וישב ישראל בשטים, “Israel settled in Shittim.” This is the meaning of the words in Numbers 33,49: “they encamped by the Jordan, from Bet Yeshimot until the plains of Shittim, in the plains of Moav.” All of these events including the dispatch by Joshua of spies occurred during the encampment of the Israelites in the wilderness of Moav.

A Midrashic interpretation based on Tanchuma Balak 17: The words “Israel settled in Shittim” indicate that there was a fountain at Shittim which caused people who drank from it to develop into adulterers, just as we know that there are fountains the waters of which cause the people drinking it either to become physically strong or weak, or to influence their characters in various ways. The waters of that well were the ones the people of Sodom had been drinking from (in former times). This is the meaning of Genesis 19,5: “Where are the men who came to you this night, take them out to us so that we can indulge our libido with them.” Seeing that this fountain had such spiritually negative effects on the people drinking from it, G’d cursed it and made it stop flowing. We know from the prophecy in Yoel 4,18 that in the future this fountain will re-emerge: “On that day the mountains shall drip with wine, the hills shall flow with milk; and all the watercourses of Yehudah shall flow with water; a spring shall issue forth from the House of the Lord and shall water the wadi of Shittim.”

ויחל העם, “the people profaned themselves.” The word ויחל means to profane something which previously was sacred, holy. We encounter the same word in connection with Noach (Genesis 9,2), when Noach planted a vineyard and became drunk. Judaism describes people who are meticulous in their sexual mores as ”holy,” whereas those that are not are considered as “profane.” Whenever the Torah refers to the Israelites simply as העם, this term implies a criticism of their spiritual level (at that time). The Following are some examples of the Torah using this terminology: Numbers 11,1: “the people were looking for something to complain about.” Numbers 20,3: “the people quarrelled.” Numbers 21,5: “the people spoke out against G’d.” On the other hand, whenever the people of Israel are referred to as עמי, this is to be taken as a complimentary term; examples are: Psalms 81,14: “if only My people would listen to Me.” Exodus 7,4: “I will take out the hosts of My people.” Isaiah 40,1: “comfort, comfort My people.”

לזנות את בני מואב, “to whore with the daughters of Moav.” This reminds us of the popular proverb: “When one throws a stick into the air it always lands on its broad side.” The reference is to the fact that the people of Moav had their origin in Lot’s older daughter who had devised the plan that she and her younger sister sleep with their father (Genesis 19,31). The fact that she had had the audacity to call her son מאב, alluding to the fact that he was born “from my father” speaks for itself, although originally, the Torah had not faulted the scheme itself seeing it was based on an innocent assessment of their chances to perpetuate the family or even mankind. Similarly, the daughters (also married women) of Moav lured the Israelites to their tents after having made themselves alluring.

ויאכל העם וישתחוו לאלוהיהן, “the people ate and prostrated themselves in front of their deities.” The mixture of the use of feminine and masculine pronoun endings means that both the Israelites and the Moabites prostrated themselves to these deities.

ויצמד ישראל לבעל פעור, “Thus Israel attached itself to Baal-peor.” The word ויצמד is from the same root as צמד בקר, “a yoke of oxen.” The meaning of the expression is that man and woman coupled together. There is a difference in meaning between the expression הצמדה and דבקות, although both express a state of togetherness, union, almost. הצמדה is a less intimate relationship, a looser coupling than דבקות. If the Torah had written here וידבק ישראל לבעל פעור, G’d forbid, this would have been such a grave sin that it could not have been repaired. This consideration is also reflected in the sages saying in Sanhedrin 64 that whereas the attachment of the Israelites to the deity בעל פעור was comparable to a lid over a pot, the attachment of the Israelites to their G’d (Deut. 4,4) is described as ואתם הדבקים בה' אלוקיכם, “you who cleave to the Lord your G’d,” i.e. a far closer attachment than that of the lid to the pot. The term דבקות when applied to two entities implies that they are so alike and clinging to each other as to be interchangeable. According to a Baraita the term ויצמד is related to צמידים — a bracelet worn by a woman (worn loosely but not attached to the body), while ואתם הדבקים indicates a tight bond.

