Power Of The Mouth

The Ostrava Gaon explains the connection of the parsha of the מי מריבה with Klal Yisrael asking Edomi to pass through the land. He says the sin of מי מריבה was a misuse of speech and therefore Klal Yisrael did not have the power of הקול קול יעקב against עשו. He continues that this is the connection to the battles against the Emori and Sichon for he quotes the Besht that the 7 nations correspond to the 7 middos and Emori corresponds to teferes, the middah of Yaakov, the power of positive speech. Sichon, the Gemarah says means הולך אחר שיחה נאה, also connected to speech. It was the power of positive speech necessary to counterbalance the powers of Sichon and Og. This may also explain why the shira of the be'ar, positive speech is mentioned in this context.  We see this theme woven into the very fabric of the parah adumah purification process. The Alter Rebbe explains the שני תולעת used in the parah adumah is a hint to the Midrash that says that the strength of the תולע is with its mouth, so too Klal Yisrael. Part of the process of the parah adumah taharah is to understand how to use the mouth.  

This serves as an intro. to the parsha of Balak which is focused on the power of speech used by Bilam. 

The Or HaChayim (Pinchas 26:23-24) reads into the families of Yissachor hints to the kinyanim of Torah. He says the family of תולע hints to the aforementioned idea of the תולע and the פוה family hints to the power of the mouth as well. 

In the family of Binyamin (26:39,) the possuk says לשפופם משפחת השופמי לחופם משפחת החופמי. It is pointed out that this is the only possuk in the Torah where every word has a פ. he letter פ, pronounced פה, literally means mouthץ The Baal HaTurim explains this hints to the fact that Binyamin closed his mouth and did not reveal the sale of Yosef. The Torah alludes to his harnessing the power of speech by not talking. 

Whether it is singing praises like the shira of the be'ar, engaging in the vocal study of Torah like Yissachar, or channeling the silence of Binyamin, our ultimate strength lies in our mouths.

Inspiration Perspiration And Integration

The Lubavitcher Rebbe (Likutay Sichos volume 28,) points out there are three different modes described regarding the division of the land of Eretz Yisrael.  There is the mode of yerusha, inheritance, highlighted by the daughters of Tzafchlad who inherited their father, the mode of division based upon the size of the shevatim, in other words a logical division, and the mode of alloting portions by way of the Divine lottery.  Similarly, the Rebbe notes (Likutay Sichos Mattos volume 13,) that we find in pessukim and Chazal the Torah referred to as a yerusha, מורשה קהלת יעקב, a sale, כִּי לֶקַח טוב נָתַתִּי לָכֶם and a present, Berachot (5a.)  Why are there three different descriptions and methods given for these two integral items, Eretz Yisrael and the Torah?  These three methods are not just three different means used to divide Eretz Yisrael and three descriptions of the Torah but are indicative of three ways of connecting to Eretz Yisrael, the Torah and Hashem.  What are these three methods? 

One way of connection is via an external inspiration, an אתערותא דלתתא, which arouses a person to matters of kedusha.  That is represented by the lottery in dividing Eretz Yisrael and the present in regard to the Torah where there is no work involved, one merely receives.  Sometimes one is filled with a burst of inspiration to connect to Hashem.  Another method is the method of the sale or division based upon the size of the shevet, this represents the method of an internal work by the individual like one who pays for something or using one's own logic to allot the portions of land.  This is the method of working to establish a greater connection to Hashem.  The final way is that of the yerusha.  Even though an inheritance is something passed on to the the recipient for free, as the Gemarah says בן קם תית אביו, a son takes the place of his father, it is not merely that the son takes over the estate of the father, but he is in his place.  This is due to the deep, internal bond that exists between the father and son.  The son doesn't merely receive from his father, he takes over the estate due to his innate connection to his father.  So too, this is an inspiration that comes to a person because one is always attached to Hashem and sometimes that connection is more readily felt.      

We say in davening every day,אַשְׁרֵינוּ מַה טּוֹב חֶלְקֵנוּ וּמַה נָּעִים גּוֹרָלֵנוּ וּמַה יָּפָה יְרוּשָּׁתֵנוּ, "We are fortunate! How good is our portion! How pleasant is our lot! How beautiful is our inheritance!"  These three expression of חלקנו, גורלנו וירושתנו line up with these three methods of connection to Hashem.  As our portion, something we work on to make it ours, our lot, that we are given and our inheritance, that which we are inherently connected to. 

These are not merely three distinct methods of inspiration but are three ways that build upon each other.  In fact, as the Tanya chapter 3 notes, every deep thought that makes a difference to a person goes through these three stages.  There is the initial spark of the thought which is an external revelation which is called  חכמה and then the person internalizes and works out the thought until its details and boundaries are clear which is בינה.  Finally, the person feels the impact of the thought, becomes united with it, and acts accordingly which is דעת.   

It may be possible to suggest that the period of the three weeks from 17 Tammuz until 9 Av also correspond to these three methods.  The first week we are shocked into the feeling of mourning over the Mikdash with the fast of 17 Tammuz and the commencement of the laws of the three weeks.  The second week is the time to acquire the mourning where we must work on our understanding of golut and longing for geulah and the final week is to internalize and integrate these feelings into our lives.

Two Forms Of Atzeret

Parshat Pinchas (29:35) בַּיּוֹם֙ הַשְּׁמִינִ֔י עֲצֶ֖רֶת תִּהְיֶ֣ה לָכֶ֑ם כׇּל⁠־מְלֶ֥אכֶת עֲבֹדָ֖ה לֹ֥א תַעֲשֽׂוּ

Rashi - עצרת תהיה לכם – עצורים בעשיית מלאכה

Parshat Reah (16:8)  שֵׁ֥שֶׁת יָמִ֖ים תֹּאכַ֣ל מַצּ֑וֹת וּבַיּ֣וֹם הַשְּׁבִיעִ֗י עֲצֶ֙רֶת֙ לַי״י֣ אֱלֹקיך לֹ֥א תַעֲשֶׂ֖ה מְלָאכָֽה

Rashi - עצרת לה אלקיך -  עצור עצמך מן המלאכה

Presumably the intent of the Rashi is the same that Atzeret means to refrain from work, so why does he express it differently, in Pinchas, about Atzeret, he says you are restricted from working but in Reah, regarding Shevii Shel Pesach, he says keep yourself back from work?  

