English translation — פנחס ב

Sicha in <pg>170</pg>

A.

On the verse<sup>1</sup>

"And the sons of Korach did not die" Rashi explains "They were in the counsel at first and at the time of the dispute they contemplated repentance in their heart therefore a high place was fortified<sup>2</sup>

for them in Gehinnom and they sat there."

And the commentators wrote<sup>3</sup>,

that Rashi's intention is to resolve a contradiction in the plain sense of the verses,

how can it be said that "the sons of Korach did not die",

and behold it is explicit above in the portion of Korach<sup>4</sup>

"and the earth swallowed ... and every man who was of Korach"

(which in plain sense includes and the main point in this the sons of Korach<sup>5</sup>)?

And therefore Rashi explains,

that indeed they were swallowed into the earth,

but they did not die,

for "a high place was fortified for them in Gehinnom and they sat there",

and the reason that "they did not die" — because "at the time of the dispute they contemplated repentance in their hearts".

But still an explanation is needed of the lengthy language of Rashi — "they were in the counsel initially and at the time of the dispute they contemplated repentance in their hearts" — for at first glance it would have been sufficient to say briefly: "because they repented therefore a place was fortified etc.",

and in the manner of Rashi's language above in the portion of Korach<sup>6</sup>

(when he explains the reason of Korach that he brought himself to dispute against Moses,

because he "saw a great chain going forth from him, Samuel who is equivalent to Moses and Aaron etc. and twenty-four watches standing from the sons of his sons etc.",

that Rashi concludes)

"and he did not see well because his sons repented".

Simply put, one can say,

that his intention in this is to explain why the sons of Korach were punished at all

(being among those swallowed up in the earth)

— and behold they repented<sup>7</sup>?

Therefore he writes that "they were in the counsel initially",

and furthermore,

that their repentance was not a complete repentance<sup>8</sup>,

because only "they contemplated repentance in their hearts" — and therefore this punishment was deserved for them

(that they were swallowed up in the earth),

except that since in any case they contemplated repentance,

therefore "they did not die" but rather "a high place was fortified for them in Gehinnom and they sat there".

But still this does not explain the precision of the language in Rashi's commentary:

a)

From what is written "they were in the counsel at first"

(and not "they were in the dispute" and the like),

it implies,

that not only did they join the dispute that broke out,

but they were among the advisors that by their counsel began⁹

the dispute of Korach.

And it is not understood:

(1)

The necessity according to the simple meaning that initially the sons of Korach were among the disputants against Moshe — and to note that Targum Yonasan and Targum Yerushalmi

Shalmei

explained that they were not in Korach's counsel — it is understood,

for it is explicit in the verse,

as above,

that every man who was of Korach was swallowed into the earth,

and it stands to reason that this is because of their participation in the dispute

; but from where does Rashi derive that "they were in the counsel initially"?

(2)

Even if there is a necessity for this in the plain sense of Scripture<sup>12</sup>

— what is the practical difference here to emphasize the greatness of their sin,

that

(Not only did they participate in the dispute of Korach and his assembly,

but)

they were "in the counsel at first"

[And even without this they are deserving of punishment because they did not do complete repentance]?

b)

"At the time of the dispute they contemplated repentance in their heart" — what is the precision that they contemplated repentance at the time of the dispute itself,

and not after it as a result of Moses' words?

And at first glance it is more logical that their repentance was after Moses said<sup>13</sup>

"With this you shall know that the Lord sent me etc. if like the death of all men etc."<sup>14</sup>,

and therefore their repentance did not then avail to cancel their punishment entirely,

and therefore they were swallowed.

3)

"They contemplated repentance in their heart" — at first glance there is no emphasis in this wording that their repentance was not a complete repentance¹⁵,

but that it was only a contemplation in the heart,

and not a confession with the mouth etc.¹⁶.

2.

And it may be said,

that Rashi's intention is,

to explain the reason that they were punished and afterwards were saved and in an unusual manner

(and miraculous)

the likes of which we do not find in the entire Torah — they were swallowed together with

(Korach¹⁷

and)

Dathan and Abiram and their families,

and on the other hand,

there itself "a high place was set apart for them

(in Gehinnom)

and they sat there"

(and especially since there is room to say that in "and they sat there"¹⁸

Rashi intends a sitting in tranquility¹⁹,

in the manner of the explanation of<pg>172</pg>

Rashi²⁰

"And Jacob settled — Jacob sought to settle in tranquility").

And what is the meaning of such a punishment,

which is a thing and its opposite — are found in the earth

(in Gehinnom),

and there specifically — in a place "high",

and in a manner of "being fortified"

(and sitting in tranquility)?

And in order to answer this question Rashi explains "And at the time of the dispute they contemplated repentance in their heart therefore it was fortified for them etc." — that is: the deficiency in the repentance of the sons of Korach was that it was only a contemplation in the heart and not in speech openly,

in a manner that it was not known to anyone.

And on the contrary,

their repentance was at the time of the dispute,

that is,

that according to the appearance of the eyes they still continued in the dispute,

and together with this a contemplation of repentance arose in their heart.

