The Izbitz on Pinchas's Zealotry

פִּֽינְחָ֨ס בֶּן־אֶלְעָזָ֜ר בֶּן־אַהֲרֹ֣ן הַכֹּהֵ֗ן הֵשִׁ֤יב אֶת־חֲמָתִי֙ מֵעַ֣ל בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל בְּקַנְא֥וֹ אֶת־קִנְאָתִ֖י בְּתוֹכָ֑ם וְלֹא־כִלִּ֥יתִי אֶת־בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל בְּקִנְאָתִֽי׃ לָכֵ֖ן אֱמֹ֑ר הִנְנִ֨י נֹתֵ֥ן ל֛וֹ אֶת־בְּרִיתִ֖י שָׁלֽוֹם׃ וְהָ֤יְתָה לּוֹ֙ וּלְזַרְע֣וֹ אַחֲרָ֔יו בְּרִ֖ית כְּהֻנַּ֣ת עוֹלָ֑ם תַּ֗חַת אֲשֶׁ֤ר קִנֵּא֙ לֵֽאלֹהָ֔יו וַיְכַפֵּ֖ר עַל־בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃

“Phinehas, son of Eleazar son of Aaron the priest, has turned back My wrath from the Israelites by displaying among them his passion for Me, so that I did not wipe out the Israelite people in My passion. Say, therefore, ‘I grant him My pact of friendship. It shall be for him and his descendants after him a pact of priesthood for all time, because he took impassioned action for his God, thus making expiation for the Israelites.’”

וְהִנֵּ֡ה אִישׁ֩ מִבְּנֵ֨י יִשְׂרָאֵ֜ל בָּ֗א וַיַּקְרֵ֤ב אֶל־אֶחָיו֙ אֶת־הַמִּדְיָנִ֔ית לְעֵינֵ֣י מֹשֶׁ֔ה וּלְעֵינֵ֖י כׇּל־עֲדַ֣ת בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וְהֵ֣מָּה בֹכִ֔ים פֶּ֖תַח אֹ֥הֶל מוֹעֵֽד׃ וַיַּ֗רְא פִּֽינְחָס֙ בֶּן־אֶלְעָזָ֔ר בֶּֽן־אַהֲרֹ֖ן הַכֹּהֵ֑ן וַיָּ֙קׇם֙ מִתּ֣וֹךְ הָֽעֵדָ֔ה וַיִּקַּ֥ח רֹ֖מַח בְּיָדֽוֹ׃ וַ֠יָּבֹ֠א אַחַ֨ר אִֽישׁ־יִשְׂרָאֵ֜ל אֶל־הַקֻּבָּ֗ה וַיִּדְקֹר֙ אֶת־שְׁנֵיהֶ֔ם אֵ֚ת אִ֣ישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וְאֶת־הָאִשָּׁ֖ה אֶל־קֳבָתָ֑הּ וַתֵּֽעָצַר֙ הַמַּגֵּפָ֔ה מֵעַ֖ל בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃

Just then a certain Israelite man came and brought a Midianite woman over to his companions, in the sight of Moses and of the whole Israelite community who were weeping at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting. When Phinehas, son of Eleazar son of Aaron the priest, saw this, he left the assembly and, taking a spear in his hand, he followed the Israelite man into the chamber and stabbed both of them, the Israelite man and the woman, through the belly. Then the plague against the Israelites was checked.

