Rabbi Shai Held at MECHON HADAR

Center for Jewish Leadership and Ideas Parashat Pinhas (Numbers 25:10-30:1) – Tammuz 5774

When Zealotry MetastasizesCENTER: for JEWISH LEADERSHIP The Passionate Self-Regard of Pinhas and IDEAS

Few biblical stories trouble modern readers quite as much as that of Pinhas (Phineas), the Torah’s zealot-hero.

The Israelites have already violated the covenant in horrific ways, “whoring with Moabite women” and offering sacrifices to their god (Numbers 25:1-3). Incensed, God orders the leaders of the people hanged (fascinatingly, these orders are never executed) (25:4). Just as it seems things could not get any worse, an Israelite chieftain brings a RabbiMidianite Shai woman Held into the camp and brazenly engages in sexual relations with her. Moses remains passive, but “One of the keenest minds in Jewish theology Pinhas, a descendant of Aaron the priest, acts decisively: Pinhas “left the assemblyin our time.” and, taking a spear in his hand, he followed the Israelite [leader] into the chamber and stabbed —Jon D. Levenson both of them, the Israelite and the woman, through the belly.” Pinhas’ actions, the Torah explains, stop a plague that had broken out among the people (25:6-9). Weekly divrei Torah from Rabbi Shai Held direct to your inbox Is there room for this kind of vigilantism in the name of God? Numbers in text and apparently audio formats thinks that there is. On the Torah’s account, God unequivocally affirms the heroism of Pinhas’ deed: Sign up here: “The Lord spoke to Moses, saying: Pinhas, son of Elazar son of Aaron the priest, has turned back My wrath from the Israelites when he zealously actedwww.mechonhadar.org/ShaiHeld for My zeal in their midst, and I did not wipe out the Israelite people in My zeal.’” Pinhas’ killing of the offender saves countless lives God otherwise would Is there room for this kind of vigilantism have taken, and his zealotry is amply in the name of God? Numbers rewarded: “Say, therefore: ‘I grant him

apparently thinks that there is. My covenant of peace (shalom). It shall

1 Center for Jewish Leadership and Ideas Parashat Pinhas (Numbers 25:10-30:1) – Tammuz 5774

be for him and his descendants after him a covenant of eternal priesthood, because he was zealous for his God, thus ransoming the Israelites” (25:10-13).

Numbers thus insists upon the nobility of Pinhas’ violent deed. Yet there is something profoundly disturbing about this evaluation. Does this text not constitute a terrifying precedent, legitimating and perhaps even mandating vigilante violence? Bible scholar John Collins writes soberingly that while it is true that “terrorist hermeneutics can be seen as a case of the devil citing scripture for his purpose, it is [nevertheless] also true that the devil does not have to work very hard to find biblical precedents for the legitimation of violence.”1 The story of Pinhas is arguably a frightening example of just such precedent.

Not surprisingly, Rabbinic tradition was decidedly ambivalent about Pinhas, seeing him both as a hero and as a potentially dangerous force needing to be contained and restrained. Even if one defends what Pinhas did, he remains an extremely troubling figure, and tradition gives voice to that fact in a variety of powerful ways.

What kind of man is Pinhas, and what does zealotry do to his character?

R. Naftali Zvi Yehudah Berlin (Netziv, 1816-1893) worries about the consequences of Pinhas’ zealous act for his own sense of well-being. Why, asks the Netziv, does God grant Pinhas a covenant of peace? “In reward for calming the anger and wrath of the Blessed Holy One,” he writes, “God blessed him with the attribute of peace, that he should not be quick-tempered or angry. Since it is in the nature of Pinhas’ action—killing human beings with his hands—to leave an intense emotional unrest in the soul afterwards… the blessing he received was to be in a state of peace and tranquility” (Ha’amek Davar to Numbers 25:12). On this reading, the blessing Pinhas receives is the one he most needs: A zealot needs help in discovering calm.

1 John J. Collins, “The Zeal of Phinehas: The Bible and the Legitimation of Violence,” Journal of Biblical Literature 122:1 (2003), pp. 3-21. Passage cited is on p. 3

2 Center for Jewish Leadership and Ideas Parashat Pinhas (Numbers 25:10-30:1) – Tammuz 5774

If the Netziv expresses concern for Pinhas’ inner world, R. Shmuel Binyomin Sofer (1815- 1871) worries about his ability to interact with others. R. Sofer praises Pinhas for doing what God’s honor required; a priest, he says, must be combative in the name of God, willing to criticize the people in educating them for divine service. And yet combativeness is explosive and can easily generate unnecessary conflict. So God grants Pinhas, “the most zealous man in all of Israel,” a blessing of peace in the hope that he can attain some internal balance (Ketav Sofer to Numbers 25:12). Pinhas’ zealotry may be noble but unchecked it can also cause immense damage.

