Difference between revisions of "Why Was Hashem Angry at Bilam/1/en"

From AlHaTorah.org
Jump to navigation Jump to search
 
(48 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown)
Line 3: Line 3:
 
<page type="Introduction">
 
<page type="Introduction">
 
<h1>Why Was Hashem Angry at Bilam?</h1>
 
<h1>Why Was Hashem Angry at Bilam?</h1>
<div><b><center><span class="highlighted-notice">This topic has not yet undergone editorial review</span></center></b></div>
+
<figure class="thumb"><a href="Bilam and the Donkey in Art" data-aht="page"><img src="/Media/4Bemidbar/22/Bilam and the Donkey in Art/Lastman.jpg"/></a><figcaption>(<a href="Bilam and the Donkey in Art" data-aht="page">Click for this topic in art</a>)</figcaption></figure>
<h2 name="Change of Heart">Why Does Hashem Keep Changing His Mind?</h2>
+
<h2>A Change of Heart</h2>
<p><a href="Bemidbar22" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 22</a>&#160;describes how Balak, the King of Moav, requests from Bilam that he curse the Children of Israel. Bilam consults with Hashem who refuses permission, telling Bilam:</p>
+
<p><a href="Bemidbar22" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 22</a>&#160;describes how Balak, the King of Moav, asks Bilam to curse the Children of Israel. Bilam consults with Hashem who flatly refuses him permission and commands him:</p>
 
<multilang style="overflow: auto;">
 
<multilang style="overflow: auto;">
 
<q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl">&#160;לֹא תֵלֵךְ עִמָּהֶם לֹא תָאֹר אֶת הָעָם כִּי בָרוּךְ הוּא.</q>
 
<q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl">&#160;לֹא תֵלֵךְ עִמָּהֶם לֹא תָאֹר אֶת הָעָם כִּי בָרוּךְ הוּא.</q>
 
<q xml:lang="en">God said to Balaam, “You shall not go with them. You shall not curse the people; for they are blessed.”</q>
 
<q xml:lang="en">God said to Balaam, “You shall not go with them. You shall not curse the people; for they are blessed.”</q>
 
</multilang>
 
</multilang>
<p>Upon hearing the message, Balak tries his luck again, sending a second set of servants to once again try and convince Bilam to curse the nation. Despite Hashem's earlier refusal, Bilam again seeks Hashem's consent, and somewhat surprisingly, receives a different answer:</p>
+
<p>Upon hearing Bilam's reply, Balak tries his luck again, sending a second entourage to&#160; persuade Bilam to curse the nation. Despite Hashem's earlier refusal, Bilam again seeks Hashem's approval, and somewhat surprisingly, this time he receives the opposite response:</p>
 
<multilang style="overflow: auto;">
 
<multilang style="overflow: auto;">
<q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl">וַיָּבֹא אֱלֹהִים אֶל בִּלְעָם לַיְלָה וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ אִם לִקְרֹא לְךָ בָּאוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים קוּם לֵךְ אִתָּם וְאַךְ אֶת הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אֲדַבֵּר אֵלֶיךָ אֹתוֹ תַעֲשֶׂה.</q>
+
<q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl">וַיָּבֹא אֱ-לֹהִים אֶל בִּלְעָם לַיְלָה וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ אִם לִקְרֹא לְךָ בָּאוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים קוּם לֵךְ אִתָּם וְאַךְ אֶת הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אֲדַבֵּר אֵלֶיךָ אֹתוֹ תַעֲשֶׂה.</q>
 
<q xml:lang="en">God came to Balaam at night, and said to him, “If the men have come to call you, rise up, go with them; but only the word which I speak to you, that you shall do.”</q>
 
<q xml:lang="en">God came to Balaam at night, and said to him, “If the men have come to call you, rise up, go with them; but only the word which I speak to you, that you shall do.”</q>
 