We have to look at the context of the parsha.  In Reah, the Torah is discussing them mitzvot of Pesach and says regarding Shevii that it doesn't have the mitzvah of korban or matzah but the only command for a person is not to do work, it is referring to the commandments on a person, עצור עצמך מן המלאכה.  It is a command on the gavra to refrain from doing work.  However, in Pinchas, the Torah is describing the kedusha of the day and the obligation of thee korbanot for the day.  Hence, Rashi explains the עצרת is a hagdarah in the day itself, the day has a kedusha which obligates one to be in a situation of being restricted from working  (Likutay Sichos volume 33 footnote 34.)

Make It Count

Why was it necessary to have a count of Klal Yisrael after the episode of Pinchas?  The Sfas Emes (5646) says that the count at beginning of Bamidbar was a count for the acceptance of Torah and the count in here is to enter Eretz Yisrael.  He says the point of the count is to attach one to their source, וכל המנינים שבתורה הוא להעמיד לכל א' בשורשו וז"ש לחנוך משפחת החנוכי כו' פי' לחנוך שלמטה נמשך משפחת החנוכי הידועה שהוא שורש השייך לו. וז"ש חז"ל שזה השם מעיד עליהם. פי' שיש להם התדבקות בעולם הנעלם שזה השם רומז על זה  

The Sfas Emes (5645) adds  כי מתנת א"י העיקר בשורש העליון שיש לכל בנ"י חלק בשורש א"י למעלה ולמטה. ולכן המנין שהי' קודם כניסתם לארץ ישראל להעמיד כל אחד על שורשו כמו שהי' המנין מקודם.  A count occurs when Klal Yisrael's essence needs to be attached to their source which is necessary when the essence of Klal Yisrael is to be revealed.  

Two Roles Of Yehoshua

Rashi (27:23) says that Moshe was commanded to put only one hand on Yehosua's head but Moshe put two hands on his head.  What is the nature of the distinction between one hand or two? The Maharsha Bava Kammah (92b) explains that one hand symbolizes appointing Yehoshua to lead the people into battle as we find Moshe used one hand to ensure victory in battle, stretching ידו on the ym suf, כאשר ירים ידו.  However, Torah he accepted with two hands, שני לוחות הברית על שתי ידיו.  When Moshe put two hands on Yehoshua's head, he also gave him wisdom in Torah.  The Maharsha understands the original instruction is to make Yehoshua the war chief but Moshe gives him wisdom as well. 

The Megallah Amukot comments on the double terminology אֲשֶׁר־יֵצֵ֣א לִפְנֵיהֶ֗ם וַאֲשֶׁ֤ר יָבֹא֙ לִפְנֵיהֶ֔ם וַאֲשֶׁ֥ר יוֹצִיאֵ֖ם וַאֲשֶׁ֣ר יְבִיאֵ֑ם that Moshe asked for two leaders, one to lead the nation in battle and another to lead them in Torah.  Then it is understood why Moshe thought his sons could take over the job, for even though they were not qualified to be the Torah leaders, they could lead in battle.  However, the response was that Yehoshua would wear both hats for the victory in battle stems from the sucess in Torah (see Likutay Sichos volume 23.)  Either way, there is a הו"א that Moshe will appoint Yehoshua to lead the nation in battle but not occupy the role of the Torah leader and the conclusion is he had both roles.  What is the הו"א and what is the מסקנה?  

The Netziv in his introduction to Bamidbar explains how in this sefer there is a transition from the generation of open miracles to the generation which follows the rules of nature as they are on the cusp of entering Eretz Yisroel.  He says this is reflected in the counting of the people with which the sefer opens and the counting in this week's parsha. In the first count Epraim comes before Menashe because Efraim has more potential in learning (which is why Yaakov put his right hand on his head.)  However, in this week's parsha Menashe comes first because he has more potential for sucess in the rules of nature and everyday life.  That is why there is reason to say that in the Midbar, where things were governed by miracles, the leader of the nation had to be the Torah master.  However, when entering Eretz Yisroel when things run under the rubric of nature, one may say there is one leader who excels in knowing how to run a nation and a country and there is someone else to be the Torah leader.  However, the conclusion was that Yehoshua was able to have both roles.  (It is noteworthy that most of the times the roles were distinct, there was a אב ב"ד and a מלך/נשיא.  Mashiach will seem to have both roles like Moshe and Yehoshua, see Likutay Sichos ibid.)  [There are different ways to explain why the roles should be linked (depending on your view of Zionism, so I leave that to the reader to decide.]

Two Types Of Leaders

Why is Yehoshua given over the reins to lead Klal Yisroel and not Pinchas?  Why does the parsha of the mussafim follow the appointment of Yehoshua?

The parsha describes two types of leaders.  There are different times that demand different forms of leadership.  The beginning of the parsha describes a time of crisis, a time of confusion where a quick, decisive decision was necessary.  For that role, Pinchas was best suited.  However, during normal times, it is best to operate with deliberation, patience, and a developed plan instead of a rash descision.  For this role Yehoshua was more apt.  That is why the parsha of the korbanot followed the appointment of Yehoshua.  There is a precise seder to be followed.  Yes, the korbanot vary based upon the time but there is in place an exact order to be followed.  The עין יעקב cites in the name of the Midrash that the yesod for the entire parsha lies in a possuk in the parsha of korbanot in our parsha, את הכבש האחד תעשה בבקר ואת הגבש השנה תעשה בין הערבים, the daily schedule is key to success.  The Torah is explaining that Yehoshua is appointed the leader because he followed Moshe Rabbenu around.  He saw the daily ins and outs of leadership.  He was witness to Moshe's daily job in the office.  Such a man is one to lead the nation.  Pinchas is called to the helm in stormy weather but is not one to captain during smooth sailing, that is Yehoshua's role.  

Moshiach Eyes

From the sefer למען אחי ורעי in the piece עיני משיח.

What Can I Add

 Harav Hagaon Yehuda Wagshal Shlita

Dovid Hamelech declares, in Tehillim, that he had one request of Hakadosh Baruch Hu: אַחַת שָׁאַלְתִּי מֵאֵת ה' אוֹתָהּ אֲבַקֵּשׁ שִׁבְתִּי בְּבֵית ה' כָּל יְמֵי חַיַּי לַחֲזוֹת בְּנֹעַם ה' וּלְבַקֵּר בְּהֵיכָלוֹ. This request begins with Dovid asking that he dwell in the beis Hashem his entire life, and concludes with him asking: וּלְבַקֵּר בְּהֵיכָלוֹ.

