 |
The Arizal on the Torah |
| Arizal Archives |
Parashat Balak (Short Version) translation and commentary by Avraham Sutton 1. Opening verses (Bamidbar 22:2-4) and a Midrash
The first three verses of our parashah: Balak son of Tzipor beheld all that Israel had done to the Amorites. Moav thus became fearful because they [Israel] were so numerous. Moav became dreadfully fearful in the face of Israel. Moav therefore said to the elders of Midian, "Now they will lick up everything around us, just as a bull licks up all the vegetation in the field." Balak son of Tzipor had just become king of Moav at that time. He sent envoys to Bilaam son of Be'or to his [Balak's] native land [Midian] in Petor, on the Euphrates River (Bamidbar 22:2-4). The keys to the above passage is in the bolded sentence: Balak was a Midianite. How then did he become king of Moav? Well, that goes back a few years before when Sichon, the king of the Amorites, conquered Moav and occupied its capital city, Cheshbon (see Appendix 1). When Moshe and the children of Israel slew Sichon, Moav was left without a king. They immediately sent word to the Midianites, to provide them with a substitute. When then confronted with the oncoming Israelite camp, Balak was terrified that they would do to him what they had done to Sichon and Og. He therefore sent messengers back home to Midian, to his old friend Bilaam the son of Be'or. Why in the world would he send for Bilaam? Because Bilaam, like Balak, was a well-known black magician. In fact, when Sichon had wanted to conquer the Amorites, for whom did he send? According to the Midrash (Sefer HaYashar, Sefer Bamidbar), he sent for Bilaam and his father: In the 36th year after the children of Israel departed from Egypt, Hashem smote the heart of Sichon, king of the Amorites, and he waged war, and went forth to fight against the children of Moav. [When he saw that he was losing] Sichon sent messengers to Be'or, son of Yanus, son of Bilaam (counselor to the king of Egypt), and to Bilaam his son, to curse Moav, so that it might be delivered into Sichon's hand. The messengers went and brought Be'or, son of Yanus, and Bilaam his son, from Petor in Aram Naharayim (Mesopotamia) to Sichon's city, and they cursed Moav and their king in the presence of Sichon, king of the Amorites. Sichon then went forth with his whole army to fight against Moav. He subdued them, and G-d delivered them into his hands. Sichon slew the king of Moav. He then took all the cities of Moav in battle, including Cheshbon… The parable tellers, Be'or and Bilaam, thus said: "Come unto Cheshbon, the city of Sichon, may it be built and established. Woe to you, Moav!…" But how do we know that Balak was a magician as well? Rabbi Chayim Vital writes in Sha'ar HaPesukim (Chumash HaAri, Bamidbar, pp. 185-189): "Balak son of Tzipor beheld all that Israel had done to the Amorites" - I have seen fit to explain here how Balak and Bilaam were both kossmeen (magicians) and chachamim (wise men), the likes of which have never been seen since. Indeed, as the sages of blessed memory have informed us, in one area of black magic, Balak was inferior to Bilaam, while in another area, Bilaam was inferior to Balak. Zohar Balak (3:112b) While Bilaam was one of the greatest magicians in the world, Balak was even greater. That is, in kessem (sorcery, witchcraft), Balak was greater; while in nachash (divination, incantation, spell), Bilaam was greater. For we have learned: kessem and nachash are two different types of black magic. Kessem depends on performing certain actions, whereas nachash does not depend on action, but rather on directed contemplation together with speech. Zohar Chadash, Balak (p. 54a) Rabbi Abba said: Come and see! There were never two charsheen (literally "whisperers" from the root cheresh, deaf) and kossmeen (sorcerers, black magicians) like Balak and Bilaam. Bilaam's power was in his mouth and eyes. Balak's power was in the actions of his hands. Each needed the other. For, in order to implement a curse, both speech and action are needed… Bilaam had [the power of his] tongue, but no [power in his] hands; Balak had hands, but no tongue. In another place, as well, the Zohar (3:184b) speaks at great length about these two. There, we are told that Balak was called "ben Tzipor" [not because it was his father's name, but] because he would use a bird [tzipor] as a means to perform his magic. The Hebrew "tzipor" (which is close in pronunciation to "SiPoR") is the source for the English "SPaRrow". These two men also exhibited a causeless hatred for Israel that was unmatched by anyone else excepting Amalek, perhaps the greatest anti-semite of all time. In view of all this, I would like to base my remarks here on a particular passage in the