיה ארון

הולך מאהל אל אהל כגר בארץ ואין השבטים מתעוררים לאמר נדרוש את ה' ונבנה

הבית לשמו כעניין שנאמר לשכנו תדרשו ובאת שמה.

Parenthetically,

I'll mention that there's,

as you know,

there's a whole discussion about to what extent are we in theory able to

do the עבודה בזמן הזה in the בית המקדש,

and those that say that אם תרצו אין זו אגדה,

others would say,

whatever,

different opinions about this.

But hey,

for a person to say,

well hey,

what does the בית המקדש have to do with us?

You know,

we have no interest in that.

That's an improper attitude.

We're meant to obviously be looking forward to and praying for the עבודה in

the בית המקדש.

So when says רמב"ן,

ואין השבטים מתעוררים לאמר נדרוש את ה' ונבנה הבית לשמו כעניין שנאמר לשכנו תדרשו

ובאת שמה עד שנתעורר דוד לדבר מימים רבים לזמן ארוך שנאמר ויהי כי ישב

המלך בביתו וה' הניח לו מסביב מכל אויביו ויאמר המלך אל נתן הנביא אנכי

יושב בבית ארזים וארון האלקים יושב בתוך היריעה.

Which הפטרה is this?

תרומה,

תצוה,

ויקהל,

פקודי,

one of them.

One of them.

ואילו דוד מנעו השם יתברך ומצד העם כי דמים רבים שפכת ארצה לפני ונתאחר

עוד הבניין עד מלוך שלמה ואילו היו ישראל חפצים בדבר ונתעוררו בו מתחילה נעשה

בימי אחד מהשופטים או בימי שאול או גם בימי דוד כי אם שבטי ישראל

היו מתעוררים בדבר לא היה הוא הבונה וישראל היו הבונים.

ויקהל?

I'm sorry?

ויקהל.

Point taken.

Sorry,

that's what I...

whatever it is,

one of them,

so we know it's not ויקהל.

In any case,

so the רמב"ן

at the end of the פסוק points out that which all the time he

spoke about the בכורות being upset,

that the בכורות were traded in,

he says that's על דרך חז"ל that said in the source 10,

he cites the משנה in זבחים,

עד שלא הוקם המשכן הבמות מותרות והעבודה בבכורות.

But he says על פי פשט,

till the לוים were chosen then כל ישראל were כשרים for עבודת קרבנות because

that's after all the דין by a במת יחיד that ישראל could do the

עבודה.

And therefore what the people wanted was to return the עבודה to all the

Jewish people ולאו דוקא to the בכור.

Okay.

פסוק כ"ט.

It's a little bit rubbed out.

אם כמות כל האדם ימותון אלה.

Yeah,

כ"ט.

So the רמב"ן explains why משה רבינו gets so angry at עדת קרח.

After all,

there were many people that spoke of going back to מצרים or spoke of

why did you take us out of מצרים.

So says רמב"ן,

והנה גם רבים בעם אמרו לו פעמים רבות למה העליתנו ממצרים אבל היה עונש

על אלה מכל העדה באמרם כי תשתרר עלינו גם השתרר כי עשו שתיים רעות

בזו על כבוד הרב וכפרו בכל מעשה השם אשר עשה ממצרים ובמדבר גם במעמד

הר סיני שנאמר וגם בך יאמינו לעולם והם אמרו שאינו כדאי להשתרר עליהם ולא

בא להם על ידו רק רע ועל זה אמר ויחר למשה מאד.

After all,

משה רבינו tells קרח or tells the Jewish people that if the fate of

קרח is like the fate of the common man,

then God did not send me.

But if in fact some miracle happens and the earth swallows them up,

then you'll know that these people blasphemed God.

So what does it mean that God...

the issue over here is whether משה רבינו was sent or wasn't sent.

So what does it mean was or wasn't sent?

So the רמב"ן points out that the initial...

appointment of a נביא is referred to as being sent.

So קורח was undermining the whole basis of מעמד הר סיני,

the whole basis of משה רבנו being נביא השם and giving them the תורה.

So that's part of the issue over here.