Some commentators seem to doubt that zealotry Pinhas’ zealotry may be noble can be checked or tamed at all. Affirming Pinhas’ greatness, they nevertheless insist that but unchecked it can also cause his zealotry disqualifies him from leading the immense damage. people. Not long after Pinhas’ slaying of the Israelite leader and his Midianite consort, Moses is reminded by God of his impending death; he will not lead the people into the land. Moses makes a request: “Let the Lord, God of all spirits,2 appoint someone over the community who shall go out before them and come in before them, and who shall take them out and lead them in” (27:16-17). God responds by appointing Joshua, “a man filled with the spirit” (27:18). Citing a midrash (Tanhuma, Pinhas 11), Rashi (1040-1105) explains what Moses was really asking: “Master of the World, the character of each person is revealed to you, and no two are alike. Appoint over them a leader who will tolerate each person according to his own individual character” (Commentary to 27:16). Why does this exchange between God and Moses happen specifically now? Why did Moses not make this request of God earlier, when he had first learned that he would not be the one to lead the people into the Promised Land? The Hasidic Master R. Menahem Mendel of Kotzk explains that until Pinhas’ moment of

2 JPS renders “Elohei Kol HaRuhot” as “Source of the breath of all flesh.” I offer “God of all spirits” here because I think it makes more sense of the midrash.

3 Center for Jewish Leadership and Ideas Parashat Pinhas (Numbers 25:10-30:1) – Tammuz 5774

ferocious zealotry, Moses had always assumed that the latter would be his successor. The Kotzker affirms that Pinhas’ actions were incomparably great, and he reminds us of the tremendous reward he receives from God. Still, he insists, “having seen Pinhas’ zealousness for God’s name… Moses thought, ‘A zealot cannot be the leader of Israel.’” Therefore Moses turned to God to find an alternative (Amud Ha-Emet, p. 42).

A fascinating midrashic story suggests that zealotry dies hard (and that the Kotzker’s anxieties were therefore well-placed). Pinhas may start out a hero, but according to a fanciful story about his encounter with the biblical character of Jephthah, he ends up a villain. And his zealotry is to blame.3

In some of the most harrowing verses in Tanakh, the book of Judges tells the story of Jephthah, a newly appointed “commander and chief” over Israel (Judges 11:11). As he heads into battle with Israel’s enemies, Jephthah makes a vow to God: “If You deliver the Ammonites into my hands, then whatever4 comes out of the door of my house to meet me on my safe return from the Ammonites shall be the Lord’s and shall be offered by me as a burnt offering” (11:30-31). Jephthah is victorious in battle, and as he returns home—tragically, unbearably—his daughter, an only child, “comes out to meet him with timbrel and dance” (11:34). Both he and she are devastated, but he nevertheless goes through with his vow (11:39). Pinhas may start out a hero, And yet, the Sages point out, Jephthah had no but... he ends up a villain. And obligation to follow through on this reckless vow. his zealotry is to blame.

3 For large parts of what follows, I am indebted to Hananel Mack, “The Zealotry of Pinhas the Son of Elazar the Son of Aaron the Priest” (Hebrew), Mahanayim 5 (1993), pp. 122-129.

4 Actually, the Hebrew (ha-yotzei asher yeitzei) is ambiguous: Does it mean “whatever comes out,” in which case an animal is intended, or “whoever comes out,” in which case a human being is intended. Scholars line up on both sides of the debate. According to Dennis Olson, “Jephthah’s language is left intentionally ambiguous so that the reader cannot know for sure what Jephthah’s real intention was.” Dennis Olson, “Judges: Introduction, Commentary, and Reflections,” The New Interpreter’s Bible, vol. 2 (1998), p. 832.

4 Center for Jewish Leadership and Ideas Parashat Pinhas (Numbers 25:10-30:1) – Tammuz 5774

After all, according to Resh Lakish if one attempts to consecrate an animal unfit for sacrifice, the consecration is null and void.5 But even if Jephthah’s vow had had legal standing, he could nevertheless have gone to the High Priest—in his time, the midrash imagines, it was Pinhas—and asked him to absolve him of the vow. So why did Jephthah not avail himself of that option and thereby save his daughter’s life? A midrash paints a horrible picture of ego run wild. “Was Pinhas not there to annul his vow? Rather, Pinhas said: ‘He needs me, and I should to go to him?! Moreover, I am the High Priest and the son of the High Priest; shall I go to an ignoramus?’ While Jephthah said: ‘I am the chief of Israel’s leaders, and I should go to Pinhas?!’ Between the two of them the young woman perished” (Genesis Rabbah 60:3, Theodor-Albeck ed.).

