Balak

Rabbi Adin Even-Yisrael (Steinsaltz)

The Key Figure in the Portion

The name of the weekly Torah portion is generally based on the first words in the portion, and therefore this portion is called "Balak," although, in essence, the hero of this portion is Balaam and in the final analysis, the entire narrative in Balak revolves around Balaam and his actions.

We encounter an interesting phenomenon when we begin to examine the character of Balaam. A literal reading of the text would seem to indicate that Balaam is an honest individual: a prophet who goes forth only with permission from the Lord, and if the Lord tells him to return, he is willing to do so, even in the middle of his journey. The Rabbinic midrashim, on the other hand, portray Balaam in a completely different light: a haughty person, who looks ill upon others, who even dares to act insolently toward Heaven.

In general, when the Rabbinic midrashim speak of a good individual they heap praise on him, and if their subject is a bad person, all manner of evil is attributed to him. Regarding Balaam, this is not true merely in a general way, for the Talmud, explaining the mishnah in the last chapter of Tractate Sanhedrin: "Four commoners have no portion in the World to Come ... Balaam, Doeg, Ahitophel, and Gehazi" (Sanhedrin 90a), states explicitly, "Regarding all [those specified as having no portion in the World to Come], you should not take [the relevant Biblical passages] to expound them [to their discredit], except in the case of the wicked Balaam; whatever you find [written] about him, expound on it [to his defamation]" (Sanhedrin 106b). In other words, we are not to excessively engage in deleterious expositions regarding those mentioned in the Mishnah as having no portion in the World to Come, except for the wicked Balaam; everything about him that may be expounded unfavorably is to be so taught.

Obviously, the Rabbis based all their teachings on the Biblical verses themselves. Thus, for example, when the Rabbis said that Balaam had a haughty spirit and a proud soul (Avot 5:19), they based this on the verse: "Though Balak were to give me his house full of silver and gold, I could not do anything, big or little, contrary to the command of the Lord my God" (Numbers 22:18). Although this is a declaration of the acceptance of the yoke of Heaven, the terms in which he thinks - a house full of silver and gold - teach us of Balaam's proud soul. Nonetheless, Balaam's wickedness is not so obvious in the verses themselves, and we must seek to understand why the Rabbis based their teachings on the assumption that Balaam is "the wicked Balaam," and why all these denigrating midrashim are taught regarding his character.

Balaam's High Level

"'Never again did there arise in Israel a prophet like Moses' (Deuteronomy 34:10) - none arose in Israel, but such a one did arise among the non-Jewish nations, and who is he? Balaam" (Numbers Rabbah 14:34). In this teaching the Rabbis impart to Balaam the greatest praise they are capable of awarding. Moses was not only a wise individual and an outstanding leader, he was a person who attained an essence different from all the other prophets: "With him I speak mouth to mouth, plainly and not in riddles" (Numbers 12:8). Moses was granted the privilege of speaking with the Holy One, blessed be He, face to face (Exodus 33:11; Deuteronomy 34:10), in a revelation unclouded by any external factors - a level not attained by any other before or after Moses.

When the Rabbis state that Balaam reached the level of Moses, we must clearly understand their intent. This dictum as well the Rabbis learned out from the simple meaning of the text, because, besides the prophecy of Moses, Balaam's statements are the only prophecy appearing in the Pentateuch. Furthermore, when we look at statements by different Biblical characters, we can discern the process of selection and clarification that they underwent before their inclusion in the Torah; thus, for example, it can hardly be doubted that Pharaoh did not speak to Moses in Hebrew. The prophecy of Balaam, in contrast, did not change: it was incorporated in the Torah in the exact manner in which the Lord spoke these words to Balaam. The phrases "A star rises from Jacob" (Numbers 24:17) or "How fair are your tents, O Jacob, your dwellings, O Israel" (op cit., v. 5) were not stated by Moses, but come directly from the prophecy of Balaam. Indeed, we relate to Balaam's prophecy, which includes a description of the End of Days, not as a statement of transitory validity, but as a prophecy in effect until the final Redemption.

