Pinechas – Action and Reward/2

Pinechas – Action and Reward

Exegetical Approaches

Overview

Vigilante Justice

Pinechas acted outside of the judicial system, and took the law into his own hands when he killed Zimri. This position subdivides...

Pinechas Led the Way

Pinechas was the first to punish any of the worshippers of Baal Peor. His killing of Zimri paved the way for others to punish the rest of the offenders.

Sources: PhiloOn the Life of Moshe I:LVAbout Philo, JosephusAntiquities 4:6:9-12About Josephus,

Zimri's sin – Zimri participated in both the sexual and sacrificial component of Baal Peor worship. According to Josephus, he also questioned Moshe's authority, and expressed disregard for the laws Moshe had given over. Philo, in contrast, simply emphasizes the licentiousness of his behavior and his shamelessness in displaying it publicly.

The judges's role – Both Philo and Josephus present the other leaders only acting in the aftermath of, and as a result of Pinechas' deed, not having been commanded to beforehand. According to them, one must assume that the Biblical text

Why does Pine? –

Why didn't Moshe act? –

Vigilante justice –

What would have happened if Pinchas did not act? –

Why was Pinechas' action enough to stop the plague? –

Pinchas' reward –

–

Crux of the position –

Pinechas Acted as a קנאי

Pinechas took on the role of a "zealot", the special circumstances of which allows one to act without due process of law.

Sources: Yerushalmi SanhedrinSanhedrin 9:7About the Yerushalmi, Bavli SanhedrinSanhedrin 82aAbout the Bavli, Targum Pseudo-JonathanBemidbar 25:4-13About Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, RashiBemidbar 25:3-13About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, RalbagBemidbar 25:3Bemidbar 23-25 Toalot 13-16Bemidbar 25 Toelet 1About R. Levi b. Gershon, Netziv

Zimri's sin – These commentators connect Zimri's sin to that of the rest of the nation, but emphasize the aspect of his illicit relations with a non-Jew over the idolatry. Most of these exegetes¹ add a component of rebellion to his actions as well, having Zimri question the decision to kill the offenders, and/or asking Moshe why consorting with a Midyanite is problematic, if after all Moshe, himself, had married Tzipporah,² also a Midyanite.³

The judges' role – According to most of these commentators,⁴ Hashem commanded Moshe to set up judges to punish those who had sinned with Baal Peor.⁵ Though it is not explicit in the text, Rashi and Ralbag maintain that they did in fact do so, and had at least begun to punish the worshipers before Pinechas' actions.⁶

Why were the judges' actions insufficient? – Zimri's public and defiant act called for its own retribution.

Why was Pinechas permitted to act on his own?

• In accord with halakhah – According to all of these commentators,⁷ Pinchas was acting according to the law that a zealot is allowed to kill one who is engaging in sexual activity with a non Jew, while they are in the midst of the act - "הבועל את הנכרית קנאין פוגעין בו".⁸
• Prevent a desecration of Hashem – Shemuel in the Bavli and the Netziv add that Pinchas took matters into his own hands and did not consult first with Moshe since this was a חילול ה' and quick action was needed to prevent any further desecration.
• Prevent punishment – According to R. Yitzchak in the Bavli, Pinechas saw that the angel of death was beginning to destroy the nation and decided to act so as to save the nation from punishment.

Why didn't Moshe act?

Why did Pinchas' act stop the plague? – for those who say zimri was trying to stop the punishments, make sense to kill him as sign that recognize punishment??

• According to Rashi, Ralbag and Netziv, the plague was a response to the idolatrous acts of the nation at large. If so, and the perpetrators of that sin were already punished by the judges, it is not clear why the plague only stopped once Pinechas acted.⁹
• According to Bavli Sanhedrin and Targum Pseudo-Jonathan, it is not clear when the plague started, and whether it was in response to the idolatrous actions of the nation or just the sin of Zimri. It is possible that Hashem had commanded the killing of the idolaters to assuage His wrath but had not personally punished anyone;¹⁰ only after Zimri's defiant act, did He do so. Thus, punishing Zimri specifically was necessary to stop the deaths. According to the Bavli, Zimri was accompanied by 24 thousand men from his own tribe, implying that it was these men (rather than the larger nation) who were killed.