קח את כל ראשי העם והוקע אותם, “take all the heads of the people and hang them!” This is not to be understood as a command to kill the leaders of the people by hanging. It meant that the leaders of the people should convict the guilty people, those who had worshipped the Baal-peor, of the death penalty. This is what Onkelos meant when he translated ”judge those guilty of death and execute them.” He did not translate: “kill the leaders of the people.” We find that during the episode of the golden calf Moses also told the judges of the people: “kill each his men (Exodus 32,27),” and the judges of the people mentioned there were identical with the people here described as ראשי העם, the leaders of the people. Although the Torah does not report that this command was carried out, the fact that G’d commanded Moses and he in turn commanded the judges makes it plausible to assume that these orders were carried out. Alternatively, they did not have a chance to complete their assignment before Pinchas killed Zimri without the benefit of a trial. Pinchas’s deed arrested the spread of the pestilence.

לה', “for G’d;” i.e. for the glorification of His name. נגד השמש, “facing the sun;” this means “in public.” Just as they had desecrated G’d’s name in public, it now had to be sanctified in public. It is also possible to understand the words נגד השמש to mean that since the Israelites had sinned at Baal-peor against Yaakov who had also been known as “sun,” (compare the Midrash: Bereshit Rabbah 84,10 that Yaakov said: “who told this one that my name was שמש”), the Torah now had to write the words נגד השמש as if to say that their punishment also had to correspond to the manner in which they sinned. Another reason for these words may be connected to the commandment that a person who was executed by hanging must be lowered to the ground by evening and buried (Deut. 21,23). G’d meant that as long as the sun is in the sky the guilty have to remain visible, on the gallows; once the sun has set they may be buried, seeing the Torah wrote: “you must not allow his carcass to remain hanging overnight.”

A Midrashic approach based on Tanchuma Balak 19: Moses asked G’d: ”who will tell me who has been guilty of prostrating himself to the Baal-peor“ [seeing that by the nature of this offense it occurred in the bedroom of the Moabite women; Ed.]. G’d answered him: “I will make their sin public.” The cloud would double over and the sun would shine on all those who were guilty. They would then hang such a person immediately.

ויקרב אל אחיו את המדינית, “He brought the Midianite woman near to his brethren;” the Torah really should have written: “a man by the name of Zimri, prince of the tribe of Shimon, went and brought the Midianite woman whose name was Cozbi bat Tzur near his brethren.” However, the Torah could not bring itself to reveal name of the wicked person who had become the reason for the raging pestilence until he had been dealt with, i.e. until Pinchas had killed him and until Pinchas had received his reward. Only then does the Torah mention the names of both the man and the woman involved (verses 14-15). All of this is to tell us the praises of Pinchas who displayed fearlessness. Although the people in question were a prince and a king’s daughter respectively, he did not let this stop him from killing them (Rashi).

לעיני משה ולעיני כל עדת ישראל, “in the presence of Moses and the assembled community of Israel.” He (Zimri) accorded no respect to either heaven or G’d’s creatures.

