“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.⁷⁶ 81b, where if one sees another having intercourse with an Aramite, he may kill him in the heat of zealotry, but if he stops to consider the situation, there must be a trial. 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.¹, “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]) ⁷⁷ are from New Writings of Chaim Vital, Jerusalem 5748, where it is written: Dinah’s root was in Gevurah—Dina Qashia or severe judgments—therefore Shimon took her. (Shimon was also rooted in Gevurah.) Since she was not yet purified, and also had intercourse with the Canaanite, who is the snake, of whom it is said, ‘cursed is Canaan,’ as is known, therefore Shaul son of the Canaanite descended from her (perhaps was reincarnated, or really descended). Our sages say Shaul is the same as Shlumiel ben TsooriShadai (prince of the tribe of Shimon), who is actually Zimri ben Salu. (See Sanhedrin 83a, which says that these are three different names for the same person.) The power of this contamination (of the snake) had been contacted by Cosbi, for Cosbi is also from the remains of the klipah (force of evil) of Dinah mother of Shaul, and she was his soulmate, except that she “ate an unripe fruit,” meaning that she was still not ready for him. Therefore he was called Shlumiel ben “Tsoori” Shadai and she was Cosbi bat “Tsoor.” Yet “Tsoor,” the father of Shlumiel, was Shimon, where “Tsoori” (“My rock” in Hebrew) is “Shaddai” (the name of God the “Almighty’), which survives the klipot and subdues them, and not so the “Tsoor” of the side of evil the father of Cosbi. We return to the subject. All the actions of our Biblical forebears, and all that is mentioned in the Torah, is not understood only according to its simple meaning and is not governed by chance, God forbid. So do not think that Shlumiel, who was the second-greatest prince, the chosen of the generation of the desert in the days of our master Moshe, was rushing out to commit forbidden sexual acts, as is understood in the small minds of fools. I have not come to explain all the verses necessary for these homilies, for the time would end but not the verses, for the Torah is not “old wives’ tales,” or the chatter of birds, God forbid, and this will suffice for those who understand. For these things are the furnace of the universe, and if these matters were to fall into the hands of one who has no brain in his skull to understand, he will just speak insolently, for a fool does not desire wisdom. Though these things appear strange … they stand at the pinnacle of the universe.

footnotes: ⁷⁶ See the Mishna in Sanhedrin ¹ Regarding the verse mentioned above in Hoshea (11:1 ⁷⁷ The references to the writings of R. Luria Z’L

“Therefore say, I give him My covenant of Peace.” (Bamidbar, 25:12) Moshe was not fit for zealotry, for in his great light he would have punished him in body and soul. But Pinchas, a young sage, only punished him in body. Therefore it was proper to give him “My covenant of Peace.”

“Harass the Midianites … for they harass you in their wiles with which they have beguiled you in the matter of Peor .…” (Bamidbar, 25:17–18) Truly the heart of Israel is clean of all dross and refuse, and will not be drawn away from the will of the Holy One, blessed be He. However, when Israel has transgressed God’s will, it was not from within themselves, but from the power of the nations that entered into them. The nations are filled with lusts and evil desires, and the heart of Israel can be affected by their power. This is as the verse says, “for they harass you in their wiles,” meaning that by means of their evil thoughts they will also harm you. Yet when the evil power in the nations has been destroyed, then the heart of Israel will be connected to God without the slightest deviation.

“And Moses brought their case [of the daughters of Tslofchad] before God.” (Bamidbar, 27:5) It is said in the Midrash (Rabba, 21:13), “they came before the princes of tens and the princes of hundreds, and all feared to rule on their case, and even Moshe Rabeynu feared this until he brought the case before the Holy One, blessed be He.” Here we may explain that the sin of the one found gathering wood on Shabbat (Tslofchad) was that he sinned against Moshe Rabeynu. It is said in the Zohar (Bamidbar, 205b), “the portion of Moshe Rabeynu was Shabbat, as it is said [in the morning prayer of Shabbat], ‘Moses rejoiced at the granting of his portion.’” Tslofchad did not uphold the Shabbat on the second Shabbat that was commanded of Israel (since the giving of the Torah), yet if he had only fulfilled the commandment of Shabbat on this second Shabbat, the level of Shabbat that is the level of Moshe Rabeynu would have been immediately revealed to all. Because of the sin of Tslofchad, who had transgressed the second Shabbat, this light was closed from Israel. Because of this Moshe Rabeynu was uncertain whether he could be lenient (with Tslofchad’s daughters) or not. In the realm of physical damage it is forbidden for a scholar to be lenient (Yoma, 23a), yet with monetary damage he has the option to be lenient. As it also says there, “all who restrain their anger and act towards others with lenience, all their sins are forgiven.” Monetary damage is something of this world and can be returned, while physical injury is something that leaves a scar forever. Moshe was thus uncertain. Perhaps this action was (on the level of) monetary damage, meaning that in the future the Holy One, blessed be He, would return this light to Israel, and it would be clear to all of Israel the goodness of the level of Shabbat, and that it was only lost temporarily. Or maybe it was (on the level of) physical damage, that if the souls of Israel only knew the precious depth of Shabbat, with what great strength and awe they would have served God. Because Moshe was uncertain of this, all the judges were afraid to rule on the case of the daughters of Tslofchad fearing that they would insult Moshe Rabeynu. God answered Moshe that since the light of Shabbat was only closed from them temporarily, it is called monetary damage, and he could be forgiving.