 |
The Arizal on the Torah
The large size green text is the direct translation of the Ari teachings.
|
| Arizal Archives |
Partnership of Evil (from Portion Balak
in the writings of) Rabbi Yitzchak Luria of Safed --translation and commentary by Avraham Sutton
Why in the world would he send for Balaam? Because Balaam, 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 Balaam and his father: In the 36th year after the children of Israel departed from Egypt, G‑d smote the heart of Sichon, king of the Amorites, and he waged war, and went forth to fight against the children of Moab. [When he saw that he was losing] Sichon sent messengers to Be’or, son of Yanus, son of Balaam (counselor to the king of Egypt), and to Balaam his son, to curse Moab, so that it might be delivered into Sichon’s hand. The messengers went and brought Be’or, son of Yanus, and Balaam his son, from Petor in Aram Naharayim (Mesopotamia) to Sichon’s city, and they cursed Moab and their king in the presence of Sichon, king of the Amorites. Sichon then went forth with his whole army to fight against Moab. He subdued them, and G-d delivered them into his hands. Sichon slew the king of Moab. He then took all the cities of Moab in battle, including Cheshbon… The parable tellers, Be’or and Balaam, thus said: "Come unto Cheshbon, the city of Sichon, may it be built and established. Woe to you, Moab!…" But how do we know that Balak was a magician as well? Rabbi Chaim Vital writes in Shaar 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 Balaam 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 Balaam, while in another area, Balaam was inferior to Balak. Zohar Balak
(3:112b)
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 Balaam. Balaam’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… Balaam 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. 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)
The Holy One, on the other hand, had a different take on their names. He took the "Bal" of "Balak" and "Balaam", and made "Balbel" [confuse; confound]. The remaining letters are the "ak" of Balak, and the "aam" of Balaam. 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".]
Balak and Balaam 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 [Moses] BeLaBat ha’esh [in the flame of the fire] out of the midst of the bush" (Ex. 3:2). For only the Hei of Hevel, embodying the good of Hevel, had been extracted and refined, and given to Moses. As the Arizal says in a number of places, the mem of Moshe (Moses) stands for Moses, 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 Balaam, 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 Balaam [beit-lamed-ayin-mem]. The last letter of Amalek, kuf, was given to Balak [beit-lamed-kuf]. In sum, although both Balak and Balaam 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 Balaam’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" (Psalms 84:4) in reference to Jethro. Jethro was the father of Tziporah, Moses’s wife. Jethro 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)
Regarding Balaam, we have explained in a number of places how he received the essential aspects of his soul from Hevel (Abel). This is the mystery of the verse, "And never has another prophet risen up in Israel, like Moses" (Deut. 34:10). As the sages have said, "No prophet has risen in Israel, but among the nations, one has risen, namely, Balaam." 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" (Genesis 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 Balaam. |
Balak son of Tzipor beheld all that Israel had done to the
Amorites. Moab thus became fearful because they [Israel] were so numerous. Moab
became dreadfully fearful in the face of Israel. Moab 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 Moab at that time. He sent envoys to Balaam son of Be’or to
his [Balak’s] native land [Midian] in Petor, on the Euphrates River (Num.
22:2-4).
The key to the above passage is in the italicized sentence:
Balak was a Midianite. How then did he become king of Moab? Well, that goes
back a few years before when Sichon, the king of the Amorites, conquered Moab
and occupied its capital city, Cheshbon. When Moses and the children of Israel
slew Sichon, Moab 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 Balaam the son of Be’or.
While Balaam 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), Balaam
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.
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" (Psalms 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 Balaam 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 Balaam 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 ‘Balaam’ 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!"
For the Erev Rav itself was an admixture of the evil
[aspects] of Cain with the evil of Abel (hereafter referred to as Hevel,
paralleling the Hebrew pronunciation). Amalek was therefore a sworn anti-Semite,
as we explained on the verse, "And the Kenites (Cain-ites, from Cain) separated
from the Amalekites" (II Samuel 15:6). For the good aspect of Cain
became rectified in Jethro, who is called Chaver HaKeni, because
he removed himself from the evil aspect of Cain.
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 Jethro; "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 weekly
Torah portion], is his father’s name mentioned? Rather, Jethro 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 Jethro’s
descendants, but he did not follow in his footsteps. When the elders of Moab
and the elders of Midian, who shared the same idolatrous practices, saw that Jethro
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 Moab
at that time" (Num. 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 Jethro]. |
Receive future postings directly in your e-mail Ascent of Safed |
|