This entry is this substack's original intent: Raf's Dvar/Riff Torah -- Recently redirected for the "Is Raf OK?" series (at the well advised impetus of sister Tanya).
Select Parsha Highlights (copied & lightly tweaked from the 2024 dvar on Balak)
The parsha of Balak and Balaam.
Who is who?
Balak, with a “k” is the king.
Balaam (aka Bilaam) is the prophet.
The People of Israel asked permission to cross various lands. They were refused. They did battle. And now (this week) they come to Moab. The king of Moab, Balak, sends messengers and representatives to ask Balaam, the (his?) Prophet, to place a curse on Israel.
Balaam refuses some number of times.
Balak seeks to apply more pressure, and invites Balaam to come to him in person. Balaam refuses.
The entreaties continue.
Eventually G-d tells Balaam that he may go to Balak. Although when actually he does this:
כב: וַיִּֽחַר־אַ֣ף אֱלֹהִים֘ כִּֽי־הוֹלֵ֣ךְ הוּא֒ וַיִּתְיַצֵּ֞ב מַלְאַ֧ךְ יְהֹוָ֛ה בַּדֶּ֖רֶךְ לְשָׂטָ֣ן ל֑וֹ וְהוּא֙ רֹכֵ֣ב עַל־אֲתֹנ֔וֹ וּשְׁנֵ֥י נְעָרָ֖יו עִמּֽוֹ
God's wrath flared because he was going, and an angel of the Lord stationed himself on the road to thwart him, and he was riding on his she-donkey, and his two servants were with him.
Balaam's donkey sees the angel and "gets the message" that it is time to stop. This leads to donkey-vs-human conflict, and a conversation with a suddenly-talking donkey.
Ultimately, despite being fed and feted by Balak, Balaam does not curse the Israelites. Rather he blesses them. Three times, from three places.
And much more.
The first pasuk. I’m snagged:
ב: וַיַּ֥רְא בָּלָ֖ק בֶּן־צִפּ֑וֹר אֵ֛ת כָּל־אֲשֶׁר־עָשָׂ֥ה יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל לָֽאֱמֹרִֽי
Balak son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites.
Balak is a king. He is "בן צפור" - son of a woman named Tzipor - bird - and it is as if he sees/knows all.
Like a bird.
What can a bird know?
From a height, observing some actions, hearing not much, a bird knows what happened. In other words, what is already history.
That Israel requested permission to pass before making war on the Amorites?
Not visible to the bird. (To know about the request, one would need to be a fly….)
Is this, perhaps the delta between Balak, the elders of Moab and Midian and Balaam?
Kings and elders saw events.
Balaam saw a situation.
The two sides could not agree on what to do next. Blind they were to the sight of the other.
The dynamic between Balak and Balaam is soo....
Balak says to Balaam:
וְעַתָּה֩ לְכָה־נָּ֨א אָֽרָה־לִּ֜י אֶת־הָעָ֣ם הַזֶּ֗ה
So now, please come and curse this people [Israel] for me
Balaam goes to sleep and:
יב: וַיֹּ֤אמֶר אֱלֹהִים֙ אֶל־בִּלְעָ֔ם לֹ֥א תֵלֵ֖ךְ עִמָּהֶ֑ם לֹ֤א תָאֹר֙ אֶת־הָעָ֔ם כִּ֥י בָר֖וּךְ הֽוּא
God said to Balaam, “You must not go with them [the will of Balak et al]! You must not curse the people [Israel], because they are blessed.”
I have always felt this section of the Parsha is, well, superfluous. Before this dialog, Balaam already knows he is not going to curse Israel. Should I care whether that decision comes from "above" or from cold, hard math? Balaam could just as easily concluded, to effect:
"Recent events show that this Israel tribe is going to go where they are going to go. Why one king after another tries to stop them--even after seeing that there is no point trying—is not my affair. If I go along with the king's request, I will be blamed when things go sideways. My head will be on the block. I will not accede to my own demise.”
