Komentarz do Liczb 25:12

את בריתי שלום [I GIVE TO HIM] MY COVENANT — PEACE — This means: I give him my covenant that it should be to him as a covenant of peace; just like a man who shows gratitude and friendliness to one who has done him a kindness. So here, too, the Holy One, blessed be He, expressed to him His peaceful feelings towards him.

את בריתי שלום. Peace with the angel of death. We have a similar meaning of this word שלום in Job 25,20 עושה שלום במרומיו, “He makes peace in His lofty regions.” [I assume that the reference is to the fact that the angel of death has no authority in the celestial regions. Ed.] Losses occur only as a result of confrontations by opposites. We find that as a result of this שלום, “peace, or armistice” with the angel of death Pinchas enjoyed an exceedingly long life on earth, more so than any other member of his generation. In fact, he was still serving as priest in the Tabernacle at Shiloh during the civil war between Binyamin and the other tribes. This occurred many years after the death of Joshua and the elders who were Joshua’s assistants. (Judges 20,28) Joshua 24,26 reports these elders as surviving Joshua for many years. If, as is indicated by the Talmud, Pinchas was still alive in the days of Yiphtach (Judges 11,26) he must have been 300 years old by that time. (compare either Bereshit Rabbah 60,3 or Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer chapter 47 on the subject of Pinchas)

לכן אמור, "Therefore, 'say,'" etc. Why did the Torah have to write the word לכן, "Therefore," seeing it goes on to explain in verse 13 "because he was jealous for his G'd?" We are forced to understand the word as an oath. We have learned in Shemot Rabbah 6,4 on Exodus 6,6 that this word is always to be understood as a form of oath. The Midrash uses as its source Samuel I 3,14, ולכן נשבעתי לבית עלי, "And this is why I have sworn an oath concerning the house of Eli, etc." This still leaves us with the question why an oath was required in this instance. Presumably, the oath was needed to reinforce the covenant of peace in the event that Pinchas' children should turn out not to be deserving of the covenant G'd had concluded with their father.

לכן אמור, “Therefore, say! etc.” the words “to the Children of Israel,” are implied here. Moses was to announce to the Israelites that Pinchas had acquired hereditary rank as a priest.

לכן אמור, “therefore say:” this wording serves as an allusion to the blessing of the priests which is introduced by a call to them from a congregant to begin to chant the blessing. [The meaning could be that whereas a priest guilty of killing a human being is prevented thereby from performing this blessing (Berachot 32), Pinchas was allowed to be an exception to this rule.]

To be a covenant of peace for him. Rashi is answering the question: Why it is written “My covenant”? Instead it should have written, “A covenant of peace.” He answers that [it was termed] “My covenant” because I am giving it to him to be a covenant of peace for him. Therefore, the verse did not write “a covenant of peace” so that the word “peace” would not be considered the content of the covenant [describing the covenant as one of peace], rather it is as if the verse is abbreviated, as Rashi explains [that “I give him My covenant to be a covenant of peace”]. Re’m explains that Rashi added the words, “To be a covenant of peace for him” rather than settling for the words “I give him” which were written in the verse, because afterwards it is written (v. 13), “It shall be for him … a covenant of eternal kehunah.” There the words “give him” and “My covenant” from our verse are insufficient [meaning that the “covenant of eternal kehunah” was in addition to the covenant already mentioned]. Thus, the same is true regarding the word “peace” and the verse means “I give him My covenant to be a covenant of peace for him and as a covenant of eternal kehunah.” Rashi adds the letter lamed to the word שלום [saying לברית שלום, lit. "as a covenant of peace"] to show the connotation of being for [something], indicating that this covenant was for peace and for an eternal kehunah. However, once Rashi had explained this regarding “peace” there was no need to do so for “eternal kehunah.”