</multilang>
 
</multilang>
<p>What makes Hashem change His mind? Has something happened that, this time around,&#160; Hashem allows Bilam to accompany the messengers? More perplexing than this change of heart, though, is Hashem's reaction when Bilam acts upon Hashem's permit. Right after Bilam departs with the Moabites, we are told that Hashem is filled with wrath. How is this reaction to be understood? Why is Hashem angry if Bilam is simply doing what he was told? As Abarbanel asks in his eighth question on the chapter:</p>
+
<p>What makes Hashem change His mind? Why, this time around, does Hashem allow Bilam to go with the messengers? Did something occur in the interim to affect His decision?</p>
 +
 
 +
<h2>A Second Change of Heart</h2>
 +
<p>More perplexing than Hashem's initial position reversal, though, is Hashem's reaction when Bilam acts on Hashem's permission. Immediately after Bilam departs with the Moabites, we are told that Hashem is filled with wrath ("וַיִּחַר אַף אֱ-לֹהִים כִּי הוֹלֵךְ הוּא"). How is this reaction to be understood? Why is Hashem angry if Bilam is simply following His orders?&#160; As Abarbanel asks in his eighth question on the chapter:</p>
 
<q dir="rtl" lang="he">
 
<q dir="rtl" lang="he">
<p>השאלה הח׳: אם הוא יתברך הרשה את בלעם ללכת ואמר לו אם לקרא לך באו האנשים קום לך אתם איך אחרי שהלך נאמר ויחר אף אלהים כי הולך הוא ויתיצב מלאך י״י בדרך לשטן לו והוא לא הלך אלא ברשותו ובמאמרו?!</p>
+
<p>אם הוא יתברך הרשה את בלעם ללכת, ואמר לו: "אם לקרא לך באו האנשים קום לך אתם", איך אחרי שהלך נאמר: "ויחר אף א-להים כי הולך הוא ויתיצב מלאך י״י בדרך לשטן לו", והוא לא הלך אלא ברשותו ובמאמרו?!</p>
 
</q>
 
</q>
  
<h2 name="Angel and Donkey">A Sword Wielding Angel and Talking Donkey</h2>
+
<h2 name="Angel and Donkey">Angel and Talking Donkey</h2>
<p>Bilam's encounter with the angel and his miraculous talking donkey are, for many, the most memorable part of the story, but also one of the most perplexing:</p>
+
<p>Bilam's miraculously talking donkey and his encounter with the angel are, for many, the most memorable part of the story, but also one of its most perplexing:</p>
 