והמה בוכים, “and they were crying.” The Israelites were crying on account of the pestilence which had begun to claim victims amongst them indicating G’d’s anger at the people. Our sages in Tanchuma Balak 20 say that they were crying because a religious decision, הלכה, had apparently escaped Moses and had made this pestilence possible. Zimri had asked Cozbi to sleep with him to which Cozbi had replied: I will not agree to sleep with any one of you unless it is Moses or Eleazar the High Priest seeing I am a king’s daughter. To this Zimri had replied: “I am just as high ranking as they are. I will bring you before them in public.” He took Cozbi by her plait and dragged her before Moses, saying: “Ben Amram, is this woman permitted for me to sleep with or not? If you say that she is not permitted for me to sleep with, who gave you permission to sleep with the daughter of Yitro (a Midianite)?” When Moses heard this he could not remember what should be done to punish Zimri. At that point all the people started crying. This is the meaning of: “they were crying at the entrance to the Tent of Testimony.” Why precisely did the people cry? Did they really think that Moses, a man who had many times been able to stand up to 600,000 fellow Israelites, such as when he burned the golden calf the people had danced around, was now too weak to hold his own against a single Zimri? G’d prevented Moses from remembering the correct procedure at that time in order to enable Pinchas to reap the reward for his initiative. Concerning this incident Solomon says in Proverbs 30,31: “the greyhound, a male goat, and a king who is senile.” Our sages in Sanhedrin 82 apply this verse to Moses (the senile king) and Pinchas the greyhound, the eager beaver. Seeing that Moses forgot the correct response to Zimri he was compared to a senile old king.

וירא פינחס, “Pinchas saw, etc.” When he saw a certain deed he remembered the halachah pertaining to it. He said to Moses: “did you not teach us when you descended from Mount Sinai that if someone has sexual intercourse with a pagan woman one may kill such a person in a fit of religious fervor?” To this Moses replied: “he who reads the letter may deliver it to the addressee.” Upon hearing this, ויקם מתוך העדה ויקח רומח בידיו, “he arose from amongst the congregation and took a short sword in his hand.” As a reward for this action he was granted the priestly portions (the foreleg, the cheekbones and the stomach of all animals slaughtered by the Israelites as food compare Chulin 134). [The meaning of this line is that he was accorded the status of a priest, a status he had not possessed previously. All the priests are entitled to these parts of the animal.] He was awarded the foreleg for seizing a sword with his hands, the cheekbones corresponding to “Pinchas stepped forth and intervened” (Psalms 106,30), and he was awarded the stomach corresponding to Numbers 25,8 “and the woman into her stomach.” The performance of this commandment helped Pinchas both in this world and in the hereafter (compare Pirke d'Rabbi Eliezer chapter 47). In this world Pinchas merited the gifts granted to the priests. Moreover, he lived for many hundreds of years on terrestrial earth. We have proof of this in Judges 11,26 when Yiftach told the Ammonites that Israel had dwelled in Hebron and other towns claimed by the Ammonites already for over 300 years. We also find over a hundred years later that Pinchas was still alive in Judges 20,28. The prophet states this explicitly. As to the benefits Pinchas received in his hereafter as a result of his courageous and purely motivated deed in killing Zimri and Cozbi, he was granted the dimension of peace, a wonderful attribute. He was ushered in to eternal life. In the course of his deed, he experienced no fewer than 12 miracles without which he could not have succeeded (based on Tanchuma Balak 21) 1) It is customary for a couple who have engaged in sexual intercourse to separate their bodies from one another afterward. In this instance an angel ensured that Zimri and Cozbi’s bodies were sticking together to enable Pinchas to pierce both with one and the same stroke of the spear. 