A Look at Parashat Pinchas

ruins on hilltop in masada national park
Photo by Samir Smier on Pexels.com

Parashat Pinchas

פרשת פנחס

במדבר  Numbers 25:10 to 30:1

Chapter 25 – Pinchus inherits the priesthood; war with the Midianites (Verses 10 through 18)

Pinchas’ impulsive vigilante action is looked upon with favor by G-d, and as a result the plague is halted, and the surviving Israelites are saved from being eliminated. Was Pinchus’ impetuous act justified in this situation, where order may have been breaking down into anarchy? Did Moses abrogate leadership and Pinchas step into the breach as some commentators proposed?

As a reward, Pinchas, son of Eleazar (the elder surviving son of Aaron the priest) is to inherit the priesthood, an honor that will be accorded to his descendants for all time. Isn’t this nepotism? Perhaps not in the spirit of the times. What do you think?

Title of high priest is to be inherited, not based on moral fortitude or capability. Could it be that G-d considered the impetuous Pinchas to be a “loose cannon”, and by granting him the title of High Priest, he would assume a ceremonial position without leadership duties and so the chances of misadventure were minimized, and he may have been effectively neutralized.

G-d’s anger over what transpired is not totally assuaged. He commands Moses that the Israelites are to go to war against the Midianites and defeat them. This is troubling on two levels:

  • A young Moses, when fleeing Pharaoh’s court was taken in by the Midianites. Don’t the Israelites owe them a degree of gratitude?
  • The Israelites were willingly seduced by the Midianite women, possibly prostitutes. If so, the women were just plying the world’s oldest profession. Didn’t Judah casually partake of the services of who appeared to him as a prostitute (not knowing that she was his daughter in law Tamar)? Killing them because the boys were being boys makes as much sense as for a patron of McDonalds to burn down the restaurant after he became obese from over consumption of junk food. Of course, one interpretation is that the sin of the Israelites was not in going with the prostitutes as much as adopting their idol worship.

Another census (Chapter 25, Verse 19 and chapter 26, Verses 1 through 65)

After the plague ended, G-d commands Moses and Eleazar to conduct a census of all the (male) Israelites able to bear arms (כל יצא צבא), from the age of twenty, by clan. The Torah does not clarify the criteria to determine who is able to bear arms; many being too old or infirm. Also, the Levites are to be exempt from military service, yet they are still counted.

Verses 52 through 56 determine how the land will be apportioned by shareholders in accordance with the above census. Not clear is how land would be (or not be) allotted for those not judged able to bear arms.

Note verse 64: None of the Israelite who were counted in the previous census, taken 38 years earlier, save Caleb and Joshua, are still around. The others, as promised by G-d, died out in the wilderness. It is up to the next generation to conquer the promised land.

Chapter 27 – The daughters of Zelophehad (Verses 1 through 11)

Here we have the famous story of the five daughters of Zelophehad (צלפחד). They presented their plight before Moses, Eleazer and other macher. Their father died without any sons. Under law and custom, as reiterated in the previous section (verses 52 through 56), his inheritance would go to his male kinsmen. They appealed to receive a share of the inheritance. Note that they were not asking for a full inheritance as would be the due for male heirs, only for a share. Moses brings the conundrum before G-d, who decrees a reasonable (for this period) reform, such that in the case of no male descendants, the property goes to the daughter(s). Only if there are no descendants of either sex will the property revert to the deceased’s closest male next of kin. No mention is made as to how two or more daughters would divide the estate. Rashi commented that the daughters are indeed wise and praiseworthy. “They saw what Moses did not forsee.” And of course, they showed a large degree of courage and perhaps chutzpah, not accepting the “natural” order of thing, and very publicly pleaded their case in the male dominated sphere.

The daughters had concerns that extended beyond their future share of the tribal allotment in the promised land. Without property, they would not have a dowry to attract husbands. Left alone, without resources, their chances of survival would be virtually nil. Still, one must admire their courage to take a stand in a patriarchal society and to challenge the prevailing laws and customs. Are we witnessing the first stirrings of feminism, with (limited) divine approval, or is this simple survival?

It is revealing that G-d saw fit to change or rather modify His previous law regarding inheritance to handle this new wrinkle that the daughters have presented to Moses. This raises a theological dilemma. Why did G-d not accommodate this possibility (only female, no male heirs) in the original ruling regarding inheritance? Here we see that divine law was adapted to handle new, perhaps unforeseen circumstances. The law will be somewhat modified (read “rolled back” to some extent) in Parashat Mas’ey (chapter 36, verses 1 through 12) where further restriction is placed upon the women; they can only inherit the land if they marry within the tribe to preserve the tribal holdings intact. Such a limitation is not placed on men.

Moses invests Joshua with leadership authority (Verses 12 through 23)

Moses is instructed to ascend to a high point to observe the promised land, to which he will not be allowed to enter, as punishment for a seemingly minor offense.

Moses invokes G-d to appoint someone to lead the community. In response, G-d instructs Moses to invest Joshua with some of his authority (ונתתה מהודך). The extent of Joshua’s new authority is not defined, nor are the rights and privileges of Moses that are to be withheld. Probably, Joshua was to be invested with mainly secular responsibilities, with religious duties conferred on Eleazar the priest.

Although the priesthood will be hereditary, the leadership will not. Neither of Moses’ two sons, Eleazar and Gershom, are considered for this role, and no more is heard from them. There is a midrash that Moses wanted, or perhaps expected, that one of his sons would have been appointed as his successor. This may have been a reasonable expectation, but it is not even hinted at in the Torah. Perhaps the message is that priestly responsibilities (primarily procedural in nature at this time, not pastoral duties) can be passed down from generation to generation, but leadership (both spiritual and secular) requires character traits that are not necessarily heredity driven.

Chapter 28 – Obligatory sacrificial offerings (Verses 1 through 31, Chapter 29, Verses 1 through 39, and Chapter 30, Verse 1)

G-d dictates to Moses descriptions of the obligatory sacrificial offerings to be presented on a daily basis, on shabbat, on new moons, during the pilgrimage festivals, as well as during the high holy days. No explanations are offered as to the reasons for the offerings, the protocols, or the contents.

Be the first to comment

What are your thoughts?

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.