Pinchas' priestly reward – According to all these commentators Pinechas was rewarded with some new status:

• Perpetual priesthood – Bavli Sanhedrin¹¹ maintains that Pinechas was promised that the priesthood would always remain in his family.¹²
• High Priesthood – Ralbag and Targum Pseudo Jonathan assert that Pinechas was promised a promotion, that he and is descendants would be the high priests.¹³
• Priest – According to Rashi, until this point Pinechas was not a priest at all. Only those anointed with Aharon and their descendants to be born thereafter had been given the position. Pinchas who had already been born at the time had missed out.

הִנְנִי נֹתֵן לוֹ אֶת בְּרִיתִי שָׁלוֹם – Targum Pseudo-Jonathan asserts that this is a promise of eternal life¹⁴ while Netziv suggests that Hashem was granting Pinechas the inner trait of peace. Since the act of killing, however justified, has the potential to change someone's character, Pinchas was promised that he would not become quick to anger but instead have a calm demeanor.¹⁵

Crux of the position –

Following Orders

When Pinechas killed Zimri, he was simply heeding the command of Moshe to kill those who had participated in the sin of Baal Peor. This approach subdivides regarding what differentiated Pinechas from other leaders in Israel:

Pinechas Alone was Loyal to Moshe

The other judges were either unwilling or unable to carry out the killings. Only Pinechas did not hesitate to fulfill Moshe's directive, and garnered the courage to stab the offenders.

Sources: SifreBalak 131About Sifre, ChizkuniBemidbar 25:6-13About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach, SefornoBemidbar 25:4,8,11-13About R. Ovadyah Seforno, Hoil MosheBemidbar 25:4,6,12-13About R. Moshe Yitzchak Ashkenazi

Zimri's sin – According to all of these exegetes, Zimri's sin was related to that of the nation and connected to the worship of Baal Peor. Hoil Moshe asserts that he was even one of the first to sin, leading the others into similar wrongdoing. Sifre, like the sources above, adds an aspect of rebellion as well.

The judges's role –

• According to Sifre, Chizkuni and Seforno, the judges=leaders were directed to kill the Israelites who had worshiped Baal Peor,¹⁶ but did not fulfill their task.
• Hoil Moshe raises the possibility that Hashem directed Moshe to appoint people to kill not the laymen within Israel but the leaders themselves, since it was these, Zimri amongst them, who were at the forefront of the worship of Baal Peor.¹⁷ The judges, though, were reluctant to act.

Why didn't the judges act? – Chizkuni suggests that they hesitated to kill their relatives while Hoil Moshe posits that the judges, being of lesser status than the leaders they were to punish, feared to harm them. Sifre, instead, suggests that in the face of Zimri's public actions, the other leaders lost their courage and refused to step forward to kill.

Why didn't Moshe act? Moshe had originally delegated the responsibility to others. It is possible that when no one followed his orders he did not personally step in because his late age precluded him from taking quick action.

Was Pinchas one of the appointed judges? – According to the Sifre, Pinechas was one of the judges appointed by Moshe.¹⁸ The other commentators do not address the question.

Vigilante justice – According to this position Pinechas is following Moshe's directive (and might even be one of the judges given the task of punishing) and thus the story raises no questions as to the validity of one taking the law into his own hands.

What would have happened if Pinchas did not act? –

Why was Pinechas' action enough to stop the plague? – As Hashem had originally claimed that His wrath would only abate after the sinners were hanged, this approach must deal with why it was sufficient to kill just one.

• It allowed the nation to repent – According to Seforno, even those who had not sinned with Baal Peor deserved punishment for not having protested against the misdeeds of their fellow Israelites,¹⁹ Hashem's wrath was only to abate when the nation agreed to the sinners' being punished.²⁰ Thus, when Pinechas publicly killed one of the criminals and the nation quietly watched, Hashem was appeased and stopped the plague.²¹
• Human Punishment Preferred over Divine – Hoil Moshe asserts that the plague only began because no one had been willing to stand up against the offending leaders.²² Thus, as soon as Pinechas acted in place of the judges, Hashem no longer felt the need for His Divine punishment.