2) The angel closed their mouths to prevent them from crying out and alerting neighbors who would have attacked Pinchas. 3) The angel directed the spear of Pinchas (who was outside the tent) to aim at precisely the private parts of both Zimri and Cozbi. 4) He miraculously lengthened the metal blade of Pinchas’ spear so that it could reach both the sinners. 5) He raised the lintel of the door to their tent so that the people could all see how these two were strung up on it. 6) He arranged the position of these two in such a way that they were head down and feet up so that everyone could see that they had been killed during the performance of the sexual act. This was to prevent people from arguing that Zimri had entered the tent merely to relieve himself. 7) He lent extra strength to Pinchas’ arm to lift both of them simultaneously so that they would be suspended from the wooden post. 8) He strengthened the wooden post on which they were hung to support the combined weight of the two. 9) He insured that they would not slide off that wooden post. 10) He protected Pinchas so that the blood of his victims did not splash upon him. 11) He enabled Pinchas to hang the two in full view of the people. Halachically speaking, (under normal circumstances), Pinchas, through contact of his spear with the bodies would have become ritually impure. Seeing Pinchas performed his deed with a flat wooden spear, an instrument which is not subject to contracting ritual impurity, he was saved from becoming ritually contaminated in contrast with Numbers 19,22 according to which anyone in contact with a corpse becomes ritually unclean for at least seven days (compare details in Avodah Zarah 37 and Chulin 28). It is also possible, based on Tanchuma Balak 21, that G’d miraculously kept both Zimri and Cozbi alive for the few moments it took for Pinchas to let go of the spear after stabbing them. This then would be the twelfth miracle Pinchas experienced in connection with his deed. If we accept the Tanchuma we need not posit that Pinchas’ spear was a wooden tool or that it was flat. The question of Pinchas becoming ritually unclean would not even have arisen. After all these miracles had happened to Pinchas and he took the two outside to display them hanging, the entire tribe of Shimon surrounded the tent in a threatening posture wanting to kill Pinchas. At that moment the pestilence began which killed twenty-four thousand Israelites, all of them members of the tribe of Shimon (Tanchuma Vayechi 13). It is relatively simple to confirm this when we consider the number of men from the tribe of Shimon counted in Numbers 1,17, i.e. 59,300, and the number of men from that same tribe counted in Numbers 26,14, i.e. 22,000. We note that the tribe had lost over 37,000 men of military age. When we consider that during the episode of the golden calf only 3,000 Israelites were killed whereas here 24,000 lost their lives this teaches that the sin of idolatry alone was far less catastrophic than the combination of idolatry and sexual licentiousness involving pagan partners displayed on this occasion at Shittim. By displaying jealousy on behalf of G’d who had described Himself as a “jealous G’d,” (Exodus 20,5) Pinchas turned away G’d’s wrath and saved untold thousands from being consumed by the pestilence through having put his life on the line. He had simply been unable to witness this public desecration of the Lord’s name. He totally ignored accepted rules of conduct which required showing respect for his superiors, in this case the prince of the tribe of Shimon and a daughter of the King of Midian. He meant to show the world that the only One who is entitled to honor and respect is the Lord. This is the meaning of Isaiah 43,7: “all who are linked to My name, whom I have created, formed and made for My glory.”

