Two personalities who we know from the Tanach performed acts of zealotry which we will read about in this week's parsha and haftarah: Pinchas and Eliyahu.
 

How does the Torah relate to zealousness? Does it see it in a positive light? By examining the zealousness of Pinchas, we can point to the characteristics of positive and negative zealousness.
 

Pinchas's deed raises several questions:

1."One who has relations with a gentile woman woman, zealots smite him."  This is a halacha to Moshe from Sinai. However, Chazal tell us that this is the halacha, but we do not instruct in this way (Sanhedrin 82a). So we must ask: if this is a mitzvah which is incumbent upon everyone who can perform it, then why not instruct to do it? The Yerushalmi Sanhedrin says that the sages did not agree with Pinchas's action, apparently meaning that it was in contradiction to the halacha.

And the Gemara adds (82b):
 

The ministering angels wanted to push him. HaShem said to them: Let him be, he is a zealot the son of a zealot (Levi, who avenged the rape of Dinah) and a deflector of wrath, the son of a deflector of wrath (Aharon). The tribes began to denounce him: Did you see this son of Puti (a derogatory name for Yitro, alluding to his past as an idol worshipper) whose mother's father fattened calves for idolatry?! He killed the prince of a tribe of Israel! Therefore the Torah detailed his (paternal) lineage: 'Pinchas the son of Elazar the son of Aharon the Cohen.'
 

The ministering angels and the tribes both condemned Pinchas's actions. So why did the Torah praise him so?
 

2. The Gemara in Sanhedrin 82b tells about Zimri:
 

"He grabbed her (Cozbi bat Zur) by her hair and brought her before Moshe. He said to him: Ben Amram (a disrespectful reference to Moshe Rabbenu), is this one forbidden or permitted? And if you say forbidden, who permitted you (to marry) the daughter of Yitro? The halacha disappeared from before him (was forgotten). They all sobbed and cried… and it is written: 'and Pinchas the son of Elazar saw.' What did he see? Rav said: He saw the act (of Zimri) and remembered the halacha. He said: Brother of my grandfather (meaning Moshe), didn't you teach us when you descended from Har Sinai that one who has relations with a gentile woman, zealots smite him? He said to him: let the bringer of the letter (with a directive) be the one to carry it out."
 

And this is perplexing: How could Moshe have forgotten a halacha which he himself taught? And when Pinchas returned the "lost" halacha, why didn't Moshe get up and perform it himself?
 

In order to answer these questions, we will endeavor to present a new perspective regarding zealousness. The term "zealousness" is generally regarded as an outburst of anger at behavior which is inappropriate in the eyes of the zealot, to the point that the zealot cannot control himself and reacts violently. However, this view does not describe the correct kind of zealousness.

Indeed the zealot acts out of intense emotion, but first and foremost he must use his intellect; he must be convinced that he is not acting out of personal interests, and that all his intentions are l'shem Shamayim (for the sake of Heaven). Only if he examined himself to make sure that he is free of any ulterior motives, only when he is convinced that his action is the need of the hour and that there is no alternative, only when he is certain that if he had asked the Great Beit Din they would have sanctioned his act of zeal – only then is the zealot permitted to kill the perpetrator.
 

HaRav Kook (Mishpat Cohen 143) explains the claim of the tribes: that one who was descended from idol-worshipping gentiles, who presumably are corrupt in their character traits and immoral regarding bloodshed and promiscuity – is one like this permitted to raise the banner of zealousness?! This testifies to their view that his zealousness was not genuine, but sprang from his dark inclinations. Therefore the Torah came and traced his lineage to Aharon HaCohen, the patient and merciful, who loves peace and pursues peace. The deed was against his nature, however he was zealous for HaShem and he saw that this was the need of the hour.
 

