Pinehas: Conflict of Human Rights values that are sometimes mutually exclusive
Al pi kitvei Mei haShiloach, R. Mordechai Yosef Leiner of Izhbitz, c. 1840. The assumptions of this book, in line with exegetical assumptions of many torah commentators, is that the Torah does not waste space telling us the obvious, and if all we take away from the story of Israels’ sinning with the Moabite and Midianite women is a message of how bad it is to wallow in the mire of orgies, and how this makes HaShem angry - it is a waste of space. So what is to be learned?
The confrontation between the Prince of Shimeon - who would not have attained his position without being righteous, as alluded to by God denoting him ”Ish Israel” - and Pinchas who killed him in the act of his togetherness with Kozbi the Mideonite princess, was a confrontation between two warring values, two often opposing and sometime irreconcilable stances. One is Ethic, the other could perhaps be described as Aesthetic. These often contrast, each fighting for its primacy, and religious sentiment is often sorely vexed as to which brings closer to HaShem. “The Religious” is, in the Torah narrative at the end of last weeks’ parsha, represented by Moshe. When Zimri is taking Kozbi by the hand and, en route to being with her in front of everyone’s eyes, asks Moshe what difference is there between this and Moshe’s taking his Mideonite Tziporah - Moshe can do nothing but “cry at the entrance to the ohel moed” (Bamidbar XXV-6). Why this ineffectiveness on the part of Moshe?
Moshe sees the complexity and ambivalence of the situation which youthful Pinchas cannot see. All zealous Pinchas sees is the evident brazen despicable act of licentiousness in public. It is ugly, morally corrupt, has to be dealt with in all severity and, in taking the law into his own hands, Pinchas risked not only public censure but also being killed himself for, if Zimri had killed Pinchas this would have been an act of pure self defence. This, says Mei haShiloach, is proof that “the two were equal” - both lawbreakers had a case. For Zimri too was no less compelled - compelled by love for the woman who actually was, according to the Ar”i’ z”l, “His soul mate from the six days of creation”. In Kozbi’s soul the Shimeonite prince met his own, the one person who was preordained for him so primally that all other considerations, bashfulness at the audacity of his act, fear for its consequences - were trivial. The ranks of the people parted as Zimri walked through the camp side by side with Kozbi, in wonder and awe for, they saw the ineffable wonder of the beauty of two people who’s unity was as perfect as can possibly be. They saw the truth of mellifluousness of man and women potential as one.
Moshe also sees this; a ‘truth’ that, like that of the pre-creation Torah which he brought down from heaven, is also pre-creation. And so he cannot act. It is only the fortunately narrow minded moral zealous Pinchas who, seeing things only in and through the prism of their ethicality, who can act in the full force of justified moral indignation, and put an end to the orgy which Zimri’s act seems to justify. Even if he was mistaken, HaShem rewards him for his youthful good intentions “for Israel is a youth and I love him for that” (Hoshea XI-1 -”Ki na’ar Israel vaOhaveihu”).
The Torah narrates this story thus expressing the inevitability of conflict of values that are sometimes mutually exclusive, which have to war and engage each other, in the world and inside ourselves. We have the choice as to which one we give primacy (eizeh anachnu mevachrim) at any given time, and need to maintain the tension of asking ourselves if, in any situation, we will be Pinchas, Moshe or Zimri.
Recent Articles by Rabbi Yehoshua Engelman
- Rosh HaShana: Human Rights and a meaningful relationship with life - September 22nd, 2008
- Ki-Tavo: Human Rights, Self understanding and Perception - September 19th, 2008
- What Rosh HaShana may be about - September 22nd, 2006
- Pinehas: Conflict of Human Rights values that are sometimes mutually exclusive - July 22nd, 2005
- Rabbi Yehoshua Engelman - July 6th, 2005
Rabbis for Human Rights recommends that you read these articles in Bemidbar / Numbers
- Naso: Jewish spirituality and social context - June 1st, 2008
- Pinehas: Fanaticism and peace between man and his neighbor and between the nation and God. - July 13th, 2006
- Balaq: Deluding ourselves into thinking that all is well in our society - July 6th, 2006
- Huqqat: Act according to the Golden Mean - June 29th, 2006
- Qorah: Clarity in arguments in defense of Human Rights - June 23rd, 2006
- Bemidbar: Reaching out to the ones we would normally turn away - May 26th, 2006
- Mas'e: Expulsion, Democracy and Civil Disobedience - August 4th, 2005
- Mattot: Find the formulas allowing all of us to have our basic Human Rights and needs met. - July 28th, 2005
- Pinehas: Conflict of Human Rights values that are sometimes mutually exclusive - July 22nd, 2005
- Balaq: We cannot negotiate for peace on the one hand and violate Human Rights on the other - July 14th, 2005
- Huqqat: Thinking Before Speaking - July 7th, 2005
- Shelah: Eyes and Vision - June 24th, 2005
- Beha'alotekha: Critical mass and individual responsibility - June 16th, 2005
- BeMidbar: Be counted as a valued individual - June 2nd, 2005
Rabbis for Human Rights recommends that you read these articles in Pinehas
- Pinehas: Human Rights and the rejoining the human family - July 18th, 2008
- Dvar Torah – Parashat Pinchas - July 8th, 2007
- Pinehas: Fanaticism and peace between man and his neighbor and between the nation and God. - July 13th, 2006
- Pinehas: Conflict of Human Rights values that are sometimes mutually exclusive - July 22nd, 2005




Leave a Reply