מגדל עוז שם ה' בו ירוץ צדיק ונשגב, “The name of the Lord is a tower of strength, the righteous runs towards it and is elevated” (Proverbs 18,10).

In this verse Solomon is teaching us a lesson in faith. The plain meaning of the verse is: “a person who puts his trust in the Lord may be compared to someone who is within a formidable tower, serene, unafraid of any potential aggressor.” It is similar to Psalms 118,6: “when the Lord is with me what can a mortal human being possibly do to me. The words: “the righteous runs towards it and is elevated,” refer to his being rescued from troubles. (Compare Rabbeinu Yonah’s understanding of the word נשגב as being equivalent to נושע). We find that word used in that context in Proverbs 29,25: ובוטח בה' ישוגב, “and he who puts his trust in the Lord will be safeguarded.” In that verse too Solomon refers to man being safeguarded from threatening troubles and enemies. The word בו in the verse above does not refer to the word מגדל, “tower,” but to שם ה' i.e. he who puts his trust not in the tower but in the name of the Lord. Clearly, a man does not run inside a strong tower, but he runs around proclaiming the name of the Lord and his trust in Him. He who does this will be saved as if he were inside a fortress although he does not appear to be protected by visible man-made shields. Whereas human beings who run are liable to stumble and fall, not so he who runs proclaiming his faith in the Lord. We find this idea expressed in Proverbs 4,12: “when you run you will not stumble.” The reason Solomon chose “a tower of strength” as his simile in our heading instead of a high mountain or something similarly impregnable, is because fortified towers are an essential need for people in trouble, being pursued, etc. We have an example of this in Judges 9,51 “there was a tower of strength inside the city to which they fled.” This is why Solomon chose an example of the kind of man-made structure that ordinary people put their trust in. This is also why David writes in Psalms 20,2: “may the Lord answer you in time of trouble, the name of Yaakov’s G’d keep you safe.” In other words: “G’d is the Tower of strength who will elevate people when they are in trouble and distress.” David used the same verb when he prayed to G’d to save him from the pursuit of king Shaul (Psalms 59,2) where he said ממתקוממי תשגבני. He also employed this verb when he faced the giant Goliath. In Samuel I 17,45 David says to Goliath: “you come against me with sword and spear and javelin; but I come against you in the name of the Lord of Hosts, the G’d of the ranks of Israel, etc.” Clearly, the words: “the name of the Lord” are of the essence in that verse. Whereas Solomon used the simile of a fortified tower to describe a feeling of security and therefore applied this simile to the name of the Lord, Isaiah used the simile of a room where a person when he closes the door feels relatively secure. Compare Isaiah 26,20: “Go, My people enter your chambers, and lock your doors behind you.” We find in many verses throughout the Bible that G’d Himself is being compared to a “refuge” (Psalms 90,1) or to a “rock,” (Samuel II 22,2). Our sages have described G’d or “the name of G’d” as מקום, “place,” seeing He comprises all “places” and He is the “place” or “site” of the universe. There is no “place” without Him. No human being is called righteous unless he has faith in the Lord (compare Proverbs 28,1: ‘the righteous are confident like a lion’). Our author lists many more verses from Scripture, all reflecting the same theme that faith in the Lord (and in the righteousness of one’s actions) are the source of confidence of the righteous. Pinchas personified such faith. If he merited to have so many miracles performed for him to help him succeed it was because of the faith he had displayed.

פינחס בן אלעזר בן אהרן הכהן השיב את חמתי, “Pinchas, son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest, deflected My wrath, etc.” Some commentators understand the word השיב here as meaning the same as בשובה ונחת, in Isaiah 30,15: “through calm and serenity.” While G’d displayed His jealousy He had allowed the attribute of Justice free reign, such as Exodus 33,14, והניחותי לך, “I will provide you rest.” I feel, however, that the more likely meaning of the word השיב is simply that the wrath of G’d which was about to advance against the people of Israel was “turned back” by Pinchas completely.

One may question this statement seeing that 24,000 Israelites died during the pestilence, so how could Pinchas be credited with having totally prevented G’d’s wrath claiming victims amongst the people? In fact, the very fact that only people from the tribe of Shimon died is the proof that Pinchas succeeded in halting G’d’s wrath claiming victims from the בני ישראל, i.e. the attribute of Justice was active only among that single tribe. This is the meaning of the words: “and I did not completely wipe out the Children of Israel during My jealousy.” Clearly, turning back G’d’s wrath resulted in the continued existence of the Jewish nation. It follows that Pinchas was the source of the Jewish people as a nation enjoying long life, i.e. continued existence from then on until the end of time. As a reward commensurate with his deed he was granted continuous life in that he became in due course Elijah the prophet as we know from Zohar 215 based on Maleachi 2,5: “My covenant was with him, Life (ongoing) and peace.” When the Torah speaks here about Pinchas being granted בריתי, “My covenant,” the meaning is the same as in Maleachi.

בקנאו את קנאתי, “when he displayed My jealousy.” According to the plain meaning of the text the meaning is that Pinchas acted in G’d’s place when he displayed religious fervour.

