Don't miss an episode! Subscribe to the Madlik podcast: Spotify | Apple Podcasts | Google Podcasts
and Join Madlik on Clubhouse every Thursday so you can participate in our weekly live discussion of the Parsha. Link to Transcript here: https://madlik.com/2024/07/25/vigilant-about-vigilantism/
(ו) וְהִנֵּ֡ה אִישׁ֩ מִבְּנֵ֨י יִשְׂרָאֵ֜ל בָּ֗א וַיַּקְרֵ֤ב אֶל־אֶחָיו֙ אֶת־הַמִּדְיָנִ֔ית לְעֵינֵ֣י מֹשֶׁ֔ה וּלְעֵינֵ֖י כׇּל־עֲדַ֣ת בְּנֵי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל וְהֵ֣מָּה בֹכִ֔ים פֶּ֖תַח אֹ֥הֶל מוֹעֵֽד׃ (ז) וַיַּ֗רְא פִּֽינְחָס֙ בֶּן־אֶלְעָזָ֔ר בֶּֽן־אַהֲרֹ֖ן הַכֹּהֵ֑ן וַיָּ֙קׇם֙ מִתּ֣וֹךְ הָֽעֵדָ֔ה וַיִּקַּ֥ח רֹ֖מַח בְּיָדֽוֹ׃ (ח) וַ֠יָּבֹ֠א אַחַ֨ר אִֽישׁ־יִשְׂרָאֵ֜ל אֶל־הַקֻּבָּ֗ה וַיִּדְקֹר֙ אֶת־שְׁנֵיהֶ֔ם אֵ֚ת אִ֣ישׁ יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וְאֶת־הָאִשָּׁ֖ה אֶל־קֳבָתָ֑הּ וַתֵּֽעָצַר֙ הַמַּגֵּפָ֔ה מֵעַ֖ל בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃ (ט) וַיִּהְי֕וּ הַמֵּתִ֖ים בַּמַּגֵּפָ֑ה אַרְבָּעָ֥ה וְעֶשְׂרִ֖ים אָֽלֶף׃ {פ}
(י) וַיְדַבֵּ֥ר ה׳ אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֥ה לֵּאמֹֽר׃ (יא) פִּֽינְחָ֨ס*(בספרי ספרד ואשכנז נהוג לכתוב פִּֽינְחָ֨ס ביו״ד זעירא) בֶּן־אֶלְעָזָ֜ר בֶּן־אַהֲרֹ֣ן הַכֹּהֵ֗ן הֵשִׁ֤יב אֶת־חֲמָתִי֙ מֵעַ֣ל בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל בְּקַנְא֥וֹ אֶת־קִנְאָתִ֖י בְּתוֹכָ֑ם וְלֹא־כִלִּ֥יתִי אֶת־בְּנֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל בְּקִנְאָתִֽי׃ (יב) לָכֵ֖ן אֱמֹ֑ר הִנְנִ֨י נֹתֵ֥ן ל֛וֹ אֶת־בְּרִיתִ֖י שָׁלֽוֹם׃*(בספרי ספרד ואשכנז וי״ו קטיעא) (יג) וְהָ֤יְתָה לּוֹ֙ וּלְזַרְע֣וֹ אַחֲרָ֔יו בְּרִ֖ית כְּהֻנַּ֣ת עוֹלָ֑ם תַּ֗חַת אֲשֶׁ֤ר קִנֵּא֙ לֵֽאלֹקָ֔יו וַיְכַפֵּ֖ר עַל־בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל׃
(6) Just then a certain Israelite man came and brought a Midianite woman over to his companions, in the sight of Moses and of the whole Israelite community who were weeping at the entrance of the Tent of Meeting. (7) When Phinehas, son of Eleazar son of Aaron the priest, saw this, he left the assembly and, taking a spear in his hand, (8) he followed the Israelite man into the chamber and stabbed both of them, the Israelite man and the woman, through the belly. Then the plague against the Israelites was checked. (9) Those who died of the plague numbered twenty-four thousand.
(10) God spoke to Moses, saying, (11) “Phinehas, son of Eleazar son of Aaron the priest, has turned back My wrath from the Israelites by displaying among them his passion for Me, so that I did not wipe out the Israelite people in My passion. (12) Say, therefore, ‘I grant him My pact of friendship. (13) It shall be for him and his descendants after him a pact of priesthood for all time, because he took impassioned action for his God, thus making expiation for the Israelites.’”
