And the children of Israel journeyed, and pitched in the plains of Moab beyond the Jordan at Jericho.
verse value 2394
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 41 letters. Verse gematria: 2394 is divisible by 18, the value of chai ('life'). The shortest word is "children·of" (בְּנֵ֣י, 3 letters) and the longest is "in·the·steppes·of" (בְּעַֽרְב֣וֹת, 6 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "in·the·steppes·of" (בְּעַֽרְב֣וֹת). 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "children·of" (root בן, 499x in Numbers); "Israel" (root ישראל, 183x in Numbers); "and·they·marched·on" (root נסע, 89x in Numbers). First appearance of the root ערבה ("in·the·steppes·of") in Numbers. First appearance of the root יריחו ("Jericho") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Israel', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 6 words. Full calculation: וַיִּסְע֖וּ [and·they·marched·on] (152) + בְּנֵ֣י [children·of] (62) + יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל [Israel] (541) + וַֽיַּחֲנוּ֙ [and·they·encamped] (80) + בְּעַֽרְב֣וֹת [in·the·steppes·of] (680) + מוֹאָ֔ב [Moab] (49) + מֵעֵ֖בֶר [across] (312) + לְיַרְדֵּ֥ן [the·Jordan] (294) + יְרֵחֽוֹ [Jericho] (224) = 2394.
Onkelos
The children of Israel journeyed and encamped in the plains of Moab, across the Jordan from Jericho.
Chizkuni
ויסעו בני ישראל, “The Children of Israel resumed journeying;” after the victory of the men over Og and his army they brought their wives and children to encamp on the east bank of the Jordan river in the region between the rivers Arnon and Yabok.
Rashbam
מעבר לירדן יריחו, meaning opposite the Jordan river and Jericho which was on the other bank of the river, i.e. it as neither south of nor north of Jericho. The formulation of מעבר לירדן is justified as it is perceived from the vantage point of those who had in the meantime (before they would read this) crossed the river, so that the river Jordan was on the far side of Jericho from their point of view.
And Balak the son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites.
verse value 2926
Insights
Verse structure: 6 words, 33 letters. The shortest word is "Balak" (בָּלָ֖ק, 3 letters) and the longest is "all·that·had·done" (אֵ֛ת כׇּל־אֲשֶׁר־עָשָׂ֥ה, 10 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "all·that·had·done" (אֵ֛ת כׇּל־אֲשֶׁר־עָשָׂ֥ה), "to·the·Amorites" (לָֽאֱמֹרִֽי). 6 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Israel" (root ישראל, 183x in Numbers); "all·that·had·done" (root עשה, 127x in Numbers); "and·he·saw" (root ראה, 47x in Numbers). First appearance of the root בלק ("Balak") in Numbers. First appearance of the root צפור ("son·of·Zippor") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'son·of·Zippor', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 3 words. Full calculation: וַיַּ֥רְא [and·he·saw] (217) + בָּלָ֖ק [Balak] (132) + בֶּן־צִפּ֑וֹר [son·of·Zippor] (428) + אֵ֛ת כׇּל־אֲשֶׁר־עָשָׂ֥ה [all·that·had·done] (1327) + יִשְׂרָאֵ֖ל [Israel] (541) + לָֽאֱמֹרִֽי [to·the·Amorites] (281) = 2926.
Onkelos
Balak son of Zippor saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites.
Rashi
וירא בלק ... את כל אשר עשה ישראל לאמרי AND BALAK … SAW ALL THAT ISRAEL HAD DONE TO THE AMORITES — He said to his people: Those two kings (Sihon and Og) on whom we relied (see Rashi on Numbers 21:23) could not resist them; how much less can we do so; on this account (because he said this to his people) ויגר מואב MOAB (the whole people) WAS SORE AFRAID (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 2).
Ibn Ezra
"To the Amorite" — with a kamatz under the lamed. The reason is to make known that it [i.e., 'the Amorite'] means Sichon and Og, and there were no kings in Canaan as great as these. The proof is [the verse]: "like the height of cedars were they tall" (Amos 2:9).
Sforno
וירא בלק, a man who was famous as well schooled in all the martial arts. We find proof of this in Judges 11,25:הטוב טוב אתה מבלק בן צפור מלך מואב?, “do you imagine yourself to be superior to Balak son of Tzippor? Balak, in spite of his expertise, “saw” what had happened to Sichon who had refused to let the Israelites pass and had paid for this error with the loss of his life and his kingdom.
Or HaChaim
וירא בלק בן צפור...ויגר מואב, Balak son of Tzippor saw- ..and Moav was afraid, etc. Why does the Torah describe only Balak as "seeing," whereas his countrymen are only described as being afraid of the Israelites? Secondly, why was only Moav afraid and not Midian? After all, Midian had much more reason to be afraid seeing that their horoscope told them they would be lost whereas there was nothing in the horoscope of the Moabites which foretold them disaster at this time? We have to remember that according to Bamidbar Rabbah 20,4 Balak used to be one of the princes of Midian, but the Moabites had appointed him as their king out of fear from the Israelites. When the Torah writes that "Balak saw," it reveals that the former prince of Midian who had seen what the Israelites had done a short while previously to the mighty king Sichon of the Emorites was just as much afraid of the Israelites as the Moabites. There was no need for the Torah to spell this out as everybody had taken note of the defeat of the mighty king Sichon. Subsequently, the Torah mentions that even Moav was afraid of Israel. The fact that both Moav and Midian feared Israel brought them closer together and they made peace with one another as is evident from the proposal made by the elders of Moav to the elders of Midian. Our sages also say in that same Midrash that the proof that the Moabites and the Midianites were warring is the verse המכה את מדין בשדה מואב, (Genesis 36,35). There was always hatred between these two peoples. The Midrash describes their relationship as like that of two dogs which always fight each other until threatened by a wolf. The reason that the Moabites humbled themselves and appointed someone from Midian as king over them instead of vice versa was that the Moabites needed the counsel of the Midianites amongst whom Moses had lived for many years. Another peculiarity in our verse is the use of the word "saw" instead of "heard" for Balak's reaction. What had Balak seen? While it is true that the Mechilta had stated that there are occasions when the Torah uses the word "saw" instead of "heard," such as in Exodus 20,15: "the whole people saw the sounds, etc.," this certainly does not apply here. In fact, we have been told in Pirke de Rabbi Eliezer 41 that the people at the time of the revelation actually saw the sounds with their eyes, [the soundwaves, I presume, Ed,]. Furthermore, why did the Torah find it necessary to tell us who Balak's father was, i.e. צפור? Why did the Torah use two expressions denoting something additional but indeterminate, i.e. את and כל? Why does the Torah describe two distinct reactions by the Moabites, "they were afraid," and "they detested?" Why are the Israelites referred to as "Israel" and simply as "the people," and then again as "the children of Israel?" We can understand all this in light of the Zohar on our verse where Balak is described as a greater sorcerer than Bileam. He employed a certain bird, צפור to perform his sorcery w...
Chizkuni
וירא בלק, “Balak saw,” (realised) Balak heard, as in Exodus 20,15: וכל העם רואים את הקולות, “and the whole nation saw the thunder.”
Rabbeinu Bahya
ברב עם הדרת מלך ובאפס לאום מחתת רזון, “When there is a multitude of people, this is the king’s honor; when the people are absent a ruler is ruined” (Proverbs 14,28). In this verse Solomon explains that a multitude of subjects and their presence constitute a king’s honor and pride. The reason that this is so is because among his subjects there may be individuals who can match or even surpass the king in wisdom, in prowess, in wealth or in other characteristics. The king’s superiority over all these people who can compete with him in individual attributes comes to the fore only in his commanding a multitude and in the size of the kingdom he controls. If, for some reason, the people abandon him, this spells the ruin of his glory. The word רזון comes from רוזנים, rulers. Seeing Solomon had commenced his sentence with the words הדרת מלך, he should by rights have continued the contrast by writing מחתת מלך, instead of מחתת רוזנים. However, Solomon wanted to convey the idea that the absence of the usual multitude so affects the king that even the title מלך can no longer be applied to him. He will be merely like any other “ruler” whose sole distinction consists in the fact that he can impose his will on a number of inferiors. The title מלך is simply not appropriate for someone who does not have a (willing) people at his disposal. It follows that the self-confidence of a king, i.e. his faith is bound up with the people at his command. This is the reason that G’d did not really want that the Jewish people should have a king. If his faith would be placed in the people under him, how could he be faithful to the Lord above him and make Him the focus of his trust?! Not only that! The people too would place their trust and faith in the visible king instead of in the Lord (who remains invisible). We, the people who are the recipients of the Torah, have been commanded את ה' אלו-היך תירא, “fear the Lord your G’d” (Deut. 6,13). We have also been commanded not to fear the Canaanites (both in Deut. 7,18 and elsewhere). Seeing the Torah has forbidden us to fear mortal man and has commanded each one of us to place our trust and faith exclusively in the Lord it follows that if we truly keep this commandment not only do we have no need for a mortal king, but we will be far better off than if we did have a king of flesh and blood. However, seeing that G’d foresaw in His wisdom that the time would come when even the Jewish people would demand to be governed by a mortal king just as is the norm among the Gentiles, the Torah forestalled some of the negative fallout of such a phenomenon by stipulating rules both for who could become such a king and how such a king would have to conduct himself. This is the reason for Deut. 17,14-16 writing: “when you will say: ‘I wish to appoint a king for myself similar to the nations around me, you shall certainly appoint a king over yourself.’” Actually, the very demand for a mortal king should have been considered a sin by the people seeing that when G’d took the people out of Egypt He had demonstrated that He could do so much more for the people than any king of flesh and blood. It would seem logical that He who controls the whole universe should be king. This is especially so when this king has seen fit to manifest His presence among the people in the Temple. No wonder that G’d considered the very demand of the people as an insult directed at Him rather than at the previous leader Samuel (Samuel I 8,7). What could possibly prompt the people to “trade” G’d’s benevolent leadership for a mortal king? The fact that King Shaul eventually fell in battle was a demonstration to the people that they had not done well in demanding a king of flesh and blood as their political leader. Based on such considerations Solomon said in the verse we quoted above that the glory of a king is in the multitude who willingly pay homage to him. A righteous person who places all his faith in the Lord is on safer ground than if he were to rely on his king, as the king who places his faith in the loyalty of his people will sometimes fall into the hands of his enemies and all his soldiers will not then be able to save him. Sichon and Og, mighty kings, placed their trust in their armies and it did not help them. They did not realize that in the last analysis success in life does not depend on numbers but on G’d’s decrees. David expressed this clearly in Psalms 33,16: “kings are not delivered by a large force, warriors are not saved by great strength; horses are a false hope for deliverance; for all their great power they provide no escape.” Seeing some of the mightiest kings of their time all fell victim to Moses it is not surprising that Balak was terrified at the approach of the Israelites who had defeated nations far stronger than his own. This is why our portion commences with the words: וירא בלק בן צפור את כל אשר עשה ישראל לאמורי, “Balak son of Tzippor saw all that the Israelites had done to the Emorite.” This Balak was the king of Moav as the Torah reveals almost immediately (verse 4). Why did the Torah describe his kingship in such a peculiar fashion, i.e. “he was a king over the Moabites at that time?” Why did it not simply write: “Balak, king of Moav, saw what the Israelites had done, etc.?” Perhaps the Torah wanted to contrast the attitude to Sichon and Og to the Israelites to that of Balak. The former had been full of self-confidence, arrogance, even. Not so Balak. As soon as Balak realised the fate that had befallen Sichon and Og he no longer considered himself as a king. Kings are arrogant by definition. Balak had learned בעת ההיא, “at that time,” i.e. at the time of the defeat of Sichon and Og, that kings with mighty armies were no match for the Jewish people who did not even have a crowned head at their helm. The fact that Sichon and Og were not just “average” kings amongst the Canaanites is pointed out by G’d Himself who, whenever He speaks about His defeating the Canaanites cites the Emorites as the ones whom He humbled, i.e. they (compare Amos 2,13); represented the mightiest tribe of the Canaanite nation. Balak had previously considered the proximity of Sichon and Og as his insurance policy against being invaded by the Israelites. When he saw that his paid “protectors” had themselves proved inadequate he suddenly became filled with fear. A Midrashic approach, based on Tanchuma Balak 2: The word וירא, he “saw,” means he foresaw some kind of disaster. We have a rule that whenever wicked people are described by the Bible as having “seen” something, the “something” is invariably some kind of disaster. Compare Genesis 9,22, (where Cham “saw” his father’s nudity, resulting in his offspring being condemned to be slaves). Compare also Genesis 6,2 where the elite of mankind is described as seeing the daughters of man and violating them, resulting eventually in the inevitability of the deluge. Compare also Genesis 12,15 where the Egyptians saw the physical beauty of Sarah and this resulted in her being abducted to Pharaoh’s palace. Still another example is that of Shechem, son of Chamor “seeing” Dinah, which resulted in his raping her and in the whole city of Shechem being destroyed (Genesis 34,2 and subsequent verses).
Kli Yakar
And Balak, son of Zippor, saw all that Israel had done to the Amorites. But were not the miracles in Egypt greater than these, so why did he not take note of those great and awesome things that God had done? Furthermore, it is worth noting that here Israel is referred to by four names: Israel, the people, the children of Israel, and the congregation. For first it says, all that Israel had done to the Amorites, and afterward it says, And Moab was afraid of the people, and then it says, And Moab was disgusted because of the children of Israel, and afterward it says, Now this congregation will lick up [everything around us]. Surely this is significant. And the explanation of the matter is as follows: It is the way of the world that kings have a book of chronicles upon which all events from many days are written, but the common people only know what is happening currently — what they see with their eyes or what they heard by rumor about the events of their days. Therefore, Balak, who was a king, had recorded with him from a long time ago what Jacob, Israel the Elder, did to the Amorites, for he [Jacob] was just one man with his household, few in number, and nevertheless defeated an entire nation, as it is written: which I took from the hand of the Amorite with my sword and with my bow (Genesis 48:22). And according to the interpretation of our Sages (Bava Batra 123a), who explained that “with my sword and with my bow” refers to his prayer, it makes sense that Balak saw all that Israel the Elder did to the Amorites through his prayer, because all his power was in his mouth. Therefore, he [Balak] also sought after someone whose power was likewise in his mouth. And that is why it says and Balak saw and not “and Balak heard,” because all those events were indeed written in the book of chronicles of the kings of the earth, and he saw with his eyes the matter written in a book, and fear entered his heart saying: “If they did this in ancient times when they were few in number, what will they do now that they are a numerous and mighty people?” And that is why it does not say “the children of Israel” or “the people” or “the congregation,” because it is speaking about Israel the Elder [Jacob]. But Moab, meaning the general masses, did not consider what had happened before. Because they did not know what it was, and they were only afraid of the present situation — what they saw with their eyes: a numerous and mighty people. Therefore it says, Moab feared the people because they were numerous. The common people of Moab were afraid of two groups, and one fear was not like the other. They feared the mixed multitude [erev rav] because of their great numbers, as it is stated in the Midrash that the mixed multitude was twice 600,000, and about them it says, Moab feared the people because they were numerous. The verse calls the mixed multitude by the name the people, because they were not from the children of Israel, because they were numerous — for they were truly many. But the children of Israel, who were not so numerous, they did not fear them due to their numbers. However, from another perspective, the fear of Israel was upon them, about which it says, Moab was disgusted because of the children of Israel. As we explained in Parshat Shemot (Exodus 1:12) on the verse and they were disgusted because of the children of Israel, the meaning is not that Israel became like thorns in their eyes, for if that were the case, it should have said “they were disgusted with the children of Israel.” What is the meaning of because of? Rather, the opposite is logical — that the Egyptians compared themselves to thorns in relation to the children of Israel, who were compared to a vine, as it says: You removed a vine from Egypt; You drove out nations and planted it. You cleared a place before it, and it took root and filled the land (Psalms 80:9-10). For it is the way of the world that when a field owner wants to plant a vineyard in a field full of thorns, he uproots the thorns from their roots and throws them far away in order to plant the vine in their place. Likewise, the Egyptians feared that Israel would be planted in the land like a vine, and they [the Egyptians] would be driven from the land like a fleeing thorn (2 Samuel 23:6), as it says, And they will go up from the land (Exodus 1:10). It should have said “and we will go up,” etc. Therefore it says, they were disgusted because of the children of Israel, meaning they would be shaken out from the land because of the children of Israel who were compared to a vine. Similarly, it says here, Moab was disgusted because of the children of Israel. They were afraid lest Moab become like a thorn cast out from the land because of the children of Israel, because of the vine which God moved from Egypt to drive out nations before them and plant them there. Therefore it says the children of Israel for Israel the elder is no more because he has already gone to his world, but his children would come there. But not the mixed multitude who are called the people for what advantage does one man have over another (Sanhedrin 65b)? And what advantage does the mixed multitude have over other nations that would cause God to drive out nations for them and plant them in their place, if not on account of the children of Israel? And afterwards it is said: “Moab said to the elders of Midian, ‘Now this assembly will lick up all that is around us, etc.’” And what caused the Midianites to become involved in a dispute that did not concern them? Rather, we find that Rashi explains in Parashat Matot (31:6) regarding them and Pinchas, that Pinchas went to avenge Joseph, his mother’s father, as it is said, And the Midianites sold him to Potiphar (Genesis 37:36). And the children of Joseph are called kahal [congregation], as it is said, A nation and an congregation of nations (Genesis 35:11). Rashi explains that a congregation of nations refers to Joseph. Thus, the elders of Moab said to Midian that you also have reason to fear the congregation, the children of Joseph, who will want to take revenge from you for Joseph, the “firstborn ox,” their father. This is what is meant by Now this assembly will lick up all that is around us, as the ox licks up. For the congregation, the children of Joseph, who is called “firstborn ox,” will lick us up like an ox that licks, in order to take revenge for the ox. And this is a precious interpretation.
Tur HaArokh
וירא בלק בן צפור וגו'....ויגר מואב מפני העם מאד כי רב הוא, “Balak son of Tzippor saw, etc…..and Moav was scared on account of The Jewish people because it was very numerous.” Moav was numerically very insignificant among the nations at that time in that region. The reason lay in their relative recent emergence as a nation, not like the Canaanites who dated back practically to 100 years after the deluge. The Israelites far outnumbered the Moabites at that time. The Moabites were well aware that the Israelites had no designs on their country as they had been specifically instructed by the Jewish G’d not to harass the Moabites, and not to provoke a military confrontation with them. They were also aware that even where the Israelites had engaged in war, they had not done so except when their request to pass peacefully through a foreign country had been rebuffed and been met with aggression by the ruler of that country. They merely dreaded the ecological damage the Israelites would leave behind in their wake if they were to be allowed to traverse the land of Moav. This is why they explained the nature of their concern when they sent emissaries to the elders of Midian to whom they explained graphically what their land would look like after the Israelites had trampled all the agricultural areas of their land. They were afraid that if the Israelites caused huge ecological damage to their economy they would wind up as totally dependent economically on the Israelites, almost as their slaves.
Daat Zkenim
וירא בלק....לאמורי, “Balak had taken note of all that Israel had done to the Emorite” (foremost Canaanite tribe). The reference is, of course, to Israel having defeated Sichon and his army totally. Balak now reasoned that if that was what they had done to mighty Sichon, they would do the same to him and the Moabites. Therefore, he preferred to have the assistance of someone who was known to have good relations with the supernatural powers.
And Moab was sore afraid of the people, because they were many; and Moab was overcome with dread because of the children of Israel.
verse value 1890
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 45 letters. Verse gematria: 1890 is divisible by 18, the value of chai ('life'). The shortest word is "because" (כִּ֣י, 2 letters) and the longest is "it·was·numerous" (רַב־ה֑וּא, 5 letters). Words sharing gematria 180: because·of, because·of. 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·was·alarmed" (וַיָּ֨גׇר), "it·was·numerous" (רַב־ה֑וּא), "and·dreaded" (וַיָּ֣קׇץ). The root מואב appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "the·children·of" (root בן, 499x in Numbers); "Israel" (root ישראל, 183x in Numbers); "because·of" (root פנים, 119x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'it·was·numerous', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 5 words. Full calculation: וַיָּ֨גׇר [and·was·alarmed] (219) + מוֹאָ֜ב [Moab] (49) + מִפְּנֵ֥י [because·of] (180) + הָעָ֛ם [the·people] (115) + מְאֹ֖ד [greatly] (45) + כִּ֣י [because] (30) + רַב־ה֑וּא [it·was·numerous] (214) + וַיָּ֣קׇץ [and·dreaded] (206) + מוֹאָ֔ב [Moab] (49) + מִפְּנֵ֖י [because·of] (180) + בְּנֵ֥י [the·children·of] (62) + יִשְׂרָאֵֽל [Israel] (541) = 1890.
Onkelos
Moab was exceedingly afraid before the people, for they were numerous, and Moab was in dread before the children of Israel.
Rashi
ויגר is an expression signifying fear, as in (Job. 19:29): “Be ye afraid (גורו)" . ויקץ מואב means they (Moab) were sick of their lives (the expression is similar to קצתי בחיי in Genesis 27:46, being an abbreviated form of it).
Ramban
AND MOAB WAS SORE AFRAID OF THE PEOPLE. The meaning of this is [that Moab stood in great fear] because they [the Israelites] were many, for Moab was small among the nations; and it was not an ancient people, like the Canaanites, the Amorites and other [nations of the] sons of Noah. Therefore they [the Moabites] were greatly afraid of the people who outnumbered them exceedingly, for they were fruitful, and increased abundantly, and waxed greater than the Moabites. And they were furthermore overcome with dread because of the children of Israel, for they had heard of the great wonders that had happened to them and their fathers. Now Moab knew that Israel would not take their land from them, since they had sent to them [offering peace] just as they had sent to Sihon, [asking permission only to pass through their land], saying, until I shall pass over the Jordan into the Land which the Eternal our G-d giveth us. Or it is also possible that they had heard of G-d’s prohibition, when He said to the Israelites, Be not at enmity with Moab. Therefore they said to the elders of Midian: “Even though the Israelites will not capture our land, they will lick up because of their great numbers all that is round about us, as the ox licketh up the grass of the field, and they will capture all [the lands] that surround us, just as they did to the two Amorite kings, and they will make us servants to do taskwork.”
Ibn Ezra
"And Moab dreaded" (va-yagor) — like va-yira, "was afraid"; similarly, "hold yourselves in dread" (goru lachem). "And was disgusted" (va-yakatz) — like [a verb meaning] to be overturned; analogous to it: "Let us go up against Judah and wear it down" (ve-nekitzennah, Isa. 7:6).
Sforno
ויגר מואב, the leaders of Moav who had not allowed the Israelites to traverse their territory as reported in Judges 11,17 were now afraid, כי רב הוא, for the Israelites were numerically superior to them, not because they felt inferior in military tactics. ויקץ מואב, “the man in the street” considered their lives as not worth living because of the impending invasion by the Israelites.
Chizkuni
ויגר מואב, “Moav was afraid;” when the Moabites saw that the Israelites after having conquered the land of Sichon, part of which the latter had conquered from Moav, had not restored that part to them, the original owners, they suspected the Israelites of having designs on their land also. Moreover, they realised that seeing that the Israelites had overcome Sichon, who had previously overcome them, they would have no problem overcoming the remaining part of Moav. They did not realise that legally speaking, the lands formerly belonging to Moav had been acquired by the Israelites legally, as they had conquered it from a nation that had made war on them although not provoked. (Compare Talmud, tractate Chulin folio 60) ויגר מואב,”Moav was afraid (of the Israelites) but not the Bney Ammon, as Rashi has explained on Deuteronomy 2,9, where the Israelites were told by G-d not to harass the Moabites.
Rashbam
ויקץ מואב, the expression describes someone becoming fed up with life, similar to when Rivkah had said that she would become fed up with her life if Yaakov were to marry a Canaanite girl as had Esau his brother (Genesis 27,46)
And Moab said to the elders of Midian: "Now will this multitude lick up all that is round about us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field."—And Balak the son of Zippor was king of Moab at that time.—
verse value 5126
Insights
Verse structure: 18 words, 85 letters. The shortest word is "now" (עַתָּ֞ה, 3 letters) and the longest is "all·that·is·about·us" (אֶת־כׇּל־סְבִ֣יבֹתֵ֔ינוּ, 12 letters). 9 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "to·the·elders·of" (אֶל־זִקְנֵ֣י), "will·lick·up" (יְלַחֲכ֤וּ), "all·that·is·about·us" (אֶת־כׇּל־סְבִ֣יבֹתֵ֔ינוּ). The root מואב appears 2 times in this verse. 16 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "that" (root הוא, 70x in Numbers); "and·Balak" (root בלק, 40x in Numbers). First appearance of the root מדין ("Midian") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·field', dividing the verse into phrases of 12 and 6 words.
Onkelos
Moab said to the elders of Midian: Now this assembly will lick up everything around us, as an ox licks up the green growth of the field. Balak son of Zippor was king of Moab at that time.
Rashi
אל זקני מדין AND MOAB SAID] TO THE ELDERS OF MIDIAN But did not these (Moab and Midian) always hate one another, just as is stated, (Genesis 36:35) “who had smitten Midian in the country of Moab”, from which it is evident that Midian had come against Moab in war? But out of fear of Israel they now made peace between themselves (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 3; cf. Sanhedrin 105a). And what induced Moab to take counsel of Midian? When they saw that Israel was victorious in a supernatural manner they said: the leader of these people grew up in Midian; let us ask them what is his chief characteristic. They replied to them; “His power lies only in his mouth (in prayer)”. Whereupon they said: “Then we must come against them with a man whose power lies in his mouth” (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 3). כלחך השור AS THE OX LICKETH — they used this comparison because whatever piece of ground the ox licks has no blessing left in it (cf. Shabbat 140b, 141a; Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 3). בעת ההוא [BALAK WAS KING OF MOAB] AT THAT TIME — at that time: he was not really entitled to the kingdom; he was actually one of the Midianite princes, but when Sihon died they (the Moabites) appointed him as king over them to meet the needs of the time (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 4).
Ramban
THE ELDERS OF MIDIAN. Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that “it is possible that the five kings of Midian were the elders.” But if so, [the expression] and the elders of Moab and ‘the elders of Midian’ departed [further on in Verse 7] does not refer to the [same] “elders of Midian” mentioned at the beginning [here in Verse 4: And Moab said unto ‘the elders of Midian’] since kings would not have gone to him [Balaam on such a mission] and [“the elders” mentioned in Verse 7 must perforce have been] princes, as is [expressly] written, [but not “kings”]. Furthermore, according to the opinion of our Rabbis who said [that the reason why Moab turned for assistance to Midian, their traditional enemy, was because they said]: “The leader of these people [the Israelites] grew up in Midian; [let us ask them about his characteristics]” — it would have been fitting for the Moabites to send [the delegation] to the elders of Midian, not to the kings or the people, for it was the elders who would know Moses’ nature. It appears to me that originally there were kings in Midian, but Sihon the king of the Amorites had fought against the former king of Moab, and taken all his land out of his hand, even unto the Arnon. He [also] fought against the children of Ammon and took [part] of their land, just as the Ammonite king said to Jephthah, Because Israel took away my land, when he came up out of Egypt, and Jephthah replied to him that they had taken it from Sihon. In [the Book of] Joshua it is [also] written, And their border was Jazer, and all the cities of Gilead, and half the land of the children of Ammon, unto Aroer; and Sihon furthermore fought against the kings of Midian and conquered their land, and made them his servants bringing tribute and took the crowns off their heads, depriving them of the splendor of royalty, and he allowed them to remain as judges of the land of Midian under his authority. Therefore [although as Ibn Ezra says, they were indeed once kings of Midian], they are called ‘the elders’ of Midian, similar in expression to [she shall go up] to the gate unto ‘the elders’ [which means “the judges”]. A proof for this [that the kings of Midian were appointed judges — “elders” — by Sihon] is the verse in [the Book of] Joshua: and all the kingdoms of Sihon king of the Amorites, who reigned in Heshbon, whom Moses smote with the chiefs of Midian, Eri, and Rekem, and Zur, and Hur, and Reba, ‘the princes of Sihon,’ that dwelt in the land, thus indicating that [the land of Midian arid its chiefs were] under the suzerainty of Sihon. The meaning then, of [the phrase] and the kings of Midian is “the former kings of Midian,” just as it says: the chiefs of Midian … the princes of Sihon. Similarly it says [of Zur, one of the five people mentioned as a king of Midian], he was the head of the people of ‘a fathers’ house in Midian,’ but he was no longer king. Or it may be that the reason [for the use of the phrase] the kings of Midian is that they had regained thei...
Ibn Ezra
"To the elders of Midian" — it is possible that the five kings were elders. "Lick up, as the ox licks up" — two [different] verb-forms [of the same root].
Sforno
עתה, now that the Israelites had conquered both Sichon and Og and their respective countries. ילחכו הקהל את כל סביבותינו, they wanted their leaders to enlarge the area under their control in order to make their borders more secure. ובלק בן צפור, who was known as a hero and a military expert. מלך למואב בעת ההיא, in spite of these factors which should have encouraged the Moabites they did not have the heart to fight the Israelites as is clear from Judges 11,25. As to the remarks by Joshua that Balak son of Tzippor arose and fought Israel (Joshua 24,9), Joshua said this in reference to Balak hiring Bileam to curse the people of Israel as he himself pointed out in the same verse.
Or HaChaim
ילחכו הקהל את כל סביבותינו, "the multitude will lick up all that is around us, etc." Perhaps the Moabites did not want to reveal to the elders of Midian the extent of their fear of the Israelites and that is why they described the presence of the Israelites in that part of the world as an ecological disaster. They spoke of "our environment" (pl) to include the Midianites as potential victims of such a disaster. The words ובלק בן צפור are what the Torah reports not part of what the Moabites told the Midianites. It is even possible that these words were also spoken by the Moabite messengers to the elders of the Midianites; they wanted to emphasise to the Midianites that inasmuch as they had appointed one of the Midianite princes as their king, the Midianites had a special interest in cooperating with them. Should anything happen to them, this would reflect negatively on Midian because of their king's origin. The Torah emphasises that Balak was king בעת ההיא, "at that time," i.e. not earlier and not subsequently. Once Bileam told the Moabites that they had nothing to fear from the Israelites in the foreseeable future, they dismissed Balak from his position and sent him home. The best proof of that is the fact that when the Torah enumerates the princes who were slain in the punitive expedition the Israelites launched after Pinchas' famous deed (Numbers 31,8), Tzur was amongst the princes listed as having been killed.
