Professional Documents
Culture Documents
The Reward
In the aftermath of the debacle that had unfolded in the
camp, Pinchas killed the lecherous Zimri, and was
rewarded by Divine decree:
Had it not been for the action of Pinchas, the Jews might
well have been annihilated. Pinchas zealously restored
order to the camp. God therefore rewards Pinchas with a
covenant of peace. Pinchas and his descendents will enjoy
the status of Kohen, as payment for his zeal.
The things with which God rewards Pinchas are far from
random. When we consider that Pinchas' actions may have
been looked upon askance by many in the camp, that his
1
method for restoring harmony in the camp was to kill
another Jew, we may conclude that peace was the one
thing Pinchas desperately needed. It may be safe to
assume that there were many people who would have
taken umbrage at Pinchas' zeal, and still others who would
seek to further the cycle of violence by taking revenge for
the murder of Zimri.1 God gives Pinchas a covenant of
peace; He endorses Pinchas and the extreme measures
Pinchas took to restore peace in the camp, while at the
same time effectively protecting Pinchas from his
detractors.2 These practical and specific goals might be
seen as quite separate from the reward of kehuna
described in the next verse.
2
the first kohen, the quintessential kohen. In the words of
Hillel:
Covenant of Kehuna
The commentaries are divided regarding the meaning and
significance of the covenant of eternal kehuna. Rashi
teaches that Pinchas was not originally a kohen, and was
only anointed in the aftermath of the Zimri affair. This
approach is found in rabbinic literature, yet is somewhat
problematic: Being that Pinchas' father and grandfather
were kohanim, why should Pinchas have been initially
excluded from kehuna? According to this approach,
Pinchas was an anomaly, the victim of a strange clause:
Aharon was made a kohen, 4 his son Elazar was made a
4
Shmot 28:1
ספר שמות פרק כח
3
kohen, 5 and any male child subsequently born to this
family line would automatically be born a kohen. However,
Pinchas "suffered" from having already been born; he was
therefore not among those specifically anointed, nor was
he among “those who would subsequently be born”6.
Rashi explains that Pinchas is here granted kehuna by
Divine directive:
4
The Riva8 has a different approach. Jewish law states that
a Kohen who kills is invalid to serve; therefore, when
Pinchas killed Zimri and Kosbi, he should have been
disqualified as a kohen. Only divine intervention in the
form of a promise of everlasting kehuna allowed him to
remain a kohen. 9 In fact, the text supports this approach:
When he was awarded the kehuna, the Torah describes
Pinchas' actions as bringing about atonement:
Taking the wider view, we realize that the role of the kohen
is to bring about atonement for the People of Israel. Most
kohanim achieve this by bringing offerings. Pinchas
brought an unorthodox offering – he killed Zimri. Instead
8
Riva Bamidbar 25:12, citing Rav Moshe MiCoucy, known as the S”mag )Sefer Mitzvot Gedolot(
פירוש הריב"א על במדבר פרק כה פסוק יב
לפי שכפיו נגואלו בדם וכהן שהרג את הנפש לא ישא את כפיו והיה מתירא שמא יפסיד כהונתו.הנני נותן לו את בריתי שלום
: כפר"מ מקוצ"י.לכך נתן לו הקב"ה את בריתו שלם
9
The Zohar makes a similar suggestion. I have seen it suggested that in fact God knew that Pinchas
would kill Zimri and therefore suffer disqualification, Pinchas' kehuna was purposely held in abeyance
until after he killed Zimri in order to avoid this problem: at the moment he killed Zimri, Pinchas was
not a Kohen. He became a kohen only subsequently. Zohar Volume 3 214a: "Now it is a rule that a
priest who kills a human being becomes disqualified for the priesthood, and therefore by rights Pinchas
should have been disqualified. But because he was jealous for the Holy One, blessed be He, the
priesthood was assigned to him and to his descendants in perpetuity."