What does the word וּלְבַקֵּר mean? It is commonly translated as “to visit,” which would mean that Dovid was asking to dwell in the beis Hashem his entire life and visit His heichal. But this is an inherent contradiction: Is he a permanent resident in Hashem’s house or is he a visitor?

It is very possible that “visit” is not actually the correct translation of וּלְבַקֵּר. Some meforshim say that this word is related to boker (morning), meaning that Dovid Hamelech not only wants to dwell in the beis Hashem, but he wants to arrive there early in the morning — in other words, he also wants to be on time.

Others explain that וּלְבַקֵּר connotes inspection, as in bikur mumin. The halachah is that before you bring a korban, you examine it for a few days to make sure there’s no disqualifying blemish; this is known as bikur mumin. Dovid Hamelech was saying, “I want, first of all, to dwell in Hashem’s house, and I also want וּלְבַקֵּר בְּהֵיכָלוֹ — to be there in the heichal, examining what needs to be fixed and checking what is missing. And I want to be the one to fix it.”

This is the true meaning of the term bikur cholim as well. People typically think of bikur cholim as a mitzvah to visit the sick, but in truth the mitzvah is fulfilled when a person goes to the patient and checks what he needs: Does he need the visitor to clean something? Does he need medication? Does he need a doctor?  Just as bikur cholim means checking what the patient’s needs are and trying to supply those needs, when Dovid Hamelech asked וּלְבַקֵּר בְּהֵיכָלוֹ, he meant that he did not want to visit the heichal as a guest, but rather in order to examine what needs to be fixed there and to be the one who is zocheh to fix it.  Why did Dovid Hamelech daven that he be the one to fix what needs repair? If the need to fix something would present itself to him, then he would certainly do it, but why daven for that?  Furthermore, according to this understanding of וּלְבַקֵּר בְּהֵיכָלוֹ, it sounds as though Dovid Hamelech actually made two requests of Hashem: to dwell in His house his whole life, and also to be the one who checks what needs fixing and repairs it. If so, that is not one request, but two — so how could he say אַחַת שָׁאַלְתִּי?

Perhaps we can explain that Dovid Hamelech’s one request was really שִׁבְתִּי בְּבֵית ה’ כָּל יְמֵי חַיַּי — to be a permanent member of Hashem’s house and reap the full benefits of being there. Dovid Hamelech understood that if he would just come to the beis Hashem and benefit from everything it had to offer, that would not suffice, because in order to properly connect to something, it’s not enough to be a receiver — you also have to be a giver, too, and contribute something.  Accordingly, when he said: אַחַת שָׁאַלְתִּי מֵאֵת ה', I have one request of Hashem, he was referring to the request of שִׁבְתִּי בְּבֵית ה’ כָּל יְמֵי חַיַּי. But how would he ensure that his connection was real? Only if he also had the opportunity to contribute, as he declared: וּלְבַקֵּר בְּהֵיכָלוֹ.

We can suggest that this idea is reflected in this week’s parashah as well, in the Torah’s account of how the daughters of Tzelafchad endeavored to obtain a portion in Eretz Yisrael. When Hakadosh Baruch Hu said that every male in Klal Yisrael would be zocheh to a portion in Eretz Yisrael, which would then be passed down throughout the generations, the daughters of Tzelafchad realized that their father would be left out, as he was no longer alive and he had no sons to inherit his portion. It had not been said explicitly that daughters would get a portion in Eretz Yisrael in such a case, so daughters of Tzelafchad came to Moshe Rabbeinu and complained.

What was their objection? Simply understood, they were saying that it was not fair that everyone else would be receiving a share of Eretz Yisrael and they would not. But Rashi, citing Chazal, explains that they did not merely want real estate.

When the Torah describes how they presented their case to Moshe Rabbeinu, it delineates their entire lineage, tracing all the way back to Yosef: וַתִּקְרַבְנָה בְּנוֹת צְלָפְחָד בֶּן חֵפֶר בֶּן גִּלְעָד בֶּן מָכִיר בֶּן מְנַשֶּׁה לְמִשְׁפְּחֹת מְנַשֶּׁה בֶן יוֹסֵף. Why, asks Rashi, does the Torah give their lineage all the way back to Yosef? To inform us that their desire for a portion in Eretz Yisrael traced back to Yosef; just as he cherished Eretz Yisrael, as he made the shevatim promise to take his bones from Mitzrayim and bury him there, his descendants, the daughters of Tzelafchad, cherished Eretz Yisrael as well, and that is why they approached Moshe Rabbeinu asking for a portion in Eretz Yisrael.

Rashi is conveying that the daughters of Tzelafchad were not interested merely in owning land in Eretz Yisrael as a financial asset; the reason they were asking for a portion of the land was that they cherished Eretz Yisrael.

We can ask, however, why it was so important to the daughters of Tzelafchad to receive a portion in Eretz Yisrael. Even had they not been granted a portion, they wouldn’t have been left behind in Mitzrayim, or in the desert — they would have entered Eretz Yisrael regardless! So if they really loved Eretz Yisrael and had no interest other than chibas haaretz, why did they care who owned the land? As long as they were in Eretz Yisrael, the kedushah of living in the land should have been enough for them!

We can explain this using the idea expressed by Dovid Hamelech. The daughters of Tzelafchad knew that if they would come to Eretz Yisrael without owning a part of it, then even if they would gain a great deal from Eretz Yisrael’s holy environment, they would be limited to the role of receivers. Since they would not own any part of the land, they would have nothing to contribute. Those who owned portions in Eretz Yisrael would have to be moser nefesh to settle the land and perform the mitzvos hateluyos baaretz, thereby contributing to Eretz Yisrael. But if they were to enter the land without having a yerushah in it, they would be coming as guests and outsiders, who could enjoy the benefits of the land, but could not give to it. Because they valued Eretz Yisrael, it was not enough for them just to take from it— they wanted to be able to contribute to the land, and thereby connect with it in a real way. To do that, they needed to have a portion in it.

We learn a very important lesson from the way the daughters of Tzelafchad related to Eretz Yisrael, and from the way Dovid Hamelech related to the beis Hashem: We can connect to spiritual matters by taking and benefiting from they have to offer, but if we really want to have a part in them, we also need to give and contribute to them in some way. Let’s not just look only for the שִׁבְתִּי בְּבֵית ה’ — let’s also constantly emphasize and look for the ways to accomplish וּלְבַקֵּר בְּהֵיכָלוֹ.