A Midrashic approach: the fact that the word קנאה appears twice in succession proves that the Torah refers to two separate jealousies. The first display of Pinchas being jealous occurred here, the second in the days of Achav when the prophet Elijah on Mount Carmel gave a repeat performance and killed 400 priests of the idol Baal, and he fled to Mount Chorev after that occurrence to escape the wrath of Achav and Izzevel. When he arrived there and G’d asked him why he had come there (Kings I 19,9-10) he answered: “I have worked with zeal for the Lord, the G’d of Hosts for they have abandoned Your covenant with the Children of Israel.” Pinchas was also involved in another act of religious zeal on behalf of G’d during the period known as Pilegesh beGivah in Judges 20,28 and Chronicles I 9,20.

According to the view of the sages in Baba Metzia 114 Pinchas and Elijah were identical. The Talmud relates that a scholar by the name of Rabbah bar Avuhah met Elijah in a cemetery where idolaters were buried. He was surprised at this and asked him: “are you not a priest?” (priests are not allowed in cemeteries) Elijah answered that the bodies of Gentiles do not confer ritual impurity if one merely is under the same roof with them without physical contact. He quoted Numbers 19,14 אדם כי ימות באהל וגו', “when someone qualifying for the description אדם dies in a tent, etc., plus Ezekiel 34,31: ואתן צאני צאן מרעיתי אדם אתם, “and you My flock, flock that I tend, are אדם", as proof that only Jews qualify for the complimentary description אדם. This also explains why he was allowed to lie down in the form of a tent over the son of the woman from Tzorfat as her son was a Gentile (compare Kings I 17,21). [The text there appears to imply close bodily contact between Elijah and the boy. Rabbi Chavell quotes some halachic sources that even such contact with the body of a dead Gentile is permitted. Ed.].

לכן אמור, “therefore say:” this wording serves as an allusion to the blessing of the priests which is introduced by a call to them from a congregant to begin to chant the blessing. [The meaning could be that whereas a priest guilty of killing a human being is prevented thereby from performing this blessing (Berachot 32), Pinchas was allowed to be an exception to this rule.]

הנני נותן לו את בריתי שלום, “I herewith grant him My covenant ‘peace.’” According to the plain meaning of the text G’d meant that he need not fear the vengeance of members of Zimri’s family who would want to avenge his death. Pinchas’ reward would be that both he and his descendants would be priests.

A Midrashic approach: the letter ו in the word שלום is broken to teach us that the covenant with the priests is contingent upon the priests being whole in body and mind. A blemished priest may not perform priestly functions in the Temple (Kidushin 66).

I have heard that the word שלום may be understood as an acrostic of the words: שלא למות, ‘not to die;” this would reinforce the tradition of our sages that Pinchas became immortal, i.e. that he was identical with the prophet Elijah. In fact, we find Elijah as saying to G’d: (Kings I 19,4) “please take my soul from me for I am no better than my forefathers;” he referred to the forefathers who had died as opposed to him who had remained alive all these many hundreds of years. Seeing that Pinchas (Elijah) had expressed his disgust with life on terrestrial earth he was granted eternal life in the celestial regions and he departed this earth in a storm riding heavenwards (Kings II 2,11).

