Aspaqlaria: Parshas Korach 5754

In this week's parshah, Korach stages a rebellion against Mosheh. He couldn't belittle Mosheh's authority - they all saw beams of light radiating from Mosheh's face when he came down from Sinai. Instead, he builds up the masses. "The whole community, every one of them is holy, and Hashem is among them; and why do you raise yourselves above the congregation of G-d?" (16:3) He attacks Mosheh politically by trying to make him redundant religiously.

This is the meaning of the two slogans the medrash attributes to Korach. "If a garment is all blue, does it need tzitzis?" The whole garment is techeiles, reminds us of G-d, why do we need an additional blue thread? The whole community was at Sinai, we don't need priests and leaders. Similarly, "If a room is full of Sifrei Torah, does it need a mezuzah?" We have all experienced prophecy, we don't need an external teacher.

R. Mosheh Feinstein zatza"l (D'rash Mosheh), stresses a second aspect that build on the first. As his very examples show, he assumes that anyone can interpret the Torah for themselves. That somehow at Sinai they were embued with the "spirit of the law" and could use that to guide practice.

Mitzvos are the primary means by which G-d communicates through man. By forcing involvement and symbols He can impart certain truths which must be impressed too deeply to be taught by mere reading. Certainly unthinking practice will modify behavior and eventually change priority values. This is why "mitoch shelo lishma, ba lishma" - from doing a mitzvah for other reasons, people will come to do them for their own sake. Also, we rule "mitzvos eino tzrichos kavanah" - obligatory mitzvos can be fulfilled even without intent. Still, most of the value of the mitzvah is lost that way.

Clearly, therefor, while the "spirit of the law" can't be the guiding principle, it also can not be neglected.

R. Safra said [in the name] of R. Yehoshua` ben Chanania, "What does it [mean when it] say 'veshinantom livanecha - and you should repeat to your children' don't read 'vishinantom' (Since it doesn't say "veshanisom - and you shall double", a simpler construction -- Rashi) but 'veshilashtom - and you shall triple'. A man should always divide his years in thirds: one third in miqra - Written [Torah], one third in Mishna (lit. repetition) one third in Talmud (lit. study). But man doesn't know how many [years] he will live? No, we need it to [teach us about] his days.

- Kiddushin 30a

(The gemara makes an almost identical quote in Avodah Zara 19b, except that it quotes R. Tanchum bar Chanila'i.) The tanna, who predates the codification of both the mishna and the gemara couldn't have meant these words in the same sense as we use them. Rashi (Kiddushin) comments:

Gemara: This means the reasoning and the hidden reasons of the "mishnayos" and to answer where they [appear] to conflict one another.>

The Rambam takes the term "gemara" in the same sense:

And one is obligated to divide his learning time into thirds. One third [spent] in [study of] the written Torah, one third in [study of] the Oral Torah, and [for] the last third he shall understand and conclude the end of the thing from its beginning, and derive one thing from another, and compare one thing to another, and understand through the principles that the Torah is expounded upon until he knows the foundation of all these limits, and what turns out to be prohibited, and what permitted, and the like from the things he learned from one who heard [the tradition]. This is what is called "gemara".

How [is this done]? If he is a workman and works three hours per day, and studies Torah for nine. Of those nine, three are [spent] in the written Torah, three in the Oral Torah, and for three others he thinks with his mind to understand one thing from another. And the words of the tradition are included in the category of Written Torah and their explanation is included in the category of Oral Torah. And the things called "Pardes" (lit. the orchard) are in the category of Gemara. What are these things talking about? In the beginning of a man's studies. However, as he grows in wisdom and no longer needs neither study of the Written Torah, nor to concentrate constantly on the Oral Torah, he should read at set times Written Torah and the Oral Words in order so that he should not forget anything from the laws of the Torah, and he should turn all his days to Gemara alone according to the breadth of his heart, and the inclination of his mind.

- Rambam Hil. Talmud Torah 1:11, 12

The Rambam not only takes the term "gemara" to mean understanding the inner meaning of the mitzvah, he places the focus of the mitzvah of Torah study on personal analysis and thoughts about "Pardes" (a term often associated with Qabbalah) and understanding the underlying principles behind each law and each mitzvah. To the Rambam, the goal of Torah study must be to understand the spirit of the law!

Tosfos (on the gemara in Avodah Zara we referred to earlier, and makes the identical remarks on Sanhedrin 24a) present the opinion that forms the basis for current practice:

... Therefor they have legislated the [saying of] the verses of the Tamid, the mishnah of "Eizehu mikoman - what are the places", and the braisa of R. Yishma'el [listing the 13 hermeneutical principles].

The "karbanos" section of shacharis is built to assure that this concept is observed daily, at least in a minimal sense. The use of the hermeneutical verses to fulfill the obligation of "gemara" study very much affirms the Rambam's words "the foundations of all these limits". The Tosfos continue to explain:

It appears to Rabbeinu Tam that we who concentrate on Talmud Bavli rule that it is soaked with miqra, mishna and talmud. As it says in Sanhedrin (24a), that it is called "bavel", "since it is soaked with miqra, soaked with mishna, and soaked with talmud.

This justifies the current style, of learning almost exclusively Sha"s [Babylonian Talmud]. Or, it would, if we were using the Talmud to perform the Rambam's three styles of study. However, as R. SR Hirsch laments:

Another misunderstood passage (Sanhedrin 24, Tosfos "b'luloh") even led to the suppression of Bible study, an error against which almost prophetic warning was given long ago (Tractate Soferim XV, 9). The inevitable consequence was, therefore, that since oppression and persecution had robbed Israel of every broad and natural view of life, and the Talmud has yielded about all the practical results for life that it was capable, every mind that felt the desire for independent activity was obliged to forsake the paths of study and research open in general to the human intellect, and to take recourse in dialectic subtleties and hair-splittings.

- Letters of Ben Uzziel, Letter 18

In the footnote (ad. loc. #4), Hirsch outlines what he thinks Torah study should be:

In nature all phenomena stand before us as indisputable facts, and we can only endevour a posteriori to ascertain the law of each and the connection of it all.... The same principles must be applied to the investigation of the Torah. In the Torah, even as in nature, G-d is the ultamite cause. Its ordinances must be accepted in their entirety as undeniable phenomena, and must be studied in accordance with their connection with each other, and the subject to which they relate.

The difference between science and alchemy is that the alchemist had his Aristotelian theories, and forced his experiments to conform. The chemist creates theories to fit the experimental data. If one datum doesn't conform, the theory must be discarded.

Korach, much like the "liberal" movements of "Judaism" make this mistake. They play alchemist with the Torah. Mitzvos can be reshaped to fit the theory. Then, by predeciding the "ethical beliefs" that they feel make up the core of Judaism, they reject the Torah at whim.

We must make sure, however, that we do not go to the opposite extreme. Clearly Torah study is supposed to revolve around the Science of Judaism. We can not use fear of the Reformist alchemy to prevent us from focusing on the broader spectrum, the deeper truths that the mitzvos impart.

When the Jews accepted the Torah, they used the words "Na`aseh vinishma - we will do, and we will hear." Many have commented that the hearing must precede the doing, for how can you follow the Torah until after you know what it says? The word ordering is odd.

The beauty of their words is how succinctly it puts forward this concept. We will do, and follow the Torah. We will also study, and find meaning. But the doing comes first and is primary. Judaism is science, not alchemy. As the Rambam says, the study of meaning is primary, but it must rest on a solid foundation of knowledge of Halachah. Perhaps the words at Har Sinai mean "we will do, and then listen to what those actions are telling us."