Changing Of The Guard

What is the connection between the many events of our parsha from the acts of Pinchas, the count of Klal Yisroel to the benot Tzelafchad, appointment of Yehoshua and the korbanot? צָר֖וֹר אֶת־הַמִּדְיָנִ֑ים וְהִכִּיתֶ֖ם אוֹתָֽם.  Rashi says the command is to constantly hate the Middyanim.  Why is this command given here if the battle only takes place in next week's parsha and why is there is such a commandment to hate the Midyanim more than any other enemy? 

The Or Hachayim (elaborated on in Netivot Shalom) commandment here is not to wage war against the Midyanim.  That command is in next week's parsha.  The command here is to be disgusted with the sin caused by the Midyanim.  In the words of the Or Hachayim, "G'd now advised the Israelites to harass the Midianites, etc. The idea was to implant in the Israelites a hatred against the people who had caused them to commit their respective sins. They were also to develop a revulsion against anything that appeared good and permissible which these people had to offer to the Israelites such as the fruit of their orchards, etc. They had to realize that anything which originated with people such as the Midianites was disaster in disguise." (From Sefaria translation of the Or Hachayim.)  Before doing battle with the Midyanim it was necessary to appreciate the tremendous evil that was caused to afflict a spiritual divide between Klal Yisroel and Hashem.  Only after such an appreciation could Klal Yisroel be ready for battle.  There had to be a hitorerut from Klal Yisroel at to the evil that had befallen them in order to complete the cleansing of the sin.

Sfas Emes (5640) explains that is the common theme running through the beginning of the parsha.  The days of the midbar generation were coming to a close.  A new chapter in Jewish history was about to be written.  The days of  open miracles way above anything Klal Yisroel was deserving of was no more.  It was the time that they were about to enter Eretz Yisroel.  The chapter of the avodah of Klal Yisroel on their own was about to be written.  That is symbolized by the new count.  "סמיכות פרשיות הללו כהונת פינחס וצרור את המדינים והמנין ופטירת משה רבינו ע"ה. הענין הוא כי עתה התחיל להיות הנהגה אחרת של דור באי הארץ. לכן הי' מנין חדש."  The Sfas Emes ends the paragraph in brackets "[וי"ל בזה ג"כ הפי' וידבר משה ואלעזר כו' צריכים אתם להמנות. פי' שהמנין הי' ע"י התעוררות עצמות נפשותיהם כנ"ל]."  What is the לאמר?  Rashi says אמרו להם: צריכין אתם לימנות מבן עשרים שנה.  It is a count that Klal Yisroel must do on their own to attach their self to Hashem.

The days of Aharon Hakohan, a kohan presented with the honor by Hashem were gone and the new kohan taking enter stage is Pinchas who merits the kehuna based upon his own actions.  The act of Pinchas, an act of קנאות is the definition of a hitorerut by an individual because the halacha does not openly sanction such an action. "וכמו בדור המדבר ניתן להם אהרן הכהן כך בדור זה הי' כהונת פנחס. רק מקודם הי' במעלה עליונה למעלה מהטבע בכחו של מרע"ה ולכן כהונת אהרן הי' מתנה משמים. ופנחס בדין זכה לכהונתו כי הי' לפי השתנות הדור שהתחיל עתה להיות עבודת האדם והתעוררות שלמטה בחי' תורה שבע"פ. וזה עצמו ענין קנאין פוגעין בו. שהוא אינו בר מות בסנהדרין שעפ"י הדין א"י להמיתו, ורק מי שמקנא לה' נשתנה הדין להורגו שכן דין התורה. נמצא שבנ"י משנים במעשיהם כל הנהגות התורה. וזה ענין תורה שבע"פ שהכל ניתן מסיני רק שבנ"י צריכין להוציאו מכח אל הפועל. ומה שמרע"ה לא הרג את זמרי רק פינחס לא הי' פחיתות למרע"ה רק שבא פינחס ונטל את שלו ובאמת דורו של משה רבינו ע"ה ע"י שהיו גבוהים מאוד לא הי' ההנהגה בכח האנשים רק בהנהגה עליונה. שבטל שכל וכח השגת האדם במדריגה רמה כזו. ואח"כ שנשפלו הדורות ניכר ונצרך התעוררות התחתונים כנ"ל. וכמו שנתבטל מאור הלבנה כלפי השמש." 

That is followed by the command to Klal Yisroel to awaken hatred against the Midyanim, to prepare themselves for the battle.  Their own input is required.  "ולכן כתיב צרור את המדינים כו'. עליכם לאייב אותם. כלומר שהי' הכאת המדינים בצירוף שנאת בנ"י. הן הדברים שכתבנו שהתחיל התנהגות בהתעוררות התחתונים. ומלחמות הראשונות הי' הכל רק בנפלאות הבורא בלבד. ואדרבא כתיב ואתם תחרישון."  

We can add to the Sfas Emes that is the hemshech of the ideas in the parsha.  The daughters of Tzelafchad have a new parsha given because of their own initiative.  As the days of the generation of direct orders from G-d are closing Moshe recognizes the need to appoint a leader that can direct the new generation, the generation of באי הארץ.  Moshe way have even been wary and frightened of the new path that Klal Yisroel had taken, afraid of all the the initiative, of possible reforms to all that he had built and may have wanted a leader that could ebb the tide, possibly stop the changes and continue the way of the old guard.  But Hashem said that is not to be.  There is a new path for Klal Yisroel now.  The previous Sfas Emes (last piece in 5639) says בפסוק צו את בני ישראל כו' ברש"י ומדרש עד שאתה מצוני על בני צוה בני עלי. הענין הוא דיש לחם מן השמים ומן הארץ. והיא בחי' תורה שבכתב ושבע"פ. ומרע"ה הוריד התורה מן השמים לארץ והמן דכ' הנני ממטיר לחם מן השמים כו'. ורצה מרע"ה להשאיר זאת גם אחריו. אבל באמת התחיל עתה בחי' לחם מן הארץ היינו התקרבות מצד התחתונים לשמים היינו צוה את בני עלי. והיא בחי' הקרבנות וכן תפלה שבמקום תמידין איתקן והוא עבודה שבלב פי' ע"י השתוקקות בלב להתדבק בשורש עליון אם כי עתה נפלנו אחורנית יכולין לחזור למקומנו הראשון.  It is now the time for korbanot, of the avodah of Klal Yisroel.  Moshe doesn't have to be worried about the honor of Hashem and his directives being fulfilled, it is time to give reign to man to express themselves in approaching G-d.  That is why the parsha of korbanot follows the appointment of Yehoshua.  It is the first mandate of the new regime.  The new mission statement is for man to serve Hashem through his own actions.  It is no longer the times of open miracles but rather אֶת־הַכֶּ֥בֶשׂ אֶחָ֖ד תַּעֲשֶׂ֣ה בַבֹּ֑קֶר וְאֵת֙ הַכֶּ֣בֶשׂ הַשֵּׁנִ֔י תַּעֲשֶׂ֖ה בֵּ֥ין הָֽעַרְבָּֽיִם, the daily offerings to Hashem, slow and methodical growth within a person's capabilities.  

