Numbers 22,3. “Moab was greatly afraid of the people ‎because they were so numerous; Moab greatly dreaded the ‎Children of Israel.” Judging by the fact that the Torah ‎distinguishes the feelings of the Moabites vis a vis ‎העם‎, the ‎‎“people,” and subsequently vis a vis the ‎בני ישראל‎, “the ‎Children of Israel”, we are entitled to assume that the term ‎העם‎ ‎refers to the fellow travelers, the mixed multitude that had ‎attached themselves to the Israelites at the time of the Exodus. ‎‎(Compare Sh’mot Rabbah 42,6)‎ According to the Zohar, the fear of the Moabites was ‎due to their having noticed that wherever the Israelites ‎encamped (40th year near the Jordan river) many gentiles would ‎join them and convert to Judaism, so that the word ‎העם‎, here ‎does not refer to the mixed multitude that had joined the ‎Israelites already at the Exodus. [I have not found this ‎‎Zohar, Ed.] Balak or his people were afraid that if ‎the Israelites were to encamp near them, many Moabites would ‎convert to Judaism and join them. [The legislation that ‎Moabites were not allowed to convert (Deuteronomy 23,4) had ‎not yet been made public. Ed.] The next line describing ‎the mental state of the Moabites as being one of dread of the ‎Israelites, explains that whereas normally, Balak could not have ‎cared less, here the fact that the Moabites were in such dread of ‎the Israelites caused him to fear wholesale defection among his ‎people to the Israelites as a real possibility. Balak was a great anti-‎Semite.‎

Numbers 22,4. “now this multitude will lick up all that ‎is around us as does the ox licking up the grass of the field, ‎etc.;” Why did Balak draw a comparison between the ‎encampment of the Israelites and the manner in which oxen ‎denude the soil of its grass cover? Before explaining this it will ‎help to explain Deuteronomy 11,15 where the Torah promises ‎the Israelites that when they observe the Torah once they are on ‎their own soil: ‎ונתתי עשב בשדך לבהמתך ואכלת ושבעת‎, “I will provide ‎the grass of the field for your beasts and you will eat and be ‎satisfied.” After the first sin G’d had condemned Adam to eating ‎the grass of the field. (Genesis 3,18) We need to remember that ‎whatever man eats is surrounded by commandments of the Torah ‎being fulfilled in the process. Long before the farmer can eat the ‎bread from the corn he grew this corn was subject to a variety of ‎regulations of the Torah that have to be fulfilled first, in order for ‎the farmer not to have been remiss. The farmer had to fulfill ‎commandments relating both to ploughing, such as not having a ‎donkey and an ox pulling the same plough; when seeding the ‎farmer must take care not to seed the same field with a mixture ‎of seeds of different grains, etc., before the tithes and related gifts ‎to the poor, etc., of the actual harvest become applicable. ‎‎(compare Deut. 22,10 and 9) By performing these various ‎commandments prior to enjoying the result of his labours, the ‎Jewish farmer becomes G’d’s partner in spiritually elevating the ‎‎“sparks” (of holiness) contained in some of these foods, i.e. ‎rehabilitating parts of G’d’s creation, such as some angels which ‎had been spiritually downgraded through failing to perform their ‎duties. When man is reduced to eating the grass of the field, i.e. ‎vegetation which grows without human input, he is unable ‎through his eating, i.e. his partaking of G’d’s largesse, to ‎accomplish his own or his environment’s rehabilitation.‎ This was the negative effect of the curse pronounced by G’d ‎as part of Adam’s punishment, i.e. road to rehabilitation, decreed ‎in Genesis 3,18. [This more than offsets the apparently ‎beneficial effect of picking his food from the ground effortlessly ‎and eating it as is. Ed.]‎ When the Torah describes the Israelite as “eating and being ‎satiated” in Deuteronomy 11,15, it does not refer to the Israelite ‎eating grass, but to his eating the ox after it has been duly ‎slaughtered, examined for blemishes, its blood having been ‎removed, etc., etc., i.e. numerous commandments having been ‎performed, so that by eating it eventually the party doing so ‎participates in the process of rehabilitating “fallen” sparks. ‎Through this round about manner of man eating grass, i.e. grass ‎which had first been eaten by the ox, he is enabled to participate ‎in the rehabilitation of holy beings that had been demoted from ‎their lofty origins. In his writings, the Ari’zal has stated ‎that the four basic levels of phenomena in this lower universe in ‎which we mortals live, i.e. the inert, the vegetarian, the ‎animalistic and the articulate, i.e. the human beings, there exist ‎four levels in the universe known in a descending order as ‎‎atzilut, b’riyah, yetzirah, and assiyah. In ‎other words, the level of the animalistic, or ‎חי‎, corresponds to the ‎level of ‎בריאה‎, creatures in the early stage of existence known as ‎בריאה‎ a stage in which this “creature” is distinct from other ‎‎“existences” on a similar level. The soul of repentant sinners is ‎in a better position to help rehabilitate converts (who used to be ‎pagans) than is the soul of a person who has always been a true ‎believer in monotheism. The wicked Balak of which our portion ‎speaks, was afraid of Israel because the Israelites had ‎demonstrated their ability to help rehabilitate fallen sinners, i.e. ‎‎“sparks,” during their journey through the desert, and he hated ‎holiness, as has been alluded to in the line ‎ויקץ מואב מפני בני ישראל‎, ‎‎“that Moab was disgusted by the Children of Israel,” i.e. their ‎moral/ethical values. The mere thought of having to be in the ‎presence of holiness, literally caused Balak to ‎puke. [The root occurs in connection with Rivkah’s ‎telling Yitzchok of being disgusted with her life if Yaakov would ‎marry a daughter of Canaanite descent as had his twin brother ‎Esau. (Genesis 27,45) Ed.] According to Ari z’al ‎what bothered Balak most, was the fact that during their ‎wanderings the converts had been most successful in ‎rehabilitating these “fallen” sinners, “sparks” and that is why the ‎Torah describes this ‎עם‎, i.e. the converts of the Jewish people as ‎being ‎רב‎, a major component of the people who rehabilitated ‎sinners. He feared them more than the natural born Israelites, i.e. ‎ויגר מואב מפני העם מאד‎, “Moab feared the newly converted ‎Israelites very much.” The reason was that ‎רב הוא‎, they were such ‎a powerful influence in rehabilitating pagans. The Moabites were ‎not nearly as afraid of the ‎בני ישראל‎, the natural born Israelites ‎being able to attract as many converts. In Balak’s eyes it was ‎as despicable to be an Israelite as it had been in the eyes of the ‎new King over Egypt and his nation in Exodus1,8-‎‎12. Moreover, he was aware that if his people would come into ‎contact with other recent Jewish converts, the influence of those ‎converts who had themselves come closer to G’d through joining ‎the Jewish people, would be powerful enough for them to elevate ‎Moabite converts to the highest spiritual level of life on earth, i.e. ‎the level of ‎בריאה‎. Referring back to the 4 spiritual levels of ‎existence in the physical part of the universe, spiritual ascent, ‎when it occurs, proceeds to the next higher level, the level of ‎בריאה ‏‎ being the one corresponding to ‎חי‎, the level of animalistic ‎creatures. This is hinted at by Balak when he compared the ‎people to the animals eating grass, i.e. ‎כלחוך השור את ירק השדה‎.‎