[In Rashi's commentary on Psalms&lt;sup&gt;21&lt;/sup&gt;

However he wrote "and at the time of the dispute they separated" — but from this that in his commentary on the Torah he stated "and at the time of the dispute they contemplated repentance in their hearts"

(and he did not write that "they separated")

it is understood,

that from the plain meaning of the verses

(in the Chumash)

it implies that they did not separate from the dispute

(and the reason in plain terms,

that if they had separated they would not have been swallowed into the earth&lt;sup&gt;22&lt;/sup&gt;),

and only they contemplated repentance in their hearts&lt;sup&gt;23&lt;/sup&gt;].

And therefore their punishment was unusual as mentioned above,

for this is measure for measure: just as their conduct was in a manner of a thing and its opposite,

that in action and openly it was not apparent that they separated from the dispute, but in the secret of their thought and contemplation they were distinguished from the rest of Korach's assembly — so too their punishment was in this measure,

that all Israel saw that they were punished similarly to Korach and his assembly, that like them they were swallowed into the earth,

except that there in a manner concealed in the earth they were distinguished from the rest,

"a high place in Gehinnom and they sat there".

3.

And one may say,

that with this Rashi explains in passing

(as is his way)

a general difficulty in this verse — that all the writing "And the sons of Korach did not die" what is it doing here?

This story that the sons of Korach did not die because they did repentance,

its place is above in the portion of Korach,

when the Torah relates the body of the incident itself.

Simply one may say,

that here in our portion the verse needed to inform us that they did not die,

so that it should not be difficult for us this counting among the families of the sons of Levi "the family of the Korchite"&lt;sup&gt;24&lt;/sup&gt;,

and therefore the verse precedes that "the sons of Korach did not die"&lt;sup&gt;25&lt;/sup&gt;,

and since they did not die in their swallowing and "a high place was fortified for them..

and they sat there",

it is reasonable that in the course of time they went out from there&lt;sup&gt;26&lt;/sup&gt;,

and from them came out

(as Rashi explains above in the portion of Korach,

as above)

Samuel the prophet and twenty-four watches etc.

[In several commentators of Rashi&lt;sup&gt;27&lt;/sup&gt;

they wrote that what Rashi said "were fortified etc. and they sat there",

his intention is that the sons of Korach remained there forever.

&lt;pg&gt;173&lt;/pg&gt;

But their words are difficult to understand,

for since Rashi wrote explicitly that from the sons of Korach came Samuel the prophet and the twenty-four watches etc. because they repented,

then it must be said that ultimately they came out alive from the earth&lt;sup&gt;28&lt;/sup&gt;.

And moreover — from this in our portion — in the time of Moses was counted "the family of the Korachite",

it is proven that in the time of Moses they already lived a family life].

But still there is no resolution to the aforementioned question — why did the verse not precede and write that the sons of Korach did not die in its place in the portion of Korach,

that remained "the family of the Korchite"?

There are commentators&lt;sup&gt;29&lt;/sup&gt;

that this is "because of the honor of Moshe, that Moshe said&lt;sup&gt;30&lt;/sup&gt;

And if a creation the Lord will create and they will go down&lt;sup&gt;31&lt;/sup&gt;

they and all that is theirs etc.,

and if it were mentioned here that his sons did not die, it would be a disgrace to Moshe that his prayer did not avail, for a remnant of them remained in the land."

But this answer is difficult,

for this that "the sons of Korach did not die" is not at all a contradiction to Moshe's prayer "If the Lord creates a creation etc. and they descend etc.",

since in actuality his prayer was fulfilled and they also descended alive to the pit,

except that afterwards "a high place was fortified for them in Gehinnom",

and if so, there is here no disgrace to Moshe

[And on the contrary,

since Moshe wanted and strove that they do repentance&lt;sup&gt;32&lt;/sup&gt;,

behold this is to the praise of Moshe,

that he effected at least regarding the sons of Korach that they do repentance].

4.

And it can be said regarding this,

with an introduction of a precise nuance of the wording of the verse in the portion of Korach&lt;sup&gt;31&lt;/sup&gt;

regarding the punishment of the swallowing — "and they descended etc. alive to the pit and the earth covered them and they perished from amidst the congregation",

for seemingly what is the precise nuance "and they perished from amidst the congregation",

and not simply "and they perished",

or "and they perished from the earth" and the like&lt;sup&gt;33&lt;/sup&gt;.

And according to what was explained above regarding the sin and repentance of the sons of Korach, it must be said,

that the punishment of the sons of Korach was only that they were lost "from within that assembly"&lt;sup&gt;34&lt;/sup&gt;,

namely the assembly that saw with their own eyes their participation in the dispute, but their repentance they did not see,

therefore it is necessary that they be lost from within this assembly; but as for another assembly

(that were not witnesses to the matter)

there is no reason that they be lost from within it.