וירא פינחס. רָאָה מַעֲשֶׂה וְנִזְכַּר הֲלָכָה — אָמַר לוֹ לְמֹשֶׁה מְקֻבַּלְנִי מִמְּךָ הַבּוֹעֵל אֲרַמִּית קַנָּאִין פּוֹגְעִין בּוֹ. אָמַר לוֹ "קַרְיָנָא דְּאִגַּרְתָּא אִיהוּ לֶיהֱוֵי פַּרְוַנְקָא", מִיָּד ויקח רמח בידו וגו' (סנהדרין פ"ב):
וירא פנחס AND PHINEAS SAW — He saw what was being done and he was thereby reminded of the law on this subject (Sanhedrin 82a). He said to Moses, “I have received a tradition from you: he who has intercourse with an Aramean (heathen) woman, zealous people may attack him”. He replied to him: “Let him who reads the letter be the agent for executing it”; — straightway, ויקח רמח בידו HE TOOK A JAVELIN IN HIS HAND, etc. (Sanhedrin 82a).
The act itself is a halakha from God to Moses on Sinai, and the only reason Pinchas carried it out rather than Moses was because Moses forgot and then granted his pupil the “honors” since he remembered. see
1 Maccabees 2:24–28 (NRSV): 24
When Mattathias saw it, he burned with zeal and his heart was stirred. He gave vent to righteous anger; he ran and killed him on the altar. 25 At the same time he killed the king’s officer who was forcing them to sacrifice, and he tore down the altar. 26 Thus he burned with zeal for the law, just as Phinehas did against Zimri son of Salu.
27 Then Mattathias cried out in the town with a loud voice, saying: “Let every one who is zealous for the law and supports the covenant come out with me!” 28 Then he and his sons fled to the hills and left all that they had in the town.
מתני׳ הגונב את הקסוה והמקלל בקוסם והבועל ארמית קנאין פוגעין בו כהן ששמש בטומאה אין אחיו הכהנים מביאין אותו לב"ד אלא פרחי כהונה מוציאין אותו חוץ לעזרה ומפציעין את מוחו בגזירין זר ששמש במקדש רבי עקיבא אומר בחנק וחכ"א בידי שמים:
MISHNA: With regard to one who steals a kasva, and one who curses with a sorcerer, and one who engages in intercourse with an Aramean woman, zealots strike him and kill him. Although the Torah does not say that one who performs one of these actions is liable to be executed, it is permitted for anyone who zealously takes the vengeance of the Lord to do so.
In the case of a priest who performed the Temple service in a state of ritual impurity, his priestly brethren do not bring him to court for judgment; rather, the young men of the priesthood remove him from the Temple courtyard and pierce his skull with pieces of wood. In the case of a non-priest who performed the service in the Temple, Rabbi Akiva says: His execution is by strangulation, and
the Rabbis say: He is not executed with a court-imposed death penalty; rather, he is liable to receive death at the hand of Heaven.
א"ר חסדא הבא לימלך אין מורין לו איתמר נמי אמר רבה בר בר חנה א"ר יוחנן הבא לימלך אין מורין לו
מה ראה אמר רב ראה מעשה ונזכר הלכה אמר לו אחי אבי אבא לא כך לימדתני ברדתך מהר סיני הבועל את כותית קנאין פוגעין בו אמר לו קריינא דאיגרתא איהו ליהוי פרוונקא ושמואל אמר ראה שאין (משלי כא, ל) חכמה ואין תבונה ואין עצה נגד ה׳ כל מקום שיש חילול השם אין חולקין כבוד לרב ר' יצחק אמר ר"א ראה שבא מלאך והשחית בעם ויקם מתוך העדה ויקח רומח בידו מיכן שאין נכנסין בכלי זיין לבית המדרש
The Gemara asks: What did Pinehas see that led him to arise and take action? Rav says: He saw the incident taking place before him and he remembered the halakha. He said to Moses: Brother of the father of my father, as Moses was the brother of his grandfather Aaron, did you not teach me this during your descent from Mount Sinai: One who engages in intercourse with a gentile woman, zealots strike him? Moses said to him: Let the one who reads the letter be the agent [parvanka] to fulfill its contents. And Shmuel says: Pinehas saw and considered the meaning of the verse: “There is neither wisdom nor understanding nor counsel against the Lord” (Proverbs 21:30), which the Sages interpreted to mean: Anywhere that there is desecration of the Lord’s name, one does not show respect to the teacher. In those situations, one need not consult his teacher, but must immediately proceed to right the wrong that is transpiring. Therefore, he took the spear and took immediate action. Rabbi Yitzḥak says that Rabbi Eliezer says: He saw that an angel came and destroyed among the people in punishment for the sin of Zimri, and he realized that he must take immediate action to ameliorate the situation. It is written with regard to Pinehas: “He arose from amidst the assembly and he took a spear in his hand” (Numbers 25:7). From here, where it is written that he took the spear only after he arose from the assembly, it is derived that one does not enter the study hall with a weapon. The assembly in this context is referring to the seat of the Sanhedrin.