Another dimension of the line:‎עתה ילחכו הקהל את כל סביבותינו ‏כלחך השור את ירק השדה‎; will become clearer when we look at ‎‎Rashi on this verse.‎ Before doing this, however, we need to explain the meaning ‎of a few verses in the previous portion ‎חקת‎. We read in Numbers ‎‎21,27: ‎על כן יאמרו המשלים באו חשבון תבנה ותכונן עיר סיחון‎, ‎‎“therefore the bards would say ‘come to Cheshbon, it will be ‎rebuilt and well founded as a city belonging to Sichon.’” The same ‎bards continue with lamenting the fate of Moab from whom this ‎city had been conquered by Sichon. (verses 28-30) Apart from the ‎short summary of Moab’s history and Sichon’s might in these ‎verses, what is especially remarkable is that the future tense used ‎in relation to the city of Cheshbon, i.e. the future tense about a ‎city that had already been rebuilt and reinforced, seems difficult ‎to understand. Instead of the poet wishing for rebuilding of the ‎city, he should have wished for its continuing to endure, i.e. ‎תהיה ‏עיר סיחון וגו'‏‎. Furthermore, the poet quoted speaks of the ‎inhabitants of the city formerly having become refugees and ‎prisoners, describing the males as “refugees” and the females as ‎‎“prisoners.” Why this distinction?‎ We will clarify all this commencing with a statement in ‎‎Gittin 38 according to which the members of people of ‎Ammon and Moav respectively had been “ritually cleansed,” i.e. ‎permitted to be conquered by the Jewish people through their ‎having experienced becoming slaves of Sichon. Israel had been ‎forbidden to annex Moab and Ammon as long as these lands had ‎retained their independence. Any part of their lands which they ‎had “lost” to predator nations had not been included in the ‎Torah’s prohibition. That prohibition had been designed to ‎prevent members of those two nations to be elevated to the ‎status of converts to Judaism and membership in the Jewish ‎people. The concept of not being allowed to join the Jewish ‎people through conversion, signals to the rest of mankind that ‎these two nations are considered as the ultimate source of ‎destruction and desolation, as they are banned by Divine decree ‎from rehabilitating themselves spiritually. If any of these people, ‎through having been captured in war by another nation, had felt ‎themselves degraded, this was not so in the long run, as they had ‎then become qualified as potential members of the Jewish people. ‎When the poet refers to the Moabites as captives and fugitives ‎respectively, followed by the wish that Sichon’s city be rebuilt in ‎the future, he refers to the new hope that the Moabite victims ‎of Sichon’s conquest can now have, since they have become ‎redeemable spiritually if they were to convert to Judaism. When ‎something is legally incapable of being elevated to sanctity, it is ‎called ‎הרוס‎ and ‎חרוב‎, in Hebrew, whereas once this legal ‎restriction has been removed it is called ‎בנוי‎, built or rebuilt. ‎Hence the poet congratulates the inhabitants of that city as ‎becoming “rebuilt.” At the same time the poet mourns the fact ‎that the remainder of the state of Moab that had not been ‎captured by Sichon will remain forever condemned to being ‎spiritually irredeemable. Another way of phrasing what we have ‎just explained is that the redemption of the wicked is predicated ‎on his first having experienced defeat, capture. The anonymous ‎poets whom the Torah quoted in Numbers 21,29 appear to have ‎had prophetic insight for those who could attune their ears to ‎this.‎ The reason why the poets spoke of the refugees in the ‎masculine mode, i.e. ‎פלטים‎, is that the males benefited by their ‎becoming refugees, as they had been forbidden to convert to ‎Judaism, a barrier that had been removed from them by their ‎becoming fugitives. As long as they represented a minority of the ‎inhabitants of Sichon’s state they would be “legally” absorbed ‎according to Jewish law as described in B’rachot 28, and ‎henceforth be considered as Emorites. The reason that ‎nowadays former Moabites and Ammonites are accepted for ‎conversion to Judaism is that we cannot determine who is and ‎who is not a descendant of these people, and since they form a ‎minority of whatever people they now belong to they have ‎benefited by that status of being “absorbed” as a minority.‎ Concerning the female members of Moab described by the ‎poets as prisoners, i.e. ‎בשבית‎, this means that their captivity has ‎no hidden redeeming feature, and is absolute. This is due to the ‎females of the nations Ammon and Moab never having been ‎included in that ban on conversion. The Talmud Yevamot ‎‎69, ruling on that subject, based it on the Torah having written ‎‎(Deut. 23,4)‎לא יבא עמוני ומואבי בקהל ה' ‏‎, “neither a member of the ‎people (masculine) Ammon or Moab must be part of the ‎community of Hashem.” The use of the masculine adjective ‎is used by the Talmud to teach that female Moabites were never ‎included in that prohibition, hence Ruth, David’s grandmother, ‎could convert. They therefore did not mind their intermediate ‎status as captives of the Israelites as the fact that they had been ‎captive was sufficient for them to be elevated to the level of the ‎עולם הבריאה‎, even by natural born Israelites, as they did not ‎require such a major spiritual ”elevation,” as did their male ‎counterparts.‎

Having explained all this, the opening line of our portion, i.e. ‎Balak’s fear of the Israelites, which had baffled many in light of ‎G’d having forbidden the Israelites to harass the Moabites, much ‎less attack them, becomes more understandable.‎ It is true that Nachmanides had addressed this problem and ‎concluded that Balak’s fear was that the Moabites, on account of ‎their love or their being related to the founder of the Jewish ‎people, would voluntarily allow themselves to be conquered, as a ‎result of which the prohibition to attack and conquer their ‎territory would have become null and void, and the Israelites ‎would conquer that land, just as they had done with the land ‎owned by Sichon and Og, annex it. Nonetheless, this is not a very ‎plausible explanation as there were no nations nearby other than ‎the Canaanites, all of whom Israel had been commanded to wipe ‎out completely, so that the Moabites would not gain by becoming ‎their captives. [Since the author had introduced an even ‎less likely scenario than the example I mentioned, examples that ‎reflect Balak’s supposed fear of the Israelites through devious ‎means trying to elevate the Moabites spiritually, level by level, I ‎have omitted it. Ed.]‎ When commenting on Deut. 34,10, ‎ולא קם נביא עוד בישראל ‏כמשה‎, “and there never arose another prophet of the stature of ‎Moses in Israel,” our sages in Sifrey Vezot Habrachah, draw ‎our attention to the significance of the word ‎בישראל‎, “in Israel,” ‎in that verse, and suggest that it means that within other nations ‎there did arise at least one prophet of a stature equal or superior ‎to that of Moses. The statement is mind-boggling, and they ‎therefore add that any comparison of Moses and Bileam is limited ‎to certain aspects of their respective prophetic knowledge and ‎power.‎

Our author describes the prophecy of Moses as dealing with ‎the holiness of matter, whereas the prophecy of Bileam ‎was focused on the ‎קליפות‎, the peels surrounding the essence of ‎the fruit, i.e. matter which at best only “protects” the holy ‎essence from being harmed. Most of the time when we speak of ‎קליפות‎, we refer to matter that must be removed before we can ‎lay bare the useful or holy essence within it. He quotes ‎‎Sifrey on Mattot 2 as support for this thesis. It is ‎stated there (in respect of the words ‎זה הדבר‎) that Moses was able ‎to employ the level of ‎זה הדבר‎, “this is the word” (the word of G’d ‎itself, (not a repetition of it), i.e. G’d speaks through my throat. ‎This is a totally supernatural level of prophecy. A prophecy ‎emanating from such supernatural regions is subject to being ‎reversed (according to our author) something that is not possible ‎when the utterance of the prophecy commenced in this material ‎world of ours. Reversals of prophecies described as ‎זה הדבר‎, can ‎occur both when referring to “good” prophecies and “bad” ‎prophecies. This is why Moses’ prophetic powers were used to ‎promote holiness, sanctity, and could often “stand in the breach,” ‎i.e. was able to reverse decrees that would have harmed or ‎destroyed Israel otherwise.‎ Bileam, whose prophecies only dealt with matters devoid of ‎sanctity, applied this technique also, but used it only to reverse ‎‎“good” prophecies to “bad” prophecies The fact that Bileam did ‎possess such powers is hinted at in the Torah when it quotes him ‎as telling Balak (Numbers 23,1) ‎בנה לי בזה שבעה מזבחות‎, “build for ‎me as a symbol of the power of ‎זה‎ seven altars.” He repeats this ‎with a slight variation when he tells Balak: ‎והכן לי בזה שבעה ‏מזבחות‎, “prepare for me, etc.” (Numbers 23,29). He again added ‎the word ‎בזה‎ to indicate under what auspices he planned to ‎change G’d’s mind about blessing Israel. ‎Rashi, commenting on 23,16 where G’d says to Bileam: ‎שוב אל בלק וכה תדבד‎, “go back to Balak and speak to him using the ‎method by which other prophets introduce their prophecies,” i.e. ‎with the preamble ‎כה‎, “thus,” explains that G’d had understood ‎what Bileam had had in mind and He thwarted him from using ‎the method called ‎זה‎, which would have enabled him ‎subsequently to reverse the blessings. In other words, G’d ensured ‎that the words Bileam would utter could not be reversed.‎‎