Zohar, where it says: Zohar Balak (3:199b) King David wrote: "For behold, the wicked have already bent the bow. [Thinking that G-d does not see] they are setting their arrows to the string, to shoot from dark hide-outs at the upright in heart" (Tehillim 11:2)… This verse refers to SamaEl [the Angel of Death, the personification of evil; the root "sam" means both "potion" or "blindness," yielding: "poison of G-d" and "the one who blinds people and thereby prevents them from seeing G-d"] and his legions [the parasitic forces of evil which live off mankind's sins]. For all of his actions and his evil intentions are directed toward Israel. Balak and Bilaam followed in this evil path. It was in this way that they made an evil pact with each other. They contemplated the name Amalek, and understood that it meant "Am" [a nation] "Lek" [that strikes] Israel like a snake strikes with its tail. Balak and Bilaam said, "With our two names together, we can do even greater harm to Israel than Amalek! 'Balak' is 'Ba' [let come the one] 'Lak' [who can strike them as he wishes], and 'Bilaam' is 'Bal' [one who has the ability to negate/obliterate] 'Am' [a nation and its shepherd]. Our names are a sign that we can exterminate this nation and uproot it from the world!" The Holy One, on the other hand, had a different take on their names. He took the "Bal" of "Balak" and the "Bil" of "Bilaam", and made "Balbel" [confuse; confound]. The remaining letters are the "ak" of Balak, and the "aam" of Bilaam. Together, they spell Emek, Deep Valley or Deep Plan. He would hereby confound the deep plan of these two wicked men, thereby not only preventing them from taking over the world, but causing them to be destroyed [by their own machinations]… Know that all these things become clearly understood with a knowledge of Gilgul, Reincarnation, i.e. by knowing the soul-roots of these men. Amalek is the pesolet ha'ra [dregs of evil] that were extracted from Cain, the son of Adam. Amalek is thus one of the five types of Erev Rav (Mixed Multitude) that became intermingled with Israel, as recorded in the Zohar (1:25a): Nefilim, Giborim, Anakim, Refa'im, Amalakim. [The initials of these five names spell NeGA RA, "evil contagion".] For the Erev Rav itself was an admixture of the evil [aspects] of Cain with the evil of Hevel. Amalek was therefore a sworn anti-semite, as we explained on the verse, "And the Kenites (Cainites, from Cain) separated from the Amalekites" (II Shmuel 15:6). For the good aspect of Cain became rectified in Yithro, who is called Chaver HaKeni, because he removed himself from the evil aspect of Cain. Balak and Bilaam contained an admixture of evil from both Cain and Hevel. They therefore both had the letters "BL (Beth-Lamed)" in their names, from the BL of Hevel (Hei-Beth-Lamed). We explained this above on the verse, "The angel of Hashem appeared to him [Moshe] BeLaBat ha'esh [in the flame of the fire] out of the midst of the bush" (Shemot 3:2). For only the Hei of Hevel, embodying the good of Hevel, had been extracted and refined, and given to Moshe. As the ARI says in a number of places, the Mem of Moshe stands for Moshe, the Shin stands for Shet, and the final Hei stands for Hevel. The two letters BL of Hevel had not been refined, and therefore contained the evil [i.e. as yet unrefined] aspects of Hevel. These were given to Balak and Bilaam, as seen in the BL in each of their names. This evil aspect of Cain that was given to them is thus alluded to in their names. For, as we have already noted, the evil of Cain was taken by Amalek. This is seen in the fact that the first three letters of Amalek, AML [Ayin-Mem-Lamed] were given to Bilaam [Beth-Lamed-Ayin-Mem]. The last letter of Amalek, Kof, was given to Balak [Beth-Lamed-Kof]. In sum, although both Balak and Bilaam contained the evil aspects of Cain and the evil aspects of Hevel, nevertheless, the essence of Balak's evil was from Cain, while the essence of Bilaam's evil was from Hevel. [As mentioned above, the Zohar (3:184b) mentions Balak's connection to birds, based on his name Balak ben Tzipor, which means not only "son of bird" but "he who understood wisdom by way of a bird".] Further on, the Zohar (3:196b) cites the verse, "Even the tzipor [sparrow] has found a home, and the dror [swallow] a nest for herself" (Tehillim 84:4) in reference to Yithro. Yithro was the father of Tziporah, Moshe's wife. Yithro took the good aspects of Cain's soul, and became a pure tzipor. His descendant, Balak, took the evil aspects. Zohar Balak (3:196b-197a) Rabbi Elazar opened [his discourse] and said: It is written, "Even the tzipor [sparrow] has found a home, and the dror [swallow] a nest for herself." "Even the tzipor has found a home" - this refers to Yithro; "and the dror