This is not how you taught me when you came down from Mount Sinai (Bamadbar 25, 6). This is how the version in the Gemara said to teach me and not to teach us in the plural, and there seems to be a delicious taste in this matter for the purpose of the matter which says that it happened that you only taught me this halacha. hold it! And Moshe said to him, "Yes, you have said this. This is proof that this law belongs to you, that it will be fulfilled in practice. That is why he said to him, 'Karina dagarta, Ihu, Yahwey Paronka.' to do something.
כְּתִיב וַיַּ֗רְא פִּֽינְחָס֙ בֶּן־אֶלְעָזָ֔ר בֶּֽן־אַֽהֲרוֹן הַכֹּהֵ֑ן. מָה רָאָה. רָאָה אֶת הַמַּעֲשֶׂה וְנִזְכַּר לַהֲלָכָה הַבּוֹעֵל אֲרַמִּית הַקַּנָּאִים פּוֹגְעִין בָּהֶן. תַּנֵּי. שֶׁלֹּא כִרְצוֹן חֲכָמִים. וּפִינְחָס שֶׁלֹּא כִרְצוֹן חֲכָמִים. אָמַר רִבִּי יוּדָה בַּר פָּזִי. בִּיקְשׁוּ לְנַדּוֹתוֹ אִילוּלֵי שֶׁקָּֽפְצָה עָלָיו רוּחַ הַקּוֹדֶשׁ וְאָֽמְרָה וְהָ֤יְתָה לּוֹ֙ וּלְזַרְע֣וֹ אַֽחֲרָ֔יו בְּרִ֖ית כְּהוּנַּת עוֹלָ֑ם וגו׳.
It is written: Phineas ben Eleazar ben Aharon the priest saw. What did he see? He understood what happened and remembered practice: “One who copulates with a Gentile woman, zealots strike him.” It was stated: not with the agreement of the Sages. [Since in most cases the zealot’s intervention would be first degree murder.] Would Phineas act against the Sages? Rebbi Jehudah bar Pazi said, they wanted to excommunicate him had not the Holy Spirit jumped on him and declared that an eternal covenant of priesthood shall be for him and his descendants after him, etc.
וְהָיָה שָׁם פִּינְחָס. אָמַר. אֵין כָּאן אָדָם שֶׁיְּהַרְגֶּנּוּ וִיהָרֵג עַל יָדוֹ. אֵיכָן הֵן הָאֲרָיוֹת. גּ֤וּר אַרְיֵה֙ יְהוּדָ֔ה. דָּ֖ן גּ֣וּר אַרְיֵ֑ה. בִּנְיָמִין֙ זְאֵ֣ב יִטְרָ֔ף. כֵּיוָן שֶׁרָאָה פִינְחָס שֶׁאֵין אָדָם מִיִּשְׂרָאֵל עוֹשֶׂה כְּלוּם. מִיָּד עָמַד פִּינְחָס מִתּוֹךְ סַנְהֶדְרִין שֶׁלּוֹ וְלָקַח אֶת הָרוֹמַח בְּיָדוֹ וְנָתַן אֶת הַבַּרְזֶל תַּחַת פַּסִּיקִייָא שֶׁלּוֹ. וַיַּעֲֽמוֹד פּֽ֭ינְחָס וַיְפַלֵּ֑ל וַ֜תֵּעָצַ֗ר הַמַּגֵּפָֽה.