Another approach among our sages to understanding the line ‎in Deut. 34,10 that there never arose in Israel a prophet of the ‎stature of Moses, implying that among the gentiles there did arise ‎such a prophet, also shares the conviction that Bileam on no ‎account could be compared to Moses on a moral basis.‎ The greatest difference between them, visible to all, was that ‎Moses during all of his life employed his gift of prophecy ‎beneficially at all times. He put his own life at risk on behalf of his ‎people many times when trying to save them from G’d’s ‎justifiable anger at them.‎ Bileam used his gift exactly in the opposite manner, as his ‎accomplishments were achieved by invoking curses. What then ‎did our sages mean when they implied that a prophet of similar ‎or even superior stature did arise among the gentiles? According to the Ari z’al they compared the vantage ‎points from which both Moses and Bileam pronounced their ‎respective prophecies. Both of them endeavoured to procure the ‎fulfillment of their prophetic announcements from the same ‎lofty source in heaven; alas Bileam used his power destructively, ‎whereas Moses invariably used his power constructively.‎ Our sages in Yevamot 49 have stated that whereas all ‎other prophets saw indistinct visions, Moses saw a clear vision. ‎This can best be understood by a parable. When a king issues ‎orders to his servants, the servants hearing it only hear the voice ‎of the king when he issues his orders. However, it is clear that ‎each order before being issued had been preceded by the king ‎thinking about if first and formulating it afterwards. Any person ‎who has been privy to the considerations which preceded the ‎orders being issued, in other words, someone who is aware of the ‎motivation resulting in these orders, has an advantage over ‎someone who has only heard the actual order being issued. This ‎was basically the difference between Moses’ level of prophecy and ‎that of other prophets. Moses also understood the reason why G’d ‎had seen fit to issue the various commandments when He did so. ‎People who are unaware of the background to the orders they ‎have been ordered to perform are compared by the Talmud to ‎having experienced indistinct images. Another way of expressing ‎this distinction is the sages saying that other prophets ‎prophesied on a level introduced by ‎כה‎, whereas Moses ‎prophesied on a level introduced by ‎זה‎.

It is easier to understand ‎why the sages claimed that prophecies introduced by ‎זה‎ were ‎subject to reversal, as if and when Moses found what the ‎conditions were upon which the prophecy he had been asked to ‎announce were based, he could find a way to try and justify their ‎reversal. A prophet who did not know the reasons for a ‎commandment issued by G’d had no way of attempting to change ‎it as G’d had not taken them into His confidence.‎ When we wrote earlier that Bileam was the exact opposite of ‎Moses and that he would therefore always use his foreknowledge ‎to bring about a reversal of a Divine decree in order to harm the ‎party concerning whom it had been ordered, he would therefore ‎wish to curse Israel which had been blessed by G’d. He told Balak ‎that after his erecting the seven altars, he, Bileam would proceed ‎with prophecies on the level ofבזה ‏‎, i.e. he would employ the ‎power of the prophetic level of ‎זה‎, to reverse the blessings that ‎had been bestowed by G’d on Israel. G’d frustrated this ‎undertaking by commanding him to speak by invoking only the ‎powers inherent in prophecies commencing with the level of ‎כה‎. ‎

Another reason why Moses may have been able to prophesy ‎using the level of ‎זה‎ as opposed to the other prophets who had to ‎use the level described as ‎כה‎, is that some people attain an ‎understanding of the awesome greatness of the Creator when ‎observing it as it looks after He had already “downsized,” ‎נתצמצם‎ ‎His essence so as not to harm those who are exposed to it. Another group of people gets a glimpse of G’d’s greatness ‎when He is in a state preceding this “downsizing” of Himself ‎during His descent to our “lower” world. People who are privy to ‎this are on a spiritually extremely high level in that G’d did not ‎have to be afraid that they would be blinded by “seeing” Him ‎hidden only by such relatively transparent screens.‎ Expressing all this in the form of a parable, there are people ‎who can look at the face of their king as it is in reality, whereas ‎others cannot do so, and must rely on coloured photographs or ‎the like. The latter type of people cannot claim to have seen the ‎king’s face as they never actually saw the king in the flesh. The ‎best they can do in describing the king is to preface such a ‎description with the word: ‎כה‎, ”like this, etc.” The people who ‎have been privy to see the king in the flesh, however, may ‎introduce their recollections with the word: ‎זה‎, “This is what the ‎king looks like.” When the Talmud quoted speaks of prophecies ‎under the heading of ‎זה ‏‎ or ‎כה ‏‎ respectively, it refers to degrees of ‎G’d’s surrounding Himself with “veils” or “screens” in order not ‎to cause fatal damage to the creatures looking at Him. None of ‎the prophets ever saw or could see G’d in His essence, and that is ‎why none of them could refer to having had such an experience. ‎The distinction between ‎זה‎ and ‎כה‎, is not a distinction between ‎seeing a photograph and seeing the party who posed for the ‎photograph, but the difference is only between ‎כזה‎ “like this,” ‎and ‎ככה‎ “similar to such.” The only exception to this was Moses ‎who was able to view G’d in the brightest light that He can reveal ‎Himself in without causing harm thereby. In other words, the ‎‎“screens” which G’d surrounded Himself with when he allowed ‎Moses to get near, were not part of any of the universes He had ‎created. As a result, Moses’ prophecy was indeed on the level of ‎זה ‏‎ and not ‎כזה‎.‎ ‎

Numbers 22,22. “G’d’s anger flared up because Bileam ‎was going.” Nachmanides already poses the question of why G’d ‎was angry at Bileam since He had given him permission to go ‎when He had said: ‎אם לקרוא לך באו האנשים קום לך אתם‎, “if the men ‎have come to invite you, rise and go with them.” (Numbers 22,20)‎ The answer to this question has already been provided by ‎‎Rashi (hundreds of years before Nachmanides posed it) ‎when he commented on that verse: “if their invitation is intended ‎for your personal benefit you may go.” Seeing that the purpose ‎of the call for Bileam to curse the Jewish people was intended to ‎benefit Balak and his people, G’d’s permission clearly did not ‎include such a scenario, and He had reason to be furious. ‎Nachmanides quotes Rashi in his commentary to show that ‎he was aware of this answer.‎ Our author feels that Bileam’s going with Balak’s emissaries ‎showed that he enjoyed being called upon to curse the Jewish ‎people. This was in clear contradiction to his having been told ‎that the Jewish people who were a blessed people could not be ‎harmed by any curses. Seeing that this was so, he was now ‎culpable not only for the curses he had intended to pronounce, ‎but for the evil intention itself, something G’d usually does not ‎punish a person for.‎

Numbers 22,32 “the angel of the Lord said to Bileam: ‎‎‘why did you strike your she-ass three times?’” We have ‎to examine why it bothered the angel that Bileam struck his ass? ‎As long as he had not been aware that the angel had blocked the ‎path, why does an owner of a domestic animal not have the right ‎to discipline it when it does not obey its master’s instructions?‎ We must assume that when G’d instructed the angel to act as ‎hindrance to Bileam, He had told the angel under what conditions ‎Bileam had been allowed to accompany Balak’s emissaries, i.e. that ‎he was restricted to do and speak only words that G’d would put ‎in his mouth. (verse 20) The angel’s task was to check if Bileam ‎conformed with the conditions G’d had stipulated for his journey. ‎When someone sets out on an errant in order to perform a ‎command of G’d and he encounters unforeseen difficulties, he ‎must examine the reason for this. If he cannot find a reasonable ‎explanation for the obstacles, he should conclude that G’d may no ‎longer wish for him to pursue that errant and return home. ‎When the angel became aware that in spite of three such covert ‎warnings Bileam had chosen to press on with his mission, he ‎recognized that this was due to Bileam’s evil intentions, and he ‎became angry, challenging him and telling him that he had ‎actually already forfeited his life by his conduct. Bileam’s stature ‎as a prophet, and his boast of being familiar with G’d’s ways, ‎‎(Numbers 24,4) should certainly have alerted him that the ass’s ‎strange behaviour was a warning from G’d for his own benefit, to ‎desist from this enterprise. The angel therefore was completely ‎justified in asking Bileam why he had struck his ass three times.‎