Moreover, Balaam is not only a prophet; not only a man with sublime spiritual powers, of the type possessed by different individuals from birth; nor is he one of the people blessed with far-reaching vision, or the ability to reveal the concealed, none of which are related to the essence of prophecy. Balaam is a prophet of the Lord. It was not for nothing that the Rabbis declared: "Three were involved in that intrigue [Rashi: that was decreed by Pharaoh: ""Every boy that is born you shall throw into the Nile" - Exodus 1:22], namely: Balaam, Job, and Jethro" (Sanhedrin 106a). Each of these three is a special existence in his own right - the existence of a non-Jew who draws near, each in his own way, to the Holy One, blessed be He.

And after all this, despite their not expropriating his prophecy, why did the Rabbis turn Balaam into a creature for whom every defamatory midrash is appropriate? The obverse of this question may also be asked: if Balaam was on such a high level, how did this come to pass?

The Disciples of the Wicked Balaam

In order to get to the root of the matter, it must be understood that Balaam is not merely a private entity: he represents an entire worldview. This thought was already expressed in the Rabbinic dictum: "The one who has the following three attributes is of the disciples of our father Abraham; but the one who has three other attributes is of the disciples of the wicked Balaam ..." (Avot loc. cit.). In this mishnah the Rabbis present two schools: the life and essence of Abraham, and in contrast, that of Balaam.

In this teaching the Rabbis emphasize only one aspect of the wicked Balaam: "an evil eye, a haughty spirit, and a proud soul," or, in other words, the egotistical conception. In contrast with Moses, who was humbler than any other man (Number 12:3), or with Abraham, who testifies about himself "I who am but dust and ashes" (Genesis 18:27), Balaam has "a haughty spirit, and a proud soul." It is well-known that when a prophet issues prophecy, it is expressed though the vehicle of his personality (see the Rabbinic teaching [Pesahim 66b) on Deborah's singing, "Till I arose, O Deborah, arose, O mother, in Israel" [Judges 5:7]). Balaam's egotistical orientation is already discernible in the style of his prophecy: "Word of Balaam son of Beor, word of the man whose eye is true [shetum ha-ayin]" (Numbers 24:3) - i.e., the one who sees clearly, and in a literal interpretation: "I am the seer" (I Samuel 9:19; also see the Rabbinic midrashim on this verse).

In our attempt to define the essence of Balaam, he may be characterized as an intellectual and a great theologian and philosopher. Balaam's existence presumably states that one may reach prophetic attainments by involving oneself in the study of the divinity. Nonetheless, in the high levels reached by Balaam there is a dividing point between the side of sanctity and the "other side" of the klipah (the nonsacred husk in which the sparks of holiness are captured). Consequently, the account that the Rabbis have to settle with him, including the imperative to expound his character in a derogatory manner, is to be made in this realm of his character, that of the theological intellectual, who counters Moses.

On the verse "the one no less than the other was God's doing" (Ecclesiastes 7:14) the literature states that this is the general form of all the worlds: there is a certain parallelism between the worlds of sanctity and the Sitra Ahra, the "other side." The Talmud relates (Hagigah 5b) that when Rabbi Joshua ben Hananiah, who constantly disputed with the heretics, was about to die, the Rabbis asked him that would become of them [at the hands of the unbelievers]. Rabbi Joshua replied with the verse: "Counsel has perished from the children, their wisdom has vanished" (Jeremiah 49:7) - when the children's counsel has vanished, the wisdom of the non-Jews is of no avail to them.

The parallelism between the spheres is all-encompassing. Thus, each of the leading figures in one world has a counterpart in the other realm. Interestingly enough, the parallel worlds are not always at war with each other: at times they reach quite similar conclusions, and the differences between them are not explicit and distinct. (To draw this point into sharper focus: just as in Israel those studying Torah are called Talmidei hakhamim, literally, "the pupils of the wise," and do not define themselves as "sages," so too the wise men of Greece defined themselves as "philosophers," i.e., the "lovers of wisdom," and not as "wise men.") The Zohar states that Greek wisdom is the closest wisdom to the way of truth. It is necessary to understand not only what causes wisdom to be close to the way of truth, but also what separates it from the truth. Similarly, there are many likenesses between the disciples of Abraham and those of the wicked Balaam, and the fine distinctions between the two must be discerned.