Leader Of Self

Moshe pleads with Hashem to appoint a new leader, יִפְקֹ֣ד י״י֔ אֱלֹהֵ֥י הָרוּחֹ֖ת לְכׇל־בָּשָׂ֑ר אִ֖ישׁ עַל־הָעֵדָֽה.  Rashi says it is plural, רוחות to indicate that the leader has to be able to deal with the many winds, the left wing, right wing, centrist etc. אלהי הרוחות – למה נאמר? אמר לפניו: רבונו של עולם גלוי לפניך דעתו של כל אחד ואחד, ואינן דומין זה לזה, מנה עליהם מנהיג שיהא סובל כל אחדב לפי דעתו.  Hashem responds  וַיֹּ֨אמֶר י״י֜ אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֗ה קַח־לְךָ֙ אֶת־יְהוֹשֻׁ֣עַ בִּן־נ֔וּן אִ֖ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־ר֣וּחַ בּ֑וֹ וְסָמַכְתָּ֥ אֶת־יָדְךָ֖ עָלָֽיו.  He switches to the singular tone, why?  And what does it mean אשר רוח בו? 

The Alter of Novardak explains (in tikkun hammidot pg. 68 of Madregot Ha'adam) that one who rules over their own desires, middot and nature to understand the correct approach to problems is one who can deal honestly with other people's problems, questions and inquiries.  It is because אשר רוח בו, he controls his own winds pushing in various directions that makes him fit to deal with others.  

Taddir Kodam

The Mishna at the beginning of the 10^th chapter of Zevachim learns a rule that תדיר ושאינו תדיר תדיר קודם from מלבד עולת הבקר אשר לעולת התמיד תעשו את אלה which teaches us the tammid precedes the mussaf offerings.  Tosfos asks תימה דבפרק תמיד נשחט (פסחים דף נח:) אמרינן מנין שלא יהא דבר קודם לתמיד שנאמר העולה עולה ראשונה ל"ל תיפוק לי מהכא, why do we need this limmud if we have another limmud that teaches us the korban tammid must come first?  The Chazon Eish Menachot (33:10) explains that  there are two distinct dinim.  The Mishna in Zevachim is learning out a din that the tammid comes first because it is taddir.  The Gemorah in Pesachim learns another din that the tammid must be the first offering of the day.  The Rambam Temmidim Umussafin (9:3) says if one shechted the korban that is not taddir before the taddir korban the offering that is not taddir is completed first and only after is the taddir korban offered.  The C.E. says that is true regarding the regular din of taddir kodam but if one shechted a korban before the tammid the tammid would still be offered first.  This is indicated by the terminology of the Rambam in Temmidim Umussafin (1:3) he says שאסור להקריב קרבן כלל קודם תמיד של שחרas opposed to in 9:2 in addressing the din of taddir he says וכיצד סדר הקרבתן.  The din of tammid is a din that the tammid must come first but the din of taddir kodam tells us just the proper order to place the offerings.  This may also be a נ"מ when two korbanot are offered at the same time.  The din of taddir kodam just means something not taddir can't come first but offerings at the same time would be valid but  the tammid must come before all other korbanot (see Mikdash Dovid 9:1.)

Rashi (28:10) says על עולת התמיד – אילו נוספים, לבד אותן שני כבשים של עולת התמיד. ומגיד שאין קריבין אלא בין שני תמידין, וכן בכל המוספין נאמר: על עלת התמיד (במדבר כ״ח:ט״ו,כ״ד, ועוד) לתלמוד זה.  The Mishne L'melech Temmidin Umussafin (1:3) asks why does Rashi need this limmid when we know it from the principle of taddir? In light of this C.E. we can say that Rashi is learning from here not the din that taddir kodam but a din that the mussafin have to be bookended by the two korbanot tammid.  (The problem is that Rashi in Tzav (6:5) brings the derasha of העולה עולה ראשונה so we already know the halacha of the tammid being first from there but it is also interesting he never cites the halacha of taddir kodam?) 

The Toras Zeav siman 37 brings a question how is it possible to violate the halacha of taddir kodam and for example bring a mussaf before the tammid, they are both olot so automatically the first korban should become the tammid? He gives a few answers.  One answer is that the korban has to be offered for intent of the mussaf or tammid because of the din the mitzvot need kavanah. The Rambam in Sefer Hamitzvot #41 about the mussaf of Shabbos says הציווי שנצטווינו להקריב קורבן בכל יום שבת נוסף על תמיד של כל יום - וזהו מוסף שבת, והוא אמרו יתעלה: "וביום השבת שני כבשים" (במדבר כח, ט).  Why does he need to say וזהו מוסף שבת?  (He says the same thing by other mussafin.)  The Or Avrohom wants to say that the Rambam is alluding to this idea that one needs to have intent for the korban that it is is being offered for.  (In some editions those words do not appear in the Rambam e.g. Sefaria  does not have those words.)