‎22,36. “Balak heard that Bileam had come; he went out ‎to meet him all the way to the city of Moab which is situated ‎at the border with the river Arnon at its farthest point.” ‎‎ A look at Rashi explains why Balak chose to meet ‎Bileam precisely at the location mentioned. The reason why this ‎choice of location was specifically auspicious in Balak’s eyes will ‎be understood in conjunction with Balak’s having praised Bileam ‎when he reminded him that when Bileam blessed someone the ‎party would prove to be blessed. (Numbers 22,6) Balak knew ‎firsthand that Moab’s loss of a great part of its territory had been ‎due to Bileam having cursed it prior to Sichon’s attack on that ‎country. Balak wanted to remind Bileam that if it had not been ‎for his cursing Moab, the border during his time would have been ‎much further to the east. (Rashi, 22,6 based on Tanchuma) Balak ‎wanted to show Bileam that he had faith in the latter’s ability to ‎curse. This might encourage him to also curse Israel successfully. ‎Bileam and Balak were of one mind concerning their viewing ‎Israel as an imminent threat, but G’d confounded their plans ‎tuning them into blessings instead.‎

Numbers 23,7. “come then and curse Yaakov for me, ‎etc.;” There is a rule that each nation must possess at ‎least one virtue, [otherwise why would G’d allow its ‎continued existence. Ed.]This virtue is the reason of its ‎existence. Israel, on the other hand, possesses all virtues. This ‎posed a problem for the wicked Bileam who had been charged ‎with cursing such a virtuous nation. Bileam/Balak was searching ‎for a virtue possessed by the Moabites which the Israelites could ‎not match. Once he had isolated that virtue, this would be the ‎key to his successfully putting a curse on the Jewish people. This ‎is the reason why Balak, instead of using the word ‎קלל‎, when ‎asking Bileam to curse the Jewish people, used the word ‎ארה‎ ‎instead, as the word ‎ארה‎, from the root ‎ארר‎, means to isolate in ‎the sense of “to pin point, to single out.” The word ‎ארר‎ is closely ‎related to the root ‎ברר‎, “isolate,” usually the refuse, waste.‎ When our sages (Bartenurah on Peyah 8,1) speak ‎of ‎אורה בתאנים‎, the reference is to the selection of ripe figs for ‎harvesting as figs do not ripen all at the same time. Apparently, Balak wanted to pinpoint a virtue possessed by ‎his people which was not shared by the Jewish people, and to base ‎this moral superiority entitling Bileam to curse that nation on ‎this virtue. This is why he referred to Yaakov, meaning: “in what ‎manner am I like Yaakov who possessed so many virtues?” He ‎went on saying: ‎ולכה זועמה ישראל‎, “so that you can proceed and ‎curse Israel.”‎ ‎

Numbers 23,9. “as I see them from the mountain tops, ‎etc.;” according to Rashi,, Bileam, viewing Israel’s ‎origin, understands that the creation of hills and mountains, etc., ‎was all due to G’d wanting a people such as Israel. If He had not ‎foreseen this in the future He would not have bothered with ‎creating our part of the universe. This reminds us of Tanna de ‎bey Eliyahu 14 where the opening line in the Torah reading ‎בראשית ברא אלוקים‎, is understood to mean that on account of ‎Israel, also known as ‎ראשית‎, G’d began the creation of the ‎universe. Had G’d foreseen only gentile nations in the future He ‎would not have bothered creating hills and mountains.‎

Numbers 23,18. “arise Balak and listen!” This ‎rather curious line may best be explained through a reference to ‎‎B’reshit Rabbah 82,8 where the Midrash comments as ‎follows on Isaiah 3,13: ‎נצב לריב אלוקים ועומד לדין עמים‎, “the Lord ‎stands up to plead a cause, He rises to judge peoples.” According ‎to the Midrash there, the verse needs explaining, as we ‎appear to have another verse (Joel 4,12) describing G’d as sitting. ‎The solution offered is that when G’d “sits” in judgment of the ‎Israelites He does so standing up, whereas when He judges the ‎nations of the world He does so while remaining seated. The ‎difference is in the amount of time devoted by G’d to that ‎judgment. When forced to do things while standing up, one tends ‎to try and finish one’s business so that one can sit down again. ‎When doing one’s work while remaining comfortably seated, one ‎is more likely to do things more slowly.‎ When our sages offered this solution to the apparent ‎contradiction, they may have had in mind the verse according to ‎which the tzaddik is able to reverse G’d’s evil decrees. The ‎Talmud Ketuvot 111 views the word ‎ישיבה‎, as a more ‎comfortable position only if the seat has arm rests; otherwise ‎standing upright while able to rest one’s arms is a preferable ‎posture, (in the sense of “more comfortable.”) When G’d is ‎portrayed as judging the nations of the world while seated, the ‎meaning is that the throne He sits on has arm rests. When G’d ‎judges the Israelites, although doing so while standing, He has no ‎supports for His arms. This “shakiness” is what enables thetzaddikim to reverse evil decrees, as these decrees had never ‎been firmly rooted. In other words, we learn that curses never ‎have the kind of strength that blessings have. Bileam’s calling on ‎Balak to arise, was meant to undermine any curse which would ‎subsequently be issued against Israel. Israel’s righteous would be ‎able to reverse such curses. ‎[I find all this somewhat irrelevant as the Jewish ‎people never knew of what Bileam and Balak had planned until ‎told about it by Moses. There were no Jewish witnesses to ‎anything which transpired in this portion until where the Torah ‎reports on what occurred subsequently in chapter 25. ‎Ed.]‎ ‎

Numbers 23,19. “G’d is not man that He should lie, nor ‎mortal that He should repent;” Our sages in Taanit ‎‎23, commenting on Job 22,28 ‎ותגזור אומר ויקם לך ועל דרכיך נגה אור‎ ‎commonly translated as “You will decree and it will be fulfilled; ‎and light will shine on Your affairs,” divide this verse into two ‎halves, the first half referring to what man decrees on earth, and ‎the second to what G’d fulfils in heaven. This is a way of ‎explaining how it is that the tzaddik can “reverse G’d’s ‎decree.” [The problem is that if so, how can Bileam say ‎that the difference between man and G’d is that the latter does ‎not “lie,” i.e. that His decrees cannot be upset by forces other ‎than Him? The subject has to be studied in the Talmud where the ‎sages debated the right of Choni ham’agel to pray ‎insistently for rain, when apparently G’d had decree a drought. ‎Ed.] Our author tries to explain these apparent ‎contradictions in a variety of ways. When Moses is referred to as ‎איש האלוקים‎, in psalms 90,1 the reason is that he tried to be like ‎G’d through invoking repeal of G’d’s harsh decrees against His ‎people. We find something analogous in psalms 106,23 where the ‎psalmist credits Moses with reversing G’d’s decree to annihilate ‎the Jewish people. Our author views the use of the word ‎אלוקים‎ ‎when applied to man as G’d “dressing up” in human garb and ‎then complying with the requests made in the tzaddik’s ‎prayerThis “dressing up” of G’d in human garb occurs only when ‎the prayer of the righteous human being is for G’d’s help to the ‎Israelites. Since wicked Bileam intended to enlist G’d’s support to ‎curse the Israelites, he explains to Balak that ‎לא איש א-ל‎, that G’d ‎in such circumstances would not “dress up as a human being” in ‎order to facilitate such prayers by Bileam. Subterfuge, i.e. ‎ויכזב‎, ‎does not qualify for G’d’s support.‎ This “dressing up” of G’d in human garb occurs only when ‎the prayer of the righteous human being is for G’d’s help to the ‎Israelites. Since wicked Bileam intended to enlist G’d’s support to ‎curse the Israelites, he explains to Balak that ‎לא איש א-ל‎, that G’d ‎in such circumstances would not “dress up as a human being” in ‎order to facilitate such prayers by Bileam. Subterfuge, i.e. ‎ויכזב‎, ‎does not qualify for G’d’s support.‎ This is also the meaning of the words: ‎ה' איש מלחמה ה' שמו‎, ‎‎“the Lord is a ‘man’ of war, his name is Hashem.” ‎‎(Exodus15,3) Moses extols G’d’s “dressing up” in human garb ‎when He destroys the mortal enemies of the Jewish people. He ‎will perform what the tzaddik requests of Him when ‎avenging the wrongs committed by the gentile nations against ‎His chosen people. He will do so, since in the process His name ‎will become sanctified and glorified.‎ While at first glance it may appear strange that G’d will ‎assume the role of a “warrior” at the behest of one of His ‎‎tzaddikim when this results in the destruction of His ‎creatures, [something He is so loath to do this that His ‎angels are not allowed to applaud it by singing a song, ‎Ed.], the fact remains that the destruction of the wicked ‎at the hands of G’d represents a major sanctification of G’d’s ‎name, and this is why in the victory song of Moses in Exodus 15, ‎He is described not as ‎‏ ‏‎ ‎אלוקים‎, the attribute of Justice, but as ‎‎Hashem, the attribute of Mercy, as the merits of this ‎sanctification of His Name accrue to the “victims”, though not ‎knowingly, seeing that at least their death has resulted in the ‎sanctification of G’d’s Name. He thus performed an act of loving ‎kindness for His enemies even while depriving their bodies of ‎their lives.‎

