BALAAM: THE PROPHET OF THE NATIONS.
We read in Parashat Vezot Habracha:(44:10) ’And there was no other prophet who arose in Israel like Moshe, whom the Lord knew face to face.’
The Midrash Sifre elucidates - presumably due to the seemingly superfluous words:’in Israel’ -‘In Israel’: in Israel there did not arise, but in the nations, there did - Balaam.
‘To what can the matter be likened? To that of the king’s cook, who knows the amount of the outlays of the king, for his table.’
Rav Baruch Halevi Epstein expounds:’Meaning: the knowledge of Balaam of דעת עליון: of knowledge of Above, was in the nature of the king’s cook - a simple and limited knowledge - whereas the knowledge of Moshe was like that of the king’s confidante, to whom the inner secrets are revealed.
‘Rav Chaim miVolozhin uses the parable of an eagle and an owl, both of whom know the time of the sunrise and of the sunset, but their reaction is different, as from one extreme to the other.
‘The eagle, whose nature is well known, loves the sun’s rays, but at night, his sight is dimmed, and he is unable to see.
‘The owl - on the other hand - only finds comfort at night, in the dark, and is fearful of the sunlight.
‘Therefore, at sunrise, both knew it, but with very different purposes - the eagle, to see the light and life, the owl to conceal itself - by contrast, when the darkness of night approaches, both of them are also aware of it - but the eagle: to hide, the owl to come to life.
‘The Rav likened ‘the knowledge of Above’, of Moshe and of Balaam at times of עת רצון: of favor Above - the time of favor, for blessings and light from Above.
‘At that time, Moshe’s prophecy arose, praying for Divine influence and blessing for the world - Balaam, too, knew that it was an עת רצון: a fortuitous time, Above for the fulfillment of prayers - but covered himself up, like the owl - and not only did not seek light and blessings, but - instead - sought to then awaken his powers of prophecy, and to use the Divine influence, to curse Bnei Israel.
‘We now understand the meaning of: both Moshe and Balaam knew when it was an עת רצון Above - the one to bring light, the other to bring darkness, to the world.’
Rav Gedalia Schorr brings the drasha of Mahar’il Diskin to expound this wondrous parsha: ‘Mahari’l Diskin brings the gemara (Yebamot 49:)’All the prophets saw as through a mirror that was not clear, whereas Moshe saw as through a clear pane of glass’.
‘He explained: All prophecy descends from the Upper Worlds, and the prophet looks into his soul, it being like a clear mirror, where any tinge of color, color what is seen.
‘So too, the soul of the prophet - the purer his soul, the clearer his prophetic vision - which is why Moshe Rabbeinu saw ‘with a clear vision’.
‘The impure souls of other prophets acted as a screen, to limit their prophetic visions.’
Mahari’l. Diskin brings our Sifre, and asks: ‘Did Balaam really think that Hashem would permit him to curse Israel? Did Hashem not adjure him that ‘this people were blessed’? - how did he think that he would be able to curse them, against the words of Hashem?
‘Expounded Mahari’l Diskin: Balaam opined that he would ‘bless’ Israel in a vision, which is dependent on the soul of the blesser - as the prophecy is fulfilled in that way.
‘Thereforel - he surmised - his ‘blessing’ would be fulfilled in accord with his lowly, hateful soul, to the detriment of Israel.
‘However, Hashem - on this single occasion - ensured that the prophetic vision Balaam saw, was as a clear vision, which precluded any interpretation other than the one Hashem intended - as a true blessing of Israel.
‘This is what Sifre meant: that Balaam on this occasion had a prophetic vision with the same clarity as Moshe Rabbeinu - though clearly Balaam’s character did not change in any way, from its venal nature, by this singular occurrence.’
Rav Aryeh Leib Heiman asks on our Sifre:’Where in the literal reading of the Torah, do we find a basis to be able to say that Balaam was comparable to Moshe Rabbeinu?
