Parashat Pinchas
3rd July 2026
Week of 28 June – 4 July 2026
Torah portion : Num. 25 :10-30 :1 Haftarah : Jer. 1-2 :3
This week’s Parashah is named after the character mentioned at the beginning. Pin’has, is the grandson of Aaron the priest and in the jealousy of God at the end of the previous Parashah he killed two sinners, including Zimri ben Salo, thus stopping the plague that was ravaging the people of Israel. Because of his action, Pin’has receives a unique blessing from God in this parashah and is appointed to the ‘eternal priesthood’.
As always, the Torah challenges those who live by it to seek it more deeply, and, after seeking the Word of God through the Word itself grounded in the Tradition that interpreted it, one should not feel satisfied and pretend to have exhausted the meaning that the Word of God intended to reveal.
The beginning of today’s parashah (Num 25:10) repeats the presentation of Pin’has that was similarly made in the previous verse 7, using the same words: “Pin’has, son of Eleazar, son of Aaron the High Priest.”
Why the repetition, or what meaning should be given to it, given that according to Jewish tradition, apparent repetition always contains a new teaching? Therefore, it is not a repetition, but rather a new meaning must be found.
In the book of Exodus 6:25 it says that “Eleazar son of Aaron married one of the daughters of Putiel, who bore him Pin’has.” According to the tradition of the Sages of Israel, Putiel was Moses’ father-in-law, that is, Jethro. And in this logic, Aaron’s son (Eleazar), Moses’ brother, would have married Jethro’s daughter.
In the preceding verses, as said before, Pin’has kills a son of Israel named Zambi, along with his wife, a Midianite named Cozbi. He and his wife had introduced idolatry into the community of the children of Israel, and God, as punishment, had sent a great plague upon Israel. Pin’has’s action is said to have appeased God’s wrath and saved the people.
Rashi, in his commentary, explains the reason for the repetition of verses 7 and 10 with the same words. What would be the intention of the apparent repetition? According to him, the people knew of Pin´has’s relationship with Jethro’s family and reacted against Pin´has as because he was close to idolatry. Therefore, the repetition aims to make it clear that Pin´has receives the eternal priesthood and God’s covenant of peace because he is directly the son of Aaron, the source of the priesthood.
Now we can see the precise point in the Torah where Pinhas’s genealogy is repeated, namely, that he was “the son of Eleazar, the son of Aaron the priest.” This point tends to show that, in his actions, Pin’has was not the “grandson of Jethro,” but only the “grandson of Aaron.” In other words, he was not at all motivated by cruelty, but only by a consuming religious zeal.
And Rashi implicitly emphasizes that in this phrase, the crucial words are “the son of Aaron.” The Torah does not simply emphasize that Pin’has was the son of Eleazar, who was the second High Priest and became High Priest upon Aaron’s death; nor does it simply state that Pin’has was the grandson of Aaron the priest. The emphasis is placed rather on Aaron’s character apart from his priestly function, namely that he sought peace and established love between opposing parties. Where tension existed between the Israelites and God, Pin’has sought to substitute love for it; as God says: “Pin´has… has turned away My wrath from the Children of Israel” (Nm 25:11). This was the profound nature of Pin´has’s zeal—a great love of peace that he had inherited from Aaron, and a desire to eliminate the cause of the bitterness existing between God and His people.
Even if it turns out that he has other motives, there is a categorical statement in the Talmud that “a person must always be absorbed in the Torah and the commandments, even if not for their own sake, because in acting for other motives, it will happen that in the course of his action, he is acting for the Torah and the commandments themselves” (TB Pesahim 50b) The good motive will, in due time, replace the bad.
Rashi wants to teach that the people did not act correctly in trying to diminish Pin’has because of his lineage, being the grandson of Jethro. That is why the text insists on emphasizing his descent solely from Aaron. His action was for the good of the people, appeasing God’s wrath and expelling idolatry from among them. This good deed was considered just by God, who gave him the eternal priesthood and established a covenant of peace with him.
The sincere reaction, upon seeing “a Jew who studies with passion and scrupulously observes the commandments, would be to feel oneself spurred to a similar zeal” (TB Babba Batra 21a) If, on the contrary, one voices criticism, it is almost as if one could not bear the sight of someone more virtuous than oneself. Our Sages say: “Weigh all people in the balance of merit” (Mishnah Avot 1:6) When a person feels toward another a sentiment that does not accord with this maxim, it must be concluded that this sentiment does not stem from holiness and truth.
This week’s Parasha Commentary was prepared by
Elio Passeto, NDS, Jerusalem-Israel, Director
[Copyright © 2026]
Comments are closed