Chizkuni
ויאמר מואב אל זקני מדין, “Moav said to the elders of Midian, etc.;” They were their neighbours and they were contractually allied to them. We know this from Genesis 36,35: where Midian is referred to as having made common cause with Moav. Combined, they had defeated Haddad ben B’dad. עתה ילחכו, “now they will lick up, etc.” after the Israelites had defeated Sichon and surrounding areas, they were afraid it would be their turn next. כלחון השור, “like the ox licks up, etc.;” the ox licks the grass with its tongue, which acts like a comb as it has no upper dentures, like all the beasts that are pure and allowed to be slaughtered by the Israelites.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ויאמר מואב אל זקני מדין, “Moav said to the elders of Midian, etc.” The sudden consultation between two peoples whom we know as enemies of one another (Genesis 36,35) is remarkable. Fear of the Israelites drove these two people into each other’s arms. When two dogs which were fighting one another perceive themselves as being threatened by a wolf, they suddenly start to cooperate. Here too the survival instinct drove Midian and Moav to bury their hatchets. Why did the Moabites choose the Midianites to consult with? [There were other nations in the region. Ed.]. They had realized that Moses’ success was due to supernatural forces. Having learned that the leader of the Israelites, Moses, had spent many decades in Midian they wanted to find out more about his personality and abilities. The Midianites explained to their Moabite neighbors that Moses’ power was not of a military nature but lay only in his mouth. Thereupon the Moabites (Balak) decided to fight Moses by means of someone (Bileam) whose power was also in his mouth (Tanchuma Balak 3). They were under the impression that Moses was simply a superior astrologer.
Kli Yakar
And Balak the son of Zippor was king of Moab at that time. According to what we explained above, that Balak observed what Israel the patriarch did to the Amorites with his sword and his bow, it is difficult to understand, why suddenly now, and why he did not awaken to make strategies against them many days earlier. Therefore, the text explains and says that at that time they appointed him as king for a temporary need, as Rashi explains. But according to the simple meaning, it is difficult to understand why the text needs to say at that time. And some say that this comes to explain why the verse says Moab was terrified and not that Balak was terrified, because they only appointed him at that time temporarily. Therefore, he said to himself, “Why do I need this trouble?” Nevertheless, outwardly, because of fear of the people, he needed to do what he did. Some say that it comes to explain why Moab was afraid, had it not already been said Do not harass Moab (Deuteronomy 2:9). Therefore, it says that because Balak was the king of Moab at that time, and Balak was an Aramean and not a Moabite, as it is said the land of the children of his people. Rashi explains that Balak was from there, and this is the land of Aram, as it is said from Aram, Balak has led me. And they were afraid lest the entire land be called by Balak’s name, just as [the designation of] Ammon and Moab was neutralized through Sihon [who conquered it from them], as it is said And he fought against the first king of Moab, etc. (Numbers 21:26). Similarly, the land was neutralized for Israel through Balak who was their king at that time. Therefore, now they will lick up and not earlier. And some say they will lick up all our surroundings and not touch us at all, but rather they will completely consume all our surroundings, and consequently, we will have no survivability. And it seems to me that this is why it says as the ox licks up the grass of the field, specifically the grass in the field that surrounds the city, but they will not touch the grass of the cities.
Tur HaArokh
זקני מדין, “the elders of Midian.” Quoting Ibn Ezra, Nachmanides writes that it is quite possible that these elders were the five kings of the Midianites, who because of heir advanced ages, are here described as זקנים, elders. If that is so, then the emissaries described in verse six, who included זקני מדין cannot have been the same זקנים mentioned in verse four. Surely, the five kings of Midian did not accompany the far less illustrious emissaries that Balak had sent to Bileam, emissaries, who by their own admission, were not of the highest levels of Moabite diplomats. According to our sages, who claim that the present head of state of the Moabites was of Midianite descent, it seems quite natural that Balak should send emissaries to his homeland in the first instance to investigate if he can forge an anti Israelite alliance with them. He would send the emissaries to the elders, not to the kings, as the elders were the ones who, due to their experience, were able to furnish good advice. It seems likely, that originally the Midianites had been ruled over by kings, and the same Sichon who had made war against Moav and confiscated a major part of their land, had also conducted a similar campaign against Midian, had defeated them and deposed them, and had instead appointed regional heads with far less political power than that wielded by kings. These are now referred to as זקנים, a title similar to that we read about in Judges 20,16 אל השערה meaning: “to the elders, who congregate near the gate of the town.” When we read in Numbers 31,8 ואת מלכי מדין, “and the kings of Midian,” the reference is to the men who had at one time been kings, but had been demoted by Sichon. The description of these people as ראש בית אב במדין is a clear indication that these people occupied subordinate positions, subordinate to the powers of kings. ובלק בן צפור מלך למואב בעת ההיא, “and Balak son of Tzippor was the king of Moav at this time.” Nachmanides writes that actually the paragraph should have commenced with referring to Balak as the King of Moav as soon as we are told of his name, describing his reaction to what had happened to Sichon and Og and their peoples. Nachmanides speculates that possibly, Balak had been known as a great warrior in his own right, and the Torah wishes to tell us that although the Moabites had a king who was such a warrior he was so afraid of the Israelites. This would also explain part of Yiphtach’s letter to the King of Moav some 300 years later in Judges 11,25 in which he asked that king sarcastically: “do you consider yourself superior to Balak? Did he start a quarrel with Israel or go to war with them?” He was afraid that he could not frighten the King of the Moabites except with a King of great renown, and Yiphtach himself was not even a crowned head of the Jewish people, so that the Moabites saw this as a sign of weakness of the Israelites It is possible that at this time Moav had not been ruled over by a king at all, and that they were terrified by the approaching Israelites. In such a desperate situation they did two things. 1) They appointed a king over themselves, 2) they sent to Midian trying to create a united front of these two peoples against the Israelites. Having come to an agreement with the Midianites, they sent a joint delegation to Bileam to ask him to curse the Jewish people. This would be the reason why the Torah spoke of בעת ההיא, “at that time,” as we would have known without these words that the Torah described current events, not history, in this paragraph. The meaning of the opening lines of our portion then would be: “Balak, a renowned warrior, one of the high ranking dignitaries in Moav, realised that the Israelites had succeeded in frightening his countrymen, and he used this opportunity to persuade them to appoint him as their king. One of the first actions he took was to forge an alliance with Midian, etc.” The Midianites had advised the people of Moav to appoint Balak as their king. According to the Midrash, the Moabites had had a king all along. He had held the rank of “prince,” but after the defeat of Sichon he had been promoted to the position of “King,” and the authority that this entailed. Balak’s promotion was not of a hereditary nature but was dictated by pressing external circumstances.
Rashbam
ילחכו, all the existing crops and any other available foodstuffs.
Daat Zkenim
ועתה ילחכו הקהל את כל סביבותינו, “and now this horde of people and livestock will lick up every blade of grass in our vicinity.” They were not worried about their lives, apparently knowing that G–d had forbidden the Israelites to make war upon them, but they faced economic ruin nonetheless. (They must have known about what G–d had said in Deuteronomy 2,9 about not harassing Moav.) כלחוך השור, “just like oxen lick up;” oxen are known not to have teeth in the upper parts of their gums, so that instead of chewing the grass they rub it in their mouths, unlike horses or donkeys. As a result also the roots of the grass are destroyed and will not grow again.
And he sent messengers to Balaam the son of Beor, to Pethor, which is by the River, to the land of his kinsfolk, to call him, saying: "Behold, there is a people come out from Egypt; behold, they cover the face of the earth, and they abide over against me.
verse value 5764 — וְה֥וּא = 18 (chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 22 words, 95 letters. Notable word values: "and·it" (וְה֥וּא) = 18, chai, 'life'. The shortest word is "a·people" (עַ֣ם, 2 letters) and the longest is "messengers" (מַלְאָכִ֜ים, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 60: behold, behold. 6 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "son·of·Beor" (בֶּן־בְּעֹ֗ר), "to·Pethor" (פְּ֠ת֠וֹרָה), "by·the·River" (עַל־הַנָּהָ֛ר). The root ארץ appears 2 times in this verse. 20 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "his·kinsfolk" (root בן, 499x in Numbers); "saying" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "which" (root אשר, 223x in Numbers). First appearance of the root בלעם ("to·Balaam") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·call·him', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 12 words.
Onkelos
He sent messengers to Bilaam son of Beor, to Pethor of Aram, which is on the Euphrates, the land of his own people, to summon him, saying: Behold, a people has come out of Egypt; behold, they have covered the eye of the sun over the land, and they are encamped opposite me.
Rashi
פתורה HE SENT TO BALAAM פתורה because he was like a money changer before whom everyone lays coins; similarly all the kings used to send him their letters, asking for his advice. However, according to the literal sense of the text, this was the name of the place (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 4). ארץ בני עמו THE LAND OF THE CHILDREN OF HIS PEOPLE — of Balak's people, for he came from there, and this man (Balaam) had prophesied saying to him, “You are destined to be king”. — And if you ask: Why did the Holy One blessed be He, let his Shechina rest upon so wicked a heathen, I reply that in order that the heathen peoples should have no excuse to say, “If we had prophets, we would have changed for the better”, He raised up prophets for them. Yet they (these prophets) broke down the moral fence of the world, because at first they (the heathens) were fenced in against (they refrained from) immoral living, but this man (Balaam) counselled them to freely offer themselves to prostitution (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 1; cf. Rashi on Numbers 24:14). לקרא לו TO CALL HIM — the call was for him, for his benefit; for he (Balak) fixed for him (agreed to pay him) a large sum. עם יצא ממצרים [THERE IS] A PEOPLE COME OUT FROM EGYPT — and if you ask: What harm does that do you? הנה כסה את עין הארץ BEHOLD THEY COVER THE FACE OF THE EARTH — Sihon and Og who used to protect us stood up against them, but they slew them (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 4). והוא ישב ממלי AND THEY ARE STATIONED OPPOSITE ME — ממלי is written deficient in the ו (the full form is ממולי, so that it may be connected with מול “to cut off”) — they are near enough to cut me off. The word is the same as in (Psalms 118:10): “that I shall cut them off (אמילם)” (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 4).
Ramban
THE LAND OF THE CHILDREN OF HIS PEOPLE — “[the people] of Balak, for he [Balak] came from there [i.e., from Pethor which is by the river], and this man [Balaam] had prophesied and told him, ‘You are destined to be king.’” This is Rashi’s language, taken from an Agadic explanation. But the plain meaning of Scripture is [that the land of the children of ‘his people’ is a reference to] Balaam’s people’s land [and not Balak’s], for there he [Balaam] was born and there was his family background. The reason for [Scripture] mentioning this is [to indicate] that he [Balaam] was a diviner, from the land where all the people were diviners, similar to that which is written, for they are replenished from the east, and with soothsayers like the Philistines.
Ibn Ezra
"Petorah" — like Mitzraimah ["toward Egypt"], meaning toward Petor. "Land of his kinsmen" — they are Arameans, as it says: "from Petor of Aram-naharaim" (Deut. 23:5). In the Midrash [it is said] that Balaam is Bela, for he [too] was an Aramean. As for [the argument from] Be'or his father — behold, Ben Ahasuerus comes before Ahasuerus [i.e., the son can precede the father in a name], yet they are two [distinct] individuals. "Who is upon the River" — this explains [the meaning of] Aram-naharaim. "The eye of the land" — I have explained it [elsewhere].
Or HaChaim
וישלח מלאכים אל בלעם, He sent messengers to Bileam, etc. The Torah, or rather Balak, specified the name of Bileam's father and his place of residence in order to expedite the mission. He did not want to leave any doubt as to which Bileam he had in mind; similarly, he stated the location where Bileam was to be found so that his messengers would not lose valuable time tracking down the right person. In the event that there was another place called פתורה, he added that the one he had in mind was situated on a great river,אשר על הנהר. He added further that the land in question was his homeland, ארץ בני עמו, a place where everybody knew who Bileam was and that in the event he was not presently at home, surely the people could tell his messengers where Bileam could be found at this time. לקרא לו, to call him. Balak was astute enough to tell Bileam immediately that what he wanted was something that would be of benefit to Bileam, i.e. לו. He, Balak, wanted to give Bileam a chance to earn a fat fee. He assumed that this would be sufficient incentive to persuade Bileam to come at once. הנה עם יצא ממצרים, Here there is a people who have come out of Egypt, etc. Why did Balak say הנה "here?" Why did he say that the people "left" Egypt? The whole world knew that the only people who had ever left Egypt were the Israelites. Bileam would certainly have been aware of this. Why did Balak say הנה כסה את עין הארץ, instead of the customary ויכס את עין הארץ? We may understand this in light of Shemot Rabbah 1,9 that when the Pharaoh who enslaved the Israelites and who wanted to "outsmart" the Israelites was on the throne he had three advisors one of whom was Bileam. At that time Bileam had invoked a magic formula which was designed to permanently prevent slaves from escaping from Egypt. Balak now informed Bileam that his magic had been invalidated, that a whole nation of slaves had fled from Egypt. [this was forty years earlier and at least 126 years after Bileam had invoked this magic. Ed.] By saying הנה, Balak suggested that Bileam owed him something seeing it was Bileam's magic the Israelites had managed to invalidate. Perhaps Bileam had previously assured Balak that the Israelites would never leave Egypt. Balak continued with: הנה כסה את עין הארץ to challenge Bileam whose advice had been based on reducing the numbers of the Israelites. By contrast, Balak pointed out, "look at them now!" They cover as much land as the eye can see. Instead of their males having been killed, their fighting men now number so many one cannot even see all of them. והוא ישב ממולי, "and it resides across from me." Balak meant that Israel's general behaviour indicated it meant to disinherit the Moabites. According to Bamidbar Rabbah 20,7 it was the posture of the Israelites which frightened Balak. They appeared to be vctorious as soon as the opened their mouths. Balak mentioned all this in order to counter Bileam's expected response that he could curse them from his residence without both...
Chizkuni
ארץ בני עמו, “the land of his people,” the people of Bileam.
Rabbeinu Bahya
פתורה, “to Petor;” according to the plain meaning of the text this was the name of a place. Deut. 23,5 describes Bileam as “son of Beor, from Petor of Aram Naharayim.” Tanchuma Balak 5 sees in the word פתורה an allusion to the word פתרון, “solution (to problems).” Bileam started his career as an interpreter of dreams, promoting himself to became a magician. Eventually, he was even granted Holy Spirit.
Kli Yakar
Behold, a people has come out from Egypt. Has come out implies past tense, whereas Balaam said Behold, the people who are coming out from Egypt, which implies that they are still now coming out and going forth. For Balaam came to mention their sin, suggesting that it was as if they had not yet completely left Egypt, because they were always in a bad state, saying Let us appoint a leader and return to Egypt (Numbers 14:4). With every complaint, they would mention Egypt, which proves that their thoughts were always wandering back to Egypt, and separating from Egypt was difficult for them, as if they were just now leaving. And regarding what is written, “behold it has covered the eye of the land.” This implies the past tense, which is difficult [to understand], because they are still covering the eye of the land today. It’s possible that [Balak] sent [Balaam] a message saying that this nation has divination in their hands, therefore “I need a man who also has divination in his hands.” And he brought proof of this from Egypt, where they brought the plague of locusts which covered the eye of the land and [caused] darkness. And he dwells opposite me — even though he is sitting across from me in one room, nonetheless he can bring darkness upon his enemies while having light in his own dwelling. This can only be through the power of sorcery that they learned in Egypt. Balaam thought that perhaps God would tell him that they had already forgotten all the practices of the land of Egypt, therefore he changed [his wording] and said “Behold the people coming out from Egypt,” making it seem as if they are coming out just now. And from the fact that Balaam said in his prophecy, For there is no divination in Jacob and no sorcery in Israel, we can learn that until now they were suspected of being diviners and sorcerers. Another explanation of “it covers the eye of the land.” He said this about Sihon and Og, who were the eye of all the land, because the eyes of all the land were upon them. And since [Israel] defeated them, who could stand before them? And likewise does it conclude in the Yalkut.
Tur HaArokh
ארץ בני עמו, “the land of his compatriots.” According to Rashi who holds that Balak was of Midianite descent, the words ארץ בני עמו refer to Balak’s people, i.e. the Midianites. Nachmanides writes that according to the plain meaning of the text the words ארץ בני עמו refer to Bileam, informing us that Balak had been born in the same land as Bileam. The point of the Torah providing this detail was that Balak was a sorcerer, coming from a land full of sorcerers, a land in which Bileam was the High Priest of all the sorcerers. (Compare Isaiah 2,6 where the prophet denigrates the Jewish people for having forsaken their tradition in favour of relying on sorcery etc, something which was the domain of the ancient backward nations)
Rashbam
ארץ בני עמו, the people Balak himself belonged to, not Moav.
Come now therefore, I pray you, curse me this people; for they are too mighty for me; perhaps I shall prevail, that we may smite them, and that I may drive them out of the land; for I know that he whom you bless is blessed, and he whom you curse is cursed."
verse value 6528
Insights
Verse structure: 20 words, 92 letters. The shortest word is "for" (כִּ֣י, 2 letters) and the longest is "whomever·you·bless" (אֵ֤ת אֲשֶׁר־תְּבָרֵךְ֙, 9 letters). 7 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "for·mighty" (כִּֽי־עָצ֥וּם), "defeat·him" (נַכֶּה־בּ֔וֹ), "and·drive·him·out" (וַאֲגָרְשֶׁ֖נּוּ). The root ארר appears 3 times in this verse. 17 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·whomever" (root אשר, 223x in Numbers); "from·the·land" (root ארץ, 119x in Numbers); "the·people" (root עם, 85x in Numbers). First appearance of the root אולי ("perhaps") in Numbers. First appearance of the root גרש ("and·drive·him·out") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'from·the·land', dividing the verse into phrases of 13 and 7 words.
Onkelos
Come now, curse this people for me, for they are mightier than I. Perhaps I will be able to wage war against him and drive him out of the land; for I know that whomever you bless is blessed, and whomever you curse is cursed.
Rashi
נכה בו (this may mean, “we may smite them”) I and my people may smite them. — Another explanation is that this is a Mishnaic Hebrew expression as in (Bava Metzia 105b) “he deducts (מנכה) for him something from the price”, so that it means: [perhaps I may be able] to reduce them a little in numbers (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 4). כי ידעתי וגו׳ FOR I KNOW etc., through the war of Sihon against Moab, because you assisted him to smite Moab (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 4; cf. Rashi on 21:27).
Ramban
THAT WE MAY SMITE THEM — the meaning [of the plural “we,” although it is only Balaam who is speaking], is “I and Midian my ally.”
Ibn Ezra
"Curse for me" (arah li) — the imperative form of a doubled-root verb, with the doubling-letter omitted; likewise "pronounce a curse upon him for me" (kabah li). Now kob [the base form] follows the pattern of shamor, and kabah li omits the he — on the pattern of shechav, rachav, tzalach. "Strike him" (nakkeh vo) — an infinitive; there is no difficulty from the fact that it ends in he, for there is a parallel: "to complete the transgression" (le-challeh ha-pesha, Dan. 9:24). "He will be cursed" (yu'ar) — the quiescent vav stands in place of the dagesh that should mark the doubled-root letter; analogous to "upon the cumin one sits" (al kammon yoshav, Isa. 28:27). It was not formed the usual way from that binyan because of the guttural letter, as is the rule.
Sforno
אולי אוכל, after you have cursed them. נכה בו, I militarily and you by means of curses. אשר תברך מבורך, actually Bileam’s power did not consist in blessing but in cursing people by mentioning their failings at a critical moment in G’d’s timetable, as elaborated on by our sages in B’rachot 7. This is why Balak did not demand a blessing from Bileam to make him victorious in war, or at least to be blessed so that he could fight the Israelites to a standstill. But when he nonetheless added the words ידעתי את אשר תברך מבורך, he did so only as a way of flattering Bileam.
Or HaChaim
ועתה לכה נא, "and now please come, etc." Balak used the word ועתה, "and now," to indicate that he did not want Bileam to delay before he would come as he felt himself in danger every moment. He pleaded by using the word נא, "please," adding that Bileam should curse this people לי, "for me." By this he meant that the effectiveness of Bileam's curse should not be delayed until after the Israelites had a chance to revenge themselves on him and Moav for having called in Bileam to curse them. By using the word לי, Balak also hinted that although -according to the Midrash- Bileam had already blessed Balak personally so that he had no reason to fear the Israelites himself, he wanted the Israelites cursed and was not content with being blessed. In the event Bileam were to say that there was no need for this, Balak added כי עצום הוא ממני, "for it is more mighty than I." Balak had two things in mind when he said these words. 1) Israel's natural strength; 2) the matter of the blessing. He felt that Israel had received more powerful blessings than he had received from Bileam. When he went on אולי נכה בו, "perhaps we can smite it," he meant that even after Bileam would do all that he requested him to do he would still not feel confident to take on the Israelites by himself. At best, he might be able to inflict a defeat on them, certainly not to wipe them out. He might also have drawn a line between the righteous Israelites and the average ones. Of the former he expressed the hope that he could expel them from the region, ואגרשנו מן הארץ, whereas concerning the less pious Israelites he entertained hopes of defeating them, נכה בו. There is also a moral/ethical message in Balak's words. His words boomeranged upon himself. When he said ארה לי, "curse for me," this turned out to be "curse me." Had he not used these words his daughter Kosbi would not have been killed by Pinchas. Bileam's coming to Moav and failing to curse the Israelites also became the reason that Balak was forced to return to Midian and be killed by the sword during the punitive expedition involving 12.000 Israelites as described in 31,8. If Bileam had not travelled all the way to Moav and assured these people that they were safe from the Israelites until the distant future, Balak would have remained on the throne in Moav, secure from all the wars the Israelites would be involved in. As it was, he became the personification of Psalms 37,15: "their swords shall pierce their own hearts." כי ידעתי את אשר תברך מברך, "for I know that if you bless someone, etc." We may understand this as a reference to another statement in the Midrash we quoted earlier that Bileam had foretold Balak that he would become a king. Balak acknowledged that Bileam's blessing had indeed come true for him. This was something only he was aware of as he had experienced it personally. On the other hand, it was common knowledge that Bileam's curse was effective for when Sichon went to war against Moav he had hired Bileam to cur...
Chizkuni
אולי אוכל נכה בו, “perhaps I can inflict a defeat on it;” the plural mode in the word נכה i.e. “we will inflict a defeat,” is not as surprising as it appears at first glance. We find a parallel in Song of Songs: 1,4: משכני אחריך נרוצה, “draw me after you, let us run.”An alternate interpretation: “Let us inflict a defeat on it, you and me by engaging it in war; “I will wage war, and you will do the cursing.” The use of the word הכאה, “striking” in the sense of cursing is also not unique, as we find it in Jeremiah 18,18: לכו ונכנו בלשון, “come and let us strike him with the tongue. ואגרשנו מן הארץ, “so that I may drive them out of the land.” Balak is referring to the land that Sichon had taken from Moav during the rule of Moav’s first king.
Rabbeinu Bahya
כי ידעתי את אשר תברך מברך ואת אשר תאור יואר, “for I am aware that those whom you bless are blessed and those whom you curse are cursed.” This verse teaches that Bileam had established a reputation as someone whose curses always came true. This confirms a saying of our sages: “do not relate disdainfully to even the curses of ordinary people” (Baba Kama 93). Ibn Ezra thought that Bileam was an astrologer who, when he observed the horoscope of a person being at a low ebb, used this knowledge of curse him so that when misfortune struck such a person he could take the credit for it, i.e. attributing it to his having cursed him. Seeing this was so he had to tell the emissaries of Balak that he would be unable to transgress the command of the Lord and do anything on his own (verse 18). He did not foresee misfortune for the Jewish people in the stars, hence his curse if it did not materialize would ruin his reputation. Our sages do not agree and attribute real powers to Bileam. However, G’d in His mercy, thwarted Bileam who had thought that he saw reason for G’d expressing anger at the Jewish people (Compare Berachot 7).
Kli Yakar
“And now, come, curse this people for me, etc.” And Balaam said to the Holy One, blessed be He, that Balak sent to him, Come, execrate this people for me. And what Rashi explains, that execrate [kabah] is harsher than curse [arah], and Balaam added this on his own due to his hatred of Israel. And similarly, I will drive him out [vegarashtiv] is harsher than I will drive him from the land [va’agarshenu min ha’aretz]. This explanation is not sufficient, because wouldn’t Balaam know that their God loves Israel, and through this addition, he would diminish his chances, because perhaps He wouldn’t give him permission to such an extent? And regarding Balak, it is difficult to understand how he could be so ignorant, because at first he said come, curse for me and his request was not granted, as it says, for the Lord has refused to let me go with you, and afterward he asked come, execrate for me. Would someone who is refused even a small thing turn around and ask for something greater? Rather, it is certain that “curse” [arah] is stronger than “execrate ” [kabah], and the term strike [nakah] is stronger than the term fight [lehilachem], and the phrase I will drive him out of the land [va-agareshenu min ha-aretz] is stronger than I will drive him away [ve-gerashtiyu]. For the term kabah is not a term of cursing, as it says Specify [nekov] your wages to me (Genesis 30:28), but rather it means to pierce and explain, or to make a small hole in them, from the phrase and he bored a hole [vayikov] in its door (Second Kings 12:10). But curse [arah] is worse because it contains curse and excommunication (Shevuot 36a). Similarly, to fight is not so absolutely bad because one might fight merely to save oneself, but to strike means to actually smite. Likewise, I will drive him away implies driving him away only from oneself, but I will drive him out of the land implies from the entire world. With this, everything is resolved, because Balak did not know that their God loves them so much, so he opened his mouth beyond measure and asked, Curse for me this people. Perhaps I can strike it and drive it out of the land, meaning to completely destroy them all and drive them from the world. But Balaam knew that their God loves them, and it is obvious that Heaven would stop him and he would not succeed in either goal. Therefore, he said before the Holy One, Blessed be He, that Balak was only asking to push them away from him, because if they came to fight him, they would violate the command do not harass Moab, and it would be justified for some curse to take effect — to bore a hole in their door to diminish them a little. That is why he said that Balak sent to him, Execrate them for me; perhaps I can fight them and drive them away. The Holy One, blessed be He, responded to him, “You shall not curse the people, for they are blessed.” Meaning, they are so blessed and the blessing adheres to them so strongly that there is no place for even the greater curse to take effect, and all the more so for the lesser execration, which does not have the power to take effect against the strength of the blessings. When Balak saw that he [Balaam] did not respond to the greater request and that heaven would prevent him from going with him, he reverted to the lesser request and said, “At least come and execrate them for me.” For Balak did not know what God had said to Balaam, for they are blessed, because Balaam only told his messengers, The Lord has refused to let me go with you. Balak thought that perhaps Balaam was prevented because he had asked for too much, so he asked for the lesser request. But Balaam replied to him, If Balak would give me his house full of silver and gold, I cannot transgress the word of the Lord my God to do anything small or great. [This refers to] neither the small execration nor the large curse. Normally, he should have listed them in order from greater to lesser, using the pattern “not only this but also that.” However, [he reversed the order] to emphasize that specifically because “I cannot do it,” but if it were within my power, I would do not only the small thing but even the greater one. Through this, he showed that all the intentions of his heart were for evil. This is the explanation of the verse “Now come and etc.” With the word now [Balak] wanted to test if [Balaam] had the power to curse at any time he wanted. If [Balaam] would push him off and say that he needed to wait until the time when the Holy One, blessed be He, is angry, then there is nothing to him, because perhaps [God] would not be angry all these days, as it is written, How can I curse whom God has not cursed? Therefore, [Balak] said curse for me — according to my will, at the time I choose. Or “curse them” so that they will be delivered into my hands. Or for me meaning that no person should know about this matter except for me. Perhaps I will be able [to defeat them] and the world will think that I prevailed, but in truth we will both strike them — you and I — and after striking them, I alone will drive them away. And [Balak] used the language of perhaps about himself because “I am uncertain if I will be able,” but “you are certain,” because with your partnership, we will certainly strike [them]. Therefore, he did not say “perhaps we can strike them.” Because I know that whomever you bless is blessed: He did not say “will be blessed,” as he said will be cursed because he told him that specifically with curses you have power, but not with blessings, because whomever you bless is already blessed. And you see this through your astrology, and you bless him in order to attribute it to yourself. For if not so, when you helped Sihon, you had cursed Moab, and why didn’t you bless Sihon? Rather, it is certain that you have no power in blessings, only in curses, to swallow [livloa] and destroy, as indicated by the name Balaam. Therefore, I ask from you a curse and not a blessing that you would bless me.
Tur HaArokh
ארה לי, “curse for me, etc.” In using the superfluous pronoun “לי,” Balak trapped himself as in the end Bileam cursed him. [Predicted the annihilation of the people of Moav. Ed.]
Rashbam
את אשר תבורך, by means of prophetic inspiration. Balak also knew that Bileam was a prophet and practiced foretelling future events by resorting to such tools of his trade as קסמים, charms of different sorts. This is the reason why in Joshua 13,22 Bileam is described as a קוסם, a sorcerer, someone working with charms. Up until now Balak had thought that his prayers and sacrifices would be enough to ward off the danger he thought the Jewish people posed for him and his country.
Daat Zkenim
וארגשנו מן הארץ, “so that I will be able to expel them from the land.” He did not mean to exterminate them but merely to chase them away from land which was his. According to Rashi, he referred specifically to that part of Moav which Sichon had many years earlier conquered from Moav. כי ידעתי את אשר תברך מבורך, “for I know that the ones whom you bless will be blessed.” Bileam (one of the people speaking in parables) had prophesied earlier that Moav would become a victim of Sichon, as we know from Numbers 21,27)
And the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed with the rewards of divination in their hand; and they came to Balaam, and spoke to him the words of Balak.
verse value 1698
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 60 letters. The shortest word is "Balak" (בָלָֽק, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·rewards·of·divination" (וּקְסָמִ֖ים, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 173: and·the·elders·of, to·Balaam. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·rewards·of·divination" (וּקְסָמִ֖ים), "in·their·hand" (בְּיָדָ֑ם). The root זקן appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·they·spoke" (root דבר, 149x in Numbers); "to·him" (root איל, 111x in Numbers); "and·they·came" (root בוא, 89x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'in·their·hand', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 6 words. Full calculation: וַיֵּ֨לְכ֜וּ [and·they·set·out] (72) + זִקְנֵ֤י [the·elders·of] (167) + מוֹאָב֙ [Moab] (49) + וְזִקְנֵ֣י [and·the·elders·of] (173) + מִדְיָ֔ן [Midian] (104) + וּקְסָמִ֖ים [and·rewards·of·divination] (256) + בְּיָדָ֑ם [in·their·hand] (56) + וַיָּבֹ֙אוּ֙ [and·they·came] (25) + אֶל־בִּלְעָ֔ם [to·Balaam] (173) + וַיְדַבְּר֥וּ [and·they·spoke] (228) + אֵלָ֖יו [to·him] (47) + דִּבְרֵ֥י [the·words·of] (216) + בָלָֽק [Balak] (132) = 1698.
Onkelos
The elders of Moab and the elders of Midian went, with divination instruments in their hands; they came to Bilaam and spoke to him the words of Balak.
