Biblical Parallels Index – Shemot 18/0

Biblical Parallels Index – Shemot 18

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Yitro and Bilam

The Torah records very little about the Children of Israel's encounters with other nations during their forty years in the desert, and even less about their interaction with private individuals who are not the rulers of their nations. Yitro and Bilam, though, are the two significant exceptions to this rule – Gentile personalities (both with ties to Midyan) to whom the Torah devotes a considerable amount of attention.  In many ways the two are a study in contrast.

Tools

Primary Sources

Many Rabbinic sources draw connections between Yiro and Bilam, some including a third Gentile figure, Iyyov.

• Sotah 11a, Sanhedrin 106a, and Shemot Rabbah 1:9 states that Paroh had three advisors: Bilaam, Iyov, and Yitro.  Bilaam advised Pharaoh to kill the Jewish baby boys, Iyov was silent, and Yitro ran away in protest.  These three characters represent different non-Jewish ways of relating to Judaism and the Jewish people. 
• Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Shemot 18:1 and Zevakhim 116a describe Bilaam’s response to popular fear and confusion after Matan Torah, which contrasts with that of Yitro. 

Articles

• See Yitro & Bilam for an overview of points of comparison between these two characters. Yitro is a friend who comes on his own initiative to bless the Children of Israel face to face in the first year in the wilderness, and whose descendants become a part of Israel. Bilam, on the other hand, is a foe who is summoned to curse the Children of Israel from afar in the fortieth and last year, and is later killed by the Children of Israel. The contrast between the two  emphasizes the realization of one of Hashem's original promises to Avraham "I will bless those who bless you, and I will curse him who curses you" (Bereshit 12:1-3).
• In Do You See the World Like Yisro or Like Balak?, R. Efrem Goldberg analyzes why Balak, Bilaam, and Yitro have such different reactions to the events experienced by Am Yisrael and how this insight might inform an individual’s religious life. 
• See Rabbi Shalom Carmy’s The House I Lived in: A Taste of Gooseflesh for an interpretation of Yitro’s feelings upon hearing of the success of the Jews, and how this relates to attitudes toward converts in Jewish culture.

Yitro and Rahav Both Yitro and Racahv are Gentiles who come to recognition of God. Comparing the two figures is illuminating in understanfing what leads one to abandon old beliefs and embrace new ones.¹

Tools

Primary Sources

Several Rabbinic sources connect the figures of Yitro and Rachav:

• Yerushalmi Berakhot 2:8 states that when the Jewish people do Hashem’s will, He searches the whole world for righteous people to bring to their fold.  The two examples given by the Gemara are Yitro and Rachav.  Similarly, Yerushalmi Rosh HaShanah 1:3 states that Hashem judges the nations favorably, remembering for them the acts of Yitro and Rachav.
• Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Shemot 18:1 and Zevakhim 116a explain that Yitro heard about the Splitting of the Sea, comparing him to Rachav, who declares that her people heard about the Splitting of the Sea.
• Mekhilta DeRabbi Yishmael Shemot 18:11 compares the reactions of three non-Jews who recognized Hashem’s miracles: Yitro, Naaman, and Rachav.  Of all of them, Rachav is the only one who declares Hashem’s kingship both in heaven and on earth.  

Articles

• See Rachav and the Spies by R. Michael Hattin for analysis of the motivations and experiences that informed Rachav’s decision to support the Jewish people, and a comparison based on the Mekhilta that indicates that Rachav’s recognition of Hashem was even more impressive than that of Yitro.  
• See ?יתרו ורחב - על גרי הצדק. ועלינו, by R. Yehuda Zoldan, for an overview of the many points of comparison between Yitro and Rahav. 

¹ It should be notes, however, that despite their recognition of God, it not explicit in either story that either characters actually converted or totally rejected their old beliefs.  See Yitro – Religious Identity for discussion.