<ul>
 
<ul>
<li>Why does Hashem decide to relay His message to Bilam in this manner rather than straightforwardly expressing His anger?<fn>This is especially difficult considering that Bilam receives prophecy and communicates with Hashem directly throughout the story.</fn>&#160; Was making a miracle (enabling the donkey to both see the angel and to speak) really necessary in order to communicate His point?<fn>See Ralbag and Abarbanel (in his eleventh question on the chapter) who point out that Hashem does not bring miracles for no reason. Since the angel could have communicated directly with Bilam, there seems to be little gained by having the donkey miraculously see an angel and speak. [Ralbag writes, "ואם אמרנו שה׳ יתעלה עשה זה על דרך המופת, הנה ישאל שואל אי־זה תועלת היה בזה המופת...&#160; והוא מבואר שה׳ יתעלה לא יחדש המופתים ללא צורך".]&#160; Ralbag here is consistent with his general tendency to minimize miracles, and Abarbanel with his repeated emphasis on the fact that miracles are related to necessity.&#160; For elaboration, see <a href="Philosophy:Miracles" data-aht="page">Miracles</a> and <a href="Moshe's Epitaph – Signs and Wonders" data-aht="page">Moshe's Epitaph – Signs and Wonders</a>.</fn></li>
+
<li>Why does Hashem decide to relay His message to Bilam in this manner rather than straightforwardly expressing His anger?<fn>This is especially difficult considering that Bilam receives prophecy and communicates with Hashem directly throughout the story.</fn>&#160; Was making a miracle (enabling the donkey to both see the angel and to speak) really necessary in order to communicate His point?<fn>See&#160;<multilink><a href="RalbagBemidbar22-13-33" data-aht="source">Ralbag</a><a href="RalbagBemidbar22-13-33" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 22:13-33</a><a href="R. Levi b. Gershom (Ralbag, Gersonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Levi b. Gershom</a></multilink> and <multilink><a href="AbarbanelBemidbar22-2" data-aht="source">Abarbanel </a><a href="AbarbanelBemidbar22-2" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 22:2</a><a href="AbarbanelBemidbar22-7" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 22:7</a><a href="AbarbanelBemidbar22-22" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 22:22</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Abarbanel" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel</a></multilink>(in his eleventh question on the chapter) who point out that Hashem does not bring unnecessary miracles. Since the angel could have communicated directly with Bilam, there seems to be little gained by having the donkey miraculously see an angel and speak. [As Ralbag writes: "ואם אמרנו שה׳ יתעלה עשה זה על דרך המופת, הנה ישאל שואל אי־זה תועלת היה בזה המופת...&#160; והוא מבואר שה׳ יתעלה לא יחדש המופתים ללא צורך".]&#160; This question is consistent with Ralbag's general tendency to minimize miracles. Abarbanel, too, is consistent with his repeated emphasis on the fact that miracles are related to necessity.&#160; For elaboration, see <a href="Philosophy:Miracles" data-aht="page">Miracles</a> and <a href="Moshe's Epitaph – Signs and Wonders" data-aht="page">Moshe's Epitaph – Signs and Wonders</a>.</fn></li>
<li>Given Hashem's anger at Bilam, the reader expects that at the end of the encounter, there will be some change in Hashem's instructions or Bilam's actions. Yet, the angel reiterates Hashem's earlier message almost verbatim, and Bilam proceeds exactly as before (see table below). If so, what was gained through the entire episode?</li>
+
<li>Given Hashem's anger at Bilam, the reader expects that at the end of the encounter there will be some change in Hashem's instructions or in Bilam's actions. Yet, the angel simply reiterates Hashem's earlier command almost verbatim, and Bilam proceeds exactly as before (see table below). If so, what was achieved by this entire episode?<fn>See <multilink><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbarPeirush22" data-aht="source">Akeidat Yitzchak</a><a href="AkeidatYitzchakBemidbarPeirush22" data-aht="source">Bemidbar Peirush 22</a><a href="R. Yitzchak Arama (Akeidat Yitzchak)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Yitzchak Arama</a></multilink>, who writes, "מה נתחדש ביציאת המלאך אחריו, אחר שפטרו באותן הדברים עצמן, שא״ל האל יתעלה מתחלה באומרו: קום לך אתם ואפס את הדבר וגו׳."</fn></li>
 
</ul>
 
</ul>
 
<multilang style="overflow: auto;">
 
<multilang style="overflow: auto;">
Line 30: Line 33:
  
 
<tr>
 
<tr>
<td style="text-align: center; vertical-align: middle;">פסוקים כ'-כ"א (לפני הפגישה)</td>
+
<td style="text-align: center; vertical-align: middle;"><b>פסוקים כ'-כ"א (לפני הפגישה)</b></td>
<td style="text-align: center; vertical-align: middle;">פסוק ל"ה (בסוף הפגישה)</td>
+
<td style="text-align: center; vertical-align: middle;"><b>פסוק ל"ה (בסוף הפגישה)</b></td>
 
</tr>
 
</tr>
 
<tr>
 
<tr>
Line 64: Line 67:
  
