Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

ושם איש ישראל המכה אשר הכה את המדינית זמרי בן סלוא נשיא בית אב לשמעוני

The name of the slain Yisraelite who was slain with the Midyanite woman was Zimri ben Salu, leader of a father’s house of the Shimonites. (25:14)

Download PDF

Rashi comments, “In a place where the Torah traces the ancestry of a tzaddik, righteous one, for praise, it gives the ancestry of the rasha, evil one, for disparagement”. In the previous parsha, when the Torah describes the immoral outrage committed by Zimri, the perpetrator is not identified by name. It is mentioned here only by way of contrasting with Pinchas’ ancestry. Pinchas’ ancestry is introduced to his credit, in order to underscore that he upheld the tradition of his grandfather, Aharon HaKohen. Zimri’s lineage is recorded to his disparagement, as if to imply that, although he was a leader of the tribe of Shimon, he debased himself publicly.

The Shlah Hakadosh questions the placement of the pasuk, “I will remember My covenant with Yaakov and also My covenant with Yitzchak and also my Covenant with Avraham will I remember” (Vayikra 26:41) within the Tochachah, Rebuke (at the end). Hashem’s remembering the merit of the Patriarchs does not seem to be a rebuke. If anything, it is a blessing. The Shlah explains that, indeed, the mention of our glorious lineage is in and of itself a glaring denunciation of our sinful behavior. When our lofty pedigree is factored in with the sin, the transgression is magnified. We should have known better.

Shearis Menachem advances this idea in connection with the Torah’s mention of Zimri’s yichus, ancestry, for the purpose of his disparagement. There is a concept stated in the Talmud (Bava Kamma 50a) Davar she’oso tzaddik mizta’er bo, yikashel bo zaro? “Can it be that something over which that righteous person was distressed (for the public’s sake), his child should stumble (and meet her demise) through it?” Chazal refer to Nechunya chofer sichin, ditch digger, who gave of himself selflessly, by digging cisterns to provide water for the sake of the olei regel, Festival pilgrims. His daughter had fallen into a cistern. The great Tanna, Rabbi Chanina ben Dosa, said that it was unconceivable that the daughter of this tzaddik should meet her death in a cistern for which her father had sacrificed himself.

Having said this, we wonder how a descendant of Shimon ben Yaakov could have demonstrated such moral turpitude, when, in fact, it was his grandfather Shimon together with Levi who slew the male population of Shechem for their part in the violation of their sister, Dinah. When a grandfather is willing to sacrifice his life to uphold the moral fiber of Klal Yisrael, we are hard-pressed to believe that his grandson could commit the exact opposite act by publicly cohabiting with a gentile. How did this utter debasement of a family for whom moral purity was a hallmark, a standard by which to live, occur? How was it that Zimri could transgress specifically in the area that his grandfather had excelled? This, explains Shearis Menachem, is the underlying motif of Rashi’s comment: the Torah mentions the rasha for his disparagement. Zimri’s act of debauchery was in direct contrast with the lofty ideals of his family’s righteous ancestor.

The question does not go away. How is it that an einikel, grandchild/descendant, of Shimon committed such a shameless act of moral licentiousness? The practice today is to sweep under the rug everything with which we are uncomfortable, to ignore the outrage by saying, “It happens”. Well – it should not happen, and, if it does, we should search for a reason, some genealogical taint, where something might just not have been “right” and generations later came to the fore as an outright sin. Indeed, when we consider the incredible kedushah, holiness, of the people we are addressing, any slight inconsistency can, over time, have dreadful ramifications.

Both Shimon and Levi took their sister’s side when they wiped out Shechem. They were willing to sacrifice their lives; yet, on his deathbed, Yaakov Avinu cursed their rage. He chastised their preoccupation with the weaponry of violence, alluding to the future rebellers, Korach, a Levi, and Zimri, from Shimon, led by their descendants. We find that it was Shimon who had said derisively (concerning Yosef), “Look! That dreamer is coming”. He was the one that threw Yosef into the pit, and he was the one whom Yosef took as hostage in Egypt. Both the descendants of Levi and  the descendants of Shimon were poor. Leviim had to go to the silos to collect their tithes and terumos. Descendants of Shimon were relegated to poverty and to positions as scribes and teachers of young children. In other words, both Shimon and Levi’s descendants were placed in positions through which they could achieve extraordinary merit – serving in the Bais Hamikdash, and educating the future of our people. It sort of implies to them that their qualities were such that, if used correctly, they could engender untold kedushah. If not, they could foment rebellion and immorality. Their qualities were very much like radiation: it can cure and eradicate malignancy; and it can burn and scar permanently. It all depends how, where and for how long it is used. I guess the same applies to all of our qualities. They all have a time and place. Without proper guidance, it is often difficult to discern the correct “time” and “place”.

Subscribe To Our Newsletter

Join our weekly Peninim on the Torah list!

You have Successfully Subscribed!