The pasuk says, “Pinchas, son of Elazar, son of Aaron the Kohen, turned back My wrath from upon the Children of Israel, when he zealously avenged Me among them, so I did not consume the Children of Israel in My vengeance. Therefore, say: Behold! I give him My covenant of peace, and it shall be for him and his offspring after him a covenant of eternal priesthood, because he took vengeance for his G-d, and he atoned for the Children of Israel.” (Bamidbar 25:10-13).
Pinchas was gifted with the Kehuna for himself and his descendants because of his act of zealotry in killing Zimri, the nasi (prince) of the shevet (tribe) of Shimon, together with Kozbi, a princess of Midyan, for their public act of immorality and desecration of Hashem’s name. (Although Pinchas was a son of Elazar Hakohen and grandson of Aharon Hakohen, he had been born before their inauguration as Kohanim, and until this point, he had not been a Kohen himself.)
Rashi points out that the lineage of Pinchas in these pesukim (verses) is traced back to Aharon Hakohen because the shevatim (tribes) were mocking him based on his lineage stemming from his maternal grandfather Yisro, who himself had originally been a priest to avodah zarah. They castigated Pinchas for having the audacity — as the grandson of a priest of idolatry — to kill a nasi of a shevet of Bnai Yisroel. Consequently, the pasuk traces his lineage along his paternal line back to the great Aharon, Kohen Gadol.
We have spoken about the obvious question in previous years as well: Tracing Pinchas’ lineage through his paternal ancestry does not really solve the problem. Why would that appease anyone? We know that he was the grandson of Aharon, but he was also the grandson of Yisro, the former priest of idolatry. The people were saying that his present act of zealotry must not have come from the peace-loving Aharon. Aharon would never do such a thing. They claimed that this act was inspired by the genes Pinchas inherited from Yisro, which were rearing their ugly heads. Therefore, what did the Torah accomplish by saying that he is “Pinchas ben Elazar ben Aharon Hakohen?”
In past years, we have cited the Ksav Sofer (the son of the Chasam Sofer) that the Torah’s point was not Pinchas’ genealogy, but rather it was testifying regarding from where Pinchas inherited the righteous zealousness that prompted him to kill Zimri and Kozbi. The Torah is saying that this brazen act came from Aharon Hakohen. How could it be, you may ask, that such violence can come from the prototype model of “loving peace and pursuing peace,” the gentle Aharon Hakohen? The Ksav Sofer famously points out that we are taught that Aharon was an “ohev shalom v’rodef shalom” rather than a “rodef achar shalom” – meaning that sometimes he was “rodef” the shalom (he pushed aside the peace). Sometimes shalom is not the solution. Of course, in general, Aharon tried to bring shalom between people, but when a situation necessitated it, he was “rodef shalom” – he pushed it away!
I saw a similar approach to this question in a Sefer of Rav Buchsban, which he based on the Sefas Emes. Rav Buchsban suggests that the expression “Aharon was an ohev shalom v’rodef shalom” might also have another meaning: Who isn’t for peace? Peace is one of those things that everyone subscribes to. “Of course I want shalom!” But it is not always easy to act for shalom and to promote shalom. People say, “Of course I advocate for shalom, but how can I get involved?” That was not the approach of Aharon Hakohen. Aharon Hakohen was a “lover of peace,” as is everyone else in the world. But it is easy to just be an “ohev shalom.” However, not everyone who is an ohev shalom is also a rodef shalom, meaning that when the situation demands it, the person actually promotes shalom by being proactive to create that shalom.
That was Aharon. He was both an Ohev shalom and a rodef shalom. When he saw a situation in which it was not enough to just “profess” love of peace, but it was necessary to actually “act” to bring about peace, he in fact did so. The situation with Zimri and Kozbi necessitated killing the offenders to bring peace, so that is exactly what Pinchas did. The people witnessing this horrible act of public brazen immorality “were crying at the opening of Tent of Meeting” (Bamidbar 25:6). In other words, the standard reaction was to fret and to cry and to bemoan what was happening – but NOT to do anything about it! The masses were crying, but who was the only one who did anything? The only one who picks up a spear and says, “I need to stop this situation” is Pinchas, son of Elazar, son of Aharon Hakohen! He is the one who acts. He inherited that initiative from his Zaide (grandfather). His Zaide was not only a lover and a professor of peace, but he was also a rodef shalom – he did whatever it took to make peace.
That is why the Sefas Emes says that the appropriate reward for Pinchas’ action was that he became a Kohen. A Kohen takes people’s thoughts and “activates” them. A person who does an aveira (sin) is obligated to bring a Korban Chatas (Sin offering) or a Korban Asham (Guilt offering), or a Korban Olah (Burnt offering). The sinner has thoughts of seeking atonement, but the person who actualizes those thoughts and actually brings the korbonos is the Kohen. Therefore, the appropriate gift for Pinchas’ actions is “bris kehunas olam” (the eternal covenant of priesthood).
