Shabbat Parashat Chukat/Balak - 5786

Shabbat Parashat Chukat/Balak - 5786

Rabbi Hal Miller

  God's wrath flared because he was going, and an angel of God stood on the road

  as an impediment to him. [Bamidbar 22:22]

  The angel of Hashem said to Bilaam, "Go with the men but only the word that I

  shall speak to you, that shall you speak." [Bamidbar 22:35]

At first glance it appears that the instructions Bilaam received from on High were contradictory. In verse 22:12, "God said to Bilaam, 'You shall not go with them'," after which in 13, Bilaam sent word to Balak that God refused to let him go, and in 18 he says that he is "unable to transgress the word of Hashem, my God". To this point, God spoke and Bilaam seemingly accepted the Divine decree.

But then Bilaam makes his mistake. In verse 19 he says to the messengers of Balak, "And now, you too, stay here for the night and I will know what more God will speak with me." This might not sound very problematic on the surface, but there is more to his words. Immediately after this statement, in verse 20, God told Bilaam "if the men came to summon you, arise and go with them, but only the thing that I shall speak to you, that shall you do" and this is repeated (by an angel rather than by God directly) in 22:35. Right after God told Bilaam he could go, Bilaam "arose in the morning and saddled his donkey" [21], yet after this, God was angry in 22.

We know that God does not change His mind, and in fact since He lives outside of time, He knows what Bilaam is going to do. What was the purpose of telling Bilaam not to go, then telling him to go, and then being angry over it?

Some things happen to Bilaam during this episode, such as in 22 the angel blocking his path and the donkey speaking to him. As if it was not enough that God Himself spoke to him at first telling him not to go, events that were clearly miraculous were also standing in his way. Rav Hirsch notes that Bilaam was no stranger to signs and omens. Rashi says that Bilaam understood that God did not want him to go, but Bilaam had his own agenda. He was given multiple opportunities to bend his will toward God but persisted in doing what he wished to do. Rashi cites Tanchuma and Makkot [10b], "Along the road on which a person wishes to go, on it they take him".

Malbim explains that "there are two ways to say 'go with them', imam and itam. Imam denotes mutual togetherness, where one connects with the others as an equal with a common goal. Itam denotes subordination, that the person travels alongside but not as a principle party and without sharing their goal. God told Bilaam not to go imam, rather he could only go itam" meaning Bilaam should not submit to the will of the messengers.

Why does verse 35 repeat, nearly word for word, what God said in verse 20, giving permission to go, although with a warning about speaking only what he is told? Ramban says that in verse 34 since Bilaam says to God, "If it is evil in your eyes, I shall return" that God forgave him for what came before on condition that Bilaam remembers that warning and does not do as the messengers of Balak asked.

We are given clear instruction in the Torah about how to live and what not to do. If we still choose to do wrong, God gives us many chances to correct our behavior and will accept that correction if we step up. Even when we struggle against His will, there is room until the end for us to return. But if we insist beyond reason in doing wrong, He will let us go forward in that wrong direction.