V. 12. לכן אמר וגו׳, nicht אמר לו oder אליו, sondern allgemein: bringe es zu allgemeinem Verständnis und zur Beherzigung aller: הנני נתן לו את בריתי שלום! Wie Wajikra 26, 42 ein יעקב :ברית, ein יצחק :ברית, ein אברהם :ברית heißt, und damit jedes unter den Begriff "אברהם" ,"יצחק" ,"יעקב" gefasste Verhältnis als ein ברית, als eine von absoluter Gottesbestimmung getragene Verheißung bezeichnet wird: so heißt hier ein שלום" :ברית" und ist damit "שלום", die Gestaltung der vollendetsten Harmonie aller Weltverhältnisse unter einander und mit Gott, als ein "ברית", als eine von absoluter Gottesbestimmung getragene Verheißung ausgesprochen, deren endliche Realisierung das absolute Augenmerk Gottes und daher der Welt unabänderlich sicher ist (siehe Bereschit 6, 18). Die Realisierung dieser höchsten Friedensharmonie überantwortet Gott hier gerade derjenigen Gesinnung und demjenigen Tatenwirken, welche eine gedankenlose, ihre pflichtvergessene Untätigkeit so gerne in den Mantel der "Friedensliebe" hüllende Welt, eben als "Friedensstörer" zu bezeichnen und zu verdammen sich gefällt. "Friede" ist ein hohes Gut, dem alles, alle eigenen Rechte und Güter, nimmer aber die Rechte anderer, nimmer aber das Recht des göttlich Guten und Wahren zum Opfer gebracht werden darf. Der wahre Friede der Menschen unter einander beruht auf dem Frieden aller mit Gott. Wer den Kampf mit dem dem göttlich Guten und Wahren im Kreise der Menschen Feindlichen wagt, der ist mitten im Kampf und durch denselben ein Streiter für den ברית שלום auf Erden. Wer um des vermeintlichen Friedens willen mit Menschen deren wirklichem Zwiespalt mit Gott schweigend das Terrain lässt, dessen Friedensliebe gesellt sich selber zu den Feinden des ברית שלום auf Erden. Nicht die Teilnahmlosigkeit der Massen, selbst nicht die am Eingang zum Heiligtum in Untätigkeit geweinte Träne des Schmerzes um den Verrat, die wackere Pinchastat hat das Volk gerettet und ihm den Frieden mit Gott und seinem Gesetze und damit die Basis des eigenen wahrhaftigen Friedens wieder gebracht. So nennt Gott (Maleachi 2, 5) seinen dem Levitengeist überhaupt übergebenen ברית: das Leben und den Frieden. בריתי היתה אתו החיים והשלום ואתנם לו מורא וייראני ומפני שמי נחת הוא. Mein ברית war bei ihm: das Leben und der Friede. Die übergab Ich ihm in der Furcht, da er nur mich fürchtete und zu allererst vor meinem Namen sich selber beugte.

לכן, because (he had performed this deed of valour) on My behalf; הנני נותן לו את בריתי שלום, “I am forthwith giving him My covenant “peace.” G–d assures Pinchas that even if either relatives of Zimri and Cosbi will hate Pinchas, He will protect him against any act of overt or covert hostility. In the Talmud, tractate Kidushin, folio 66, attention is drawn to the fact that the letter ו in the word שלום is written with a break in the stem of that letter, to indicate that when a priest is not totally whole in all of his limbs, he is not fit to perform the service in the Temple. His service would be rendered invalid retroactively.

את בריתי שלום, “My covenant of peace.” He has no reason to fear the vengeance of either the relatives of Zimri or of Cosbi, the Midianite princess.

הנני נותן לו את בריתי שלום, “I herewith grant him My covenant of peace.” According to the plain meaning of the text family members who might act as גואל הדם, having the license to kill him by reason of being blood relations. Seeing that Zimri was a high-ranking member of the Israelite society there might have been numerous people who would have welcomed a chance to do just this. Apart from this assurance, his real reward would be that both he and his descendants would be priests.

Gratitude and favor towards someone who benefitted him. Meaning: He expresses favor towards him for the assistance that he provided. Re’m writes: There is reason to be puzzled, for it is understandable according to Ibn Ezra who explains that the peace which He gave him was that he should not be fearful of Zimri’s brothers. For this is an assurance, and for which an oath [in the form of a covenant] would be appropriate, [confirming] that He would uphold His assurance. However, according to Rashi who says that He expressed his peace to him like a man who harbors gratitude, for this there is no assurance, so an oath is not appropriate and it would not say that My oath (covenant) shall be an oath (covenant) of peace for him. One can answer that the main covenant was for the eternal kehunah, for the main Kohanim Gedolim were descended from Pinchas. And by way of this covenant, Hashem informed him that He harbored gratitude and favor towards him because of his assistance, and this was the peace [mentioned].

We may also be able to explain this verse on the basis of what we learned in Zevachim 101 that prior to the incident with Zimri Pinchas had not yet been appointed to the priesthood, as, although he was around at the time Aaron and his sons were anointed, he himself had not bothered to be anointed. After he performed his deed of jealousy on behalf of G'd he was appointed to the priesthood. Pinchas could have acquired the priesthood either as an act of forgiveness or as a gift from G'd. In the former event, his deed prompted G'd to forgive him for having failed at the time to have himself anointed. If we see in his appointment now a gift from G'd, we may view it as something entirely new. Just as Aaron and his sons were appointed to be priests, though Amram Aaron's father and his brothers had not been priests, so Pinchas' appointment was something quite new. There is a halachic difference between priesthood acquired as an act of forgiveness and priesthood acquired as a gift. In the fomer case, the priest need not perform an act of קנין, a symbolic act of acquisition of the priesthood; however, someone who had not had a previous claim to the priesthood and was awarded same as a gift must perform such an act of קנין.