And this is the reason that it was not stated above in the portion of Korach that "the sons of Korach did not die" — because only after the assembly that existed at the time of Korach's dispute was no longer,

as Rashi explains above

(in the portion of Chukat&lt;sup&gt;35&lt;/sup&gt;)

that in this congregation "there was not among them any of those upon whom the decree had been decreed, for all the desert-dwellers had already perished" — were they able to leave their place etc.,

and only then was it revealed to Bnei Yisrael that "the sons of Korach did not die".

5.

But still the matter is not entirely settled,

for this verse "And the sons of Korach did not die" comes

(at the conclusion of the count of the families of the sons of Reuven —)

in continuation of the story about Dasan and Aviram, sons of Eliav

(the son of Pallu, the son of Reuven)

— "He³⁶

Dasan and Aviram, the called ones of the assembly, who contended against Moshe etc. in their contending against Hashem,

and the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them etc."

<pg>174</pg>

And at first glance,

it would have been more fitting to write this matter in the place where the verse counts the families of the sons of Levi³⁷,

and among them "the family of the Korchi"³⁸.

In simple terms, one must say: since the verse tells here about the swallowing of Dasan and Aviram,

therefore the verse concludes the matter of the swallowing briefly that "the sons of Korach did not die"

(but not so if it had been written in the portion of the families of the sons of Levi,

the verse would have needed to repeat at length the matter of the dispute and the swallowing).

But this is a bit forced from the perspective of the content of the matters — because since the verse comes to hint at the repentance of the sons of Korach,

because of which they did not die — it is therefore not fitting to mention the sons of Korach in one continuum with the story about these wicked ones,

Dasan and Aviram,

who were lost, they and all that was theirs.

And in order to resolve this question,

Rashi prefaces "they were in the counsel at first": that the text joins the matter that "the sons of Korach did not die" to the story about Dasan and Aviram,

it comes to teach us about the comparison and similarity between them in the severity of the dispute — just as Dasan and Aviram were those "who incited against Moshe",

and as Rashi explains "they incited Israel to quarrel against Moshe",

meaning not only that they inserted themselves into the assembly of the dissenters,

but that they "incited" and "induced" to quarrel with schemes and counsels to dispute against Moshe and against the Holy One, blessed be He

[and this was the severity of the sin of Dasan and Aviram because of which they were destroyed, they and all that was theirs,

that we do not find

(explicitly in the Chumash&lt;sup&gt;39&lt;/sup&gt;)

such a punishment during all the 40 years that Israel was in the desert

(and also not regarding the 250 men of the assembly of Korach&lt;sup&gt;40&lt;/sup&gt;)]

— so too is it regarding the sons of Korach,

that they also "were in the counsel at first".

And this is the greatness of the wonder in the matter of the sons of Korach,

that even though they were in the counsel at first like Dasan and Aviram,

nevertheless,

since they "contemplated repentance in their hearts" they escaped from the pit of destruction,

to the extent that from them emerged Samuel the prophet and the 24 watches etc.

And one must say,

that this matter — the distinction between Dathan and Abiram and the sons of Korach — is in accordance with the general content of this census of the children of Israel,

which was "after the plague"⁴¹,

and as Rashi explains that the census was in order "to know the number of the remaining"; and in continuation of this the Scripture tells about the assembly of Korach,

that among those upon whom destruction was decreed

(who were lost, they and all that was theirs, without a remnant remaining of them)

there were "remaining ones" — "and the sons of Korach did not die."

6.

From all the above there is a lesson in the greatness of the power of repentance — that it is able to change and transform a person from one extreme to the other:

The sons of Korach were initially at the very lowest end,

and as above that they were in the counsel at first,

meaning that not only did they stumble in the sin of the dispute,

but they were in the category of causing the many to sin,

to dispute against Moshe and against the Holy One, blessed be He;

And also their repentance was not an open repentance,

and on the contrary, it was only a thought of repentance in the heart,

and openly it was — "at the time of the dispute",

that their thought of repentance was not strong enough to affect them that they should separate openly from the dispute.

And nevertheless,

behold, not only this,

that in the merit of&lt;pg&gt;175&lt;/pg&gt;

this thought of repentance saved them from the punishment that came upon the congregation of Korach,

but moreover,

that even at the time of the punishment itself,

when they were swallowed in Gehinnom,

this was a sitting out of "calmness",

in a high and fortified place,

And until they reached the highest end — that "they said a song"⁴²,

And moreover — that the words of their song and praise were included in the book of Psalms⁴³,

And until the song⁴⁴

that "its foundation is in the mountains of holiness".

And from this it is understood a fortiori and all the more so etc. etc. regarding the future redemption to come,

that the Rambam ruled⁴⁵

"that ultimately Israel will do repentance..

and immediately they are redeemed" — that after the multitude of performance of commandments out of self-sacrifice etc. during the length of time of the exile,

it is enough and sufficient for Israel a thought of repentance in the heart to bring immediately and at once the redemption of Israel — "And of Zion it shall be said, This and that man was born in her, and the Most High Himself establishes her"⁴⁶,

in the true and complete redemption through our righteous Messiah.

(From the sicha of Shabbos Parshas Pinchas 5737)