A kabbalistic approach to the words: “Herewith I grant you My covenant peace.” G’d assured him of the attribute known as ברית which is identical with the concept of כנסת ישראל. This is a variation of the attribute of Justice. We find this attribute mentioned by our sages who stated that Avraham had a daughter (in explaining the words וה' ברך את אברהם בכל, “the Lord had blessed Avraham in all respects,” (Genesis 24,2) see Baba Batra 16). This is why in our verse the wording is והיתה לו ...ברית, meaning that the covenant with this attribute of Justice will be his. G’d assured Pinchas that the peace He promised would be an adjunct to this covenant. It is similar to Leviticus 26,6 where G’d promises that as a consequence of observance of His commandments ונתתי שלום בארץ, “I will grant peace in the land” [as opposed to peace merely between people. Maybe the author means that the very fact that man has to die, the body to return to earth, is symbolic of a constant state of war between the living and the dead. Ed.]. All of this implies that Pinchas deserved to be granted eternal life. This is the justification of the verse in Maleachi 25, we quoted earlier that “My covenant was with him, the life and the peace.” “Life” is an outgrowth of the attribute of Mercy. This is reflected in the Torah describing Pinchas as קנא לאלו-היו “he was jealous for the sake of his G’d (in the sense of the attribute of Justice). If I understand our author correctly, when Pinchas observed a joining together of bodies which represented opposing philosophies which had no business to be joined together he tried to restore the state of affairs in which matters which belong together are joined together. In the celestial regions צדק ושלום נשקו, “righteousness and peace kissed” (Psalms 85,11), i.e. the emanations of מלכות and the adjoining one ofיסוד are perceived as a natural fit. When they are close together the universe can continue to exist. In our terrestrial part of the universe the continued existence of this world is also dependent on matters that belong together being joined together, not matters or people who have no business to indulge in physical union. Basically, Pinchas tried to restore the world’s (Jewish) equilibrium by his deed. If he was granted “peace” as the reward for his deed this was precisely a case of the reward fitting the merit attained. “Peace”, after all, is joining together, creating harmony.

It may be appropriate to understand the very name of אליהו as combining elements of both the attribute of Justice, i.e. א-ל, and the attribute of Mercy i.e. י-ה-ו. The attribute of Mercy and the attribute peace can be viewed as being interchangeable, whereas the attribute of Justice and the attribute ברית, covenant may also be viewed as interchangeable. When we keep these facts in mind we can understand some of Elijah’s actions reported in the Book of Kings. When he called down fire from heaven to kill the captain of fifty soldiers and his men who had been dispatched by King Achaziah to capture him, he activated the part of his personality which represented the attribute of Justice (Kings II 1,8-12); when he resurrected the dead he activated the part of his personality which represented the attribute of Mercy (Kings I 17,22). Interestingly, the numerical value of the name אליהו is 52, i.e. twice the numerical value of the name י-ה-ו-ה. Also Pinchas was the seventh generation after Yaakov the founder of the Jewish nation, just as Chanoch (who left earth heavenward alive) was the seventh generation counting from Adam, the first human being. The number seven symbolises the seventh day of the week, the Sabbath, a day of rest, of harmony, serenity and therefore devoted to life.

והיתה לו ולזרעו אחריו, “it will be for both him and his descendants after him, etc.” From this wording it appears as if but for Pinchas’ deed his priesthood would not have been permanent and hereditary. However, this seems extremely implausible, seeing that the priesthood was granted to Aaron and his sons on an ongoing hereditary basis. All of Aaron’s sons had already been anointed with the holy oil of anointing so that all their offspring would automatically have been priests. However, the fact is that Pinchas had been born prior to the anointing of Aaron and his sons as priests, so that as a grandson he did not automatically qualify under the heading under which Aaron and his sons (exclusive of existing grandsons if any) had been appointed as priests. As of that point only sons born to Aaron’s children after their being anointed qualified for automatic priesthood status at birth. In view of all this, had Pinchas not performed the deed of killing Zimri under the circumstances described, he would never have become a priest, to say nothing of retaining such status in perpetuity. This is why the Torah had to stress that his elevation to the priesthood was לעולם. This is also why our sages (Zevachim 101) said that Pinchas was not made a priest until after he killed Zimri. [This disposes of the need for special legislation to allow Pinchas to perform the blessing of the people. Ed.].

According to Ibn Ezra the words ולזרעו אחריו “and for his descendants after him” indicate that Pinchas's descendants succeeded him as High Priest and he himself eventually died, and is therefore not the same person as Elijah. But the author feels that the view of our Sages identifying Pinchas with Elijah is correct, and the word אחריו in our verse may refer to Pinchas/Elijah’s disappearance from earth, i.e. his “departure.”

