Date: July 13th 2017

PARSHAT BALAK – GROUP SYMBIOSIS



Parshat Balak, read last week, discusses the attempts of the Moavite king to destroy the Jewish People. He first attempted to have them cursed by Bilam, a Gentile prophet. When that failed, Bilam advised that if the Moavite and Minyanite women would seduce the Jewish men to sin, G-d’s wrath would be spilled out on them. That plan succeeded, and it ultimately led to many Jewish deaths.

As the public was sinning, Zimri ben Salu, the Prince of the Tribe of Shimon, committed a particularly brazen act. He and a Minyanite woman openly cohabited in front of Moshe (Moses) and all of the Jews. According to Torah law, in this type of situation, those who are sincerely zealous may avenge Hashem’s (G-d’s) Honor by killing the sinners. Aaron’s grandson Pinchas therefore arose and slew both of them.

Regarding this deed the Torah (Parshat Pinchas 25:11) writes, “Pinchas the son of Eliezer, the son of Aaron the priest, turned back My wrath from the Children of Israel when he zealously avenged Me among them, so I did not consume the Children of Israel in My Vengeance.” This sentence clearly indicates that were it not for Pinchas’s deed, Hashem might have destroyed the Jewish People.

The Midrash Rabbah (20:25) explains that the situation could be compared to a king who was passing a group of young people. One of them cursed the king, who understandably became enraged at all of them. A passerby then quickly slapped the one who cursed, and the king’s anger abated. So too, Hashem’s anger with the Jewish People over what Zimri did could have led to their death. However, after Pinchas’s deed, the Heavenly wrath Subsided, and the Jews were saved.

The words of the Midrash require closer examination. Had Zimri not sinned, the nation would not have been in danger. This is evident from the Midrash’s example: if the person never cursed, the king, would not have gotten angry. If so, why were the Jews all suddenly deemed guilty due to one person’s sinning? It was Zimri who sinned, not them. If they were considered guilty anyway due to their own sins, why were only found guilty due to what Zimri did?

It must be that there is a powerful symbiotic relationship among members of a group. It is as if their morals were all mixed together in a large pot, and that concoction of principles becomes the ethical code of all members of the group. Therefore, when one of the group acted in an outrageous manner, it was certain that the underlying depravity behind that act was fundamentally shared by all members of the group. They too are therefore considered guilty, despite not having committed the actual sin. For this reason, Hashem held all of the Jews somewhat guilty of committing Zimri’s sin.

Consider: when the Palestinians commit a heinous terrorist act in Israel, who is the guilty party? The prevailing secular notion is that only the perpetrators who are guilty. Hence, after such incidents, Israel typically attempts to avenge the crime by targeting the actual killers. And when there is collateral damage to “innocent” bystanders, handwringing, guilt, and earnest apologies are the order of the day.

This text would indicate that the entire Palestinian society is largely guilty. If they were a humane people who shuddered at the thought of outrages like murdering and maiming children on school busses, a member of their group would almost never commit such crimes. A comparable deed in the US would be for a man to fire rockets into downtown Toronto from Rochester, NY because of a grievance he had with Canada. Because the USA society is generally law abiding and just, even its extremists will likely not act in this manner. And if such an act ever did occur, the entire country would be outraged and embarrassed, and it would mobilize to track down the murderer.

Some may argue that many of the West Bank and Gaza Arabs are simply people who want to live peacefully and raise their families. Is every single one of them somewhat guilty of murder? Should all of them be blamed?

In truth, the Arabs are not merely members of a society that happens to have terrorists in its midst. As a group, they glorify murdering innocent Israelis. When five members of the Fogel family in the Israeli town of Itamar were treacherously stabbed to death while sleeping on March 11, 2011, throughout the territories the Arabs were rejoicing. When three innocent Jewish teenagers were murdered in Chevron several years later, the same thing happened. After both of those horrific killings, there were news reports of candy being distributed to children all over Gaza to enhance the celebration. The Arabs also maintain a museum of terrorism in the city of Ramallah where they honor the memory of particularly ‘successful’ suicide bombers.

From the perspective of the Torah’s ethics taught in Parshat Pinchas, this group acceptance and endorsement of terrorism means that almost all of the Palestinian Arabs are considered as participants in the heinous murders, even if they did not do the actual killing.


The idea of group symbiosis also has significant personal application. People should be very mindful when choosing a circle of friends. All of the group’s personalities will coalesce and produce a single communal psyche that will influence everyone’s moral and religious standard – for worse or for better.
`



This is a much-edited version of the Dvar Torah that was previously emailed on July 10th 2014.


--
You are subscribed to Jewish Heritage Initiative using example@example.com

You may automatically unsubscribe from this list or change your subscription
by visiting http://www.jhicambridge.com/mail/mail.cgi/list/parsha

For more information, visit http://www.jhicambridge.com or send mail to jhi@jhicambridge.com
__________________________________

Mailing List Powered by Dada Mail
http://www.jhicambridge.com/mail/mail.cgi/what_is_dada_mail/