Two Types Of Offerings On Shavuot

 Among the mussaf offerings enumerated in parshas Pinchas the Torah does not mention that the goat offered on Shavuot is a chatas.  The Yerushalmi (Rosh Hashana 21a) says the reason is once one accepts the yoke of Torah sins are not looked at.  However, in this week's parsha it does  mention the korban as a chatas,  וַעֲשִׂיתֶ֛ם שְׂעִיר־עִזִּ֥ים אֶחָ֖ד לְחַטָּ֑את, why can it mention it is a chatas here but not in Pinchas?  The Daas Zekanim in Pinchas (28:30) asks why we don't mention the sair mentioned in Emor in the mussaf prayers of Shavuot?  He explains וי״ל שהם נזכרים בכלל מה שכתוב וביום הבכורים בהקריבכם מנחה בשבועותיכם בגלל המנחה כל אלו באין ולא במוסף.  In other words, there are two different types of korbonat offered on Shavuot.  There are the offerings because it is Shavuot, the day of mattan Torah and then there are offerings to accompany the shtei halechem.  It is the offering that comes because it is Shavuot where chatas isn't mentioned because it is a day of kabbalas Hatorah, we don't mention the sins.  However, in Emor, the Torah is listing the shair offered to come along with the shtei halechem and there chatas can be mentioned.  This is clear from the Rambam as well.  In Ch. 8 of Temmidin U'mussafin he says: בְּיוֹם חֲמִשִּׁים מִסְּפִירַת הָעֹמֶר. הוּא חַג הַשָּׁבוּעוֹת. וְהוּא עֲצֶרֶת. וּבַיּוֹם הַזֶּה מַקְרִיבִין מוּסָף כְּמוֹ מוּסַף רֹאשׁ חֹדֶשׁ שְׁנֵי פָּרִים וְאַיִל וְשִׁבְעָה כְּבָשִׂים כֻּלָּם עוֹלוֹת וּשְׂעִיר חַטָּאת. וְאֵלּוּ הֵן הַקָּרְבָּנוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בְּחֻמַּשׁ הַפְּקוּדִים וְהֵם מוּסַף הַיּוֹם. וְעוֹד מְבִיאִין יֶתֶר עַל הַמּוּסָף בַּיּוֹם הַזֶּה מִנְחָה חֲדָשָׁה שְׁתֵּי הַלֶּחֶם וּמַקְרִיבִין עִם הַלֶּחֶם פַּר וּשְׁנֵי אֵילִים וְשִׁבְעָה כְּבָשִׂים. הַכּל עוֹלוֹת. וּשְׂעִיר חַטָּאת. וּשְׁנֵי כְּבָשִׂים זֶבַח שְׁלָמִים. וְאֵלּוּ הֵן הַקָּרְבָּנוֹת הָאֲמוּרוֹת בְּחֻמַּשׁ וַיִּקְרָא.  One of the שעירים is offered because it is the holiday of Shavuot and the other is offered to accompany the shtei halechem. (Rav Eliyahu Baruch.)  [It is noteworthy that the Chabad nusach of the the mussaf does mention both seirim.  The simple peshat in that would be that even though the sair is offered to accompany the shtei halechem, since it effects a kapparah it is mentioned.  See here.)  [Also see here, especially bottom.]

Avrohom Was Ashkenazi Yitzchak Was Sephardic

The Zohar Pinchas 218b-219a says וּבְגִין דְּאַבְרָהָם אִיהוּ מַיִם, שַׁוִּי זַרְעֵיהּ בְּגָלוּתָא דֶּאֱדוֹם וּבְגִין דָּא כָּבֵד לִימִינָא דְּאַבְרָהָם, וּמָרָה, דְּכָבֵד חֶרֶב דִּילֵיהּ, אִיהִי מָרָה, אִתְּמַר בָּהּ (משלי ה׳:ד׳) וְאַחֲרִיתָהּ מָרָה כַלַּעֲנָה. וְאִי חוֹבִין מִתְרַבִּין בִּבְנוֹי דְּאַבְרָהָם דְּאִינּוּן בְּגָלוּתָא דֶּאֱדוֹם, אִתְיְקַר בֵּיהּ מְרָע עָלַיְיהוּ מִסִּטְרָא דְּכָבֵד, דְּרוֹעָא יְמִינָא צָּרִיךְ לְאַלְקָאָה לְאָקָזָא דָּמֵיהּ מִנֵּיהּ, דְּמַאן דְּנַטְלִין מִנֵּיהּ מָמוֹנֵיהּ, כְּאִילּוּ שְׁפִיכוּ דָּמֵיהּ, וְאִשְׁתְּאַר עָנִי, דְּעָנִי חָשׁוּב כַּמֵּת. וְאִי חוֹבִין מִתְרַבִּין מִסִּטְרָא דִּבְנֵי יִצְּחָק, דְּאִינּוּן (ס''א בגלותא) בֵּין יִשְׁמָעֵאל, בֵּי מַרְעֵיהּ יִתְיְקַר מִסִּטְרָא דִּטְחוֹל לִשְׂמָאלָא, וְצָּרִיךְ לְאָקָזָא דְּרוֹעָא שְׂמָאלָא, וְלָא יַתִּיר. וְאִי חוֹבִין מִתְרַבִּין בִּבְנֵי יַעֲקֹב, דְּאִינּוּן אֲחִידָן לִתְרֵין סִטְרִין, דְּאִינּוּן מְפוּזָרִים בִּבְנֵי עֵשָׂו וְיִשְׁמָעֵאל, הָא מַרְעָא אִתְיְקַר עַל גּוּפָא, וּבָעֵי לְאָקָזָא ב' דְּרוֹעִין.  
Whatever is lacking, the fix is to go to the land of the opposite side and by having to fight against the opposite side, it will bring out the strength of the middah.  For ex. a lack in the middah of chesed when exposed to the gevurah of Edom will fight harder to come to the surface and hence its full potential will be brought out (explanation based on Matuk M'sdevash and Mittler Rebbe (chabad.))  It seems to come out from this that the Sephardic Jews are Yitzchak people and Ashkenazi Jews are Avrohom people.    

Didn't Dye In Vain

What was the great merit of the daughters of Zelophehad that they merited a parsha to be written in their sake?  Rav Simcha Zissel Broide suggested it not as most think that it is the daughter's of Zelophehad's actions that merited a parsha to be written in the Torah, rather it is the act of Zelophehad himself.  As Rashi notes, he was the the מקושש עצים who desecrated the Shabbos for noble purposes to show the harshness of violating Shabbos.  The act of Zelophehad was a true act of מסירות נפש.  He lost all of his עולם הבא just to teach a lesson.  Says Rav Simcha Zissel, it is because it was such a great act of מסירות נפש, even though he was culpable for his actions, that merits that a parsha is given his name.  He points out the parsha doesn't bear the names of the daughter's of Zelophehad , rather that of Zelophehad, the parsha of the בנות צלפחד.
Based upon this idea the Shlal Rav adds the Gemorah Sanhedrin (8a) says ראויה פרשת נחלות שתיכתב על ידי משה רבינו אלא שזכו בנות צלפחד ונכתב על ידן ראויה היתה פרשת מקושש שתיכתב ע"י משה רבינו אלא שנתחייב מקושש ונכתבה על ידו ללמדך שמגלגלין חובה ע"י חייב וזכות על ידי זכאי.  Why does it mention the בנות צלפחד before the מקושש, if the episode of the מקושש is first?  Because the Gemorah is explaining the merit of the בנות צלפחד was from their father; what was his merit?  Because he was the מקושש and although that was an act of חובה, it was an act of זכות as well.  The Gemorah means one act can contain an element of חובה and an element of זכות that are both noteworthy. 