So when משה רבנו says that I didn't do כל המעשים האלה מלבי,

he's not just talking about the choosing of אהרן and the כהנים,

rather he's talking about everything which משה רבנו did from the very beginning.

Okay.

ואת כל האדם אשר לקרח.

It says that האדם אשר לקרח were therein were swallowed up.

So says the רמב"ן,

קנה לו עבדים ושפחות ובני בית of מצריים,

כושיים,

כנעניים,

those were swallowed up,

but not קורח children.

After all the פסוק says ובני קרח לא מתו.

Not this week's פרשה but in פרשת פנחס,

I believe it is.

היו גדולים צדיקים וטובים וזכותם עמדה לו.

And he didn't have young children,

because after all the תורה doesn't mention טף with respect to קורח.

Okay.

י"ז ב' כי קדשו.

י"ז ב' כי קדשו.

It says that the מחתות are I think אלעזר when he was meant to

gather the מחתות because they became holy.

Became holy?

What do you mean became holy?

They were used,

these מחתות were used by people that brought קטורת that they weren't allowed to

bring.

So why why did they become holy?

So רמב"ן has a number of approaches.

Number one,

well משה רבנו did tell them to bring this קטורת if they thought they

were the right people to do so and they thought,

they were convinced,

they were what they were doing was לשם שמים.

They thought that God would in fact answer them.

And since they did it לשם שמים and they did it על פי what

משה רבנו said,

it did become holy.

Parenthetically,

this is wild because it's somewhat scary because after all,

a very often you have people that are involved in terrible מחלוקות and on

some level they really think that they're right.

They really think that what they're doing is proper.

It obviously would be a lot easier for us philosophically to assume that all

evil people they intend to be evil,

but that's not the case.

There are many evil people that really think that they're very holy and doing

wonderful things.

So why are they to be blamed?

Well,

apparently if they would do a true חשבון נפש,

they would realize that what they're doing is terrible.

So a person needs to be very careful about what his motives are,

sometimes to consult others.

The very fact that you think that you're right doesn't mean that what you're

doing is right.

So continues the רמב"ן,

ונכון בעיני כי יאמר הכתוב כי הקריבום לפני השם ויקדשו להיות לאות לבני ישראל

כלומר אני הקדשתי.

הקדוש ברוך הוא is saying that now I'm making it holy,

not that it became holy through the use of those two hundred and fifty

people at the time.

Rather,

I'm now making it holy because I want this to be a part of

the מזבח as an אות to בני ישראל that they shouldn't do like actions

like קורח.

Okay.

פסוק ו' אתם המיתם את עם השם.

So what does it mean אתם המיתם את עם השם?

After all,

the people they themselves sinned and therefore they were punished.

So the אונקלוס says you caused the death of עם השם,

דהיינו that the people held like the פשט that משה רבנו was not told

by God explicitly to suggest this קטורת idea.

Rather it was משה רבנו on his own.

So they come to complain,

hey,

you should have said that the אות won't be that only one person will

survive the קטורת.

You should have said the אות should be that whoever is the real כהן,

so he'll some crown will grow on his head and the other people,

they won't have the crown grow,

or whatever,

whatever other אות.

Have some a patch of משיח.

Oh no,

no patch of משיח,

that's that's אסור.

Whatever.

They have some some holy what's it called.

So why did משה רבנו choose the why did משה רבנו choose דווקא the

אות of the קטורת of having the people that not meant to bring the

קטורת die?

So it's your fault.

Presumably the response that משה רבנו would say is that he felt that it

was necessary to calm down the מחלוקת.

Okay.

And the רמב"ן has some other approach but for now let's move on.

הרומו מתוך העדה הזאת.

Again,

we have a similar expression to before,

and the רמב"ן says לא הבינותי טעם הכתוב הזה.

We're in י"ז...

י"ז:י' וחברו and a similar פסוק earlier,

הבדלו מתוך העדה הזאת,

היש באלוקים להמית בדבר or בדבר רבים סביב הצדיק אחד והוא לבדו נשאר.

God could punish many and save one individual.

So he says that he has a number of פשטים,

one of them is that לכבוד הצדיק,

לכבוד הצדיקים,

הקדוש ברוך הוא didn't want the rest of the people punished while משה רבינו

is there in their midst.