It is written212Num. 25:3–4. ...
There, Phineas was present. He said, is there nobody who would kill him or be killed? Where are the lions? A lion whelp is Jehudah219Gen. 49:9.; Dan is a lion whelp220Deut. 33:22.; Benjamin a rapacious wolf221Gen. 49:27.. When Phineas saw that nobody of Israel did anything, he immediately rose from his court, took the spear in his hand, and put its iron under his belt222Latin fascia “band, girdle”..
This Yerushalmi comes as close to outright condemnation of Pinchas as possible and is quite explicit about the tension inherent in the rabbis’ interpretive process when weighing whether Pinchas’ actions should be evaluated positively or negatively. On one hand, Pinchas is a hero, the covenantal Father of the Priesthood, and his actions are given unqualified divine approval. Still, Pinchas’ behavior does fly in the face of the Sages’ own norms and standards.
The thrust of the Yerushalmi’s rhetoric is that the Pinchas case is anomalous, because of the unique circumstances of the Baal Peor sin, and due to God’s clear validation of Pinchas’ act of violent zealotry. Yet the Yerushalmi wants to make it clear that Pinchas should not be treated as a role model, nor should his actions frame any legitimate moral precedent. Quite the contrary!
Pinchas’ Extrajudicial Execution of Zimri and Cozbi, Dr. David Bernat, thetorah.com
וַחֲמָא פִּינְחָס בַּר אֶלְעָזָר בַּר אַהֲרן כַּהֲנָא וְאִידְכַּר הִילְכְתָא עָנֵי וַאֲמַר מַאן דְיִקְטוֹל וְקָטִיל הָאן אִינוּן אַרְיְוָתָא דְשֵׁיבַט יְהוּדָה כֵּיוַן דְחַמְנוּן שַׁתְקִין קָם מִגוֹ סַנְהֶדְרֵי דִילֵיהּ וּנְסֵיב רוּמְחָא בִּידֵיהּ
And Phinehas bar Elazar-bar Aharon, the priest, saw, and, remembering the ordination, answered, and said: He who ought to kill, let him kill! Where are the lions of the tribe of Jehudah? When they saw, they were quiet. And he arose from among his Sanhedrin, and took a lance in his hand.
בא וחבטן לפני המקום אמר לפניו רבש"ע על אלו יפלו כ"ד אלף מישראל שנאמר (במדבר כה, ט) ויהיו המתים במגפה ארבעה ועשרים אלף והיינו דכתיב (תהלים קו, ל) ויעמד פנחס ויפלל אמר רבי אלעזר ויתפלל לא נאמר אלא ויפלל מלמד כביכול שעשה פלילות עם קונו בקשו מלאכי השרת לדחפו אמר להן הניחו לו קנאי בן קנאי הוא משיב חימה בן משיב חימה הוא
Pinehas came and slammed them on the ground before the Omnipresent and said before Him: Master of the Universe, will twenty-four thousand of the children of Israel fall due to these sinners? As it is stated: “And those that died in the plague were twenty-four thousand” (Numbers 25:9). And that is the meaning of that which is written: “And Pinehas stood and wrought judgment and the plague was stayed” (Psalms 106:30). Rabbi Elazar says: It is not stated in the verse: And prayed [vayitpallel]; rather, it is stated vayefalel. This teaches that Pinehas, as it were, wrought judgment [pelilut] with his Creator. The ministering angels sought to push him away because he spoke harshly to God.
The Holy One, Blessed be He, said to them: Leave him be; he is a zealot, son of a zealot, from the tribe of Levi, who was zealous in avenging the violation of his sister Dinah; he is an alleviator of wrath, son of an alleviator of wrath, a descendant of Aaron, who alleviated the wrath of God during the plague that followed the assembly of Korah.
