Who Was Pinchas? - Rashi Studies (Advanced) - Parshah https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=pt-BR...

Adaptado por Chaim Miller; Dos ensinamentos do Rebe Lubavitcher

Perguntas clássicas

Por que o versículo 11 enfatiza a linhagem de Pinchas ?

Rashi : Porque as tribos o ridicularizaram, dizendo: "Você viu o descendente de Puti [ Yisro
], cujo pai da mãe engordou bezerros para adoração de ídolos, e ainda assim ele matou
um líder de uma das tribos de Israel ?" Portanto, as escrituras traçam sua linhagem até
Aharon .

Sifsei Chachamim: No final de Parashas Balaque , a Torá já declarou que Pinchas era "o
filho de Elazar, filho de Aharon, o sacerdote" (25: 7), então por que esse ponto precisa ser
enfatizado novamente aqui? Rashi concluiu que a Torá enfatizou novamente a linhagem de
Pinchas em resposta ao ridículo que ele sofreu.

Kli Yakar : As tribos o ridicularizaram porque era difícil acreditar que uma pessoa cujo pai
se casasse com alguém que não era judeu deveria sentir genuína indignação contra Zinri
por morar com uma mulher não judia.

Da mesma forma, o avô de Pinchas era um idólatra, por isso é difícil acreditar que ele
estivesse genuinamente enojado com a adoração de Ba'al Pe'or .

Be'er Basadeh: As tribos sentiram que a Torá somente sanciona um verdadeiro fanático
para executar uma pessoa como Zinri. Eles acharam difícil acreditar que suas intenções
eram puras.

Os Ensinamentos do Rebe

A linhagem de Pinchas (v. 11)

On reading the opening of our parsha, Rashi was troubled: Why does the Torah stress
again that Pinchas was "the son of Elazar the son of Aharon the priest," when this was

1 of 4 10/07/2020 11:32
Who Was Pinchas? - Rashi Studies (Advanced) - Parshah https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=pt-BR...

already stated in verse 25:7 above (as Sifsei Chachamim writes)?

Rashi answers that "Scripture traces his lineage to Aharon" here (for a second time)
"because the tribes ridiculed him, saying, 'Have you seen the descendant of Puti, whose
mother's father fattened calves for idol worship, and yet he killed a leader of one of the
tribes of Israel?'"

This prompts the following questions:

1. Surely, "fattening cows" for the purposes of idol worship is a much less serious crime
than the actual worship of idols, which is heresy. So, why did the tribes merely taunt
Pinchas that his grandfather "fattened cows," when they could have stressed that Yisro
had actually worshiped every idol in existence (Rashi to Shemos 18:11)?
2. Why does Rashi stress that Yisro was Pinchas' "mother's father," and not simply his
"grandfather"?
3. Surely, Pinchas' act of vengeance was a personal affront only to the tribe of Shimon,
whose leader Pinchas killed. We would presume, however, that the other tribes would
be thankful for Pinchas' speedy action which stopped a brazen act of public indecency
and halted the plague, saving many of their lives. On what basis did Rashi conclude
that all the tribes ridiculed Pinchas?
4. Did the tribes feel that Pinchas acted within the bounds of Jewish law or not? If they felt
that Pinchas was legally justified in his actions because "If someone cohabits with a
non-Jewish woman [in public], zealots have a right to strike him dead" (Rashi to 25:7),
then what was their complaint? And if they felt that the above law only applies to a true
zealot who feels righteous indignation, and Pinchas did not fall into this category [as
Be'er Basadeh writes], then it follows that, in their opinion, Pinchas had no right to kill
Zimri. Why then did they not criticize Pinchas for spilling innocent blood, rather than
stressing the fact that his grandfather fattened cows for idol worship?

The Explanation

In his commentary to verse 6, at the end of Parshas Balak, Rashi explains why everybody
was weeping, rather than taking action, at Zimri's brazenness: "The law was concealed from
him [i.e., from Moshe]. So they all burst out weeping. At the incident of the Golden Calf,
Moshe stood up against six hundred thousand people... yet here he seemed helpless!

2 of 4 10/07/2020 11:32
Who Was Pinchas? - Rashi Studies (Advanced) - Parshah https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=pt-BR...