Rashi
וקסמים בידם AND DIVINATIONS WERE IN THEIR HANDS — all kinds of divination, in order that he should not say, “I have not got my tools with me”. — Another explanation is: this omen (קסם) the elders of Midyan took with them: — they said, “If he comes with us this time, there is something substantial in him, but if he puts us off there is no use of him”. — Consequently when he told them, “Stay here tonight”, they said, There is no hope in him”; they left him and went away, as it is said, (v. 8) And the princes of Moab stayed with Balaam”, but the princes of Midyan went away (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 5).
Ibn Ezra
"Elders of Moab" — wise men. "And divination-fees in their hand" — R. Shmuel ha-Nagid the Spaniard, of blessed memory, said the meaning is "the fees for the divinations," and he saw support in the phrase "in their hand," but he said nothing of substance. Rather, the phrase is to be taken at face value: Scripture reports that he sent to a practiced diviner, just as it says elsewhere [that Balak sent]; moreover, [Balaam] could not delay [the messengers] by saying "I cannot find an auspicious day or hour to go and curse," since these men were his colleagues in the craft. The proof that this is the plain meaning is that Scripture itself later says: "divination was in his right hand" (Ezek. 21:27).
Sforno
וקסמים בידם, the instruments by means of which to perform sorcery.. Bileam’s specific expertise in such sorcery was to calculate precisely when certain constellations would be favourable to what he planned to achieve. He is described as a sorcerer when his death his reported in Joshua 13,22.
Chizkuni
וקסמים בידם, “with tools of divination in their hands.” The “tools” were books of instruction on that subject, as explained by Rashi. This is also how the Jerusalem Targum understands this phrase. We find a parallel of this when even in our time, sorcerers utter curses by sticking needles into dolls symbolising the party to be cursed. An alternate interpretation: Balak’s emissaries took financial rewards with them to pay Bileam for the use of these instruments used in sorcery. Compare Targum Yonatan on Nachum 3,17, according to Rabbi Chavell.
Rabbeinu Bahya
וקסמים בידם, “with charms in their hands.” This proves that Bileam was a magician employing charms. The emissaries brought along charms so that Bileam would not be able to stall them by saying that he did not have any charms available at that time. An alternative explanation [seeing it is most unlikely that a man whose trade depends on charms should not have the tools of his trade available. Ed.]: They brought money to pay Bileam for using his own charms on their behalf. (Compare both Rashi, for the former view and Ibn Ezra quoting Rabbi Shmuel Hanaggid for the latter view).
Tur HaArokh
וקסמים בידו, “with charms in their hands.” According to the interpretation of Rabbi Shmuel Hanagid, the delegation brought with them the money to defray the cost of these charms they expected Bileam to employ, [as they themselves could hardly tell Bileam which kind of charms to employ. Ed.]
Rashbam
וקסמים בידו, they brought along charms of their own to forestall Bileam saying that he did not have any of these charms handy. We read in Ezekiel 21, 27-28: “in his right hand the קסם, sorcery, indicated Jerusalem, to appoint commanders to urge on to murder. But it was for them as a vain divination, קסם שוא, etc.”
Daat Zkenim
וילכו זקני מואב, “The elders of Moav went forth, etc.” The Talmud in tractate Sanhedrin folio 105, tells us that there never had been peaceful relations between Moav and Midian before, but now that both felt threatened, they became like dogs when afraid of wolves that threaten them, and they acted in unison. וקסמים בידם, “and they had brought instruments .of divination with them.” They brought money with them to pay Bileam for employing divinations with which to curse the Israelites. This is the way the Jerusalem Talmud translated our verse. An alternate interpretation is that seeing that Balak himself was no novice in that art, he sent along samples of what he used when practicing divination.
And he said to them: "Lodge here this night, and I will bring you back word, as Hashem may speak to me"; and the princes of Moab remained with Balaam.
verse value 3933 — אֲלֵיהֶ֗ם = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 67 letters. Notable word values: "to·them" (אֲלֵיהֶ֗ם) = 86, equal to Elohim. The shortest word is "here" (פֹה֙, 2 letters) and the longest is "the·dignitaries·of·Moab" (שָׂרֵֽי־מוֹאָ֖ב, 7 letters). 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "spend·the·night" (לִ֤ינוּ), "and·I·shall·reply" (וַהֲשִׁבֹתִ֤י), "may·speak" (יְדַבֵּ֥ר). The root אל appears 2 times in this verse. 13 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "and·he·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "as" (root אשר, 223x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·me', dividing the verse into phrases of 12 and 3 words.
Onkelos
He said to them: Lodge here tonight, and I will bring you back word as Hashem speaks to me. The princes of Moab stayed with Bilaam.
Rashi
לינו פה הלילה LODGE HERE THIS NIGHT — The Holy Spirit rested upon him only at night time, and similarly in the case of all the prophets of the heathen peoples, and similarly He revealed Himself to Laban in a dream at night, as it is said, (Genesis 31:24) “And God came to Laban in a dream of the night” — as a man who comes to his concubine furtively (cf. Leviticus Rabbah 1 13; Rashi on Job 12:4). כאשר ידבר ה' אלי [AND I WILL GIVE YOU AN ANSWER] AS THE LORD SHALL SPEAK TO ME — If He advises me to go with people such as you I will go with you; but perhaps it is not compatible with His dignity to permit me to go except with princes greater than you. וישבו — this is an expression for “remaining”, (they remained with Balaam).
Ibn Ezra
"And I will bring you back word" — after you have lodged [the night here].
Sforno
כאשר ידבר ה' אלי, for I am preparing myself to receive a prophetic message.
Or HaChaim
לינו פה, "stay here overnight." Bileam may have meant that the messengers stay overnight in his own home, and that is what he meant by the word פה, "here." He concluded by saying that he would tell them what G'd was going to say, כאשר ידבר, not what G'd had said. He hinted that by staying overnight at his home he could inform them immediately G'd would give him instructions. When he emphasised הלילה, "this night," he might have inadvertently revealed his miserly nature as he was not willing to play host to them for more than one night.
Chizkuni
וישבו שרי מואב עם בלעם, “the emissaries of Moav stayed overnight with Bileam. They did so as they did not know anyone in Midian who would offer them hospitality. On the other hand, the dignitaries of Midian who had been accompanying them, had where to spend the night, as they were well known there.
Rabbeinu Bahya
לינו פה הלילה, “stay here overnight!” Bileam’s great arrogance made him view Balak’s emissaries as people not deserving especial consideration; this is why his invitation was of the grossest variety. Instead of inviting them graciously as he did the second set of emissaries to whom he said: שבו נא בזה, “please stay here,” he said: “spent the night here.” There is no mention of food, making them comfortable, etc. The word שבו by contrast implies a longer stay such as in Deut.1,15 “they stayed in Kadesh, וישבו, for many years.” Also, the word נא, used by Bileam to the second set of emissaries indicates that he urged them to stay, pleaded with them.
Daat Zkenim
וישבו שרי מואב עם בלעם, “the emissaries of Moav spent the night with Bileam.” This raises the question of why the elders of Midian did not remain there also? When they heard that Bileam was going to consult with the G–d of the Israelites about how to conduct himself, they reasoned that a father (G–d as Israel’s father-figure) will not display hatred for his son, so what possible answer could Bileam expect from him asking permission to curse G–d’s son? They therefore left.
And God came to Balaam, and said: "What men are these with you?"
verse value 1162 — אֱלֹהִ֖ים = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 8 words, 35 letters. Notable word values: "God" (אֱלֹהִ֖ים) = 86, equal to Elohim. The shortest word is "who?" (מִ֛י, 2 letters) and the longest is "to·Balaam" (אֶל־בִּלְעָ֑ם, 6 letters). 8 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "the·men" (root איש, 130x in Numbers); "and·came" (root בוא, 89x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·Balaam', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 5 words. Full calculation: וַיָּבֹ֥א [and·came] (19) + אֱלֹהִ֖ים [God] (86) + אֶל־בִּלְעָ֑ם [to·Balaam] (173) + וַיֹּ֕אמֶר [and·said] (257) + מִ֛י [who?] (50) + הָאֲנָשִׁ֥ים [the·men] (406) + הָאֵ֖לֶּה [these] (41) + עִמָּֽךְ [with·you] (130) = 1162.
Onkelos
A word came from before Hashem to Bilaam and said: Who are these men who are with you?
Rashi
מי האנשים האלה עמך WHO ARE THESE MEN WITH THEE? — By putting this question He intended to delude him. And indeed he (Balaam) thereupon said: “It seems, then, that there are times when everything is not manifest to Him; His knowledge is not always alike. I will select a time when I can curse and when He will not observe it” (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 5).
Ibn Ezra
"And God came" — for the honor of Israel; for Hashem knew about the matter of Baal Peor, and had Balaam actually cursed them, all the world would have said that the plague came because of Balaam's curse. "Who are these men?" — an opening and a beginning of speech, like "Where is Abel your brother?" (Gen. 4:9); yet there [Cain] lied, and Hashem said to him: "The voice of your brother's blood [cries out]."
Sforno
?מי האנשים האלה עמך, who are these people with you on account of whom you went to the trouble to receive prophetic messages in order to know what to do for them?Have they really come to you to inquire about matters which will occur in the future and you want to know about the future in order to give them guidance? Or, have they stayed with you to enlist your help to pronounce curses over someone and you are now asking My permission to fulfill their request?
Or HaChaim
מי חאנשים האלה עמך, "who are these men with you?" Why did G'd bother to ask him? Didn't He know who these men were and why they had come? Also, why did G'd have to say עמך, "with you?" It would have been enough to say האלה "these." We also have to understand Bileam's peculiar reply. To the question who these men are he replies who has sent them. Our sages in Yalkut Shimoni item 765 have noted this oddity and wrote as follows: "Bileam said to G'd: 'I do not know who these people are but Balak the son of Tzippor has sent them to me, etc.'" The Yalkut means that from the way Bileam phrased his answer G'd was supposed to conclude that he was unaware of who precisely these messengers were. He certainly did not say outright: "I do not kow, etc." Why did Bileam have to add that Balak was the king of Moav? Was it not enough that he told G'd the name of the man? I believe that we can best understand G'd's question after remembering what I have written about the words "stay here overnight," that Bileam invited these messengers to sleep with him in the same room. G'd wanted to know what was so special about these people whom Bileam had invited to be present when he expected to be addressed by an angel of G'd. After all, G'd implied, this room is the one you have reserved for when I communicate with you. The word האלה implies that these people are not deserving of such an honour, much as the words מי אנכי, "who am I" in Exodus 3,11 suggest that Moses did not consider himself worthy of the task G'd wanted to entrust to him. From G'd's question it is evident that He was concerned with the honour due to Bileam vis-a-vis the Gentile nations amongst whom he was rated as a prophet. We find a statement in Bamidbar Rabbah 20,14 that G'd killed the she-ass Bileam was riding on as she was belittling him. When we look at the next verse (10) we see that Bileam understood what G'd meant and that is why he said that Balak the king of Moav had sent these men, i.e. they deserve to be honoured as they came on an errand from the king. He gave Balak's full name to indicate that Balak had already been an important prince in Midian even before his elevation to become king over Moav. By mentioning that Balak was king over Moav he wanted to remind G'd that the Moabites were not one of the nations which would be given to the Israelites to conquer. He was very astute in hinting at this as he wanted G'd's consent to accept the assignment and he did not want G'd to put any obstacle in his way.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ויבא אלו-הים אל בלעם, “G’d came to Bileam, etc.” The only reason that Bileam was granted a divine vision at this point was in honour of the Israelites. This situation was similar to G’d revealing Himself in a nocturnal vision to Lavan to prevent him from harming Yaakov (Genesis 34,24). Something similar occurred in Genesis 20,3 where G’d revealed Himself to Avimelech, King of the Philistines, for the sake of Avraham. ויאמר מי האנשים האלה עמך, He said: “who are these men with you?” We do not find anywhere throughout the Bible that G’d asks (as if He did not know) except when the people whom G’d asked are wicked and G’d gives them a chance to incriminate themselves by giving untrue answers. This would provide G’d with the excuse to execute His judgment on them. This is what Job 12,23 had in mind when he said: משגיא לגוים ויאבדם, “He exalts nations then destroys them.” [They initially feel complimented by being found worthy of a divine revelation. Ed.] G’d had asked Kayin at the time (Genesis 4,9) “where is Hevel your brother?” Kayin (instead of expressing remorse) had answered defiantly: “am I my brother’s keeper?” Seeing Kayin had thereby denied that he believed that G’d knew what goes on in His universe and holds people accountable was punished. G’d had misled Kayin as if He really did not know what had happened to Hevel and by whom. Here too, G’d asked Bileam a rhetorical question to see if Bileam would try to deceive Him.” He gave Bileam the impression that whereas at certain times He knew everything, at other times He did not. Tanchuma Balak 5 quotes Proverbs 28,10: “he who misleads the upright into an evil course will fall into his own pit, but the blameless will prosper,” as applying to our situation. According to the Midrash, in earlier times people observed sexual mores, respecting laws laid down by G’d. They base this on Genesis 29,9 “and Rachel came with the flocks which belonged to her father.” [Her father did not need to worry that the male shepherds would molest her. Ed.]. We have a similar statement concerning the seven daughters of Yitro who were not scared of encountering male shepherds when watering their father’s flocks (Exodus 2,16). Then there arose Bileam who misled people into practicing sexual permissiveness. He would therefore fall victim to being misled himself. This is the reason G’d asked him the question: “who are these men with you?” Bileam jumped to the conclusion that there are times when G’d can be deceived and decided to accept the mission to curse the Jewish people looking for a point in time when G’d’s “blind side” would be turned in his direction.
Kli Yakar
“Who are these men with you?” We find that the expression who is not always a question, but can be used in a derogatory manner, as it says And Nabal answered David’s servants, “Who is David? And who is the son of Jesse?” (1 Samuel 25:10), meaning, who is he, as he is considered as nothing. So the Holy One, blessed be He, said to Balaam, whose spirit was haughty, “Who are these lowly men, and are they worthy to be with you, that you should go with them?” And Balaam replied, Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab, sent to me. And a servant of a king is like a king. Nevertheless he said, The Lord has refused to let me go with you, but only with greater princes than you.
And Balaam said to God: "Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab, has sent to me [saying]:
verse value 1593
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 38 letters. The shortest word is "Balak" (בָּלָ֧ק, 3 letters) and the longest is "to·God" (אֶל־הָאֱלֹהִ֑ים, 8 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "to·God" (אֶל־הָאֱלֹהִ֑ים), "son·of·Zippor" (בֶּן־צִפֹּ֛ר). 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·he·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "to·me" (root אל, 85x in Numbers); "Balaam" (root בלעם, 53x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·God', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 6 words. Full calculation: וַיֹּ֥אמֶר [and·he·said] (257) + בִּלְעָ֖ם [Balaam] (142) + אֶל־הָאֱלֹהִ֑ים [to·God] (122) + בָּלָ֧ק [Balak] (132) + בֶּן־צִפֹּ֛ר [son·of·Zippor] (422) + מֶ֥לֶךְ [king] (90) + מוֹאָ֖ב [Moab] (49) + שָׁלַ֥ח [sent] (338) + אֵלָֽי [to·me] (41) = 1593.
Onkelos
Bilaam said before Hashem: Balak son of Zippor, king of Moab, has sent to me.
Rashi
בלק בן צפור וגו׳ BALAK THE SON OF ZIPPOR [KING OF MOAB, HAS SENT TO ME] — Although I am of no importance in Your eyes, I am of importance in the eyes of kings (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 5).
Daat Zkenim
בלק בן צפור, “Balak, son of Tzippor, etc.” He was one of three people mentioned in the Bible as not having answered G–d appropriately. The other two were Kayin and King Chizkiyah. When G–d had asked Kayin where his brother Hevel was (after Kayin had murdered and buried him Genesis 4,9) he answered: “am I my brother’s keeper?) He should have answered G–d that seeing G–d is omniscient He was well aware where Hevel was. Similarly, when G–d asked Bileam who the men were that had come to visit him that evening, he too should have answered that he was well aware that G–d knew full well who they were. When the prophet Isaiah, in Kings II 20,14 asked King Chizkiyah who his visitors were and what they had requested from him, he said only that they had come from Babylon. When Isaiah persisted in knowing why they had come, and what they had seen in his palace? He replied that he had shown them all the treasures in his palace. Isaiah then told him that as a result of the King’s foolishness, the time would come when the Babylonians would destroy Jerusalem and take with them all the treasures the king had so foolishly shown them. I am troubled by the fact that the Talmud refers only to these three people, omitting Adam, who when asked by G–d where he was hiding, did not say that he knew that G–d must be well aware of where he was, but pretended that he had thought that he could hide from Him. If he was smart enough to have given all the animals appropriate names, he must have known that their Creator would know where each one was at any given time. We would say that Chizkiyah should be removed from that list and Adam should be substituted, Actually, of the four we have mentioned only three spoke to G–d directly, namely Adam. Chizkiyah had been spoken to by the prophet, and prophets do not know everything.
Behold the people that is come out of Egypt, it covers the face of the earth; now, come curse me them; perhaps I shall be able to fight against them, and shall drive them out."
verse value 3858
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 65 letters. The shortest word is "in·it" (בּ֖וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·I·shall·drive·it·out" (וְגֵרַשְׁתִּֽיו, 7 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·it·covered" (וַיְכַ֖ס), "to·battle" (לְהִלָּ֥חֶם), "and·I·shall·drive·it·out" (וְגֵרַשְׁתִּֽיו). 16 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "the·earth" (root ארץ, 119x in Numbers); "the·people" (root עם, 85x in Numbers); "the·one·coming·out" (root יצא, 68x in Numbers). First appearance of the root קבב ("curse·for·me") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·earth', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 9 words.
Onkelos
Behold, the people who came out of Egypt have covered the eye of the sun over the land. Come now, curse him for me; perhaps I will be able to wage war against him and drive him out.
Rashi
קבה לי CURSE FOR ME — this is worse than ארה לי, (the expression which Balak had actually used, v. 6), for in the case of this verb it means that one mentions and pronounces in full [the name of God] when cursing (cf. Rashi on Leviticus 24:16) (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 5). וגרשתיו AND I WILL DRIVE THEM OUT, meaning from the world; but Balak had said only, (v. 6) “and I will drive them out from the land”: I seek only to make them move away from me. Balaam, however, hated them even more than did Balak (cf.Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 5).
Or HaChaim
הנה העם היוצא ממצרים, "Here are the people who have come out of Egypt, etc." Why did Bileam not repeat to G'd Balak's message to him verbatim? Balak had spoken about עם, "a people," whereas Bileam speaks about העם, "the people." Balak had described the Israelites' impact on the surrounding areas with the words: הנה כסה את עין הארץ, whereas Bileam changed the words הנה כסה to ויכס. Balak had asked Bileam to curse the people using the expression ארה, whereas Bileam tells G'd that Balak had said קבה. Whereas Balak had said אולי נכה בו, "perhaps we can smite it," Bileam changes Balak's words to read אולי אוכל להלחם בו, "perhaps I will be able to make war against them." We can explain all these changes Bileam made with the help of Bamidbar Rabbah 20,9 that Bileam made the mistake of believing that there are things which are concealed from G'd. He arrived at this conclusion because G'd asked him who these people were. Although we have already explained G'd's question in a different manner, there are 70 ways to interpret the written Torah. As soon as Bileam had been deceived into thinking that G'd' did not know everything, he felt at liberty to meddle with the exact wording of Balak's request. On the one hand, Bileam had always hated the Israelites, on the other hand he knew full well -as did every other nation- that this people was beloved by G'd. The Exodus and the subsequent drowning of the Egyptian army had been proof enough of that. Bileam commenced by saying: "here is the people who came out of Egypt," a rhetorical remark, referring to a well known historical fact. Such a wording did not reveal the hostility implied in the formula הנה עם יצא ממצרים which had been implicit in Balak's remark. The difference between הנה כסה and ויכס is similar in that the latter formulation does not reveal any implied animosity towards the people who cover the earth. Bileam also omitted the word הנה because it too suggests the contrast with other nations who do not provocatively "cover" the whole earth surrounding Moav. On the other hand, the word ויכס does reflect the fear in the heart of someone who commences the sentence with these words. When Bileam quoted Balak as saying ועתה לכה קבה לי אותו, "and now curse it for me," he implied that Balak was entitled to ask this as the people in question threatened his existence. He implied that although G'd had destined Ammon and Moav for Israel, the time for handing these nations over to Israel had not come as yet. At this point in time it was permissible to curse and make war against this people in order to expel them from Balak's area. A curse called קבה is quite different from a curse called ארה, the latter being of a general nature, i.e. a nation that has been cursed by ארה is accursed world-wide, whereas the curse called קבה is effective only vis-a-vis the one who did the cursing, i.e. Balak only cursed in self-defence. The words להלחם בו are also much milder than נכה בו, "to smite it." Whereas Balak had demanded t...
And God said to Balaam: "You shall not go with them; you shall not curse the people; for they are blessed."
verse value 2570 — אֱלֹהִים֙ = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 44 letters. Notable word values: "God" (אֱלֹהִים֙) = 86, equal to Elohim. The shortest word is "not" (לֹ֥א, 2 letters) and the longest is "to·Balaam" (אֶל־בִּלְעָ֔ם, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 31: not, not. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "you·shall·go" (תֵלֵ֖ךְ), "with·them" (עִמָּהֶ֑ם). The root לא appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·he·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "not" (root לא, 129x in Numbers); "with·them" (root עם, 85x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'with·them', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 6 words. Full calculation: וַיֹּ֤אמֶר [and·he·said] (257) + אֱלֹהִים֙ [God] (86) + אֶל־בִּלְעָ֔ם [to·Balaam] (173) + לֹ֥א [not] (31) + תֵלֵ֖ךְ [you·shall·go] (450) + עִמָּהֶ֑ם [with·them] (155) + לֹ֤א [not] (31) + תָאֹר֙ [you·shall·curse] (601) + אֶת־הָעָ֔ם [the·people] (516) + כִּ֥י [for] (30) + בָר֖וּךְ [blessed] (228) + הֽוּא [he·is] (12) = 2570.
Onkelos
Hashem said to Bilaam: You shall not go with them; you shall not curse the people, for they are blessed.
Rashi
לא תלך עמהם THOU SHALT NOT GO WITH THEM — He said: If so, I will curse them in my own place. Whereupon God answered: לא תאור את העם THOU SHALT NOT CURSE THE PEOPLE. — He said to Him: If so, I will bless them. He replied to him: They do not need your blessing, כי ברוך הוא FOR THEY ARE ALREADY BLESSED. A parable! People say to the hornet: neither any of your honey nor any of your sting! (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 6).
Ibn Ezra
"For he is blessed" — the meaning is: for you will not be able to curse him, since I have blessed him.
Sforno
לא תלך עמהם. Even if you were not to curse the people they referred to you are not at liberty to go with them. The reason is that I do not want you to set your evil eye on these people even without uttering any words. (compare the expression נתן עיניו בו in B’rachot 58 In that instance the victim was reduced to a heap of bones.)
Or HaChaim
ויאמר אלוקים אל בלעם, "G'd said to Bileam, etc." Why did the Torah have to write אל בלעם? Why was it not sufficient for the Torah to write: ויאמר לו, or ויאמר אליו "He said to him?" Why did G'd have to say "do not go and do not curse?" Moreover, why did G"d have to give as the reason כי ברוך הוא, that Israel is already blessed? Our sages in the above-quoted Midrash write as follows: "In the event Bileam would say I will curse them from here, G'd added 'do not curse!' If Bileam were to say that in that event he would bless the Israelites, G'd told him not to bother as they were blessed already." I believe we have to explain the verse in accordance with what I have written about G'd asking why Bileam had honoured these people to let them sleep in the same room with him. Bileam had explained that these people were emissaries of a very exalted personage, Balak, etc. G'd now answered Bileam in the order in which Bileam had answered G'd's first question. As far as Bileam having explained the nature of these emissaries, G'd said: "do not go with them," i.e. they are not of the calibre that you should go with them. G'd informed Bileam that Balak had insulted him by sending such low-ranking emissaries. Bileam had failed to understand at the time when G'd asked him "who are these men?" G'd had meant: "are these people sufficiently high-ranking to bring you on such an errand?" Now Bileam understood G'd's meaning and he told the emissaries that G'd had refused to allow him to go with them, i.e. it was up to Balak to send higher ranking emissaries. The reason that G'd related with so much concern for Bileam's dignity may not only have had to do with his standing as a prophet amongst the Gentiles, but may have reflected G'd's desire to reward him for telling the emissaries at the outset that his decision would hinge on whether G'd would permit him to go with them. We know that G'd does not withhold the reward due to any individual, even the reward due to Gentiles. It is illuminating to read how Sanhedrin 96 describes G'd rewarding Nebuchadnezzar who was a scribe of king Merodach of the Babylonians at the time for recalling a letter addressed to King Chiskiyah in which the king Merodach had blessed king Chiskiyah before blessing G'd. When Nebuchadnezzar found out about this error he chased after the courier and recalled the latter to have it changed. Nebuchadnezzar, a servant with no claim to the throne, later on became king. In this instance too, G'd repaid Bileam for honouring Him in the eyes of Balak's emissaries when He said to Bileam: "do not go with them." When we keep this in mind we can also understand why the Torah wrote "G'd said to Bileam," instead of "to him." The Torah meant that G'd honoured Bileam by advising him not to go with such low ranking emissaries. Bileam deserved to be addressed by name. Even if the mission itself would have been approved by G'd, it was below Bileam's dignity to respond to the pleas of such emissaries. When G'd told B...
Chizkuni
לא תאור את העם, ”do not curse the people.” G-d was well aware of the plague that would strike many Israelites who would worship Baal Peor, as a result of Bileam’s advice to seduce the Israelites by becoming sexually licentious. G-d did not want that plague to be attributed to Bileam’s curse.
Rabbeinu Bahya
לא תלך עמהם, “do not go with them!” G’d offered as His reason that even if Bileam would go with Balak’s emissaries he would not be able to curse the Jewish people seeing He Himself had already blessed them. A Midrashic approach (Tanchuma Balak 6), (describing how Bileam wriggled out of this prohibition). G’d said: “do not go with them.” Bileam therefore decided to curse the people while he was at home. G’d then added: “do not curse them,” to which Bileam replied: “O.K. then I will bless them.” G’d told him not to bless them as He had already blessed them so here was no point in Bileam duplicating G’d’s work. The whole episode recalls the popular saying applied to hornets: “spare me your sting and I will gladly forego your honey.”
And Balaam rose up in the morning, and said to the princes of Balak: "Get you into your land; for Hashem refuses to give me leave to go with you."
verse value 3212 — יְהֹוָ֔ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 14 words, 56 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֔ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "for" (כִּ֚י, 2 letters) and the longest is "to·your·country" (אֶֽל־אַרְצְכֶ֑ם, 7 letters). 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "to·dignitaries·of" (אֶל־שָׂרֵ֣י), "go!" (לְכ֖וּ), "to·your·country" (אֶֽל־אַרְצְכֶ֑ם). The root הלך appears 2 times in this verse. 13 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "and·he·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "to·your·country" (root ארץ, 119x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·your·country', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 6 words. Full calculation: וַיָּ֤קׇם [and·he·arose] (156) + בִּלְעָם֙ [Balaam] (142) + בַּבֹּ֔קֶר [in·the·morning] (304) + וַיֹּ֙אמֶר֙ [and·he·said] (257) + אֶל־שָׂרֵ֣י [to·dignitaries·of] (541) + בָלָ֔ק [Balak] (132) + לְכ֖וּ [go!] (56) + אֶֽל־אַרְצְכֶ֑ם [to·your·country] (382) + כִּ֚י [for] (30) + מֵאֵ֣ן [has·refused] (91) + יְהֹוָ֔ה [Hashem] (26) + לְתִתִּ֖י [to·let·me] (840) + לַהֲלֹ֥ךְ [to·go] (85) + עִמָּכֶֽם [with·you] (170) = 3212.
Onkelos
Bilaam arose in the morning and said to the princes of Balak: Go back to your land, for there is no willingness before Hashem to permit me to go with you.
Rashi
להלך עמכם [THE LORD REFUSES TO GIVE ME LEAVE] TO GO WITH YOU, but only with princes greater than you. This tells us that he was of a proud nature and he did not wish to divulge that he was under the control of the Omnipresent except in arrogant terms (“God will not permit me to go with you”). Consequently (v. 15), ויוסף עוד בלק “Balak sent yet again [more princes, and more honorable than these] (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 6).
Ramban
[AND BALAAM ROSE UP IN THE MORNING, AND SAID] UNTO THE PRINCES OF BALAK. According to the opinion of Rashi the elders of Midian had left [Balaam] when he told them, Lodge here this night [and therefore Scripture here only mentions the princes of Balak — i.e., the elders of Moab]. This is [indeed] possible, because when Balaam mentioned to them [and I will bring you back word,] as the Eternal may speak unto me, they did not want to wait for Balaam’s [message], for they said: “This G-d has always come to the help of Israel. It is He Who brought them out of Egypt and did signs and wonders for them.” For the elders of Midian were wise men, and they knew about all the words of Moses with Jethro, the most distinguished of their country, although Scripture does not mention this [that Jethro informed the elders of his land what Moses had told him]. And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra said that “[the reason why Scripture here] did not mention them [the elders of Midian] is because Balak was the principal party [in this matter], and it was he who sent the mission.” Similarly, [the verse stating] and the princes of Moab abode with Balaam [omits “the elders of Midian”] because the main [impetus of the] mission came from their lord [the king of Moab].The correct explanation is that the elders of Midian — who were perhaps the first kings thereof — came from their country to Balak to take counsel about the problem of Israel, and they all decided to send [a mission] to Balaam. Therefore Balak sent his princes, his judges and wise men, and they went together with the elders of Midian to the land of Midian, because from there their way led to Balaam’s city; and the elders of Midian remained in their city, while the princes of Balak, who were the delegates, went on their own to Aram [Balaam’s native land]. This is the meaning of [the expression], and the elders of Moab and the elders of Midian departed, meaning that they all left Balak and went as far as Midian, with the rewards of divination in their hand. And ‘they’ came unto Balaam, [and spoke unto him the words of Balak] — this refers to the elders of Moab, about whom Scripture states, and he sent messengers, not to the elders of Midian. [FOR THE ETERNAL REFUSETH] TO GIVE ME LEAVE TO GO WITH YOU — “but only with great princes. This teaches us that he was of a haughty spirit, and did not want to tell [them] that he was under the control of G-d. Therefore [he spoke] in arrogant language. It was because of this that Balak sent yet again princes.” This is Rashi’s language. But it is not correct, for Balaam’s whole honor consisted of boasting and glorifying himself in [the fact that he received] the word of G-d [and so he would not have been ashamed to tell the princes of Moab that he was awaiting G-d’s word, as Rashi wrote, but on the contrary would have boasted of it]! Moreover, he did not [in fact] know that G-d would give him permission to go with other, greater, princes! Rather, the meaning [of Balaam’s words] is tha...