Okay,

skipping to עבודת מתנה י"ח:ז'.

י"ח:ז',

עבודת מתנה אתן את כהונתכם.

So he has one פשט of רש"י,

but the רמב"ן says ונכון בעיני שיאמר ועבדתם עבודת כהונה ואיננה לכם עבודת שיבוד

כעבודת עבדי המלכים אלא עבודה מתנה גדולה נתתי לכם בה לכבוד ולתפארת מאיתי.

Not meant to view the עבודת כהונה as just a pain in the neck,

as a difficult yoke,

rather to understand that it's a great gift.

And of course,

this is the way we're meant to view מצוות in general,

not as something that הקדוש ברוך הוא wanted to give us a hard time

with,

therefore gave us the מצוות,

חס ושלום.

That's not what our attitude's meant to be.

Meant to realize it's a great gift.

Okay,

now the פסוק says בקדש הקדשים תאכלנו.

י"ח:י'.

What's the פסוק?

כל זכר יאכל אותו בקדש הקדשים תאכלנו.

Okay,

so what does it mean בקדש הקדשים תאכלנו?

We know the קדש הקדשים is where the ארון is.

That's not where you eat our קרבנות.

So what does it mean בקדש הקדשים?

So apparently רש"י says לימד על קדשי קדשים,

thank you,

לימד על קדשי קדשים that it's meant to be eaten in the עזרה.

בקדש הקדשים תאכלנו,

you should eat in the עזרה.

So says רמב"ן,

I don't understand that,

because קדשי קדשים,

בקדש הקדשים is where you eat קרבנות rather than the עזרה,

so why is it called בקדש הקדשים?

So על פי פשט,

the רמב"ן later towards the end of the פסוק says what this means is

meant to eat in a holy fashion.

בקדש הקדשים doesn't mean in what we call בקדש הקדשים,

rather you eat it in a holy fashion.

Realize קדשים that קדשי קדשים need to be eaten particularly קדשי קדשים need to

be eaten in a particular fashion,

eat it in a fashion that's appropriate.

But he cites what he saw in the ספרי,

ראיתי בספרי,

we're in י"ח:י'.

רבי יהודה בן בתירה אומר הרי גויים שהקיפו את העזרה מנין לקקשי קדשים שנאכלים

אפילו בהיכל תלמוד לומר בקדש הקדשים תאכלנו.

So if

there's a situation where the גויים are surrounding the עזרה and there's no possibility,

if there's no possibility of eating the קדשי קדשים like they're meant to be

eaten in the עזרה,

so how do you know they're allowed to eat it in the היכל?

תלמוד לומר בקדש הקדשים תאכלנו.

So explains רמב"ן,

נתעורר רבי יהודה בן בתירה בזה on the

phrase בקדש הקדשים תאכלנו,

וממה שכתב במקום האונס והזכירו באימה שאמר נאכלים בהיכל וראוי שיאמר שנאכלים אפילו לפני

ולפנים אם הוקפה היכל.

The idea is the following:

רבי יהודה בן בתירה understands that the פסוק over here is a special גזרת

הכתוב that if the only way one could eat the קדשי קדשים without there

being defiled is by eating them in the היכל,

they're allowed to eat them in the היכל.

And although רבי יהודה בן בתירה didn't have the courage to say explicitly that

if it needs to be eaten in the קדש הקדשים,

you're meant to eat it there,

but that's,

the רמב"ן seems to indicate that's what רבי יהודה בן בתירה understood the פסוק,

that although ideally speaking it's eaten in the עזרה outside the היכל,

but if necessary,

you could even be eaten in the היכל and if necessary,

even eat it in the קדש הקדשים.

Okay,

בארצם לא תנחל says רמב"ן,

שתהיה נוחל חלקך באחד מכל שבטי ישראל וחלק קטן.

The פסוק is a double לשון.

בארצם לא תנחל and then it says וחלק לא יהיה לך בתוכם or something

like that.

So says רמב"ן that double לשון is coming to say that even the,

you don't even have a חלק קטן because those cities...

Those cities which were given to the לויים,

they were ערי מקלט לצורך ישראל הם,

לצורך ישראל and didn't fully belong to the לויים.