The Difference between the Side of Sanctity and the "Other Side"

In order to understand the source of the difference between the wise men of the non-Jewish world and the sages of Israel, we must first note that this difference is not inherent in the essential difference between Jew and non-Jew, but rather in the differential between two disparate approaches.

There are dissimilarities that do not pertain to the initial search, but rather to its prefaces and preparations. Every discussion is preceded by various introductions that, even if they do not dictate the results of the inquiry, do determine the coloration and individual significance of the conclusion. Consequently, two individuals may work in parallel on more or less equivalent data, and reach very similar basic conclusions, but with considerable variance regarding the details.

Thus, for example, we can reach the roots of the difference between the servant of God and the philosopher. The spiritual preparation of the former is: "I serve the Lord, and I am going to search for him." The initial preparation of the philosopher is: "I am going to search." In other words, the philosopher and the Kabbalist are confronted by the same problem, namely, the relationship between the material world and the Holy One, blessed be He, and how the two may be joined into a single system. Each, however, asks a completely different question. The philosopher asks: "The world exists; if there is a world, how can there be a God?" The Kabbalist, on the other hand, asks: "God exists; if there is a God, how can there be a world?" If each succeeds in delving to the depths of this issue, they will arrive at similar conclusions; but if they are not successful, the difference between them will be all the more striking.

Formulating this differently: it is possible to begin from the starting point of "I am a servant of the Holy One, blessed be He" (from the Berikh Shemeih prayer preceding the taking out of the Torah scroll); or from the preparatory point of "I am seeking God." The difference between these two formulations mandates a tremendous attitudinal contrast. Such a gap does not direct the course of the inquiry and its results, but it does shape the approach, the course of action, and the hue accompanying the general essential nature of the study. Indeed, the Rabbis greatly stress the difference between abstract thought for its own sake, and the one who seeks to vitalize his faith.

Consequently, Balaam may be a person with a perception of God of the highest possible level, with the most subtle understanding of such manners, but nonetheless still remain Balaam. Why is this so? Because, for him, there is no contradiction between bestial life in the material world and the perception of the Divinity in the spiritual realms, since the two worlds are detached in his conception. Rashi has noted (Numbers 24:3) that Balaam is called "the one with the open eye [i.e., blind]" "because he said, 'and the number of the seed of Israel' (Numbers 23:10), [i.e.,] the Holy One, blessed be He, sits and counts the issue of Israel. 'When {He wonders] will appear the drop from which a righteous person will be fashioned?' He said to himself, 'Does He who is holy and Whose ministers are holy contemplate such matters?' It is for this reason that Balaam's eye was blinded." In other words, Balaam does not see the connection between the two worlds, and he therefore is surprised when he sees what the Holy One, blessed be He, is pondering.

There are some people for whom there is an everlasting, never-ending partition between the essence of the abstract, the sublime, the pure truth, and that of the very nature of life, to its very lowest level. This boundary leads to the thought that He who is holy and Whose ministers are holy is totally disinterested in base material matters. For such a person, there is a fundamental intellectual divide between the two spheres: in one world, the soul ascends to the highest attainments in the perception of the Divine, while the other world is that which occupies man in his leisure hours. For those who hold such a view, intellectual study and pure thought exist in a world intrinsically perfect and refined which, surprisingly enough, is not soiled by a person's individual personality.

The Relationship between the Spiritual Spheres and the Material World

The Rabbi of Kotsk once asked, regarding the concept of "the prophets of the non-Jewish nations," how could a person be both a prophet and a debased creature. He replied that there could not be such a one in Israel, but this is possible among the non-Jews. Why is this so? The realm of thought and abstraction does not always wield influence over the whole man; the entire person does not participate in the struggle and the building of the relationship between man and God: he sends only his mind to the fray. Such a labor uproots both man's emotional parts and the human portion in general.