וְלֹא עוֹד, אֶלָּא שֶׁאִם פֵּירַשׁ זִמְרִי וַהֲרָגוֹ פִּנְחָס – נֶהֱרָג עָלָיו. נֶהְפַּךְ זִמְרִי וַהֲרָגוֹ לְפִנְחָס – אֵין נֶהֱרָג עָלָיו, שֶׁהֲרֵי רוֹדֵף הוּא. תְּפָשָׂהּ בִּבְלוֹרִיתָהּ וֶהֱבִיאָהּ אֵצֶל מֹשֶׁה. אָמַר לוֹ: בֶּן עַמְרָם, זוֹ אֲסוּרָה אוֹ מוּתֶּרֶת? וְאִם תֹּאמַר אֲסוּרָה, בַּת יִתְרוֹ מִי הִתִּירָה לָךְ? נִתְעַלְּמָה מִמֶּנּוּ הֲלָכָה. גָּעוּ כּוּלָּם בִּבְכִיָּה, וְהַיְינוּ דִּכְתִיב: ״וְהֵמָּה בֹכִים פֶּתַח אֹהֶל מוֹעֵד״. וּכְתִיב: ״וַיַּרְא פִּנְחָס בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר״. מָה רָאָה? אָמַר רַב: רָאָה מַעֲשֶׂה וְנִזְכַּר הֲלָכָה. אָמַר לוֹ: אֲחִי אֲבִי אַבָּא, לֹא כָּךְ לִימַּדְתַּנִי בְּרִדְתְּךָ מֵהַר סִינַי: הַבּוֹעֵל אֲרָמִית קַנָּאִין פּוֹגְעִין בּוֹ? אָמַר לוֹ: קַרְיָינָא דְּאִיגַּרְתָּא אִיהוּ לֶיהֱוֵי פַּרְוָונְקָא. וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: רָאָה שֶׁאֵין חׇכְמָה וְאֵין תְּבוּנָה וְאֵין עֵצָה לְנֶגֶד ה׳. כׇּל מָקוֹם שֶׁיֵּשׁ חִילּוּל הַשֵּׁם, אֵין חוֹלְקִין כָּבוֹד לָרַב. רַבִּי יִצְחָק אָמַר רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר: רָאָה שֶׁבָּא מַלְאָךְ וְהִשְׁחִית בָּעָם.

Moreover, if Zimri son of Salu (see Numbers 25:1–9) had separated himself from the woman and only then Pinehas killed him, Pinehas would have been executed for killing him, because it is permitted for zealots to kill only while the transgressor is engaged in the act of intercourse. Furthermore, if Zimri would have turned and killed Pinehas in self-defense, he would not have been executed for killing him, as Pinehas was a pursuer. One is allowed to kill a pursuer in self-defense, provided that the pursued is not liable to be executed by the court. He seized her by her forelock and brought her before Moses. Zimri said to Moses: Son of Amram, is this woman forbidden or permitted? And if you say that she is forbidden, as for the daughter of Yitro to whom you are married, who permitted her to you? The halakha with regard to the proper course of action when encountering a Jewish man engaging in intercourse with a gentile woman eluded Moses. All of the members of the Sanhedrin bawled in their weeping, and that is the meaning of that which is written: “And they are crying at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting” (Numbers 25:6). And it is written thereafter: “And Pinehas, son of Elazar, son of Aaron the priest, saw and arose from the midst of the congregation and took a spear in his hand” (Numbers 25:7). The Gemara asks: What did Pinehas see that led him to arise and take action? Rav says: He saw the incident taking place before him and he remembered the halakha. He said to Moses: Brother of the father of my father, as Moses was the brother of his grandfather Aaron, did you not teach me this during your descent from Mount Sinai: One who engages in intercourse with a gentile woman, zealots strike him? Moses said to him: Let the one who reads the letter be the agent [parvanka] to fulfill its contents. And Shmuel says: Pinehas saw and considered the meaning of the verse: “There is neither wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the Lord” (Proverbs 21:30), which the Sages interpreted to mean: Anywhere that there is desecration of the Lord’s name, one does not show respect to the teacher. In those situations, one need not consult his teacher, but must immediately proceed to right the wrong that is transpiring. Therefore, he took the spear and took immediate action. Rabbi Yitzḥak says that Rabbi Eliezer says: He saw that an angel came and destroyed among the people in punishment for the sin of Zimri, and he realized that he must take immediate action to ameliorate the situation.

לָכֵן אֱמֹר הִנְנִי נֹתֵן לוֹ אֶת בְּרִיתִי שָׁלוֹם, שֶׁעֲדַיִן הוּא קַיָּם, וְכֵן הוּא אוֹמֵר (מלאכי ב, ה): בְּרִיתִי הָיְתָה אִתּוֹ הַחַיִּים וְהַשָּׁלוֹם וָאֶתְּנֵם לוֹ מוֹרָא וַיִּירָאֵנִי וּמִפְּנֵי שְׁמִי נִחַת הוּא. וְהָיְתָה לוֹ וּלְזַרְעוֹ אַחֲרָיו, וַיְכַפֵּר, וְכִי קָרְבָּן הִקְרִיב שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר בּוֹ כַּפָּרָה, אֶלָּא לְלַמֶּדְךָ שֶׁכָּל הַשּׁוֹפֵךְ דָּמָן שֶׁל רְשָׁעִים כְּאִלּוּ הִקְרִיב קָרְבָּן.