ישראל הבא על העובדת כוכבים הלכה למשה מסיני היא דאמר מר הבועל ארמית קנאין פוגעין בו
וְאֵין הַקַּנַּאי רַשַּׁאי לִפְגֹּעַ בָּהֶן אֶלָּא בִּשְׁעַת מַעֲשֶׂה כְּזִמְרִי שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר כה ח) "וְאֶת הָאִשָּׁה אֶל קֳבָתָהּ". אֲבָל אִם פֵּרַשׁ אֵין הוֹרְגִין אוֹתוֹ. וְאִם הֲרָגוֹ נֶהֱרַג עָלָיו. וְאִם בָּא הַקַּנַּאי לִטּל רְשׁוּת מִבֵּית דִּין לְהָרְגוֹ אֵין מוֹרִין לוֹ וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא בִּשְׁעַת מַעֲשֶׂה. וְלֹא עוֹד אֶלָּא אִם בָּא הַקַּנַּאי לַהֲרֹג אֶת הַבּוֹעֵל וְנִשְׁמַט הַבּוֹעֵל וְהָרַג הַקַּנַּאי כְּדֵי לְהַצִּיל עַצְמוֹ מִיָּדוֹ אֵין הַבּוֹעֵל נֶהֱרַג עָלָיו. וְהַבָּא עַל בַּת גֵּר תּוֹשָׁב אֵין הַקַּנָּאִין פּוֹגְעִים בּוֹ אֲבָל מַכִּין אוֹתוֹ מַכַּת מַרְדּוּת:
If the zealous person comes to ask permission from the court to slay him, they do not instruct him [to], even if this takes place at the time [of relations]. Not only that, if the zealous person comes to kill the transgressor and he withdraws and kills the zealous person in order to save himself, the transgressor is not executed for killing him.
When a Jew has relations with the daughter of a resident alien, the zealot may not strike him. [The transgressor] should, however, be given stripes for rebellious conduct.
ברית כהנת עולם. הבועל ארמית קנאין פוגעין בו, תני, שלא ברצון חכמים, ופינחס שלא ברצון חכמים, א"ר יודה בן פזי, בקשו לנדותו, אלמלא קפצה רוח הקודש ואמרה והיתה לו ולזרעו אחריו ברית כהונת עולם .
כמה עמלו המפרשים לפרש דרשה זו בכלל, אבל האמת יש לפרש בדרך פשוט, דאמר בזה תני שלא ברצון חכמים, כלומר, הא דקנאים פוגעין בבועל ארמית אין רוח חכמים נוחה מזה, והסברא בזה י"ל, דכיון דצריך לעשות זה ברוח קנאה אמתית לכבוד ה׳, א"כ אי אפשר לתת רשות לכל אדם שיהיה רשאי לפגוע באיש כזה, כי מי יודע אולי הוא עושה זה באיזו פניה צדדית ואומר כי עושה ברוח קנאת ה׳, ובין כה הוא הורג נפש שאינו מחויב מיתה מצד הדין ממש
(ירושלמי סנהדרין פ"ט ה"ז)
How much the interpreters have labored to interpret this interpretation in general, but the truth must be interpreted in a simple way, he said, "it is be done against the will of the Sages, meaning this that zealots may attack the sinner , the Rabbis were not happy with this, and the reasoning is It is necessary to do this in a spirit of true jealousy for the honor of God. ', so it is impossible to give permission to just any person who has the right to harm such a person, because who knows, maybe he is doing it with some ulterior motive and saying that he is doing it in the spirit of God's jealousy, and in the meantime he is killing a soul that is not obligated to die by the law itself
“Pinḥas, son of Elazar, son of Aaron the priest, has caused My wrath to be withdrawn from the children of Israel, in that he was zealous on My behalf among them, and I did not destroy the children of Israel in My zealotry” (Numbers 25:11).
“Pinḥas, son of Elazar, son of Aaron the priest” – the Holy One blessed be He said: By right, he should receive his reward:
“Therefore, say: Behold, I am giving him My covenant of peace” (Numbers 25:12) – great is peace, which He gave to Pinḥas, as the world is conducted only through peace, and the Torah in its entirety is peace, as it is stated: “Its ways are ways of pleasantness, and all its pathways are peace [shalom]” (Proverbs 3:17). If a person comes from the road, one greets him with peace [shalom]. Likewise in the morning, one greets him with peace. And at night, likewise, one greets with peace. Shema Yisrael concludes with the blessing: Who spreads a canopy of peace over His people. One concludes the Amida with peace. One concludes the Priestly Benediction with peace. Rabbi Shimon be Ḥalafta said: The only vessel that holds blessing is peace, as it is stated: “The Lord will give strength to His people; the Lord will bless His people with peace. (Psalms 29:11).
