Parasha Chukat-Balak, The Times They are a Changing: Numbers 19:1-25:9, Haftarah, Micah 5:6-6-8

This week we have a double parasha, Chukat-Balak, a parasha where rebellion remains a continued theme unfortunately.  In this case we read about the rebellion of the people over their fear of running out of water and food, with some even saying that Moses also rebelled against God regarding the water from the rock. Chukat ends with Israel having victorious battles with three different kings who are not amenable to allowing Israel passage through their territory before Israel would come to the Kingdom of Moab who also feared Israel. The king, named Balak, employees a prophet named Balaam to render a curse upon Israel as they approach. It is here we encounter the story of a donkey, who Balaam rides upon, who speaks to Balaam that in the end instead of a curse would yield a familiar blessing, which says, “How lovely are your tents, O Jacob, Your dwellings, O Israel!”

What about this Donkey, who like the snake in Genesis, speaks with Balaam?  Prior to answering that question I’d like to tell you a story about a donkey who also spoke named Albert.  In a small village nestled at the foot of a majestic mountain, there lived a peculiar creature—a talking ass, named Albert. Unlike ordinary donkeys, Albert possessed the extraordinary ability to speak and reason. The villagers were both bewildered and intrigued by this exceptional animal. Albert's eloquent and witty remarks made him the talk of the town. People from far and wide would travel to hear him share his wisdom and engage in thought-provoking conversations. His clever insights on various matters brought laughter, inspiration, and sometimes even a change of heart to those who listened.

As Albert grew older, he began to feel a deep sense of purpose. He realized that his gift of speech could be used to uplift others, spreading joy and knowledge throughout the village and beyond. With every word he uttered, Albert aimed to instill kindness, compassion, and understanding in the hearts of his listeners. News of Albert's enchanting gift spread across the kingdom, reaching the ears of a wise and benevolent king. Intrigued by the tales, the king invited Albert to his grand palace, seeking the donkey's wisdom to aid in his ruling decisions. Albert, honored by the king's invitation, accepted with grace and set off on a journey to the royal court. Along the way, he encountered numerous challenges, but his quick wit and unwavering determination helped him overcome every obstacle.

Arriving at the palace, Albert was welcomed with great reverence. The king, eager to engage in discussions with the extraordinary donkey, sought his advice on matters of governance, justice, and diplomacy. Albert's insights proved invaluable, and the kingdom flourished under the wise counsel of this humble, talking ass. As the years passed, Albert's influence continued to grow. His fame transcended borders, and people from distant lands sought his wisdom. The world began to recognize the extraordinary potential that exists within every being, regardless of their outward appearance or origin.

Albert's tale spread far and wide, inspiring generations to embrace the power of empathy, understanding, and the importance of listening to diverse voices. The talking ass became a symbol of unity, breaking down barriers and bridging divides among people from all walks of life. And so, the legend of Albert, the talking ass, lived on as a reminder that sometimes, the most profound wisdom can emerge from the unlikeliest of sources. His story became a testament to the beauty of uniqueness, proving that a kind heart and a wise mind can change the world, no matter the form they inhabit. This is what the Donkey who spoke to Balaam did, it broke down the walls of hate and anger with blessing and renewal instead, it brought a new and fresh voice into the situation at hand that in the end would be a blessing to Israel on their travels.  But lets contrast this briefly with the story of Moses being barred from entering the land because he struck the rock with his staff instead of speaking to it in order to produce water for the people.

Although we are not told why this isolated incident received such an unfair punishment, we know that Moses after leading the people for 40 years, would not be able to enter the promised land.  Jewish tradition says this may be because Moses lacked trust in God (Yalkut Shimoni), depending on his own might instead of the Lord's (Yalkut Me’am), perhaps it may have to do with Aaron's sin of the golden calf as well as Moses' failure to unify the spies (Numbers Rabbah 19:9), all unknowns of coure.  The Torah, A Modern Commentary, offers an intriguing view.  In this case they simply grew old and tired, Moses and Aaron could no longer fight for the people and/or God the way they once did, the Psalmist writes, “They provoked wrath at the waters of Meribah, and Moses suffered on their account, because they embittered his spirit and he spoke rashly,” reflecting a fed up and broken Moses, but it was more than that. The upshot was simple: what happened with Moses and Aaron was an indication that the new generation who would enter the land simply needed a new vision and a new voice, it was time for a change.

Balaam’s donkey, like Albert in our story above, represented something new, something different, something that was not like before to indicate a new beginning was ahead, making what was bad into to everyone's good.  Does what we fight for create something new, or is it for a past glory that simply needs to change? 