וידבר ה' אל משה לאמר פינחס בן אלעזר בן אהרן הכהן השיב את חמתי מעל בני ישראל בקנאו את קנאתי בתוכם ולא כליתי וכו'. בגמ' (סנהדרין פ"ב:) אמרינן בקשו מלאכי השרת לדחפו, אמר להם הש"י הניחו לו קנא בן קנאי משיב חמה בן משיב חמה וכו'. בקשו מלאכי השרת לדחפו כי אין אדם יכול לקנא ולנקום נקמת ה' לחבירו, רק באם יהיה הוא נקי במדה הזאת, ולזה העיד הש"י קנא בן קנאי וכו' הוא נקי וטהור במדה הזאת, התחילו השבטים מבזין אותו כי אמרו כי היה עושה זאת מחמת שנאתו לזמרי והשיב הש"י בקנאו את קנאתי בתוכם, פי' שקנאתו היתה מחמת גודל אהבתו לישראל וזה מרמז תיבת בתוכם. וירא פינחס בן אלעזר בן אהרן הכהן, ויקח וכו'. ולא יעלה ח"ו על הדעת לומר שזמרי היה נואף ח"ו כי מן הנואף לא עשה הקב"ה פרשה בתורה, אך יש סוד בדבר זה, דהנה יש יו"ד נקודות בזנות, הנקודה הא' מי שמקשט עצמו והולך במזיד לדבר עבירה היינו שהאדם בעצמו מושך עליו היצה"ר ואח"ז יש עוד ט' מדרגות, ובכל המדרגות שניטל מהאדם כח בחירתו ואי אפשר לו להמלט מעבירה, עד המדריגה היו"ד, היינו מי שמרחיק עצמו מן היצה"ר ושומר עצמו מן העבירה בכל כוחו עד שאין ביכולתו לשמור א"ע יותר מזה, ואז כשנתגבר יצרו עליו ועושה מעשה אז הוא בודאי רצון הש"י, וכענין יהודא ותמר, ואיהי בת זוגו ממש וזה הענין היה גם כאן, כי זמרי היה באמת שומר עצמו מכל התאוות הרעות, ועתה עלתה בדעתו שהיא בת זוגו מאחר שאין בכוחו לסלק א"ע מזה המעשה ופנחס אמר להיפך שעדיין יש בכוחו לסלק עצמו מזה, וזה שמרמז הגמ' (סנהדרין פ"ב:) ו' נסים נעשו לפנחס, וכדאיתא שם אלו פירש זמרי והרגו לפנחס היה פטור, כי באמת היה כאן שקול הדעת, כי גם על פנחס היה מקום לבעה"ד לחלוק שמצוי בו מדה הנראה לעינים שהוא כעס כמו שבאמת טענו עליו זאת, והיה הדין בזה שודא דדיינא ופירש ר"ת [תוס' ב"ב ל"ה. ד"ה שודא] ע"ז שיכולת הדיין ליתן לקרוביו, ולכך יצא פנחס זכאי לפי שהיה קרוב למרבע"ה, וז"ש ושם איש ישראל המוכה, היינו שהקב"ה הראה לפנחס אחר מעשה שעשה עם מי היה המלחמה שלו, שאל יחשוב כי נואף גמור היה ח"ו, ופנחס מחמת שהיה בא מזרע יוסף שנתברר בסיגופים ונסיונות בענין זה ולכך הרע בעיניו מאד על מעשה זמרי, וע"ז נאמר (הושע י"א,א') כי נער ישראל ואוהבהו, וזה ממש ענין פנחס שהיה דן את זמרי לנואף בעלמא, ע"כ דן אותו קנאין פוגעין בו ונעלם ממנו עומק יסוד הדבר שהיה בזמרי, כי היא היתה בת זוגו מששת ימי בראשית, כמו שמבואר בכתבי האר"י ז"ל, עד שמרבע"ה לא הכניס א"ע בזה לדונו במיתה, ונמצא שפנחס היה במעשה הזה כנער היינו שלא היה יודע עמקות הדבר רק עפ"י עיני שכל אנושי ולא יותר, ואעפ"כ הש"י אוהבו והסכים עמו, כי לפי שכלו עשה דבר גדול בקנאתו ומסר את נפשו.