‘Might it not be in Moshe’s refusal to accede to Hashem’s command, that he go to Pharoah, to take Bnei Israel out of Egypt - maintaining his refusal until Hashem sent Aaron with him, to speak to Pharoah?
‘The only other comparable place where this occurred is Balaam! ‘Initially Hashem commanded him not to go to Balak and - as it were - Hashem later ‘yielded’ to the wish of Balaam and permitted him to go.
‘Further: When Moshe said to Hashem: ’Send by the hand of whom you send’, he had Aaron in mind - yet Hashem did send Aaron with Moshe - and, with Balaam, too, Hashem permitted him to go.
‘Nowhere else do we find that the matter was resolved according to the wish of flesh-and-blood, as against the thought of Hashem
‘We see, therefore, that Moshe and Balaam are the only two that stood their ground, till Hashem acceded to their wishes, and Hashem permitted them to go in accordance with their prophetic mission - therefore, the Midrash saw a common-side, in the nature of (Taanit 19.) both ‘standing against the Will of their Father doing their will’.
‘As we said at the outset, our Sages wanted to teach us that, despite his lofty aptitudes, Balaam wss thoroughly wicked, and, because they knew his true lowly character, they brought all his actions and thoughts, to teach that despite his aptitudes, he remained thoroughly wicked.
‘Thus, whilst both he and Moshe refused to fulfill their prophetic mission, there was an enormous difference in their reason for so doing: Moshe refused out of concern for the honor of his older brother, Aaron - whereas Balaam ‘refused’ because of his desire to curse Bnei Israel.
‘Rashi (32:5) comments:’And if you should say: why did Hashem rest His shechina on a wicked man like Balaak? Answer: So that the nations would not have an opening to say: ‘if we had prophets, we would have gone on the straight path’ - He set for them prophets, but they were steeped in immorality, and, in the end, counseled them to give themselves to harlotry.
‘The reason for the different outcomes was because the prophets of Israel were of a different nature: their pure souls sought to further ascend in purity, and to come nearer to Hashem - prophecy being but a means to do so - but you - the prophets of the nations, did not have the main element: the will to submit yourselves to the Will of Hashem - I will give you a prophet with great spiritual aptitudes, and see to what use he put them!
‘So it will be with any prophet that I give you, unlike My faithful servants, who seek only to cleave closer to Me.
‘We can but conclude that it is clear that a person can have all the means necessary to cleave to Hashem - even to be a talmid chacham - yet, despite this, his יראת שמים : Awe of Heaven, is deficient.
‘Not only non-Jews like Balaam can be like him - we find the very same result in lofty members of our nation: Doag the Edomi, who was the head of the Sanhedrin?in Achitophel and above all of them -Yeroboam whom Hashem Himself nominated to be the king of the nation - yet all three have ‘no share in the world-to-come’.
‘The determinant is not the external appearance of a person which displays signs of piety, but the purity of one’s soul, and doing only what Hashem wants of us.’
Rav David Hofstedter comments:’We need to ask why the venal Balaam was chosen to be the prophet for the nations, a person of such lowly character that he co-habited with his ass - why, then, was such a low-life chosen?
‘To answer this, we need to note that the purpose of his prophecy was very different from that of the prophets of Israel.
‘They only merited prophecy after they first purified and sanctified themselves, ascending one level after another, till they nullified their physical nature - the peak being Moshe Rabbeinu, who nullified his physical nature, till the Shechina spoke from his throat - and therefore merited to be ‘the father of all prophets’, as the Torah attests:’And no prophet arose in Israel the like of Moshe.’
‘By contrast, Balaam did not sanctify himself or make any preparation for his prophecy, but ascended his bed like all men- and prophesied.
‘He was the opposite of anything connected to sanctity, being totally concerned only with the material world and its attractions.
‘Because of this total subjugation to the material world and his desires, he remained as lowly as he was, despite being gifted with prophecy.
‘He was but an intermediary in the hands of Hashem, to transmit through him His words, in the nature of a receptacle which receives and passes-on, whilst himself remaining as he was, as he did not possess any of the attributes necessary for prophecy.
