Parashat Pinchas, Numbers 25:10-30.1

This week’s portion, Pinchas – named after the grandson of Aharon the Priest, Moshe’s brother – is, in a way, a mirror image to the portion of Korah that we have read several weeks ago. There, if you recall, Korah dared to challenged Moshe’s leadership in quite sophisticated a manner; no good, said the Lord, and the earth “open its mouth” and swallowed” both Korah and his followers. (Interestingly, but not coincidently, a reminder of that story appears in this week’s potion as well – see Numbers 26:9-11).

The “mirror image” of this week’s portion is also a bit nuanced.  Here, we first learn – still in the previous Portion – that the Children of Israel no longer wonder in the desert, but rather “sit” or park at a place called Shittim (perhaps a play on words on “shotim,” fools). Next thing we learn is that they begin to “go out with” – or, in the biblical language, to “whore with” – the daughters of Moab, a local people from the other side of the Jordan. And soon thereafter, the Israelites begin worship these women’s Gods. That, of course, makes God extremely angry (and not for the first time).  Rather than instructing Moshe, as he done in the past, to kill the entire people, God instruct him to take only the “ringleaders” and kill them. Moshe instruct the Judges to do so (I am emphasizing this seemingly trivial fact to demonstrate the notion of separation of powers was not quite developed yet: the judges were also executioners, or at leas so it seems.).

But the Israelites – who had “chutzpa” long before Alan Dershowitz were born – refuse to take the hint: A man – later known as Zimri, a president of some family of the Tribe of Shimon – goes out in public, and in front of Moshe himself and the entire people he “brought the Midianite woman closer to him”; the people of Israel, in response, began weeping.  (Num. 25:6)

And here comes the act that defines this week’s portion:

And Pinchas – the son of Elazar, the [grand]son of Aharon, the [Chief] Priest – saw this and he stood out of the community and he took a spear in his hand. … And he came after that man [Zimri]and he stabbed both of them: The man from Israel and the woman to her stomach, and the plague ceased to attack the Children of Israel.    (Num. 25:7-8)

Thus, at first glance, in Pinchas we have the exact mirror-image of Korah: Not only that he does what God ordered Moshe to do, he even “jumped ahead” of Moshe and killed the sinners before Moshe – through his “judges” was able to lift his hand.

A more careful examination, however, may demonstrate that the picture – as indicated earlier – is a bit more nuanced.  Recall the story of the (other) sons of Aharon, Nadav and Avihu, who were put to death for (what I referred to) as “Rosh Gadol” – too much of a good thing, if you will. They sacrificed, without a specific permission, another fire – a “foreign fire” – to God, and so their punished was harsh and swift. (See Leviticus 10:1-3).   Just like Pinchas, they wanted to show that they are “holier than thou” in the sense that they practiced a tradition – the providing of sacrifice – that demonstrates a great devotion to God, above and beyond what God ordered them.  For that they were punished (by death). Pinchas, in essence, did the same: He jumped, ahead of Moshe and his men (judges), and pro-actively approached the sinner and the woman with him and killed them both. The response by God this time, however, was the complete opposite of punishment:

And God spoke to Moshe and Said: … I would provide him [Pinchas] with my covenant in peach; and he would have it for him and his posterity after him – a covenant of eternal priesthood for he was jealous to his own God and repent the sins of the Children of Israel. (Num. 10-13)

What is the cause to this stark difference? How come the first generation of Aharon’s sons, after trying their best to show their devotion to God were punished by death, while the grandson was blessed with eternal covenant with God for doing quite the same thing?

Obviously, one answer is that the two deeds are not the same. Sacrificing a “foreign fire” without permission is nothing like killing a sinner after God specifically instructed Moses to do so. But this is not a satisfactory answer. Recall the largest point made by both stories of Korah (“opposition equals death”) and the Sons of Aharon (“too much of a good thing” also equals death”). Brought together, these two stories should suggest that Pinchas’ act – as noble and pro-God as it may have been – was still in direct violation of Moshe’s authority and of God’s instructions (who told the Judges to kill the sinners). How come his life was not only spared, but blessed – and by God himself, for good measure?

To be honest, I don’t have a good answer to that.  (I’d be delighted to hear one from you, the readers.)  But I may surmise that these two former stories – Korah (who is, again, mentioned in this portion as well), and Aharon’s sons’ death – created a sense of awkwardness, not to say a sense of injustice by some readers. The overall impression was that it’s “Moshe’s word or death,” a tough pill to swallow, even for the most ardent of believers. Hence, we needed a story where Moshe was instructed to do X, but someone “jumped ahead” of him, executed God’s wish, and won an eternal award. Now go out and do the same.

Shabbat Shalom.