“And God spoke to Moses saying, ‘Pinchas son of Elazar son of Aharon haCohen has removed My fury from being sent upon the children of Israel in taking My vengeance among them, and I did not destroy .…” (Bamidbar, 25:10) It is written in the Gemara (Sanhedrin, 82b), “The ministering angels asked to punish Pinchas. God said to them, ‘let him go, he is a zealot, the son of my zealot [being from the tribe of Levi], an appeaser of my wrath, the son of one who appeased my wrath [being the grandson of Aharon who appeased God’s wrath in the affair of Korach].’” “The angels asked to punish Pinchas,” for a man may not take up the vengeance of God unless he is clean in this aspect. On this God testified, “he is a zealot, the son of my zealot,” to show that (just as were Shimon and Levi when they destroyed Shchem) he was clean and pure in this aspect. Furthermore, the tribes began to shame him, saying that he did it because of his hatred for Zimri. God answered them, “in taking up My vengeance among them,” meaning that his vengeance was owing to his great love for Israel, hinted at in the words “among them.” “And Pinchas son of Elazar son of Aharon haCohen saw … and took a spear .…” (Bamidbar, 25:7) It would not, God forbid, occur to anyone to say that Zimri was licentious, for the Holy One, blessed be He, would never have dedicated an entire Parsha in the holy Torah to licentionsness. Rather, there is a secret in this whole affair. There are ten levels of lechery. the first (and lowest) level is when one dresses up and goes intentionally to commit a sexual transgression, meaning one who deliberately invites the evil inclination upon himself. After this there are nine other levels, with each one a man’s power of free choice is taken from him a little more. (With the first level it was totally within his power to refrain), and with each level it becomes more and more difficult to escape the transgression. Finally at the tenth level, where one distances himself from the evil inclination and guards himself from transgression with all his power until it is impossible to guard himself anymore, if his evil inclination still overpowers him and he does such an action, then it certainly must be God’s will. Such was the case with Yehuda and Tamar, for she was his true soulmate. This is also the case here, as Zimri truly guarded himself from all evil desires. And now it occurred to him that she was his soulmate, since it was not within his power to remove himself from the action. Pinchas said the opposite, that it was still in Zimri’s power to refrain. This is hinted at in the Gemara (Sanhedrin, 82b), “six miracles were performed for Pinchas,” and as it is said there, “if Zimri had separated from Cosbi, and risen up to kill Pinchas, then Zimri would have been found innocent of murder [acting in self-defense. That he did not do this was the miracle.]” Here there was a deliberation of each side, for with Pinchas there is also room for criticism. It seemed as if Pinchas was angry. Truly they claimed this against him, and here the judgment is at the discretion of the judge. As Rabeynu Tam explained (Tosefot Baba Batra, 35a,), “it is possible for the judge to give to those close to him,” therefore Pinchas emerged blameless because he was close to Moshe Rabeynu. This is why it said, “the name of the Israelite man who had been struck,” for afterwards, the Holy One, blessed be He, showed Pinchas with whom his struggle was really with (because he was Zimri— “who truly guarded himself,” etc.). He was not to think that Zimri was completely lecherous, God forbid. And in Pinchas’s eyes, since he had come from the seed of Yosef and had become purified concerning this through mortification of the flesh and trials, Zimri’s action was a great evil. On this it is written (Hoshea, 11:1), “for Israel is a child, and I loved him.” This is precisely the matter of Pinchas, for he judged Zimri as lecherous, and in this case the judgment is that a zealot may kill him. However, the depth of the foundation of the matter with Zimri was hidden from him. Cosbi was indeed his soulmate from the six days of creation, as explained in the writings of R. Isaac Luria, Z’L. Owing to this, Moshe Rabeynu didn’t become involved and sentence Zimri to death. Pinchas’s response in this action is thus compared to a child, meaning that he didn’t know the depth of the situation, seeing only through human eyes and no further. Nevertheless, God loved him and agreed with him, for in Pinchas’s mind he had done a great and self-sacrificing act in his zealotry., “Israel is a child, we find that Yosef, Pinchas’ predecessor, was also called “a lad” (Breishiet 37:10) when he resisted his evil inclination when he was tempted by in Egypt by Potiphar’s wife. The Midrash tells us that he was rewarded, seing in a vision that his children would actually descend from her. And so it was that he married her Daugther, Osnat.[Hagahot Peretz])

