Bilam and Balak
PARASHAT HASHAVUA
PARASHAT
BALAK
Bilam
and Balak
Ezra
Bick
Parashat
Balak is a parasha of dialogues. The most striking is that between Bilam and his
ass, and the one which justifiably draws the most attention is the one between
Bilam and God, both for what it says about God's relationship with Israel and
for its insight into the enigmatic character of Bilam, who is characterized by
the Sages as the "prophet of the gentiles." I would like to concentrate on a
related but somewhat different dialogue, the one between Balak and Bilam, which
continues throughout the parasha, and is the actual framework for most of what
is related.
While
the character of Bilam is problematic, even a cursory reading of the parasha
presents him as a tzaddik compared to Balak. Balak constantly presses
Bilam to curse Israel, and Bilam repeatedly replies that he will do only that
which God instructs him. In the final result, Balak refuses to pay him, and
Bilam accepts that result. While psychologically it is not hard to find clues to
what Bilam would have really wished to do, were he not bound by the hand of God,
it is still undoubtedly true that in the relationship between him and Balak, he
is the hero and Balak the villain (at least up and till the incident of Baal
Peor, where his name is not actually mentioned in the parasha).
The
parasha opens with a description of Balak. "Balak son of Tzippor saw all that
Israel had done to the Emori" (22,2). In this verse he is not described as king
of Moav. Only two verses later, after describing the worried consultation of
Moav and Midian about the danger of the Jews, does the Torah add "and Balak ben
Tzippor was king of Moav at that time" (22,4). This leads many
commentators to conclude that he was appointed king only after the people
of Moav began to worry about the danger posed by the approaching Israelite
nation. The Ramban claims that this was because, as part of their preparations
for war, they needed a mighty warrior as king, and Balak filled the role. The
only support the Ramban is able to find for his assumption that Balak was a
military figure is in the verse in Shoftim which was in last week's haftara,
where Yiftach asks the king of Ammon whether he sees himself as "better than
Balak ben Tzippor," who did not wage war on Israel when they came from Egypt.
The Ramban understands this question to mean are you mightier than the famous
hero Balak, who did not dare to wage war on us, that you now seek to fight with
us. In our parasha there is, in fact, no hint that Balak is a warrior. If we
remember that our only knowledge of the character called Balak before being
informed that he was the king at that time is that he "saw all that
Israel had done to the Emori," it is reasonable to conclude that he was chosen
king for precisely that reason that he was perceptive. He was the one
who raised the issue and warned the people of Moav of the approaching danger,
and hence he was chosen to deal with the problem.
In
other words and this is my first point Balak is introduced as a perceptive
statesman and strategist, who had studied the Jewish advance on the land of
Canaan, and specifically had been impressed by the surprising victory of the
band of escaped slaves over the mighty kings of the Emori, Sichon and Og. This
had resulted in a state of psychological panic in the people of Moav, and Balak
had been specifically chosen as king in response, to offer a response and "save
the day."
Now
we begin the dialogue.
First
act: 22,5-13
Balak
sends messengers to Bilam, asking him to curse the "people who have come from
Egypt," for he explains "I know that he whom you bless is blessed and he
whom you curse shall be cursed." In other words, Balak ascribes power to Bilam
he has the power to bless and to curse. Hence, Bilam can be hired to change the
destiny of Israel and Moav.
Bilam
answers (after consulting with God, which may indicate something about Bilam's
own desires and beliefs but we are not concerned with his character now) that
God has not permitted him to go with the messengers of Balak. Notice he does
not in any way indicate that if he did go he could not meet the demand. His
answer implies that he does in fact have the power to overcome Israel; however,
he is not permitted to go. Like all men, Bilam obeys the commands of his God. In
this case, that means that he restrains the power that he possesses and does not
use it against God's express command.
Does
Bilam actually believe that he possesses this power? It is interesting to note
that when Bilam repeats the message of the messengers of Moav to God at night,
he cites their words nearly verbatim, with one very notable exception. He leaves
out entirely the explanation of Balak that "I know that he whom you bless is
blessed and he whom you curse shall be cursed." Bilam does not dare repeat this
to God, for of course it is absurd the power to bless or curse is God's. The
real reason that Bilam asks God what to do is because he can only curse the
people if God agrees to curse them. In other words, it is not prohibited to go
to Balak against God's command, it is pointless to go without God's support. But
Bilam does not tell this to Balak (or rather, at this point, to the messengers
of Balak). He does not wish to impugn his professional reputation, which is
based on the occult powers he is believed to possess. In the morning, he merely
tells them that he is not permitted to travel to Balak, implying nothing
about his ability to curse or bless.
Technically,
this is accurate, as what God had told him was "Do not go with them" (22,12).
And so, Bilam tells them that "God has refused to permit me to go with you"
(22,13). It is just that he has left out a little. God told Bilam, "Do not go
with them, do not curse the people." Bilam conveniently leaves out the second
part. What is more, God has added a reason for the prohibition. "Do not go with
them, do not curse the people, for they are blessed." The last part
directly contradicts the premise of Balak and the pretense of Bilam. Blessing
and curse are not actually in the mouth of Bilam at all. It is not only
prohibited, it is pointless, as they are blessed (by God) before Bilam begins to
act. Of course Bilam does not cite this part of God's statement to the
messengers of Balak.
