Parshas Pinchas- Fighting for Peace

It is important to define words properly. Today, certain groups would prefer to leave terms undefined, or explain them in ways that are an outright perversion of reality. This may seem insignificant and mundane. However, the ramifications of such exercises in fantasy can often be far-reaching and quite detrimental. We are blessed with an objective source of wisdom, the holy Torah. It guides us in understanding general ideas, as well as the nuances. Certain words may appear obvious in its definition, but upon analysis, deeper layers are revealed. One of these words is the term “shalom.” Naturally, we may view peace as a utopia, void of acts of aggression or violence. Instinctively, we may think that these are antithetical concepts. However, as always, the Torah teaches us the truth of the matter.

At the conclusion of Parshas Balak, a great tragedy had befallen the Jewish people. Rampant promiscuity with the Midianite and Moabite girls had occurred. In addition, the Jews began to engage in idol worship, and deny in the Torah. Moshe commanded the judges to begin murdering the sinners. Additionally, Hashem struck the Jews with a plague that ultimately killed twenty-four thousand people. At the pinnacle of this depravity, Zimri, the prince of the tribe of Shimon, engaged in an illicit affair with a Midianite princess, Cozbi. Upon seeing this, Pinchas, a grandson of Aharon, murdered them both in heroic fashion. His efforts were successful in stopping the plague, and saving the Jewish people. Our Parsha begins with the rewards Hashem promised to Pinchas, due to his good deed. Because Pinchas acted with zealousness on behalf of Hashem, he was gifted “brisi shalom,” “My covenant of peace.” Kehuna status was granted to Pinchas and his descendants, as well.

Reward and punishment are generally delivered “mida k’neged mida,” in similar measure to the deeds performed. Pinchas acted with great aggression. He was correct in doing so, but it was a violent act nonetheless. The idea of a covenant of peace, and kehuna seem antithetical to the action performed. The character of a kohen is one of peace, as defined by the father of kehuna, Aharon. How could his act of violence, albeit laudable, be rewarded with shalom?

Chazal teach us that Pinchas and Eliyahu HaNavi are one and the same. In Melachim 1 (ch. 18) the pesukim record a fascinating story. At the time, many Jews unfortunately worshipped a deity known as ba’al. Achav, the wicked king, encouraged and facilitated this involvement. Hashem struck the Jews with a three-year drought, as a result of the serious violations. Eliyahu, the primary prophet, challenged the false prophets of ba’al to a test. Each side would attempt to have a sacrifice accepted, Eliyahu, by Hashem, and the ovdei ba’al, by ba’al. This would prove where the truth existed. This incident occurred on Har HaCarmel, outside of the Temple. Ultimately, Hashem sent a fire to consume the korban of Eliyahu, proving his position. This act of Eliyahu was quite bold. In truth, it was forbidden to offer sacrifices outside of the Beis HaMikdash. The Gemara explains how this was permitted. However, as earlier, the same theme emerges. Eliyahu acted with “extremism” to protect the Honor of Hashem. The man of “peace” acted with aggression. In addition, Chazal teach us that Eliyahu attends brissim. The act of circumcising a baby requires a certain boldness, and yet the man of “peace” attends.

How can we understand these seemingly contradictory ideas coexisting?   

In a similar vein, Chazal state that talmidei chachamim increase peace in the world (Yevamos 122b). However, the Mishna (Avos 5:17) teaches that Hillel and Shammai argued with virtue, and are lauded as the epitome of a “machlokes l’shem shamayim.” This seems to highlight a path of strife as being acceptable.

How can we reconcile these ideas?

Finally, in the Midrash Rabba (on Koheles 7:16), Reish Lakish explains that one who is merciful when he should be cruel, will ultimately be cruel when he should be merciful. This is illustrated with Shaul’s refusal to wipe out Amaleik, as directed by Shmuel HaNavi (Shmuel 1 ch. 15), that resulted in his destruction of Nov, the city of kohanim (ch. 22).

There are times that aggression is necessary and applauded. Doing otherwise is a failure of justice, and will not promote peace. How then can we define the word “shalom”?

Negative fighting results from a feeling that others are imposing on one’s place. When a person thinks that he should be correct at all costs, the success of his opposition is infuriating, as it equals his failure. When one needs to win, his ego is harmed when he does not. This is the idea of “machlokes shelo l’shem shamayim.” This will certainly not result in genuine peace. However, when one argues without personal agenda, but for the sake of real truth, he is overjoyed to be disproven, as it results in clarification of what is real. A win on either side becomes a success for both. This is the idea of a debate “l’shem shamayim.” It yields peace in the world. Each party is validated in their distinct abilities, mission, and path. Neither infringes on the other. A success for one is a win for all. This is the concept of genuine peace.

Sometimes, acts of aggression are necessary to restore the “shalom” in a relationship. Pinchas/ Eliyahu saw the destruction that the Jews were engaging in. He understood how it was damaging their connection with Hashem. His acts of boldness restored the peace between the two sides. He acted with might, to rebuild the harmony. Thus, he was rewarded with peace. The man who reinstated peace was blessed with it.

When people understand their personal abilities, mission, and responsibilities, they tend to be secure. They do not need to engage in petty fights with others. The successes others experience, are then celebrated. Important matters may require acts of boldness, and this is perfectly appropriate. B’ezras Hashem, we should merit to identify and maximize our personal paths and bring peace to the world!

Please email yshifman1@gmail.com with questions, comments, or to be placed on the mailing list

Yitzchak Shifman