HHMI Newsgroup Archives
From: Ephraim Frank (shevet@netvision.net.il)
To: heb_roots_chr@hebroots.org
Subject: Parashat Balak
Hebrew Insights into Parashat Balak - Numbers: 22 - 25: 9
Last week Israel's exploits and adventures (including the partially
successful surprise attack of the Canaanite King of Arad, who defeated
Israel) terminated with victory over the Emorites, which alerts Balak,
King of Mo'av (Moab). He therefore solicits the services of Bil'am
(Balaam) son of Be'or the Midianite sorcerer, who with 'supernatural'
abilities is to put a curse on the people that constitutes so great of
a threat to the Moabite monarch. "Now shall this company lick up all
that are round about us, as the ox licks up the grass of the field...
there is a people come out from Egypt: behold, they cover the face of
the earth, and they abide over against me... for they are too mighty
for me" (22:3 - 5), says Balak. In other words, 'this numerous
multitude is liable to devour my land and my people, just like a
hungry ox would green grass in a field. There are so many of them,
that they cover every visible part of the land'. The "face of the
earth", or the 'visible part' is rendered here as "the eye of the
earth". The imagery of the "eye" (which has many and varied uses), in
this case is utilized not for that which sees, but rather for that
which is seen. Since the very theme of the Parasha centers around
Bil'am's 'visions', it only stands to reason that sight and eyes are
mentioned frequently. Thus, in chapter 24 we read that Bil'am "lifted
his eyes"... and said about himself: "Balaam the son of Beor has said,
and the man whose eyes are open has said the words of God, which saw
the vision of the Almighty, falling, with uncovered eyes" (literal
translation, vv. 3,4,16). Interestingly, the term for "he whose eyes
are open", is "sh'tum ey'na'yim (=eyes)". With a slight modification
"shatum" becomes "satum", making it "that which is covered"
or "not
revealed" (e.g. Ez. 28:3). Truly, Bil'am's assurance about his
inherent ability to 'see' is more than questionable. This is
demonstrated very graphically in the episode with the she-ass, when it
was only after YHVH "uncovered the eyes of Bila'm" (22:31) that the
latter was able to see what his animal noticed without any distraction
and help.
The meaning of the name Bil'am, just like Par'oh's (ref. Parashat
Miketz, Gen. 41 - 43), happens to be appropriate and relevant to its
bearer, as it contains the letters that make up "bela" (b.l.a, bet,
lamed, ayin), which is to "swallow or swallow down". "Frequently this
word is used as a symbol of destruction and ruin: Lam. 2:2, 5:8; Isa.
3:12; 49:19 etc."1 In Psalms 52:4 "devouring words", are "divery
bela". Balak's intention was just that. Bil'am's words were to become
a source of destruction for Israel. The Theological Wordbook Book of
the Old Testament goes on to say that "bela" and "am" [making up the
name "Bil' am"] mean "destruction of a people" which accords with his
reputation as a charmer and conjurer." Albright believes that its
origin is from the Amorite Yabil'ammu, meaning, "the (divine) uncle
brings". 2
"Come now therefore, I pray, curse ["ara"] me this people... for I
know that he whom you bless is blessed and he whom you curse is
cursed" (22: 6), is the essence of Balak's assignment for Bil'am. When
the latter quotes the former (in 22: 11), he uses "kava" for "curse".
Hebrew is replete with verbs having to do with "cursing". The most
common is "kalel" (k.l.l, kof, lamed, lamed) which stems from "kal"
meaning "light" and "easy", and by implication "of no
esteem", with
its primal meaning being therefore, by default, "no blessing". However
a.r.r (alef, resh, resh) and k.v.v (kof, vet, vet) that are used in
this narrative, are more "dynamic". "On the basis of Akkadian araru,
"arar" is to "snare, or bind" and the noun irritu is "noose, or
sling". Brichto, following Speiser, advances the interpretation that
the Hebrew "arar" means "to bind (with a spell), hem in with
obstacles, render powerless to resist." Thus the original curse in
B'resheet (Genesis 3:17 "cursed are you above all cattle" and "cursed
is the ground for your sake", means "you are banned/anathematized from
all the other animals" and "condemned be the soil on your account".