Ibn Ezra
"The officers of Balak" — and he does not mention the elders of Midian, because Balak is the principal, and it is he who sent to him. R. Moshe ha-Kohen the Spaniard, of blessed memory, said that even though the sign of the [third-person] verb is the yod [i.e., the hif'il prefix], it cannot be [parsed] other than with a nun, as in: "Is it to kill me [ha-lehargeni]?" — you would not say "ha-lehargi." He, however, forgot [the counterexamples]: "[that He has not given] to let me go [leti]" (Gen. 30:26) and "my brother-in-law refuses" (Deut. 25:7). And R. Yonah the grammarian said that the yod is merely appended [a pleonastic suffix], but that is not correct.
Or HaChaim
ויקם בלעם בבקר, Bileam arose in the morning, etc. Bileam may have waited with relaying what G'd had said to his guests as the news would not please them. There was therefore no point in waking them in the middle of the night. Alternatively, the Torah means to tell us that Bileam himself did not awaken from his deep sleep until morning. When the Torah wrote that he rose in the morning, the implication is that he could not rise sooner. It is also possible that the Torah meant to criticise Bileam who immediately sent back these emissaries in order to ensure that other, higher ranking ones, would take their place to enable him to go with them. The Torah may also have wanted to give us an example of Bileam's tight-fistedness in that he dismissed Balak's emissaries before offering them breakfast. This is in stark contrast to the story of the פלנש בגבעה in Judges chapter 19, where the prophet describes the art of treating guests and making them feel welcome. Bileam may be described as the root of all avarice. He told the emissaries to be on their way as he was afraid that if they were to have a meal at the local inn he would be required to foot the bill. לכו..כי מאן ה׳ לתתי להלך עמכם, "go..for G'd has refused to permit me to go with you." Bileam did not tell his emissaries all that G'd had told him. He neither mentioned the fact that G'd had forbidden him to curse the people, nor that the people were blessed. All that he told them was that G'd had not allowed him to go with them, implying that their rank was inferior. This is the reason that Balak immediately sent higher ranking emissaries. It is possible that Bileam interpreted the words "for it is blessed," to mean that as long as the Jewish people enjoyed G'd's blessing he must not curse them, but that there could be a time when the people would not enjoy that blessing as a result of which they would become subject to his curse. This may have been the reason Bileam did not give Balak's emissaries a final answer at this time. He hoped that by the time higher ranking emissaries would come, the people might be subject to his curse.
Chizkuni
ויאמר אל שרי בלק, “he said to Balak’s emissaries, etc.” the emissaries of Midian are no longer mentioned as they were only of secondary interest their land not bordering on the land of Canaan and not under threat by the Israelites.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ויאמר אל שרי בלק, “he said to Balak’s princes, etc.” He did not make mention of the elders of Midian at all. The reason was that they were merely secondary as the delegation had been initiated by Balak. כי מאן ה' לתתי להלוך עמכם, “The Lord has refused me permission to go with you.” Bileam implied that G’d was totally opposed to such a mission. He could not imagine that G’d would permit him to go at all, even if more princes of a higher rank than the original ones would be sent to him. Balak suspected Bileam of having made up this refusal in order to blackmail him into paying a higher price for his services. This is why he sent a larger delegation composed of even more prominent emissaries. He wanted to show Bileam that cost was no obstacle as long as Bileam would perform the services for which he was being hired. Bileam therefore had to tell him that he was mistaken, that money was not the issue at all, but that he Bileam was a tool in G’d’s hands and could not contravene His instructions. In the Midrash: "For the Lord has refused to let me go with you" - implying instead [he would go] with greater princes. From here we learn that Bilaam possessed three flaws: an evil eye, a haughty spirit, and a greedy soul. The evil eye, as it is written (Numbers 24:2): "And Bilaam lifted up his eyes and saw Israel dwelling according to their tribes." The haughty spirit, as it is written: "For the Lord has refused to let me go with you." The greedy soul, as it is written: "If Balak would give me his house full of silver and gold." From this we understand that he coveted others' wealth. He reasoned: "It is proper that he give me all his silver and gold, for he would need to hire armies - and perhaps he would triumph and perhaps not - whereas I would certainly triumph."
Tur HaArokh
ויאמר אל שרי בלק, “He said to the dignitaries of Balak, etc.” According to Rashi the elders of Midian abandoned the Moabite delegation as soon as Bileam requested that they stay overnight to wait for what G’d would tell him. They were aware through Yitro, Moses’ father-in-law, of how Hashem related to the Israelites and that there was no chance that He would permit Bileam to curse this nation. They had all been briefed by Yitro on the many miracles the Jewish G’d had performed on behalf of His nation. Ibn Ezra says that the reason why the elders of Midian are not mentioned again is simply that the delegation consisted primarily of the dignitaries of Moav and they were the principal spokesmen. This is also why only the return of the dignitaries of Moav is spelled out our portion, (verse 14) It is possible that the people referred to here as the “elders” of Midian had at one time been its kings (before they had been demoted by Sichon), and had traveled to Moav to hold consultations with Balak concerning the danger the Jewish people posed for them, and as a result of these deliberations they had all agreed to turn to Bileam and to invoke his prophetic powers. When Balak sent forth his emissaries their route took them through Midian as Bileam resided there or near its borders. Once the elders of Midian had reached their home town in Midian, they simply remained there and the emissaries of Balak traveled on in the direction of Bileam’s place of residence. מאן ה' לתתי להלוך עמכם, “Hashem has refused to allow me to go with you.” Rashi writes that Bileam presented G’d as having forbidden him only to go with this delegation of dignitaries, leaving open the possibility that he would secure permission to go with dignitaries of higher rank. Nachmanides disagrees, saying this could not be the meaning, seeing Bileam’s boast had always been that he had such close relations with Hashem. If he were to present Hashem as a deity that could be manipulated by him, he would thereby make himself laughable in the eyes of his petitioners. Bileam was convinced that G’d would not let him accompany dignitaries of higher rank either. It was only Balak who suspected Bileam of seeking a higher fee for his services who felt that he would agree to come if the price was right. This is why he sent a second delegation composed of high- ranking dignitaries.
And the princes of Moab rose up, and they went to Balak, and said: "Balaam refuses to come with us."
verse value 1632
Insights
Verse structure: 10 words, 43 letters. The shortest word is "dignitaries·of" (שָׂרֵ֣י, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·they·arose" (וַיָּק֙וּמוּ֙, 6 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·they·arose" (וַיָּק֙וּמוּ֙). 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·they·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "and·they·came" (root בוא, 89x in Numbers); "with·us" (root עם, 85x in Numbers). First appearance of the root שרי ("dignitaries·of") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·Balak', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 5 words. Full calculation: וַיָּק֙וּמוּ֙ [and·they·arose] (168) + שָׂרֵ֣י [dignitaries·of] (510) + מוֹאָ֔ב [Moab] (49) + וַיָּבֹ֖אוּ [and·they·came] (25) + אֶל־בָּלָ֑ק [to·Balak] (163) + וַיֹּ֣אמְר֔וּ [and·they·said] (263) + מֵאֵ֥ן [refused] (91) + בִּלְעָ֖ם [Balaam] (142) + הֲלֹ֥ךְ [to·go] (55) + עִמָּֽנוּ [with·us] (166) = 1632.
Onkelos
The princes of Moab arose and came to Balak and said: Bilaam has refused to come with us.
Ibn Ezra
The meaning of "walking with us" (haloch immanu) — [he refused to go] from his place.
Or HaChaim
מאן בלעם הלך עמנו, "Bileam refused to come with us." They suspected him of being a liar, accusing him of desiring more honour than what Balak had shown him thus far. It is also possible that seeing that Bileam had promised to inform the emissaries immediately of G'd's answer but had not done so until morning, this made them assume that he told them what he wanted them to know and not what G'd had told him. Perhaps there was even a traditon that Bileam was a compulsive liar.
Rashbam
הלוך עמנו, for we do not appear as men of substance in his eyes.
And Balak sent yet again princes, more, and more honorable than they.
verse value 1716
Insights
Verse structure: 8 words, 32 letters. Verse gematria: 1716 is divisible by 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "still" (ע֖וֹד, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·distinguished" (וְנִכְבָּדִ֖ים, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 132: Balak, and·distinguished. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·distinguished" (וְנִכְבָּדִ֖ים), "than·these" (מֵאֵֽלֶּה). 8 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "than·these" (root אלה, 76x in Numbers); "Balak" (root בלק, 40x in Numbers); "to·send" (root שלח, 29x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Balak', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 5 words. Full calculation: וַיֹּ֥סֶף [and·he·again] (156) + ע֖וֹד [still] (80) + בָּלָ֑ק [Balak] (132) + שְׁלֹ֣חַ [to·send] (338) + שָׂרִ֔ים [dignitaries] (550) + רַבִּ֥ים [more·numerous] (252) + וְנִכְבָּדִ֖ים [and·distinguished] (132) + מֵאֵֽלֶּה [than·these] (76) = 1716.
Onkelos
Balak again sent princes, more numerous and more distinguished than the first.
Ibn Ezra
"More numerous" (rabbim) — either its plain meaning, or "greater," as in "over the entire great one of his house" (al kol rav beito, Gen. 45:8), and "the city of the great king" (kiryat melech rav, Ps. 48:3), which refers to David — for thus it [Jerusalem] is called "the city of David's encampment" (kiryat channah David, Isa. 29:1).
Or HaChaim
ויוסף עוד בלק שלח שרים, Balak sent additional princes, etc. This means that he sent both the original emissaries as well as additonal higher ranking ones. We deduce this from the word מאלה, "than these." Unless the original emissaries were present with the additional ones the word מאלה makes no sense. The Torah should then have written the word מהם, "than those." The reason that Balak sent the original emissaries along was so as to prevent Bileam from denying what these emissaries had reported in his name. The word ויוסף may also indicate that Balak sent a larger number of emissaries than the first time. We could not have deduced this if the Torah had only written: וישלח עוד שרים רבים. I would then have understood the word רבים to mean that he did not send fewer delegates than the first time.
Chizkuni
שרים רבים, “more and higher ranking emissaries.” We have a parallel for this in Esther 1,8 where the word רב in the singular is used in the same sense, i.e. על כל רב ביתו, “over the highest ranking officials of his household.” Compare also Jeremiah 39,13: וכל רבי מלך בבל, ”and all the commanders of the King of Babylonia.”
Rashbam
רבים, more numerous than the previous delegation. ונכבדים, more distinguished and of higher rank than the earlier delegation.
And they came to Balaam, and said to him: "Thus said Balak the son of Zippor: Let nothing, I pray you, hinder you from coming to me;
verse value 2101 — ל֗וֹ = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 48 letters. Notable word values: "to·him" (ל֗וֹ) = 36, double chai. The shortest word is "to·him" (ל֗וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "to·Balaam" (אֶל־בִּלְעָ֑ם, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 25: and·they·came, thus. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "refuse" (תִמָּנַ֖ע), "from·going" (מֵהֲלֹ֥ךְ). The root אמר appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·they·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "do·not·please" (root איל, 111x in Numbers); "and·they·came" (root בוא, 89x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·Balaam', dividing the verse into phrases of 2 and 10 words. Full calculation: וַיָּבֹ֖אוּ [and·they·came] (25) + אֶל־בִּלְעָ֑ם [to·Balaam] (173) + וַיֹּ֣אמְרוּ [and·they·said] (263) + ל֗וֹ [to·him] (36) + כֹּ֤ה [thus] (25) + אָמַר֙ [said] (241) + בָּלָ֣ק [Balak] (132) + בֶּן־צִפּ֔וֹר [son·of·Zippor] (428) + אַל־נָ֥א [do·not·please] (82) + תִמָּנַ֖ע [refuse] (560) + מֵהֲלֹ֥ךְ [from·going] (95) + אֵלָֽי [to·me] (41) = 2101.
Onkelos
They came to Bilaam and said to him: Thus says Balak son of Zippor: Please do not refrain from coming to me.
Or HaChaim
אל נא תמנע, "please do not be prevented, etc." Inasmuch as the first set of delegates had come to the conclusion that Bileam had declined their invitation for reasons of his own, they expressed the hope that his desire for the appropriate honour had now been satisfied. There was therefore no further obstacle that could prevent him from acceding to their request. Bileam, who was not aware that the first set of emissaries had suspected him of merely inventing G'd's prohibition interpreted the words of the new delegates to mean that he should ignore what G'd had told him and should come against G'd's will. This is why he made a point of saying that his previous refusal had nothing to do with the size of his fee or his personal honour, but that he was unable to contravene G'd's instructions. He explained that he was not free to exercise his free will in this matter.
for I will promote you to very great honor, and whatever you say to me I will do; come therefore, I pray you, curse me this people."
verse value 2555
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 49 letters. The shortest word is "richly" (מְאֹ֔ד, 3 letters) and the longest is "that·you·say" (אֲשֶׁר־תֹּאמַ֥ר, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 56: for·surely, and·anything. 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "for·surely" (כִּֽי־כַבֵּ֤ד), "that·you·say" (אֲשֶׁר־תֹּאמַ֥ר), "and·come!·please" (וּלְכָה־נָּא֙). The root כבד appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "that·you·say" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "I·will·do" (root עשה, 127x in Numbers); "and·anything" (root כל, 98x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'I·will·do', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 4 words. Full calculation: כִּֽי־כַבֵּ֤ד [for·surely] (56) + אֲכַבֶּדְךָ֙ [I·will·reward·you] (47) + מְאֹ֔ד [richly] (45) + וְכֹ֛ל [and·anything] (56) + אֲשֶׁר־תֹּאמַ֥ר [that·you·say] (1142) + אֵלַ֖י [to·me] (41) + אֶֽעֱשֶׂ֑ה [I·will·do] (376) + וּלְכָה־נָּא֙ [and·come!·please] (112) + קָֽבָה־לִּ֔י [curse·for·me] (147) + אֵ֖ת הָעָ֥ם [the·people] (516) + הַזֶּֽה [this] (17) = 2555.
Onkelos
For I will honor you with very great honor, and whatever you say to me I will do. Come now, curse this people for me.
Rashi
כי כבד אכבדך מאד FOR I WILL HONOR THEE EXCEEDINGLY — Exceedingly: more than you have ever received as a fee in the past (cf. Rashi Numbers 21:27) will I now give you (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 6).
Ibn Ezra
"For I will honor you greatly" — with wealth. "And all that you say" — whatever is needed in order for you to curse them; and the proof is "for I will honor you greatly," for so Balaam himself said: "If Balak were to give me his house full of silver and gold" (v. 18).
Tur HaArokh
כי כבד אכבדך, “for I will greatly honour you.” He meant that he would pay him handsomely. וכל אשר תאמר אעשה, “and everything you will say (to me) I shall do;” Balak referred to anything he could do to facilitate such a curse on the Israelites he would do.
And Balaam answered and said to the servants of Balak: "If Balak would give me his house full of silver and gold, I cannot go beyond the word of Hashem my God, to do anything, small or great.
verse value 4104 — יְהֹוָ֣ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 21 words, 84 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֣ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. Verse gematria: 4104 is divisible by 18, the value of chai ('life'). The shortest word is "not" (לֹ֣א, 2 letters) and the longest is "if·gives·to·me" (אִם־יִתֶּן־לִ֥י, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 132: Balak, Balak. 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "to·servants·of" (אֶל־עַבְדֵ֣י), "little" (קְטַנָּ֖ה), "great" (גְדוֹלָֽה). The root בלק appears 2 times in this verse. 20 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "and·he·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "not" (root לא, 129x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·gold', dividing the verse into phrases of 11 and 10 words.
Onkelos
Bilaam answered and said to the servants of Balak: If Balak were to give me his houseful of silver and gold, I have no authority to transgress the decree of the Word of Hashem my God, to do anything small or great.
Rashi
מלא ביתו כסף וזהב [IF BALAK WOULD GIVE ME HIS HOUSE] FULL OF SILVER AND GOLD — This tells us that he was avaricious and covetous of other peoples wealth. He said: He ought to give me all his silver and gold, for, behold, he would otherwise have to hire many armies to fight against them. Even then it is doubtful whether he would conquer or not conquer, but “I” would certainly conquer (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 6). לא אוכל לעבר I CANNOT GO BEYOND [THE WORD OF THE LORD] — Against his own will he divulged to them that he was under the control of others, and he prophesied here that he would be unable to annul those blessings with which the patriarchs had been blessed by the mouth of God (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 6).
Ibn Ezra
"Full of his house" — [meaning] his house being full; similarly, "the whole earth is full of His glory" (melo kol ha-aretz kevodo, Isa. 6:3), for many have erred in thinking that Hashem's glory itself fills the world, as in the sense of "the earth is Hashem's and its fullness" (Ps. 24:1). "Small or great" — an adjective [modifying] the noun [i.e., command or matter], with the noun omitted; similarly, "and a rich man answers boldly" (Prov. 18:23), and "his food is fat" (ve-ma'achalo beriah, Hab. 1:16).
Rabbeinu Bahya
ואמר אל עבדי בלק, אם יתן לי בלק, “He said to Balak’s servants: even if Balak were to give me, etc.” Earlier the first group of emissaries had been described as שרי בלק; the new delegation is described by Bileam as עבדי בלק. The first delegation who had behaved towards Bileam with deference had been rewarded by him in that he considered them as שרי בלק, Balak’s princes. The second group who related to Bileam in a peremptory manner, saying: “Balak said not to refuse to come to me,” he treated with disdain seeing they had been arrogant towards him. Hence he treated them as merely עבדי בלק “Balak’s servants.” He also wanted to allude to the fact that they who were merely the servants of a mortal king and not allowed to disobey their ruler, must surely understand that he as a servant of an immortal King, G’d, could most certainly not disobey His instructions.
Tur HaArokh
ויאמר אל עבדי בלק, ”He said to the servants of Balak, etc.” The first delegation was described by the Torah as consisting of שרי בלק, ministers of Balak. The title conferred by the Torah on the members of the second delegation is that they were עבדי בלק, ”servants of Balak.” This sounds strange seeing that they had previously been described as of even higher rank than the first delegation. Perhaps the Torah merely wanted to show us the haughtiness of Bileam who considered even the members of this delegation as merely: “Balak’s servants.” When he spoke to them he related to them as someone’s underlings, not as high-ranking officers in their own right.
Now therefore, I pray you, tarry you also here this night, that I may know what Hashem will speak to me more."
verse value 2051 — וְאֵ֣דְעָ֔ה = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 42 letters. Notable word values: "and·let·me·know" (וְאֵ֣דְעָ֔ה) = 86, equal to Elohim. The shortest word is "please" (נָ֥א, 2 letters) and the longest is "you·too" (גַּם־אַתֶּ֖ם, 5 letters). 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "stay!" (שְׁב֨וּ), "and·let·me·know" (וְאֵ֣דְעָ֔ה), "what·more" (מַה־יֹּסֵ֥ף). 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "to·speak" (root דבר, 149x in Numbers); "with·me" (root עם, 85x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·night', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 5 words. Full calculation: וְעַתָּ֗ה [and·now] (481) + שְׁב֨וּ [stay!] (308) + נָ֥א [please] (51) + בָזֶ֛ה [here] (14) + גַּם־אַתֶּ֖ם [you·too] (484) + הַלָּ֑יְלָה [the·night] (80) + וְאֵ֣דְעָ֔ה [and·let·me·know] (86) + מַה־יֹּסֵ֥ף [what·more] (195) + יְהֹוָ֖ה [Hashem] (26) + דַּבֵּ֥ר [to·speak] (206) + עִמִּֽי [with·me] (120) = 2051.
Onkelos
Now then, stay here tonight as well, so that I may know what Hashem will yet speak with me.
Rashi
גם אתם [ABIDE] ALSO YE [HERE] — His mouth tripped him up (unwittingly he spoke the truth): you also in the end will go away disappointed as the former princes (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 6). מה יסף WHAT MORE [THE LORD WILL SAY TO ME] — He certainly will not change His words from a blessing to a curse: I only hope that he will not add a further blessing. — He here prophesied that He would in the end give them a further blessing by his agency (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 6).
Ibn Ezra
"In this [place]" — in this very place. The Gaon, of blessed memory, said: Should someone raise an objection and ask — since Hashem said "you shall not go with them," how then did He say "arise, go with them"? The answer is that Hashem did not want him to go with the first [delegation] of men until more distinguished officers came. But in my view there is no need for this: the meaning parallels "send for yourself men" (shelach lecha anashim, Num. 13:2), for Hashem had told Israel "go up and take possession," but they did not believe and instead said "let us send men ahead of us" — so Moshe asked Hashem, and Hashem said to him "send for yourself men." Similarly here: after Hashem told Balaam "you shall not curse the people," what need was there for him to say "let me know what more Hashem will say"? — it was only because Balaam harbored an evil thought in his heart. So Hashem said to him: "Go with the men" — but take heed that you speak only what I tell you. The proof for my interpretation is: "And God's anger was kindled because he was going" (v. 22).
Or HaChaim
ועתה שבו נא בזה גם אתם, "And now, you stay here also, etc." Bileam pleaded as he was afraid that these dignitaries would do what the Midianite delegates had done when they heard that Bileam was waiting to get G'd's instructions. The Midianite delegates at the time had gone home immediately without staying overnight as they anticipated Bileam's refusal (compare Bamidbar Rabbah 20,8). Now that the delegation was large and consisted of highly placed people, Bileam was afraid that they would not be willing to wait.
Chizkuni
ואדעה מה יוסף ה' דבר עמי, “and I will know what G-d will say to me in addition.” Even though G-d had told him already: “do not go with them!” Bileam was so anxious to find a way to go and curse the Israelites that he was convinced that his curse would be effective. He said to himself: “if G-d considered my curses as ineffective, why did He bother to try and stop me?”
Rabbeinu Bahya
ועתה שבו נא בזה, “and now, please stay here, etc.” The word בזה refers to “this place.” גם אתם הלילה, “also you, for the night.” [According to the cantillation there is a comma between “also you” and “night.” Ed.] Our sages claim that G’d punished Moav for this “night” which its emissaries spent with Bileam. They derive this from Isaiah 15,1 in which the prophet deals with G’d’s judgment of Moav. The prophet writes: “Ah, in the night Ar was sacked (a capital of Moav), Moav was ruined; Ah, in the night Kir was sacked, Moav was ruined.” The two nights which two delegations of Moav spent with Bileam attempting to get him to curse the Jewish people proved ultimately to boomerang on them. [This writer believes that the dropping of an atom bomb on Hiroshima and Nagasaki by the Americans also boomeranged, i.e. the men the U.S. lost in Korea and in Vietnam. Ed.].
And God came to Balaam at night, and said to him: "If the men are come to call you, rise up, go with them; but only the word which I speak to you, that you shall do."
verse value 4710 — אֱלֹהִ֥ים = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 19 words, 78 letters. Notable word values: "God" (אֱלֹהִ֥ים) = 86, equal to Elohim. The shortest word is "to·him" (ל֗וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "that·I·shall·speak" (אֲשֶׁר־אֲדַבֵּ֥ר, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 50: you, go!. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "if·to·invite" (אִם־לִקְרֹ֤א), "and·but" (וְאַ֗ךְ). The root בוא appears 2 times in this verse. 16 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "the·word" (root דבר, 149x in Numbers); "the·men" (root איש, 130x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'together·with', dividing the verse into phrases of 13 and 6 words.
Onkelos
A word came from before Hashem to Bilaam at night and said to him: If the men have come to summon you, arise, go with them; but only the word that I speak to you — that shall you do.
Rashi
אם לקרא לך IF [THE MEN COME] TO CALL THEE — If the call be for you, for your benefit, and you think to take a fee for it. קום לך אתם ARISE, GO WITH THEM, ואך BUT, in spite of yourself, את הדבר אשר אדבר אליך אתו תעשה THE WORD WHICH I SHALL SPEAK TO THEE, THAT SHALL YOU DO, and, nevertheless, Balaam went (as it is stated in the next verse), for he said: perhaps I may persuade Him and He will agree that I should curse.
Ramban
[AND G-D CAME UNTO BALAAM AT NIGHT, AND SAID UNTO HIM]: ‘IF THE MEN ARE COME TO CALL THEE.’” ‘If the call be ‘for you’ [for your benefit] and you think you will receive a reward for it, then rise up, go with them. But [you should realize that even] against your will, the word which I speak unto thee, that shalt thou do’. And nevertheless Balaam went [as stated in the following verse], for he said: ‘Perhaps I may persuade Him to agree [that I should curse’].” This is Rashi’s language. “And G-d’s anger was kindled because he went. [This was because] Balaam realized that the matter was not pleasing in the sight of the Eternal, and [yet] he longed to go.” This too, is the Rabbi’s language. And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra wrote: “The Gaon [Rav Saadia] said: If someone wishes to argue, saying: ‘Since He had told Balaam, Thou shalt not go with them, how is it that He told him [afterwards], Rise up, go with them?’ one may answer that G-d [indeed] did not want him to go with the first [emissaries], until more honorable princes than they would come. But in my opinion [continues Ibn Ezra] there is no need for this [interpretation of the Gaon], for the meaning [of Rise up, go with them is not that this was a command, but] is like Send thou men [which is not a Divine command, but permission in the nature of a concession to Israel’s demand]. For G-d had said to Israel, Go up, take possession, but they did not believe [that they would conquer it], and said instead, Let us send men — so Moses asked G-d [and He told him, Send thou men, meaning: ‘I do not command you, but if you wish to do so, send them’]. And this case [here too] is similar, for why did Balaam have to tell [Balak’s servants], tarry ye also here this night, that I may know what the Eternal will speak unto me more, [since G-d had already told him not to go with them]? It was because he harbored an evil intention in his heart [persisting in the hope that G-d would agree that he should go to Balak], and so G-d told him: ‘[You may] go with them, but be careful only to speak that which I will say to you.’ And the proof for my interpretation [that G-d was angry with Balaam for his evil intention in persisting in his request to go to Balak, and that go with them is a concession, not a command], is the following verse, And G-d’s anger was kindled because he went.” These are the words [of Abraham ibn Ezra].Yet all this availeth me nothing. For the explanation of the Gaon [Rav Saadia, that G-d wanted him to go with more honorable men] is not correct, for G-d told Balaam, Thou shalt not go with them; thou shalt not curse the people, for they are blessed, [thus clearly indicating] that He forbade him to go in order that he should not curse the people, and he did not prohibit him from going because these princes were not sufficiently important, so how could it be permissible for him to go with other princes! And Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra’s explanation [that G-d was angry with him because of his persistence in his e...
Sforno
אם לקרוא לך באו האנשים, if they only came in order to get your advice, as in Numbers 1,16 where such people who give advice are described as קרואי העדה, or in Samuel I 28,15 where a similar expression is used for advisors; go ahead and accompany them in order to prevent them from sinning.
Or HaChaim
אם לקרא לך באו האנשים, "if the men simply came to call you, etc." Why did G'd describe the purpose of this delegation as in doubt, i.e. "if?" After all, G'd knew full well what was in the minds of these delegates? A more difficult question is why G'd consented that Bileam go on an errand the purpose of which was for him to curse Israel? Why, in the process, did G'd appear to reverse Himself seeing He had told Bileam previously not to go with Balak's delegates nor to curse that people? How had conditions changed since the arrival of the first set of emissaries so that G'd's decision now would not be viewed as a reversal of His previous decision? It appears from what the Torah reports that G'd could have dealt with this request in one of two ways. Each one of these ways contained the appearance of His being unfair in some way. If G'd were to agree to Bileam going on such a mission, the nations of the world would conclude that Bileam was totally free to make his own decisions in the matter, and they would not appreciate that just as the master controls the line by which his dog is tied so G'd pulled the strings limiting Bileam's freedom of action. It was important to G'd to demonstrate to the world at large that Bileam was unable to cause harm to anyone whom G'd did not want to be harmed. On the other hand, if G'd refused to let Bileam go altogether Bileam would conclude that G'd Himself was afraid of what Bileam would be able to do once he got to Moav, i.e. that G'd was afraid of Bileam! As a result of these two considerations G'd was very clever in resolving both possible misunderstandings. He first told Bileam לא תלך, "you must not go." In this way He had shown the world that the wicked dog Bileam was not at liberty to cause havoc wherever and whenever he wanted to. He also paid Bileam the reward due to him for having explained to Balak's emissaries that he was not at liberty to disobey G'd. The reward that G'd gave Bileam was related to G'd's foreknowledge that in the end Bileam would go to Moav with the next set of delegates. This was something that would not be to his advantage, as we know from Balak's own remarks in 24,11 that G'd had prevented Bileam from receiving the honour Balak had intended to bestow upon him. However, his very trip would lead to his being killed by the sword as we know from 31,8. Bileam was caught in Midian at the time, as he had gone there to collect his reward for the 24.000 Israelites whom G'd had killed because they had allowed themselves to be enticed by Moabite women at the suggestion of Bileam. Originally, G'd had not stopped Bileam from going because He does hold back people who are bent on their own destruction by telling them not to go. This was an additional form of reward to the one we mentioned earlier that Balak was to send higher ranking delegates. When Balak now sent a second delegation, G'd had to address His second fear, namely that if He forbade Bileam to go this would be interpreted as His inabili...
Chizkuni
אם לקרא לך, “if these men simply extended an invitation to you to visit Balak, etc.” G-d referred to a social visit, involving food and drink. If you were to ask what happened in the interval so that G-d appeared to give Bileam an opening now that He did not know about previously, whereas previously He had spoken to him in absolute terms: “do not go with them!?”We must interpret G-d’s previous instruction as having meant only: “do not go with them to curse the people,” but not as an absolute refusal to let Bileam make the journey. A different interpretation: there was no change in G-d’s attitude at all; this time G-d related to a new delegation of officials, and whatever G-d permitted now was not relevant to what He had forbidden to an invitation issued by lower ranking emissaries. A third possible interpretation: “if these people are so foolish as to believe that I will change My basic attitude whichI already expressed to Bileam the first time, go ahead and travel with them, and you will see soon how useless this journey will be.”
