WHEN WE LAST LEFT Parashat Balak, Pinchas was creating shiskabob with an Israelite and a Midianite.
Pinchas was upset because the two were “intimate” in “front of Moses and all of the congregation.” They may have had a room, but they — or at least the Israelite — chose to couple in the opening of a tent.
(Tomorrow we will learn in the first aliyah that the Israelite was Zemri ben Salu and the woman was Cozbi bat Zur, daughter of a Midianites big shot. Numbers Chap 25, V 14, 15)
SEVERAL THOUGHTS come to mind.
We know, because the Torah tells us, (Numbers Chap. 25) that HaShem was pleased with Pinchas’ spear work.
If, as the Torah tells us, Jews are to have nothing to do with Moabites for all time, how come King David is descended from Ruth, a Moabite?
Simple. The rabbis declared that while normative Hebrew includes females and males in the same category (e.g., Moabites includes ALL people of Moab), this fails to apply when it comes to Moabite women.
That does not compute.
Cozbi was very much a Moabite woman and apparently was only one of several (many?) who enticed the Israelite males to worship their god, Ba’al Peyor. (Where were the Israelite women with their wiles? Perhaps foreign fruit always has looked sweeter than the local variety.)
OK.
First question. Israel already had a court system of sorts. Who gave Pinchas authority to administer capital punishment sans a hearing? Was Pinchas guilty of murder? Justifiable homicide?
The answer may be found in Numbers Chap. 25, V. 5 where HaShem tells Moses: “Slay you every one his men who were attached to Baal-Peor.”
The Torah tells us that HaShem apparently thought Pinchas’ action was justified: “Behold, I give to him my covenant of peace (Numbers, Chap. 26, V. 12)
And then
And the Lord spoke to Moses, saying, Harass the Midianites, and strike them (Numbers, Chap. 25, V. 16, 17).
In the next verses we have a post-plague census.
UNLIKE JACOB, Moses did not pack up and run.
Jacob (Genesis 34, Chap. 34, V. 30, 21) after Simon and Levi avenged their sister, Dina, for Shechem’s rape told the brothers: You have brought trouble on me to make me odious among the inhabitants of the land, among the Canaanites and the Perizzites; and I being few in number, they shall gather together against me, and slay me; and I shall be destroyed, I and my house. And they (Simon and Levy) said, Should he deal with our sister as with a harlot?
HaShem tells Jacob to “get up and go to Beth-El, and live there; and make there an altar to God, who appeared to you when you fled from the face of Esau your brother.” (Genesis 35 V. 1). Jacob did a lot of "fleeing."
While not specifically stated, coming as it does immediately after the brother’s revenge, it suggests that Jacob packed up and ran, despite leaving Shalem, a city of Shechem, sans the ability to make war.
Granted we were fewer in number then than when Moses was told to “Harass the Midianites, and strike them.”
Some rabbis suggest that Shechem actually wanted to marry Dina or that Dina went out looking for “trouble.” The Torah does state: “And Dinah the daughter of Leah, whom she bore to Jacob, went out to see the daughters of the land.” (Genesis 34, V. 1) Why a princess (Jacob’s daughter) would go sans retinue is open to speculation.
The abduction of Dinah by James Tissot (https://www.jamestissot.org/)
Different views
Some rabbis question Pinchas’ actions. Was it really praiseworthy?
What was Pinchas’ authority to skewer Zimri and Cozbi? Numbers Chap. 25, V. 5, although addressed to Moses, seems to provide justification for Pinchas’ action. Zemri, layingcq with Cozbi, suggests that he was following her ba’al of Peyor.
As far as Moabites go, the rabbis quickly changed Hebrew grammar to welcome Ruth.
Today King David’s antecedent would not be accepted by most “Orthodox” rabbis and certainly not by the rabbinical establishment in Israel. Saying “Your people will be my people,” doesn’t cut it.
A potential convert today faces a lengthy process, including lessons that go well beyond what Rambam claims is necessary.1 Hillel’s famous conversion of a Roman2 — do not do unto others what is hateful to you … — most assuredly would be rejected, and Hillel was head of the Sanhedrin!
(Why did Hillel present the negative, “Do NOT do…”? Because it is easier NOT to do something than to do something; Hillel understood human nature then and now.)
Some others might suggest that the rabbis are making a business of conversions; this scrivener, of course, would never suggest anything of the kind.
Sources
1. the Shulchan Arukh (YD 268:2) rules that someone who wants to convert to Judaism can be taught some of the basic mitzvot. The language there is borrowed directly from the Rambam in his Mishneh Torah (Isurei Biah 14). It seems from the language of the Rambam that the convert should not be taught in great detail, but should be generally informed about the laws: And they inform him of some of the lenient commandments, and some of the stringent commandments. And they do not dwell at length on this. (https://tinyurl.com/twnfcktt)
2. One famous account in the Talmud (Shabbat 31a) tells about a gentile who wanted to convert to Judaism. This individual stated that he would accept Judaism only if a rabbi would teach him the entire Torah while he, the prospective convert, stood on one foot. The man went to Hillel. who told him : "What is hateful to you, do not do to your neighbor. That is the whole Torah; the rest is the explanation of this—go and study it!" (https://tinyurl.com/f3nrmje9)
PLAGIARISM is the act of appropriating the literary composition of another, or parts or passages of his writings, or the ideas or language of the same, and passing them off as the product of one’s own mind.
Truth is an absolute defense to defamation. Defamation is a false statement of fact. If the statement was accurate, then by definition it wasn’t defamatory.
Web sites (URLs) beginning https://tinyurl.com/ are generated by the free Tiny URL utility and reduce lengthy URLs to manageable size.
