Who is (Truly) Wealthy?
The third Question & Answer of (Shimon) Ben Zoma’s four famous Q&As from the opening mishna in this week’s Perek makes a perfect counterpoint to Korach and his unattainable lust and quest for power and position.

At first glance, Korach’s challenge seems to be based on jealousy and the feeling that he was passed over for positions of authority (either the Kohein Gadolship or the leadership of the K’hat branch of Leviyim). Moshe’s response is to “suggest” a test to determine whom G-d has chosen for leadership in Israel.

Then Moshe tries to reason with Korach. He “reviews” for him the specialness and greatness of the Levi, and asks, “Isn’t it enough... He has brought you close to Him... you are now demanding Kehuna!?” Why, Korach, are you not satisfied, and thrilled, to be in that special position of servant of G-d in the Mikdash?

What makes Korach a particularly appropriate example (actually, a counter-example) is that (our sources tell us) he was fabulously wealthy, and an original, first edition Levi (which must have been particularly exciting), and one of the carriers of the Aron — and he was not satisfied with what he had. If the mishna is asking even a poor person to be happy with his “share” and thus be considered rich, how much more so in Korach’s case can we say that the mishna was composed just for him.

And if Ben Zoma was talking about being happy with what one has, or what one is allotted, then perhaps we can use the Korach model to expand the meaning and lesson of Ben Zoma’s teaching, beyond material possessions. Let’s say that Korach was quite satisfied with his material wealth. Was he ASHIR (rich)? Let’s say yes. But was he happy? Obviously not.

Let’s rephrase Ben Zoma’s Q&A. Who is truly happy? He is is happy with his lot. And that includes material possessions, knowledge, education, talent, status, family, health, strength, looks, and anything else a person “has”. It includes that which he cannot do anything about to chnage, and that which he can change.

Whether one aspires towards something more than he has or not, depends upon whether more is attainable or not. That’s another issue. If and when a person strives for more of something, it does not necessarily mean dissatisfaction with one’s share. (Obviously, that’s a personal opinion.) There is definitely a message here.