Rabbeinu Bahya
אם לקרא לך באו האנשים קום לך אתם, “if these men came to call you, arise and go with them.” Seeing G’d had previously told Bileam: “you must not go with them (עמהם)”, how could G’d reverse Himself? You may compare this to G’d saying to Moses: “send for yourself men, etc.,” (the spies in Numbers 13,2). G’d said to Moses: “send according to your considerations.” G’d meant: “I do not command you to dispatch spies seeing I already told the Jewish people: ‘I will bring you up from the poverty of Egypt to a good and generous land (Exodus 3,17).’” However, when I told them (Deut. 1,21) “go up and take possession,” they did not believe Me but said: “let us (first) send men (spies), etc.” G’d therefore consented to let the people do what they wanted. Here, on an individual basis, we face a similar situation. Although G’d had told Bileam previously (in his own interest) “do not go,” now that He saw that Bileam was bent on going he did not restrict his freedom of choice. This is an illustration of the Rabbinic dictum (Tanchuma Balak 8) that G’d allows a person to pursue the lifestyle he chooses for himself. Nachmanides approaches our verse differently, understanding the words: “you must not go with them (verse 12) as merely prohibiting Bileam from going with the intention of cursing the Jewish people.” G’d never meant to issue travel restrictions to Bileam. This is why this time G’d added the introductory remark: “if these people merely came to call you (invite you) you may accept their invitation.” The understanding was that whereas Bileam would go with them he would not do so for the purpose of cursing the Jewish people. ואך את הדבר אשר אדבר אליך, “but only the word which I will speak to you, etc.” G’d meant that that even if G’d would tell him to bless the Jewish people Bileam would agree to do so (as the price for being allowed to go). He was not to be afraid of Balak’s anger, etc. At this point we may well ask if Bileam possessed the power to either curse or bless at all. You might well ask how it is possible for a mere mortal to countermand decrees which issued from G’d? If G’d blessed a people, as we know from verse 12 כי ברוך הוא, what possible point was there in anyone attempting to turn such a blessing into a curse? If you were to answer that indeed, Bileam’s curse would have been totally ineffective, then why did G’d bother to dissuade or even prevent Bileam from going? Why did He say to him: “do not curse the people!?” Let Bileam curse all day long, as long as the people enjoyed G’d’s blessing what did it matter? After all we have a verse on this subject in Psalms 109,28: “let them curse, but You bless.” The answer is that indeed Bileam neither possessed independent power to bless nor to curse. If we want to look for proof that his curses were ineffective we only need to look at the ineffectiveness of his blessings. If he himself had believed that his curses or his blessings were effective, seeing that he was prevented from cursing Israel, a nation which already enjoyed a blessing, why did he not simply bless Balak and his people, a people concerning which he had neither been forbidden to curse nor to bless? If Balak was so afraid of the Jewish people, why did Bileam not extend the protection of his prophetic blessing to Balak? Moreover, if Bileam thought of himself as powerful by means of his words, why would he demean himself by earning his livelihood through handouts from Balak and the like, instead of blessing himself by bestowing material riches on himself? In fact, we find that he did bless himself when he said (23,10) “may my soul die the death of the righteous!” If he could do this, why did he not bless himself with silver and gold, something he sorely desired? We know that even the wish to die the death of the righteous was not fulfilled as the Torah tells us that Bileam died by the sword in battle, hardly the death “of the righteous?” (Joshua 13,22) Job 11,20 also makes it plain that Bileam’s hereafter (if he had any) was certainly not that of the righteous. What we learn from the above is that Bileam’s power most certainly did not reside in his mouth, his pronouncements. However, any power he had emanated from his wisdom. Seeing that he was able to divine when G’d was angry and at whom, and whom G’d was favorably disposed at at a given moment in time, he would exploit that knowledge making it appear as if he had originated those people’s good fortune of misfortune. Even allowing for this fact, the question remains that seeing that at the time Balak hired Bileam G’d was not angry at the Jewish people (Berachot 7), what chance would Bileam have to even appear to curse the people effectively when he would be shown up as a charlatan in short order? Neither his pronouncements nor his insight into G’d’s “moods” would produce any results at all? Seeing that at this time Bileam would be totally ineffective why did G’d bother to restrain him in any way? Why not let him discredit himself instead? The answer is that it was known to G’d that there would shortly occur a pestilence among the Jewish people (Numbers 25,1-9). G’d did not want anyone to assume that the reason for this pestilence was Bileam’s curse. This is why He warned Bileam not even to open his mouth by mouthing any curses, however ineffective He knew those curses to be. The fact that we must remember is that Bileam was certainly unable to effect the fortunes of the Jewish people by his pronouncements.
Kli Yakar
If the men came to call you. There are two types of missions: Sometimes the messenger makes a condition with the person whom he is following, saying, “Only on this condition do I guide you on the path you should go,” ensuring that you promise to fulfill my request. And sometimes the messenger does not set any condition, but merely performs the mission of calling, even if they do not promise to fulfill his word, and there the important matters will be discussed — whether the matter is worthy to be done or not. And so God said to Balaam: “If these men want to make an arrangement with you and finalize promising you such and such silver and gold so that you will also promise them to curse [Israel], then do not go with them, because the matter is not in your control. But if they have only come to call you, and the matter will be in your control whether to do it or not, then go with them.” And that is what it means when it says, But only the word, etc. And because I saw in this parashah a significant variation in the matter of the messengers, who are sometimes called the officers of Moab, sometimes the officers of Balak, and sometimes men, and there is also a great question regarding what is said, And God’s anger was kindled because he went, after He had given him permission, Rise, go with them, so I say that there were two types of messengers: the officers of Balak, who were the officers specifically assigned to the king, and these He called men, a term of importance, because a king’s servant is like the king himself. And the officers of Moab, who were the officers of the state to whom the land belonged, while Balak had only the kingship but not the land, as they had appointed him king only temporarily. Therefore, for two reasons, the officers of Balak were not as eager for Balaam’s curses as were the officers of Moab. The first reason is that the land belonged entirely to the officers of Moab, which was not the case with Balak and his officers, who were appointed only temporarily. So certainly the officers of Moab were more concerned about their welfare through this curse than were the officers of Balak. Furthermore, since the officers of Balak were important people, they would not ask Balaam so much to curse when it was against the will of God, blessed be He. And with this suggestion, all the questions will be resolved, because throughout the entire mission, the officials of Balak and the officials of Moab went together, and [the Torah] called them all the elders of Moab, and they came to Balaam and spoke to him the words of Balak. And when he replied to them, Lodge here tonight, and pushed them off, it is written the officials of Moab remained with Balaam, because they were the interested parties who remained to await his answer, but the officials of Balak were not so particular and did not stay with him. And God came to Balaam and said, “Who are these people with you?” We have already said that everywhere it mentions “the people” it refers to the officials of Balak, and proof comes from what is written after the incident with the donkey: Go with the people, and it is written Balaam went with the officials of Balak. Similarly, the Holy One, blessed be He, said to him, Who are these people with you? where who serves as a term meaning “indeed” [ki], as if to say, “Indeed, are the important people with you? And why did they not stay with you, but only the lesser ones?” And Balaam replied, Balak son of Zippor, king of Moab, sent to me, therefore these officials who are from Moab, who are directly affected by the matter, are sitting with me and waiting, but the officials of Balak do not have as much interest in the matter. And Balaam arose in the morning and said to the officials of Balak, “The Lord has refused,” and he did not say this to the officials of Moab so as not to distress them face to face. Or perhaps he said even to the officials of Balak, the important ones, The Lord has refused to let me go with you, but rather with officials more important than you, and all the more so with the officials of Moab. And the officials of Moab arose and came to Balak, etc., for they were the interested parties, but the officials of Balak were not particular about bringing back an answer. And He said to him, “If the men have come to call you,” the important men, the officials of Balak, arise and go with them specifically, for there is no concern that they will entice you on the way to act against God’s will. And He permitted him to go specifically with the important men, the officials of Balak, and not with the lesser officials of Moab, for there is concern that throughout the journey sinners might entice you and cause you to transgress your Master’s will. And it is written, And Balaam arose in the morning, etc., and went with the officials of Moab, contrary to the will of the blessed God, for He had only permitted him to go with the important men. Therefore, God’s anger flared because he was going. And after the incident with the donkey, when he said, I have sinned, etc., the angel of the Lord said to him, Go with the men, meaning the officials of Balak, and so he did, as it says, Balaam went with the officials of Balak, and with this everything is resolved.
Daat Zkenim
אם לקרוא לך באו האנשים, “if these men who have visited you came to invite you (in your professional capacity) etc.” I would not want you to accuse Me of having been instrumental in your forfeiting a substantial fee for your services.” However, I want you to say only words which have been approved by Me.” (You are not free to use your power of speech freely)
And Balaam rose up in the morning, and saddled his ass, and went with the princes of Moab.
verse value 2521
Insights
Verse structure: 8 words, 36 letters. The shortest word is "and·arose" (וַיָּ֤קׇם, 4 letters) and the longest is "his·jenny" (אֶת־אֲתֹנ֑וֹ, 6 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·saddled" (וַֽיַּחֲבֹ֖שׁ), "his·jenny" (אֶת־אֲתֹנ֑וֹ). 8 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Balaam" (root בלעם, 53x in Numbers); "and·departed" (root הלך, 45x in Numbers); "in·the·morning" (root בקר, 43x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'his·jenny', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 3 words. Full calculation: וַיָּ֤קׇם [and·arose] (156) + בִּלְעָם֙ [Balaam] (142) + בַּבֹּ֔קֶר [in·the·morning] (304) + וַֽיַּחֲבֹ֖שׁ [and·saddled] (326) + אֶת־אֲתֹנ֑וֹ [his·jenny] (858) + וַיֵּ֖לֶךְ [and·departed] (66) + עִם־שָׂרֵ֥י [with·dignitaries·of] (620) + מוֹאָֽב [Moab] (49) = 2521.
Onkelos
Bilaam arose in the morning and saddled his donkey and went with the princes of Moab.
Rashi
ויחבש את אתנו AND HE SADDLED HIS SHE-ASS — From here we may learn that the hatred one bears for a person makes one disregard the rule imposed upon him by his exalted position, for he, himself, not a servant, did the saddling. The Holy One, blessed be He, said: You wicked man! Their ancestor Abraham has already anticipated you in this, as it is said, (Genesis 22:3) “And Abraham rose up early in the morning and saddled his ass”) (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 8; cf. Sanhedrin 105b). עם שרי מואב [HE WENT] WITH THE PRINCES OF MOAB — his heart alike with their hearts (cf. Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 8).
Ibn Ezra
"And he saddled" — [the word functions here] as a command [i.e., with imperative force].
Chizkuni
וילך עם שרי מואב, “he went with the emissaries from Moav.” He did not literally go with them, i.e. keep pace with them, but he followed them. Had the Torah written: וילך אתם, this would have meant that he literally accompanied them.
And God's anger was kindled because he went; and the angel of Hashem placed himself in the way for an adversary against him.—Now he was riding upon his ass, and his two servants were with him.—
verse value 3395 — אֱלֹהִים֮ = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 69 letters. Notable word values: "God" (אֱלֹהִים֮) = 86, equal to Elohim. The shortest word is "to·him" (ל֑וֹ, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·was·incensed" (וַיִּֽחַר־אַ֣ף, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 91: that·going, angel·of. 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "that·going" (כִּֽי־הוֹלֵ֣ךְ), "and·took·position" (וַיִּתְיַצֵּ֞ב), "riding" (רֹכֵ֣ב). The root הוא appears 2 times in this verse. 15 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "to·him" (root לכם, 88x in Numbers); "with·him" (root עם, 85x in Numbers). First appearance of the root אתון ("on·his·jenny") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·him', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 6 words.
Onkelos
The anger of Hashem flared because he was going, and the angel of Hashem stationed himself on the road to obstruct him. He was riding on his donkey, and his two young attendants were with him.
Rashi
כי הולך הוא [AND GOD'S ANGER WAS KINDLED] BECAUSE HE WENT — He perceived that the matter was evil in the eyes of the Omni-present and yet he longed to go. לשטן לו [AND THE ANGEL OF THE LORD STOOD IN THE WAY] FOR AN OBSTRUCTION AGAINST HIM — It was an Angel of Mercy מלאך ה׳, an angel of the Lord,( the designation of God as a God of Mercy), and he wished to deter him from sinning — so that he should not sin and perish (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 8). ושני נעריו עמו AND HIS TWO LADS WERE WITH HIM — From here we have a rule for a distinguished personage who is going on a journey, that he should take with him two men to serve him, so that these in turn may serve one another (i.e., act for one another by taking over the other’s duties if he must leave his master for a short time) (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 8). (See Rashi Genesis 22:3).
Ibn Ezra
"As an adversary to him" (le-satan lo) — I have already explained this in my commentary on the book of Job: the satan was [actually] the angel. The Gaon's view that it was a human being adds nothing and resolves nothing.
Sforno
כי הולך הוא, that his purpose in accompanying them was not to lead others as in Kings II 4,30 where Gechazi followed the dead boy’s mother to be shown the way, etc. Bileam, on the other hand, went as if he had his own agenda, attempting to foil the will of the Lord. The delegates had not come to ask for his advice at all. לשטן לו, to obstruct him. The subject matter known as שטנה, always involves an activity contrary to someone else’s activity. We find an example of this expression in this sense in Genesis 26,21 where the Philistines foiled the attempt of Yitzchak’s servants to use the water from the well they had dug. In this instance the angel had come to oppose Bileam seeing his journey contravened G’d’s will. He was afraid that Bileam would do his usual and not be content to await a propitious moment, so that he would become guilty of death. G’d wanted to spare him such a sin. [if I understand the author correctly, he feels that Bileam’s function as a “prophet”, i.e. pronouncing curses, when exploited at times when doom threatened his potential victims anyway, would not be construed as sinful by G’d. Ed.] והוא רוכב על אתונו ושני נעריו עמו. This is why he did not see the angel; as our sages explain when three people travel together they do not see potential dangers but they will not be harmed by what they do not see either.
Or HaChaim
ויחר אף ה׳…כי הולך הוא, G'd's anger was kindled that he went, etc. The Torah emphasises the word הוא, "he." G'd's anger was caused by the manner in which Bileam rose early in the morning, saddled his ass, and did not even tell the delegates of Balak that G'd had given permission for him to go. The words וילך עם שרי מואב speak volumes. They mean that Bileam and the delegates were on the same wavelength, that they shared the same objective. Bileam made it plain that he went along on his own initiative. We may also glean another insight from the remarks of the Zohar Chadash page 168 on the words וילך שפי in 23,3. According to the Zohar this meant that Bileam isolated himself in order to draw down to him the forces of negative spirituality, impurity. When G'd observed that Bileam isolated himself from the emissaries of Balak this was a sign that he prepared himself to do as he pleased. The fact that he had his two lads with him would not interfere with his attempt at solitude as these lads were part of his regular retinue and he would always do "his thing" in their presence. G'd immediately realised Bileam's intention and this is what caused His anger. The words הולך הוא also convey to us that Bileam would have been ready to curse the Jewish people even if Balak had never asked him to do this and offered to pay him for his efforts. He thereby revealed his innate hatred of the Israelites and all this combined to arouse G'd's anger. ושני נעריו עמו, and his two lads with him. Why did the Torah have to tell us this insignificant detail? Tanchuma on our verse says that the Torah taught us rules of proper conduct by mentioning the fact that Bileam as befits a man of his stature did not travel without his own assistants. Even if we accept this, why didn't the Torah mention this detail before telling us that G'd's anger was aroused at Bileam, and that the ass had already been made G'd's emissary to be his adversary? We may understand this in light of Berachot 43 that when one travels in a threesome one will not become aware of destructive forces in one's path nor will one be attacked by such forces. In this instance, seeing that Bileam had become aware of the destructive force arraigned against him, we must understand why he did not become its victim. Our verses explain why Bileam had not recognised the danger himself as well as why he was not harmed by it. The answer is that Bileam together with his two lads formed such a threesome as is mentioned in the Talmud.
Chizkuni
ויחר אף ה' כי הולך הוא, “The Lord was angry that he was going;” G-d’ had not given a “green light,” although Bileam made believe that he had obtained full approval. He should have understood from the first nocturnal conversation with G-d that it was not His intention for him to be going. We find something similar in the story of the spies that Moses sent out to evaluate the land of Canaan. G-d had said: שלח לך אנשים, “send out for your own peace of mind men, etc, (Numbers 13,2)” It had been quite clear to Moses that when G-d had agreed to the people’s demand to send spies, that G-d had entertained reservations from the start about the success of such a mission. An alternate interpretation of the line: “G-d was a angry, etc.” He had told Bileam that he was not able to say what he wished but could say only the words G-d would put in his mouth. Surely this was a clear warning to Bileam to desist, as he was going to make a fool or worse of himself if after having come all the way from Midian to Moav he could not deliver what was expected of him. At least he should have asked G-d what precisely he was allowed to say once he faced Balak in person. He was too hasty due to his hatred of the Jewish people. The paragraph about Balak and Bileam, which did not directly impact on the Israelites, was written to teach us why G-d deprived the nations of the world of any share in holy spirit, as it demonstrates the effect of granting holy spirit to the wrong kind of people, who would use it to try and manipulate G-d for their desires instead of to help them to serve Him better. ושני נעריו עמו “accompanied by his two loyal servants.” He took only two. G-d arranged it so in order that the strangebehaviour of Bileam’s ass could not be attributed to the ass having become confused in the presence of so many people.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ויחר אף אלו-הים, “G’d’s anger was kindled.” G’d was angry because He realized Bileam had gone in order to curse. ויתיצב מלאך ה' בדרך לשטן לו, ”an angel of Hashem positioned himself on the way in such a manner as to obstruct him.” Bileam had tried to appropriate to himself a vocation which was meant to be exclusively that of the Jewish people, i.e. הקול קול יעקב, “the use of the voice is a use reserved for Yaakov” (Genesis 27,2). In retaliation for this trespass, the angel also made use of a weapon which is not really his own, i.e. the sword, the weapon allocated to Esau, as he was an angel dispatched by the attribute of Mercy. [Had it been an angel dispatched by the attribute of Justice he would have killed Bileam instead of preventing him from carrying out his sinful intent. Ed.]. We find here another demonstration of the principle מדה כנגד מדה, measure for measure.
Tur HaArokh
ויחר אף אלוקים כי הולך הוא , “G’d became angry at him that he was going, etc.” Ibn Ezra, (verse 19) quoting Rabbi Saadyah gaon, raises the question: “how could G’d reverse Himself after He had told Bileam once that he must not go and curse that people seeing that they had already been blessed by G’d Himself?” He answers that Hashem did not want Bileam to go until Balak had sent a second and more impressive delegation. Ibn Ezra does not see any need for this explanation, seeing that the consent by G’d to someone undertaking a potentially disastrous enterprise is within the boundaries of his freedom of choice. G’d had told Moses to proceed and to begin the conquest of the land of Canaan (Deut. 1,21) clearly not wanting spies to be sent, and yet when Moses submitted the people’s request to send spies G’d told Moses: שלח לך אנשים, ”send out men on your own behalf.” (13,2) The people at the time were not full of trust in G’d, and claimed to want to investigate the best way to begin the conquest. Here too, the question that could be raised is: what need was there for Bileam to tell the servants of Balak that he would enquire from G’d once more, seeing that G’d had already said “no” once? Clearly, Bileam was ill intentioned, and when G’d saw this, He did not wish to deprive him of his freedom of choice at that point and let him dig a premature grave for himself if that was what he was bent on doing in clearly planning to thwart G’d’s desire. He therefore told Bileam that if he wanted to merely go with these people, He could not stop him, though He would prevent him from saying anything that would not please G’d. (Rabbi Saadya gaon.) Nachmanides (on verse 20) rejects Rabbi Saadya gaon’s explanation out of hand, quoting that G’d had told Bileam the first time not only that he must not go with these men but that he must not curse, and that seeing that these people are blessed already the idea of effectively cursing them would be a non-starter. To Nachmanides it is preposterous to suggest that G’d would permit Bileam to go with higher-ranking dignitaries on a mission that had already been nixed by G’d when it had been requested from Bileam by lower-ranking dignitaries, in the name of the same Balak. As to Ibn Ezra’s describing G’d as having second thoughts and now allowing Bileam to go with the second delegation of Balak, this is not a valid interpretation of what the Torah reports. Bileam’s obstinacy in wanting to go was not what motivated G’d to change His instructions. The assumption that when a person insistently asks G’d to let him do something as being the reason why G’d “changes His mind,” is quite erroneous. In my opinion, writes Nachmanides, originally G’d prevented Bileam from going, in order to ensure that he would not curse a people that was already blessed and therefore immune to such curses. G’d showed Bileam that his journey would be foolish, embarrassing even, seeing that he could not keep the bargain he would make with Balak. Seeing that the dignitaries of Balak were not interested in Bileam for any purpose other than cursing the Israelites, what possible gain could Bileam derive from going with them? In other words, G’d had actually tried to save Bileam a major embarrassment by warning him not to go with these people. The delegation had also reported Bileam’s words faithfully, telling Balak that he had explained his refusal by his being duty bound to obey G’d’s command. Balak, however, had chosen to ignore the report of his emissaries, placing the least flattering interpretation on Bileam’s refusal, namely that he was only interested in upping the ante, and to demand more money before acceding to Balak’s request. Bileam did tell even the second delegation that the subject of his cursing the Jewish people did not depend upon him at all, and was entirely not within his power. Seeing that Bileam had not misled the delegations, G’d no longer had a reason to forbid Bileam’s accompanying the second delegation, as long as Bileam only lent them his presence as a famous prophet, not as an instrument of Balak who, for payment, would countermand his G’d’s orders, appearing to try and manipulate G’d. G’d even warned Bileam that if Balak were to pressure him to curse the people in spite of what Bileam had told him, He would be with him, seeing that what G’d wanted to show the world was that the Jewish people were not only blessed by Him, but even by an outstanding prophet of the nations at large. Had Bileam been honest and upright, he would have told that delegation that his very going with them would most likely result in his being bidden by G’d not only not to curse these people but to bless them instead, thus adding mankind’s blessing to His own. Had Bileam been frank with them, they most certainly would not even have wanted Bileam to come with them. When they saw that Bileam was quite anxious to come with them, even personally saddling his ass, they realized that Bileam’s previous reluctance was only a “diplomatic sickness” he had feigned, in order to command a higher fee, and that even at this point he was maintaining the fiction of being forced to be only G’d’s mouthpiece, no wonder that G’d was angry at him for misleading the Moabites into thinking that his own and their interest coincided. He had made them believe that the very fact that he was accompanying them now was proof that his G’d had approved of that mission. When Balak noticed that after all these twists and turns, in the end Bileam did not curse the people, he gained the impression that Bileam’s G’d had changed His mind once again, or worse that He was deliberately making fun of him.
Rashbam
כי הולך הוא, willingly; he was desirous of cursing the Jewish people even though he knew that this was not what G’d wanted.
Daat Zkenim
ויחר אף אלהים כי הולך הוא , “G–d’s anger was kindled that he was walking (with them in the spirit);” although Bileam had been given permission to accept Balak’s invitation to come to him, he had not been given permission to curse the Israelites. It was obvious that unless he had intended to do just that, (manipulated G–d) he should have stayed at home. Bileam had thought that seeing the first time G–d had told him not to go to Balak, and now He had agreed to let him go, He must have changed His mind due to something having occurred after the first emissaries had returned to Moav. Seeing that Bileam was too anxious to collect his fee, he had not noticed that he had only been allowed to go אתם, with these emissaries, i. e. physically, but that he was still forbidden to go עמהם “with them in spirit,” something that G–d had forbidden already in verse 12. In order to save Bileam from committing a fatal sin, G–d even dispatched the angel as an obstacle, hoping that he would take the hint on his own. He hoped that Bileam would realise that G–d knew what he was up to.
And the ass saw the angel of Hashem standing in the way, with his sword drawn in his hand; and the ass turned aside out of the way, and went into the field; and Balaam smote the ass, to turn her into the way.
verse value 6302 — יְהֹוָ֜ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 19 words, 85 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֜ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "standing" (נִצָּ֣ב, 3 letters) and the longest is "the·jenny" (אֶת־הָ֣אָת֔וֹן, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 462: the·jenny, the·jenny. 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "drawn" (שְׁלוּפָה֙), "from·the·road" (מִן־הַדֶּ֔רֶךְ), "and·went" (וַתֵּ֖לֶךְ). The root אתון appears 3 times in this verse. 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "Balaam" (root בלעם, 53x in Numbers); "and·saw" (root ראה, 47x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'into·the·field', dividing the verse into phrases of 14 and 5 words.
Onkelos
The donkey saw the angel of Hashem stationed on the road, with his sword drawn in his hand; the donkey turned aside from the road and went into the field. Bilaam struck the donkey to turn her back onto the road.
Rashi
ותרא האתון AND THE SHE-ASS SAW [THE ANGEL] — but he did not see him, for the Holy One, blessed be He, gave an animal power to see more than the man, for just because he possesses sense his mind would become perturbed if he sees noxious beings. וחרבו שלופה בידו AND HIS SWORD DRAWN IN HIS HAND — He (God) said: This wicked man has abandoned the tools of his own craft, — for the offensive weapons of the heathen peoples consist in the sword, — and he is attacking them with his mouth which is their metier; I will take his implement and come against him with his own metier. Thus, indeed, was his end (Numbers 31:8): “And Balaam the son of Beor they slew by the sword” (Midrash Tanchuma 4:7:23).
Ramban
AND THE ASS SAW THE ANGEL OF THE ETERNAL. Angels of G-d — which are Separate Intelligences — cannot be perceived by the [human] sense of sight, for they are not physical beings which can be apprehended by sight. And when they become visible to prophets or to men possessed of Ruach Hakodesh, such as Daniel, they are apprehended by them through the perception of the rational soul which reaches the degree of prophecy or some lower degree, but that they [the angels] should be perceived by the eyes of an animal — that is impossible! Therefore you could explain [the phrase] and the ass saw [the angel of the Eternal] to mean that she felt the presence of something which frightened her off from passing on, namely the angel that had gone forth for an adversary. This is a similar expression [to that which says]: yea, my heart ‘ra’ah’ [literally: “had seen”] much wisdom and knowledge, [the term “seeing” here] being used [in the sense of] perception, and not [in the sense of] physical sight [since the heart does not “see”]. Now when this miracle occurred to the ass, and the Creator gave her [the power of] speech, she said to Balaam, Was I ever wont to do so unto thee?, but [nonetheless] she did not know why she did so now, because she was forced to do so. Therefore she did not say to him: “Behold the angel of G-d stands over against me with his sword drawn in his hand,” since her perception did not reach this knowledge at all. [Our verse] saying: And the ass saw the angel of the Eternal standing in the way, with his sword drawn in his hand does not mean that she [actually] saw the sword, let alone the angel; but the verse is hinting that since the angel was ready to strike them, she trembled very exceedingly, because she felt as if people were coming to slaughter her. [We must explain that the ass merely felt the angel’s presence, but did not actually see him, because] if we were to say that those angels that appear in human form — as I have mentioned in the section of Vayeira — can be seen even by the eyes of an animal, then how was it that Balaam did not see him, since he was not smitten with blindness! It is, however, possible that He Who gave the ass the power of speech, also bestowed upon her an additional power of vision, so that she saw the likeness of a human being, although Scripture does not mention it. Thus G-d opened the eyes of the ass [and she indeed saw the angel], just as Scripture mentions [later] in regard to her master, [And the Eternal opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of the Eternal]. For the whole matter of the ass was a great miracle, being a “new creation” like those that were created at twilight [on the eve of the first Sabbath], and it is not merely called “an opening of eyes.” However, our Rabbis have only mentioned amongst the miracles the opening of the mouth [of the ass, although the whole matter — and especially her seeing the angel — was miraculous in nature]. The reason for this miracle was to show Balaam Who...
Ibn Ezra
"Off the road" — the trodden path; so it [the she-donkey] went into the field where there was no road. "To turn her toward the road" — a shortcut; the meaning is [to return] to the road.
Sforno
ותלך בשדה, this is when he abandoned his two attendants and the dignitaries of Moav. [the ass on its own took a path of her own enabling what followed to become possible. Ed.] Naturally, neither the lads nor the dignitaries of Moav had any idea of what transpired now.
Or HaChaim
ותרא האתון, The ass saw, etc. Why did G'd allow the angel to become visible to the ass? Why was the angel allowed to take up a threatening position three times? What was the point of squeezing Bileam's legs? Why did he strike the ass? Why did G'd open the mouth of the ass? Everything which happened here appears quite mysterious. We may assume that the entire paragraph was designed to show us how G'd humbled Bileam seeing he had given Balak's delegates the impression that he was free to curse and that his curse against the Israelites would be effective. If Bileam had revealed to the emissaries of Balak before he set out on the way that G'd had severely restricted his freedom to curse the Israelites he would not now have been humbled. G'd paid him back by humbling him in front of the delegates and in front of the ass in a most degrading fashion. We are all aware that the composition of animals which have not been equipped with the power of speech is radically different from the composition of human beings who enjoy the power of speech. In order to suitably humble Bileam by means of an animal, G'd had to effect a transformation in the physical composition of the body of the animal in question. G'd accomplished this by means of stationing the angel in three different locations on three different occasions and by enabling the ass to see the angel in each location. In order for a creature to possess the power of speech its components must be endowed with three prerequisites. A) Since it possesses the ability to grow, something every living organism does, this component of it must be altered so that it can function even after it has been equipped with the ability to speak. B) A similar transformation must be effected in the animal's ability to move freely. C) It must be endowed with the power to verbalise its thoughts and emotions. When the angel took up position opposite the ass for the first time, the ass's basic components were altered so that they could function if equipped with the power to speak. It was enabled to see spiritual beings. When the ass saw the angel the second time its ability to move freely was altered so that it would also be able to move once it would be equipped with the power to verbalise its thoughts and emotions. After the ass had seen the angel for a third time it became equipped with the power to speak similar to a human being. As soon as this had occurred it opened its mouth, spoke intelligently and put Bileam to shame as a result. It actually put down Bileam in the presence of his assistants. The shame resulting from this occurrence was twofold and left a deep impression. 1) The ability of the animal to speak. 2) The revelation that Bileam the great prophet had been in the habit of using his she-ass as one uses a wife, i.e. as his sexual mate. We still have to explain why the angel had to take up position in three different locations instead of appearing three times in the same location. Perhaps the three locations in wh...
Chizkuni
וחרבו שלופה בידו, “with his sword drawn in his sword.” This is a case of the punishment fitting the crime, i.e. Bileam had said that he would kill his ass for its rebellious behaviour; (verse 29) now the angel makes Bileam realise that the one who deserved to be killed for rebelling against G-d was not the ass but Bileam himself.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ותרא האתון את מלאך ה' נצב בדרך, “When the she-ass saw the angel of Hashem standing in the way, etc.” The word “saw” in this instance does not mean “saw with its eyes,” but “she realised, she had a distinct feeling of a dangerous obstruction in front of her.” Seeing that as a rule angels do not appear in such guise in front of human beings, the likelihood for them to reveal themselves in such a fashion to animals is nil. We do not have to stress that this was not a mental vision, something originating in the brain seeing that animals do not possess such a brain, i.e. intelligence. All the ass knew was that if faced a frightening phenomenon and therefore she tried to dodge the obstacle she perceived. Had the ass had a clearer perception of precisely who it was that blocked her way, she would have said to Bileam: “an angel of G’d with drawn sword is facing me and therefore I had to deviate from the path.” This is Nachmanides’ view of the incident (page 290 Chavell edition). ותט האתון מן הדרך ותלך בשדה, “the she-ass turned from the path and walked in the field.” Bileam’s desire to curse the Israelites was so strong that he was blind to any indications which were designed to deflect him from his purpose. Anyone else in his place would have noticed if not the first sign then the second sign or at least the third sign. Bileam, the “seer” was so blind on this occasion that he ignored even the clearest indications that his mission was not to be crowned with success. It is almost inconceivable that an individual whose profession was the interpretation of all unusual phenomena, who interpreted every inconsistency in nature, should not have realized that he was being given the grossest possible hints of G’d’s displeasure. Even the power of speech which the she-ass suddenly displayed did not stun him into realising the error of his ways. He should have realized what Moses was told in Exodus 4,11 when he used his speech impediment as an excuse not to accept the position of leader of the people that G’d can grant the power of speech to whomsoever He wants to just as He can withhold it from those who possessed it. The fact that Bileam did not display the slightest amazement at the ass talking is his greatest indictment. This is why eventually the angel had to reveal his presence to him and had to address him directly telling him that as of this time, he had to continue on his way but could only say what he was told to say. The reason Bileam had offered to abandon his journey and to return home was that once he had seen that even his ass could talk, he realized that his so-called power of speech was quite meaningless. He could no longer boast of his power of speech.
