## Kli Yakar on Numbers Chapter 25

###### Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:11:1
[Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:11:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Numbers/r/25:11:1)

**פִּינְחָס בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן וְגוֹ׳.** הַכֹּל לִרְבוּתָא נָקַט, כִּי אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהָיָה ״בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר״ אֲשֶׁר לָקַח לוֹ מִבְּנוֹת פּוּטִיאֵל, מִזֶּרַע יִתְרוֹ שֶׁפִּטֵּם עֲגָלִים לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, וְהָיָה לוֹ לִמְנֹעַ אֶת עַצְמוֹ מִמַּעֲשֶׂה זֶה פֶּן יֹאמְרוּ לוֹ לֵיצָנֵי הַדּוֹר: בַּת יִתְרוֹ מִי הִתִּיר לְאָבִיךָ, וְאֵיךְ אַתָּה מְקַנֵּא עַל הַמִּדְיָנִית, וְכֵן אֲבִי אָבִיךָ פִּטֵּם עֲגָלִים לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, וְאֵיךְ אַתָּה מְקַנֵּא עַל הָעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. וְהָיָה ״בֶּן אַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן״ וְיֹאמְרוּ לוֹ: אֲבִי אָבִיךָ זֶה פִּטֵּם עֲגָלִים לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, וְהוּא עָשָׂה הָעֵגֶל. וְאַף עַל פִּי כֵן לֹא הָיָה מַקְפִּיד עַל כְּבוֹדוֹ. וְרַשִׁ״י פֵּרֵשׁ שֶׁהָיוּ הַשְּׁבָטִים מְבַזִּין אוֹתוֹ כוּ׳, יָכוֹל לִהְיוֹת שֶׁזֶּה כַּוָּנָתוֹ, כִּי עַל יְדֵי שֶׁהָיוּ הַשְּׁבָטִים מְבַזִּין אוֹתוֹ, בָּא הַכָּתוּב וְיִחֲסוֹ לוֹמַר, רְאֵה כִּי אִישׁ חָסִיד הוּא. אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁעַל יְדֵי שֶׁהוּא בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן אַהֲרֹן הָיָה לָהֶם מָקוֹם לְבַזּוֹתוֹ, מִכָּל מָקוֹם נִכְנַס בָּעֳבִי הַקּוֹרָה וְלֹא הָיָה חוֹשֵׁשׁ לִכְבוֹדוֹ. וְעוֹד הִגִּיד לָנוּ הַכָּתוּב שֶׁהָיָה מֵשִׁיב חֵמָה בֶּן מֵשִׁיב חֵמָה (סנהדרין פב:), עַל כֵּן אָחַז מַעֲשֵׂה אֲבוֹתָיו בְּיָדוֹ.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**Pinchas the son of Eleazar the son of Aaron the priest, etc.** All of this elaborate genealogy is noted to add something. For despite being the son of Eleazar, who took a wife from the daughters of Putiel from the lineage of Jethro, who fattened calves for idolatry, [we would have thought that] he should have refrained from this zealous act, lest the mockers of the generation say to him: “Who permitted your father to marry a daughter of Jethro, and how can you be zealous against a Midianite woman?” Similarly, “Your grandfather fattened calves for idolatry, so how can you be zealous against idolatry?” And he was the grandson of Aaron the priest, and they might say to him: “This grandfather of yours fattened calves for idolatry, and that one made the golden calf.” Nevertheless, he did not concern himself with his own honor.
Rashi explained that the tribes were disparaging him, etc. It is possible that this was his intent — that because the tribes were disparaging him, the verse traced his lineage to tell us: See that he was a pious man. Even though, being the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron, gave them grounds to disparage him, nevertheless he put himself in harm’s way and did not worry about his honor. Furthermore, the verse tells us that he was *one who turned away wrath, the son of one who turned away wrath* (Sanhedrin 82b); therefore he seized upon the deeds of his forefathers.


###### Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:11:2
[Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:11:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Numbers/r/25:11:2)

**בְּקַנְאוֹ אֶת קִנְאָתִי בְּתוֹכָם.** ״קִנְאָתִי בָּהֶם״ לֹא נֶאֱמַר אֶלָּא ״בְּתוֹכָם״, לִמֵּד עַל כָּל קִדּוּשׁ הַשֵּׁם שֶׁצָּרִיךְ לִהְיוֹת בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל דַּוְקָא, וּכְמוֹ שֶׁכָּתוּב (ויקרא כב לב): ״וְנִקְדַּשְׁתִּי בְּתוֹךְ בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״. וּלְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר (כה ז) ״וַיָּקָם״ פִּינְחָס ״מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה״. וְהוֹדִיעַ לָנוּ שִׁבְחוֹ שֶׁל פִּינְחָס שֶׁהָיָה מוֹסֵר נַפְשׁוֹ עַל קִדּוּשׁ הַשֵּׁם, וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהָיָה בְּתוֹךְ הָעֵדָה, מָקוֹם מְסֻכָּן מִפְּנֵי קְרוֹבֵי זִמְרִי, מִכָּל מָקוֹם שָׂם נַפְשׁוֹ בְכַפּוֹ.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**“In his jealousy for My jealousy among them.”** It does not say “My jealousy for them” but rather *among them* teaching that all sanctification of God’s name must specifically take place within the midst of the children of Israel, as it is written, *And I shall be sanctified within the children of Israel* (Leviticus 22:32). This is why it says, *And Phineas rose up from the midst of the congregation* (Numbers 25:7). This informs us of Phineas’s virtue: that he was willing to sacrifice his life for the sanctification of God’s name. And even though he was within the assembly — a place of danger because of Zimri’s relatives — nevertheless, he placed his life in his palm [he risked his life].


###### Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:11:3
[Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:11:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Numbers/r/25:11:3)

וְעַל צַד הָרֶמֶז לָקַח רֹמַח בְּיָדוֹ, כִּי בְּמַעֲשֶׂה זֶה שָׂם כָּל רַמַ״ח אֵבָרָיו בְּכַפּוֹ, וְהָיָה מְקַנֵּא שְׁתֵּי קְנָאוֹת, אַחַת עַל עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה וְאַחַת עַל הַזְּנוּת. לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״בְּקַנְאוֹ אֶת קִנְאָתִי״. אוֹ אַחַת לִכְבוֹד הַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ וְאַחַת לִכְבוֹד מֹשֶׁה, כִּי כָּל הַמְחַלֵּל הַשֵּׁם אֵינוֹ חוֹלֵק כָּבוֹד לְרַבּוֹ, בְּקַל וָחֹמֶר, שֶׁאִם אֵין הַשְּׁכִינָה חֲשׁוּבָה כְּנֶגְדּוֹ, רַבּוֹ לֹא כָל שֶׁכֵּן. וְכֵן הֵעֵז פָּנָיו כְּנֶגְדּוֹ וְאָמַר לוֹ: בַּת יִתְרוֹ מִי הִתִּיר לְךָ. וְעַל זֶה סָמַךְ פִּינְחָס שֶׁהוֹרָה הֲלָכָה לְמַעֲשֶׂה בִּפְנֵי מֹשֶׁה רַבּוֹ, כִּי אָמַר שֶׁרַבּוֹ נוֹגֵעַ בַּדָּבָר, פֶּן יֹאמְרוּ לוֹ: בַּת יִתְרוֹ מִי הִתִּיר לְךָ. וּלְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר: ״לָכֵן אֱמֹר הִנְנִי נוֹתֵן לוֹ אֶת בְּרִיתִי שָׁלוֹם״, וְהָיָה לוֹ לוֹמַר ״לָכֵן אֱמֹר לוֹ״, אֶלָּא בֵּאוּרוֹ שֶׁהַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא אָמַר לְמֹשֶׁה: לָכֵן אֱמֹר לְכָל יִשְׂרָאֵל עַל עַצְמְךָ הִנְנִי נוֹתֵן לוֹ אֶת בְּרִיתִי שָׁלוֹם, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יֹאמְרוּ יִשְׂרָאֵל שֶׁאֵין אַתָּה בְּשָׁלוֹם עִם פִּינְחָס עַל שֶׁהוֹרָה הֲלָכָה בְּפָנֶיךָ. לָכֵן תּוֹדִיעַ לָרַבִּים וְתֹאמַר מִצִּדְּךָ ״הִנְנִי נוֹתֵן לוֹ״ וְגוֹ׳, וְ״הִנְנִי״ קָאֵי עַל מֹשֶׁה. (עיין סנהדרין פב: א״ל הקב״ה למשה הקדם לו שלום) וּכְנֶגֶד מַה שֶּׁקִּנֵּא לֵאלֹהָיו אָמַר: ״וְהָיְתָה לּוֹ וּלְזַרְעוֹ אַחֲרָיו בְּרִית כְּהֻנַּת עוֹלָם, תַּחַת אֲשֶׁר קִנֵּא לֵאלֹהָיו״, וְטַעַם זֶה אֵינוֹ קָאֵי עַל מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב ״הִנְנִי נוֹתֵן לוֹ״ וְגוֹ׳, לְפִי שֶׁזֶּה שְׂכָרוֹ עַל שֶׁקִּנֵּא לְמֹשֶׁה כָּאָמוּר. וְאָמַר ״וַיְכַפֵּר עַל בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל״, כִּי הֵבִיא אֶת הָרָשָׁע הַזֶּה לְכַפָּרָה עַל כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל, וְנֶחְשָׁב לוֹ כְּהַקְרָבַת פָּרִים וּכְבָשִׂים. עַל כֵּן נִשְׁבַּע ה׳ אַתָּה כֹהֵן לְעוֹלָם, כַּאֲשֶׁר הִתְחַלְתָּ בְּשִׁמּוּשׁ כְּהֻנָּה.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And by way of allusion, he took a spear [*romach*] in his hand,** for in this act he put all of his 248 [*ramach* in Hebrew numerology] limbs in his palm [on the line], and he was zealous with two zealotries: one against idolatry and one against fornication. Therefore it says, *in his zealotry for My zealotry*; or one for the honor of the Blessed Name and one for the honor of Moses. For anyone who desecrates the Name does not give honor to their teacher, applying the logic of *a fortiori*: If the Divine Presence is not important to him, then certainly not his teacher. And thus he [Zimri] acted insolently against him [Moses] and said to him, “Who permitted you [to marry] the daughter of Jethro?”
On this, Pinchas relied when he ruled practically [the law] in the presence of his teacher Moses, for he said that his teacher was affected by the matter, lest they say to him, “Who permitted you [to marry] the daughter of Jethro?” Therefore it says *therefore say: Behold, I give him My covenant of peace*. It should have said “therefore say to him,” but rather the explanation is that the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses: “*Therefore, say* to all Israel on your own behalf, *’Behold, I give him My covenant of peace*,’” so that Israel would not say that you are not at peace with Pinchas for having ruled [the law] in Your presence. Therefore, make it known to the public and say from Your side, *Behold, I give him, etc.* And *Behold* refers to Moses. (See Sanhedrin 82b: “The Holy One, blessed be He, said to Moses: Precede him with peace.”)
And corresponding to his zealotry for his God, it says *and it shall be for him and his seed after him a covenant of eternal priesthood, because he was zealous for his God*. And this reason does not refer to what was said *Behold, I give him, etc.*, because that was his reward for being zealous for Moses, as mentioned. And it says *and he made atonement for the children of Israel*, for he brought this wicked one as an atonement for all Israel, and it was considered for him as if he had offered bulls and sheep. Therefore, God swore, “You are a priest forever,” as you have begun your priestly service.


###### Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:14:1
[Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:14:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Numbers/r/25:14:1)

**וְשֵׁם אִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל הַמֻּכֶּה אֲשֶׁר הֻכָּה.** פֵּרֵשׁ רַשִׁ״י, בְּמָקוֹם שֶׁיִּיחֵס אֶת הַצַּדִּיק לְשֶׁבַח יִחֵס אֶת הָרָשָׁע לִגְנַאי, וּמָה גְּנַאי הוּא זֶה שֶׁאָמַר זִמְרִי בֶּן סָלוּא, בִּשְׁלָמָא לְשֶׁבַח שַׁפִּיר קָאָמַר, כִּי אֶלְעָזָר וְאַהֲרֹן נוֹדְעוּ בַּשְּׁעָרִים לְשֵׁם וְלִתְהִלָּה, אֲבָל סָלוּא זֶה מָה הוּא וּמָה שְׁמוֹ כִּי תֵדַע שֶׁהוּא לִגְנַאי, מָה שֶׁמֶץ דֹּפִי נִשְׁמַע עָלָיו? וְעוֹד, מַה שֶּׁכָּתוּב ״הַמֻּכֶּה אֲשֶׁר הֻכָּה״, לָמָּה הִפְלִיא אֶת מַכּוֹתָיו פַּעֲמַיִם? הֲוָה לֵיהּ לְמֵימַר: ״וְשֵׁם הָאִישׁ הַמֻּכֶּה אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִית״ וְגוֹ׳, וְעוֹד שֶׁהָיָה לוֹ לוֹמַר: ״וְאִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל הַמֻּכֶּה שְׁמוֹ זִמְרִי״, וּמִדְּקָאָמַר ״וְשֵׁם אִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל הַמֻּכֶּה אֲשֶׁר הֻכָּה״, שְׁמַע מִנַּהּ שֶׁאֲשֶׁר הֻכָּה חוֹזֵר עַל עֶצֶם הָאִישׁ, אֲבָל הַמֻּכֶּה חוֹזֵר אֶל הַשֵּׁם לוֹמַר שֶׁהַשֵּׁם שֶׁלּוֹ הָיָה מֻכֶּה.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**“And the name of the Israelite man who was struck, who was smitten.”** Rashi explains that in the place where the righteous person is praised, the wicked person is denigrated. But what disgrace is it when it says *Zimri son of Salu*? Granted, for praise it makes sense, since Eleazar and Aaron were known in the gates for praise and glory, but who is this Salu and what is his name that you should know it is for disgrace? What hint of fault is heard about him? Furthermore, why does it say *who was struck, who was smitten* — repeating his blows twice? It should have said, “And the name of the man who was struck with the Midianite woman, etc.” Also, it should have said, “And the Israelite man who was struck, his name was Zimri.” From the fact that it says, *And the name of the Israelite man who was struck, who was smitten*, this implies that *who was smitten* refers to the man himself, while *who was struck* refers to his name, suggesting that his name itself was afflicted.


###### Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:14:2
[Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:14:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Numbers/r/25:14:2)

וְנִרְאֶה שֶׁמֵהֶכְרֵחַ קֻשְׁיוֹת אֵלּוּ דָּרַש רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן בְּמַסֶּכֶת סַנְהֶדְרִין (פב:) חֲמִשָּׁה שֵׁמוֹת הָיוּ לוֹ: זִמְרִי עַל שֵׁם שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה כְּבֵיצָה הַמְזֹרֶרֶת, סָלוּא עַל שֵׁם שֶׁהִסְלִיא עֲוֹן מִשְׁפַּחְתּוֹ, כִּי וַדַּאי יֵשׁ לְהַפְלִיא מָה רָאָה רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן עַל כָּכָה לִדְרוֹשׁ הַשֵּׁמוֹת לִגְנַאי, אֶלָּא וַדַּאי שֶׁגַּם הוּא דָּרַש וְשֵׁם הָאִישׁ הַמֻּכֶּה, שֶׁתֵּיבַת הַמֻּכֶּה חוֹזֵר אֶל הַשֵּׁם, כִּי אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִקְרְאוּ מִתְּחִלָּה עַל שֵׁם הַמַּעֲשֶׂה, אֶלָּא שֶׁעֲוֹנוֹתָיו גָּרְמוּ לוֹ שֶׁבָּדְקוּ בִּשְׁמוֹ וּבְשֵׁם אֲבוֹתָיו וּפֵרְשׁוּ עַל שֵׁם הַמְּאֹרָע, לוֹמַר לְךָ שֵׁם רְשָׁעִים יִרְקָב, וּרְאָיָה שֶׁלּוֹ מִן הַתּוֹרָה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְשֵׁם אִישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵל הַמֻּכֶּה, הַשֵּׁם מֻכֶּה, וַאֲשֶׁר הֻכָּה אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִית קָאֵי עַל עֶצֶם הָאִישׁ, וְכֵן וְשֵׁם הָאִשָּׁה הַמֻּכָּה כָּזְבִּי, כִּדְמַסִּיק בַּגְּמָרָא כָּזְבִּי שֶׁכִּזְּבָה בְּאָבִיהָ, כִּי גַּם שְׁמָהּ הֻכָּה לְדָרְשׁוֹ לִגְנַאי. וְאִם נַפְשְׁךָ לוֹמַר שֶׁהַמֻּכֶּה קָאֵי עַל הָאִישׁ, וַאֲשֶׁר הֻכָּה אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִית קָאֵי עַל הַשֵּׁם, יֵשׁ לוֹמַר שֶׁלְּכָךְ אָמַר אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִית, לְפִי שֶׁהָיָה אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִית וּבָעַל בְּעִילוֹת הַרְבֵּה עַד שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה כְּבֵיצָה הַמְזֹרֶרֶת, עַל כֵּן נַעֲשָׂה מוּזָר לְאֶחָיו כְּבֵיצָה הַמֻּזֶרֶת, וְדָרְשׁוּ שֵׁם זִמְרִי עַל שֵׁם הַמְּאֹרָע.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**It seems that due to the necessity of these questions, Rabbi Yochanan expounded**, in Tractate Sanhedrin (82b), that Zimri had five names: Zimri, because he became like a scrambled egg [*muzeret*]; Salu, because he made his family’s sin extraordinary [*hisli*]. Certainly, it is extraordinary what Rabbi Yochanan saw to expound these names in a derogatory way, but surely he also interpreted *the name of the man who was smitten* such that the word *smitten* refers to the name itself. For although [he and his fathers] were not initially named after the deed, still his sins caused his name and his fathers’ names to be scrutinized and interpreted according to the event, to tell you that *the name of the wicked shall rot*. And his proof is from the Torah, where it says, *And the name of the Israelite man who was smitten*, meaning the name was smitten. And *who was smitten with the Midianite woman* refers to the man himself. And similarly, *the name of the woman who was smitten, Cozbi*, as it concludes in the Gemara, “Cozbi” because she lied [*kizbah*] to her father, for also her name was smitten to be expounded derogatorily. And if you wish to say that *who was smitten* refers to the man, and *who was smitten with the Midianite woman* refers to the name, we can say that this is why it says *with the Midianite woman*, because he was with the Midianite woman and had many sexual encounters until he became like a scrambled egg. Therefore, he became estranged [*muzar*] from his brothers like a scrambled egg, and they interpreted the name Zimri according to the event.


###### Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:14:3
[Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:14:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Numbers/r/25:14:3)

וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים שֶׁלְּכָךְ אָמַר ״אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִית״, בִּהְיוֹתוֹ עִמָּהּ מַמָּשׁ, דְּאִלּוּ פֵּרֵשׁ זִמְרִי לֹא הָיָה רַשַּׁאי לְהָרְגוֹ. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים שֶׁאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֻכָּה בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה, מִכָּל מָקוֹם לֹא נִפְטַר מִלִּהְיוֹת אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִית עִמָּהּ מַמָּשׁ בָּעוֹלָם הַבָּא, כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית לט י) ״לִשְׁכַּב אֶצְלָהּ״ בָּעוֹלָם הַזֶּה, ״לִהְיוֹת עִמָּהּ״ לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא (יומא לה:).

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And some say that this is why it says “with the Midianite woman,”** because he was literally with her [engaged in sexual relations], for if Zimri had separated [from her], it would not have been permissible to kill him. And some say that even though he was struck down in this world, nevertheless he was not exempted from being with the Midianite woman in the World to Come, similar to what is said *to lie beside her* (Genesis 39:10) in this world [means] to be with her in the World to Come (Yoma 35b).


###### Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:14:4
[Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:14:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Numbers/r/25:14:4)

וּמִלְּבַד מַה שֶּׁדָּרְשׁוּ רַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (סנהדרין פב:) בַּשֵּׁמוֹת הַלָּלוּ לִגְנַאי, הֲלֹא לֵאלֹהִים פִּתְרוֹנִים, אֶעֱנֶה גַּם אֲנִי חֶלְקִי לְפָתְרָם בְּדֶרֶךְ אַחֵר, כִּי מָצִינוּ לְרַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (סוטה כב:) עַל הַחֲנֵפִים שֶׁעוֹשִׂין מַעֲשֵׂה זִמְרִי וּמְבַקְשִׁים שָׂכָר כְּפִינְחָס, וְכִי זִמְרִי הָיָה מִן הַחֲנֵפִים? וַהֲלֹא הָיָה רָשָׁע מְפֻרְסָם, אֶלָּא וַדַּאי מִדְּקָאָמַר לְמֹשֶׁה זוֹ אֲסוּרָה אוֹ מֻתֶּרֶת, שְׁמַע מִנַּהּ שֶׁהָיָה עוֹשֶׂה כְּמַעֲשֵׂה הַצְּבוּעִים לְהַכְשִׁיר מַעֲשָׂיו לוֹמַר שֶׁבַּדִּין הוּא עוֹשֶׂה. וְאַחַר שֶׁרַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה הֶחֱזִיקוּהוּ בְּחָנֵף, עַל כֵּן יֵשׁ לִדְרוֹשׁ כָּל שְׁמוֹתָיו עַל זֶה הָאֹפֶן, כִּי כָל חָנֵף וְצָבוּעַ תָּמִיד תְּהִלָּתוֹ בְּפִיו לְשַׁבֵּחַ אֶת עַצְמוֹ, וְ״זִמְרִי״ הוּא לְשׁוֹן שֶׁבַח, כִּי ״עָזִּי וְזִמְרָת יָהּ״ (שמות טו ב) תַּרְגּוּמוֹ: ״תֻּקְפִי וְתוּשְׁבַּחְתִּי״. וְשֵׁם ״סָלוּא״ גַּם כֵּן לְשׁוֹן שֶׁבַח, מִלְּשׁוֹן ״סֹלּוּ לָרוֹכֵב בָּעֲרָבוֹת״ (תהלים סח ה), וְכֵן ״כָּזְבִּי״, כִּי כָל חָנֵף כּוֹזֵב, כִּי אֵין פִּיו וְלִבּוֹ שָׁוִים, וּ״בַת צוּר״, כִּי הֵמָּה מַגְבִּיהִים לָשֶׁבֶת בְּצוּר גָּבוֹהַּ. וְהִזְכִּיר בִּשְׁנֵיהֶם רֹאשׁ וְנָשִׂיא, כִּי זֶה הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר בִּקְשָׁה נֶפֶשׁ הַחֲנֵפִים. עַל כֵּן נֶאֱמַר ״אֲשֶׁר הֻכָּה אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִית״, כִּי שְׁמוֹת שְׁנֵיהֶם הֻכָּה שָׁוֶה בְּשָׁוֶה, נִדְרָשִׁים עַל עִנְיָן אֶחָד.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**In addition to what our Sages of blessed memory (Sanhedrin 82b) interpreted these names derogatorily,** do not interpretations belong to God? [So] I will also offer my interpretation in a different way. For we find that our Sages of blessed memory (Sotah 22b) said regarding hypocrites that they “perform the deed of Zimri but seek the reward of Pinchas.” But was Zimri among the hypocrites? Was he not a well-known wicked person? Rather, certainly since he asked Moses, “Is this [Midianite woman] forbidden or permitted?” we can learn that he was acting like the pretenders who seek to justify their actions, claiming that what they do is legally permitted. Since our Sages established him as a hypocrite, we can therefore interpret all his names according to this characteristic, for every hypocrite and pretender constantly praises himself verbally. The name “Zimri” is a term of praise, as in *My strength and song [zimrat] is God* (Exodus 15:2), which is translated [in Aramaic] as “my strength and my praise.” Similarly, the name “Salu” is also a term of praise, derived from *Extol [Salu] Him who rides on the clouds* (Psalms 68:5). Likewise, “Cozbi” [comes from the root meaning falsehood], as every hypocrite is a liar because his mouth and heart are not aligned. And *daughter of Tzur* because hypocrites elevate themselves to sit on a high rock [*tzur*]. The text mentions for both of them *chief* and *leader*, as this is what the souls of hypocrites seek. Therefore it says, *who was slain with the Midianite woman*, because the names of both of them, when interpreted equally, point to the same matter.


###### Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:17:1
[Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:17:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Numbers/r/25:17:1)

**צָרוֹר אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִים וְגוֹ׳.** וְלֹא צִוָּה לִצְרוֹר הַמּוֹאָבִים, לְפִי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר כה א): ״וַיָּחֶל הָעָם לִזְנוֹת אֶל בְּנוֹת מוֹאָב״, מַהוּ ״וַיָּחֶל״? אֶלָּא כָּךְ פֵּרוּשׁוֹ, שֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל הָיוּ הַמַּתְחִילִין וְתוֹבְעִים אֶת בְּנוֹת מוֹאָב, וְהָלְכוּ לָהֶם לְאָהֳלֵיהֶם וְתוֹבְעִים אֶת הַנָּשִׁים וּמְפַתִּים אוֹתָם, לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר: ״וַיָּחֶל הָעָם״, כִּי הָעָם הָיוּ הַמַּתְחִילִין וְלֹא בְּנוֹת מוֹאָב. לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״אֶל בְּנוֹת מוֹאָב״ וְלֹא נֶאֱמַר ״עִם בְּנוֹת מוֹאָב״, אֶלָּא שֶׁבָּא לְהוֹרוֹת שֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל הָלְכוּ אֲלֵיהֶם, אֲבָל מוֹאָב לֹא שָׁלְחוּ נְשׁוֹתֵיהֶם וּבְנוֹתֵיהֶם אֶל יִשְׂרָאֵל, עַל כֵּן לֹא נִתְחַיְּבוּ מוֹאָב, כִּי הַמַּתְחִיל בַּקַּלְקָלָה הוּא הָעִקָּר וּבוֹ תָּלוּי הַחֵטְא.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**Harass the Midianites etc.** And He did not command to harass the Moabites because it is said (Numbers 25:1): *And the people began to commit harlotry with the daughters of Moab.* What is the meaning of *began*? It means that the Israelites were the initiators and sought out the daughters of Moab, going to their tents and soliciting the women, enticing them. Therefore it says *the people began*, because the people were the initiators, not the daughters of Moab. That is why it says *to the daughters of Moab* and not *with the daughters of Moab*, to indicate that the Israelites went to them, but Moab did not send their wives and daughters to the Israelites. Therefore, the Moabites were not held accountable, because the one who initiates the corruption is the primary culprit and the sin depends on him.


###### Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:17:2
[Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:17:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Numbers/r/25:17:2)

אֲבָל בַּמִּדְיָנִים הָיָה הַדָּבָר בְּהֵפֶךְ, שֶׁאַדְרַבָּה הַמִּדְיָנִים הִפְקִירוּ אֶת בְּנוֹתֵיהֶם שֶׁתָּבְעוּ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל לִזְנוּת, וְהַסְּבָרָא נוֹתֶנֶת כִּי אֵיךְ מְלָאוֹ לִבּוֹ שֶׁל זִמְרִי לִתְבֹּעַ אֶת בַּת מֶלֶךְ? אֶלָּא וַדַּאי שֶׁהִיא תְּבָעַתּוּ. וְאִם לֹא אָמְרוּ כֵן בַּפֶּה מִכָּל מָקוֹם עָשׂוּ הַהִשְׁתַּדְּלוּת עִם צַרְצוּר שֶׁל יַיִן לְהַשְׁקוֹתָם כּוֹס הַתַּרְעֵלָה כְּדֵי לְהַבְעִיר בָּהֶם אֵשׁ הַתְּשׁוּקָה, כִּדְמַסִּיק בְּפֶרֶק חֵלֶק (סנהדרין קו). לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר: ״צָרוֹר אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִים״, וְלָמָּה, ״כִּי צוֹרְרִים הֵם לָכֶם״, רוֹצֶה לוֹמַר הֵמָּה בָּאוּ לָכֶם לַהֲבִיאֲכֶם לִידֵי הֶרְגֵּל עֲבֵרָה זוֹ לִצְרוֹר לְגַלּוֹת עַל עֶרְוַתְכֶם, וְלֹא כִּבְנוֹת מוֹאָב שֶׁיִּשְׂרָאֵל בָּאוּ לָהֶם, וְרוֹצֶה לוֹמַר הַצּוֹרְרִים הָהֵם הַיְדוּעִים הֵם לָכֶם, הֵם הִתְחִילוּ בַּקִּלְקוּל עִמָּכֶם. וּבָזֶה מְיֻשָּׁב לְשׁוֹן ״צוֹרְרִים״ לְשׁוֹן הֹוֶה, וּלְפִי דַּרְכֵּנוּ ״צוֹרְרִים״ תֹּאַר הַשֵּׁם שֶׁלָּהֶם, וְהֵם ״לָכֶם״, הַיְינוּ שֶׁהֵם בָּאוּ לָכֶם בְּנִכְלֵי עַרְמוּמִיּוּת עַל יְדֵי שֶׁהִשְׁקוּם צַרְצוּר יַיִן הַמַּרְגִּיל לְעֶרְוָה. וְזֶהוּ שֶׁאָמַר: ״בְּנִכְלֵיהֶם אֲשֶׁר נִכְּלוּ לָכֶם עַל דְּבַר פְּעוֹר״, כִּי הַזּוֹנוֹת נִתְכַּוְּנוּ לְצַעֲרָם כְּדֵי שֶׁבְּעַל כָּרְחָם יָשׁוּבוּ לְדָתָם.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**But with the Midianites, it was the opposite,** for indeed the Midianites abandoned their daughters who solicited the Israelites to commit harlotry. Logic dictates: How could Zimri have had the audacity to solicit a king’s daughter? Rather, it is certain that she solicited him. And even if they [the Midianites] did not explicitly say so, they nonetheless made the effort with a flask of wine to give them a cup of poison in order to ignite in them the fire of desire, as explained (in Sanhedrin 106a). Therefore it is stated, *Harass the Midianites*. And why? *For they harass you* — meaning, they came to you to bring you to habitually commit this sin, to harass you by exposing your nakedness, unlike the daughters of Moab whom the Israelites came to. The text means: These known harassers are known to you — they initiated the corruption with you. This explains the term *harassers* [*tzorerim*] in the present tense. According to our approach, *harassers* is a descriptive noun, and *they to you* means that they came to you with deceitful schemes by giving them a flask of wine that habituates one to sexual immorality. And this is what is meant by *with their schemes which they schemed against you concerning the matter of Peor*, for the harlots intended to cause them distress so that they would be forced to regress to their [the Midianites’] religion.


###### Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:17:3
[Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:17:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Numbers/r/25:17:3)

דָּבָר אַחֵר ״וַיָּחֶל הָעָם״ לְשׁוֹן חֻלִּין הֵפֶךְ הַקְּדֻשָּׁה, כִּי בְּכָל מָקוֹם שֶׁתִּמְצָא גֶּדֶר עֶרְוָה שָׁם אַתָּה מוֹצֵא קְדֻשָּׁה (ויק״ר כד ו), וְכָאן הָיוּ מִתְעַסְּקִים בַּעֲרָיוֹת וְחִלְּלוּ קְדֻשָּׁתָם וְנַעֲשׂוּ חֻלִּין, לְכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״וַיָּחֶל״. וּלְמֵדִין מִן ״וַיָּחֶל נֹחַ אִישׁ הָאֲדָמָה וַיִּטַּע כָּרֶם״ (בראשית ט כ) שֶׁגַּם ״וַיָּחֶל״ הַנֶּאֱמָר כָּאן הָיָה עַל יְדֵי צַרְצוּר יַיִן שֶׁהָיָה מַרְגִּילָם לְעֶרְוָה. וְיֵשׁ אוֹמְרִים שֶׁלְּכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״וַיָּחֶל״ כִּי הַהַתְחָלָה הָיְתָה בִּבְנוֹת מוֹאָב וְהַגְּמָר בִּבְנוֹת עַמּוֹן, וְלֹא פִּרְסְמָם הַכָּתוּב כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁחִסֵּךְ עַל הַצְּעִירָה אֲשֶׁר אִחֲרָה בַּזְּנוּת וְקָרְאָה שֵׁם בְּנָהּ בֶּן עַמִּי, כָּךְ לֹא פִרְסֵם כָּאן. וְזֶה כְּדַעַת הַמִּדְרָשׁ (ספרי כי תצא קיז) הָאוֹמֵר שֶׁעַמּוֹן וּמוֹאָב עַל יְדֵי שֶׁהֶחֱטִיאוּ אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל נִתְרַחֲקוּ רִחוּק עוֹלָמִית. וּפְשׁוּטוֹ שֶׁל הַפָּסוּק עוֹמֵד כְּנֶגֶד מִדְרָשׁ זֶה לְהַכְחִישׁוֹ, שֶׁהֲרֵי נֶאֱמַר (דברים כג ה): ״עַל דְּבַר אֲשֶׁר לֹא קִדְּמוּ אֶתְכֶם בַּלֶּחֶם וּבַמַּיִם״. וְרוֹב הַמְפָרְשִׁים יָצְאוּ לְלַקֵּט וְלֹא מָצְאוּ יִשּׁוּב מַסְפִּיק עַל זֶה.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**Another explanation of “the people began” [in Hebrew: “*vayachel*”] is that it is related to the term “*chulin*” [mundane/profane], which is the opposite of holiness,** because wherever you find a fence against immorality, there you find holiness (Vayikra Rabbah 24:6). And here they were engaging in sexual immorality and profaned their holiness, becoming mundane/profane, therefore it says “*vayachel*” [they began/became profane]. And we learn from *vayachel Noah, man of the earth, and planted a vineyard* (Genesis 9:20) that the term “*vayachel*” mentioned here was also related to the intoxication of wine, which habituated them to immorality. And some say that [the following] is why it says “*vayachel*”: because the beginning [of the sin] was with the daughters of Moab and the conclusion was with the daughters of Ammon, but Scripture did not publicize this, just as it spared [the dignity of] the younger [daughter of Lot] who was later in committing harlotry and called her son Ben-Ammi, similarly it did not publicize [the involvement of the Ammonite women] here. And this follows the opinion of the Midrash (Sifrei, Ki Teitzei 117) which states that Ammon and Moab, because they caused Israel to sin, were distanced [from the congregation of Israel] permanently. However, the simple meaning of the verse stands against this midrashic interpretation to refute it, since it is stated *because they did not greet you with bread and water* (Deuteronomy 23:5). Most commentators have gone out to gather [explanations] but have not found a sufficient resolution for this.


###### Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:17:4
[Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:17:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Numbers/r/25:17:4)

וְאוֹמֵר אֲנִי שֶׁהַדָּבָר כִּפְשׁוּטוֹ וְהָא בְּהָא תַּלְיָא, כִּי אֵין הַסְּבָרָא נוֹתֶנֶת לְהַרְחִיק שְׁנֵי אֻמּוֹת עַל דָּבָר שֶׁלֹּא קִדְּמוּם בַּלֶּחֶם וּבַמַּיִם, אֶלָּא עַל דְּבַר כַּוָּנָתָם, כִּי יָדַע ה׳ שֶׁלְּכָךְ לֹא קִדְּמוּם כְּדֵי שֶׁיִּהְיוּ רְעֵבִים גַּם צְמֵאִים מִן טֹרַח הַדֶּרֶךְ, וְיִהְיוּ מֻכְרָחִים לֶאֱכֹל מִזִּבְחֵי אֱלֹהֵיהֶן וְלִשְׁתּוֹת יֵין נִסְכֵּיהֶם הַמַּרְגִּילִים לְעֶרְוָה, כִּי כָּךְ הַדֶּרֶךְ בְּכָל הַבָּא מִן הַדֶּרֶךְ עָיֵף וְיָגֵעַ מִטֹּרַח הַדֶּרֶךְ וְהוּא רָעֵב וְצָמֵא, שֶׁהוּא שׁוֹאֵף לֶאֱכֹל וְלִשְׁתּוֹת מִן הַבָּא בְּיָדוֹ, לֹא יְבַקֵּר בֵּין אָסוּר לְמֻתָּר, וְכָל כַּוָּנָתָם הָיְתָה לְהַכְשִׁילָם בַּזְּנוּת וְלַהֲבִיאָם עַל יָדוֹ לְמַעֲשֵׂה פְּעוֹר, עַל כֵּן לֹא קִדְּמוּם בַּלֶּחֶם, כְּדֵי לְהַרְעִיבָם וּלְהַאֲכִילָם מִזִּבְחֵי אֱלֹהֵיהֶן, וְלֹא קִדְּמוּם בַּמָּיִם, כְּדֵי לְהַשְׁקוֹתָם כּוֹס הַתַּרְעֵלָה וְיֵין נִסְכֵּיהֶם, וְכָל זֶה נִכְלֵי דָתוֹת וְעַרְמוּמִיּוּת. וּפֵרוּשׁ זֶה יָקָר, לֹא יָדַעְתִּי מֵאֵיזוֹ טַעַם לֹא מְצָאוּהוּ בְּשִׂכְלָם מְפָרְשֵׁי תּוֹרָתֵנוּ אֲשֶׁר קָטָנָּם עָבָה מִמָּתְנַי.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**And I say that the matter is according to its plain meaning, and one depends on the other,** as it is not logical to distance two nations solely because they did not greet [the Israelites] with bread and water, but rather it’s about their intentions. For God knew that the reason they did not greet them was so that [the Israelites] would be hungry and thirsty from the hardship of the journey, and would be compelled to eat from their sacrifices to their gods and drink their libation wine which leads to immoral behavior. For this is the way of anyone who comes from a journey, tired and weary from the hardship of the road, hungry and thirsty — he yearns to eat and drink whatever is at hand, not distinguishing between what is forbidden and what is permitted. All their intention was to cause [the Israelites] to stumble into promiscuity and thereby bring them to the worship of Peor. Therefore, they did not greet them with bread in order to starve them and feed them sacrifices to their gods, and they did not greet them with water in order to give them the ‘cup of poison’ and their libation wine. All this was ‘cunning of religions’ and trickery. This explanation is precious, and I do not know for what reason our Torah commentators, whose small finger is thicker than my loins, did not find it in their wisdom.


###### Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:18:1
[Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:18:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Numbers/r/25:18:1)

**כִּי צוֹרְרִים הֵם לָכֶם וְגוֹ׳.** בַּפָּסוּק הַקּוֹדֵם נִרְאֶה כֶּפֶל לָשׁוֹן: ״צָרוֹר אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִים וְהִכִּיתֶם אוֹתָם״, מַה בֵּין צָרוֹר לִ״וְהִכִּיתֶם״? וְרַבּוֹתֵינוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה אָמְרוּ (תנחומא פנחס ג) מִכָּאן הַבָּא לְהָרְגְךָ הַשְׁכֵּם לְהָרְגוֹ – הַעֲרֵב לְהָרְגוֹ מִבָּעֵי לֵיהּ, שֶׁהֲרֵי הַמִּדְיָנִים הִתְחִילוּ בַּקַּלְקָלָה. וּלְשׁוֹן ״צוֹרְרִים״ צָרִיךְ בֵּאוּר, כִּי מַשְׁמָעוּתוֹ שֶׁעֲדַיִן הֵם צוֹרְרִים לָכֶם. וְאוּלַי יָדַע הַשֵּׁם יִתְבָּרַךְ מַה שֶּׁבְּלִבָּם שֶׁל הַמִּדְיָנִים, שֶׁעֲדַיִן לֹא נָח רָגְזָם וַעֲדַיִן הֵם צוֹרְרִים חוֹשְׁבִים מַחֲשָׁבוֹת לְהִתְעוֹלֵל עֲלִילוֹת בְּרֶשַׁע וְאוּלַי יוֹתֵר מִבָּרִאשׁוֹנָה, לְפִי שֶׁנּוּרָא דַּאֲחוֹתָם דָּלוּק בְּלִבָּם לְהִתְנַקֵּם, לְפִיכָךְ הַשְׁכֵּם לִצְרוֹר אוֹתָם. וּפְשׁוּטוֹ שֶׁ״צּוֹרְרִים״ הוּא שֵׁם דָּבָר, לוֹמַר שֶׁמֵּעוֹלָם הֵם צוֹרְרִים שֶׁלָּכֶם, כִּי מִתְּחִלָּה ״וְהַמְּדָנִים מָכְרוּ אוֹתוֹ לְפוֹטִיפַר״ (בראשית לז לו), אַחַר כָּךְ עָשׂוּ מִדְיָן שָׁלוֹם עִם מוֹאָב עַל יִשְׂרָאֵל, אַחַר כָּךְ הִפְקִירוּ בְּנוֹתֵיהֶם לְהַכְשִׁיל אֶת יִשְׂרָאֵל, נִמְצָא שֶׁהַמִּדְיָנִים מֵעוֹלָם רְצוּעַת מַרְדּוּת לְיִשְׂרָאֵל. עַל כֵּן אָמַר כִּי הֵם צוֹרְרִים שֶׁלָּכֶם.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**For they are harass you, etc.** In the previous verse, there appears to be a repetition of language: *Harass the Midianites and smite them*. What is the difference between *harass* and *smite*? Our Sages said (Tanchuma Pinchas 3) from here we learn that “if someone comes to kill you, rise early in the morning to kill him.” It should have said “rise in the evening to kill him,” since the Midianites were the ones who initiated the transgression. And the language of *harassers* [*tzorerim*] needs explanation, as it implies that they are still enemies to you. Perhaps the Holy One, blessed be He, knew what was in the hearts of the Midianites, that their anger had not yet subsided and they were still adversaries plotting evil schemes, perhaps even more than before, because the fire of [avenging] their sister was burning in their hearts to take revenge. Therefore, rise early to harass them. But according to its simple meaning, *tzorerim* [harassers] is a noun, saying that they have always been your enemies, for initially *the Midianites sold [Joseph] to Potiphar* (Genesis 37:36), afterwards Midian made peace with Moab against Israel, and later they prostituted their daughters to cause Israel to stumble. Thus, the Midianites have always been a scourge of rebellion against Israel, therefore it says that they are your enemies.


###### Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:18:2
[Kli Yakar on Numbers 25:18:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Kli%20Yakar%20on%20Numbers/r/25:18:2)

וּכְדֵי לְיַשֵּׁב הַכֶּפֶל אוֹמֵר אֲנִי שֶׁצִּוָּה ה׳ עַל שְׁנֵי דְּבָרִים. אַחַת, ״צָרוֹר אֶת הַמִּדְיָנִים״ לְצַעֲרָם תְּחִלָּה יָמִים רַבִּים, וְאַחַר כָּךְ ״וְהִכִּיתֶם אוֹתָם״ וְכָל כָּךְ לָמָּה, לְפִי שֶׁצוֹרְרִים הֵם לָכֶם, וְהוּא נְתִינַת טַעַם עַל ״צָרוֹר״, כִּי גַם הֵמָּה צִעֲרוּ אֶתְכֶם עַל יְדֵי שֶׁהַזּוֹנוֹת הִשְׁקוּם יַיִן, וּכְשֶׁאָמַר הַשְׁמִיעִי לִי, אוֹמֶרֶת לוֹ פְּלַח לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה תְּחִלָּה. וְזֶהוּ שֶׁאָמַר ״כִּי צוֹרְרִים הֵם לָכֶם בְּנִכְלֵיהֶם אֲשֶׁר נִכְּלוּ עַל דְּבַר פְּעוֹר״, כִּי כָל עִקַּר צַעַר זֶה שֶׁצִּעֲרוּ אֶתְכֶם הָיְתָה הַכַּוָּנָה לְהַכְרִיחַ אֶתְכֶם לִפְעוֹר. וְעַל מַה שֶּׁאָמַר ״וְהִכִּיתֶם אוֹתָם״, נָתַן טַעַם וְאָמַר, ״עַל דְּבַר כָּזְבִּי בַת נְשִׂיא מִדְיָן אֲחֹתָם הַמֻּכָּה בְּיוֹם הַמַּגֵּפָה עַל דְּבַר פְּעוֹר״, לְפִי שֶׁאֲחוֹתָם הִיא הַמֻּכָּה יַחְשְׁבוּ גַם הֵמָּה לְהִנָּקֵם וּלְהַכּוֹת אֶתְכֶם. עַל כֵּן הַשְׁכִּימוּ לְהַכּוֹת אוֹתָם, כִּי הַבָּא לְהָרְגְךָ הַשְׁכֵּם לְהָרְגוֹ. וְאוּלַי שֶׁלְּכָךְ נֶאֱמַר ״וַיְהִי אַחֲרֵי הַמַּגֵּפָה״ סוֹף פָּסוּק וּבְאֶתְנַחְתָּא, לְדָרְשׁוֹ אַשֶּׁלְאַחֲרָיו וְאַשֶּׁלְפָנָיו: לְאַחֲרָיו כִּפְשׁוּטוֹ, וּלְפָנָיו לוֹמַר שֶׁגַּם אַחֲרֵי הַמַּגֵּפָה הֵם רוֹצִים לְהַכּוֹת אֶתְכֶם עַל דְּבַר אֲחוֹתָם הַמֻּכָּה, עַל כֵּן תַּשְׁכִּימוּ לְהַכּוֹתָם.

**Sefaria Kli Yakar, 2026 (Claude 3.7, ed. Francis Nataf) ✧:**
**In order to resolve the repetition, I say that God commanded about two things.** First, harass the Midianites to cause them suffering for many days, and afterward *you shall strike them*. And why all this? Because *they harass you* — which gives the reason for “harass them,” since they also caused you suffering by having the prostitutes give them wine, and when he [an Israelite] would say “listen to me,” she would say “worship idolatry first.” This is what it means by *for they harass you with their plots which they plotted concerning Peor* — for the main purpose of the suffering they caused you was to force you to worship Peor.
And for what it says *you shall strike them*, it gives the reason saying *because of the matter of Cozbi, daughter of the Midianite prince, their sister who was struck on the day of the plague concerning Peor*. Since their sister was struck, they too would consider taking revenge and striking you, therefore rise early to strike them, for “if someone comes to kill you, rise early and kill him first.”
And perhaps this is why it says *And it was after the plague* at the end of the [paragraph], yet with an *etnachta* [cantillation mark designating a pause], to interpret it as referring both to what follows and what precedes it. What follows is according to its simple meaning, and what precedes is to say that even after the plague, they want to strike you because of their sister who was struck, therefore you should rise early to strike them.