וַיַּרְא פִּנְחָס בֶּן אֶלְעָזָר. וְכֻלָּן לֹא רָאוּ. וַהֲלֹא כְּתִיב: לְעֵינֵי מֹשֶׁה וּלְעֵינֵי כָּל עֲדַת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל. אֶלָּא רָאָה מַעֲשֶׂה וְנִזְכַּר הֲלָכָה, שֶׁהַבּוֹעֵל אֲרַמִּית קַנָּאִין פּוֹגְעִין בּוֹ. וַיָּקָם מִתּוֹךְ הָעֵדָה. מֵהֵיכָן עָמַד. אֶלָּא שֶׁהָיוּ נוֹשְׂאִין וְנוֹתְנִין בַּדָּבָר אִם הוּא חַיָּב מִיתָה אוֹ לָאו. עָמַד פִּנְחָס בְּתוֹךְ הַקָּהָל וְנִתְנַדֵּב. וַיִּקַּח רֹמַח בְּיָדוֹ. נָטַל שִׁנּוֹ שֶׁל בַּרְזֶל וְהֵנִיחוֹ בְּחֵיקוֹ וְהִתְחִיל מִסְתַּמֵּךְ עַל הָעֵץ, שֶׁנִּתְיָרֵא מִפְּנֵי שִׁבְטוֹ שֶׁהִקִּיפוּ אוֹתוֹ. כֵּיוָן שֶׁהִגִּיעַ אֶצְלָם, אָמְרוּ לֵיהּ, לָמָּה בָּאתָ. אָמַר לָהֶם: אַף אֲנִי בָּאתִי לַעֲשׂוֹת צְרָכַי. הֱנִיחוּהוּ וְנִכְנַס.
(Numb. 25:7:) “When Phinehas [ben Eleazar ben Aaron the priest] saw.” But did they all not see it? And is it not written (in vs. 6), “before the eyes of Moses and the eyes of the whole congregation of the Children of Israel?” It is simply that when he saw the deed, he remembered the ruling (halakhah); that one who cohabits with an Aramean woman will have zealots strike him down. (Numb. 25:7, cont.:) “He arose from the midst of the congregation.” From where did he stand up? It is simply that, while they were involved in give and take on the matter of whether or not [the culprit] was liable for death, that man (Phinehas) stood up from the midst of the congregation and volunteered [to carry out the sentence]. (Numb. 25:7, cont.:) “And took a spear in his hand.” He put the iron prong in his hand, which he put in his bosom. Then he began [to approach] leaning on the wood like a staff, because he was afraid of [the culprit's] tribe, as they surrounded him. When he reached them, they said to him, “Why have you come?” He said to them, “I also have come to fulfill my needs.” So they gave him permission, and he entered.
Ginsburgh’s teachings about ‘the simple Jew’ greatly compound such concerns, in my view. When Seeman described an ‘unacknowledged devaluation of Jewish legal authority’, he was writing about Barukh HaGever; I submit that the devaluation is explicit in Ginsburgh’s later publication, Malkhut Yisrael. A great many passages therein laud the ‘simple Jew’ and his aggressive ‘natural reaction’ to insult or threat. Such passages also privilege impulsive physical action over Torah study or obedience to rabbinical authority as Jewish virtues: when the name of God has been ‘desecrated’ (e.g., by a Gentile insulting a Jew), it must be redeemed, and the emotional urge to sanctify God’s name through vengeance supersedes the duty to honour and obey one’s rabbi or to study Torah. Studying Torah, Ginsburgh opines, is not synonymous with honouringTorah, and a learned student of Halakhah could be selfish relative to the ignorant but spirited activist or the ba‘al teshuvah (תשובה בעל), one who returns to his faith after being ‘lost’. Learning is a form of personal enrichment, he says, and honours Torah less than does the physical self-sacrifice of ‘the simple Jew’ willing to act on his spontaneous, God-given revenge impulses to uphold Jewish honour in Gentile eyes (through violence), rather than scurrying to his bookshelf to check whether the Halakhah permits him to act.