‘It was for that very reason that he was chosen, to teach that prophecy amongst the nations is totally unlike the prophecy and Torah of Moshe - Balaam was but an intermediary, and his prophecy had no effect on him personally.
‘The lesson we are to learn from our parsha, is that at times we hear lofty meaningful ideas from persons who are totally engaged in the physical world - since the lofty words themselves do not attest to the character of the person who uttered them, we need to always check the speaker by his deeds, and his toil to improve his character attributes - to make sure his character matches his words.’
Rav Elya Lopian comments:’Though Sifre compares Balaam to Moshe Rabbeinu, there are vast differences between the level of their prophecy: Moshe did not know who was speaking to him, whilst Balaam did; Moshe did not know when Hashem would speak to him, until Hashem did so; Moshe did not speak to Hashem except when he was standing, Balaam when he had fallen down - ‘To what can it be likened? To the king’s cook who knows what the expenses of the kitchen were, for the household’.
‘Why does the Torah see a need to relate to us all the defects and wickedness of Balaam?
‘More so - when Rambam lays down the lofty attributes required for a person to merit prophecy - prime being battling and overcoming the wiles of the evil inclination - yet Balaam was the very opposite of this!
‘So we are left with our question: how did Balaam merit prophecy?
‘The.answer is that there are two aspects of prophecy, and there is a vast difference between them: there is the principal prophecy, that the prophet receives after he has worked to refine his attributes, this to overcome the wiles of his evil inclination - he then merits to receive prophecy from Hashem, as was the case with all the prophets of Israel throughout the generations.
‘The second type, is when it is given to a person by way of a gift, for a time - and this does not require any preparation by the person, but, instead, his soul is purified for that time, and he sees a prophetic vision - but just as it came, so it goes, and the person remains the same person he previously was.
‘Such was the prophecy of Balaam - he did not purify his soul to merit prophecy of the level of the prophets of Israel.
‘Rashi answers the obvious question - ‘why was the wicked Balaam given prophecy?’ - to stem the mouths of the nations’ - as we have brought.
‘Now everything becomes clear: prophecy which results from working on one’s self, leads to the building of worlds; but prophecy like that of Balaam, can lead to the destruction of worlds.
‘This, because the prophets of Israel adjured the observance of Torah and mitzvot and upright attributes, whereas the prophets of the nations teach the opposite: immorality, idolatry and the like.
‘Why, then, was Balaam - who was like these prophets - chosen from Above, and not someone else?
‘The answer is that in his intellect, Balaam was truly gifted, but only in his mind - but not in his heart, and (Sanhed’ 106:) ‘.HaShem wants hearts’.
‘To teach us this, the story of Balaam teaches that this type of prophet remains as he was - as he is unaffected by the singular gift of prophecy, as without Torah, intellectual wisdom is as nought - more: it can destroy worlds.’
The Mashgiach - Rav Yerucham from Mir - adds: The need for the prophecy of Balaam is, that it is necessary that the wicked also admit the lofty level of Bnei Israel, as this becomes clearer when the antagonist admits it - as the purpose of the matter of good in this world, is that it should become so evident, that there is no escape from it - when even the avowed wicked enemy, admits it : this is the required level of clarity
A parting gem from our Sages:(Midrash Rabba, Patashat Devarim):’Said Rav Acha the son of Rav Chanina:’The rebukes should have come from the mouth of Balaam and the blessings from the mouth of Moshe - but had Balaam rebuked them, Israel would say: The one who hates us, rebukes us AND had Moshe blessed them, the nations would say: The one who loved them, blessed them.
‘Said Hakadosh-Baruch-Hu:’ Let the rebukes come from Moshe, and the blessings from Balaam - so that they should be established in Israel.’
לרפואת נועם עליזה בת זהבה רבקה ונחום אלימלך רפאל בן זהבה רבקה, בתוך שאר חולי עמנו.