Numbers 23,20. “here I have been instructed to bless, ‎since He has blessed I cannot reverse it.” Bileam clearly ‎explains to Balak his inability to alter G’d’s decrees, as he told him ‎before when he said that the difference between man and G’d is ‎that G’d does not lie. On the other hand, although G’d does not ‎reverse Himself, the righteous are able by their prayers to bring ‎about a reversal of decrees harmful for the Jewish people. ‎‎[In other words, man can sometimes accomplish what G’d ‎is prevented from doing by His own initiative. Ed.]‎

A different approach to our verse. The Talmud in ‎‎B’rachot 33 taught that if someone in his prayer for mercy ‎to Hashem includes a line in which he compares G’d’s ‎mercy on the young and helpless birds in the nest, by praying ‎that Hashem should extend His mercy to him likewise, such ‎a person is to be silenced. One of the commentators on that line ‎in the Talmud explains that the reason why the author of the ‎Mishnah considers this such a travesty, is that the worshipper ‎arrogates to himself the right to draw parallels between emotions ‎experienced by us mortal human beings and immortal ‎‎Hashem. We have to accept Divine legislation, such as the ‎commandment to send off the mother bird, as decrees, without ‎trying to examine G’d’s motivation.‎ There is a line similar to the one we quoted from ‎‎B’rachot 33 in Megillah 25, and there Tossaphot ‎question the reasoning offered in the Talmud B’rachot by ‎citing a well known poetical liturgist, Rabbi Eliezer Hakalir, who ‎wrote (in connection with the kedushah we recite on the ‎second day of Passover) suggesting that the commandment not ‎to slaughter the mother animal and its young (Leviticus 22,8) on ‎the same day, by citing G’d’s attribute of Mercy as the reason. ‎‎[Tossaphot’s point is that surely Rabbi Eliezer Hakalir ‎was not ignorant of both these Mishnayot? Tossaphot do ‎not offer a solution. Ed.]‎ Perhaps we may resolve this problem when recalling that in ‎‎Shabbat 151 the Talmud states that anyone who displays ‎mercy and compassion vis a vis any of G’d’s creatures will ‎experience that Hashem in turn will display His Mercy ‎concerning himself. The root for that statement is found in the ‎‎Zohar Tossephet 308 where it is stated that when a human ‎being displays compassion for other creatures he “incites” the ‎attribute of mercy, as a result of which this attribute will relate ‎with mercy toward him.‎ It is a well known fact that ‎חסדי ה' לא כלו‎, “the deeds of loving ‎kindness by Hashem are inexhaustible because His mercy is ‎inexhaustible.” If we sometimes have the feeling that we have ‎been shortchanged by the attribute of Mercy, the reason is never ‎that G’d has run out of Mercy, but the reason is that we do not ‎qualify for it at all times. Nonetheless G’d is able to bring about a ‎radical change within our hearts so that we will have a pure heart ‎and qualify to serve Him loyally and devotedly. When that occurs, ‎we will qualify for additional displays of His mercy. This is why we ‎regularly pray: ‎לא תכלא רחמיך ממנו‎, “do not allow Your mercy to ‎come to and end as far as we are concerned.”(Psalms 40,12)‎ When Bereshit Rabbah 14,11 quotes psalm 150,6 ‎‎[the last verse in psalms, Ed.] the line ‎כל הנשמה ‏תהלל קה יהללו-קה‎, is understood to mean that “with every breath ‎we draw we praise the Lord with our whole soul,” so that G’d has ‎no difficulty in changing us into a new creature whenever the ‎soul is restored to us. At that time He can supply us with a pure, ‎non-polluted heart.‎ We have mentioned repeatedly that a tzaddik by means ‎of his prayer can convert what was an evil decree into a beneficial ‎decree, as we have been taught in Moed Katan 16. This is ‎also the meaning of ‎ויכון בחסד כסאך ותשב עליו באמת‎ “when Your ‎throne will be firmly established through loving kindness You will ‎sit on it truly.” [I could not find such a verse. Ed.] ‎When G’d sits so firmly on His throne the righteous will not ‎overturn His decrees, [as there has been no need for harsh ‎decrees. Ed.]‎

When G’d commanded us not to remove the mother bird ‎away from her young in the nest, this is not due to considerations ‎of mercy for the mother bird’s feelings, for if it were so the Torah ‎did not have to issue such a commandment, for G’d Himself could ‎have taken care either of the mother bird or its young without ‎leaving their fate to our sense of compassion. G’d has many other ‎ways and means of insuring these birds’ survival. Rather, the ‎decree was issued to teach us mortals to have compassion on ‎G’d’s creatures. When we keep this in mind Rabbi Eliezer Hakalir’s ‎liturgical poem does not contradict the statement we quoted ‎from the Talmud at all. [The reference in his poem to ‎Leviticus 22,8 is so oblique that only outstanding scholars would ‎have detected it. Ed.]‎ Seeing that every tzaddik, surely has assimilated the ‎‎mussar contained in either Leviticus 22, 28 or ‎Deuteronomy 22,6-7, so that when he blesses an Israelite he has ‎surely done so with all the generosity his heart is capable of, he ‎himself will also be blessed by heaven. This is the meaning of the ‎line that he who displayed compassion for G’d’s creatures will be ‎rewarded. Bileam, even when engaged in blessing the Jewish people, was ‎well aware that he was not doing so with a full heart, and that the ‎words uttered by his lips were only words supplied to him by G’d, ‎and did not come forth from his heart; thus he exclaimed that he ‎was aware that the blessings he had bestowed would not accrue to ‎him as a response from heaven.‎ When he said “I have taken blessing,” he meant that he had ‎borrowed these words from G’d’s vocabulary, but ‎ברך לא אשיבנה‎, “I ‎am aware that I will not in turn be rewarded with blessing for ‎myself.”‎

