Korach- Emunah and Ma'aseh

 וַיִּקַּ֣ח קֹ֔רַח בֶּן־יִצְהָ֥ר בֶּן־קְהָ֖ת בֶּן־לֵוִ֑י וְדָתָ֨ן וַאֲבִירָ֜ם בְּנֵ֧י אֱלִיאָ֛ב וְא֥וֹן בֶּן־פֶּ֖לֶת בְּנֵ֥י רְאוּבֵֽן׃

רש''י: ויקח קרח. פרשה זו יפה נדרשת במדרש רבי תנחומא: ויקח קרח... באו ועמדו לפני משה. אמרו לו טלית שכלה של תכלת חיבת בציצית או פטורה. אמר להם חיבת. התחילו לשחק עליו,  אפשר טלית של מין אחר חוט אחד של תכלת פוטרה, זו שכלה תכלת לא תפטור את עצמה 

Rav Shlomo Zevin explains a deep yesod from this. Emunah in Hashem and performing mitzvos are not two separate things. They are meant to go hand in hand with each other. We see the Gemara in Berachos (13a) explains, why does “שמע” precede “והי'ה אם שמוע”? In order so that one should first be mekabel ol malchus Shomayim and then be mekabel ol mitzvos. One must first have a clear picture that there is a Commander and then understand that there is a commandment. 

The flip-side is true as well; plain emunah, unconnected to mitzvos, is not real emunah. It is not founded in anything and therefore has no real body to it. The Torah says, “כי ה' אלקיך אש אכלה הוא” (Devarim 4:24); Hashem is compared to a fire. And just as flame without a wick cannot last, so too, emunah in Hashem cannot last unless it has the wick of mitzvos to sustain it. 

The techeiles and lavan in tzitzis represent these two ideas, Emunas Hashem and Ma’aseh HaMItzvos. Chazal tell us that techeiles is similar to the sea, which is similar to the sky, which is similar to the Kisei HaKavod (Menachos 43b). The Gemara there brings pesukim to show that Kisei HaKavod is blue. Rashi there explains that is through the visage of the techeiles that we are reminded of HaKadosh Boruch Hu. So, here we see the connection to Emunas Hashem. Whereas by the rest of the tzitzis, the Torah says “וראיתם אתו וזכרתם את כל מצות ה' ועשיתם אותם” (Bamidbar 15:39). Here we see the connection to Maaseh HaMitzvos. 

What was Korach’s argument? He claimed that there was no need for the actual performance of mitzvos. “כי כל העדה כלם קדשים ובתוכם ה'”, everyone is holy! Everyone is connected to Hashem. Rashi explains that Korach was exclaiming that it was not only Moshe and Aharon who were at Har Sinai and heard “אנכי ה' אלוקיך”. That is to say, all the nation were directly commanded the foundations of faith; “אנכי ה'” and “לא יהי'ה לך אלהים אחרים”. But whatever mitzvos came through Moshe, Korach claimed that Moshe himself made them up, and that Bnei Yisrael had no reason to abide by them.       

This is why Korach claim to Moshe was that a tallis which is entirely techeiles surely is patur from tzitzis. That is to say, a people so connected to Emunas Hashem don't need all of "Moshe's mitzvos."

ובני קרח לא מתו
Rav Zevin writes that there are people in every generation that foster the propagation of this Korachian philosophy, that faith alone is enough to get by. The Torah here is telling us otherwise, Emunas Hashem must go hand in hand with Ma'aseh HaMitzvos.

Korach- From the teachings of the Or Gedalyahu

In Parshat Korach, as we know, Korach amasses his own kehillah to challange Moshe. Now when the Torah names the bigshots in Korach's party, the pasuk lists him as "Korach ben Yitzhar ben Kehat ben Levi." Now as Rashi brilliantly points outs, its does not say "ben Yaakov" or "ben Yisrael" anywhere. And why would one have assumed that it should? Because in Divrei HaYamim, when it lists the families for the duchen-ing, Korach's lineage is listed with "ben Yisrael"! Rashi writes that Yaakov Avinu had davened that his name not be mentioned by machloket, as is the case in the parshah. But why? And what is the difference between Parshat Korach & Divrei HaYamim?

The answer given in Or Gedalyahu is essentially that Yaakov Avinu davened that his named not be mentioned by machloket because he didn't want the middah which he handed down to his children to be cursed and distorted. Yaakov Avinu represented the middah of Emet. Just as talmidim take on middot of their rebbe, so too children would naturaly take on good middot of their parents. The Chiddushei HaRim explains that the middah of Emet is everlasting without change, as truth remains constant and cannot be distorted. Therefore Yaakov really davened that his middah of Emet not be mentioned near machloket, which is just the opposite of what Emet represents. However, by the duchening, Yaakov's name is mentioned because Emet lasts forever, and certainly Yaakov's middot and strength would join with the Leviim in later generations when they do the great mitzvah of duchening.

Another explanation is based on that which the Torah says, "תורה צוה לנו משה מורשה קהלת יעקב". Yaakov Avinu passed on to future generations the sense kehillah. This is why Yaakov davened not to be mentioned by Korach's kehillah; because that kehillah was in itself against the Kehillat Yaakov as he was actually breaking away from the main chunk of Am Yisrael. Korach mistakenly thought that he was promoting the middah of Achdut. So Yaakov did not want his strength of achdut connected to Korach, as achdut is itself a base of Emet. That is why Korach could not truly unite people together, because he was lacking achdut. His group was united against Moshe, but in truth they were not united amongst themeselves.