ברית כהונת עולם, “a covenant of everlasting priesthood.” In this instance the word מלח, “salt,” normally associated with the wordברית is absent although it appears in 18,19 when Aaron and all his offspring are mentioned seeing they have been assured of two worlds, the terrestrial world when the covenant is effective to provide the priests with their sustenance from “G’d’s” table, i.e. the gifts listed as being given to the priests in Parshat Korach. Secondly, as recorded in 18,20, G’d uses two separate terms describing Himself as bothחלקך and נחלתך. The former word refers to the priests being G’d’s share in the terrestrial world, the latter word to His being the priest’s share in the hereafter. Seeing that in Korach the subject is both worlds, the word מלח symbolizing something enduring is used whereas in connection with Pinchas and his covenant there is no need to reinforce the promise of G’d that he is assured of an eternal future by adding the word מלח. Pinchas merited his promotion from the attribute of Mercy which, as opposed to the attribute of Justice, does not envisage death, i.e. impermanence. The priesthood and what it stands for is an emanation of the attribute of חסד, an attribute over which death has no control.

ויכפר על בני ישראל, “he obtained atonement for the Children of Israel.” This verse teaches that he who spills the blood of the wicked is considered as if he had offered a sacrifice. The idea is reflected in Exodus 21,14: “from My altar you shall remove him to die.” The meaning of the verse is that even if the party concerned is a priest involved in performing his priestly duties on the altar, he must be removed and executed (Yuma 85).

ושם איש ישראל המוכה, “and the name of the slain Israelite man, etc.” Just as the Torah mentioned the name of the righteous person in order to bestow compliments on him, it now mentions the name of the wicked party to teach that if one brings disgrace upon oneself one simultaneously disgraces one’s family (Tanchuma Pinchas 2).

נשיא בית אב לשמעוני, “prince of a father’s house of the Shimonites.” He was one of five such princes of the tribe of Shimon (Ibn Ezra). Concerning him Solomon said in Kohelet 10,8: “he who breaks down a wall will be bitten by a snake.” The ancestral father, Shimon, had killed the people of Shechem for treating his sister like a whore (Genesis 34,31) and now one of his descendants had himself become guilty of tearing down the wall of chaste sexual mores established and defended by his forebear (Tanchuma Pinchas 2).

כזבי בת צור, “Cozbi daughter of Tzur.” She was the daughter of a king, seeing that Tzur was one of the five Midianite kings killed by the Israelites in the punitive expedition (Numbers 31,8). The Midianites harbored so much hatred against the Israelites that one of their kings demeaned his own daughter to the status of a whore in order to lure the Israelites into sin (Tanchuma Pinchas 2).

צרור את המדינים, “Harass the Midianites.” After the Torah had administered the reward for the righteous, G’d commanded the people to punish the guilty. The reason the punitive campaign was directed only against the Midianites and not against the Moabites was in order to enable Ruth the Moabite, ancestral great-grandmother of David to be born in due course.

A Midrashic approach based on Tanchuma Pinchas 2: the meaning of “harass the Midianites for they (are preparing to) harass you,” is that when you know that someone harbours aggressive hostile intentions against you pre-empt him and kill him before he can carry out his intention.

בנכליהם אשר נכלו לכם, “by their trickery they practiced against you.” This verse is proof that it was the elders of Midian who advised their Moabite partners to trick the Israelites into committing sexual promiscuity with their daughters. The allure of the Moabite women was to be the tool by which to get the Israelites to commit idolatry by prostrating themselves before the Baal-peor.

ועל דבר כזבי בת נשיא מדין, “and because of the affair of Cozbi daughter of a Midianite prince.” The Torah could have written: “daughter of Tzur” as it had done in verse 15. In this verse the Torah wanted to place the emphasis on the word “Midianite,” seeing that it was the advice of the elders of Midian to send one of their princesses to lure the Israelites to commit harlotry with her.