Numbers 23,21. “no harm is in sight for Yaakov no woe ‎for Israel. The Lord their G’d is with them.” The true ‎meaning of these words is hard to understand, [as the ‎Israelites certainly had not been faultless throughout these 40 ‎years. Ed.] Bileam describes G’d’s attitude when ‎Israel’s merits come to His attention and when, G’d forbid, their ‎sins call for His attention. He says that Israel’s merits will ‎immediately command G’d’s attention and He will respond to ‎them without delay, whereas He does not wish to take a look at ‎their sins immediately. The former is spelled out when Bileam ‎adds: ‎ה' אלוקיו עמו‎, Hashem, its G’d is with it.” The ‎expression following, i.e. ‎ותרועת מלך בו‎, “and their king’s acclaim ‎is in their midst,” is a reference to the divisive nature of the ‎‎teruah sound of the shofar. A king can be acclaimed ‎by unbroken sounds of the shofar or by broken sounds. G’d ‎reacts selectively to reports He receives about the conduct of His ‎people.‎ The author proceeds to use the opportunity to explain the ‎deeper meaning of the respective sounds ‎תקיעה‎ and ‎תרועה‎ which ‎emanate from the ram’s horn, the shofar. The former sound ‎is unbroken, symbolizing unity, continuity, whereas the latter ‎signifies dissonance, friction, disharmony.‎ At the time when the Holy Temple stood and service was ‎performed in it, this was an era distinguished by the ‎תקיעה‎, the ‎very letters in that word when examined meaning ‎תקע י-ה‎ ‎meaning “G’d fastens, clasps, unites.” During periods of exile, ‎however, this is symbolised by the broken sound ‎תרועה‎; during ‎the period when the Temple stood daily burnt offerings, known ‎as ‎תמידים‎ were offered by the priests on behalf of the entire ‎people (who had contributed on an equal basis to the cost of ‎these animals) both mornings and evenings. All of this symbolised ‎the inner adhesion of the various tribes to one another. The ‎תרועה‎ ‎sound by its very nature calls attention to the fact that the Jews ‎are dispersed among gentiles, lacking this inner cohesion. As a ‎result of their sins and the subsequent exile, G’d delays looking at ‎the sins of the Jewish people while they are in exile, as the ‎conditions for them to observe the Torah in full measure do not ‎exist and it is harder for them to accumulate collective merits. ‎‎[Some of the words are mine, but the author whose fame ‎rests on his being an advocate vis a vis G’d of his people in ‎exile, is making the point I described. Ed.]. He sees in the sequence in which we blow the shofar a summary of our ‎history which began in glory, i.e. ‎תקיעה‎, was interrupted by ‎decline, exile, i.e. ‎תרועה‎,‎‏ ‏‎ but will most certainly end again with ‎the ‎תקיעה‎ to signal our redemption soon in our days.‎ In support of his theory, the author quotes the statement of ‎our sages that G’d’s presence cannot rest on us permanently ‎unless at least 600000 male adults are assembled. (Midrash ‎Hagadol Vayishlach 32,3) The ‎תקיעה‎ symbolizes that thought. ‎This explains that whenever the Jewish people made camp while ‎in the desert, a ‎תקיעה‎ as blown as a reminder that the ‎‎Shechinah, G’d’s presence, was at hand. On the other hand, ‎breaking camp was signaled by the blowing of a ‎תרועה‎, the broken ‎sound, as breaking camp was a sign that the people had ‎displeased G’d, and that this was why they had to pack up once ‎more. According to the Ari z’al, the various journeys were ‎inspired by the need to accumulate merits by picking up “fallen” ‎sparks along the route and to become the instrument of restoring ‎same to the celestial position before they had “fallen” out of ‎grace. The fact that the Israelites offset their sins by these merits ‎of picking up “fallen sparks,” was responsible for G’d not ‎immediately turning His attention to the misdemeanours of the ‎Israelites that had brought about their need to move on. The ‎sound of the ‎תרועה‎, reminder that G’d had broken, interrupted ‎His preoccupation with the Israelites’ sins, was also a reminder of ‎the need to acquire merits by elevating themselves spiritually to ‎offset the effect of their sins. [Various commentators ‎in dealing with the inverted way in which Moses reports the ‎process of making camp and breaking camp in Numbers 33,1-33,2 ‎refer to each move being testimony to the people having angered ‎G’d. Ed.]‎

A different way of looking at the line: ‎לא הביט און ביעקב ולא ‏ראה עמל בישראל, ה' אלוקיו עמו‏‎. Bileam may be saying that ‎Israel’s errors are being ignored by G’d, whereas its merits are ever ‎present within His field of vision. The outstanding merit Israel ‎has to its credit is described as ‎ה' אלוקיו עמו‎, “they are always ‎aware of their G’d being with them.” They constantly enthrone ‎their G’d anew as their only King. As a result, their name is ‎engraved in G’d’s throne and He is cognizant of their merits ‎constantly.

Numbers 23,22. “the G’d Who has brought them out of ‎Egypt.” Rashi draws our attention to the fact that ‎Bileam had to retract a statement he had made when speaking to ‎G’d in answer to His question who the men were that had come to ‎visit him. (Numbers 22,9) At that time he had attributed Israel’s ‎exodus from Egypt as being due to their own efforts, i.e. ‎העם ‏היוצא ממצרים‎. He has now been forced to admit publicly that it ‎was G’d Who had brought the Jewish people out of Egypt. We have a rule that “awakening, initiative,” can start either ‎in the celestial regions or in the terrestrial regions. Every person ‎can be the cause of G’d relating to him with the attribute of ‎Mercy by simply improving the number of credits he accumulates ‎through his good deeds. Based on this he may appeal to G’d to use ‎His attribute of mercy in dealing with him. Invoking the merits of ‎the patriarchs, however, in other words, mobilizing forces of ‎mercy whose sources are in the “higher world,” is something only ‎members of the Jewish people are able to do. ‎[Very doubtful, as King Chiskiyah, invoking his merits ‎when asking G’d to let him live longer, was told by G’d that he ‎was granted this extension only due to the merits of his ancestor ‎David. Compare Kings II 20,1-5. Ed.]‎ This is what the wicked Bileam referred to when he said to G’d ‎הנה העם יצא ממצרים‎, “here we have this nation that departed from ‎Egypt, etc.” When crediting the Exodus to the Jewish people ‎themselves, Bileam meant that this people by dint of their own ‎merits aroused sufficient forces of the attribute of Mercy to bring ‎about their redemption.‎ In order to show how wrong Bileam was, our sages in ‎‎Avot chapter 5, list 10 “trials that the Jewish people had ‎subjected G’d to, i.e. 10 collective sins, instead of ten collective ‎merits which had resulted in their redemption. G’d indicated to ‎Bileam that the attribute of Mercy which after being “awakened” ‎by our patriarchs reminded G’d of His promise to them, that the ‎Exodus was put in motion. It was the accumulated merits of the ‎patriarchs which were the major factor in the redemption of the ‎Jewish people from their cruel fate in Egypt. This is a factor that ‎may come to the aid of the Jewish people, but never to the aid of ‎the gentiles.‎ ‎

Numbers 23,24. **“they are a nation that rises like a ‎lion, leaps up like the king of beasts. It rests not till it has ‎feasted on prey and drunk the blood of the slain.”*‎ In the matter of how to serve the Lord optimally, it is an ‎accepted rule that the first stage of becoming a true servant of ‎the Lord involves that the person concerned expects a reward as a ‎form of recognition for his effort. It is simply not to be expected ‎that every person will begin his career as a servant of the Lord by ‎eschewing every kind of reward. When the Mishnah in ‎‎Avot* 1,3 teaches not to serve the Lord on condition of ‎receiving a reward, it does not address “beginners.” Proof that ‎this is the accepted norm is found in Pessachim 50 where ‎the Talmud teaches that if we perform G’d’s commandments, ‎even while also having ulterior motives, in due course we will do ‎so without having ulterior motives. [This is part of the ‎promise that the reward of performing a commandment brings in ‎its wake performance of another commandment, (Avot 4,1) i.e. ‎the same commandment, but on a higher level. Ed.] ‎When one has attained this level of serving the Lord, one will also ‎become the vehicle through which the “fallen” sparks, i.e. ‎spiritual beings or human beings who have “fallen” from their ‎erstwhile high moral/ethical level may be restored to grace ‎through contact with such servants of the Lord. This has been ‎spelled out in the writings of the Ari z’al. As long as one serves the Lord expecting to be rewarded for ‎this, the human being doing so is considered as on the level of a ‎female, as by definition all females, i.e. their functions, are viewed ‎primarily as recipients, vessels to be filled. Once having attained ‎the level of serving the Lord without any expectation of reward, ‎one has joined the ranks of the males. Not only does such a ‎person not depend on “receiving,” but he is able to become a ‎dispenser of satisfaction and pleasure even to the Creator. This is ‎the true meaning of a statement in the Zohar III,7 that the ‎Jewish people provide G’d with His sustenance, ‎פרנסה‎.‎ This is also what Bileam had in mind when he said: ‎הן עם כלביא ‏יקום‎, “this is a nation that arises like a lioness,” but develops to ‎the stature of being ‎כארי יתנשא‎, “it elevates itself to become ‎comparable to a mature male lion.” [According to our ‎author Rashi commenting on that verse interprets it as ‎sequential, i.e. beginning to serve the Lord while expecting a ‎reward, progressing to serve Him without such expectations. I ‎have not been able to find this Rashi. Ed.]‎

