Torah Study Pinchas
Notes
Transcript
Handout
Handout
Bamidbar/Numbers 25:10-30:1, Jeremiah 1:1-2:3, John 2:13-22
Bamidbar/Numbers 25:10-30:1, Jeremiah 1:1-2:3, John 2:13-22
Torah Portion Bamidbar/Numbers 25:10-30:1
Torah Portion Bamidbar/Numbers 25:10-30:1
Numbers 25:10-13 “Then Adonai spoke to Moses saying, “Phinehas son of Eleazar son of Aaron the kohen has turned away My anger from Bnei-Yisrael because he was very zealous for Me among them, so that I did not put an end to Bnei-Yisrael in My zeal. So now say: See, I am making with him a covenant of shalom! It will be for him and his descendants after him a covenant of an everlasting priesthood—because he was zealous for his God and atoned for Bnei-Yisrael.””
1. What priesthood is Pinchas now a part of?
a. Kohen/Levitical
b. not a new or seperate one
2. Why was he not part of that priesthood before? *1 *2
a. He was already born when the priesthood was conferred to Aaron and his sons and those that would come from them. He was not Aaron nor his Sons and he would not come from them as he had already come from them.
RASHI It shall be for him. This pact of friendship. A pact of priesthood for all time. Though the priesthood had already been conferred on Aaron and his descendants, it was given only to those whom Aaron and his sons would father after they had been anointed. Phinehas, who had already been born and was not anointed, did not fall into this category. B. Zev. 101b tells us this plainly: “Phinehas did not become a priest until he killed Zimri.” For his God. That is, “on his God’s behalf.” Compare “Are you wrought up on my account?” (11:29); “I am very jealous for Zion” (Zech. 8:2).
IBN EZRA His descendants after him. “After him” shows that he did in fact die. He could not, therefore, have been Elijah (as some think). He did, however, live well into the period of the judges (see Judg. 20:28) but not as late as the time of David (see my comment to 1 Chron. 9:20). Because he took impassioned action for his God, thus making expiation for the Israelites. Out of his love for God, he did Israel a good turn as well. But midrashically, this can be read to say that he “made expiation” for the Israelites on an ongoing basis—his sons would now do so just as their father did.
NAHMANIDES It shall be for him and his descendants after him a pact of priesthood for all time. Notice that this is not what Aaron’s other priestly descendants were told—that their anointing would “serve them for everlasting priesthood throughout the ages” (Exod. 40:15). Rather, God gave Phinehas “the covenant of an everlasting priesthood” (OJPS)—“My covenant, with peace” (as the phrase in v. 12 is correctly understood). God would give him a covenant to which peace was inextricably attached. But Aaron was granted the priesthood “for dignity and adornment” (Exod. 28:2). That is why we are reminded here that Phinehas took impassioned action for his God. One who is enlightened will understand.
Michael Carasik, ed., Numbers: Introduction and Commentary, trans. Michael Carasik, First edition, The Commentators’ Bible (Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 2011), Nu 25:13.
b. He was also the son of a midianite Woman who had converted.
RASHI Phinehas, son of Eleazar son of Aaron the priest. The tribes were speaking disparagingly of him: “Look at this Phinehas ben Puti! His maternal grandfather, Putiel, fattened calves to sacrifice to an idol, and he dared to kill an Israelite tribal chieftain!” So the text makes sure to associate him with his paternal grandfather, Aaron. By displaying among them his passion for Me. Not his passion, but his “jealousy”: He was “very jealous for My sake” (OJPS)—more literally, “he acted jealously out of My jealousy.” That is to say, he took My revenge, he displayed the anger that I should have displayed.—This word “jealousy” indicates one who is burning with anger to get revenge.
Phinehas … has turned back My wrath from the Israelites. They should therefore not feel enmity toward him for killing Zimri (Bekhor Shor). The plague would have finished them off (Abarbanel). The others stood by and did nothing to stop the transgressors (Sforno). By displaying among them his passion for Me. Elijah, who displayed a similar passion (see 1 Kings 19:10 and 19:14), may have been a descendant of Phinehas (Abarbanel).
Michael Carasik, ed., Numbers: Introduction and Commentary, trans. Michael Carasik, First edition, The Commentators’ Bible (Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 2011), Nu 25:11.
Numbers 26:9-11 “The sons of Eliab were Nemuel, Dathan, and Abiram. These were the Dathan and Abiram who were community leaders who rebelled against Moses and Aaron and were among the following of Korah in their rebellion against Adonai. Then the earth opened its mouth and swallowed them with Korah, whose followers died when the fire consumed the 250 men, these men serving as a warning. Korah’s sons, however, did not die.”
3. Wanted to point out that from the Korach portion we see here again that his sons did infact survive.
Numbers 27:1-4 “The daughters of Zelophehad son of Hepher son of Gilead son of Machir son of Manasseh, of the families of Manasseh son of Joseph (the names of his daughters were Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah) stood before Moses, Eleazar the kohen and the princes of the entire assembly at the entrance to the Tent of Meeting and said, “Our father died in the wilderness. But he was not one of the followers banding together against Adonai with Korah, though he died for his own sin. Yet he had no sons. Why should our father’s name diminish from his family just because he had no son? Give to us property among our father’s brothers.””
Genesis 50:23 “Joseph saw the third generation of Ephraim’s sons. Also the sons of Machir, Manasseh’s son, were born upon Joseph’s knees.”