Shabbat Shalom,
Rabbi Adam

Parasha Korach, Dispute or Discussion - it Cant be both; Numbers 16:1-18:, Haftarah, 1 Samuel 11:14-12:22

After a two week break I returned to one of the more provocative parshiyot, Korach.  Before the final "real" departure from Sinai back in B'haalot'cha Moses sought to unify the community because he knew that the differences would lead to unfortunate outcomes. We see rebellion after rebellion that began last week with the spies and continues from there, this week being no different either with Koarch himself or the people who tired of manna and wanted meat.  This is why our Rabbis selected 1^st Samuel 11-12 as the haftarah.  The community wanted a king because everyone else had one, and while not a bad thing, it also meant they would have to own its consequences.  In this case the king who was elected yielded bad results for Israel and another had to be chosen.  In this week’s parasha we have the makings of a political insurrection that follows on the heals of a community mutiny because the right guy went about it the wrong way.

This week we meet Korach, who was a Levite from the family of  the Kohathites who took care of the sacred objects in the Mishkan, who calls our Moses and his brother, Aaron, which is why the Talmud (Sanhedrin 110a) suggests it was also about nepotism.  In this case Korach felt that they abused their power and horded it over the community, thus speaking on the behalf of others Korach says to Moses and Aaron, “You have gone too far! For all the community are holy, all of them, and the Lord is in their midst. Why then do you raise yourselves above the Lord’s congregation?” In response Moses counters with “Is it not enough for you that the God of Israel has set you apart from the community of Israel and given you direct access, to perform the duties of the Lord’s Tabernacle and to minister to the community and serve them?”

Each had a role; Moses had oversight for the community, Aaron was the High Priest, haKohen haGadol,  and Korach was the leader of the Levitical family the Kohathites as part of Israel’s polity, all three men played very important, and sacred roles, in the life of Israel. Still, Korach was not completely wrong either, “For all the community are holy, all of them,” basing that upon the words of Exodus 19:6 that the entire nation was “a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.”  I actually do not think Moses would have had any issue with that whatsoever, recalling the words from Numbers 11:29 that said, “Would that all the Lords people were prophets, that the Lord put [the divine] spirit upon them!”  But was it simply a matter of Korach wanting to be Moses, or if not Moses per se he wanted the perceived power of Moses?  Or was it a matter of perception about how the direction of Israel should have a new administration?

Korach was not alone, represented by Dathan and Abiram of the non-Levitical tribe of Reuven (Numbers 16:12), who in opposition stood up to Moses and Aaron and the rest of Israel who sided with them.  In the end there is a huge earthquake that caused the ground to open and swallow up Koarch and his followers, the writers of Numbers, like many today, read that as a direct judgement by God against those who came against Israel's chosen leaders.  Yet here what we really have is the Left against the Right or visa versa, so to speak, two ideologies that fought to exist simultaneously; sound familiar?  Regardless, turning to the Talmud (Sanhedrin 110a) once more we read concerning Korach, “Rav says: Anyone who perpetuates a dispute violates a prohibition, as it is stated: ‘And he will not be like Korach and his assembly.’” So the word for “dispute,” machloket can also mean “discussion,” but it needs to be read in context.  In this case the Talmud used machloket as a divisive dispute that was perpetrated by Korach who accused Moses of unfair leadership practices with the attitude of “my way or the highway,” creating a lose-lose in the end.  In short a machloket with the attitude of Korach created a divisive dispute instead of a platform for resolution.

The Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, taught that divisiveness and true communal harmony are actually very similar; they are birthed from human desire.  The conflict is part of the lower world and the harmony is part of the upper world, or the sefirot of Malchut as opposed to Keter. So while we physically live in a world that is in need of repair (Malchut) the human spirit is to be connected with the spiritual (Keter) to guide our actions, hence the connection between divisiveness and true communal harmony.  Korach forgot that while the Kohen Gadol is wholly devoted to spiritual pursuits and "ordinary" Israelite's must contend with the mundanity of regular life, he and his followers failed to see there was anything mundane about the mundane, taking away the holiness within the ordinary.

Korach lost sight of what he claimed he fought for, actually going against his own argument, “For all the community are holy, all of them, and the Lord is in their midst.”  If that was so, he (and others) were just as holy, as opposed to thinking that true holiness came only in what Moses did.  Torah looks to remind us that everything we do from the mundane to the sacred are equal because they are done with a sense of the holy, something that asks us to look beyond our own sense of right to walk with another who may have a different view of the same. Sure that is not easy and yeah we have extreme views that we cannot tolerate, but we are being asked to mange that, or how else can we be a community of diverse people?  Conflict will happen, we all know that, but it must be in light of discussion, machloket, or it just becomes divisive disputes that leave us worse off than we began.  More food for thought from Torah.

Shabbat Shalom,
Rabbi Adam