"Kavav connotes the act of uttering a formula designed to undo its
object. The most frequent use of this root relates to the incident
involving Balaam and Balak. Certainly the "magical" belief and intent
of Balak is prominent here". 3 Both a.r.r and k.v.v are used
throughout the Parasha, denoting that the issue at stake is steeped in
witchcraft. Several other terms found here verify that fact. In 22:7
the elders of Mo'av and Midian come with "divinations - "k'samim" - in
their hands". Again, in 23:23 we read the words that YHVH puts in
Bila'ms' mouth: "There is no enchantment in Ya'acov and no divination
- "kesem" - in Israel." And thusly "it shall be said to Ya'acov and to
Israel what YHVH has wrought" (literal translation, italics added),
and not that which the diviners and sorcerers have. Therefore "when
Balaam saw that it pleased YHVH to bless Israel, he went not, as at
other times, to seek for enchantments ["n'cha'shim"], but he set his
face toward the wilderness" (24:1).
An interesting encounter forms a prelude to Bil'am's oracles about
Israel. As he is about to walk with Balak's messengers, "the angel -
"mal'ach" - of YHVH stood in the way as an adversary - "(le)satan" -
against him... with his sword drawn in his hand (22:22,32).
Juxtaposing "mal'ach" with "satan", in this particular context, may
allude to YHVH's supremacy over all powers, and to the control He
exerts over them to the point of even using them for His own purposes.
However, the would-be prophet, unlike his she-ass, is unaware of
YHVH's messenger. When the animal is forced to divert from the path
and to put its master in what appears - to him - as a compromising
situation, Bil'am, losing his temper, strikes the ass with his staff
(22:27). What ensues is the most improbable dialog between a man and
his donkey. Thus, Bil'am not only finds himself mishandled physically,
he also has to deal with his own unjustified anger and express regret
to a vindicated beast. And as if this is not enough, when his eyes are
opened, he is the one who is seen as the blind fool who incurs a
rebuke from the angel: "And the ass saw me, and turned from me these
three times: unless she had turned from me, surely now also I would
have slain you, and saved her alive" (22:33). Bil'am forthwith admits
to being wrong, and only then is given permission to "go with the
men", while at the same time he is warned to utter only that which
YHVH will speak to him (ref. v. 35). In the dialog between Bil'am and
his she-ass, the latter justifies her conduct by asking (rhetorically)
if she had never caused her master any trouble "as a rule". "A'has'ken
his'kanti?" is the question. "Sachen" (s.ch.n, samech, chaf, noon) in
this context is "customarily or habitually". In other words, "has it
been my custom (to so treat you)?" The root s.ch.n, however, also
means, "to be of use, benefit or service", as indeed the she-ass had
been in the past, and even more so in this particular case, acting as
a tool in the hand of YHVH.
Three times in this text we encounter the phrase, "three times"
(22:28,32,33). The word for "times" here is "r'galim"
("regel"
singular). "Time", as referred to here, is "an occurrence, event, or
occasion". The much more common phrase is "pa'am", (a word we briefly
looked at in Parashat Tetzaveh, Ex. 28; 33, where we noted that it
means, among other things, "pulse or beat"). "Regel", on the other
hand, is the word for "foot". It is evident that both "pa'am" and
"regel" connote movement, which of course is an indication of the
passing of time, but also, and especially in the case of the latter
("regel"), point to a purposeful advance, such as walking. Since
walking assumes an arrival, and arrival points to a specific
destination (a place), we are led to the conclusion that in the Hebrew
mind there exists an interrelation between time and place, as we have
already observed when we examined "mo'ed" (appointed time) in Vayikra
(Leviticus 23, Parashat Emor). It was Bil'am's crushed "regel"
("foot", 22:25), which prevented him from arriving at his destination,
thus perhaps prompting the usage of "r'galim" for "times", rather than
"p'amim". Note that last week, at the end of Parashat Chu'kat's, we
met the spies that Moshe had dispatched (21:32), who were called
"m'raglim", again of the root r.g.l. And we had not yet mentioned
"ragal", meaning "slanderer" (e.g. Ps. 15:3), which brings us back to
our protagonist.
The extraordinary episode just experienced by Bil'am, proves to be part of his preparation for speaking YHVH words, couched in four powerful prophetic oracles describing Elohim's intended destiny for His people. "The three blessings are... differentiated in their relation to the time factor; the first one refers to the immediate present, to the generation of the wilderness facing him, the second to the immediate future, to the generation which would conquer the land, whilst the third concerns the distant future, to an era when wars and conquests will be no more and when the lion will lie down to rest after it has finished its task" 4 However, there is a fourth blessing, one which has not been solicited (as a curse) by Balak (24:14-19).