a nest for herself" - this refers to his descendants… Come and see: It is written, "Balak ben Tzipor beheld…" Why, more than all the other kings [that are mentioned in the preceding parashah], is his father's name mentioned? Rather, Yithro distanced himself from all the various forms of idolatry that were practiced by his contemporaries, and he and his children came to bond with Israel. As a result, he was excommunicated by his contemporaries and persecuted. Balak was one of Yithro's descendants, but he did not follow in his footsteps. When the elders of Moav and the elders of Midian, who shared the same idolatrous practices, saw that Yithro and his sons had removed themselves from idolatry but Balak had not… they approached him and invited him to rule over them at that time. This is the meaning of the verse, "And Balak ben Tzipor had just become king of Moav at that time" (Bamidbar 22:4). This tells us that he was not their king prior to this. In this sense, he did something not befitting his namesake: ben Tzipor [i.e. a descendant of Yithro]. Regarding Bilaam, we have explained in a number of places how he received the essential aspects of his soul from Hevel. This is the mystery of the verse, "And never has another prophet risen up in Israel, like Moshe" (Devarim 34:10). As the sages have said, "No prophet has risen in Israel, but among the nations, one has risen, namely, Bilaam." We have also explained how Hevel is alluded to in the verse, "Hinei yalda Milkah gam hi banim le'Nachor achicha - Behold, Milkah has also borne children to Nachor your brother: Utz, the firstborn, Buz, his brother, Kemuel… and Bethuel" (Bereshit 22:20-22). The initials of the words hi banim le'Nachor are Hevel. This alludes to the fact that Lavan, the son of Bethuel, and his entire family, were from Hevel… This is of particular interest in light of the fact that, as I have told you, Lavan's soul reincarnated in Bilaam. Click on Zohar Parshat Balak for a special supplement to the above: "The Zohar on Black Magic" Shabbat Shalom Background: The Geo-Political Map of the Ancient Middle East Toward the end of parashat Chukat, and correspondingly in parashat Devarim, the Torah records of number of crucial encounters between Israel and the kings and armies of the surrounding nations: 1. Moshe sent envoys from Kadesh to the king of Edom… Edom responded, "Do not pass through my land…" [At G-d's command] Israel made a detour around Edom (Bamidbar 20:14-21; Devarim 2:2-8). 2. When the Canaanite king of Arad, who lived in the Negev, heard that the children of Israel were traveling along the Atarim Highway, he attacked them… The children of Israelite routed them… (Bamidbar 21:1-3) 3. They traveled further and camped in the desert extending from the Amorite border, on the opposite side of the Arnon River. The Arnon is the Moabite border, separating Moav from the Amorites (Bamidbar 21:11-15). Hashem said to me, "You are now about to pass through Ar, which is Moabite country… Do not attack or provoke them. I will not let you occupy the land of the Ammonites, for I have given it as a heritage to the children of Lot…" (Devarim 2:17-23). 4. Hashem said, "Now set out and cross the Arnon River. Behold, I have given over Sichon, the Amorite king of Cheshbon, and his land, into your hands. Begin the occupation! Provoke him into war! Today I am beginning to make all the nations under the heavens fear and dread you. Whoever hears of your reputation will panic and tremble before you" (Devarim 2:24-25). Moshe sent envoys to Sichon, king of the Amorites, saying, "Let me pass through your land…" Sichon gathered all his people and went out to the desert to confront Israel… Israel struck him down with the sword, and occupied his land from the Arnon (River) to the Yabok (River), as far as the border of the Amonites… They then settled in Cheshbon and all its tributary towns, all the Amorite cities… Cheshbon was the capital of Sichon king of the Amorites. He had fought the first king of Moav and taken all his land as far as the Arnon (Bamidbar 21:21-26; Devarim 2:26-37). 4. We then turned and traveled along the road to the Bashan, where Og and his troops came to confront us in battle at Edre'i. Hashem said to me, "Do not fear him, since I have turned him over to you along with all his people and his land. You will do the same to him as you did to the Amorite king Sichon, who lived in Sichon" (Devarim 3:1-2). Og king of the Bashan came out with all his people to battle Israel… The children of Israel slayed Og and his children and his people, and they occupied his land. The children of Israel traveled on and they camped in the western plains of Moav, across the Jordan from Jericho (Bamidbar 21:33 - 22:1; Devarim 3:1-10). |
 |
Ascent of Safed
|
|