Doing Violence for God
What are we to think about Pinehas, son of Eleazar son of Aaron the high priest, after whom this week鈥檚 Torah portion is named?
We learned at the very end of last week鈥檚 portion that Pinehas 鈥渢urned away God鈥檚 wrath鈥 against Israel when the people engaged in a mass orgy involving Moabite women and Moabite gods. Moses got a direct order from God to 鈥渢ake all the ringleaders and have them publicly impaled before the Lord鈥 (Num. 25:4), and in response ordered Israelite officials to 鈥渟lay those who attached themselves to [the idol] Baal-peor.鈥 When an Israelite man brazenly consorted with a Midianite woman within sight of Moses and Aaron, Pinehas followed the two into their chamber 鈥渁nd stabbed both of them . . . through the belly.鈥 God鈥檚 鈥減lague against the Israelites was checked鈥濃攂ut not before 24,000 perished.
Now, at the start of this week鈥檚 parashah, Pinehas is rewarded by God for his 鈥減assion for Me, so that I did not wipe out the Israelite people in my passion鈥 (25:6鈥9), God grants Pinehas a brit shalom. The words are variously translated as a 鈥渃ovenant of peace,鈥 a 鈥減act of friendship,鈥 or鈥攁 popular Hasidic rendering鈥攁 鈥渃ovenant of wholeness or fulfillment鈥 (shelemut). That covenant shall be for Pinehas and his descendants a brit kehunat 鈥榦lam, a 鈥減act of priesthood for all time鈥 (vv. 12鈥13).
Questions about the passage abound. Three stand at the forefront of my mind, particularly this week, when violence has once again bred violence between Israelis and Palestinians, and vengeance has taken its toll in further vengeance.
1. There seems something utterly primitive about the notion of an out-of-control God, grateful to Pinehas鈥攁s He was to Moses after the Israelites built and worshipped a golden calf鈥攆or finding a means to assuage His anger and stave off a national disaster that might have ended the Jewish story once and for all.
2. Pinehas鈥檚 鈥減assion鈥 (or 鈥渮ealotry鈥) is explicitly related to God鈥檚 in verse 10: 鈥bekan鈥檕 et kin鈥檃ti.鈥 The Torah seems to be saying that one can imitate God not only through acts of justice and mercy, creation and redemption, but in hot anger, violence, and slaughter. This is not the Judaism I have been taught, but there it is鈥攐r seems to be鈥攊n black and white.
3. The entire passage reeks of violence. Moses has commanded killing. God destroys many thousands through plague. Immediately after the story about Pinehas, we are told that (v. 16) 鈥渢he Lord spoke to Moses, saying, 鈥楢ssail the Midianites鈥欌欌欌攖he tribe to which Moses鈥檚 wife and father-in-law belong鈥斺溾榓nd defeat them, for they assailed you by the trickery they practiced against you [in the] affair of Peor.鈥欌 Pinehas is caught up in this violence. He is not an instigator or an outlier, but an exemplar.
Of all the problems the Torah places before a contemporary reader committed to walking in its path, following its guidance, and trying to ensure that 鈥渁ll its ways are pleasantness, and all its paths are peace,鈥 these incidents at the heart of the book of Numbers seem to be among the very hardest.
The text turns away from them at once: we read about a second census of the Israelites fit to bear arms as the people prepares to conquer the Land (ch. 26) and then learn detailed prescriptions for festival sacrifices (chs. 28鈥29). Our attention is focused (ch. 27) on leadership succession and on inheritance by women, two popular subjects with contemporary interpreters. But I cannot turn away from Pinehas so quickly. I am, I confess, both riveted and repelled by the image of his spear. My fealty to Torah requires me to face up to its challenges; my gratitude to Torah stems in part from what I learn from such challenges. That is the case here. I want to understand what I can learn from the very difficult passage, in which God apparently blesses Pinehas for resorting to vigilante justice.
I am of course not the first Jew to pose such questions to the text. While Etz Hayyim probably exaggerates when it says that 鈥渕ost postbiblical commentators . . . tend to be uncomfortable with [his] zealous vigilantism鈥 (918), it is true that the Talmud goes out of its way to show that Pinehas鈥檚 deed fulfilled rather than violated the law. If one 鈥渃ohabits with a heathen, he is punished by zealots.鈥 No trial is needed. Pinehas knew that law and complied. Taking the matter one step further,
R. Hisda said: If the zealot comes to take counsel [whether to punish the transgressors enumerated in the Mishnah], we do not instruct him to do so . . . What is more, had Zimri forsaken his mistress and Pinehas slain him, Pinehas would have been executed on his account; and had Zimri turned upon Pinehas and slain him, he would not have been executed, since Pinehas was a pursuer [seeking to take his life]. (Sanhedrin 81b-82a)
The Rabbis knew that the law is not helped when people take it into their own hands. God would not, in their view, have rewarded lawless behavior. We have seen again in recent days what follows when vigilantes engage in revenge killings of innocents. Violence can quickly spiral out of control.
Hasidic commentators add another dimension to our understanding of Pinehas, moving from the societal plane of law to the individual realm of religious psychology and so to the connection between our nature and God鈥檚. Pinehas鈥檚 greatness, as a colleague of mine pointed out in summary of the Hasidic approach, 鈥渋s wrapped up in the fact that he was able to bring various opposing aspects of divinity and humanity into a kind of harmony.鈥 In rewarding Pinehas with a covenant of shelemut, God was fulfilling and rendering permanent a quality of wholeness that Pinehas had already displayed.
Of course this interpretation idealizes the man and his zealotry. We would bridle, I think, if someone did the same for Crusaders or jihadists. But there is sadly something true to experience in the linkage of faith to fanaticism, and of loyalty to God to righteous anger at acts of perceived betrayal. The Torah frequently depicts God too as subject to such anger. God, as Abraham Joshua Heschel famously pointed out, is the very opposite of an 鈥渦nmoved Mover,鈥 Aristotle鈥檚 description of God. The biblical God cares immensely about us, practices mercy, and renders judgment. God鈥檚 nature, as it were, makes God unable to abide among Israelites who practice idolatry.
That theology is problematic to many of us, but the religious psychology seems accurate. Religion is practiced by human beings, rather than by angels. We get angry at times and our anger sometimes鈥攐ften鈥攍eads us astray, while it only rarely provides the energy for good deeds. Being passionate in the service of God carries with it the danger that one will find good reasons for indulging in fanaticism and even committing violence in God鈥檚 name. We know this all too well from recent headlines. And because humans are prone to violence, further violence is often required in order to stop violence, or stave off worse violence. As the Rabbis taught, the rigor of law is essential to the practice of mercy. Pinehas may well have prevented national disaster by taking the step he did. The Israelite mob, unchastened by the disaster of Korah鈥檚 rebellion, may have been on the verge of rampage. The threat to the people鈥檚 well-being, if so, was not divine plague but human anarchy.
The book of Numbers often reeks of violence, because our world does. This week鈥檚 news鈥攎ost weeks鈥 news鈥攐ffers sufficient evidence of that. Leaders must act quickly and forcefully to restore order. Justice鈥攁s opposed to vengeance鈥攊s crucial to that effort.
Perhaps Pinehas receives God鈥檚 covenant of peace because he needs it so desperately. We all do. May it come speedily, in our days.
The publication and distribution of the JTS Torah Commentary are made possible by a generous grant from Rita Dee and Harold (锄鈥漧) Hassenfeld.