Es ist aber das "ו" in שלום ein ויו קטיעא, nach allgemeinster Auffassung ein gebrochenes Waw. Der Pinchasbund heißt eben der "wiederzusammengefügte" שלום. Wo der Pinchaseifer von nöten ist, da ist eben der Friede "gebrochen". Und der Pinchaskampf gilt eben der Wiederherstellung des Friedens, er will den שלום wieder שלם machen. Daran knüpft dann (Kiduschin 86b) die Halacha den Satz, dass בעל מום שעבד עבודתו פסולה, dass der מום des ministrierenden כהן die עבודה nichtig mache. Es heiße hier von dem in das Priestertum eintretenden Pinchas: הנני נתן לו את בריתי שלום כשהוא שלם ולא כשהוא חסר הא שלום כתיב אמר רבי נחמן וי׳׳ו דשלום קטיעה היא, wer die Wiederherstellung des mit Gott gebrochenen Friedens vermitteln will, und das soll symbolisch jede עבודה — der muss selber שלם sein. —

My covenant [of] peace. Pinchas was promised he would not become an agitated and angry person, for the nature of the act he did — killing a person with his hands — leaves a strong impression. However, since he did it for the sake of Heaven he received the blessing that he would always be in peace and serenity.

The expression: את בריתי שלום, is to be understood as if the Torah had written: את בריתי, ברית שלום, “My covenant, the covenant of peace.” We find a similar construction in Psalms 45,7: כסאך אלוקים, “Your throne, G-d,” which is to be understood as if the author had written: כסאך כסא אלוקים, Your throne, the throne of G-d. We also find such a construction in Joshua 3,14: הארון הברית, which is to be understood as if the author had written: ,הארון ארון הברית, “the Ark, the Ark of the covenant.” The author states that he could cite numerous such examples. An alternate interpretation of the expression: בריתי שלום: Pinchas had been worried that as a result of his having killed a human being, something forbidden to do for a priest, he might have to forego his status as a priest. G-d therefore assured him that seeing that his intention was to glorify the name of the Lord, he need not fear such consequences. This will be spelled out forthwith.

Receiving the priesthood as a gift carries with it two disadvantages which the person who receives the priesthood as an act of forgiveness need not worry about. If the priesthood was attained via G'd forgiving Pinchas for an act of negligence in the past, then, if Pinchas were to be appointed High Priest at a future date he would not have to face any challengers. Any challenge would be dealt with as had the challenges against Aaron becoming High Priest. If the priesthood were to be granted only as a gift, the priest in question could face challenges to his promotion just as did Aaron before G'd had intervened. Such a challenge would be reinforced by the fact that Pinchas had killed. A priest who has killed is supposedly unfit to perform his priestly duties. People would claim that inasmuch as the status of the priesthood granted as a gift is limited to the recipient of that gift becoming an ordinary priest, such a priest does not qualify to compete for the office of High Priest. This is not so when a potential priest regains his former status through the act of G'd's forgiveness. Seeing that he had been in line for the office of High Priest before he had forfeited it through negligence, G'd's forgiveness reinstates such a potential priest in his former status. As a result of these considerations, obtaining the priesthood by way of an act of forgiveness from G'd is superior in three ways to obtaining it as a mere gift. 1) No formal act of acquisition is needed. 2) One need not worry about potential challengers to one's promotion. 3) It is an enduring status transferable to one's children and grandchildren as something hereditary.

In His wisdom, G'd decided to accord Pinchas the priesthood as a gift in order to demonstrate that he did not become a priest merely through a hereditary claim to the priesthood instead of a claim based on moral excellence. By appointing Pinchas as priest directly, G'd elevated the meaning of Pinchas' priesthood, made it into something which he could point to as a mark of personal distinction. This is why the Torah describes G'd as saying: "Here I give to him My covenant, peace." In view of our having pointed out that such a gift by definition may not be transferable to one's children, G'd had to reinforce the gift by an oath, i.e. the word אכן, in order to make the appointment as enduring as if it had been acquired through an act of forgiveness. This is why G'd had to add לו ולזרעו אחריו "to him and his descendants after him." The "peace" included that no one would challenge Pinchas' claim to the priesthood and the office of High Priest when the time came. I have pointed out on a previous occasion that the word כהונה is the name of a certain category of souls known as such in the region where the souls are at home. G'd assured Pinchas that his descendants would always receive souls drawn from the pool of souls known as כהונה. This is the mystical dimension of the expression כהונת עולם.