Second
act: 22,16-38
Balak
sends a second request to Bilam. This time, the message begins with the opening,
"Thus speaks Balak ben Tzippor, do not refrain to come to me." This sentence
includes both the formal emphasis on the status of the king, and a not very well
hidden threat. The first time, Balak offered Bilam an assignment. This time he
is given a direct royal order.
Since
Bilam had claimed that his inability to give Balak what he had requested was
rooted in a command, Balak responds with a contravening one. Against Bilam's
explanation that "God has refused to permit me to go with you," Balak responds
with, "do not refrain to come to me." Parallel to Bilam's attribution of the
prohibition to "God," Balak carefully and explicitly attributes his command with
the words "Thus speaks Balak ben Tzippor." Apparently, Balak is not overly
impressed with the authority of God, or specifically of the god whom Bilam had
called by the name we assume refers only to the God of Israel (HaShem - the
tetragrammaton). He is perfectly willing to place his own royal authority
against the (divine) authority behind which Bilam is hiding. To which he also
adds that it is worth Bilam's while to obey him rather than God, as he will pay
handsomely.
Bilam
answers, "If Balak will give me enough silver and gold to fill his house, I
still will not be able to transgress the word of HaShem my God" (22,18). Here we
have direct confrontation. Balak has implicitly placed his authority above that
of God; Bilam answers him directly that the authority of God binds him more, and
takes over both the authority of the king and his money as
well.
Before
this answer is actually delivered to the king, we have the incident of Bilam's
ass. Something about Bilam's message or understanding of his mission is not
acceptable to God. Before Bilam sets out to the king, after receiving God's
permission to do so, he is told by God, "But, that which I will speak to
you, that is what you shall do" (22,20). When the angel frees him to continue,
he says to him, "However, that which I shall speak to you, that is what
you shall speak" (22,35). There is subtle change here, especially if measured
against Bilam's understanding of his role. It is not just that Bilam may not
transgress God's prohibitions on his actions. His speech, the locus of
his presumed power, is not his speech at all. His very words are to be no more
than the words that God gives him. If this will be carried out, it will be that
Bilam has no words of his own at all, he is merely quoting God.
And
so, when Bilam finally meets Balak, he answers him with one sentence, which in
fact appears to go far beyond what he has said in the
past.
Behold,
I have come to you. Now, can I say anything? That which God shall place in my
mouth, it will I speak (22,38).
Here
we have the answer to Balak's original assumption, one which Bilam has tried to
avoid contradicting. The question is not one of authority at all, though of
course Balak's authority could not supervene that of God. Bilam is not only
bound by God's command to restrain his power of cursing or blessing. In fact, he
has no such power at all. The words, apparently so powerful, which come out of
his mouth they are only the words that God has placed there beforehand. The
picture in our minds created by this use of language, of God placing a piece of
paper in the mouth of Bilam, turns him into no more than an amplification
device. The question is rhetorical.
"Now, can I say anything?" Do I have the power of speech? I just release that
which is implanted in me by God. If Balak will understand this answer, he will
realize that the entire enterprise of hiring a wizard to curse is pointless and
nonsensical. There is no such thing as the power to curse.
Third
Act: The Blessings
The
rest of the drawn out conversation of Balak and Bilam repeats this conflict, as
Balak remains unable to understand it.
Balak
said to Bilam: What have you done to me; I hired you to curse my enemies,
and you have blessed them.
He
answered him and said: Behold, that which God places in my mouth, that is what I
keep to speak. (23,11-12)
Balak's
next move is to see whether Bilam has the power to change God's mind. He sends
him back to try again, and enquires, "What has God said?" (23,16). When Bilam
blesses once again, including the statement that God, unlike men, does not change his mind (23,19), Balak
exclaims,
If
you will not curse them, then you will not bless them.
Bilam
answered and said to Balak, But I have already told you, everything that
God will speak, I will do. (23,25-26)
Balak
has given up on getting a curse from Bilam, but at least he thinks that if he
can get Bilam to be silent, then there will be no blessing. Bilam answers him
that neither Balak nor Bilam have the power to stay the blessing of
God.
Balak
improves a little on his previous suggestions. He does not suggest that Bilam
can do anything to change the situation, but perhaps God will nonetheless
change.
Balak
said to Bilam: Let me take you to another place; perhaps it will please God and
you can curse them for me there. (23,27)
When
this does not work, Balak reverts to his original form, mocking Bilam. "And now,
run away to your place; I said I would honor you greatly, but your god has
prevented you from honor" (24,11). Bilam does not run away at all, and answers
once again,
Did
I not tell your messengers whom you sent to me, saying,
If
Balak will give me silver and gold to fill his house, I shall not be able to
transgress the word of God, to do good or evil from my own heart; that
which God speaks, I shall speak. (24,12-13)
The
dialogue ends with a conclusion of failure, dialogue without
understanding.
Bilam
rose and went and returned to his place, and also Balak went on his way.
(24,25)
Nothing
has changed.
Perhaps
this is part of the answer to the important question why Parashat Balak exists
at all. Why do we need to know of this incident, which happened around us and
did not affect us? Perhaps the answer is to inculcate the difference between the
understanding of Balak (who, after all, has his name as the name of the
parasha), a belief in power and in magic, and that of the Torah, as expressed
clearly by the one who stood on both sides of the question, of
Bilam.
For
there is no incantations in Yaacov, and no magic in Israel
Now
will be said to Yaacov and to Israel, what has God
wrought!
(23,23)