כָּל הַבּוֹעֵל כּוּתִית בֵּין דֶּרֶךְ חַתְנוּת בֵּין דֶּרֶךְ זְנוּת אִם בְּעָלָהּ בְּפַרְהֶסְיָא וְהוּא שֶׁיִּבְעל לְעֵינֵי עֲשָׂרָה מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל אוֹ יֶתֶר אִם פָּגְעוּ בּוֹ קַנָּאִין וַהֲרָגוּהוּ הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מְשֻׁבָּחִין וּזְרִיזִין [ו.] וְדָבָר זֶה הֲלָכָה לְמשֶׁה מִסִּינַי הוּא. רְאָיָה לְדָבָר זֶה מַעֲשֶׂה פִּינְחָס בְּזִמְרִי: וְאֵין הַקַּנַּאי רַשַּׁאי לִפְגֹּעַ בָּהֶן אֶלָּא בִּשְׁעַת מַעֲשֶׂה כְּזִמְרִי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר כה ח) "וְאֶת הָאִשָּׁה אֶל קֳבָתָהּ". אֲבָל אִם פֵּרַשׁ אֵין הוֹרְגִין אוֹתוֹ. וְאִם הֲרָגוֹ נֶהֱרַג עָלָיו. וְאִם בָּא הַקַּנַּאי לִטּל רְשׁוּת מִבֵּית דִּין לְהָרְגוֹ אֵין מוֹרִין לוֹ וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא בִּשְׁעַת מַעֲשֶׂה. וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא אִם בָּא הַקַּנַּאי לַהֲרֹג אֶת הַבּוֹעֵל וְנִשְׁמַט הַבּוֹעֵל וְהָרַג הַקַּנַּאי כְּדֵי לְהַצִּיל עַצְמוֹ מִיָּדוֹ אֵין הַבּוֹעֵל נֶהֱרַג עָלָיו. וְהַבָּא עַל בַּת גֵּר תּוֹשָׁב אֵין הַקַּנָּאִין פּוֹגְעִים בּוֹ אֲבָל מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת:

Whenever a man has relations with a gentile woman in public, i.e., the relations are carried out in the presence of ten or more Jews, if a zealous person strikes him and kills him, he is considered praiseworthy and ardent. [This applies whether the relations were] in the context of marriage or licentious in nature. This matter is a halachah conveyed to Moshe at Sinai. Support for this can be derived from Pinchas' slaying of Zimri. The zealous person can strike [the fornicators] only at the time of relations, as was the case with regard to Zimri, as [Numbers 25:8] states: "[He pierced] the woman into her stomach." If, however, [the transgressor] withdraws, he should not be slain. Indeed, if [the zealous person] slays him, he may be executed [as a murderer]. If the zealous person comes to ask permission from the court to slay him, they do not instruct him [to], even if this takes place at the time [of relations]. Not only that, if the zealous person comes to kill the transgressor and he withdraws and kills the zealous person in order to save himself, the transgressor is not executed for killing him. When a Jew has relations with the daughter of a resident alien, the zealot may not strike him. [The transgressor] should, however, be given stripes for rebellious conduct.

והנה איש מבני ישראל בא ויקרב וכו' המדינית וכו'. קודם העונש נקרא איש מבני ישראל אבל אח"כ נקרא איש ישראל, כי אמר בת יתרו מי התיר לך ועשית זאת מחמת שראית שיש לה חלק לעוה"ב, אף אני ג"כ רואה שיש לה חלק לעוה"ב, וע"ז אמר הכתוב אל תתהלל ביום מחר כי לא תדע מה יולד יום (משלי כ"ז,א'), כי אף שתראה כי לעתיד יהיה טוב עכ"ז לא תדע במה ינהג ה' בההווה, אבל למשה האיר הש"י איך להתנהג בההווה ע"כ היתה מותרת לו, אבל לעתיד יברר הקב"ה שזה הנפש היה שייך לו בשורשו כדאיתא בכתבי האר"י ז"ל [מאמר פסיעותיו של אברהם אבינו], ע"כ יקרא אח"כ איש ישראל.

“And behold, a man of the children of Israel came and brought close to his brethren a woman of Midian before Moshe and before the whole community of Israel .…” (Bamidbar, 25:6) Before his punishment he was called “a man of the children of Israel” and afterwards he is called “a man of Israel [verse 14].” This man said to Moshe, “who said Yitro’s daughter is permitted to you? You must have seen that she has a portion in the world to come. I too see that the woman of Midian has a portion in the world to come.” On this it is written, “Do not praise tomorrow, for you do not know what the day will bring forth” (Mishlei, 27:1), for even if you see that the future will bring something good you still do not know how God will act at any present given moment. Yet since God shined into Moshe how to act in the present moment, therefore she was permitted to him. And in the future God will make it clear that the soul of this woman of Midian was connected to the root of his soul, as is explained in the writings of the Ari’zal; therefore he is afterwards called “a man of Israel.”