 
<h2>Obedient Servant or Devious Plotter</h2>
 
<h2>Obedient Servant or Devious Plotter</h2>
<p>When reading our story in isolation, Bilam appears to be a fairly positive character.<fn>Of course, Hashem's wrath must still be explained.</fn> He is the epitome of the obedient servant, never acting without first consulting Hashem and always following Hashem's directions.<fn>Even when told that he is in the wrong, he immediately confesses, "I have sinned," and thereafter proceeds as exactly as told.</fn>&#160; He merits prophecy and consistently refers to Hashem using His proper name (the&#160;Tetragrammaton or שם הויה), suggesting that Bilam recognized Hashem's sole authority.</p>
+
<p>From reading our story alone, one might get the impression that Bilam is a positive character.<fn>Of course, Hashem's wrath must still be explained.</fn> He is the epitome of the obsequious servant, never acting without first consulting Hashem<fn>The same cannot necessarily be said of all Israelite prophets, who often appear to act on their own, without first seeking Hashem's consent.&#160; For examples and differing opinions as to whether prophets have some autonomy, see&#160;<a href="Prophetic Actions Without Explicit Divine Sanction" data-aht="page">Prophetic Actions Without Explicit Divine Sanction</a> and&#160;<a href="Invoking Hashem's Name Without Explicit Divine Sanction" data-aht="page">Invoking Hashem's Name Without Explicit Divine Sanction</a>.</fn> and always following Hashem's directions.<fn>Even in the episode of the angel, upon being admonished, Bilam immediately confesses, "I have sinned," and thereafter proceeds exactly as commanded.</fn>&#160; He merits prophecy<fn>According to <multilink><a href="RambamHilkhotYesodeiHaTorah7-1" data-aht="source">Rambam</a><a href="RambamShemonahPerakim7" data-aht="source">Shemonah Perakim 7</a><a href="RambamHilkhotYesodeiHaTorah7-1" data-aht="source">Hilkhot Yesodei HaTorah 7:1</a><a href="R. Moshe b. Maimon (Rambam, Maimonides)" data-aht="parshan">About R. Moshe b. Maimon</a></multilink> and others, one of the requirements for the attainment of prophecy is moral perfection. [See <a href="Philosophy:Requirements for Prophec" data-aht="page">Requirements for Prophecy</a>.]&#160; If so, one would expect Bilam to have an impeccable character.&#160; See&#160;<a href="2" data-aht="subpage">Approaches</a> for more on Rambam's view of Bilam.</fn> and consistently refers to Hashem using His proper name (the&#160;Tetragrammaton or שם הויה), suggesting that Bilam recognized Hashem's supreme authority.</p>
<p>Two tangential comments at the end of Sefer Bemidbar, however, question this portrait.&#160;<a href="Bemidbar31-8" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 31:8</a> states that Bilam was killed together with the Midianite kings in the war waged against them by Israel, while&#160;<a href="Bemidbar31-16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 31:16</a> provides an explanation and justification for his death:</p>
+
<p>However, several subsequent verses pose challenges to this portrait. When recounting the story in <a href="Devarim23-4-7" data-aht="source">Devarim 23</a>,<fn>See also the similar formulation in <a href="Yehoshua24-9-10" data-aht="source">Yehoshua 24</a>, "וְלֹא אָבִיתִי לִשְׁמֹעַ לְבִלְעָם וַיְבָרֶךְ בָּרוֹךְ אֶתְכֶם וָאַצִּל אֶתְכֶם מִיָּדוֹ", and see <a href="Nechemyah13-1-2" data-aht="source">Nechemyah 13</a> which speaks of Hashem's changing Bilam's curse into a blessing. Both of these verses imply that Bilam's intentions were indeed to curse the nation.</fn> Moshe writes:</p>
<multilang style="overflow: auto">
+
<multilang style="overflow: auto;">
 +
<q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl">וְלֹא אָבָה י״י אֱ-לֹהֶיךָ לִשְׁמֹעַ אֶל בִּלְעָם וַיַּהֲפֹךְ י״י אֱ-לֹהֶיךָ לְּךָ אֶת הַקְּלָלָה לִבְרָכָה כִּי אֲהֵבְךָ י״י אֱ-לֹהֶיךָ.</q>
 +
<q xml:lang="en">Nevertheless Hashem your God wouldn’t listen to Balaam; but Hashem your God turned the curse into a blessing to you, because Hashem your God loved you.</q>
 +
</multilang>
 +
<p>Contrary to the obedient profile of Bilam found in our story, this verse implies that Bilam had headed to Moav with a plot of his own to curse the Children of Israel and that Hashem needed to overturn this nefarious plan. At the end of Bemidbar, Bilam makes another cameo appearance, and it, too, makes one question his innocence. <a href="Bemidbar31-8" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 31:8</a> states that Bilam was killed together with the Midianite kings in the war waged against them by Israel, and <a href="Bemidbar31-16" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 31:16</a> may provide a justification for his death:</p>
 +
<multilang style="overflow: auto;">
 