Kli Yakar
And the donkey turned from the path, etc. In the Tanchuma (Balak 8) they said, “He showed him signs of the forefathers, etc.” For and she went into the field, a wide place, to say that if he wanted to curse the seed of Abraham, he would find [room] to curse the children of Keturah and Ishmael. And if he wanted to curse the seed of Isaac, he would find one side to curse, as he could turn toward Esau. But from the side of Jacob, whose bed was complete [i.e., all his children were righteous], he stood in a narrow place, because from his side there is no way to turn right or left. And there are other interpretations from the commentators. As Rashi wrote, “These three times [regalim],” “You wish to uproot a nation that celebrates three pilgrim festivals [regalim]” (Numbers Rabbah 20:14). This indicates that those three signs he mentioned correspond to the three pilgrim festivals. He begins with Sukkot, which is in the month of Tishrei [the new year], about which it is said (Deuteronomy 16:13), when you gather in your produce from the field. Regarding this, it says, And the donkey turned from the path and went into the field — you wish to uproot a nation that celebrates the Festival of Ingathering, which is connected to the field. During this festival, Israel sacrifices seventy bulls corresponding to the seventy nations, and thus their cessation would cause the cessation of all the nations. And after that it said, “in the path of the vineyards, alluding to the festival of Passover, the time of the Exodus from Egypt, as it is said: You brought a vine out of Egypt; You drove out nations and planted it (Psalms 89). For reason dictates that the thorns should be uprooted and the vine planted, so how do you wish to reverse the order and uproot the vineyards because of the thorns? The nature of the vine is that it is trampled underfoot, but ultimately the wine brings down the one who trampled it when he drinks it, as concluded in Yalkut Parashat Vayeshev (146) in the name of Midrash Shocher Tov, which brings many comparisons of Israel being likened to a vine, all of which serve to refute Balaam’s intention. This alludes to the festival of Passover, during which we drink four cups of wine corresponding to the cup of salvation for Israel who are compared to a vine, and Scripture mentions four expressions of redemption. Correspondingly, the Holy One, blessed be He, gives the nations four cups of suffering, as concluded in Genesis Rabbah (Vayeshev 88:5). So how do you wish to uproot all this and reverse the arrangement between Israel and the nations? And afterward it said, “And the angel of the Lord stood in a narrow place, where there was no way to turn either to the right or to the left,” corresponding to Shavuot, when they received the Torah, about which it is said Length of days is in her right hand, and in her left hand are riches and honor (Proverbs 3:16). And if Israel had not received the Torah, the world would have returned to chaos and void (Shabbat 88a), and all the nations would have ceased to exist. So how can you want to uproot this nation that celebrates this festival, which is necessary for all nations and for all beings above and below? And it may be that even in the path of the vineyards there was a hint to him: You want to uproot a nation that celebrates the festival of Passover and drinks four cups of wine, corresponding to the four kingdoms, and [cups] of wine, whose numerical value is 70, corresponding to the 70 nations; and the cancellation of this would also cause the cancellation of all 70 nations. And it is further possible to interpret “these three times,” that it hinted to him [Balaam]: How do you wish to uproot a nation that upholds the three things upon which the world stands (Avot 1:2)? Namely the three pillars of the world, which are Torah, worship, and acts of kindness, for their nullification would destroy the entire world. And it hinted to him about acts of kindness in what it says and went into the field, because the essence of acts of kindness comes from the field through tithes, gleanings, forgotten sheaves, and the corners [of the field left for the poor]. And the worship in the Temple, which is compared to a vineyard, it hinted to him in the path of the vineyards. And so Rashi explained He brought me to the house of wine (Song of Songs 2:4) [as referring to] the Tent of Meeting. And about them it is said (Song of Songs 7:12-13), Come, my beloved, let us go out to the field, let us rise early to the vineyards, etc. And in the narrow place where there is no way to turn right or left, it hinted to Torah in the way that has been explained, and this is a correct allusion.
Tur HaArokh
ותרא האתון את מלאך ה', “The ass saw the angel of Hashem, etc.” Nachmanides writes that it is impossible to understand these words literally, i.e. that the ass had a vision of an angel that held a sword, etc. Angels are disembodied beings not visible to the eyes of mortal creatures. Whenever prophets did have visions of angels, this was not a perception with their physical eyes, but they had been given supernaturally charged “eyesight” which enabled them to “see” these disembodies beings. There can be no question that beasts, that do not even possess a נשמה, divine soul, should be so endowed, even for such an occasion. We may therefore explain the words ותרא האתון את ה' as “the ass noticed something that frightened her very much,” the Torah explaining to us what it was that frightened her so much, i.e. the angel. Concerning the graphic description of the angel having a drawn sword in his hand, וחרבו שלופה בידו, the ass neither saw the angel nor the sword. The Torah tells us that the ass felt it was about to be struck, and therefore the Torah describes its fear in these terms. The ass had the impression that someone or something was about to slaughter it. This is why when the ass was suddenly miraculously enabled to speak, it asked Bileam if it had ever been in the habit of conducting itself in the manner displayed most recently. The ass itself was not clear why it had acted as it did all of a sudden. Had the ass seen an angel with her physical eyes, seeing that it had been granted the ability to speak, it would certainly have told Bileam that it had seen an angel with drawn sword, a most frightening spectacle, and that this was why it had acted so strangely. If we were to say that angels appeared to beasts as visible to their physical eyes, how are we to explain that Bileam, who was a prophet to boot, did not see this apparition? It is, of course, possible that G’d lent special powers of perception to the ass at that time, just as He enabled it to suddenly speak coherently. The reason why G’d bothered to perform this miracle was to demonstrate to Bileam Who it was that endowed man (or beast) with the power of speech, or Who may therefore prevent him from speaking if He so pleases. It was an oblique warning not to resort to sorcery to enable him to curse the Jewish people seeing that Hashem had already pre-empted him. At any rate, our sages, when discussing this whole episode, mention only one miracle, i.e. the sudden ability of the ass to speak intelligently and coherently. This was so that Bileam should realize that the same G’d Who enabled the ass to speak could certainly make man say what He wanted Him to say.
Daat Zkenim
ותלך בשדה, “she (the ass) walked in the field (instead of on the path).” Rashi’s comment on verse 26 based on Tanchuma that the angel showed Bileam a hint of the three founding fathers of the Jewish people, needs a super commentary. It appears to mean the following: the first time the angel positioned himself as an obstacle on the path, he did so that the ass could pass either to the right or to the left of him but could not proceed without making a detour, the choice that Avraham had given Lot (Genesis, 13,9). The sons of Avraham by Keturah and Hagar are viewed as partially his descendants, as they had a different mother than Sarah. In other words, Bileam would not be permitted to curse Yitzchak who was a descendant of both Avraham and Sarah. The second time the angel tried to obstruct the ass in a narrow passage in the vineyard, he did so in a manner that allowed the ass to squeeze by but painfully, this was a hint that even cursing Yitzchok’s descendants would be allowed only if he cursed Esau, not Yaakov and his descendants. The third obstruction, which forced the ass to lie down, as passage was blocked completely, was a hint to Bileam that on no account would he be permitted to curse any of the descendants of Yaakov and his twelve sons. This is what the angel showed Bileam, using the patriarchs as his symbol.
Then the angel of Hashem stood in a hollow way between the vineyards, a fence being on this side, and a fence on that side.
verse value 1534 — יְהֹוָ֔ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 38 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֔ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. Verse gematria: 1534 is divisible by 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "fence" (גָּדֵ֥ר, 3 letters) and the longest is "in·lane" (בְּמִשְׁע֖וֹל, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 52: on·this·side, on·this·side. 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "in·lane" (בְּמִשְׁע֖וֹל), "the·vineyards" (הַכְּרָמִ֑ים), "fence" (גָּדֵ֥ר). The root גדר appears 2 times in this verse. 7 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "and·stationed·himself" (root עמד, 20x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·vineyards', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 4 words. Full calculation: וַֽיַּעֲמֹד֙ [and·stationed·himself] (130) + מַלְאַ֣ךְ [angel·of] (91) + יְהֹוָ֔ה [Hashem] (26) + בְּמִשְׁע֖וֹל [in·lane] (448) + הַכְּרָמִ֑ים [the·vineyards] (315) + גָּדֵ֥ר [fence] (207) + מִזֶּ֖ה [on·this·side] (52) + וְגָדֵ֥ר [fence] (213) + מִזֶּֽה [on·this·side] (52) = 1534.
Onkelos
The angel of Hashem stood in a path of the vineyards, with a wall on this side and a wall on that side.
Rashi
במשעול — Understand this as the Targum does: IN A PATH. And similar is, (1 Kings 20:10) “If the dust of Samaria shall suffice לשעלים” — the dust that attaches itself to the soles of peoples’ feet when they walk. And similarly, (Isaiah 40:12) “Who hath measured the water בשעלו” — with his feet and through his walking (as one measures by pacing). גדר מזה וגדר מזה A FENCE BEING ON THIS SIDE AND A FENCE ON THAT SIDE — The term גדר without further definition is one of stone (and that is why in the next verse it is called a קיר which is a term for a stone wall; cf. Leviticus 14:37—40).
Ibn Ezra
"In the path of the vineyards" (be-mish'ol ha-keramim) — the explanation follows from its context, according to the words of the Aramaic translator [Onkelos], for there is no parallel for it [to another usage].
Chizkuni
גדר מזה וגדר מזה, “with a fence being on either side.” There are some commentators who claim that this “fence” was the same as the stone piles erected by Yaakov and Lavan, at the time they parted company; the same commentators also identify Bileam as being the reincarnation of Lavan, as he displayed the same attitude towards the Jewish people as had Lavan towards the first Jewish family. They go further and identify Bileam as Kushan Rishatayim, Judges 3,8 (compare Talmud tractate Sanhedrin folio 105), where they describe all three characters as basically the same, each a reincarnation of the former. At this point Bileam/Lavan is perceived as having violated the pact concluded at that stone pile between Yaakov and Lavan (Genesis 31, 4454) It was logical therefore that this stone pile would now threaten Bileam for violating the oath sworn by Lavan to Yaakov at the time. The קיר, wall, mentioned in our story is a clear reference to the stones erected by both Lavan and Yaakov at that time. If Bileam is described a little while later as being lame, this is attributed to the ass having pressed him against that wall as punishment for his violating the original oath of peace between Yaakov and Lavan. (Compare 23,3, וילך שפי, “he walked with a limp.”)
And the ass saw the angel of Hashem, and she thrust herself to the wall, and crushed Balaam's foot against the wall; and he smote her again.
verse value 4739 — יְהֹוָ֗ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 59 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֗ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "and·saw" (וַתֵּ֨רֶא, 4 letters) and the longest is "the·angel·of" (אֶת־מַלְאַ֣ךְ, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 534: and·pressed·herself, and·squeezed. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "foot·of" (אֶת־רֶ֥גֶל), "to·beat·her" (לְהַכֹּתָֽהּ). The root לחץ appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "Balaam's" (root בלעם, 53x in Numbers); "and·saw" (root ראה, 47x in Numbers). First appearance of the root קיר ("against·the·wall") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'against·the·wall', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 2 words. Full calculation: וַתֵּ֨רֶא [and·saw] (607) + הָאָת֜וֹן [the·jenny] (462) + אֶת־מַלְאַ֣ךְ [the·angel·of] (492) + יְהֹוָ֗ה [Hashem] (26) + וַתִּלָּחֵץ֙ [and·pressed·herself] (534) + אֶל־הַקִּ֔יר [against·the·wall] (346) + וַתִּלְחַ֛ץ [and·squeezed] (534) + אֶת־רֶ֥גֶל [foot·of] (634) + בִּלְעָ֖ם [Balaam's] (142) + אֶל־הַקִּ֑יר [against·the·wall] (346) + וַיֹּ֖סֶף [and·again] (156) + לְהַכֹּתָֽהּ [to·beat·her] (460) = 4739.
Onkelos
The donkey saw the angel of Hashem and pressed herself against the wall, and pressed Bilaam's foot against the wall; and he struck her again.
Rashi
וַתִּלָּחֵץ — the Niphal form denotes that SHE PRESSED HERSELF. וַתִּלְחַץ — the Kal denotes that SHE PRESSED something else — viz., את רגל בלעם BALAAM’S FOOT.
Ibn Ezra
"And pressed against the wall" — she pressed herself [against it]. "Against the wall" — that is, the fence. "And he added to beat her" — for he had already struck her the first time when she veered toward the field.
Rashbam
ותלחץ את רגל בלעם, which resulted in Bileam becoming partially lame as we know from 23,3 וילך שפי, he walked with a limp.
And the angel of Hashem went further, and stood in a narrow place, where was no way to turn either to the right hand or to the left.
verse value 2939
Insights
Verse structure: 11 words, 53 letters. The shortest word is "narrow" (צָ֔ר, 2 letters) and the longest is "angel·of·Hashem" (מַלְאַךְ־יְהֹוָ֖ה, 8 letters). 6 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·again" (וַיּ֥וֹסֶף), "angel·of·Hashem" (מַלְאַךְ־יְהֹוָ֖ה), "to·pass" (עֲב֑וֹר). 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "that" (root אשר, 223x in Numbers); "to·pass" (root עבר, 32x in Numbers); "and·stationed·himself" (root עמד, 20x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·pass', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 8 words. Full calculation: וַיּ֥וֹסֶף [and·again] (162) + מַלְאַךְ־יְהֹוָ֖ה [angel·of·Hashem] (117) + עֲב֑וֹר [to·pass] (278) + וַֽיַּעֲמֹד֙ [and·stationed·himself] (130) + בְּמָק֣וֹם [on·spot] (188) + צָ֔ר [narrow] (290) + אֲשֶׁ֛ר [that] (501) + אֵֽין־דֶּ֥רֶךְ [no·way] (285) + לִנְט֖וֹת [to·swerve] (495) + יָמִ֥ין [right] (110) + וּשְׂמֹֽאול [or·left] (383) = 2939.
Onkelos
The angel of Hashem continued and passed ahead, and stood in a narrow place where there was no way to turn to the right or to the left.
Rashi
ויוסף מלאך ה' עובר AND THE ANGEL OF THE LORD WENT FURTHER — went further in front of him — it went on so as to be before him in another spot. It is similar to, (Genesis 33:3) “And he passed in front of them”. — And there is a Midrashic explanation in Tanchuma: What reason had he to stand in three places? He (the Angel) showed him (Balaam) symbols referring to the three patriarchs (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 8).
Chizkuni
ויוסף מלאך ה עבור, “and the angel of the Lord went further;” according to Rashi he hinted to him that a people founded on the merits of three patriarchs such as Avraham, Yitzchok, and Yaakov, would hardly be intimidated by the curses of the likes of a moneyoriented Bileam. In Lavan’s time Yaakov had not yet been able to draw on the merits of three patriarchs as could the Israelites in the meantime. When Bileam thought that the fact that Yishmael and the sons of Keturah, all of whom Avraham expelled, were asign of spiritual weakness in that house, the merit acquired by Yitzchok at the binding of him at Mount Moriah, offset any such notion. When Bileam thought that the fact that Yitzchok had also sired Esau showed spiritual weakness in the family of that patriarch, the fact that all of Yaakov’s children had remained true to the Abrahamitic tradition blocked his attempts in that direction to harm the Israelites by cursing them. This is the implied meaning of the words: אשר אין דרך לנטות ימין ושמאל, “where there was no way to turn either to the right or to the left.”
Tur HaArokh
אשר אין דרך לנטות ימין ושמאל, “where there was no room to turn right or left.” This needs to be understood allegorically, [I suppose because both the words “right” and “left” are superfluous. Ed.] The words are understood as referring to people who veer theologically to the ‘right’ or ‘left, i.e. Avraham and Yitzchok each had a son who did not follow in his father’s footsteps. By the time Yaakov appeared on the scene of history all his children followed in his footsteps. The descriptions of the ability of the ass to pass the angel in the first two instances, though with difficulty, and not without discomfort to its owner, were to be a message to Bileam that by now there was no loophole in the conduct of the descendants of Avraham that would allow him room for his curse to be effective. אשר אין דרך, ”where there was no path.” Seeing that he had come to a narrow place where Bileam was deprived of the protection of the two lads he had taken along with him, we find here confirmation that when a threesome walks together, or even a twosome such as when Avraham and Yitzchok went to the way to the Akeydah, Satan was unable to frustrate their holy mission. Now when circumstances had arisen that forced Bileam to be on his own, Satan had a chance to target him. [This appears to be a departure from Tanchuma’s approach on that verse. Ed.]
And the ass saw the angel of Hashem, and she lay down under Balaam; and Balaam's anger was kindled, and he smote the ass with his staff.
verse value 4753 — יְהֹוָ֔ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 55 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֔ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "under" (תַּ֣חַת, 3 letters) and the longest is "the·jenny" (אֶת־הָאָת֖וֹן, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 142: Balaam, Balaam. 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·lay·down" (וַתִּרְבַּ֖ץ), "with·the·stick" (בַּמַּקֵּֽל). The root אתון appears 2 times in this verse. 10 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "Balaam" (root בלעם, 53x in Numbers); "and·saw" (root ראה, 47x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Balaam', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 5 words. Full calculation: וַתֵּ֤רֶא [and·saw] (607) + הָֽאָתוֹן֙ [the·jenny] (462) + אֶת־מַלְאַ֣ךְ [the·angel·of] (492) + יְהֹוָ֔ה [Hashem] (26) + וַתִּרְבַּ֖ץ [and·lay·down] (698) + תַּ֣חַת [under] (808) + בִּלְעָ֑ם [Balaam] (142) + וַיִּֽחַר־אַ֣ף [and·was·furious] (305) + בִּלְעָ֔ם [Balaam] (142) + וַיַּ֥ךְ [and·beat] (36) + אֶת־הָאָת֖וֹן [the·jenny] (863) + בַּמַּקֵּֽל [with·the·stick] (172) = 4753.
Onkelos
The donkey saw the angel of Hashem and crouched down beneath Bilaam. Bilaam's anger flared, and he struck the donkey with his staff.
Chizkuni
ותרבץ תחת בלעם ויחר אף בלעם, “when she lay down beneath Bileam, Bileam became very angry.” His anger was prompted by the fact that his ass had chosen to deny him her services at the very moment when her master had been injured and was in need of her more than ever before. ויך את האתון במקל, “he struck the ass; the first time with the palm of his hand, the second time with a kind of riding whip, and the third time with his walking staff, as one does to obstinate domestic beasts.
And Hashem opened the mouth of the ass, and she said to Balaam: "What have I done to you, that you have smitten me these three times?"
verse value 4637 — יְהֹוָ֖ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 13 words, 55 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֖ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "to·you" (לְךָ֔, 2 letters) and the longest is "what·have·I·done" (מֶה־עָשִׂ֣יתִֽי, 7 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·opened" (וַיִּפְתַּ֥ח), "what·have·I·done" (מֶה־עָשִׂ֣יתִֽי), "you·have·beaten·me" (הִכִּיתַ֔נִי). 13 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "and·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "what·have·I·done" (root עשה, 127x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'the·jenny', dividing the verse into phrases of 4 and 9 words. Full calculation: וַיִּפְתַּ֥ח [and·opened] (504) + יְהֹוָ֖ה [Hashem] (26) + אֶת־פִּ֣י [the·mouth·of] (491) + הָאָת֑וֹן [the·jenny] (462) + וַתֹּ֤אמֶר [and·said] (647) + לְבִלְעָם֙ [to·Balaam] (172) + מֶה־עָשִׂ֣יתִֽי [what·have·I·done] (835) + לְךָ֔ [to·you] (50) + כִּ֣י [that] (30) + הִכִּיתַ֔נִי [you·have·beaten·me] (495) + זֶ֖ה [this] (12) + שָׁלֹ֥שׁ [three] (630) + רְגָלִֽים [times] (283) = 4637.
Onkelos
Hashem opened the mouth of the donkey, and she said to Bilaam: What have I done to you, that you have struck me these three times?
Rashi
זה שלש רגלים THESE THREE TIMES — By these words he suggested to him: You seek to root out a nation that celebrates three festivals (שלש רגלים) annually?! (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 9).
Ibn Ezra
"And Hashem opened" — Our Sages of blessed memory said that ten things were created on Erev Shabbat at twilight; in my view the meaning is that Hashem decreed to introduce through these signs [wonders] that are outside the natural order. The Gaon said that the she-donkey did not actually speak, and R. Shmuel ben Hofni challenged him on this; R. Shmuel ha-Nagid the Spaniard, author of the poems, sought to defend the one who had been thus caught. Know, however, that people of balanced judgment were compelled to interpret these things non-literally because they reasoned that Hashem would not introduce a sign into the world to alter what He established in creation — unless it were to vindicate His prophet. But they did not speak the truth, for behold, regarding Hananiah, Mishael, and Azariah a miracle was performed for them though they were not prophets. Some of them argue that Balaam was a prophet — but the truth is that his prophecy was [granted] for the honor of Israel, for he was a diviner, and so Scripture itself calls him. Others say he was one who knew higher wisdom — able to draw down supernal powers below by means of [astrological] configurations; and this is the meaning of "and whom you curse is cursed" (22:6). In my view the correct [position] is that he was an expert in the stars: at the moment he saw in a person's constellation that his time of harm had arrived, he would curse him, and when the evil befell the cursed one, observers and hearers would think that the harm came because of his curse. The proof is that he dealt deceptively with Balak's officers. This is the meaning of "I cannot go beyond the word of Hashem my God" — for it is not within a created being's power to alter the work of the Creator or His decree. The esoteric principle is: a part cannot alter [the decree of] a part, but the decree of the Whole overrides the decree of the part. I cannot reveal this secret, for it is deep. The straightforward [reading] is that the she-donkey spoke; and if you understand the secret of the angels of Abraham and of Jacob, you will understand the truth. The reason for "with a staff" — for the first and second times he had struck her with wood or with leather. "Legs" (raglayim) — I have explained it [elsewhere].
Sforno
ויפתח ה' את פי האתון, He provided her with the ability to speak; we are familiar with the verse in Psalms 51,17 which we recite daily before our prayers, asking G’d ה' שפתי תפתח, O Lord please open my lips.” G’d went to all these lengths in order to provide Bileam with yet another incentive to become a penitent. Solomon in Proverbs 16,1 points out מה' מענה לשון, “the answer of the tongue comes from G’d.” Even when man is not prepared to change his way for the better, G’d, on occasion, initiates a step in this direction; how much more so will He extend a helping hand to sinners who seek to mend their ways! All of this in order to save the sinner from perdition.
Chizkuni
מה עשיתי לך , “what have I done to you?” [It did not dawn on the ass that her master had not seen the angel barring the path. Ed.] The letter ל in the word לך, has a semivowel sheva.
Rabbeinu Bahya
ויפתח ה' את פי האתון, “Hashem opened the mouth of the she-ass.” If we look at the plain meaning of the text, the fact that the ass could suddenly speak intelligently was a great miracle. The performance of this miracle has to be construed as a compliment to the Jewish people for whose sake G’d performed this miracle. G’d made even the animal kingdom realize that any mission undertaken in order to curse G’d’s chosen nation was totally inadmissible. Such an undertaking would be equivalent to telling the mountains “to bury us” under them or for the hills to fall upon us” (compare Hoseah 10,8). There was no need to tell intelligent human beings that cursing the Jewish people was both forbidden and futile if even the animals understood this. If we approach the mystical dimension of our paragraph you will find that there is a similarity between the original serpent speaking to Chavah (the only previous time the Torah mentions animals as speaking) and the she-ass speaking to Bileam. Neither the serpent nor the she-ass said what they said of their own free volition, seeing that they did not possess the kind of soul necessary to formulate their own thoughts and then express them verbally. The serpent’s words had been inspired by Satan. You will note the sequence of “the Lord opened the mouth of the she ass,” etc., followed in verse 31 by: “G’d uncovered Bileam’s eyes so that he saw the angel of Hashem.” As soon as the she-ass had said what G’d wanted her to say she died. Only then did an angel of Hashem appear to Bileam. The reason the she-ass is described as having seen an angel three times is that she saw three different angels in the guise of men. When the angel, on the fourth occasion, challenged Bileam why he had struck his she-ass three times, he referred to three separate signs G’d had sent him to realise that he should not proceed with his evil plan. The angel used the same words as had the she-ass when he said על מה הכית את אתונך שלוש רגלים, “why did you strike your ass three times?” whereas the she-ass had also employed the expression שלוש רגלים to signify “on three separate occasions.” When the angels used the word יצאתי, “ I have come forth” (now) he meant that prior to this the she-ass had experienced other angels in the guise of men.
Kli Yakar
And God opened the mouth of the donkey. It appears that this too was necessary for the moment, to show him that he is similar to this donkey whose nature is not to speak, and only for the honor of Israel did God open its mouth. Similarly, Balaam was only temporarily granted prophecy by God opening his mouth, for the honor of Israel, and so that the nations could not say, “If we had prophets, we would have returned to the right path.”
And Balaam said to the ass: "Because you have made a mockery of me; I would there were a sword in my hand, for now I had killed you."
verse value 3588 — ל֤וּ = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 46 letters. Notable word values: "if·only" (ל֤וּ) = 36, double chai. Verse gematria: 3588 is divisible by 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "because" (כִּ֥י, 2 letters) and the longest is "you·have·made·mockery" (הִתְעַלַּ֖לְתְּ, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 30: because, for. 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "to·the·jenny" (לָֽאָת֔וֹן), "you·have·made·mockery" (הִתְעַלַּ֖לְתְּ), "there·is·a·sword" (יֶשׁ־חֶ֙רֶב֙). The root כי appears 2 times in this verse. 11 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·he·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "because" (root כי, 79x in Numbers); "Balaam" (root בלעם, 53x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'of·me', dividing the verse into phrases of 6 and 6 words. Full calculation: וַיֹּ֤אמֶר [and·he·said] (257) + בִּלְעָם֙ [Balaam] (142) + לָֽאָת֔וֹן [to·the·jenny] (487) + כִּ֥י [because] (30) + הִתְעַלַּ֖לְתְּ [you·have·made·mockery] (935) + בִּ֑י [of·me] (12) + ל֤וּ [if·only] (36) + יֶשׁ־חֶ֙רֶב֙ [there·is·a·sword] (520) + בְּיָדִ֔י [in·my·hand] (26) + כִּ֥י [for] (30) + עַתָּ֖ה [now] (475) + הֲרַגְתִּֽיךְ [I'd·kill·you] (638) = 3588.
Onkelos
Bilaam said to the donkey: Because you have mocked me. If only I had a sword in my hand, I would kill you right now.
Rashi
התעללת — Understand this as the Targum does: an expression denoting scorn and disdain — [THOU HAST MADE SPORT OF ME]. לו יש חרב בידי I WOULD THERE WERE A SWORD IN MY HAND — This utterance was a great shame for him in the sight of the princes: this man was going for the purpose of slaying a whole nation by his mouth, and for this animal he required a weapon! (cf. Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 9).
Ibn Ezra
"You have mocked me" (hit'allalt) — I have explained it [elsewhere].
Rabbeinu Bahya
כי התעללת בי, “because you mocked me!” As we pointed out already Bileam should have expressed his amazement at the ass’s sudden ability to speak to him. However, Bileam was so intent on reaching his destination and accomplishing his evil intent that he related to the ass’s speaking with utter naivity, taking the phenomenon for granted, and conversing with the ass as if with an equal. If the Torah does not report any reaction by the Moabite members of the delegation or of Bileam’s personal valet, perhaps they had not been privy to this conversation having walked some distance ahead (compare Nachmanides). This great miracle may have occurred when Bileam remained alone with the ass. Alternately, no one else had become privy to the miracle just as the prophets who were disciples of Elijah had not seen him ascend to heaven except for Elisha, or just as Daniel’s companions had not experienced Daniel’s visions even while walking alongside him, (Daniel 10,7).
And the ass said to Balaam: "Am not I your ass, upon which you have ridden all your life long to this day? was I ever accustomed to do so to you?" And he said: "Nay."
verse value 5255
Insights
Verse structure: 18 words, 79 letters. The shortest word is "to·you" (לְךָ֖, 2 letters) and the longest is "that·you·have·ridden" (אֲשֶׁר־רָכַ֣בְתָּ, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 140: all·along, have·I·been·in·the·habit. 6 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "your·jenny" (אֲתֹֽנְךָ֜), "that·you·have·ridden" (אֲשֶׁר־רָכַ֣בְתָּ), "all·along" (מֵעֽוֹדְךָ֙). The root אמר appears 2 times in this verse. 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·she·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "not" (root לא, 129x in Numbers); "upon·me" (root על, 128x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'thus', dividing the verse into phrases of 16 and 2 words.
Onkelos
The donkey said to Bilaam: Am I not your donkey, upon which you have ridden since you first had me until this day? Have I ever been accustomed to do to you like this? He said: No.
Rashi
ההסכן הסכנתי — Understand this as the Targum does — HAVE I EVER LEARNT? Similar is, (Job 22:2) “Does a man learn (יסכן) for God’s benefit” (see Rashi on this verse). And our Rabbis have explained this verse in the Talmud: They said to him, “What is the reason you are not riding on a horse?” He replied to them: “I have left it in the meadow grass” (i.e., I have put it out to graze). Whereupon the ass exclaimed: Am I not your ass upon whom thou hast ridden from my very youth unto this day?!” (so you see, you have never possessed a horse) — as it is related in Treatise Avodah Zarah 4b.
Ibn Ezra
"From your days" (me-odecha) — the meaning: from the day you rode [me]. "Have I been accustomed to do so?" (ha-hasken hiskanti) — "have I been wont to do so?" — the meaning: has this ever been my habit? [Compare:] "Please be familiar with him and be at peace" (hasken na immo ve-shalom, Job 22:21).
Sforno
?ההסכן הסכנתי, you should have reflected on the meaning of my behaviour knowing that it is so totally out of character for me to act in this manner unless there was an urgent reason. You should have realised that all this only happened to you in order to teach you that your plan will not succeed, for even though you did not have an overt sign there have been hints.