The scene stands as a devastating indictment of Israel’s leaders: Two “great men” in positions of authority are more committed to their own status than to the urgent need to save an innocent life.6 The midrash insists that both Jephthah and Pinhas paid dearly for their crime: Jephthah dies a gruesome death while Pinhas loses the spirit of prophecy (lit. the Holy Spirit, Ruah HaKodesh) and his tenure as ruler comes to an end.7

A zealot for God’s honor can all What is striking about the story is what it suggests too easily become a zealot for about Pinhas’ life: His zealotry metastasizes. his own. There is something crucial to be learned here: A

5 In the interest of brevity and clarity, I am simplifying a bit. According to R. Yohanan, who disagrees with Resh Lakish, one who made such a vow would be obligated to pay the monetary value of the sacrifice. But in any event, Jephthah clearly had no obligation to go forward with his deadly vow.

6 R. Abraham ben Aryeh Loeb Schick (19th century) struggles valiantly to insist that “Pinhas did not, God forbid, intend to exalt himself with his words” but was instead focused on the honor due to the High Priest and the fear that allowing Jephthah to claim superior status would lead to “the Torah being disgraced” (bizayon haTorah). R. Schick adds that Jephthah’s motivations were similarly pure and pious (Eshed HaNehalim to Genesis Rabbah 60:3). In my view, Schick’s interpretation is not persuasive.

7 Both punishments are derived from creative interpretations of verses (cf. Genesis Rabbah 60:3). The fact that the Sages chose to read this way when other possibilities were available strongly suggests their desire to make a point about failed leadership and its consequences.

5 Center for Jewish Leadership and Ideas Parashat Pinhas (Numbers 25:10-30:1) – Tammuz 5774

zealot for God’s honor can all too easily become a zealot for his own. Even if we imagine that the former is a virtue, the latter is an unpardonable vice.

A later midrash recounts the story of Jephthah and Pinhas we have been discussing and then adds this chilling observation: “Woe for the kind of greatness that buries those who have it; woe for the kind of greatness that does not bring good for the world” (Tanna DeBei Eliyahu, Ish-Shalom ed. p. 55). Midrash scholar Hananel Mack explains that the first “greatness” describes Jephthah, whose lofty status ended up burying his own daughter, while the second refers to Pinhas, whose high position (and his zealousness for it) did not serve to prevent that terrible death. According to Mack, this midrash seeks “to emphasize the responsibility of the leader for his own life and the life of those close to him, as well as for the life of others; his leadership must [always] take them into account.”8

This second midrashic source has a great deal According to Numbers, Pinhas’ more to say about Pinhas: Immediately passion for God saved many following the sacrifice of his daughter, Jephthah lives. Maybe so, notes the is confronted by men from the tribe of Ephraim, editor of Tanna DeBei Eliyahu, who are angry at having been excluded from the but it ultimately cost many battle with the Ammonites and threaten to “burn lives as well. [Jephthah’s] house down over [him]” (12:1). A battle ensues and Jephthah kills 42,000 people (Judges 12:1-6). Our midrash imagines that Pinhas, the High Priest, should have intervened on Jephthah’s behalf, saying to the Ephraimites: “To annul his vow you did not come, but to fight with him you come?!” But Pinhas again says nothing. The midrash’s words are scathing: “Who really killed all those people? Say that Pinhas did it—he could have intervened on Jephthah’s behalf and did not do so; he could have annulled Jephthah’s vow

8 Hananel Mack, “The Zealotry of Pinchas,” p. 129.

6 Center for Jewish Leadership and Ideas Parashat Pinhas (Numbers 25:10-30:1) – Tammuz 5774

and did not do so.” Mack notes that whereas the earlier midrashim blamed Pinhas for his failure to annul Jephthah’s vow—and for his arrogant refusal to take the first step—they nevertheless insisted that Pinhas and Jephthah shared the blame for the young woman’s death. But Tanna DeBei Eliyahu takes a much more radical step: “It blames Pinhas for both of Jephthah’s enormous mistakes—the fulfillment of his vow regarding his daughter and the mass slaughter of the people of Ephraim.”9

“Whether consciously or not,” Mack points out, Tanna DeBei Eliyahu portrays Pinhas as someone “whose zealousness for God became jealousness and zealousness for his own name and honor.”10 The warning is clear: Even those whose zealotry starts out pure risk becoming as zealous for themselves as they are for God. And then they will be no better than murderers. According to Numbers, Pinhas’ passion for God saved many lives. Maybe so, notes the editor of Tanna DeBei Eliyahu, but it ultimately cost many lives as well. While many Rabbinic sources think that zealotry has its place, we should always remember that it is explosive and dangerous and is likely to cause far greater devastation than it prevents.

Shabbat Shalom.

www.mechonhadar.org/ShaiHeld

9 Hananel Mack, “The Zealotry of Pinchas,” p. 129.

10 Hananel Mack, “The Zealotry of Pinchas,” p. 129. I would be more persuaded that the midrash’s move is conscious if the word kannai, zealot, so prominent in Numbers, appeared here too. It may be a conscious move, but I don’t think we have enough evidence to definitively show that to be the case.