The Moral Objective of Torah

At the end of last weeks Parsha, Bilaam masterfully plotted to seduce Israelite men with foreign women. Having succeeded, a terrible plague was sent by God to punish the Israelites for their illicit actions. The Torah writes that Pinchas, the son of Elazar ha-Kohen, witnessed an as of yet anonymous Israelite man engaging in sexual relations with a Midianite woman. Unhesitatingly, he proceeded to kill both of them in the midst of the act. It was Pinchas' singular act of zealotry that ended the plague cast upon the Jewish people.

In the beginning of this weeks Parsha, God explicitly tells Moshe that he was pleased with Pinchas' deed. As a result, God promises Pinchas and his descendants that they will perpetuate the priestly lineage for the rest of human history. It is at this point that the name of the Pinchas' victim is revealed: none other than Zimri, a leader from the tribe of Shimon. The anonymous victim from Parshat Balak is thus immediately transformed into a very real individual, no less than a leader among the people. This is the tragic story of the fall of someone whom society had put their trust in. How many times in our own lives have our leaders disappointed us? It is never an easy pill to swallow.

Nevertheless, I have always found this narrative to be terribly perplexing. Why was Pinchas permitted to kill Zimri? Doesn't the Halacha require azarah - warning - followed by testimony before beit din in order to effect the death penalty on the accused? All of these legal questions and more were answered by our very own Josh Gutenberg over Shabbos, so I won't dwell on those issues now. What I hope to shed some light on is why Pinchas' act of manslaughter was seen, in the eyes of God, as the praiseworthy action of a righteous man.

The answer lies in our perspective. How do we view the purpose of law? The stance taken by the American legal system is that the law is meant to protect the individuals rights from being exploited by another person. For example, it only wrong for Reuven to steal from Shimon because it is Shimon's right to not have his property stolen. Regarding such a legal perspective, Rabbi Jonathan Sacks writes that the secular legal system takes a passive approach to the idea of a moral imperative.

In Rabbi Sacks' own words: "Rights are passive, responsibilites active. Rights are demands we make on others, responsibilites are demands others make on us. A responsibility-based culture exists in the active mode. It emphasizes giving over receiving. What is wrong with rights-talk, is that is draws on resources that only exist if we recognize responsibilities. It neglects the moral commitments we need to create if rights are to be honored at all. Rights are the result of responsibilities; they are secondary, not primary. A society that does not train its citizens to be responsibile will be one in which, too often, rights talk will be mere rhetoric, honored in the breach, not the observance."

As citizens of Israel we have a responsibility first, and foremost, to God. Respect for the laws of God leads us to respect the rights of man. Pinchas internalized this message. But have we?

Have a great week.