Why Was Hashem Angry at Bilam/2

Why Was Hashem Angry at Bilam?

Exegetical Approaches

This topic has not yet undergone editorial review

Evil Intent

Hashem was angry at Bilam since he was acting in bad faith.  Though Bilam knew that Hashem's intentions were that the Children of Israel be blessed, Bilam was nonetheless hoping to curse them.

Sources:RashiBemidbar 22:9-35About R. Shelomo Yitzchaki, RashbamBereshit 32:29Bemidbar 22:22-33About R. Shemuel b. Meir, perhaps Ibn EzraBemidbar 22:20About R. Avraham ibn Ezra, R. Yosef Bekhor ShorBemidbar 22:12-35About R. Yosef Bekhor Shor, ChizkuniBemidbar 22:12-34About R. Chizkiyah b. Manoach,¹ AbarbanelBemidbar 22:2Bemidbar 22:22About R. Yitzchak Abarbanel, SefornoBemidbar 22:12-38About R. Ovadyah Seforno, Or HaChayyimBemidbar 22:13-38About R. Chayyim b. Atar, HaKetav VeHaKabbalahBemidbar 22:12-35About R. Yaakov Mecklenburg, R. S.R. HirschBemidbar 22:12-39About R. Samson Raphael Hirsch, MalbimBemidbar 22:6-40About R. Meir Leibush Weiser, NetzivBemidbar 22:11-38About R. Naftali Tzvi Yehuda Berlin

"קוּם לֵךְ אִתָּם" / "לֹא תֵלֵךְ עִמָּהֶם" - Did Hashem change His mind? All these sources assume that Hashem did not fundamentally change His mind between the first and second visit of Balak's messengers, and that throughout He was opposed to Bilam's cursing.² However, they dispute whether Hashem was also consistent in the matter of giving Bilam leave to accompany the officers:

• Consistent – Several of these sources³ suggest that in both cases, Hashem allowed Bilam to travel but not to curse. HaKetav VeHakabbalah⁴ attempts to bring linguistic support for the claim. He differentiates between the phrases "לֵךְ עִם" and "לֵךְ את", suggesting that while "לֵךְ את"  refers to a physical accompaniment, "לֵךְ עִם" means to be of one mind.⁵ As such, when Hashem initially said "לֹא תֵלֵךְ עִמָּהֶם", He meant only that Bilam not go with the intent to curse the people,⁶ but not that he could not physically accompany Balak's officers.⁷
• Change of plan – Ibn Ezra and Chizkuni, in contrast, suggest that though initially Hashem forbade Bilam from joining the Moabites, He later permitted him to do so.  Ibn Ezra⁸ explains that though Hashem opposed Bilam's going, He gave in to Bilam's persistent requests,⁹ so that he would learn his lesson (the futility of his attempt to curse) the hard way.¹⁰  The point was driven home when the expected curse became a blessing.¹¹

According to both readings of the story, though Bilam did leave with God's explicit permission, he should have been aware that that this was limited and did not grant him leave to curse. He was expected to say only that which Hashem commanded him.

What was Bilam thinking? Rashi and R. Hirsch point out that though Bilam was fully aware of Hashem's opposition to his cursing, his pagan view of gods led him to believe that Hashem was like a human, who might be swayed to change His mind through sacrifices¹² or magical practices.¹³  Alternatively, he believed that his curses or other magical rites had the power to harm even without Hashem's sanction. ¹⁴

Evidence of Bilam's evil intent – These sources find various clues in the text that imply that Bilam was not innocently heeding Hashem's words to go¹⁵, but that he had evil intent and wished to curse.

• "וַיֵּלֶךְ עִם שָׂרֵי מוֹאָב" – HaKetav VeHaKabbalah, Malbim, and Netziv assert that the phrase "וַיֵּלֶךְ עִם" (rather than "וילך את") implies that Bilam not only physically joined the officers, but that he was also of one mind with their intentions to curse Israel.¹⁶
• "כִּי הוֹלֵךְ הוּא" – Seforno, Or HaChayyim and R. Hirsch suggest that the somewhat extraneous word "הוּא" implies that Bilam was going to do as he pleased, according to his own agenda and not Hashem's.
• "כִּי הוֹלֵךְ" – R"Y Bekhor Shor maintains that the very fact that Bilam went with the messengers betrays his intentions. If he had been planning on abiding by God's words, what was the point of going?
• No mention of Hashem's condition - The fact that Bilam did not share with the Moabites Hashem's caveat, that he could go but only say that which Hashem commands, might further suggest that he planned to ignore these instructions.¹⁷

Bilam's Motives – Most of these sources imply that Bilam was motivated by his personal hatred of the Children of Israel and a desire to harm them.  R"Y Bekhor Shor and Abarbanel, in contrast, suggest that Bilam was acting out of financial interest.  He did not harbor ill will against the nation; he simply hoped to earn a good fee from Balak.