The Jewish people, by its very nature, encompasses the admixture between the heavenly and the earthly and is cognizant of the paradox between the world and God, of the continuous intertwining of the material and the spiritual, of the attempt to join together the abstract and the concrete. The spiritual and the psyche are not sufficient for the Jew. As the Talmud comments: "The one who says, 'I have only Torah,' does not even possess Torah" (Yevamot 109b) and "Whoever studies Torah but does not preserve it, it would have been better if his placenta had turned over" (Tanhuma, Ekev 6), that is, regarding a person for whom only abstract thought exists, it would be better if he had never been born. Every action must be performed in the manner of "All my bones shall say" (Psalms 35:10), that includes all aspects of the "I."

The human intellectual power is capable of applying itself in the realm of the perception of abstract divine subjects totally divorced from the sacred. The sanctity of Israel, however, begins, first of all, with an admixture of the spiritual and the material. This intermingling is a part of our perpetual pain, which is not an intellectual pain.

There are several Rabbinic expositions of the verse "O youth, enjoy yourself while you are young! Let your heart lead you to enjoyment in the days of your youth. Follow the desires of your heart and the glances of your eyes - but know well that God will call you to account for all such things" (Ecclesiastes 11:9), one of which learns: "'O youth, enjoy yourself while you are young' - [enjoy] the Torah you learned in your youth; 'Let your heart lead you to enjoyment in the days of your youth' - this is the Mishnah; 'Follow the desires of your heart and the glances of your eyes' - this is the Talmud; 'but know well that God will call you to account for all such things' - these are the commandments and good deeds" (Ecclesiastes Rabbah 11:8). Know that after everything you study, "God will call you to account for all such things": what have you done with all that you have learned?

The verse "For as wisdom grows, vexation grows" (Ecclesiastes 1:18) may be interpreted in several ways. When someone encounters a difficult argument which he cannot master, he experiences intellectual pain; beyond this intellectual suffering, however, is the anguish of the Israelite, who adds to his wisdom and asks himself (based on Genesis 41:39): "After God has made all this known to me," what do I do with this? This anguish ensues from a different understanding of wisdom, one that regards it as an awesome responsibility. According to this conception, every Torah teaching makes a great tumult, and cries out to the person who learned it: "And what have you done with me?" From this aspect, every attainment of man is also a critique of him.

The Influence of Theoretical Study on the Student

A part of the difference between the students of Balaam the wicked and those of Abraham is related to the question of the connection between the worlds. Balaam attained a perception of the divine, but what use did he make of this understanding? He stretched out in his easy chair and exclaimed: "Oh, how nice!" - and nothing more. The Hasidic literature (see Torah Or by Shneur Zalman of Lyady, the first Lubavitcher Rebbe, on the portion of Lekh Lekha) states that there is an entity named "Reumah"("Reumah," the name of Nahor's concubine, is understood here as re'u mah - see something). "Mah" - something, is the smallest of things, but it says to all: "See what I am, that I have something within me!" Such a person need not head a university department; like Diogenes, he can merely sit in a barrel - provided that the barrel is not concealed, but in plain view, with everyone seeing his humility. And so every conclusion that such a person takes while occupied with a theological subject, reinforces his "I."

The disciples of Balaam, like Balaam himself, are therefore great individuals who froze in "an empty howling waste" (based on Deuteronomy 32:10), in a place where one may ponder every question in the world, undisturbed. For these people, everything which exceeds a certain structure of abstract thought ceases to be significant. This is the world in which Balaam lives, and this is the trail that he blazed for his disciples.

In contrast, whoever is one of "the disciples of Abraham" (the Hasidic literature [see Torah Or, loc. cit.] also expounds the name "Avraham" as a combination of the words: aver-mah - a part of nothing, as Abraham spoke of himself, "I who am but dust and ashes" [Genesis 18:27]), who bears the essence of Moses (Moses is a very humble man, more so than any other man on earth [Numbers 12:3], and a similar verse referring to him also appears in this context: "venahnu mah - for who are we?" [Exodus 16:7] - we are nothing), the more he sees, the more he is reduced. He is seized by the desire to do something with the things he has learned, he cannot sit idly by. Every new insight attained by the disciple of Abraham does not remain in the realm of the abstract: it must have some effect within him.