After the curses-turned-blessings had been uttered, the angry Moabite
King commands his appointee to flee, adding the following: "I thought
to promote you to great honor; but, lo, YHVH has kept you back from
honor" (24:11). Stubborn and blind, Balak dares to make the statement,
"YHVH has kept you back from honor"! (The word being "mah'nah", m.n.a,
mem, noon, ayin, meaning "withheld"). It is at this point that Bil'am,
as a persona-non-grata, offers to speak out what "this people [Israel]
will do to your [Balak's] people in the latter days" (24:14). What
comes next is not too pleasant to the ears of the Moabite, but at the
same time it does not incur his protest (perhaps because of the late
date ascribed to it). At the end of a very significant prophecy
pertaining to Israel and to some of its neighbors, the two men depart
silently; one "to his place" and the other "on his way" (v. 25). All
the pomp and ceremony planned by Balak have just been deflated without
as much as another word.
The story of a pagan enchanter and magician, who is commissioned by an
equally pagan king to lay a debilitating curse on YHVH's people, and
whose mouth utters some of the most profound words regarding the very
people whom he is called to curse, is rather curious and stands out in
the Torah narrative. The addition of the talking donkey episode makes
for an even more curious text. "The dialog between the man and the
ass, [as interpreted by some of the commentators] is the Torah's
scornful commentary on the imaginary powers ascribed to sorcerers, its
mockery of human gullibility, in believing in the power of the
magician to curse and subject the supernatural to his will." 5 Thus,
the story of the she-ass echoes Bil'am and his so called
wonder-working abilities. But, if an ass can talk, so can this con man
be made to speak out YHVH's words, calling to mind 1st Corinthians 2:
"I will destroy the wisdom of the wise, and will bring to nothing the
understanding of the prudent. ... God has chosen the foolish things of
the world to confound the wise... [and] the things which are mighty;
... and things which are not, to bring to nought things that are: That
no flesh should glory in his presence " (vv. 19, 27-29). In the end,
it is YHVH's sovereignty that pervades far above any and all of man's
feeble attempts at controlling life.
The last section of the Parasha actually begins next week's Parashat
Pinchas. What could not be achieved by war, or by sorcery is now being
accomplished by seduction. 6 In 25:3 we read: "And Israel joined
himself to Baal Pe'or". In the former narrative, chapter 22:41,
mention was made of Bamot Ba'al, the "high places of Ba'al", as being
one of the sites designated by Balak for Bil'am to curse Israel.
Several places later, when Balak's aspirations are not realized, he
takes the seer to Rosh (the "head of") Pe'or (23:28). Thus we are
introduced to both Ba'al and Pe'or earlier on; a premonition as it
were, of the tragic words: "And Israel joined himself [va'yitza'med -
"clung"] to Ba'al Pe'or", and is it a coincidence that Pe'or is
similar to the verb "pa'or" (p.a.r, pey, ayin, resh), which means to
"open wide", such as is found in Yisha'ya'hu (Isaiah) 5:17: "Therefore
hell has enlarged herself, and opened ["pa'ara", root p.a.r) her mouth
without measure: and their glory, and their multitude, and their pomp,
and he that rejoices, shall descend into it"? Indeed the elders of the
people were "destroyed before YHVH, against the sun" (25:4).
"Destroyed" here is of the root y.k.a (yod, kof, ayin), whose literal
meaning is to "dislocate or pluck out" from the roots. Thus, the
leaders who did not take care to root out sin were now the ones to be
"rooted out".
Notes:
1 Theological Wordbook of the Old Testament, ed. R. Laird Harris,
Moody Press, Chicago,
1980.
2 Ibid.
3 Ibid.
4 New Studies in Devarim, Nechama Leibowitz, trans. Aryeh Newman.
Eliner
Library, Department for Torah Education and Culture in the
Diaspora.