Pinchas' reward –

• High Priesthood – Sifre and Chizknui suggest that Hashem granted Pinechas a higher status, the high priesthood. Sifre also implies that there was a measure for measure component, as pinechas is to recieve 24 gifts granted to priests (matching the 24,000 who died.)
• Eternal Life – According to Seforno, the "covenant of peace" refers to peace from death and the promise that Pinechas would live forever.
• Status Quo - Chizkuni asserts that this covenant refers to peace from potential enemies and the promise that he need not fear retribution from the families of Zimri and Kozbi. Similarly, he was reassured that despite having killed, he would still be able to serve as priest. Hoil Moshe also suggests that Pinechas was promised nothing in new; this is just a repetition of an old promise, much like the forefathers were continuously blessed by Hashem.

Crux of the position –

Pinechas Killed the Worst Offender

Though other judges also heeded Moshe's command and punished the offenders, it was Pinechas' deed which assuaged Hashem's wrath because he killed Zimri, the most public and esteemed of the wrongdoers.

Sources: ??Ibn EzraBemidbar 25:4-13About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, AbarbanelBemidbar 25:1Bemidbar 25:12 QuestionsBemidbar 25:12About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel,

Zimri's sin – Zimri's union with Kozbi was connected to the worship of Baal Peor.²³ He, though, was more brazen and offensive than the others. Though he was supposed to be amongst those killing the sinners, he not only refuses to punish the others, but he joined them and went so far as to commit his act in the very midst of these punishments. In this public act he effectively permitted the rest of his tribe to act likewise.

The judges's role – According to Abarbanel, Hashem had directed Moshe to appoint judges to kill the leaders themselves for not having protested against and stopped the nation from sinning.²⁴ Upon hearing the command, Moshe instead, immediately tells the leaders to actively protest against the idolaters by killing them,²⁵ which the leaders (with the exception of Zimri) proceed to do.

Why didn't Moshe act? – There was no need for Moshe to act since others were doing their job.

Was Pinchas a judge? – Abarbanel implies that he was not a judge²⁶ but that he was witness to Moshe's directive to kill the offenders.

Vigilante justice – According to Abarbanel Pinechas is heeding Moshe's command,²⁷ and this this is not a case of vigilantism.

What would have happened if Pinchas did not act? – Abarbanel asserts that all of Israel would have been wiped out.

Why did Pinechas specifically stop the plague? – Though other leaders had similarly punished offenders, Pinechas was unique in that he killed the ringleader. Abarbanel assumes that most of the 24,000 killed in the plague were from the tribe of Shimon, who had acted in the wake of their leader, Zimri. Thus, it was his death that was most necessary to stop Hashem's wrath.

Pinchas' reward – Abarbanel asserts that Pinechas was assured protection from the families of Zimri and Kosbi and that his priestly status would not be harmed by his having killed, but rather, to the contrary, he was now promised high priesthood.

Crux of the position –

3

Sources: Bavli SanhedrinSanhedrin 35aAbout the Bavli, TanchumaBalak 19About the Tanchuma, R. Yosef Bekhor ShorBemidbar 25:6, 11-12About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, RambanBemidbar 25:5Bemidbar 25:12-13About R. Moshe Nachmanides, ShadalBemidbar 25:6,13About R. S.D. Luzzatto,

–

–

–

–

–

Crux of the position –

5

Sources:

–

–

–

–

–

Crux of the position –

Sources:

–

–

–

–

–

Crux of the position –

¹ Netziv is the exception.

² To read more about Moshe's marriage to Tzipporah, see Moshe and Zipporah's Marriage.

³ Thus, though these commentators do not explicitly say that Zimri was worshiping idolatry through his cohabiting with Kozbi, they present Zimri acting as a representative of his tribe, clearly connecting his actions and themisdeeds of the people.

⁴ Yerushalmi Sanhedrin does not address the issue.

⁵ The word "אוֹתָם" in Hashem's directive does not refer back to the phrase "רָאשֵׁי הָעָם" in the earlier part of the verse, but rather to the Israelites of the verse before. According to this read, the term "שֹׁפְטֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" of verse 5 refers to the same people as the "רָאשֵׁי הָעָם" of verse 4, and Moshe fulfills the command exactly as directed.