<q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl">הֵן הֵנָּה הָיוּ לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּדְבַר בִּלְעָם לִמְסׇר מַעַל בַּי״י עַל דְּבַר פְּעוֹר וַתְּהִי הַמַּגֵּפָה בַּעֲדַת י״י.</q>
 
<q xml:lang="he" dir="rtl">הֵן הֵנָּה הָיוּ לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּדְבַר בִּלְעָם לִמְסׇר מַעַל בַּי״י עַל דְּבַר פְּעוֹר וַתְּהִי הַמַּגֵּפָה בַּעֲדַת י״י.</q>
 
<q xml:lang="en">Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against Hashem in the matter of Peor, and so the plague was among the congregation of Hashem.</q>
 
<q xml:lang="en">Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against Hashem in the matter of Peor, and so the plague was among the congregation of Hashem.</q>
 
</multilang>
 
</multilang>
<p>This verse implies that it was at Bilam's advice that the Midianites incited the nation to sin at Baal Peor.&#160; Bilam emerges here, not as a faithful servant, but a devious schemer, plotting the downfall of Israel. How might the two portraits be reconciled?&#160; Which story portrays the "real" Bilam? Should one re-read the original story in light of Bilam's later actions, or reinterpret the later story in light of his earlier obedience? Alternatively, might something have occur ed in the interim that led Bilam to change his attitude?&#160;</p>
+
<p>This verse implies that it was due to Bilam's counsel that the Midianites induced the nation to sin with Baal Peor.&#160; As such, Bilam emerges here, not as a faithful servant, but as a devious schemer, plotting the downfall of Israel.</p>
 +
<p>How might these stories and verses be reconciled?&#160; Which story portrays the "real" Bilam? Should one re-read the original narrative in light of Bilam's later actions and Moshe's account, or reinterpret the later verses in light of his earlier ostensible obedience?<fn>Despite the ambiguous portrait that emerges from the Biblical text, Bilam is almost universally vilified by both Midrashic and later sources. For some examples, see <multilink><a href="MishnaAvot5-19" data-aht="source">Mishna Avot 5:19</a><a href="MishnaAvot5-19" data-aht="source">Avot 5:19</a><a href="Mishna" data-aht="parshan">About the Mishna</a></multilink>, <a href="BavliSotah11a" data-aht="source">Bavli Sotah 11a</a>, <multilink><a href="TargumYerushalmiYonatanBemidbar31-8" data-aht="source">Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)</a><a href="TargumYerushalmiYonatanBemidbar31-8" data-aht="source">Bemidbar 31:8</a><a href="Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)" data-aht="parshan">About Targum Yerushalmi (Yonatan)</a></multilink> and <a href="YalkutShimoniShemot2-11" data-aht="source">Yalkut Shimoni Shemot 2:11</a>.This fits with the Midrashic tendency to view characters as black or white, portraying rejected or questionable characters as totally wicked, and whitening apparent sins of otherwise righteous figures. For other examples where a seemingly neutral figure in Tanakh is painted black, see <a href="Nimrod" data-aht="page">Nimrod</a>, <a href="A Portrait of Yishmael" data-aht="page">A Portrait of Yishmael</a>, and <a href="A Portrait of Esav" data-aht="page">A Portrait of Esav</a>.</fn></p>
  