In other words, Balaam could be considered “foreign policy analyst” as easily as prophet. Balak sees. Balaam groks.
This reminds me of peace activist Gershon Baskin's observation cited in yesterday's Is Raf OK #192:
I would like to quote some of my Palestinian friends and colleagues who say to [the "Free Palestine"] camp that the use of the slogan “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be Free” is the most anti-Palestinian slogan there is.
In the situation cited by Baskin, the problem is slogans that encourage extremists and maximalist positions, ignoring the enormous cost of aspiring to the unachievable.
The situation Balaam faces is the same. King Balak wants a maximal solution: Not only deny Israel passage, and not only try to defeat them in battle, but also put on them a spiritual curse.
Maximalism wears me out. It’s also a profound cop out. Instead of Balak doing “the work” of asking questions and taking counsel, he throws the problem “over the fence,” as it were, to Balaam: You fix it. Balak’s persistence with Balaam is like going to a lawyer first instead of the counterparty. Once a lawyer picks up the ball, the situation is going to go downhill. If that is what you want, fine. But if it isn’t, try everything else first.
(Balaam is like a good lawyer, who would ask, “Are you sure you want me to be the one doing the talking? Have you done A? Have you done B? You understand the implications of my involvement? Think about it and call me back in a week if you are sure.)
Balaam sees the maximalism in Balak’s request and says: Not going there.
King Balak does not take No for an answer. Balaam declines over and over. Kings don't hear No much—key flaw of the royal system: Those who say Yes are promoted. Those who say No are demoted. Balak has years of training that reinforce: When you ask, you get Yes.
Balaam's authenticity is that he sees the situation in a larger sense and stays true not only to himself but to reality (which is larger than the King). He says No. He faces obstacles and does not lie about or deny them:
The donkey balks
The donkey talks
The donkey calls Balaam on his attitude
An armed angel stands in the way
Balaam didn't know what was going on at first. As the donkey herself says:
ל: וַתֹּ֨אמֶר הָֽאָת֜וֹן אֶל־בִּלְעָ֗ם הֲלוֹא֩ אָֽנֹכִ֨י אֲתֹֽנְךָ֜ אֲשֶׁר־רָכַ֣בְתָּ עָלַ֗י מֵעֽוֹדְךָ֙ עַד־הַיּ֣וֹם הַזֶּ֔ה הַֽהַסְכֵּ֣ן הִסְכַּ֔נְתִּי לַֽעֲשׂ֥וֹת לְךָ֖ כֹּ֑ה
The she-donkey said to Balaam, “Am I not your she-donkey, on which you have ridden since you first started, until now? Have I been accustomed to act like this to you?”
In other words: Wake up dude! I have always been here for you. You are distracted by the pressure Balak is putting on you. But I am trying to get your attention! To get your attention back to your intention!
Balaam had the right intention but social (professional?) pressure made him get on the donkey. As the King wasn't accustomed to No, so Balaam never knew his donkey to say No. It just wasn't in Balaam's vocabulary:
כט: וַיֹּ֤אמֶר בִּלְעָם֙ לָֽאָת֔וֹן כִּ֥י הִתְעַלַּ֖לְתְּ בִּ֑י ל֤וּ יֶשׁ־חֶ֨רֶב֙ בְּיָדִ֔י כִּ֥י עַתָּ֖ה הֲרַגְתִּֽיךְ
Balaam said to the she-donkey, “For you have humiliated me! If I had a sword in my hand, I would kill you right now!”
Balaam ultimately apologizes. All the way. Acknowledges that he made a profound mistake and offers to undo every misstep. He goes further: He makes a full, public atonement.
Three times.
It is hard to do the right thing. Balaam was strong, but persistent pressure pushed him out of his groove. Shook his certainty.
I think this is the value of honest friends and family: They help us see what we already know. They are able to call us out on our mistakes without judging us in the process. Direct attention back to our intention.
Balaam: One of the Thirty Six?
(Thanks to A.K.)