⁶ Bavli Sanhedrin mentions the convening of the courts, but does not say explicitly whether anyone had yet carried out the killings.

⁷ It is unclear if Shemuel and R. Yitzchak in the Bavli disagree with Rav and do not think that this is a case of "קנאין פוגעין בו", or if they are simply adding a second possibility to explain Pinchas' actions.

⁸ Rav in the Bavli and Rashi add that, before acting, Pinchas sought the approval of Moshe who did not tell him explicitly to kill the couple but suggested that it was the right thing to do.This is in accordance with the law that states that though a person viewing such a deed might act on his own zealousness, an authoritative figure may not tell him explicitly to kill.

⁹ When commanding the judges to punish the people, Moshe says that in doing so "וְיָשֹׁב חֲרוֹן אַף ה' מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל", suggesting that no more would be needed to stop the plague.

¹⁰ Though the end of the plague is explicit in the verses, there is no mention of when it began.

¹¹ See also the first possibility raised by Ralbag who suggests that this is actually a promise that his blood line will perpetuate, and therefore that their will always be priests from his descendants.

¹² This position is picking up on the word "עוֹלָם".

¹³ The two see in this reward a measure for measure component. Since Pinchas atoned for others, he will continue to be able to do so. In addition, since he killed Zimri in the gut, that portion of sacrifices will be his in the role of priest. This specific suggestion might in part be motivated by the fact that Pinchas and his descendants were in fact high priests. Ralbag points out that the fact that there are known to be some high priests from other lines does not refute this possibility, since the promise could have been conditional.

¹⁴ a better textual hook for this idea might be the words בְּרִית כְּהֻנַּת עוֹלָם, that Pinechas will somehow manage to be a priest forever.

¹⁵ This, too, is measure for measure. Pinchas had calmed Hashem's wrath so, now Hashem is ensuring that Pinchas himimself not be filled with anger.

¹⁶ As above, "אוֹתָם" in Hashem's directive refers to the Israelites of the previous verse and the terms "שֹׁפְטֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" and "רָאשֵׁי הָעָם" are interchangeable.

¹⁷ Thus, in verse 4 the words, "וְהוֹקַע אוֹתָם" refer to the previously mentioned "רָאשֵׁי הָעָם". The "שֹׁפְטֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" of verse 5 represent a different group of people, who were assigned to kill "הַנִּצְמָדִים לְבַעַל פְּעוֹר" which were the leaders ("רָאשֵׁי הָעָם" of verse 4) themselves.

¹⁸ The midrash states, "כיון שראה שהיו הכל שותקים עמד מתוך סנהדרי שלו ושמט את הרומח".

¹⁹ Though seforno does not say so explicitly, it would seem that it was they who were targeted by the plague.

²⁰ In not protesting the sinners' deaths, they would show that they had repented of their previous inaction.

²¹ It no longer mattered that other worshipers had not yet been punished, since the nation demonstrated that they had repented.

²² This is in contrast to those who maintain that "וַיִּחַר אַף ה' בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל" of verse three (before the directive to kill the sinners) represents the beginning of the plague.

²³ Though this is not explicit in Abarbanel, it emerges from his explanation of the episode.

²⁴ Like Hoil Moshe above, he reads the words "וְהוֹקַע אוֹתָם" to refer to the earlier mentioned "רָאשֵׁי הָעָם", but suggests that they deserved death not because they had been active participants, but because they had been passive standers-by.

²⁵ Thus, according to Abarbanel, "שֹׁפְטֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל" of verse 5 is identical to the "רָאשֵׁי הָעָם" of verse 4, with both referring to the leaders. Though Hashem had wanted them punished, Moshe spares their lives by having them repent of their wrongdoing and actively show their protest.

²⁶ He stresses that Pinechas was not learned in the art of war and that weapons were new to him.

²⁷ He suggests that even Pinechas' choice to kill by sword related to Hashem's command, "הוֹקַע אוֹתָם", which in Abarbanel's opinion refers to stabbing.