“Korach took…” famously starts this week’s parsha. With 250 men, Korach confronts Moses and Aharon saying, “You have taken too much for yourselves since the entire congregation is holy and Hashem is in their midst, why do you raise yourselves above the assembly of Hashem?” (Bamidbar 16:1-3) Korach’s rebellion is built on the favoritism of the subclass of Jews, the tribe of Levi, being elevated above the rest of the Israelites and well as the even smaller subset of Levites, the sons of Aharon, being given the priesthood. From a surface reading of the text alone, Korach doesn’t sound like he’s looking for political overthrow for his own aggrandizement like the commentators describe. What evidence do we have to see him as this power hungry manipulator?

The Midrash relates a story that Korach told to amass his 250 followers for the purposes to incite this mutiny.

“Listen and I will tell you of this unfortunate widow who once lived near me with her two daughters, all of whose possessions consisted of a small field from which she eked out a living. One day, when she had just begun to plow her field, Moses came to her and said, “Be careful not to plow by using an ox and a donkey together, for God has commanded, ‘Do not plow with an ox and a donkey together’ (Devarim 22:10). Then she came to sow her field, and Moses said to her, ‘Be careful not to seed your field with mixed seed, for God has commanded, “Do not plant your field with different spices of seeds.’ (Vayikra 19:19)

She came to reap and Moses told her, ‘Take care not to pick up the individual stocks that have fallen (Vayikra 19:9), nor go back to retrieve the forgotten sheaves (Devarim 25:19) nor completely harvest the corners of your field (Vayikra 19:9). When she was about to put the grain into storage, Moses said to her, ‘You must separate terumah tithe for the Kohanim (Devarim 18:4) and the first ma’aser to the Levites (Numbers 18:24) and second ma’aser (Devarim 14:22).’ The widow suffered in silence and fulfilled all that Moses had commanded her. But having done so, she concluded that it was not worthwhile to maintain the field and to have all this on her head. So she sold the field and bought two sheep whose wool she planned to shear off and thus provide for herself and her daughters. But when the sheep were about to give birth, Aharon came along and demanded the first-born, for God has commanded, ‘You must consecrate to God every firstling among your cattle and flocks.’ (Devarim 15:19)

The widow suffered in silence and gave him the firstlings. Later when they came to shear the wool, Aharon appeared again, demanding that he be given the inaugural wool, since God had commanded, “You must give him… the first of your shearing’ (Devarim 18:4). ‘I see that I have fallen into a trap from which I cannot escape,’ she said to herself, ‘so I will slaughter them instead.’ But no sooner had she slaughtered the sheep when Aharon again appeared and demanded the foreleg, the jaw, and the maw.’ (Devarim 18:3) ‘I see that even by slaughtering them I cannot be rid of these demands. Therefore, I will put everything under cherem (donation, consecrated to God) and let us see what he says then!’ the widow exclaimed in desperation. Aharon replied, ‘Now give me everything, for God has said, ‘Everything that the Israelites declare as cherem shall be yours.’ (Bamidbar 18:14)

“Thus it was,” Korach concluded, “that after Aharon took away everything that she had, leaving her and her two daughters with nothing to support themselves, they died of hunger. Whatever Moses and Aharon preach is for their own benefit. They rob you and assert that God commanded them to do so.” (Yalkut Shimoni)

At first glance, Korach makes a rather compelling argument. These laws are not only onerous, they could seriously impoverish if not outright kill the most vulnerable among us! Clearly, these decrees must have been made up so Moses and his nepotistically appointed brother could line their pockets with the hard earned produce of the “lower class.” However, as with most demagogues, if you look closely at their rhetoric and use the brain to see past the emotion, the half truths and manipulation start to become clear.

Appeal to emotion – It just so happens that the woman in the story is a widow raising two daughters all by herself. At the end of Moses and Aharon’s demands, not only is the poor woman left destitute, she and her daughters die. She “suffers in silence” and complains, “she has fallen into a trap she cannot escape.” How many politicians tell stories of constituents crying their eyes out over some given problem. The politician decries, “It’s so sad.” Of course, the most compelling arguments are going to be based in emotion, but if we get caught up in those emotional elements of a story that can bypass our reasoning.

