Kagandahan

Kagandahan
Minsan gusto mo dito

Thursday, June 30, 2011

Our Choice: Moses or Korah?

Korah, a Levite, together with 250 Israelite leaders protested against the appointment of Aaron as priest. They rebelled against Moses. For they believed that he and the whole Jewish community needed not the spiritual leadership of Moses, and why he and Aaron should assume it? It is Korah’s intention to attain priesthood for himself for he like Moses and Aaron a descendant of Levi, a rightful heir to priesthood. Dathan and Abiram like Korah refuses to recognize Moses as the leader of the Jewish community for his promise was in vain, that they should have reach by then the a land flowing with milk and honey. After Moses had warned them the earth trembled and swallowed the rebels. Some Commentators would suggest that Psalm 106 would tell us: “When they became envious of Moses in the camp, and of Aaron, the holy one of the Lord[1].” This for the psalmist and some commentators is the reason of their upset in Moses. But was it?

Commentators agree that Korah was a well versed man, eloquent in speech, and that he was able to attract Israelite leaders to follow his lead. He was unsatisfied with the leadership of Moses and he sought it. In addition he was disappointed not to inherit the priesthood that should have been his. At first glance or read we could sympathize with Korah’s ill feeling toward Moses and Aaron. But was it? Nachamanides disagree, this may sound true or it may be, but in context, this was the time when Israelites were already confused, they were still in the wilderness and they are having difficult life there, the spies have returned and all of them except two gave a negative report on the lands. This was an opportunity for Korah to seek and claim power from Moses. Together with Abiram and Dathan, Korah wanted to mislead the people by accusing Moses of deceiving them.

Ne(c)hema Leibowitz gave a different opinion on this matter. She said there are two kinds of disputes: first is the pursuit for Heavenly or good cause, her example was Hillel and Shammai (the two leading rabbis of the 1st century[2]), their discussion was for the good of their community, and another good example of this is done in Sr. Helen Graham’s class in Pentateuch. Korah’s dispute on the other hand falls on the second kind – a selfish dispute. He did not seek the good of the community rather he smeared Moses, claiming that he is not at all needed as leader of the community. He tried to create a division in the community.

“You have gone far enough, for all the congregation are holy, every one of them, and the Lord is in their midst; so why do you exalt yourselves above the assembly of the Lord?[3]” We may agree that if God is with us who needed a leader? If God is with us therefore we are holy. What is the need of Moses? Do we need a mediator, when we are ourselves are holy?

As articulated, Korah claimed that holiness is an inherent quality of members of the community but not to be aspired. However, as Yeshayahu Leibowitz, an Israeli philosopher contends: holiness is the objective of a life lived in relationship to God and God’s will. A path set before them.[4] Holiness therefore is not something you gain because you are a Jew or Christian, it is not claimed either by position even by priest or bishops not even the Papacy assures holiness rather it is what one follows – the will of God.

Holiness is a gift from God, if we allow God to direct our lives we are able to share in the Holiness of the Lord. Korah sees it the other way. He did not want direction, he wanted to master his own ship, for he enough can gain holiness- it is ontologically given. He sees his “Jewishness” enough to give him holiness and that priesthood could gain him more holiness. His view of holiness is paralleled with his desire for power and self centered motives.

Martin Buber states that Moses’ goal was holiness and that holiness is our constant choice between God and our selfish ways in contrast to Korah’s view of holiness. Oftentimes we suffer from the same perspective as Korah’s in our particular community. Sometimes we regard our being professed as holy, that we are called ‘religious’ and we are already holy. Holiness is not an attribute but a constant choice – a fundamental option. Everyday of our life we have a chance to be holy. To decide whether we work over our selfish desire or follow God’s will. For a religious it means to live faithfully the vows we have. Obedience is difficult, like Korah, we hope we could simply just run our lives without anyone deciding where we limit ourselves. But this obedience is not an end itself; it helps us to follow God’s will and to achieve the fullness of freedom which is the freedom from the desire of the self. We have the right to free speech, just like Korah, but if we malign our brothers we have abused this freedom, we did serve its purpose – to have a healthy relationship with our fellowmen. The punishment of Korah is an effect of his egocentricity, if we seek too much our desire, we drown on it, we are swallowed by our desire, it is Korah’s desire that swallowed him. He deserves the punishment. However, we can be like Moses who humbled himself and followed God’s will, he seek for the good of the community. Everyday, we have the chance to choose to be like Moses or to be like Korah or his followers.

Disclaimer – most of the commentaries from Jewish scholars is taken from A Torah Commentary for our Times.

No comments: