Behold, I give him my covenant of peace (25:12).
Rashi writes that Pinchas took his reward rightfully.
This statement clearly needs explanation, since if someone does something that merits reward, obviously, they take their reward rightfully. Many of the meforshim explain Rashi’s statement, each in their own way. The Zera Shimshon explains it as follows:
The Medrash (Bamidbar Rabba 21:1) says, “Great is the (blessing of) shalom that was given to Pinchas, since the world stands only on peace. As well, the Torah is all shalom, we daven for shalom three times a day, etc.
On this Medrash, the Zera Shimshon asks that it sounds as though the shalom that was given to Pinchas was different than the shalom that the Medrash continues to speak about, since the Medrash refers to the shalom that was given as “great.”
The Medrash (Bamidbar Rabba 11:16) teaches that shalom is so great that even if the Jewish people serve idols, the Satan is not able to affect the Jewish people with his prosecution.
From here we see the greatness of peace in that it weakens the Satan’s power. However, until Moshiach comes, there will not be absolute shalom, and in turn, this means that the Satan will always be able to be somewhat effective, even in times of peace.
However, the peace that Pinchas merited was different than the peace that the Medrash continues to speak about. The peace that Pinchas merited was entirely free of any rule of the Satan, as is seen by the fact that Pinchas didn’t die (he is Eliyahu Malach Habris). This is why the Medrash singles out the peace that Pinchas merited, since it is indeed different.
This explains what Rashi writes, “Pinchas took his reward rightfully.”
Usually, when a tzaddik wishes to live in peace in this world, like Yaakov Avinu did, the Satan fights against it, since in regard to tzaddikim, the attribute of judgment is very strict. Pinchas, on the other hand, totally nullified the Satan’s dominance over him with his act of zealousness. Therefore, even though everyone else eventually receives the reward that they deserve, and rightfully so, however, this cannot happen as long as they are in this world since the Satan would fight against this, even on the smallest grounds. Only in the world to come can one claim their rightful reward. Pinchas, who wasn’t affected by the jurisdiction of the Satan, was able to receive his reward rightfully in this world, unaffected by the Satan’s interferences.
Zeal and Peace
Pinchas turned back Hashem's wrath from upon B'nai Yisrael when he was zealous, displaying Hashem's zeal in their midst, and he was given Hashem's covenant of peace (paraphrase of Bamidbar 25:11-12). Rashi interprets "bekan'o, when he was zealous," as "benokmo, when he avenged," emphasizing Pinchas' action, i.e., killing Zimri and Cozbi (25:8, 14-15), rather than his zeal.
Toras Chaim (Sanhedrin 82a) explains that it was Pinchas' anger that led him to act immediately when he saw the chillul Hashem. Had he waited until the sinful deed ended, his killing of the perpetrators would be an act of murder and a capital offense. Thus, it was his zeal that enabled his vengeful act.
Perhaps it was Pinchas' zeal itself that turned back Hashem's anger. In effect, Pinchas' anger substituted for the anger Hashem should have expressed (Rashi 25:11), thereby ending the anger and the plague (25:8).
Since zeal and anger can often be expressed inappropriately and lead to unwarranted divisiveness, Hashem gave Pinchas His covenant of peace.
Zealots may kill one who cohabits with a gentile woman (ibid. 81b). If the sinner is not killed by zealots, his punishment is kares (ibid. 82a, based on Malachi 2:11-12). Even for zealots, the license to kill such a sinner is limited to cases where the sin is committed publicly (b'farhesya) (Avodah Zara 36b).
The Ran (Sanhedrin 82a) suggests that the punishment of kares is also limited to when the sin is committed in public. It is the chillul Hashem, not the sinful act itself, that warrants kares. It was precisely the chillul Hashem that aroused Pinchas' ire.
The Gemara (ibid. 82a) interjects the story of the burning of Yehoyakim's skull in the middle of the discussions of zealots killing a public sinner. Ostensibly, it is an unrelated story told by R' Chiya ben Avuya, whose previous statement deals with one who cohabits with a gentile woman. Perhaps there is a deeper connection than merely being stated by the same amora. Yehoyakim violated the laws of the Torah publicly (Yerushalmi Pe'ah 1:1). It is not the severity of the sin for which he is singled out but the insolence to sin without shame (Rambam Hilchos Teshuva 3:11). In this way, Yehoyakim's public sin and gruesome punishment is related to one who cohabits publicly with a gentile woman, who is punished by kares if not killed by a zealot.
How should one react nowadays to one who sins publicly, pridefully, and without shame? Vengeful acts are unthinkable, forbidden, and counterproductive. Egregious sinners were eliminated at a time of open miracles and clear Divine Providence (see the halachah of moridin, Avodah Zara 26b) to prevent others from being swayed by a small minority of sinners. Today, however, such actions would be viewed by the majority as outrageous thuggery. Vigilantism of this sort is counterproductive and prohibited (Chazon Ish Yoreh Deah 2:16).
While we dare not imitate Pinchas' actions, we also dare not ignore his emotional reaction. Equanimity in the face of chillul Hashem betrays a lack of zeal. In our analysis, it was the zeal itself that turned back Hashem's anger and stopped the plague. Our visceral reaction to public, shameless sin, especially in sexual relationships, such as those reacted to by Pinchas, should contain a measure of zealous outrage.
Zeal and anger, in word as in deed, can be expressed inappropriately and lead to unwarranted divisiveness. In striking a balance between zeal and apathy, we must pray to be given Hashem's covenant of peace in the spirit of Pinchas.
RABBI MORDECHAI WILLIG
ZERA SHIMSHON
ZERA SHIMSHON SHIUR BY RABBI SIMCHA BUNIM BURGER