4. What where the daughters of Zelophehad requesting and what where they not requesting?
a. The Father’s name to be carried on and not diminished.
b. to change the Torah for a more “equal or equitable” ruling
5. Why are they quick to point out that he was not a follower of Korach?*3
a. Korach’s followers lost their inheritance.
b.RASHI He was not one of the faction, Korah’s faction, which banded together against the Lord. Since they were going to admit that he had died as a result of sin, it was imperative that they make clear that he was not one of the people who had grumbled about Moses nor part of Korah’s faction, who agitated Israel against the Lord. But died for his own sin. He did not cause others to sin. R. Akiva says he was the man who gathered wood on the Sabbath in 15:32–36; R. Simeon says he was one of those who marched defiantly against the Amalekites in 14:44 despite having been warned not to do so.
IBN EZRA He was not one of the faction, Korah’s faction, which banded together against the Lord. They were afraid that the children of those who had banded together against the Lord would not inherit their fathers’ property. But died for his own sin; and he has left no sons. Judah Halevi says these two clauses go together—just as people say today, “Such-and-such happened to So-and-So on account of his sins.” This is not implausible.
Michael Carasik, ed., Numbers: Introduction and Commentary, trans. Michael Carasik, First edition, The Commentators’ Bible (Philadelphia, PA: The Jewish Publication Society, 2011), Nu 27:3.
6. What does it mean he dies of his own SIN?
a. Could be a euphamisim for he died on his own. Or it could that he died for some specific other SIN not related to rebellion against Moshe directly.
b. Rabbi Akiva had the opinion that he was the man who gathered sticks on Shabbat, Rabbi Simeon had the opinion that he defiantly marched against the Amalekites, others say he was one of the ones that went in to the promised after HaShem told them not too. His SIN was not a sin that was leading to other rebelling and could have infact been born of passion for HaShem and the kingdom.
Numbers 27:5-7 “So Moses brought their issue before Adonai, and Adonai spoke to Moses saying, “The daughters of Zelophehad are right in saying you should give them property by inheritance among their father’s relatives. You are to turn over the inheritance of their father to them.””
7. Why did HaShem not include this before?
a. it is often thought to honor the daughters of Zelophehad Mahlah, Noah, Hoglah, Milcah, and Tirzah as righteous woman and to set an example for how to approach properly.
b. The only other time we have of Moshe going for clarification on a Mitzvah is Pesach Sheni in Numbers 9. Again righteous people doing their duty and more concerned with proper application than their own wellfare.
8. Does this undo the previous laws of inheritance?
a. no it applies when there is not a kinsman redeemer.
b. They still have to marry in their tribe Numbers 36:6-9.
c. interestingly in reference to a daughters inheritance the word transfer is used and the word for a son’s inheritance the word give is used.
Numbers 27:18 “Adonai said to Moses, “Take Joshua son of Nun, a man in whom is the Ruach, and lay your hand on him.”
9. What Ruach was upon Yehoshua?
a. the Ruach Kodesh.
Numbers 28:1-8 “Adonai spoke to Moses saying, “Command Bnei-Yisrael and tell them to be careful to present to Me at the moadim My food offerings by fire as a pleasing aroma. Tell them: This is the fire offering which you are to present to Adonai: two male lambs a year old, without flaw, as a daily regular burnt offering. Prepare one lamb in the morning and the other lamb you are to prepare at twilight, along with a tenth of an ephah of fine flour for a grain offering, mixed with a fourth of a hin of oil from pressed olives. This is the regular burnt offering initiated at Mount Sinai, as a pleasing aroma, a fire offering to Adonai. With each lamb pour out a fourth of a hin of fermented drink at the Sanctuary as a drink offering to Adonai. Prepare the second lamb at twilight with the same type of grain and drink offerings you prepared in the morning, a fire offering as a pleasing aroma to Adonai.”
10. Why where daily offerings/sacrifices made to HaShem?
a. pleasing aroma, why does HaShem need pleasent smells? He does not need smells he wants obidience.
b. daily as in everyday without fail even with other sacrifices even on Shabbat and Yom Kippur and evven with their Sacrifices.
Haftorah Portion Jeremiah 1:1-2:3
Haftorah Portion Jeremiah 1:1-2:3
Jeremiah 1:11-12 “Moreover, the word of Adonai came to me, saying, “What do you see, Jeremiah?” I answered, “I see an almond branch.” Then Adonai said to me, “You have seen correctly, for I am watching over My word to perform it.””
11. What does an almond branch and watching over my word have to do with each other?
a. The word for almond is saqed and the word for watching is soqed. So they are similar in pronunciation.
b. HaShem transmits his message perfectly but we may not recieve it perfectly. It is similar to Peter in Acts with his vision.
12. Who are these words for and who do the apply to?
a. The words are for Jeremiah and though we can read them we need to make sure they are not our own.
b. they apply to Israel
Besorah Portion John 2:13-22
Besorah Portion John 2:13-22
John 2:15 “Then He made a whip of cords and drove them all out of the Temple, both the sheep and oxen. He dumped out the coins of the moneychangers and overturned their tables.”
13. Why did Yeshua drive out the money changers?*4
a. They may have been working on Shabbat.
b. The exchange of money was a business transaction and should have been done outside the temple.
c. money changing is not a SIN.
d. The animals for sacrifice could have been making a mess in the court of the gentiles.
e. The prices could have been quite high. Rabbi Gamaliel also forced a price reduction by throwing a fit. He forced the price down 99%.
L. Said Rabban Simeon b. Gamaliel, “By this sanctuary! I shall not rest tonight until they shall be at [silver] denars.” M. He entered the court and taught [the following law]: N. “The woman who is subject to five confirmed miscarriages [or] five confirmed fluxes brings a single offering. O. “And she eats animal sacrifices. P. “And the rest [of the offerings] do not remain as an obligation for her.” Q. And pairs of birds stood on that very day at a quarter-denar each [one one-hundredth of the former price].
Jacob Neusner, The Babylonian Talmud: A Translation and Commentary, vol. 22a (Peabody, MA: Hendrickson Publishers, 2011), 61.