Vigilante Murder and the Crown of Hashem

(7) “He sent messengers to Bilam son of Beor, to Petor” – it was his city. Some say he was a moneychanger [shulḥani],14Petora means table [shulḥan] in Aramaic. as the kings of the gentiles would consult with him like a moneychanger to whom everyone brings his money.15So, too, people would bring their money to Bilam, for his counsel. Some say he was initially an interpreter of dreams, but then he reverted to being a sorcerer and reverted to [prophesy by] the Divine Spirit.
“In the land of the members of his people” – as Balak was from there, and he [Bilam] had told him that he would ultimately reign.
“To summon him” – as he wrote to him: ‘Do not think that it is only my mission that you are performing and that I, alone, will honor you. If you uproot them, you will be honored by all the nations, and Canaan and the Amalekites will prostrate themselves to you.’
“Behold, a people emerged from Egypt” – he [Bilam] said to him: ‘Of what concern is it to you?’ He said to him: ‘“Behold, it has covered the face of the earth [ein haaretz]” – they shut the eyes [einayim] upon which the land relies, Siḥon and Og, they destroyed them and covered their eyes. What can I do?’
“And it sits across from me [mimuli]” – mimuli is written without a vav,16The word "mimuli" can be written mem, mem, vav, lamed, yod. In the verse here, the vav was left out which makes it possible to connect it to the word amilam. just as it says: “In the name of the Lord, for I will cut them down [amilam]” (Psalms 118: 10).
“And now, please go curse this people for me, as they are too mighty for me; perhaps I will be able to smite them, and I will drive them from the land, for I know that he whom you bless is blessed, and he whom you curse is cursed” (Numbers 22:6).
“And now, please go curse [ara] [this people] for me” –“what is “ara for me”? I can overcome them a bit, like a person who picks [oreh] figs.17A few at a time, since they do not all ripen at the same time.
“As they are too mighty for me” – not that they are powerful, and their armies are numerous, but rather that they are victorious with their mouths. This is something that I am unable to do.
“Perhaps I will be able to smite them” – what did this one see, that led him to provoke [them]; did the Holy One blessed be He not say to them [Israel] that they may not take their land? It is, rather, that they18The Moavites. were sorcerers and diviners greater than Bilam, as it is stated: “Balak saw”; however, they were unable to understand the matters accurately. Likewise, it says: “You are wearied in the abundance of your devising; let now the astrologers, the stargazers…save you [from what will come upon you]” (Isaiah 47:13). He [Balak] saw in his astrology that Israel would fall into his hands. That is why he made his daughter available to wantonness, and twenty-four thousand of them fell. That is why he provoked [them]. But he did not know how. That is why, “perhaps I will be able to smite [nakeh] them” – like one who deducts [shemenakeh] one twenty-fourth per se’a.19The assumption is that this is the percentage of waste found in the grain (Bava Batra 93b). Likewise, for each twenty-four thousand of Israel, one thousand was missing.20Twenty-four thousand people died due to the sin relating to the wantonness of the daughters of Moav and the consequent worship of the idle of Baal Peor. If multiplied by twenty-four the number is 576,000 which is close to the number of men older than twenty.
“I will drive them from the land” – he was seeking to prevent them only from entering the Land.
“For I know that he whom you bless is blessed” – how did he know? It is because at the time that Siḥon sought to wage war against Moav, he feared that they were mighty, and hired Bilam and his father to curse Moav, as it is stated: “Therefore the allegorists will say” (Numbers 21:27), and it is written: “A fire emerged from Ḥeshbon” (Numbers 21:28), and it is written: “Woe to you, Moav” (Numbers 21:29). That is why he said: “For I know that he whom you bless is blessed.”

The Gemara asks: What did Pinehas see that led him to arise and take action? Rav says: He saw the incident taking place before him and he remembered the halakha. He said to Moses: Brother of the father of my father, as Moses was the brother of his grandfather Aaron, did you not teach me this during your descent from Mount Sinai: One who engages in intercourse with a gentile woman, zealots strike him? Moses said to him: Let the one who reads the letter be the agent [parvanka] to fulfill its contents.

(4) Whenever a man has relations with a gentile woman in public, i.e., the relations are carried out in the presence of ten or more Jews, if a zealous person strikes him and kills him, he is considered praiseworthy and ardent.9The Ra'avad rules that the zealous person must warn the transgressor before striking him. The Maggid Mishneh states that the concept of a warning is relevant only with regard to execution by the court and not to the independent actions taken by a zealous person. The Rama (Choshen Mishpat 425:4) quotes the Ra'avad's view. [This applies whether the relations were] in the context of marriage or licentious in nature. This matter is a halachah conveyed to Moshe at Sinai.10I.e., a law which is not commanded by the Written Torah, yet communicated by the Oral Tradition. Support for this can be derived from Pinchas' slaying of Zimri.11As Numbers, ch. 25 relates, the Jews began worshiping idols, because they were lured to by Midianite women. Enraged Moses commanded that the worshipers be executed. Zimri, the prince of the tribe of Shimon, took a Midianite woman and confronted Moses, engaging in relations before him. When Pinchas saw this, he slew Zimri, giving expression to the law mentioned by the Rambam.

(1) Rema: Regarding those guilty of the death penalty in our days, we have no power to give them lashes, exile them, kill them, or beat them. Instead we censure them and distance them from the community (Tur 68 from Natronai Gaon). Thus far regarding [strictly Torah] law. However, if the beit din sees a necessity for a preventative measure, it has the authority to institue whatever punishment they see fit (ibid., from the Responsa of the Natronai Gaon), as explained above in Siman 2. This regards those instances involving capital punishment which necessitates a beit din. Cases in which the death penalty can be implemented even without a beit din, are still judged in our days, as will be explained (ibid.). One who pursuses his fellow in order to kill him, and was warned, and continued in his pursuit: Even if the pursuer was a minor, every Jew is commanded to save the pursed, even at the cost of one maiming one of the pursuer's limbs. If it is impossible to save the pursued without killing the pursuer outright, then the pursuer should indeed be killed, even though he has not yet performed the act. Rema: (Tur 67) One who "tunnels [into a house] in order steal" has this rule of pursuer applied to him, however if it is understood that his only intent is monetary gain, and that he would not kill the owner in a confrontation, then it is forbidden to kill him. See further in the Tur in this paragraph regarding one who endangers the public, such as a Jew who engages in forgery in a land where the authorities take a strict approach to such action, such a person constitutes a "pursuer" and it is permitted to turn him over to the authorities (Nimukei Maharam MiRizburg), as explained above in 388:12.

(5) In the case of a Jewish heretic, which is someone who worships idols or sins in spite- even if he just ate unslaughtered animal or wore shaatnez in spite he would be a heretic- and those who deny the Torah or Jewish prophecy, there is a mitzvah to remove them. If there is a way to remove them publicly, we would do so. If not, we would use excuses to remove them. How so? If one saw one of them fall into a pit and the ladder is in the pit, he would come and remove the ladder and say he is busy taking his son down from the roof and he will return the ladder, or something similar. With respect to an idolater whom we are not at war with or a shepherd of small domesticated animals in a place where the fields belong to Jews or someone similar, however, we would not arrange for their death but one is prohibited from rescuing them. When is this true? In the case of a Jewish sinner who remains firm in his wickedness and consistently repeats his sins, such as a shepherd of small domesticated animals who is cavalier with theft, and they continue in their wicked ways. With respect to a Jew who sins and does not remain firm in his wickedness, but just sins for his own benefit, however, such as one who eats unslaughtered animals out of desire, one does have a mitzvah to rescue him and one is prohibited from standing idly by his blood