Chizkuni
אשר רכבת עלי, “the one upon which you have ridden.” There are several interruptions in the cantillation signs in this verse, indicating that the ass did not immediately add the words: “all your life.” מעודך עד היום הזה, “from the time you have learned how to ride.” These words complement the ass’ question if it had ever been in the habit of acting so strangely. You should have asked yourself what could possibly be the reason for my having acted so strangely and out of character. Surely I must have had a valid reason for acting as I did.
Then Hashem opened the eyes of Balaam, and he saw the angel of Hashem standing in the way, with his sword drawn in his hand; and he bowed his head, and fell on his face.
verse value 3497 — יְהֹוָה֮ = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 67 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָה֮) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. Verse gematria: 3497 is divisible by 13, the value of echad ('one') and ahavah ('love'). The shortest word is "standing" (נִצָּ֣ב, 3 letters) and the longest is "the·eyes·of" (אֶת־עֵינֵ֣י, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 142: Balaam, standing. 6 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·he·uncovered" (וַיְגַ֣ל), "the·eyes·of" (אֶת־עֵינֵ֣י), "drawn" (שְׁלֻפָ֖ה). The root יהוה appears 2 times in this verse. 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "Balaam" (root בלעם, 53x in Numbers); "and·he·saw" (root ראה, 47x in Numbers). First appearance of the root גלה ("and·he·uncovered") in Numbers. The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'in·his·hand', dividing the verse into phrases of 12 and 3 words.
Onkelos
Hashem uncovered the eyes of Bilaam, and he saw the angel of Hashem stationed on the road, with his sword drawn in his hand; he bowed down and prostrated himself on his face.
Ramban
AND THE ETERNAL OPENED THE EYES OF BALAAM. From this verse we learn that Balaam was not a prophet [who habitually received Divine messages], because had he been a prophet, how could it be that he required “opening of the eyes” to see the angel, which is the term used by Scripture about someone who has not reached the degree of prophecy, such as Elisha’s young man, or Hagar the Egyptian, and Scripture does not speak in this manner about the prophets! And indeed Scripture calls him, Balaam the son of Beor, the soothsayer. And when Balaam said, as the Eternal may speak unto me, he called his [ability] to know future events by means of his soothsaying “the word of G-d,” [and it does not refer to the gift of prophecy]. But for the sake of the honor of Israel G-d [indeed] came to him that night [in a prophet-like vision], and afterwards he was favored with “opening of the eyes” in seeing the angel, and speaking to him, and finally he attained the degree of [seeing] the vision of the Almighty — all this being for the sake of Israel and in their honor. But after he returned to his land, however, he [reverted to the status of a mere] soothsayer, for that is how Scripture describes him at [the time of] his death, [saying]: And Balaam the son of Beor, the soothsayer, did the children of Israel slay with the sword, and G-d forbid that they should stretch forth a hand against a prophet of G-d! And so did the Rabbis say in the Midrash Bamidbar Sinai Rabbah: “Balaam partook of the Ruach Hakodesh, but after he associated himself with Balak, the Ruach Hakodesh departed from him and he became again a [mere] soothsayer, as he had been originally. Therefore he complained: ‘I was elevated [in prophecy], but Balak brought about my descent.’”
Ibn Ezra
"And Hashem uncovered [his eyes]" — as with Elisha's servant, [Hashem] added to the brightness of his vision, or He first struck him with blindness [and then restored his sight]. "And he bowed down on his face" — I have explained it [elsewhere].
Rabbeinu Bahya
וחרבו שלופה בידו, “with a drawn sword in his hand.” This was a hint to Bileam that he would ultimately die by the sword. It presages Joshua 13,22: “and Bileam the magician they killed by the sword.”
Tur HaArokh
ויגל ה' את עיני בלעם, “Hashem uncovered the eyes of Bileam.” Nachmanides writes that the principal message of our verse is that there was a need to remove the spiritual blinkers from Bileam’s eyes, the blinkers that had prevented him from becoming aware of the angel. All this teaches that Bileam was not a prophet in the true sense of the word else G’d did not need to remove these “blinkers” from his eyes. We find something parallel in Kings II 6,17, when Elisha’s disciple needed to have similar “blinkers” removed with the help of Hashem. Hagar, the Egyptian maid of Sarah, also underwent such removal of blinkers that enabled her to “find” a well that had been nearby all the time. (Genesis 21,19) Such expressions never occur in connection with true prophets. Bileam is correctly referred to as a קוסם “a sorcerer,” When the Torah quotes him as revealing what “Hashem had said to him” regarding future events, this reflects only knowledge he had acquired by resorting to magic. When G’d did appear to him at night, this was not because he was a prophet, but this was in honour of Israel. Similarly, when he describes himself as מחזה שדי, someone accorded visions of the Divine, this too was only in honour of Israel, where he prophesied Israel’s feats in the future. When he returned to his home he is again referred not as a seer, or prophet but either without title or as the sorcerer when his death by the sword during the punitive expedition against the Midianites is reported in the Torah (Numbers 31,8 and Joshua 13,22 respectively)
And the angel of Hashem said to him: "Why have you smitten your ass these three times? behold, I am come forth for an adversary, because your way is contrary to me;
verse value 4420 — יְהֹוָ֔ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 17 words, 72 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֔ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. Verse gematria: 4420 is divisible by 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "this" (זֶ֖ה, 2 letters) and the longest is "your·jenny" (אֶת־אֲתֹ֣נְךָ֔, 6 letters). 7 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "why" (עַל־מָ֗ה), "have·you·beaten" (הִכִּ֙יתָ֙), "your·jenny" (אֶת־אֲתֹ֣נְךָ֔). 17 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "and·he·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "to·him" (root איל, 111x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'times', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 7 words.
Onkelos
The angel of Hashem said to him: Why have you struck your donkey these three times? Behold, I have come out to obstruct, for it has been revealed before me that you intend to go on a road against me.
Rashi
כי ירט הדרך לנגדי BECAUSE THY WAY IS PERVERSE BEFORE ME — Our Rabbis, the Mishnaic Sages, explain it as an acrostic, יראה she feared when ראתה, she saw, and נטתה she turned aside (Shabbat 105a), because that the journey (הדרך) is לנגדי, is against me, that is to say, to anger me, to affront me. — But according to its literal meaning, it is equivalent to חרד הדרך לנגדי, the word ירט being associated in meaning with רטט, “rapid movement” (cf. 49:24). The phrase therefore signifies: for I have seen the man who is taking the journey (Balaam) that he hastened and hurried on the journey, which was taken to my anger and to my despite. It is an elliptical verse (the words בעל הדרך being omitted after ירט), just as (II Samuel 13:39) “And the soul of David longed” (the word נפש being omitted). Another explanation is: ירט is an expression denoting “being pleased”. Similar is, (Job 16:11) “Through the wicked ירטני” — i.e., He appeases and comforts me through the wicked, whilst indeed they do nought but annoy me (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 9).
Ramban
FOR THE WAY ‘YARAT L’NEGDI’ — for he who is going [on this journey, i.e., Balaam], has distorted his way and perverted it in front of my eyes, for I am He that knoweth, and am witness. Or [the word] l’negdi [may not mean “in My presence”, but] that he perverted the way [i.e., the journey] to act “against My Will,” as Onkelos rendered it, [“because you wanted to go on the journey against My Will”], as in [the verse]: for they have vexed ‘l’neged’ (before) the builders. The word yarat is an expression of “perverting.” Similarly, through the hands of the wicked ‘yirteini’ which means “He warps me.” And the meaning of our verse is as I have explained, namely that the [actual] journey had the permission of the Glorious Name, but Balaam perverted it by going with them and apparently having them believe that he would curse the people [since he had not informed them of the conditions under which G-d had allowed him to go].
Ibn Ezra
"For it has gone perversely" (ki yarat) — the meaning: it went crookedly; similarly, "by the hand of the wicked He has made me go perversely" (ve-yirteni, Job 16:11), which is from the root ratah — for if it were from the root yarat, it would be expected to read like ya'ateni [a different pattern]. If they are two separate roots, compare: "a robe of righteousness He wrapped me in" (me'il tzedakah ye'ateni, Isa. 61:10), which is on the pattern of "who counsels me" (asher ye'atzeni) — like "who wraps Himself in light" (oteh or, Ps. 104:2).
Sforno
על מה הכית את אתונך?; When you saw these various signs you should have been astute enough to guess that your journey is unwelcome and will not succeed. זה שלוש רגלים, how could you remain obstinate in light of three successive warnings! How could you persist in trying to hasten events? הנה אנכי יצאתי לשטן, When I went out of my way to oppose you I did so for your eventual benefit! כי ירט הדרך לנגדי, the root of the word ירט is רטט, it occurs in a sense similar to here in Jeremiah 49,24 ורטט החזיקה “and a quaking has seized her.” The construction is parallel to that of the root רצץ, to crush, which we find meaning “it crushed his skull,” ותרץ את גוגלתו, in Judges 9,53. The angel when saying הנה יצאתי לשטן, explained that his purpose in opposing Bileam had been to frighten him into turning back Sometimes the presence of a hostile or superior force is felt although not seen, as in the case of Daniel’s companions who trembled although they did not see the visions Daniel had seen and which were the cause of this trembling. (Daniel 10,7). The angel chides Bileam for all his efforts apparently having been in vain. He accuses Bileam of having been stiff-necked, else he could not have failed to notice the signs.
Or HaChaim
ויאמר אליו מלאך השם, The angel of the Lord said to Bileam, etc. We need to understand the angel's argument "why did you strike the ass three times?" It seems pretty obvious that Bileam struck the ass each time he perceived her to act disrespectfully towards him. Why did the angel have to ask? Besides, seeing that the angel said that he himself had been the cause that Bileam had been inconvenienced, why did he have to ask Bileam this question? The angel knew full well that Bileam had not been aware that the primary obstacle to his progress had been the angel and not the ass! The Torah itself testified that G'd had to open Bileam's eyes indicating that up until that moment they had been shut! Perhaps it was the angel's intention to humble Bileam so much that he would acknowledge by word that whereas his ass had seen an angel three times, he, the Seer who had claimed to be G'd's intimate, had not even seen the angel once. This would also demonstrate how insignificant had been Bileam's achievements in trying to penetrate the mysteries of how and when G'd does what He does. The words (verse 33) ותראני האתון, "the ass has seen me," were the ultimate degradation the angel inflicted when he contrasted Bileam's spiritual blindness with the ass's sensitivity to the presence of spiritual beings. These words had the effect of an arrow having been shot at Bileam's heart. This then was the whole purpose of G'd having despatched the angel. The angel had also wanted to demonstrate the immediate negative effects Bileam's decision to go with Balak's delegates had on his standing as a prophet. We have been told in Sanhedrin 106 that originally Bileam enjoyed Holy Spirit. As soon as he befriended Balak this Holy Spirit departed from him and the Bible refers to him as a קסם, sorcerer, (Joshua 13,22). The proof of this is the fact that he did not recognise that the angel was blocking his way. Previously he would have immediately recognised the angel as such. The angel had been despatched against him to apprise him of the fact that he had forfeited the Holy Spirit he once possessed. The operative words of the angels are כי ירט הדרך לנגדי, i.e. because he had decided to walk along that way against the wishes of G'd he lost his Holy Spirit (compare Nachmanides' comment on this verse).
Chizkuni
כי ירט הדרך לנגדי, “because your way is contrary to me.” The word כי is used here in the sense of “although,” just as in Genesis 48,14: “כי נמשה הבכור, “although Menashe is the firstborn.” The same meaning for the word כי is true inPsalms 41,5: כי חטאתי לך, which correctly translated means: “although I have sinned against You.” It would not make sense to translate this as “for I have sinned against you,” although most translated editions of Psalms translate it this way. One does not ask for mercy because one has sinned, but in spite of having sinned. The angel explains to Bileam that although the latter had undertaken a mission against G-d’s will, G-d gives him this opportunity to desist from his evil intent and the resulting punishment. [This is also why the angel is associated with G-d’s attribute of Mercy, Hashem, instead of with His attribute of Justice, i.e. elokim. Ed.]
Tur HaArokh
כי ירט הדרך, “for the path (you had taken) was obnoxious to me.” Nachmanides understands these words as “the person taking that path behaves in a manner irritating me extremely.” The root of the word when it appears in Job 16,11 ועל ידי רשעים ירטני, means: “He thrust me in the clutches of the wicked.” Basically, the meaning may be that although Bileam started out going with this delegation having secured permission for the journey, he corrupted it into a journey intended to defy and thwart G’d’s wishes by seeking devious means of cursing the Jewish people.
and the ass saw me, and turned aside before me these three times; unless she had turned aside from me, surely now I had even slain you, and saved her alive."
verse value 5783
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 67 letters. The shortest word is "this" (זֶ֖ה, 2 letters) and the longest is "and·she·saw·me" (וַתִּרְאַ֙נִי֙, 6 letters). 6 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·she·saw·me" (וַתִּרְאַ֙נִי֙), "she·had·shied·away" (נָטְתָ֣ה), "even·you" (גַּם־אֹתְכָ֥ה). The root נטה appears 2 times in this verse. 14 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "before·me" (root פנים, 119x in Numbers); "for" (root כי, 79x in Numbers); "three" (root שלוש, 74x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'times', dividing the verse into phrases of 7 and 9 words.
Onkelos
The donkey saw me and turned aside from before me these three times. Had she not turned aside from before me, I would by now have killed you as well and let her live.
Rashi
אולי נטתה — This is the same as לולא: UNLESS SHE HAD [TURNED ASIDE]. Sometimes אולי is used in the sense of לולא “unless”. גם אתכה הרגתי SURELY NOW ALSO THEE HAD I SLAIN — This is an inverted sentence, and it is the same as גם הרגתי אותך — I would also have slain thee, as much as to say: not only would this delay have happened to you through me, but death also. ואותה החייתי AND IT WOULD I HAVE KEPT ALIVE — but now because it spoke and rebuked you andyou could not stand against its rebuke, — just as it is written, "and he said, No!" — I have killed it in order that people should not be able to say: This is the animal that silenced Balaam by its rebuke, so that he could not reply. For God has regard for human dignity. Similar is (Leviticus 20:16): “And thou shalt slay the woman and the animal (with which sin was committed)”, and similarly Leviticus 20:15): “And the animal shalt thou slay” (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 9).
Ramban
AND SHE TURNED ASIDE ‘L’PHANAI’ (BEFORE ME). Commentators have explained this [word ‘l’phanai’ as meaning]: “and she turned aside into the field when she was before me.” But there is no need [for this interpretation and addition], for the meaning [of the word l’phanai] is like mipanai (“from” before me), for such is the usage of the letter lamed, as in [the verses]; and they left off ‘livnoth’ (to build) the city [which is like mivnoth — literally: “from building” the city]; he hath left off ‘l’haskil’ (to be wise), to do good [which is like meihaskil — literally: “from being wise”]. There are also many other cases [like this]. Similarly: And Joab and the captains of the host went out ‘liphnei’ [literally: “before,” but really meaning mipnei — “from before,” i.e. “from the presence of”] the king, to number the people of Israel. ULAI’ SHE HAD TURNED ASIDE FROM ME. In the opinion of the commentators [the word ‘ulai’ here] is like lulei — “‘unless’ she had turned aside from me [surely now also I had slain thee.” The word ulai] in this context is thus used [with a meaning] different than that of all the other occasions where it is found. But in my opinion it is used here in its literal meaning [“perhaps:” — implying a doubt]; for the ass felt the presence of — or saw — the angel, but did not know what it meant, and [the reason why she turned aside] was because of the drawn sword, as animals are wont to do [when they see a drawn sword]. Therefore the angel said to Balaam: “And the ass saw me and turned aside from me, [although it was only] because of a doubt that she turned aside from before me [not knowing my intentions], for I came to slay you, but I would have saved her life, since the sin is in you and not in the ass.” GAM OTHCHAH HARAGTI’ (“ALSO” THEE I HAD SURELY SLAIN). Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra commented that “the word gam [meaning “also”] is a proof that the ass died after it had spoken. And the meaning of [the phrase] and saved her alive [which implies that she should have died, were it not for the angel that kept her alive] is that when [even] a human being sees an angel, he dies [straightaway, whereas the ass lived on for a while until after she had spoken to Balaam] — proof being [Jacob’s statement]: and my life is preserved — and how much more so [does it follow that] an animal, which has no common factor with an angel, as a human being has [ought to die immediately upon seeing an angel].”But the word gam cannot be interpreted as Ibn Ezra explains it, for [if so, we do not find any circumstances under which] both of them [Balaam and the ass] would die; because now when she did turn aside, the ass died and Balaam was saved alive, and had she not turned aside, he [the angel] would have killed Balaam and saved the ass alive! However, the word gam is [to be interpreted] as Rashi explains it, its meaning being as if [the word-order of the verse were] inverted, namely: gam haragti othchah [“also would I slay thee,” meaning to say: “not only wo...
Ibn Ezra
"And the she-donkey saw me" (va-tirani) — with a patach in place of a tzere; it should have been vocalized va-tireni; there are many such cases. "Unless" (ulai) — this word has many meanings; here it means 'unless.' The word 'even' (gam) is evidence that the she-donkey died after she spoke. "And her I would have let live" — an elliptical construction; the meaning is: as I would have killed her, so I would have killed you, or, I would have killed you alone and her I would have let live. The reason for "and her I would have let live" is that when a human being sees an angel he dies, as evidenced by "my life was spared" (va-tinnatzeil nafshi, Judg. 13:23) and the words of Manoah — how much more so the animal, which has no share whatsoever in the spirit of the angel as a human being does.
Sforno
ותראני האתון ותט לפני, in spite of your own oblivion to these signs your ass did see me and tried to avoid a frontal contact with me. She did so three times and yet you did not pay any attention to these strange symptoms. אולי נטתה מפני, you should have considered that maybe she had swerved so on my account You were aware that the Jewish people have advocates at G’d’s throne so that it is not far fetched to assume that such an advocate had been commissioned to hinder your mission against these people. G’d has given me permission to act in the manner in which I did.
Or HaChaim
כי עתה גם אתכה הרגתי ואותה החייתי. "surely NOW I would have slain you whereas I would have allowed the ass to remain alive." What is the significance of the word "now" in this verse? Bamidbar Rabbah 20,14 on our verse claims that this verse is proof that the ass was killed. We deduce this from the sequence of the words גם אותכה, "you as well," instead of גם הרגתי אותכה. The word NOW indicates that the ass had been killed immediately before this interchange. When the angel said: "I would have let her live," he referred to what had taken place. He had not killed the first time she spoke up which would have resulted in Bileam being killed also, but had waited until the ass had revealed Bileam's spiritual blindness. The word החייתי actually refers to a new activity, i.e. "I have let her live until now." The angel pointed out that he had done something extraordinary. He had been dispatched to hurt both the rider and and the animal he rode. In this instance the rider had been saved by the action of the animal he rode. In this way the word החייתי is justified.
Chizkuni
.ותראני האתון ותט לפני, “and the ass saw me andturned aside.” It was facing me all the time but attempted to detour either to the right or to the left so as to pass me. If it had turned backwards on account of your having struck it, I would have killed you as you had abused it. מפני, “only on my account;” only on account of her having seen me. She was totally innocent, as her behaviour was due to my not having given her any other choice. ואותה החייתי, “but I would have let her live,” as she acted under duress, as opposed to you. There is a difference between the words: לפני, and מפני. as in Deuteronomy 7,22: The latter means “out of your sight; ונשל הגוים האלה מפניך, “He will fling out these nations before you (so that you will no longer see them;)” or Deuteronomy 9,4: “He will dispossess them so that you will no longer see them.) גם אותך הרגתי “but I would have killed you also;” according to Rashi, this is a truncated phrase, and we have to translate it as if the word גם had been written before the word הרגתי so that the meaning is: “not only would I have impeded the ass’ progress, but I would even have also killed you in order to prevent your progress any further.” Now that the phrase has been truncated, taking into consideration that your own ass has already remonstrated with you, I have only “killed” the ass but have let you live. An alternate interpretation: If I had interpreted this verse strictly in accordance with how it appears here, I would have placed you on the same level as your ass, and the meaning of the phrase would have been: “I also would have killed your two loyal servants.”
Rabbeinu Bahya
אולי נטתה מפני, “if she had not turned aside on my account, etc.” The word אולי which often means: “maybe, perchance,” here means “if not.” The words “instead of killing her” clearly demonstrate that after the she-ass spoke the angel killed her. He now told her that the she-ass’s very speaking had been the reason he had spared her master, Bileam. The Midrash cites another possible reason for the ass being killed, namely to prevent the Emorites deifying an ass that was able to speak like a human being (Tanchuma Balak 9). A third reason is simply that the ass had performed the function it had been created for and kept in limbo since dusk on the sixth day of creation (Avot 5,8). We observe a similar phenomenon with the fish whose purpose on earth (in water) had been to swallow and subsequently spit out Jonah. We read in the Book of Jonah 2,2: “G’d appointed a large fish, דג גדול, to swallow Jonah.” The reason that fish was described as גדול “large,” is “great in years,” i.e.very old. Although there were many fish in the sea with bodies larger than that which swallowed Jonah, there was none that was as old, i.e. which had been assigned this particular task since the days of creation. The intention of the author of the Book of Jonah in writing the word וימן is to tell us that this fish and none other had been appointed for this specific task already during the dawn of history. This thought is also reflected in the word לבלוע, “in order to swallow,” instead of the simple ויבלע, “it swallowed,” when the Book of Jonah describes this fish. The peculiar wording alerts us to the fact that the sole purpose of G’d creating this fish when He did was to swallow Jonah. It is also peculiar that initially the fish is described as דג, fish (masculine) whereas in the course of the narrative the author changes to describe it as דגה, fish (feminine). Jonah is described as praying from the entrails of the דגה (Jonah 2,2) after he had first spent three days inside the דג. The term דגה repeatedly occurs as describing dead fish such as in Exodus 7,21 when the fish of the river Nile which had died due to the plague of blood are described as והדגה אשר ביאור מתו. [Perhaps the fact that the fish had died was the catalyst which caused Jonah to pray. Ed.]. When he said: מבטן שאול שועתי, “I have cried out from the belly of Sheol,” he meant that the fish had become his grave (Jonah 2,3).
Tur HaArokh
אולי נטתה מפני, “had it not turned away to avoid me,” Nachmanides, quoting other commentators, writes that the word אולי here has the same meaning as the word לולי elsewhere, i.e. “if not.” He adds, that in his personal opinion the word is completely in place as is, and can be understood at face value. The ass, not knowing what exactly it was that threatened her, took evasive action as a possible means of saving itself and its rider. [The word אולי, identical to שמא in later Hebrew, i.e. in Nachmanides’ manuscript, means “perhaps, possibly.” Ed.] The angel tells Bileam that whereas he would have killed him he would have allowed the ass to survive. גם אותך הרגתי, “I would also have killed you, etc.” Ibn Ezra writes that the words גם אותך are conclusive proof that the angel did kill the ass as soon as it had concluded what it had been programmed to say. Nachmanides writes that he word גם in our verse need not be interpreted in the usual manner, i.e. as meaning: “also”, seeing that it is inappropriate, for when used with Bileam who had not been killed by the angel, it would not make sense. Therefore, there is no reason to assume that the angel killed the ass, as Ibn Ezra would have us believe. Had the ass not evaded the sword, the angel would have killed the ass but would have allowed Bileam to live, [as clearly it had been instructed to do so by Hashem its boss. Ed.] We therefore would have to interpret what the angel said as meaning that if the ass had not taken evasive action the angel would have killed both Bileam and the ass. The word גם therefore must be understood in accordance with Rashi, as if the word גם had been written in front of the word הרגתי, meaning that the angel told Bileam he would not only have been prevented him from proceeding or have obstructed his journey, but he would even have been killed by him. In light of the ass’s evasive action, Bileam’s life had been saved and he had only experienced an obstruction. Seeing that your ass has made a detour for your sake and not for its own sake, you have struck it without provocation and you have repaid a kindness with malice instead of with gratitude. The Torah has not taken us into its confidence by revealing if the members of the Moabite delegation had observed what had occurred or not, or even if they had thought that the ass had behaved in an unpredictable manner, as donkeys and other beasts of burden are apt to do from time to time. Possibly, they had been riding well ahead of Bileam and had not noticed what went on behind them. If so, they probably had not overheard the conversation between the ass and Bileam either. Our sages said that the members of that delegation did observe and hear what had been going on, adding that the ass died immediately after having had its say. They most likely derived their information from an oral tradition seeing that there is no indication in the written text about all this at all.
Rashbam
אולי נטתה מפני; whenever the word אולי occurs in the Bible its meaning is similar to the words אם and אילו. (‘if’) Commentators who explain the word as meaning לולי as in Genesis 43,10 לולי התמהמנו, ”if not for the fact that we procrastinated,” or as in Genesis 31,42, לולי אלוקי אבי, “if not for the G’d of my father, etc.,” are in error. We have to understand the word as in Lamentations 3,29 אולי יש תקוה, “maybe there is hope,” or as in Amos 5,15 אולי יחנן ה', “maybe G’d will be gracious,” or as in Genesis 43,12 אולי משגה הוא,”maybe it was an oversight.” Here too the angel challenged Bileam asking: “why did you strike your ass three times, implying that Bileam had been wrong to do this, explaining that the ass had tried to avoid him, the angel, לפני, “in front of me,” as opposed to מפני. He meant that if the ass had actually passed the angel instead of halting before him, he, the angel, would have been forced also to kill Bileam as he was not supposed to get past him. As matters stood, thanks to the ass’ behaviour Bileam had suffered only minor injury. In the alternate scenario the ass would not have been harmed at all for the angel would allowed her to live just as she was alive now. After all, it was not the ass who had sinned but her owner. גם אותך הרגתי, the word גם here is used in the same sense as in Exodus 12,32 וברכתם גם אותי, “also bestow a blessing upon me!” [be on your way and bless me, i.e. the word גם is not a continuation of something conceptually identical with what preceded it. Ed.]
Daat Zkenim
גם אותך הרגתי, “I would also have killed you.” Rashi considers this verse as having been truncated, as no reference was made to who would have been the angel’s first victim. I believe Rashi must be understood as follows: if we were to assume that he meant that the angel would have killed the ass first, this line would make perfect sense at this point. But, how are we then understand his adding in the same breath: “and her (the ass) I would have allowed to remain alive?” When we turn the verse around, as implied by Rashi, the meaning would be “not only would I have blocked your progress on this path, but if you had not taken the hint to turn around, I would have been forced to not only delay you but to also kill you in order to prevent you from getting to Balak.” In that event, I would not have needed to kill your ass. Once you had been dead, there would not have arisen the embarrassment of Bileam’s ass having been treated with more concern than its owner, as the dead cannot be embarrassed. However, thanks to the fact that even your ass talked to you and criticised you, this has saved your life as I did not want you to be considered as inferior to your beasts. ואותה החייתי, “but I allowed her to remain alive.” From this wording it appears that Bileam’s two man servants had been killed by the angel as they have not been mentioned anymore.
And Balaam said to the angel of Hashem: "I have sinned; for I knew not that you stood in the way against me; now therefore, if it displease you, I will get me back."
verse value 4383 — יְהֹוָה֙ = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 18 words, 72 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָה֙) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "because" (כִּ֚י, 2 letters) and the longest is "to·the·angel·of" (אֶל־מַלְאַ֤ךְ, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 142: Balaam, standing. 4 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "to·the·angel·of" (אֶל־מַלְאַ֤ךְ), "I·erred" (חָטָ֔אתִי), "if·it·is·displeasing" (אִם־רַ֥ע). The root כי appears 2 times in this verse. 17 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "and·he·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "not" (root לא, 129x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'in·the·way', dividing the verse into phrases of 13 and 5 words.
Onkelos
Bilaam said to the angel of Hashem: I have sinned, for I did not know that you were stationed against me on the road. Now, if it is displeasing in your eyes, I will turn back.
Rashi
כי לא ידעתי FOR I KNEW NOT — This statement, too, (cf. v. 29), was a disgrace for him, for in spite of himself he had to admit it — because he used to boast that he knew the will of of the Most High (24:16) and now his own mouth bore testimony: “I knew not” (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 10). אם רע בעיניך אשובה לי IF IT BE EVIL IN THINE EYES, I WILL RETURN — To set himself in opposition to the Omnipresent was the purpose of this reply. He said, in effect, “He Himself commanded me to go, and you, angel, annul His words. He is accustomed to this — that He says something and an angel recalls it. He said to Abraham, (Genesis 22:2) Take now thy son, etc.’ and by an angel annulled His words. I, too: "If it be evil in thine eyes, then I must return” (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 10).
Or HaChaim
ויאמר בלעם…חטאתי, Bileam said…"I have sinned, etc." The word "I have sinned" referred to the angel having hinted that he had sinned by his having set out on the way. Regarding the angel's question of why he had beaten his ass, Bileam said: "I did not know." The word ועתה means that Bileam had now become a penitent. He no longer wanted to curse the Jewish people Concerrning the fact that he had set out on the way, Bileam offered that if this displeased the angel he was willing to turn back. The word לי meant that he now saw that it would be beneficial for him to go back home.
Chizkuni
חטאתי כי לא ידעתי, “I have sinned for I did not know;” the word כי here is to be understood in the sense of אשר, “in that,” i.e. Bileam explains that he had not known previously why his journey would not be successful.”
Rabbeinu Bahya
ויאמר בלעם אל מלאך ה' חטאתי, ”Bileam said to the angel of the Lord: ‘I sinned;’” our sages in Tanchuma Balak 10 state that this verse is proof that if someone confesses his guilt by saying “I have sinned,” the angel no longer has permission to touch him. כי לא ידעתי, “for I had been unaware, etc.” He, who had boasted that he was יודע מחשבות עליון, “aware of the thoughts of the Supreme One,” now had to humble himself by admitting that he did not know anything.
And the angel of Hashem said to Balaam: "Go with the men; but only the word that I shall speak to you, that you shall speak." So Balaam went with the princes of Balak.
verse value 4614 — יְהֹוָ֜ה = 26 (Hashem)
Insights
Verse structure: 16 words, 73 letters. Notable word values: "Hashem" (יְהֹוָ֜ה) = 26, the value of the divine name Hashem. The shortest word is "go!" (לֵ֚ךְ, 2 letters) and the longest is "with·the·men" (עִם־הָ֣אֲנָשִׁ֔ים, 8 letters). 2 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "with·the·men" (עִם־הָ֣אֲנָשִׁ֔ים), "but" (וְאֶ֗פֶס). The root דבר appears 3 times in this verse. 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "Hashem" (root יהוה, 389x in Numbers); "and·he·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "the·word" (root דבר, 149x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'you·shall·speak', dividing the verse into phrases of 12 and 4 words.
Onkelos
The angel of Hashem said to Bilaam: Go with the men; but only the word that I speak to you — that shall you speak. Bilaam went with the princes of Balak.