‘Before the beginning of a rectification [tikkun] process, an explosive, asymmetric phenomenon is often necessary in order to set things in motion’. The chaotic, impulsive trajectory followed by the simple Jew who follows his instincts can serve the redemptive process by providing these explosive disruptions, because he is unencumbered by crippling misgivings about his acts’ legal implications or future consequences.
With respect to members of the Hilltop Youth, already heavily involved in vigilante acts and highly sceptical of authority figures, including rabbis, sanctioning and sanctifying impulsiveness has clear incendiary potential. Werzberger told the newspaper Israel Hayom that ‘many of them [price tag operatives] were either kicked out of school or disowned by their families ... They have never learned in an organized setting, and if I describe some of them as thugs, I would not be off the mark.’ Ginsburgh’s praise of revenge attacks by the ‘simple Jew’ is a dangerous ingredient in this mix. As noted by a pre-eminent scholar of the settler movement, Gideon Aran, ‘Past confrontations have already highlighted the gray areas in which ideological delinquency partially overlaps with criminal delinquency or sheer hooliganism.’ The matrix of ideological and criminological characteristics in which price tagging has arisen should thus give us pause.
Furthermore, the rabbinic accusations that Rabin was a rodef or moser generally lacked the added gunpowder of Ginsburgh’s borderline antinomian praise of impulsive violence or the profound mystical framework. Thus, there are some grounds for speculation that Ginsburgh’s doctrines could facilitate intra-Jewish violence at least by suitably ‘primed’ individuals. Disgruntled Hilltop Youth dabbling in Ginsburgh’s works but without formal Halakhic training may fit this mould.
Finally, reading Ginsburgh’s writings on ‘the simple Jew’ leaves one with a disquieting impression that every disaffected young settler in his trailer could (quite reasonably) declare himself a ‘Pinchas’ based on these texts, without ever opening the Gemara. The youth need not grasp the Halakhic nuances nominally constraining the virtue of impulsive revenge in order to be impressed by the overall positive picture painted in Ginsburgh’s (and Kahane’s) works. These ideas could encourage inappropriate action without any endorsement from Ginsburgh himself of the ‘harming of innocents’ (to quote Werzberger), since his own teachings praise impulsive action taken without prior consultation with a rabbi. Ginsburgh’s teachings may therefore function as a catalyst that lowers the threshold of youths’ self-restraint – already regularly strained by tense and unpleasant contacts with Arabs and the security forces.
Satherley, Tessa. "‘THE SIMPLE JEW’: THE ‘PRICE TAG’ PHENOMENON, VIGILANTISM, AND RABBI YITZCHAK GINSBURGH’S POLITICAL KABBALAH" Melilah: Manchester Journal of Jewish Studies (1759-1953), vol. 10, no. 1, 2014, pp. 57-91. https://doi.org/10.31826/mjj-2014-100106
Yitzchak Feivish Ginsburgh (Hebrew: יצחק פייוויש גינזבורג; born 14 November 1944) sometimes referred to as "the Malakh" (lit. 'the angel') is an American-born Israeli rabbi affiliated with the Chabad movement.[1] In 1996 he was regarded as one of Chabad's leading authorities on Jewish mysticism.[2] He is the leader of the Derech Chaim Movement[3] and founder of the Gal Einai Institute, which publishes his written works. His students include Charedim, religious Zionists, and Chabad Chassidim, as well as ba'alei teshuvah.[4] He is currently the president of a number of educational institutions, including the Od Yosef Chai yeshiva in the settlement of Yitzhar in the West Bank.[4]
In 1994, Ginsburgh received widespread criticism for his article "Baruch Hagever"[50] in which he defended Baruch Goldstein who had massacred 29 Palestinian worshippers at the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron.[51][52] Rabbi Ginsburgh wrote that it is possible to view Baruch Goldstein's act as either following or defying[53][54] five Halachic principles, namely "sanctification of God's name", "saving life" (referring to allegations that Goldstein had received prior warning from the IDF regarding a planned Arab massacre of Jews[55]), "revenge", "eradication of the seed of Amalek" and "war".[56] The conclusion to the article is that Goldstein's act emanated from the super-rational powers of his soul, therefore one cannot rely on logical reasoning to determine whether the act was worthy or condemnable.[57]