When Zimri grabbed Cozbi by her hair, Moshe refrained from killing him. We can explain that it wasn't the theoretic knowledge of the halacha which Moshe forgot, but the gnawing concern that his measure of zealousness was not proper. Even though he knew the halacha, Moshe suspected that his reaction would be motivated by his anger with Zimri, and he wasn't certain that he was free of conflicting motives.

Even though a zealot can kill, this particular halacha – it is the halacha but we do not instruct in this way. It is a completely unique halacha, which is relevant only to one who is certain that his heart is clean and pure. What "disappeared" before Moshe was the verdict, whether he was appropriate to perform this halacha.
 

The mental state which motivates zealousness is not rage and fury, anger and agitation. All of these are liable to confuse one's understanding and rationality, and to cause more harm than good. Very often rash actions serve only to pour fuel on the fire, and the outcome is the opposite of what the doer of the deed intended. Admittedly, zealousness involves emotion and excitement, however these are proper only if they pass the test of pure intellect which thoroughly examines both the zealot's personal motives and the effects of his actions on the community.
 

And the Torah Temima (Bamidbar 25, note 31) writes regarding Chazal's interpretation that Pinchas's deed was not approved by the Sages:
 

The commentators labored very much to explain this interpretation, but in truth it can be explained simply: That which was said, that zealots smite one who copulates with non – Jewess, the Sages are not comfortable with this, and this can be explained: since this has to be done out of genuine zeal, for the honor of HaShem, therefore we cannot permit just anyone to smite a man like this, since, who can know whether he does it from some ulterior motive and says he his acting out of a spirit of zeal for HaShem? And in any case he takes the life of one who the din (Torah law) does not condemn to death.
 

As reward for his deed, Pinchas merited a covenant of peace. The Natziv explains that since he acted for the sake of Heaven, he merited a blessing that in spite of the fact that his deed involved cruelty, this will not have a negative influence upon him.

By virtue of allaying HaShem's anger and wrath, He blessed him with the attribute of peace, that he will not hold grudges and not become angry. And because it was in the nature of Pinchas's deed - to kill someone with his own hand - to leave a strong emotional impression afterwards as well, since the act was for the sake of Heaven – therefore came the blessing that he will always be tranquil and characterized by peace.
 

HaRav Kook (Olat Raya) explains that this is the reason that Shmuel HaKatan enacted the addition of the blessing against the minim (traitors): in this blessing one is zealous for HaShem and prays for the destruction of our enemies. Shmuel HaKatan said in Pikei Avot 'when your enemy falls do not jubilate, and when he stumbles do rejoice in your heart'. So he, whose heart was filled with love, was the appropriate one to coin this blessing, for the sake of Heaven and without any personal or ulterior motives.
 

'All of the blessings of the prayer, which are full of kindness and love, any sage on this high level is fit to enact them. Since it is impossible that a typical person will not feel a natural hatred toward his enemies and the persecutors of his nation, therefore this blessing (la-minim), which contains words of hatred and enmity, must come from one who is completely pure and holy to HaShem, and his heart bears no attribute of hatred at all. Therefore Shmuel HaKatan stood up and enacted it - and only he, who removed all emotion of hatred from it, so that nothing will be contained in it except the feeling of a pure heart for the objective of the genuine, all-encompassing ultimate good.'

Since proper zealousness is limited to exceptional cases and is not the normal way of life, we can say that this is the connection to Moshe's request at the end of the parsha to appoint a 'man over the community (nation).' Moshe describes the leader as 'a man who has a spirit in him' – one who can stand up to the spirit of each and every one. In normal life, the leader requires composure of spirit and the ability to cope with the nation, and he must resort to acts of zealousness only in extraordinary events, such as in our parsha.

In conclusion, it can be said that the halacha "zealots smite him" is unique and exceptional, and is only applicable in extraordinary cases. The zealot must have special traits, genuine zeal only for the sake of Heaven, free of any personal or other motive. The halacha does not require him to act zealously. It does permit his act and sanctions his deed, but only after the fact, and after thorough examination that his motive was completely pure.