Rashi
לך עם האנשים GO WITH THE MEN — On that road which a man is resolved to go, he is allowed to go (Makkot 10b). לך עם האנשים GO WITH THE MEN — for thy lot is with them, for in the end you will perish from the world. ואפס BUT — in spite of yourself, את הדבר אשר אדבר וגו׳ THE WORD THAT I SHALL SPEAK [TO THEE, THAT THOU SHALT SPEAK]. עם שרי בלק [SO BALAAM WENT] WITH THE PRINCES OF BALAK — he was glad to curse them, even as they were (see Rashi v. 21) (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 10).
Ramban
GO WITH THE MEN; BUT ONLY THE WORD THAT I SHALL SPEAK UNTO THEE, THAT THOU SHALT SPEAK. It is possible that He means to say: “Go with the men; but only the word that I shall speak unto thee, that thou shalt speak, and you should inform them [of this limitation of your powers].” Or it may mean that after Balaam had confessed [his evil intention, and said]: if it displease thee, I will get me back, He said to him, “Go with them, for I have forgiven you your sin, but only [on condition] that you remember My warning which I have given you [only to speak that which I tell you to say].” He had to say this [again] to him, in order that Balaam should not think that He was telling him: “Go with them to do what they have asked you to do.” It is also possible that since he who went [on the journey, i.e., Balaam] wanted to curse the people and did not want to bless them under any circumstances, therefore G-d warns him on every occasion that He speaks to him. It is for this reason that Balaam informed Balak at the very start of his speaking to him, [saying]: Lo, I am ‘come’ unto thee, [meaning to say that] “I have only been permitted to come, but as far as [cursing] the people [of Israel] is concerned, have I now any power at all to speak any thing in accordance with your wish? The word that G-d putteth in my mouth, that shall I speak — whether it be a curse or a blessing. Decide therefore if you [Balak] want me to speak about them [despite this risk], and if you do not want it, I will already now get me back.”
Ibn Ezra
"With the men" — these men. "But" (efes) — like raq, "only"; similarly, "efes, for there shall not be a needy person among you" (Deut. 15:4) and "efes, for the people is strong" (Num. 13:28).
Sforno
לך עם האנשים, do not go following your own agenda, but go with them as if you are there only at their request, so that they will not kill you for reneging. ואך את הדבר, In spite of all that has transpired I am not afraid that you will actually act against My interest as the fact is that you will not be able to do anything other than what I will command you.
Or HaChaim
ויאמר מלאך…לך עם האנשים, The angel said: "go with the men, etc." Why did the angel say: "with the men?" Our sages in Bamidbar Rabbah 20,15 say that the angel told him that the die had been cast, that from now on Bileam belonged to the same team as these men, and that ultimately he would be deprived of any future in the world to come. I believe that this is pure homiletics; we need to understand the plain meaning of the angel's words. We need to understand further why the angel did not tell Bileam to go home as the latter had offered to do and as we would have expected. However, the angel wanted to explain to Bileam the reason he agreed that Bileam continue to travel with the emissaries. It all had to do with what these emissaries would think if Bileam suddenly went home. They would conclude that G'd was afraid of what Bileam would be able to do once he was in Moav and that on that account G'd had forbidden him to come along. Allowing the emissaries of Balak to arrive at such a conclusion would be a desecration of the name of G'd, i.e. would lower G'd's image in their estimation as I have already explained on the words הולך הוא. Perhaps the angel's instructions have to be understood thus: "go with them and do not isolate yourself in solitude." In this way Bileam would not have an opportunity to prepare himself to contravene G'd's instructions by consulting his charms. Bileam complied, as we know from the words וילך בלעם עם שרי בלק, "Bileam went together with the ministers of Balak." ואפס את הדבר…אותו תדבר. "However, the word which I put in your mouth, it you shall utter!" Here the angel made a new condition, something that G'd had not told Bileam outright in his dream. When G'd had spoken to Bileam previously (verse 20) He had said: "the word I shall tell you that is what you shall do!" G'd's wording at that time had allowed Bileam to plot how to get around what G'd had obviously had in mind. His own strength lay both in deed and in speech. The deeds would be the practice of magic. He also exercised his power by means of his evil eye. Zohar volume 3 page 202 draws attention to this in connection with 24,2: "Bileam raised his eyes and saw Israel, etc." This is a hint that Bileam tried to employ his evil eye against the Jewish people at that moment but that G'd covered the Israelites with His protective "shadow" so that Bileam could no longer see them. When the Torah said in 24,2 ותהי עליו רוח השם, the subject is the Jewish people, not Bileam. G'd protected Israel against the evil eye (Zohar volume 3, page 211.) The power Bileam exercised by mouth was his ability to curse. When G'd had said to him during the night: "it you shall do," He had meant to forbid him also to speak against the Jewish people if such words as he would say would result in deeds. Bileam had not understood this correctly as his mind was bent on finding a loophole in G'd's instructions. This is why at this point the angel told him unmistakably that he must not even utter a wor...
Rabbeinu Bahya
אותו תדבר, “it you shall say.” Previously (verse 20) G’d had said to him in the dream: “it you shall do.” Clearly, the angel warned Bileam specifically about what to say. G’d’s permission for Bileam to accompany the delegation extended precisely to that, not one iota more.
Tur HaArokh
לך עם האנשים אפס את הדבר, “go with the men, but only, etc.” According to Nachmanides it is quite possible that the meaning of the line is: “go with the men but inform them that you may only speak what I allow you to say.” Alternatively, after Bileam had confessed his sin and said to the angel that he would return home if it displeased the angel that he would continue on this mission, the angel meant “go with them for I have forgiven your sin, but be careful not to say anything other than what I shall tell you to say.” The angel had to add this latter remark so that Bileam would not have an excuse to think that he had now become a free agent. This is why Bileam informed Balak of this condition he was subject to as soon as he met him. הנה באתי אליך, “here I have come to you;” with these words, unnecessary words, Blieam meant to convey that although he had followed the invitation of Balak to come to him, this, and only this, is what he could do. He could not curse the Jewish people.
Daat Zkenim
ואפס את הדבר, “however, only the word, etc.;” (Bileam is warned that he will have to utter words against his will to do so). If these words refer to an earlier part of this chapter, as according to a different commentator, then we must assume that the angel had been sent as a warning, in order to frighten him.
And when Balak heard that Balaam was come, he went out to meet him to Ir-moab, which is on the border of Arnon, which is in the utmost part of the border.
verse value 3624
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 60 letters. The shortest word is "that" (כִּ֣י, 2 letters) and the longest is "to·meet·him" (לִקְרָאת֜וֹ, 6 letters). Words sharing gematria 501: which, which. The root אשר appears 2 times in this verse. 13 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "which" (root אשר, 223x in Numbers); "was·coming" (root בוא, 89x in Numbers); "that" (root כי, 79x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'Balaam', dividing the verse into phrases of 5 and 10 words.
Onkelos
Balak heard that Bilaam had come, and he went out to meet him at the city of Moab, which is on the border of the Arnon, at the edge of the border.
Rashi
וישמע בלק AND BALAK HEARD [THAT BALAAM WAS COMING] — He sent messengers to announce this to him. אל עיר מואב [AND HE WENT TOWARDS HIM] UNTO THE CITY OF MOAB — to his metropolis, the most important city he had, as much as to say: See what these Israelites wish to exterminate (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 10).
Sforno
ויצא לקראתו, in order to honour him, for Balak knew that Bileam was a very vain person, as our sages have made clear in Avot 5,18.
Or HaChaim
ויצא לקראתו אל עיר מואב, He came to welcome him to the city of Moav. Why did the Torah have to bother to tell us where the meeting between Bileam and Balak took place? Perhaps the Torah wanted to show us that Balak did not hold Bileam in high esteem. Although Balak had heard that Bileam was on his way, he did not leave his city to prepare a welcome such as one does for highly placed visitors. He was content to await Bileam's arrival before welcoming him. ויצא לקראתו אל עיר מואב אשר על גבול ארנון אשר בקצה הגבול. Why all these details about the location of the border? Perhaps the Torah wanted to tell us that if Balak did trouble himself to go to the border of Moav which was close to his capital, he did not do so in order to honour Bileam but that he had a different reason. Bamidbar Rabbah 20,16 explains that the reason Balak went to this border was to tell Bileam that this border had been established already in times of Noach [not literally speaking as Moav was not founded till after Abraham's time. Ed.] He wanted to show Bileam how both Og and Sichon had been guilty of violating these longstanding borders. At any rate, if not for these political considerations, Balak would not have troubled himself to come out towards Bileam even this little distance.
And Balak said to Balaam: "Did I not earnestly send to you to call you? why did you not come to me? am I not able indeed to promote you to honor?"
verse value 2998 — הֲלֹא֩ = 36 (double-Chai)
Insights
Verse structure: 15 words, 62 letters. Notable word values: "did·not" (הֲלֹא֩) = 36, double chai. The shortest word is "not" (לֹ֥א, 2 letters) and the longest is "to·Balaam" (אֶל־בִּלְעָ֗ם, 6 letters). 5 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "I·sent" (שָׁלַ֤חְתִּי), "to·invite·you" (לִקְרֹא־לָ֔ךְ), "did·you·not·come" (לֹא־הָלַ֖כְתָּ). The root לא appears 2 times in this verse. 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·he·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "did·not" (root לא, 129x in Numbers); "to·you" (root אל, 85x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'to·me', dividing the verse into phrases of 11 and 4 words.
Onkelos
Balak said to Bilaam: Did I not send repeatedly to summon you? Why did you not come to me? Did you truly think that I am not able to honor you?
Rashi
האמנם לא אוכל כבדך AM I NOT ABLE INDEED TO HONOUR YOU — He prophesied unwittingly that he (Balaam) would eventually leave him in disgrace (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 10).
Ibn Ezra
"Why did you not come to me?" — [haloch] is like ba'ta, "you came" — owing to the word eilai ["to me"] [which implies direction toward]. Similarly with the word va-yasar, as I have explained it.
And Balaam said to Balak: "Lo, I am come to you; have I now any power at all to speak anything? the word that God puts in my mouth, that shall I speak."
verse value 3855 — אֱלֹהִ֛ים = 86 (Elohim)
Insights
Verse structure: 17 words, 70 letters. Notable word values: "God" (אֱלֹהִ֛ים) = 86, equal to Elohim. The shortest word is "now" (עַתָּ֕ה, 3 letters) and the longest is "behold·I·have·come" (הִֽנֵּה־בָ֙אתִי֙, 7 letters). Words sharing gematria 92: anything, in·my·mouth. 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "behold·I·have·come" (הִֽנֵּה־בָ֙אתִי֙), "indeed·can" (הֲיָכֹ֥ל), "anything" (מְא֑וּמָה). The root דבר appears 3 times in this verse. 15 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·he·said" (root אמר, 246x in Numbers); "that" (root אשר, 223x in Numbers); "to·speak" (root דבר, 149x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'anything', dividing the verse into phrases of 10 and 7 words.
Onkelos
Bilaam said to Balak: Behold, I have come to you; but can I say anything at all? The word that Hashem places in my mouth — that shall I speak.
Sforno
הנה באתי אליך, even though I would have come to you at the time as you requested, what good would it have done you? Even now the situation is the same. ?היכול אוכל דבר מאומה; I am totally unable to speak in the manner normal people speak when they express their own will. הדבר אשר ישים אלוקים בפי אותו אדבר, similar to Samuel II 23,2 where David said that the spirit of the Lord spoke through him, i.e. רוח ה' דיבר בי. When uttering words in this fashion I am truly not the speaker.
Or HaChaim
עתה היכול אוכל דבר מאומה? "Am I now able to say anything?" The reason the Torah quoted Bileam as saying עתה, "now," was to show us that this was his reaction to what the angel had told him when he had been expressly forbidden to be anything but G'd's mouthpiece. When Bileam repeated the words היכול אוכל he revealed the depth of his wickedness as he told Balak that he had tried 2 different ways to speak evil, but that G'd had blocked him in both instances. If only he had retained his freedom of action he would surely have cursed the Jewish people.
Tur HaArokh
היכול אוכל דבר מאומה, ”am I empowered to say anything?” He referred to anything that Balak wanted him to say. הדבר אשר ישים ה' בפי אותו אדבר, ”whatever words Hashem will put in my mouth are the ones that I will utter.” He meant that it did not matter whether these words would be a curse or a blessing, as he was there only in his capacity as Hashem’s mouthpiece.
And Balaam went with Balak, and they came to Kiriath-huzoth.
verse value 1689
Insights
Verse structure: 6 words, 26 letters. The shortest word is "and·he·went" (וַיֵּ֥לֶךְ, 4 letters) and the longest is "with·Balak" (עִם־בָּלָ֑ק, 5 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "with·Balak" (עִם־בָּלָ֑ק), "Kiriath-" (קִרְיַ֥ת), "huzoth" (חֻצֽוֹת). 6 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·they·came" (root בוא, 89x in Numbers); "Balaam" (root בלעם, 53x in Numbers); "and·he·went" (root הלך, 45x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'with·Balak', dividing the verse into phrases of 3 and 3 words. Full calculation: וַיֵּ֥לֶךְ [and·he·went] (66) + בִּלְעָ֖ם [Balaam] (142) + עִם־בָּלָ֑ק [with·Balak] (242) + וַיָּבֹ֖אוּ [and·they·came] (25) + קִרְיַ֥ת [Kiriath-] (710) + חֻצֽוֹת [huzoth] (504) = 1689.
Onkelos
Bilaam went with Balak and they came to the city of his settlements.
Rashi
קרית חצות — a city (קריה) full of streets (חצות), — men and women and children thronging the streets, as much as to say: Look and have pity that these should not be exterminated (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 11).
Ibn Ezra
"Kiryat Hutzot" — the name of a province.
Or HaChaim
וילך בלעם, Bileam went, etc. The fact that the Torah does not describe Bileam and Balak as walking together in the plural, i.e. וילכו, shows that Balak did not even show his guest the honour of letting him precede him. Balak marched ahead and Bileam caught up with him, or something similar. It is even possible that in this instance the word עמו means that he was forced to walk behind.
Targum Yonatan
And Bileam went with Balak, and they came to a city surrounded with walls, to the streets of the great city, the city of Sihon, which is Berosha.
And Balak sacrificed oxen and sheep, and sent to Balaam, and to the princes that were with him.
verse value 2634
Insights
Verse structure: 9 words, 37 letters. The shortest word is "Balak" (בָּלָ֖ק, 3 letters) and the longest is "and·to·the·dignitaries" (וְלַשָּׂרִ֖ים, 6 letters). 3 words in this verse appear nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·he·sacrificed" (וַיִּזְבַּ֥ח), "and·sheep" (וָצֹ֑אן), "and·to·the·dignitaries" (וְלַשָּׂרִ֖ים). 9 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "who" (root אשר, 223x in Numbers); "to·Balaam" (root בלעם, 53x in Numbers); "oxen" (root בקר, 43x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'and·sheep', dividing the verse into phrases of 4 and 5 words. Full calculation: וַיִּזְבַּ֥ח [and·he·sacrificed] (33) + בָּלָ֖ק [Balak] (132) + בָּקָ֣ר [oxen] (302) + וָצֹ֑אן [and·sheep] (147) + וַיְשַׁלַּ֣ח [and·he·sent] (354) + לְבִלְעָ֔ם [to·Balaam] (172) + וְלַשָּׂרִ֖ים [and·to·the·dignitaries] (586) + אֲשֶׁ֥ר [who] (501) + אִתּֽוֹ [with·him] (407) = 2634.
Onkelos
Balak slaughtered cattle and sheep and sent to Bilaam and to the princes who were with him.
Rashi
בקר וצאן THE HERD AND FLOCK — a small matter (one ox and one sheep, nothing in comparison with what he had promised him) (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 11).
Sforno
וישלח לבלעם, as a gift offering in addition to his regular meal, in order to satisfy Bileam’s quest for honour.
Or HaChaim
ויזבח בלק, Balak slaughtered, etc. The Torah reveals another aspect of the low esteem Balak held Bileam in that he did not even serve him a meal before proceeding with the task for which he had been commissioned. It is possible that the Torah writes ולשרים אשר אתו, to indicate that Balak did not even send enough meat for Bileam's lads, only for the ministers of his entourage. All of this shows how little respect Balak displayed vis-a-vis Bileam. The reason for this apparent display of being a miser may have been either that Balak was afraid that Bileam would take everything for himself without sharing with the ministers as Bileam enjoyed a reputation of being avaricious. This is why Balak gave specific instructions that what he sent over was not to be Bileam's alone but was also intended for the ministers who accompanied him. This may be the reason why our sages in Bamidbar Rabbah 20,16 claim that when Bileam saw how little meat Balak had allocated to him he threatened to send a curse against Balak's possessions on the morrow. As a reaction to this display of being cheap on the part of Balak, Bileam demanded on the morrow that Balak build an altar on which he would have to slaughter seven bulls and seven rams (23,1).
And it came to pass in the morning that Balak took Balaam, and brought him up into Bamoth-baal, and he saw from there the nearest part of the people.
verse value 2718
Insights
Verse structure: 12 words, 47 letters. Verse gematria: 2718 is divisible by 18, the value of chai ('life'). The shortest word is "Balak" (בָּלָק֙, 3 letters) and the longest is "Balaam" (אֶת־בִּלְעָ֔ם, 6 letters). 1 word in this verse appears nowhere else in Numbers. Unique to this verse in Numbers (hapax): "and·he·brought·him·up" (וַֽיַּעֲלֵ֖הוּ). 12 unique roots are used. Frequent roots: "and·it·was" (root היה, 180x in Numbers); "and·he·brought·him·up" (root עלה, 96x in Numbers); "Bamoth-" (root מות, 87x in Numbers). The etnachta (major mid-verse pause) falls on 'baal', dividing the verse into phrases of 8 and 4 words. Full calculation: וַיְהִ֣י [and·it·was] (31) + בַבֹּ֔קֶר [in·the·morning] (304) + וַיִּקַּ֤ח [and·he·took] (124) + בָּלָק֙ [Balak] (132) + אֶת־בִּלְעָ֔ם [Balaam] (543) + וַֽיַּעֲלֵ֖הוּ [and·he·brought·him·up] (127) + בָּמ֣וֹת [Bamoth-] (448) + בָּ֑עַל [baal] (102) + וַיַּ֥רְא [and·he·saw] (217) + מִשָּׁ֖ם [from·there] (380) + קְצֵ֥ה [the·edge·of] (195) + הָעָֽם [the·people] (115) = 2718.
Onkelos
In the morning Balak took Bilaam and brought him up to the high place of his deity, and from there he saw the nearest part of the people.
Rashi
במות בעל BAMOTH-BAAL — Understand this as the Targum does: to the heights of his god (more lit., of that which he reverenced); Baal is the name of a god.
Ramban
[AND IT CAME TO PASS IN THE MORNING AND BALAK TOOK BALAAM] AND BROUGHT HIM UP INTO BAMOTH-BAAL, AND HE SAW FROM THENCE THE UTMOST PART OF THE PEOPLE. Balak took him up to a [high] place from which he could see them [the people of Israel], in order that he could concentrate his curse upon them, and his mind would not separate itself from them, for it is one of the attributes of the soul’s powers that it attaches itself at the time of seeing a certain object as is known from that which the Sages tell [of Rabbi Yochanan, that he said to his disciples]: “‘Lift up my eye-lids for me, because I want to see [this scholar].’ They [accordingly] lifted up his eye-lids. He set his eyes upon him, and [as a result] that person died.”Now Scripture relates that Balaam did not see the whole camp [of Israel] because they were encamped in four standards [positioned in all] four directions of the heaven. On the second occasion Balak said to him, thou shalt see but the utmost part of them, and shalt not see them all, meaning: “this time also you will not [be able to] see them all, if that is what prevents you from cursing them, but [nonetheless] curse me them from thence if you can, for I do not have any place from where I can show you all of them.” Balak thought that perhaps there was a standard in one of the sections [of the camp of the Israelites] consisting of righteous and good people whom it pleased not the Eternal to crush, [and therefore Balak took Balaam to other places from which Balaam could see other parts of the camp, in order to curse them effectively].It is also possible to explain that on the first occasion [referred to in this verse] Balaam did see the whole camp, for Bamoth-baal is a high place, and from there both of them [Balak and Balaam] saw part of the people, and built the altars there; then Balaam ascended to the peak of the hill on that mountain, and saw the whole people, this being the meaning of [the expression] and he [Balaam] went ‘shephi,’ which means he went to “the height” thereof, as Rabbi Abraham ibn Ezra has explained.
Ibn Ezra
"Bamot-Baal" — that is, the high places of Baal of the Arnon. "And from there he saw the end of the people" — for they were encamped toward the four directions of heaven.
Sforno
וירא משם קצה העם, in order to harm them by focusing his evil eye on them. Compare kings II 2,24 ויפן אחריו ויראם ויקללם, “He turned around and cursed them in the name of the Lord.” (the prophet Elisha cursed the lads who had insulted him) Deuteronomy 34,1 is an example of the very reverse, i.e. bestowing a blessing. Moses looked at the people with a benevolent eye, i.e. he blessed them.
Or HaChaim
ויהי בבקר ויקח בלק…וירא משם קצה העם. On the following morning Balak took Bileam…and he saw a small part of the people. The word ויהי, as usual, also connotes something sad. The word may refer to the disagreement between Bileam and Balak over the measly portion of meat the latter had sent over on the previous day. The words ויקח בלק accordingly would refer to Balak trying to assuage Bileam's hurt feelings on the subject. Another meaning of these words may be a reference to Bileam's partial lameness. As a rule people suffering from such lameness have difficulty in walking in the morning and especially if they have to climb hills. The word ויהי may hint at the discomfort Bileam experienced on that morning when he had to undertake physical exertions which were most difficult for him. Balak assisted him, and this may be the meaning of the words ויקח בלק את בלעם Balak helped Bileam climb the במות, the hills. The word בבקר, "in the morning," may also indicate that Balak did not sleep well during the preceding night. We have a rule that kings do not normally rise till 3 hours after daybreak (Berachot 9). In this instance, Balak broke the rule and rose much earlier than usual. Still another reason why the Torah mentioned the detail בבקר, may be connected with what we learned in A vodah Zarah 4. The Talmud questions what precise time is called רתח, a moment when G'd's anger is hot and Abbaye says it is three hours after daybreak. [In order to understand the significance of this let me quote from the text of the Talmud prior to this statement. The Talmud discusses Bileam's ability to divine what G'd thinks about and asks how this is possible in view of Bileam's demonstrated inability to know even what his ass was thinking about. After explaining that there was a special reason why on that day Bileam did not know what went on in his ass's mind, the Talmud even reconstructs the dialogue carried on between Bileam and his ass in addition to that reported in the Torah. At any rate, it is presumed that he was an expert at divining the precise moment when G'd is angry, something important because G'd's anger is so brief. Ed.] When the Torah speaks about בבקר, it hints that Balak and Bileam picked that moment in time when G'd might be angry at His world and a curse might be effective. Bamidbar Rabbah 20,18 also claims that the במות בעל mentioned in our verse refer to the cult of the בעל פעור and that Bileam foresaw that the Israelites would die there [as they did in due course as a result of Bileam's advice to Balak to have the Israelites seduced. Ed.] It is well known that this cult consisted of the worshiper excreting before that idol. Sanhedrin 64 describes what happened in these words: "how did one serve this particular deity? One ate beets and drank beer and then excreted and urinated in front of the idol." In other words, the very worship consisted in the worshiper behaving in the most primitive and revolting fashion. In view of this, Balak wanted to take...
Chizkuni
ויעלהו במות בעל, “he brought him up to the heights of Baal;” the word בעל as a description of a plain, also occurs in Numbers 21,28: when it describes a similar plain in the region of the river Arnon. Our author draws the reader’s attention to what he had written on that verse. It also occurs in this sense in Joshua 11,17 בעל גד.
Rabbeinu Bahya
במות בעל, “the heights of Baal.” Bileam (Balak) built a total of 21 altars in three different locations, seven in each. He built the first seven altars in the place described as במות בעל, the next seven in a place known as שדה צופים ראש הפסגה, “the field of the lookouts, the top of the height” (verse 14), whereas he built the last seven altars at ראש הפעור, “the summit of the height” which looks down on the face of ישימון (23,28). On each of these altars he sacrificed a bull and a ram, i.e. a total of 42 burnt-offerings. If verse 40 speaks of בקר וצאן, cattle and flocks, the meaning is that he offered only one of each species (Rashi). Our author wonders what prompted Rashi to interpret the words בקר וצאן in this fashion as elsewhere this is always a reference to something more comprehensive. His reason may have been that these animals which were meat-offerings intended for the consumption of the entourage of Balak as well as for Bileam should be kept to a minimum so as not to delay the principal part of the mission, i.e. to find a place from where G’d might let Bileam curse the Jewish people. The normal meaning of the expression בקר וצאן or צאן ובקר certainly does not imply a minimal number of specimens of each. וירא משם את קצה העם, “He could see from there a portion of the people.” He could not see all of them. The reason was that their encampment extended in all four directions of the globe. Balak was very eager to lead Bileam to heights from which he could see them and focus his eye on them as he believed Bileam’s power to curse to repose in his evil eye. The eye, or the manner in which it sees, reflects the inner soul. Our sages in Baba Kama 117 comment on this: (in connection with a story involving Rabbi Yochanan and Rabbi Kahane where a stare from Rabbi Yochanan who mistakenly thought that Rabbi Kahane had made fun of him killed Rabbi Kahane). Rabbi Yochanan had used his eyes as conveying a curse. The reason that such stares from great Torah scholars can have such lethal effect is that these scholars cannot stand being deflected from thoughts of Torah even momentarily. When they encounter persons who cause them to be deflected from Torah thoughts they resent this strongly and when they look at the person causing this their look reflects their anger. They view the person having caused them to become deflected from pure Torah thoughts as if guilty of heresy, deserving to be cursed. This may be the meaning of Kohelet 10,9 ”He who splits logs, עצים, will be endangered by them.” If someone becomes the cause of the עץ החיים, i.e. Torah, to be “split,” to be interrupted, he endangers his life by doing so. It is true, of course, that we find many times that the words or stares of great Torah scholars, pious individuals, do not appear to have any harmful effects at all; the matter is something which is subject to the individual. The makeup of the personality of the individual scholar determines if his stare can be potentially lethal. One requires this particular gift in addition to great Torah knowledge in order for one’s stare prompted by one’s anger to have such harmful effects as reported in the Talmud of certain outstanding personalities.
Kli Yakar
And he saw from there the edge [ketzeh] of the people. Because the edges are more susceptible to damage, as it is said regarding the complainers, and it consumed at the edge of the people (Numbers 11:1). This could refer to the first edge, meaning the leaders [katzinei] of the people, or the furthest edge, meaning those who are cast off [muktzim] among the people. For from the side that it was those who are cast off, they would deserve an actual curse, and if from the side that it was the important leaders, it would be easy to introduce the evil eye among them because of their elevated status. This was the approach that Balaam chose for himself — that if he could not find a way to curse them, he would cast the evil eye upon them. And you, the reader, please lift your eyes and see the differences that we find in three places, because initially it says and he saw from there the edge of the people, and afterwards it says only its edge shall you see, but all of it you shall not see, which implies that in the first reference to the edge he saw all of them through seeing the edge. And in the third instance it says and he saw Israel dwelling according to its tribes, meaning he actually saw all of them. The explanation of this matter is that initially Balaam looked at the roots of Israel, meaning their source and origin, to see if he could find in it a sin through which the curse would apply also to the branches, because with the nullification of the root the branches would also fall. This is the seeing of the edge that includes all of them, because the fathers include the children. And after he searched and did not find, he went back to examine the branches to see if he could find sin in the descendants, and this is the edge that all of it would not be seen, because the fathers are not included in the children. And after he did not see iniquity neither in the fathers nor in the descendants, he said, “Now they are all in the peak of perfection.” If so, I will cast the evil eye on them, which has the most effect on something that is perfect from all sides and has no flaws at all, as it is concluded in the Tanchuma (Balak 15) and brought in the Yalkut on the verse, He who blesses his friend with a loud voice early in the morning, it will be considered a curse to him (Proverbs 27:14), referring to Balaam who sought to cast the evil eye on Israel through his blessings. And in this way I have seen fit to explain all three places, and this is their order. And he brought him up to Bamoth-Baal, and from there he saw the outskirts of the people. This is the first investigation where he looked into the root of the nation, and he searched and found that at first our forefathers were idol worshippers, as it is written: Your ancestors lived beyond the Euphrates from ancient times, Terah, the father of Abraham and the father of Nahor, and they worshiped other gods (Joshua 24:2). That is, bamot [the high places of] Baal, because they went after the Baals, as other masters ruled over them besides the Blessed One. From there he saw the edge of the people — the root is the first edge, and it is considered as the whole, for all the children branch out from the root. And when the root deserves to be cursed, the curse will certainly fall also upon the heads of the branches, because with idolatry God visits the iniquity of the fathers upon the children. The prophecy came to Balaam because both Balak and Balaam had fallen into a great error, for the original ancestor of the nation is not from Aram, since Terah was considered as dead while still alive, to the extent that Abraham was exempt from honoring his father and mother, which proves that he [Terah] is not considered the founding ancestor of this nation. Rather, the beginning of this nation is from the top of the rocks, which is Abraham. And this is what it means when it says he took up his parable and said, “From Aram, Balak has led me” — for he [Balak] wanted to make Terah, who lived in Aram-naharaim, the head of this nation, from the mountains of the east, meaning from Terah who came before Abraham and was known to worship idols, which places him under the curse Cursed be the man who makes a carved or molten image, etc. (Deuteronomy 27:15). Therefore he requested come curse Jacob for me, because surely the curse would take effect on the lesser ones as indicated by the name Jacob [which is derived from ekev, [heel]], and come, denounce Israel, because through this there would be indignation and anger even toward the good ones among them who are alluded to by the name Israel, as they would witness the destruction of their birthplace.
Tur HaArokh
ויעלהו במות בעל וירא משם קצה העם, “he brought him up to the heights of Baal, and from there he could view the edge of the people.” Balak had brought him to an elevated piece of land from where it was possible to see some of the people of Israel. The Torah makes a point of telling us that Bileam could not see the whole people, seeing that the pattern in which they were encamped spread out in the four directions of the globe. This made it impossible to see more than some of them at one time. It was commonly believed that for a curse or a blessing to be effective, there had to be at least visual contact between the parties concerned. On the second occasion Balak informed Bileam in advance that he would only be able to see part of the people. Nonetheless he asked Bileam to at least curse the part of the people who were within his field of vision (23,13) He made it plain that he was unable to provide Bileam with a site from which he could see the entire encampment of the Israelites in all directions. Balak thought that possibly among the various sections of the people there could be a group of righteous people whom G’d did not want to be harmed in any way.
Daat Zkenim
וירא משם קצה העם, “from that point he was able to see part of the people.” Our author understands these words as meaning that he saw the entire nation from one end (קצה) of the camp to the other.
Onkelos
Chizkuni
Rashbam