לא ישכב עד יאכל טרף‎, “It will not lie down until having ‎eaten prey.” If we follow the interpretation of Israel’s ‎progressive elevation to higher spiritual accomplishments, this ‎line would refer to its ability to elevate the fallen “sparks” after ‎having attained a level of serving the Lord without expecting a ‎reward. [The author has repeatedly demonstrated how ‎even consuming, eating, the flesh of a properly slaughtered ‎animal and the nutrients being absorbed by our bloodstream, ‎elevates such an animal to a higher spiritual level. Ed.] ‎When that happens, (killing the enemies of G’d) the very slain ‎having become a vehicle for glorifying G’d’s name, become ‎חיים‎, as ‎if alive, their lives having served a sacred purpose in retrospect.‎ Numbers 24,3. “word of the man whose eye is true. ‎‎(closed)” There are eyes that are “good,” i.e. the owner ‎wishes to do good for Israel. When G’d created the universe He ‎created positives, matched by negatives, i.e. He also gave some ‎people “bad” eyes, i.e. jealous, envious use of one’s ‎eyesight. Although, generally speaking Bileam was certainly ‎equipped with eyes that singled out everything negative, in this ‎instance he was unable to put his jealous eyes to such use. On the ‎other hand, he had also not been provided with ‎עין טובה‎, eyesight ‎of a benevolent, generous nature. Even though he had blessed ‎Israel, these blessings had not originated from the depth of his ‎heart, his personality. He therefore had to describe himself as of a ‎blind eye. This is why he adds: ‎נופל וגלוי עינים‎, “prostate but with ‎eyes unveiled.” He admits that the visions he has been granted ‎are due to his having “fallen.” His evil eye had become the reason ‎that he had been forced to bless Israel. When our sages describe ‎the symptoms of a person that possesses an evil eye, they ‎mention that one of the differences between visions which Moses ‎received and visions which Bileam received was that whereas ‎Moses could remain standing upright while being addressed by ‎G’d, Bileam had to prostrate himself in order to receive any ‎communication from G’d. ‎

Numbers 24,5. “how fair are your tents , O Yaakov, ‎your dwellings O Israel.” This may best be understood in ‎light of the sages urging us to set aside definitive hours each day ‎for Torah study. (Avot 1:15). “Yaakov” is the name used for ‎Israel when it is at “low” ebb spiritually, whereas “Israel,” is the ‎name applied to the Jewish people when they are spiritually at ‎their best. When Torah study is only an occasional activity of the ‎Jewish people, they are on the level of “Yaakov.” [The ‎word: ‎אהל‎ always denotes a temporary abode, as opposed to ‎משכן‎ ‎which always describes permanent dwellings. When Torah study ‎comprises a major part of their waking hours, i.e. it is a fixture, ‎they are referred to as Israel. Ed.]‎

Numbers 24,8. “it will consume nations that are its ‎oppressors.” The meaning of this verse is that G’d’s ‎intervention on behalf of His people Israel who are being ‎oppressed by the gentile nations, occurs in order to glorify His ‎name. He helps the Israelites in a variety of ways. All the people ‎who have at one time jeeringly asked the Israelites: “where is your ‎G’d?, will be shown G’d’s power when they observe the Israelites ‎consuming all the “goodies” G’d provides for His people. Seeing ‎that G’d will do all this for the sake of His glory, none of these ‎acts of generosity of G’d will be offset against merits that the ‎Israelites had previously accumulated. In other words, the ‎Israelites benefit indirectly from the hostile actions of the gentile ‎nations, as they will be more than compensated for their ‎suffering.‎ ‎**“and they will crush their (enemies’) bones.”** ‎Bileam uses the word ‎עצמות‎ as a double entendre, to indicate that ‎the very personalities, their independence, ‎עצמיות‎, will be ‎crushed. This will be a punishment for the uncalled for cruelty ‎with which the gentiles treated the Israelites. G’d treats people ‎according to the yardsticks with which the sinners had treated ‎their victims. Incidentally, this is also one of the reasons why ‎the Torah describes G’d as being so angry at Bileam for going with ‎Balak’s second set of emissaries, when a superficial reading of the ‎text would have led us to believe that G’d had approved of ‎Bileam’s journey.‎ The real reason why G’d was so angry at Bileam was –as the ‎text clearly says- ‎כי הולך הוא‎, “he went of his own accord, “ i.e. he ‎signaled that he welcomed the opportunity to harm the Jewish ‎people who had never harmed him. Cruelty is not always ‎expressed physically. In the case of Bileam he expressed it, or ‎tried to express it, spiritually, metaphysically. Whereas G’d always ‎tried to “awaken” love and sympathy for Israel, as well as hatred ‎against its enemies, Bileam, on the other hand, tried to do the ‎opposite. No wonder that G’d’s anger was inflamed by this. It ‎follows that a single attribute, i.e. loving kindness, can be split ‎into two branches, love for Israel and simultaneous hatred against ‎its enemies.‎ The word ‎וחציו‎, literally translated as: “and its arrows,” in this ‎instance is indicative of strife, as Rashi has already explained ‎on Genesis 49,23 where Yaakov refers to the brothers’ hatred of ‎Joseph. He explains the word as referring to divisions, basing ‎himself on Onkelos who links ‎חץ‎, “arrow,” to ‎מחצה‎, “half.” Israel ‎is able to divide the single attribute of ‎חסד‎, love, into two halves, ‎i.e. love for G’d and hatred toward G’d’s’ enemies. Rashi’s ‎major contribution is that he considers the subject of the word ‎וחציו‎, to be Israel.‎