<h2></h2>
+
<h2>Additional Questions</h2>
 +
<p>Several smaller questions might shed light on the above issues:</p>
 +
<ul>
 +
<li><b>"לֹא תָאֹר אֶת הָעָם כִּי בָרוּךְ הוּא"</b>&#8206;&#160;(<a href="Bemidbar22" data-aht="source">22:12</a>) – When Bilam conveys to the first set of messengers Hashem's initial refusal to let him go, he relays only part of Hashem's response, omitting that he may not curse the nation since they are blessed. Is this omission significant?&#160; Why might Bilam have kept this fact to himself?&#160; Alternatively, is it possible that, despite the text's silence, Bilam relayed this point as well?</li>
 +
<li><b>"אִם לִקְרֹא לְךָ בָּאוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים"</b> &#8206;&#8206; (<a href="Bemidbar22" data-aht="source">22:20</a>) – This language appears extraneous. Why does Hashem add the condition, "if the men have come to summon you"?&#160; Is it not obvious that they came to&#160;summon Bilam?</li>
 +
<li><b>Disappearing officers</b>&#8206; (<a href="Bemidbar22-21-41" data-aht="source">22:22-34</a>) – Though Bilam departs with Moabite officers (<a href="Bemidbar22-21-41" data-aht="source">22:21</a>), there is no mention of them throughout the angel-donkey episode. To where did they disappear?&#160; Is it possible that though they are absent from the text, they, too, witnessed the incident?</li>
 +
</ul>
  
 
</page>
 
</page>
 
</aht-xml>
 
</aht-xml>

Latest revision as of 00:22, 13 September 2019

Why Was Hashem Angry at Bilam?

Introduction

(Click for this topic in art)

A Change of Heart

Bemidbar 22 describes how Balak, the King of Moav, asks Bilam to curse the Children of Israel. Bilam consults with Hashem who flatly refuses him permission and commands him:

EN/HEע/E

 לֹא תֵלֵךְ עִמָּהֶם לֹא תָאֹר אֶת הָעָם כִּי בָרוּךְ הוּא.

God said to Balaam, “You shall not go with them. You shall not curse the people; for they are blessed.”

Upon hearing Bilam's reply, Balak tries his luck again, sending a second entourage to  persuade Bilam to curse the nation. Despite Hashem's earlier refusal, Bilam again seeks Hashem's approval, and somewhat surprisingly, this time he receives the opposite response:

EN/HEע/E

וַיָּבֹא אֱ-לֹהִים אֶל בִּלְעָם לַיְלָה וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ אִם לִקְרֹא לְךָ בָּאוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים קוּם לֵךְ אִתָּם וְאַךְ אֶת הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אֲדַבֵּר אֵלֶיךָ אֹתוֹ תַעֲשֶׂה.

God came to Balaam at night, and said to him, “If the men have come to call you, rise up, go with them; but only the word which I speak to you, that you shall do.”

What makes Hashem change His mind? Why, this time around, does Hashem allow Bilam to go with the messengers? Did something occur in the interim to affect His decision?

A Second Change of Heart

More perplexing than Hashem's initial position reversal, though, is Hashem's reaction when Bilam acts on Hashem's permission. Immediately after Bilam departs with the Moabites, we are told that Hashem is filled with wrath ("וַיִּחַר אַף אֱ-לֹהִים כִּי הוֹלֵךְ הוּא"). How is this reaction to be understood? Why is Hashem angry if Bilam is simply following His orders?  As Abarbanel asks in his eighth question on the chapter:

אם הוא יתברך הרשה את בלעם ללכת, ואמר לו: "אם לקרא לך באו האנשים קום לך אתם", איך אחרי שהלך נאמר: "ויחר אף א-להים כי הולך הוא ויתיצב מלאך י״י בדרך לשטן לו", והוא לא הלך אלא ברשותו ובמאמרו?!

Angel and Talking Donkey

Bilam's miraculously talking donkey and his encounter with the angel are, for many, the most memorable part of the story, but also one of its most perplexing:

  • Why does Hashem decide to relay His message to Bilam in this manner rather than straightforwardly expressing His anger?1  Was making a miracle (enabling the donkey to both see the angel and to speak) really necessary in order to communicate His point?2
  • Given Hashem's anger at Bilam, the reader expects that at the end of the encounter there will be some change in Hashem's instructions or in Bilam's actions. Yet, the angel simply reiterates Hashem's earlier command almost verbatim, and Bilam proceeds exactly as before (see table below). If so, what was achieved by this entire episode?3
EN/HEע/E
פסוקים כ'-כ"א (לפני הפגישה) פסוק ל"ה (בסוף הפגישה)
וַיֹּאמֶר לוֹ אִם לִקְרֹא לְךָ בָּאוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים קוּם לֵךְ אִתָּם וְאַךְ אֶת הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אֲדַבֵּר אֵלֶיךָ אֹתוֹ תַעֲשֶׂה. וַיֹּאמֶר מַלְאַךְ י״י אֶל בִּלְעָם לֵךְ עִם הָאֲנָשִׁים וְאֶפֶס אֶת הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אֲדַבֵּר אֵלֶיךָ אֹתוֹ תְדַבֵּר.
וַיֵּלֶךְ בִּלְעָם עִם שָׂרֵי בָלָק

וַיֵּלֶךְ עִם שָׂרֵי מוֹאָב

Obedient Servant or Devious Plotter

From reading our story alone, one might get the impression that Bilam is a positive character.4 He is the epitome of the obsequious servant, never acting without first consulting Hashem5 and always following Hashem's directions.6  He merits prophecy7 and consistently refers to Hashem using His proper name (the Tetragrammaton or שם הויה), suggesting that Bilam recognized Hashem's supreme authority.

However, several subsequent verses pose challenges to this portrait. When recounting the story in Devarim 23,8 Moshe writes:

EN/HEע/E

וְלֹא אָבָה י״י אֱ-לֹהֶיךָ לִשְׁמֹעַ אֶל בִּלְעָם וַיַּהֲפֹךְ י״י אֱ-לֹהֶיךָ לְּךָ אֶת הַקְּלָלָה לִבְרָכָה כִּי אֲהֵבְךָ י״י אֱ-לֹהֶיךָ.

Nevertheless Hashem your God wouldn’t listen to Balaam; but Hashem your God turned the curse into a blessing to you, because Hashem your God loved you.

Contrary to the obedient profile of Bilam found in our story, this verse implies that Bilam had headed to Moav with a plot of his own to curse the Children of Israel and that Hashem needed to overturn this nefarious plan. At the end of Bemidbar, Bilam makes another cameo appearance, and it, too, makes one question his innocence. Bemidbar 31:8 states that Bilam was killed together with the Midianite kings in the war waged against them by Israel, and Bemidbar 31:16 may provide a justification for his death:

EN/HEע/E

הֵן הֵנָּה הָיוּ לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּדְבַר בִּלְעָם לִמְסׇר מַעַל בַּי״י עַל דְּבַר פְּעוֹר וַתְּהִי הַמַּגֵּפָה בַּעֲדַת י״י.

Behold, these caused the children of Israel, through the counsel of Balaam, to commit trespass against Hashem in the matter of Peor, and so the plague was among the congregation of Hashem.

This verse implies that it was due to Bilam's counsel that the Midianites induced the nation to sin with Baal Peor.  As such, Bilam emerges here, not as a faithful servant, but as a devious schemer, plotting the downfall of Israel.

How might these stories and verses be reconciled?  Which story portrays the "real" Bilam? Should one re-read the original narrative in light of Bilam's later actions and Moshe's account, or reinterpret the later verses in light of his earlier ostensible obedience?9

Additional Questions

Several smaller questions might shed light on the above issues:

  • "לֹא תָאֹר אֶת הָעָם כִּי בָרוּךְ הוּא"‎ (22:12) – When Bilam conveys to the first set of messengers Hashem's initial refusal to let him go, he relays only part of Hashem's response, omitting that he may not curse the nation since they are blessed. Is this omission significant?  Why might Bilam have kept this fact to himself?  Alternatively, is it possible that, despite the text's silence, Bilam relayed this point as well?
  • "אִם לִקְרֹא לְךָ בָּאוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים" ‎‎ (22:20) – This language appears extraneous. Why does Hashem add the condition, "if the men have come to summon you"?  Is it not obvious that they came to summon Bilam?
  • Disappearing officers‎ (22:22-34) – Though Bilam departs with Moabite officers (22:21), there is no mention of them throughout the angel-donkey episode. To where did they disappear?  Is it possible that though they are absent from the text, they, too, witnessed the incident?