This is an interesting question,

is there a דין קריעה on חברון within ערי יהודה?

So לכאורה there should be a חיוב קריעה within ערי יהודה,

but I think that הרב ליאור שליט"א,

he said that no because חברון was in a certain sense not ערי יהודה,

it was an עיר מקלט which belonged to the לויים.

Is it in our control now?

I'm sorry?

If it's in our control now,

shouldn't it no longer be?

How recently have you been in חברון?

Well,

the point that they call חברון is what we have,

no?

What we control is a very small part of what's חברון.

I don't know,

probably bigger than the one street that it used to be.

I don't know,

maybe now with the expansion now,

some of the Jewish property finally after 1929,

close to 100 years,

it's about time that we get back the property.

Some of that property is being returned and you have the wonderful Jewish community

in חברון that are doing and many people doing wonderful things,

so it is expanding,

so maybe that would okay.

In any case,

to review some things which we've seen,

רבותי,

ניקח קרח,

the רמב"ן understands that ניקח just means that it was נתעורר.

Okay,

when did this rebellion take place?

So אבן עזרא says,

oh it took place earlier when the בכורים were traded in,

when the בכורים were out and the לויים came in.

But the רמב"ן says no,

it took place now,

after the rebellion,

after the story with the מרגלים,

when the Jewish people were upset and thus were willing to,

the conditions were right for rebellion against משה רבינו.

Okay,

were the 250 people לויים?

The ר"ח,

רבינו חננאל says yes,

and רמב"ן says לא תיתכן.

It says שמעו נא בני לוי,

well that's mainly for קרח and mainly trying to prevent other לויים from joining

the rebellion.

Okay,

the רמב"ן has a number of opinions concerning whether this idea of the קטורת

was his own idea,

or was something which was told by God,

or somewhere in between,

some sort of רוח הקודש.

היבדלו מתוך העדה הזאת,

הקדוש ברוך הוא says,

and משה רבינו responds,

האיש אחד יחטא?

Says רמב"ן,

well there was some level of guilt in the rest of the Jewish people,

but nevertheless משה רבינו says that he is מלמד זכות on the rest of

the Jewish people that they're just following this evil קרח and we get rid

of קרח then everything will calm down.

And the רמב"ן points out this is also what's taking place there in the

story in ספר שמואל with דוד המלך and the census,

there was some level of guilt also on the part of the Jewish people,

either that they didn't give their שקלים or the fact that they weren't נתעורר

on the building of the בית המקדש.

Okay,

the רמב"ן points out that על פי פשט it wasn't only the בכורים that

were upset but also the rest of the Jewish people as well,

because על פי פשט before the לויים were chosen,

then the rest of the Jewish people were able to do the עבודה and

לאו דווקא the בכורים.

Okay,

why does משה רבינו get so upset at קרח and company?

Says רמב"ן,

well there was also ביזיון כבוד הרב and also denying the fact that all

that משה רבינו did in the name of God,

not just the fact that אהרן was chosen.

What does it mean that the מחתות became holy?

They became holy because those people sinned,

because those people were told by משה רבינו that if you guys think you're

right you should bring קטורת and they were מקדיש them לשם שמים,

or that כי קדשו means that now God is declaring them as holy.

אתם המיתם את עם ה',

the אונקלוס says that you brought this about by choosing the קטורת as the

אות.

Alternatively,

the רמב"ן quotes the אבן עזרא,

he says that hey,

maybe those 250 people died as a result of your תפילה or חכמה,

but not that really they were not fit to be chosen.

Okay,

עבודת מתנה,

the עבודה in the בית המקדש is the עבודה of the לויים,

remember it's דווקא the כהנים also לויים,

is meant to be not viewed as a שיעבוד but rather as a gift.

קודש הקודשים תאכלנו,

the רמב"ן says that על פי פשט it means to eat in a holy

fashion,

but רבינו רבינו בחיי says it's a special גזירת הכתוב that if necessary,

it could be eaten in the קודש הקודשים,

and the פסוק says at the end that the לויים do not have a

חלק in ארץ ישראל,

don't even have a small portion,

even though ערי לויים were not fully,

were not fully theirs.

Okay,

have a wonderful שבת.