שפתי כהן על במדבר פרק כה פסוק יא
וכמו שאהרן אוהב שלום ורודף שלום, מאחר שתפס במדותיו של אהרן ראוי הוא לכהונתו של אהרן,לזה אמר בן אהרן הכהן
:כן פינחס נאמר לו הנני נותן לו את בריתי שלום
ובני, נתקבצו שבטו של שמעון להורגו ופרחה נשמתו של פינחס, אלא כשהרגו לזמרי,) למה אמר בן בן.אמר בזוהר (ח"ג רי"ז
ואף על פי שהם שנים ואין גוף אחד יכול לקבל שתי, נכנסו בגופו, לפי שלא נשאו נשים,אהרן נדב ואביהוא שהיו ערטלאין
, והם היו כהנים, שנכנסו בגופו, ולזה לא נתכהן פינחס עד שהרגו לזמרי, לפי שלא נשאו נחשבים כל אחד כחצי גוף,נשמות
אלה ראשי אבות, כ"ה) ואלעזר בן אהרן הכהן לקח לו מבנות פוטיאל ותלד לו את פינחס,'לזה רמז בפרשת וארא (שמות ו
אלא, ואם תאמר נשמתו היכן הלכה. הן נכללין בפינחס, לומר מראשי בית אבותם שהן נדב ואביהוא שהיו סגני כהונה,הלוים
לפי, אלא כדי שלא תאמר שהוא לכתחילה עשה כן ולא הלך אחר היחס, לא אמר בת פוטיאל,לפי שאלעזר לקח מבנות פוטיאל
והיה קשה, לפי שהדבר הוא מאתו יתברך, תהיה מה שתהיה, לזה לא אמר בת פוטיאל אלא מבנות פוטיאל,שישרה בעיניו
והנשמה חזרה להיות גוף בערך נשמות, וכשפרחה נשמתו מת אותו גוף, ולזה לא נמשח,בעיניו איך יקח בת כהן לעבודה זרה
ואין, שגופו היה נשמה, לזה נתן לו חיים לעולם, והנשמה בן אהרן, אם כן הוא בן אלעזר שהוא הגוף שנזדכך,נדב ואביהוא
:מיתה אלא לגוף
5
of being seen as an outrage, God accepted this offering,
and spared the People.10
11
See Yerushami Makot 7a, Yalkut Shimoni Yehchezkel 358.
א/תלמוד ירושלמי מסכת מכות דף ז
אמר רבי פינחס (תהלים כה) טוב וישרא למה הוא טוב שהוא ישר ולמה הוא ישר שהוא טוב על כן יורה חטאים בדרך שמורה
שאלו לחכמה חוטא מהו עונשו אמרו להם חטאים תרדף רעה שאלו לנבואה חוטא מהו עונשו אמרה להן הנפש.דרך תשובה
.החוטאת היא תמות שאלו לקודשא בריך הוא חוטא מהו עונשו אמר להן יעשו תשובה ויתכפר לו
רמז שנח- פרק יח- ילקוט שמעוני יחזקאל
א"ל הנפש, שאלו לנבואה חוטא מהו ענשו, שאלו לחכמה חוטא מהו ענשו א"ל חטאים תרדף רעה,הנפש החוטאת היא תמות
שאלו להקב"ה חוטא מהו ענשו מהו ענשו א"ל. שאלו לתורה חוטא מהו ענשו א"ל יביא אשם ויתכפר לו,החוטאת היא תמות
שאלו להקב"ה חוטא מהו ענשו א"ל יעשה תשובה ויתכפר לו הה"ד טוב וישר ה' על כן יורה חטאים.יביא אשם ויתכפר לו
.בדרך
12
See Talmud Bavli Sanhedrin 60b, 64a
“Rau Yehudah said in Rab's name: A gentile woman once fell sick. She vowed, 'If I recover, I will go
and serve every idol in the world.' She recovered, and proceeded to serve all idols. On reaching Peor,
6
pantheistic theology, were involved in idolatry. Zimri and
Kosbi hoped to bring a message of false peace and
universal love - love of nature and natural love; Pinchas
showed them and all of the congregation that this was not
service of God through nature, but avoda zara, foreign
theology. Zimri and Kozbi, who may have viewed their
carnal performance as a “natural” act, part and parcel of
the worldview of worship of peor, were in fact guilty of a
terrible outrage, a transgression against the boundaries of
holiness and purity which are dictated by belief in One
God and the Torah's path to achieve kedusha.
she asked its priests, 'How is this worshipped?' They replied, 'People eat beets, drink strong drink, and
then uncover themselves before it.' She replied, 'I would rather fall sick again than serve an idol in such
a manner.' But you, O House of Israel, were not so [as it is written, Slay ye every one his men( that
were joined unto Baal Peor: you were attached to it like an air-tight lid. Whereas, 'While you that did
cleave unto the Lord your God,' implies merely like two dates sticking to each other. In a Baraitha it
has been taught: that were joined unto Baal Peor: [loosely] like a bracelet on the hands of a woman;
whereas 'While you that did cleave unto the Lord your God' indicates that they were firmly attached.
Our Rabbis taught: Sabta, a townsman of Avlas, once hired an ass to a gentile woman. When she came
to Peor, she said to him, Wait till I enter and come out again. On her issuing, he said to her, Now do
you wait for me too until I go in and come out again. But, said she, are you not a Jew? He replied,
'What does it concern you?' He then entered, uncovered himself before it, and wiped himself on the
idol's nose, whilst the acolytes praised him, saying, 'No man has ever served this idol thus.'He that
uncovers himself before Baal Peor thereby serves it, even if his intention was to degrade it. He who
casts a stone at Merculis thereby serves it, even if his intention was to bruise it.