Numbers 24,17. “a star emerging from Yaakov has ‎begun its journey, a scepter from Israel. It smashes the ‎corner posts of Moab the foundation of all the descendents of ‎Sheth.” The poetic language of Bileam becomes clearer when ‎we look at psalms 22,29 ‎כי לה' המלוכה ומושל בגויים‎, “for dominion ‎belongs to Hashem and He rules the nations;” This will be ‎demonstrated when ‎ועלו מושיעים בהר ציון לשפוט את הר עשו והיתה ‏לה' המלוכה‎, “when the liberators (exiles that have been freed) will ‎march up Mount Zion to wreak judgment on Mount Esau and ‎dominion shall be the Lord’s.”(Ovadiah 1,21)‎ We need to understand the difference between the words ‎ממשלה‎ and ‎מלוכה‎, both of which refer to the exercise of authority, ‎rule. The word ‎מלוכה‎, when used in Scripture, refers to rule by a ‎king whose subjects have submitted to it willingly, whereas the ‎word ‎ממשלה‎ is used in Scripture when the subjects are unwilling, ‎but unable to shake off the rule by the monarch or dictator. As a ‎general rule, only the Jewish people are described as willingly ‎submitting to G’d’s rule, whereas the gentile nations described in ‎these verses as being in exile, submitted to G’d’s rule under ‎protest, and rebelled against it whenever possible. G’d imposes His ‎rule upon them in order to frustrate their evil designs against His ‎people. In the eras described, both in psalms and Ovadiah, this ‎situation will have changed and the gentile nations will willingly ‎appoint G’d as their king also. (Compare Rashi on ‎Deuteronomy 6,4,on ‎שמע ישראל ה' אלקינו ה' אחד‎.‎‏(‏‎ He quotes both ‎Zecharyah 14,9 and Tzefaniah 2,9 in support of his statement. We are aware that it is impossible for mortal man to have a ‎true concept of the essence of G’d as we know from Tikkuney ‎Hazohar chapter 11. When we recite daily in our prayers the ‎line ‎ברוך אתה ה'‏‎, “blessed are You Hashem,” this is because ‎through making judicious use of the letters, i.e. concentrating on ‎the written text of our prayers, Jews can achieve comprehension ‎of concepts that are incapable of comprehension to human ‎beings if one would think about them only in the abstract. The ‎letters, i.e. the sacred letters of the printed or written words: ‎‏ אתה ‏וגו'‏‎, illuminate for us the concept of G’d’s dominion over the ‎Jewish people. As a result of this advantage we possess, ‎‎tzaddikim are able to use the 22 letters in the aleph bet at ‎will for the furtherance of loving kindness, mercy and life ‎through our prayers which will then become engraved in the ‎throne of Hashem. The numerical value of the tetragram, i.e. ‎י-ה-ו-ה‎ is 26. When ‎you add to this the 22 letters in the aleph bet, you will get ‎the numerical value of the word ‎כוכב‎, “star” in our verse. ‎Homiletically speaking, Bileam refers to the emergence of a ‎person in Israel who, by judicious use of the name of the Lord and ‎the 22 letters He has used to create the universe, has tremendous ‎influence on the decision making process in the celestial regions. ‎His power will extend to smashing Moab and other enemies of ‎Israel. When Bileam speaks of ‎וקם שבט בישראל‎, the word ‎שבט‎ is to ‎be understood as a simile for the rule by the Jewish people, ‎whereas the word ‎פאתי‎ in the line ‎ומחץ פאתי מואב‎, refers to ‎צמצום‎, ‎contraction as opposed to largesse, i.e. a major aspect of ‎דין‎, ‎application of the attribute of Justice, which severely impairs the ‎freedom granted to human beings as long as they have not ‎abused it (grossly) by rebelling against G’d. [Some of these ‎words are mine. Ed.] The word ‎מואב‎ in our verse also ‎alludes to the source of these disasters befalling Moab being G’d, ‎i.e. Israel’s spiritual “Father,” ‎מ-אב‎ emanating from the father.‎ A recurring theme in the author’s definition of true service of ‎the Lord is that when pertaining to service of the Lord, ecstasy is ‎not only permitted but desirable, whereas ecstasy when applied ‎to anything material, secular, is strictly forbidden. Furthermore, ‎true service of the Lord is performed in a “hidden” manner, i.e. ‎must not attract public attention, so as not be seen as arrogant ‎behaviour. Whatever man does publicly, i.e. to draw attention to ‎himself, is by definition ‎חצוניות‎, externalism, not reflecting the ‎sanctity of the soul. Bileam refers to the ‎קרקר‎, extreme coldness, ‎to be maintained when engaged in secular but necessary ‎activities, so that any show of enthusiasm for the performance of ‎such tasks will not be mistaken as religiously inspired. ‎ ‎

A second interpretation of the expression: ‎ומחץ פאתי מואב‎, ‎one not substantially different from the first interpretation. It is generally known that according to the Ari z’al, ‎another appropriate ‎כנוי‎, pronoun for ‎השם יתברך‎, “The (holy) ‎Name blessed He,” is the expression: ‎אין סוף‎, “the Endless, Infinite ‎One.” In order for Israel to receive emanations from Him, ‎‎[be they material, or even spiritual in nature Ed.], ‎that are beneficial for them, He voluntarily restricted Himself, i.e. ‎hid some of these aspects that make Him Infinite. The degree to ‎which G’d has to resort to this ‎צמצום‎, “downgrading” of the ‎absolute brightness that His essence represents, depends on the ‎spiritual level of His people, or of the elite of His people. As Israel ‎ascends to progressively higher rungs on the ladder of ‎spirituality, G’d is able to remove the layers of “insulation” with ‎which He has surrounded Himself to avoid harming people who ‎wish to gaze at it, but are as yet unqualified to do so. When ‎Bileam speaks of ‎ומחץ פאתי מואב‎, he predicts that there will come ‎a time in the future when G’d will be able to dispense with these ‎מחיצות‎, “dividers” between Himself and His people. Bileam speaks ‎of G‘d having to surround Himself with ‎מחיצות‎ in the past tense, ‎whereas when the redeemer of The Jewish people will surface, ‎there is no further need for Him to do this as they can tolerate ‎gazing at Him in all His brightness.‎ At such times when the Jewish people have merits to their ‎credit, they will view even the present world as something ‎superior, a world in which ”ideas,” “positive thinking,” will ‎outweigh the importance of performing menial tasks with one’s ‎body. This reformed ‎עולם הזה‎, has been described in the writings ‎of the Ari z’al as ‎מוחין עלאין‎, “superior intellects.”‎ According to publications by the outstanding medical doctors ‎of our time, the brain is basically cool, (as opposed to the heart). ‎This is what Bileam refers to when he speaks of all of mankind, ‎describing them as cold, ‎וקרקר כל בני שת‎. In other words, all ‎derivatives of this present world are ‎מגולים‎, revealed to all, the ‎word ‎שת‎ refers to something that has been revealed. The Israelites ‎will enjoy that even the present world will present itself to them ‎as of a higher dimension. The reason that the word ‎קרקר‎, “cold,” ‎is repeated, is that the brain operates on two levels, respectively ‎known as ‎חכמה‎ and ‎בינה‎, “wisdom and insight.” ‎ ‎

Numbers 24,18. “at that time Edom will become a ‎conquest , and Seir will become the conquest of its enemies, ‎whereas Israel will perform deeds of valour.” In order to ‎understand the apparent repetition in our verse, it will help to ‎refer to psalms 115,1 where David (addressing the holy spirit) ‎says: ‎לא לנו ה' לא לנו כי לשמך תן כבוד‎, “not to us, O Lord, not to us, ‎but to Your name bring glory.”‎ According to Tanna de bey Eliyahu zutta chapter 19, ‎Yaakov and Esau divided the world between themselves, Esau ‎claiming the present material world, whereas Yaakov claimed the ‎world beyond physical death. The problem with this division ‎is that we also ask G’d to provide for us in this life, as otherwise ‎we would not be able to keep the commandments of the Torah ‎which was given to be observed in this life. This does not detract ‎from Yaakov not claiming any part of this world. In fact, seeing ‎that the gentiles abuse us in this life and demean us, they could ‎ascribe our fate on earth as due to our having foresworn the ‎advantages of this life on earth. If we were not asking G’d for ‎sustenance and G’d would accede to our request, the gentiles, ‎seeing that they do not believe in our G’d and His concern for us, ‎His people, would never be able to change their attitude. David ‎therefore explains to the holy spirit that when we ask G’d for ‎something that appears to contradict what Yaakov had ‎foresworn, the reason is not that we wish to enjoy life on this ‎earth per se, but we wish the gentiles to see that G’d is able ‎to provide for us, and that therefore they should take note of this ‎and change their attitude to the Creator, our G’d. We merely wish ‎to be the vehicle through which the gentiles will come to ‎recognize the glory of our G’d, Who should also be their G’d. By ‎repeating the words ‎לא לנו‎, the psalmist proceeds to explain how ‎in spite of our asking G’d for sustenance and reprieves from ‎persecution, we do not do so for our sakes, but for the sake of the ‎glorification of His great name. We do not wish that the gentiles ‎are in a position to jeeringly ask us: “where is your G’d about ‎Whom you boast so much?”‎ Bileam, in the verse above, refers to the wheels of fortune for ‎Israel and Esau respectively, having changed as an illustration; he ‎repeats mentioning the fate of Esau, in order to show that the ‎purpose of Israel’s success even in this world is designed to ‎forestall the gentiles making fun of our G’d, claiming that He is ‎powerless. ‎