False premise – Korach says this widow once lived near him. That’s particularly odd given that at this point in time, the Israelites had been slaves in Egypt or they were wandering with the camp in the desert. Virtually all of these laws wouldn’t take effect until they entered the land of Israel and started farming. This story could not have happened. It’s clearly designed to demonstrate how oppressive the laws might be, given a certain scenario. But because Korach presents it as true, it comes off as more truthful even though it is fabricated. Do the facts of a story add up when we think them through?

Slippery slope – This is a minor action that will lead to extreme consequences. However, if we think critically about the Torah obligations, we find that they may not have been so bad. Separating terumah for the Kohein was a minute amount, as little as a grain of wheat. The donation of the sheep’s inaugural wool was a small amount as well. Yes, the first ma’aser was a tenth of your earnings, but everyone has to pay taxes. The second ma’aser was to be consumed by the donor. It was just supposed to eaten in Jerusalem. Some of the second ma’aser had to be donate to the poor. But if you’re so poor you’re going to die of starvation, then clearly that donation is going to go to you, along with ma’aser from other people to you. The laws were made to fortify society, not plunge it into ruin. It is absurd to say that the required donations would bankrupt a person to the point of starvation.

Strawman – The woman becomes so hindered by the requirements of the land that she has to sell her field for two sheep. All she gets from selling a field is two sheep? I don’t think there’s ever been a period of history where a farmable tract of land would only be worth two animals. This is a Strawman fallacy because the Torah’s agricultural laws don’t strip things of their value. Korach isn’t arguing against the Torah, but a cartoonish extreme.

False Dilemma – The story characterizes Moses and Aharon as watching the woman like a hawk. But in reality Moses and Aharon are in positions of top leadership, they’re exceedingly busy. They would never have time to do something so petty. That’d be like saying the President of the US was personally watching your tax returns. The tactic goes even further when the woman gives up and donates her property to God, only for Aharon to respond, “Guess where that goes!” In doing this, the story characterizes Moses and Aharon under a false dilemma implying, you’re either with these corruptly fixated monsters, or you’re with me. But in actuality, the argument has nothing to do with Moses and Aharon at all, but the Torah.

I could go on listing more logical fallacies in the story, but I think you get the point. Korach wasn’t interested in arguing Torah decrees on the merits. Instead he used superficial understanding and emotion to contort the truth for his own advantage. Not only was he wrong, it led him, his family, and 250 followers to their doom. The Korach story is so important because we live in an age where major decisions are made almost purely based on emotion, false narratives, and logical fallacies. An out of context image with a quote overlaid that has nothing to do with the situation is the norm in our modern public square of social media. Not a week goes by without me seeing someone share a message that claims Facebook will give away all of your data unless you formally declare you do not consent, as if Facebook posts were legally binding. And with the emergence of AI generated images and content that look photo realistic and Deep Fakes, it’s only going to get a lot worse.

Arguments (aka machlokes) are important and Jews love to argue more than anyone. The end of the parsha ends with a miracle proving Aharon was in fact divinely appointed. The miracle is that his staff blossomed with almonds. Why almonds? The first chapter of Masechta Maaseros says that there are two types of almonds. One that is sweet at the beginning, but when it ripens, becomes bitter. The other is bitter at first, but when ripe is sweet. Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Kook said these two almonds symbolize two different types of arguments. One type of argument we launch into, quick to attack, responding to emotion, not thinking things through or learning all the facts. They start out fun and can end quickly in disaster, even if we win the argument. The second type of argument, done for the sake of truth and what is right, starts out difficult. You have to get all the facts, consider the other side’s perspective, admit when you’re wrong, and don’t just stop when you get bored but actually get to the truth of the matter. But the fruits of these arguments make us smarter, fosters connections, and brings us closer to the truth. Where Korack took for himself, an argument for the truth gives to everyone.