"לוּ יֶשׁ חֶרֶב בְּיָדִי כִּי עַתָּה הֲרַגְתִּיךְ" – The angel's intentions

• Punishment - Rashbam suggests that the angel was sent to punish Bilam (who emerges from the encounter lame)¹⁸ for planning to overturn Hashem's will.¹⁹ He points to Yaakov, Moshe, and Yonah as examples of others who tried to avoid fulfilling the mission assigned them by Hashem, and who were similarly punished.²⁰
• Warning – Rashi and Seforno assert that the angel was sent as a warning, expressing Hashem's disapproval.  However, they highlight how this was a merciful act, aimed to prevent Bilam from sinning and to aid him to repent so as to avoid punishment.²¹

Message of the donkey episode

חָטָאתִי

Did Bilam change?

Ability to curse

Character of Bilam

Lack of Transparency

Bilam was not upfront with Balak's messengers, leading them to believe that he was coming to curse as they requested, when he, in fact, was not given permission to do so.

Sources:RambanBemidbar 22:13-35About R. Moshe b. Nachman #1

No Wrongdoing

Bilam had not yet committed any problematic deed. Hashem was simply issuing a warning to emphasize that he do as told.

Sources:perhaps Ibn Kaspi and RalbagBemidbar 22:13-33About R. Levi b. Gershom

Changing Circumstances

Hashem's varying responses relate to the changing deeds of Israel and whether or not they merited protection from Bilam's curses.

Chronology – This approach assumes that the interactions between Bilam and Balak take place at the same time as the story of the Sin of Baal Peor.  Though the stories overlap in time, they are written consecutively, as independent narratives, so as not to confuse the reader in switching back and forth between each.

"הֵן הֵנָּה הָיוּ לִבְנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בִּדְבַר בִּלְעָם לִמְסׇר מַעַל בַּי״י עַל דְּבַר פְּעוֹר" – This approach, following Bavli SanhedrinSanhedrin 106aAbout Bavli Sanhedrin, understands this verse to mean that it was Bilam's idea to incite the Israelites to sin with the Midianites at Baal Peor. However, it uniquely suggests that this advice was given, not after Bilam's attempt to curse the nation failed, but at the very outset of the story. When Hashem forbade Bilam from going to curse the nation because "they are blessed", Bilam suggested to Balak that he cause the nation to stumble and sin so that they would no longer be deserving of blessing.

"קוּם לֵךְ אִתָּם" / "לֹא תֵלֵךְ עִמָּהֶם" - Did Hashem change His mind? According to this approach, Hashem did change His mind between the first and second visits of Balak's messengers. During the first visit, Israel was free of sin and worthy of Hashem's protection, and so Bilam was prevented from cursing the nation.  By the second visit, however, the nation had sinned at Baal Peor (in the wake of Bilam's advice) and were deserving of punishment. As such, Hashem acquiesced that Bilam be the tool to inflict it. Hashem, however, added a caveat: "וְאַךְ אֶת הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אֲדַבֵּר אֵלֶיךָ אֹתוֹ תַעֲשֶׂה",  leaving room for the nation to repent and Hashem to change His mind.

The angel and donkey – By morning, Pinechas had killed the guilty parties and the nation was once again deserving of Divine protection.

¹

² This is why Hashem stipulates, "אַךְ אֶת הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אֲדַבֵּר אֵלֶיךָ אֹתוֹ תַעֲשֶׂה", warning Bilam that he will not be able to say whatever he pleases, but only what Hashem tells him to say.

³ See R"Y Bekhor Shor, Chizkuni (his first explanation), HaKetav VeHaKabbalah, and Netziv.

⁴ Cf. Malbim. R"Y Bekhor Shor and Chizkuni do not point to any specific language in the verses, but reach the same conclusion, claiming that in Hashem's first response He only refused to let Bilam go if he was to curse: "מתחילה לא אמר אלא לא תלך עמהם לקללם". Otherwise, though it would appear futile, he would have been free to travel. [Rashi , R"Y Bekhor Shor and Abarbanel suggest that Hashem allowed this so that Bilam could not complain that he lost out on potential profits.]

⁵ This reading encounters a significant difficulty from the end of episode of the angel and donkey. According to this approach, when the angel once again permits Bilam to go with the Moabites,  he should say "לֵךְ את הָאֲנָשִׁים" (as the angel clearly is not saying that he wants Bilam to share the Moabites' intent and only permitting physical travel), yet the angel nonetheless says, "לֵךְ עִם הָאֲנָשִׁים".

⁶ This would be to go "עם" the Moabites, with one mind and intention.