The Ketzos's Rashba Isn't Your Rashba

Rav Shlomo Heiman

Sadly this is a general problem that the lay man can't recognize between a great leader and one who is not so great.  Too many people feel as long as the one they are following has a title of Rabbi stuck in front of their name, they are entitled to voice their opinion on issues just as much as anyone else who's title is Rabbi. And even better if his title is Rabbi Dr.  Despite the fact that these people may have never opened a Rashba in years and are completely unqualified to voice on opinion on any matter of Jewish law.  It is incumbent upon the זקנים, those that can discern to correct this error.

Lottery, Torah, Eretz Yisroel

This is from the Teshuvot Geonim.  What is the peshat, why is disagreeing with a goral like disagreeing with the 10 dibrot?  Why was there a need for a goral at all if Rashi in Pinchas (26:24) says explains how there was ruach hakodesh regarding the portion of each tribe?

The Rebbe (Likutay Sichos volume 13) explains that the Torah is referred to as a a מתנה (Berachos (5a) and in prayer מתן תורתנו.)  The Torah is also referred to as a ירושה and a מכר, however the name מתנה is given to indicate that a human doesn't deserve the Torah, it is a gift from Hashem.  That is why the first dibrot were given in a manner where the people heard but didn't understood.  It was to ingrain that we are given the dibrot not according to our understanding but as a מתנה even beyond our capabilities.

Similarly, ארץ ישראל is a land that is עיני ה אלקיך בה, it is above human capability to be able to truly live in Eretz Yisroel and be able to feel the kesusha of it.  It is a gift of Hashem.  That is why Eretz Yisroel is given out via a lottery; just as isn't limited by human knowledge, so too our ownership over Eretz Yisroel is above human capability.  It is a מתנה to be able to live in such a holy land.

That is the explanation of what we say in our prayers, שיבנה בית המקדש במהרה בימנו ותן חלקנו בתורתך.  What is the connection between Beis Hamikdash and Torah, why is it חלקנו, our חלק but תורתך, your Torah?  It is חלקנו, we attempt to learn according to our ability in order to have the עביד ליה נייחא לנפשיה, but at the end we accept the Torah of מתנה.  That Torah will be able to received in its full potential only after there is the kedusha of the Beis Hamikdash in the world.

Time For Mussaf

The Gemorah in Temurah (14b) has a derash that one can offer the korban mussaf the entire day.  The Briskor Rav asks why do we need a possuk, why would assume it’s not allowed to be offered all day?  (See much discussion about the question in the Mishmar Halevi.)

We can suggest without a possuk one would have thought that the mussaf has to be offered in the morning for it is connected to the korban tammid. (It would explain why the parsha of mussafin opens with the korban tammid and why its mentioned in conjunction with the mussafin of the holidays על עולת התמיד.)  Sources for this idea can be found in Malbim (28:10) ומ"ש על עולת התמיד היינו שיקריב אחר תמיד של שחר ונסכיו וכר"ש בזבחים (דף פ"ט) דהא אמר עולת בלשון יחיד שקאי על עולת השחר:  The Malbim learns the possuk tells us the mussaf must be offered after the tammid, but we see he assumes it should be offered early.  The source of this can be found in the Midrash Hagodol.  In the Mahara M’pano responsa 14 he refers to mussaf as being part of shacharis as well (Or Avrohom on Sefer Hamitzvot #41.)

However, the Tosfos Rashba in Pesachim (58a) and the same vein is approached by Tosfos Yeshanim in Yoma (35a) assume that the time to offer the korban mussaf is in the midday hour.  The Tosfos Rashba has a derash on the words (Vayikra 23:37) דְּבַר־י֥וֹם בְּיוֹמֽוֹ that it indicates midday.  They seem to assume this is the time of the mussaf and not that it would have been offered only in the time of the tammid.  We could suggest still in the same vein that I would have thought the mussaf would only be valid if offered in the sixth hour of the day; hence, the Gemorah in Temurah has a derash to tell us its valid even if offered later, ועדיין צ"ע.

It noteworthy that this approach of assuming the optimal time is midday is followed by the Rambam regarding the laws of the mussaf prayer as well.  He says in Tefillah (3:5): תפלת המוספין זמנה אחר תפלת השחר עד שבע שעות ביום והמתפלל אותה אחר שבע שעות אף ע"פ שפשע יצא ידי חובתו מפני שזמנה כל היום.  He assumes that optimally one should pray mussaf before 7 hours into the day.  This is the ruling of the Shulchan Aruch (286:1) as well.

Lessons Of Rashi

Even A Little Teshuvah Helps:

The possuk (26:11): וּבְנֵי־קֹ֖רַח לֹא־מֵֽתוּ׃.  Rashi: ובני קרח לא מתו – הם היו בעצה תחלה, ובשעת המחלוקת הירהרו תשובה בלבם, לפיכך נתבצר להם מקום גבוה בגיהנם וישבו שם.  How does Rashi know that the sons of Korach were in the עצה from the very beginning, and even if there is a source, why strengthen their sin when discussing their teshuvah?  And how does Rashi know their teshuvah was only a הרהור הלב, incomplete? 

The Rebbe explains (Likutay Sichos volume 33) that Rashi is bothered why the possuk juxtaposes the sons of Korach to the death of Dasan and Avirom if they did teshuvah?  Rashi explains the possuk is teaching us that the sons of Korach were also the masterminds of the argument.  However, they were spared because of their teshuvah.  If they did teshuvah why were they stuck in gehhonom and not fully spared?  It must be their teshuvah wasn’t complete. 

The lesson we can derive from the Rashi is that any small amount of teshuvah, even merely a הרהור a has a tremendous effect and can literally save a person's life .

---

Every Day Is A Holiday:

The possuk (28:2) צַ֚ו אֶת־בְּנֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל וְאָמַרְתָּ֖ אֲלֵהֶ֑ם אֶת־קׇרְבָּנִ֨י לַחְמִ֜י לְאִשַּׁ֗י רֵ֚יחַ נִֽיחֹחִ֔י תִּשְׁמְר֕וּ לְהַקְרִ֥יב לִ֖י בְּמוֹעֲדֽוֹ  Rashi says: במועדו – בכל יום הוא מועד התמידים.  What is Rashi adding to the possuk and what is he coming to explain?  The Rebbe (Likutay Sichos volume 28) explains Rashi is bothered that normally the wordמועדו  would indicate some special time, a holiday, but what is the holiday every day?  Rashi says that everyday is considered the holiday vis-a-vis offering the tammid.  What difference does it make if it’s considered an offering of the מועד of the day or is just an obligation of a korban?  Since its an obligation of the specific day, if the day passes and one doesn’t offer the tammid it can’t be made up on another day; had it just been an obligation of a korban one would’ve been able to make it up.