The litmus test of a disciple of Abraham is not that he says that his insight was a truthful one, but rather that we see that he follows the way of truth. When he walks in this path, the way acts upon him and obligates him to build, to act in an actual essential manner in all arenas: between him and himself, between him and God, between him and others, and between him and his parents.

In order to sharpen this distinction, we may add that Balaam is not a simple non-Jew riding on an ass; he is a respectable non-Jew, possessing inner significance, who is incapable of lying and who is truly willing to waive all the gold and silver that Balak offers him. The question arises: what prevents Balaam from lying a little? Balaam is a man of science, a theologian; for him, this is the truth, and he obviously cannot deviate from it. Thus, even though this attitude would seem to be on a high level, in actuality it is precisely the side opposite and opposed to the aspect of sanctity, since it is interwoven with the spiritual essence of the person who lives with it - Balaam.

The Wicked Balaam vs. Abraham

The Rabbis seemingly could have contrasted Balaam with Moses. They chose, however, to present him in comparison with Abraham because of the profound point of similarity between the two. Both Abraham and Balaam came from the same place (the Rabbis taught [see Targum Jonathan on the verse "They also put Balaam son of Beor to the sword" - Numbers 31:8] that Balaam is Laban; according to this exposition, not only did Abraham and Balaam come form the same region, they were also relatives); both are individuals who sought the way to God and found Him by themselves. The main distinction between the two consists of their response to a unexplained, and inexplicable, actuality.

Both Abraham and Balaam rode on an ass, and on their way they encountered angels, who gave them directions contrary to what the Holy One, blessed be He, had explicitly told them. From this aspect, each was confronted by a very difficult paradox. The anguish of each, however, is not equal. For Balaam, the question is whether he will manage to receive a bit of money and honor or not; for Abraham, the command he received stands in inner and external contrast to the entire course of his life until then.

The command to bind Isaac was diametrically opposed to Abraham's entire emotional and intellectual world; to everything he possessed; to everything that he had perceived and knew about the Holy One, blessed be He; to everything that the Lord had promised him; to everything that he had understood, said, and done his entire life. All was destroyed in a single moment. All that remained to him in this world was the Holy One, blessed be He, Himself, the desire to heed the command of the Lord. And after all this the angel of God comes from Heaven, and gives him a command contradicting the explicit directive he has received. At different stages, Abraham could have stopped contending with the many contradictions; but no: he continues to live with the Holy One, blessed be He, despite all these inconsistencies. This is at the very center of the essence of Abraham. When Balaam, on the other hand, faces this contradiction, he remains Balaam, with his interests and occupations, and he goes forth to do precisely what he planned to do.

In conclusion, mention should be made of one point connected with Balaam's end. As we have seen, Balaam was a great prophet as Moses, he had long-range vision to the End of Days, but nevertheless, he was fated from the beginning to fall into the abyss of purely intellectual pursuit. This may possibly explain the strange manner in which the Bible describes the death of Balaam: "Together with the others that they slew, the Israelites put Balaam son of Beor, the augur, to the sword" (Joshua 13:22). Suddenly, Balaam has ceased to be a prophet, a man of God, and all that remains is just Balaam the augur.

Balaam was not an ordinary conjurer: he was a sorcerer is the realm of the intellect, where he engaged in hocus pocus not with a juggler's balls, but with ideas. In the final analysis, however, in the great trial of history, Balaam is not a "prophet," but an "augurer." In the end, all that remains of Balaam is the fact that he was a person who played various types of intellectual games; in the end, he was killed together with all the females of Midian, so that a single intellectual - Balaam - was added to all the nonintellectual Midianites.

The episode of Balak and Balaam does not end with their being killed. Rather, this only begins a new drama, with the recurring question: what do we do next? How do we apply the teachings of this Torah?