However, [this was orchestrated] so that Pinchas could come and take [the reward] that he
deserved." Now, the tribes could not possibly have known, or even imagined, that God had
concealed the law from Moshe in order to reward Pinchas. So when they saw that Moshe
chose not to act and then Pinchas took action in Moshe's presence, they were outraged.
How could Pinchas have been so disrespectful to Moshe and the other sages, who were
surely aware of the law and yet had not taken action? Pinchas had disgraced Moshe and the
other sages by acting as if he alone was willing to take vengeance for God!

The fact that Moshe did not have Pinchas sentenced by the court for murder ultimately
proved that Pinchas had been legally justified in his actions. Nevertheless, the tribes felt that
Pinchas had acted disrespectfully to Moshe, since they were unaware that the law had been
concealed from him by God. This led them to feel contempt for Pinchas, as they desired to
defend Moshe's honor—and clearly, Moshe's honor was something that concerned all of the
tribes, and not just the tribe of Shimon.

To the tribes, the "disrespectful" nature of Pinchas' actions indicated that he had not acted
entirely out of moral necessity, but that he had allowed undesirable aspects of his
personality to become unleashed. Pinchas, they concluded, was not a pure moralist but
somewhat of an opportunist. Jumping to kill Zimri, before Moshe had decided on the
appropriate course of action, suggested that Pinchas had a sadistic disposition and simply
reveled in the opportunity to spill blood as soon as the law permitted him to do so.

Where was the tribes' proof? Rashi explains their line of thinking: "Have you seen the
descendant of Puti whose mother's father fattened calves for idol worship?" The tribes could
not bring proof from the fact that Yisro (Puti) was an idol-worshiper in general, because idol-
worship is an ideological mistake which is not inherited by one's children. Rather, they
stressed that Yisro had a cruel, sadistic nature in that he fattened cows only in order to
slaughter them (to idols), i.e., he was cruel to animals. And since a cruel disposition can be
inherited, it follows—argued the tribes—that Pinchas' opportunist killing must be an
expression of a tendency to cruelty that he inherited from his grandfather.

On the other hand, they argued, the person that Pinchas killed was an inherently kind
person, a tribal leader, who cared for the needs of his people. In fact, Zimri did what he did
in an (albeit misguided) attempt to prove that it was permissible to cohabit with a non-
Jewish woman, so as to save his tribe from being punished for doing likewise (see Rashi to

3 of 4 10/07/2020 11:32
Who Was Pinchas? - Rashi Studies (Advanced) - Parshah https://translate.googleusercontent.com/translate_c?depth=1&hl=pt-BR...

25:6). This point served to further the tribes' argument—for who but a cruel, sadistic person
would kill a leader who cared so much for his people? In fact, they argued, don't nice people
just bring out the worst in nasty people, who cannot bear the fact that somebody could be
genuinely good-natured?

Pinchas' Connection to Aharon

A serious flaw in the tribes' argument was that, in addition to being the grandson of Yisro,
Pinchas was also Aharon's grandson. So how can we be sure that he inherited the negative
qualities of Yisro and not the good traits of Aharon?

In answer to this point, the tribes stressed that Yisro was Pinchas' "mother's father." By
nature, a boy's disposition is most similar to that of his mother, and a girl to that of her
father—a fact which the reader will have gleaned from Rashi's comment on Bereishis 46:15:
"The males are attributed to Leah whereas the females are attributed to Ya'akov, to teach
you that if the woman emits seed first, she will give birth to a male, and if the man emits
seed first, she will give birth to a female." Thus, the tribes wished to argue that Pinchas
would have inherited the disposition of his maternal and not paternal grandfather.

Rashi thus explains, "Scripture traces his lineage to Aharon," indicating that Pinchas actually
inherited the nature of Aharon, who "pursued peace and brought people who were fighting
with each other to love each other" (Rashi on 20:29 above). And this was proof that Pinchas'
intentions had indeed been pure.

(Based on Likutei Sichos vol. 8, p. 160ff.; Sichas Shabbos Parshas Pinchas 5725)

Adapted by Chaim Miller; From the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe

Based on the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson of righteous memory;
adapted by Chaim Miller.
An excerpt from the Gutnick Chumash published by Kol Menachem, New York.

The Chumash incorporates a flowing English translation of the Torah which is loyal to the commentary of Rashi and
includes 'Classic questions' that are drawn from a range of commentators and are then ingeniously brought
together by the teachings of the Lubavitcher Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem Mendel Schneerson, of righteous memory.

Click here to purchase the Chumash.

© Copyright, all rights reserved. If you enjoyed this article, we encourage you to distribute it further, provided that you comply with Chabad.org's copyright
policy .

4 of 4 10/07/2020 11:32