Parsha Roundup and Reaction

1. Gems Of Torah
   

   "One of the reasons Korach gets his name on the Parsha is that he did want to serve Hashem more."

   Another reason is that Korach's name is the second word in the parsha.
2. At Hirhurim, an occasional vort, which interprets Rashi's comment on vayikach korach that "He took himself" as being that he “took for himself.” This is not the meaning of Rashi, who is initially trying to solve a peshat-based grammatical question about the valence of vayikach, as an Anonymous commenter (the fifth commenter) partially notes.
3. Rabbi Berel Wein on Korach:
   

   Moshe, who is known as a person of limitless patience and tolerance... And yet with Korach and his followers, Moshe adopts a hard line and uncompromising stance... The deeper issue here is that Korach wishes to convert Torah and Judaism to a man-made “democratic” faith, not its original and true source as a faith revealed to humans from on high, a faith and life system ordained in Heaven and revealed to humans... On that basic core issue of Judaism, Moshe sees no room for compromise or tolerance... The struggle to maintain Judaism as a Godly revealed religion is an ongoing one. There are many forces within and without the Jewish world that have attempted and still attempt to remove the Godly revealed part from Judaism.

   I, too, have long held the possibility that this idea of "democratic" Judaism was Korach's claim. It finds extremely strong purchase in the pesukim and the midrashim. Yet I would like a concrete example of what he considers this democratic, Korachite force, which seeks to strip God out of Judaism. And yet 'וּבְתוֹכָם ה seems to suggest some role for God here. See Shadal's take on the nature of the dispute.
   
4. Rabbi Yossocher Frand on Korach:
   

   [T]he Almighty administers punishment in a "measure for measure" fashion. What significance is there to the fact that the earth swallowed up the people who sided with Korach? ... What did Korach take? Rashi's approach is that Korach took himself off to one side, to be separate from the assembly of Israel by raising objections regarding the priesthood... As a result of this "striking out on one's own", everything else follows naturally. Inevitably, the next step will be something akin to "he was jealous regarding the fact that Elizaphon was appointed the Prince of the Tribe of Levi."... Once one fails to see himself as part of the tzibur, one becomes bothered by other people's roles.

   Beautiful as homiletics, but I think that this is a misinterpretation of Rashi. See Rashi inside. I would say that pashut peshat in Rashi is that first Korach was jealous. As a result, he separated from the tzibbur in order to contest the kehunah.
   
5. Rabbi Ephraim Buchwald on Datan and Aviram the Protagonists. One small excerpt:
   

   Although the Torah does not describe Dathan and Abiram playing a very major role in the rebellion, they are portrayed in the Midrash as the most arrogant and defiant of people. The fact that they stand "neetz'a'vim," erect, is identified by the rabbis as the paradigm of defiance. The Talmud therefore concludes (Tractate Nedarim 64b), "Wherever the words ‘nee'tzim,' fighting, or ‘neetz'a'vim,' stand erect, appears in the Torah it is an allusion to Dathan and Abiram.
   

6. Rabbi Zev Leff makes the same claim as Rabbi Yissocher Frand, that Rashi is claiming that the separation caused the jealousy, rather than vice versa. As noted, I am not convinced this is Rashi's intent at all:
   

   Rashi comments on the opening words of the sedrah, “Korach took -- He took himself off to one side.” Korach separated himself. He did not see himself as a part of the klal, but rather as a detached, isolated individual. His sense of separation caused his jealousy of Elizaphon ben Uziel, when the latter was appointed as the family head, and led to his lust for the glory of the kehunah gedolah.