Hatred Out Of Love

The possuk at the end of last weeks parsha traces back the lineage of Pinchas to Aharon so why does it have to be repeated in our parsha?  Rav Chayim Shmulevitz explains that the Torah is explaining when one can carry out an act of killing someone else for the sake of religion; only if there is no element of hate introduced into the act.  The Torah is teaching that when Pinchas killed Zimri, he felt like his grandfather, Aharon, אוהב את הבריות ומקרבן לתורה, he didn’t feel any prejudice against him, it was purely as for the sake of Hashem.  The yesod is that the act of din isn’t a sacrifice of chesed; it itself is an act of chesed.

Based upon this idea, he explains the Gemorah in Yoma (54a) that when the gentiles entered the Beis Hamikdash before they destroyed it, they found the keruvim hugging.  The Rishonim ask that the Gemorah in Babba Bathra (98a) that the keruvim hugged each other only when Klal Yisroel is doing the will of Hashem?  Based upon this yesod we understand that the middos hadin was able to have an effect only if there was a backdrop of ahavah.

This idea is elucidated in Tanya Ch. 32 (לב) וגם המקורבים אליו והוכיחם ולא שבו מעונותיהם שמצוה לשנאותם מצוה לאהבם ג"כ ושתיהן הן אמת שנאה מצד הרע שבהם ואהבה מצד בחי' הטוב הגנוז שבהם שהוא ניצוץ אלקות שבתוכם המחיה נפשם האלקית וגם לעורר רחמים בלבו עליה כי היא בבחי' גלות בתוך הרע מס"א הגובר עליה ברשעי' והרחמנות מבטלת השנאה ומעוררת האהבה כנודע. 

Based upon this we can understand the following idea.  " The disciples of the Maggid of Mezritch used to take turns to wait on him according to a certain schedule.  The Alter Rebbe heard of the following episode from R. Zusya, who heard it from his brother, R. Elimelech.  One night, when R. Elimelech was on duty, the Maggid called him from his room nearby and said: “Meilech, do you hear what they’re saying in the Academy on High? They’re saying that ahavas Yisrael means loving an utter rasha just as one loves an utter tzaddik!”  The Maggid continued: “A tzaddik is able to arouse the powers that are latent in every soul, and to empower that person to do teshuvah. A minyan of members of the Holy Brotherhood are able to arouse even an utter rasha to do teshuvah!” " (From the talks of Rabbi Yosef Yitzchak of Lubavitch; translated by Uri Kaploun (Shavuot day 1940.))  The   אוהבי ה' שנאו רע doesn't diminish from the love one has for the core of the neshama that remains pure.

The Ohav Yisroel asks why in this week’s parsha, in the three weeks do we read about the korbanot of Yom Tov which only apply in the Beis Hamikdash?  He explains that the 21 days of the three weeks correspond to all the Yomim Tovim (including Shabbos) which add up to 21.  He says that in the times of Mashiach the 9^th of Av will be the greatest Yom Tov. He adds that the 21 days of the three weeks will be the source of kedusha for the Yomim Tovim.  That’s why in the letter ט the top of the head turns in, to show that the good in is hidden.  Therefore, the Yomim Tovim are read in the three weeks for this is the time that will bring kedusha to the Yomim Tovim.   How can he days of the greatest sorrow be the source of days of happiness and joy?  The answer is the same yesod.  The din of the days of the three weeks really contain in them the greatest compassion.

Vav And Geulah

The Baal Haturim explains the cut vav in the word שלום is because Pinchas is Eliyahu and Yaakov took a vav from his name to guarantee the geulah (Rashi Bechukosai 26:42.)  Therefore, the vav is cut to indicate that the name is taken from his name to guarantee the geualah.  Why is this hinted to here?  According to the Targum Yonason, the ברית שלום is that Pinchas will live forever and be the harbinger of the geulah.  It is when Pinchas is established as the one to lead the geulah that its hinted to the fact that he gives a guarantee for it. 

[How does the Targum see in the word שלום this idea?  The Sforno says: את בריתי שלום – ממלאך המות, כענין ״עושה שלום במרומיו״ (איוב כ״ה:ב׳). כי אמנם ההפסד לא יקרה אלא בסבת התנגדות ההפכים. וזה אמנם נתקיים בפינחס שהאריך ימים הרבה מאד מכל שאר אנשי דורו, עד שהיה הוא משמש במשכן שילה בזמן פלגש בגבעה, שהיה בלי ספק אחרי מות יהושע ושאר ״הזקנים אשר האריכו ימים אחרי יהושע״ (שופטים ב׳:ז׳), וכל שכן אם היה בזמן יפתח שכתב למלך בני עמון ״בשבת בני ישראל בחשבון ובבנותיה כו׳ שלש מאות שנה״ (שופטים י״א:כ״ו). וכבר ספרו ז״ל שפינחס לא רצה ללכת אז אל יפתח להתיר נדרו. וכל שכן לדברי האומר אליהו זה פינחס, והוא עדין חי וקיים.  In Yehuda Ya’aleh volume 2 #155, Rav Yehuda Asad explains that death is caused when the four prime elements are no longer in line with each other.  Hence, the bris of shalom to Eliyahu covered these elements as well; hence he wasn’t subject to death.  (I saw it quoted in Otzar Hatorah by Rav Eliyahu Shlesinger.)  See a similar approach regarding shalom between body and soul in the Alshich.]

Fabulous Egrah D'kalah here (start bottom of pg.) as to why the guarantee is a vav.  

Based upon his words we understand why this hint is directly in the middle of the word שלום.  Vav is חיבור, attachment.  The proper attachment is among Jews, that is the proper שלום.  The sin of Zimri was a perversion of the vav.  Eliyahu was the one to stand up and fix the vav.  The vav in the name of Pinchas is to indicate that he is the one to repair the proper חיבור, it is Eliyahu that will bring forward the geulah which will be the ultimate proper חיבור between Klal Yisroel and Hashem, he is the one to usher in the ultimate שלום. (Based upon Shviley Pinchas Pinchas 5773.)