Any Controversy Which Is For The Sake Of Heaven Will Be Perpetuated; And That Which Is Not For The Sake Of Heaven Will Not Be Perpetuated.

Which Is A Controversy For The Sake Of Heaven? The Controversy Between Hillel And Shammai.[60] And Which Is Not For The Sake Of Heaven? The Controversy Of Korach And All His Faction.[61]

Which Is A Controversy For The Sake Of Heaven? The Controversy Between Hillel And Shammai

The Zohar[62] explains that the controversy between Hillel and Shammai stemmed from the fact that Shammai's soul was characterized by the quality of gevurah, might, while Hillel's was characterized by the quality of chesed, kindness. These attributes are highlighted by several examples in the Talmud which show Shammai as short-tempered and Hillel as gentle and patient.[63] For that reason, Hillel's opinions would generally be more lenient, and Shammai's more stringent.

Nevertheless, the differences of opinion between Hillel and Shammai were not merely expressions of their personal natures; they were "for the sake of Heaven." As proof, we find several instances[64] in which Shammai issued lenient rulings, and Hillel, more stringent ones. Because their study of Torah was characterized by a selfless desire to discover G-d's truth, they rose above their individual natures and at times displayed the opposite thrust.

As long as a person's divine service follows his natural tendencies, he can never be sure that his intent is to serve G-d; it is possible that his efforts, however worthy, do not reflect a commitment above his individual nature. When, by contrast, he is required to display tendencies that run contrary to his nature, it is clear that he is being motivated by a commitment to G-d that transcends his personal motives.[65]

(Sichos Shabbos Parshas Bamidbar, 5734)

The Controversy Of Korach And All His Faction

The mishnah does not say "the controversy of Korach and Moshe," for Moshe was not involved in controversy. Although Korach aroused strife, Moshe's response was intended solely to preserve the unity of the Jewish people.

(Ibid.)

   

Notes:

60. (Back to text) Eruvin 13b.

61. (Back to text) Bamidbar, ch. 16.

62. (Back to text) III, 245a; see Tanya, Iggeres HaKodesh, Epistle 13.

63. (Back to text) E.g. Shabbos 31a.

64. (Back to text) E.g., Ediyos, chs. 4 and 5.

65. (Back to text) This concept is reflected in one of the explanations given for the greatness inherent in Avraham's binding of Yitzchak. Previously, Avraham's divine service involved acts of kindness which reflected his own personal nature. With regard to the binding of Yitzchak, however, it is written (Bereishis 22:12): "Now I know that you fear G-d"; i.e., he had to first display qualities that ran contrary to his natural tendencies. See Sefer HaMaamarim-Kuntreisim, Vol. II, p. 642; Likkutei Sichos, Vol. II, p. 378.