Hemed Books Inc.,
Brooklyn, N.Y
5 Ibid.
6 Gill Commentary, Online Bible
********************************************************************
From: Ephraim Frank (shevet@netvision.net.il)
To: heb_roots_chr@hebroots.org
Subject: Parashat Chu'kat
Hebrew Insights into Parashat Chu'kat- Numbers 19 - 22:1
This week's Parashat Chu'kat ("statute of..."), not unlike many of the other Parashot, deals with several issues, some of which are unrelated, or appear to be so. Moreover, a number of these topics are clouded over with an air of mystery, or at least with insufficient information, leaving us wondering as to their full meaning. Nechama Leibowitz1 lists for us some of the queries which our Parasha gives rise to: 1) Chapter 19: "The chapter on the Red heifer... is one of the most mystifying in the Torah...[which] even the wisdom of the wisest of men failed to fathom". 2) Chapter 20:7-13: "What was Moses' sin for which he was so severely punished?" 3) Chapter 20:14-21: "What was the point of referring to all their [Israel's] travail? Did Moshe wish to arouse their [the Edomites'] compassion?" 4) Chapter 21:1-3: "What made the King of Arad attack the Israelites? Especially with view to the assertion made in the Song of the Red Sea that all the nations of the world were terror-struck by the Divine miracles and dared not interfere with Israel (Ex. 15:14-15)?"
5) Chapter 21:4-9: "The serpents' description as "fiery", which in Hebrew is seraphim [s'rafim], is curious in itself, but more so is this method given to Moshe to heal the victims [which] is somewhat strange" and "has puzzled many commentators..."
Although we shall not make an attempt to solve these puzzles, word investigations may help us to connect some of these ideas and discover a possible 'internal logic' within Parashat Chu'kat.
The red heifer, described as being "without blemish, in which there is no defect ("t'mee'ma") and on which a yoke has never come", is "para - cow - aduma - red" (19:2). As far back as Parashat B'resheet (Genesis 1-6:8) we noted that "man" - "a'dam" - is 'rooted' in "adama", "earth" and that "dam" is "blood", and hence the color "red". Thus, the animal used in the purification process, whose blood was to be sprinkled (ref. 19:4) was 'earthy', but was also without blemish or defect, recalling the humanity of Messiah (who "was in all points tempted as we are", Heb. 4:15), as well as His perfection ("a lamb without blemish and without spot", 1Pet. 1:19). Messiah is also the One who turns our crimson-red sins, making them as white as snow and wool (ref. Is. 1:18). The mixture, which contained the ashes of the red heifer, was made available to the impure for "cleansing" or "purification", with the verb used being "yit'cha'teh" ("shall cleanse himself", v. 12ff). The root of this type of purification is ch.t.a. (chet, tet, alef), which means "sin" (as we have already seen a number of times, e.g. Ex. 29:36; Lev. 6:19; 14:49 etc.). In the past we have noted that the remedy, or cure, for "missing the mark" (i.e., sinning) is already taken into account in sin's very definition. This principle takes us to another topic of examination contained in the Parasha - the bronze serpent: "And it shall be that everyone who is bitten, when he looks at it, shall live" (21:8). Once again, the very cause of the disease (the serpent's bite) also becomes, symbolically, its cure. Additionally, the serpents' rendering as "srafim" ("fiery or burning", of the root s.r.f - sin, resh, fey), forms another link to the red heifer (whose carcass was to be burnt), as the same root for "burning" being employed several times in the above account.
At the very onset of the narrative leading up to Moshe's action of smiting the rock, the congregation gathers around him and Ah'aron, striving with them (ref. 20:2,3). "Striving" is "meriva", and as we recall the Waters of Meriva (Parashat B'shalach, Ex. 17:7) we read here too: "This is the water of Meribah, because the children of Israel contended ["ravu"] with YHVH, and He was hallowed among them" (20:13). A similar root is m.r.h (mem, resh, hey), and in verse 10 Moshe addresses the "rebels", who are called "morim" - "those who are contentious or disobedient". Moshe, like Y'chezkel (Ezekiel), was not to be "rebellious ["meri"] like that rebellious house ["beit ha-meri"]" (Ez. 2:8) of Israel, and although commanded to "take the rod", he was to speak peaceably to the rock (ref. 20:8). Moshe and Ah'aron, however, failed, proving their faith to be deficient (20:12) and acting much like their compatriots.
Moshe's "rod" is called "ma'teh", which aside from being rooted in the verb to "stretch out", also means to "incline, turn or turn away". Thus, it was the rod, symbolic of Moshe and A'haron's authority, which the people followed, while the two leaders had the power to turn their subordinates either toward YHVH or away from Him.
The next part of the chapter presents Moshe's surprising approach to the Edomites (20:14-21), whose compassion he appears to be seeking, promising that the procession of Israelites will not trespass or trample down, nor use anything of theirs along the road, saying, "we will not turn aside ("nita", once again of the root n.t.h that we just looked at) to the right hand or to the left" (v. 17). And when "Edom refused to give Israel passage through his territory, Israel turned away ["va-yet"] from him" (v. 21). Thus the last two episodes seem to be characterized by acts of "turning" and "diversions" (of the root n.t.h - noon, tet, hey - again) from YHVH's 'straight and narrow' path.
Following Aha'ron's death on Mount Hor, the Canaanite King of Arad, upon hearing of Israel's approach, fights them and takes prisoners (21:1). As we have already pointed out, the fact that he dared to do so is rather curious. However, the mention in that connection of the road to Atarim led Nahmanides to connect the sad spy episode to this present adversity, as "Atarim" may share the root "tour" - to "spy out" - which we looked at in Parashat Sh'lach Lecha (Lev. 13-15)). "What connection then was there between the incident of the spies and this attack on the children of Israel? The latter had shown their lack of confidence and fear of the future, by sending the spies. The Canaanites fortified themselves with the knowledge of Israel's sense of weakness and inferiority. The lowering of the Israelites' morale was followed, automatically, by the rising morale of their enemies".2 If Israel were indeed coming by "the way - or manner - of the spies" it certainly would have prompted the Canaanite king to fight them.
We now return to the snakes' story. The people complain once more, this time with the result of YHVH sending them fiery serpents which bite them, causing the death of many (ref. 12:5,6). Nechama Leibvowitz3 points out that the verb "sent", "(va)y'sha'lach", being in the conjugation of "pi'el", and not in the more regular one of "kal", connotes a "letting go" or "releasing" of the serpents, whereas up until that time they were held back by YHVH, who did not permit them to harm the Israelites in the desert. The serpents' title points to their characteristic of "burning" or of being "firey" ("saraf"), although the actual word for serpent is "nachash", while the bronze object made by Moshe is called "nachash" - serpent - ha'nchoshet" (of the) brass. The play on words and alliteration continues in 21:9: "If a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived." "A serpent had bitten" is "nachash nashach" (without there being an etymological connection between these two words). This unusual 'formula', of looking at the brass serpent and being cured, is interpreted for us by Yeshua: ""And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of Man be lifted up, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life" (John 3: 14, 15). The healing is found in lifting up one's eyes to the Creator, while the object in front may serve as a reminder of one's sin and disbelief and of YHVH's grace, but has no power in and of itself.
In 21:17-18 we read the following: "Then Israel sang this song, 'Spring up, O well. Sing to it. The well which the rulers dug, which the nobles of the people dug with their lawgivers' staves and rods'." According to Daat Mikra Commentary4, "the digging was initiated by the "nobles of the people", being a reference to Moshe and A'haron, who dug it without using ordinary work tools, but with "m'chokek mish'a'notam" ("their lawgivers' staves"). A "m'chokek" is a prince, ruler or lawgiver, but it is also the word used for his staff (see Gen. 49:10). The usage of this term is aimed at pointing out that many miracles were performed with this staff." "M'chokek" originates with the root ch.k.k (chet, kof, kof) and means to "inscribe or engrave" (see Parshat Yitro, Ex. 18 - 21, where we examined this root more extensively), and is thus employed in the word "statute" - "chok" or "chukka", such as we see in the title of our Parasha ("chu'kat" - the "statute of").
The Parasha ends with another spying episode; before the Israelites venture out to conquer the Amorites we read in 21:32: "Then Moses sent to spy out Jazer..." The word there for "spy out" is different than the one we encountered previously, this time it is "(le)ra'gel", of the root r.g.l, meaning "foot or leg" ("regel"), a term also used for the spies who were later sent by Yehoshua to explore Yericho (ref. Joshua 2:1).
Notes:
1. Nechama Leibowitz, Studies in Bamidbar, Eliner Library, Dept. of
Torah Education and Culture in the Diaspora, Joint Authority for
Jewish Zionist Education, Jerusalem, 1995.
2. ibid
3. ibid.
4. Da'at Mikra, A'haron Mirski, Rav Kook Inst., Jerusalem, 2001
***************************************************************
Return to
Newsgroup Archives Main Page
Return to our Main Webpage
�2011
Hebraic Heritage Ministries International. Designed by
Web Design by JB.