⁷ This, then, is no different from Hashem's second response, in which Bilam is again allowed to go, but not to be of one mind with the Moabites (i.e. not allowed to curse).  Cf. Seforno who explains that the phrase "אִם לִקְרֹא לְךָ בָּאוּ הָאֲנָשִׁים", means "if the officers came to seek your advice", suggesting that Hashem permitted Bilam to go only under these conditions, that he go as an outside consultant, but not if he was planning on cursing.

⁸ Chizkuni (in his third explanation) explains similarly, but highlights Balak's repeated requests. If Balak was foolish enough to ask Bilam to come and curse Israel a second time, then Hashem was ready to grant the request just so that he would learn how pointless it was. Cf. Rav Huna in Bavli Makkot 10bMakkot 10bAbout the Bavli, that this incident teaches that בַּדֶּרֶךְ שֶׁאָדָם רוֹצֶה לֵילֵךְ בָּהּ" מוֹלִיכִין אוֹתוֹ" - Hashem assists a person to follow the path upon which they desire to proceed.

⁹ Ramban argues against this possibility, claiming that it is inconceivable that Hashem would change His mind, only due to the obstinacy of Bilam.

¹⁰ Ibn Ezra compares this to Hashem's agreeing to the sending of the spies. Though Hashem had let it be known that no spies were needed, and the people should have known better, when they nonetheless pressured to send scouts (Devarim 1:22), He reluctantly agreed (Bemidbar 13:1). Though Hashem knew it was a mistake and was to end badly, He allowed the people to discover this for themselves.  This can be compared to a parent who refuses a child's request so as to guard them from harm, but after persistent pestering, might give in and let the child learn the consequences on their own. [For other approaches to the discrepancy regarding who initiated the spying mission, Hashem or the nation, see The Story of the Spies in Bemidbar and Devarim.]

¹¹ According to this reading, initially Hashem had planned only on preventing Bilam from going to curse the nation. It was only in the face of Balak and Bilam's intransigence and insistence on cursing, that He decided to also transform it into a blessing.

¹² See M. Leibtag "Haftarat Parshat Balak", who notes that we see this attitude to sacrifices taken by the Children of Israel as well.  Both Yeshayahu and Mikhah chastise the people for assuming that they can act as they want, for later they can simply appease Hashem by bringing sacrifices. This misunderstanding that God can be "bribed" via sacrifices, shared by both Israel and Balak and Bilam, explains why when rebuking the nation about this issue, Mikhah explicitly references Bilam and Balak.

¹³ R"Y Bekhor Shor adds that the fact that Hashem appeared to change His mind regarding Bilam's travels (first saying no, then yes) led him to believe that he might also change His mind regarding the curse.

¹⁴ See also Abarbanel who suggests that Bilam, being an astrologer, thought that the workings of Hashem's providence and the system of stars and constellations were distinct. Even if Hashem were to bless the nation, this need not mean that the stars could not foretell a different calamity to befall the people. 

¹⁵ If so, it would be hard to understand Hashem's anger, as after all he had been given permission.

¹⁶ See the discussion above. As mentioned, the angel's later words, "לֵךְ עִם הָאֲנָשִׁים" is difficult for this approach, as it is clear that the angel does not want Bilam to share the Moabite officers' agenda, and he nonetheless uses the words "לֵךְ עִם".  This might suggest that there really is no difference in meaning between "לך עם" and "לך את".

¹⁷ See R. Hirsch. Chizkuni further suggests that after Hashem had said "אַךְ אֶת הַדָּבָר אֲשֶׁר אֲדַבֵּר אֵלֶיךָ אֹתוֹ תַעֲשֶׂה" Bilam was meant to wait and hear what it was that he was to transmit, but Bilam being so eager to go, rushed out, not waiting to hear the rest of  Hashem's words.  This, too, betrays Bilam's great animosity towards Israel and his intense desire to inflict upon them harm.

¹⁸ Rashbam reads the phrase "וילך שפי" in Bemidbar 23:3 to mean lame. When Bilam's leg was pressed against the fence, it caused an injury.

¹⁹ R"Y Bekhor Shor reads the angel similarly, but less harshly. He claims that the angel was sent to let Bilam know that Hashem was aware of his intentions and to frighten him into obedience. The angel relayed that if Bilam continued to act as he planned he would be killed by sword. [See also Abarbanel who explains similarly.]

²⁰ Each is put into a potentially fatal situation, and, like Bilam, each of Moshe and Yaakov are also injured or touched on the thigh. It is possible that in all three cases the leg is specifically chosen as a measure for measure punishment for not going to do what Hashem desired. For more on Rashbam's reading of each of these stories, see Wrestling With Angels and Men and Mystery at the Malon.

²¹ The understanding that even Gentiles who are guilty of heinous crimes are given an a opportunity to repent is a major motif that runs throughout Seforno's commentary.  See, for example, his reading of Hashem's hardening of Paroh's heart and Seforno.