- This topic has 31 replies, 16 voices, and was last updated 13 years, 10 months ago by .
-
Posts
-
Bilaam, as we all know, was one of the more detestable characters to ever “grace” the pages of the Torah. The Gemara in Sanhedrin 105 goes into detail about his character flaws and evil deeds. There is little need to recount them here.
Of course, the question can be (and has been) asked: Why would HKBH grant the gift of prophecy to one so vile. The answer commonly given (I’ve been looking for the source but haven’t been able to find it on a cursory search — if anyone knows off the top of their heads, I’d appreciate it) is that Bilaam was given these powers so that the Nations would not be able to say “Had we had a prophet like Moshe, we too would have accepted the Torah.” So, to preempt that defense, HKBH gave prophetic powers to Moshe.
However, I’ve always found that explanation to be unsatisfying as it still leaves the nations with a valid defense. The defense is that they did NOT, in fact, get a prophet like Moshe. Yes, Bilaam may have been Moshe’s equal in prophecy, but there is far more to the task than simply the gift of prophecy. Moshe was not the ideal leader for Klal Yisroel simply because he was a great prophet. It was his other traits — his humility, his morality, his willingness to selflessly serve the community — that made him an ideal leader. Bilaam was none of those. By choosing Bilaam to be the prophet, HKBH almost ensures that the nations never really have a chance. He lacked the very skills necessary to lead people to Torah.
If so, how could this really preempt the claim by the nations? It would seem to me that they still have a valid point*.
The Wolf
(* Of course, that assumes you accept the original defense as valid. But it seems that Chazal did — otherwise why make the point to begin with?)
A possibility:
Kedusha is impossible without Tumah (before Moshiach), and as Kedusha grows, Tumah must grow as well (Similar to Newton’s Third law). In order to have a “Koach Kedusha” i.e. Moshe Rabbainu, there was a requirement to have someone with the “Koach HaTumah” equal to Moshe.
Not my style (too Kabbalistic), but its an idea.
I’m just guessing here
Perhaps the defense is:
Moshe and Bilaam were prophets who reflected the people whom they came from. You were given a prophet who reflected the people to whom he was given to exactly the same extent that Moshe reflected the people to whom he was given.
im not like any rav or something but i think i have an answer for you. No one is born bad, everyone is born with potential to do good its all how you use it. billaam had great potential to be good yet he used it all in a negative way.I once learned that the reason eisav’s head was zoche to be buried in meoras hamachpaila was because he had great potential to be a tzadik-it was all in his head he knew torah, yet he used it all for bad. i imagine its the same with bilaam. Likewise its true that Moshe had good qualities-but he worked on the to become what he was, its not that he just had them. I hope this answers your question.
Mod,I was just going to say that..
On the same note It says about rabbanim of generations are given according to what the people deserve or on the level they are .
About Eisev, we learnt that he was zoche to have his head buried there because he was great at kibud av
in the days of Moshe Rabbeinu, a gentile king, having heard of his leading the Jewish nation out of Egypt, splitting the sea, receiving the Torah, etc. greatly desired to see how Moshe looked (there were no tabloids back then). It was beneath his dignity to journey into the desert to meet him, so he hired a skilled artist to study Moshe and ultimately paint his portrait. The artist spent many months until he was satisfied with his work and presented it to its commissioner. The king took one look at the picture, and gave the artist a slap across his face. “How dare you try to fool me! I am well versed in the reading of faces, and the picture you’ve painted is of a man who is of very poor character. Am I to believe this the great Moshe, who’s name is uttered with such reverence in all the world?” The artist, however, stuck by his story that this was indeed Moshe.
The king, intrigued, journeyed into the desert to behold Moshe’s countenance with his own eyes. To his shock, Moshe looked exactly as the artist had depicted him. He approached the great leader and expressed his surprise, based on his understanding of face-reading. “Why are you surprised?” asked Moshe simply. “Is this not the true test of man – to overcome his poor character and strive for greatness – not to be born into it?” (This story is quoted by Tiferes Yisrael [Kiddushin 4:77] and others. There is some disagreement as to its veracity [some say it was Aristotle and not Moshe [Midrash Eliyahu]). But for the most part the story is widely accepted [see Or P’nei Moshe (Chukas), Noam Ha-middos (88:2), P’ri Ha’aretz (Balak), et al.]) “
i once heard a medrash (dont know the source) where a person who by looking at someones face can tell exactly what type of person he is.he looked at Moshe Rabeinund said he has traits of bad people like anger, so they asked him whats pshat, and he said he worked on himself. bilaam didnt but he was still zoche to nevuah
I’m thinking along the lines of Moderator 80. The Tanchuma (Balak 4 the yesh omrim) says that all the kings would go to him for advice. So essentially Bilaam was somewhat of a leader for the nations. Its possible that they looked up to Bilaam because he was a reflection of them.
Had the nations wanted to know what Hashem wanted from them Bilaam could have told them (as we see in perek 22).
i meant the type of bad trait he had was anger and gaavah jealosy
They can’t make ANY argument. They can’t say if only Avrohom were our father. If only we were the Jewish People, if only we were all prophets.
But what they can argue apparently, is that had they a prophet, of their nation, as great as the prophet Moshe, taken from the Jewish Nation, things would have been different. They didn’t argue that had Moshe been their prophet things would have been different.
I know you love the art of debating wolf, but I really don’t. I don’t think I can explain it any clearer. If you still don’t understand what I am trying to say, maybe someone else can answer your points.
This isn’t really a debate………..It’s a question that I would like to find an answer to.
great! One technique you might find useful when someone is trying to give you an answer to a question that you would like to find an answer to is this.
Read the answer, try to imagine what they are trying to say, “try” to find merit in their answer. If you find a logical flaw in the answer, spend some time trying to come up with a way to solve the flaw. Actually try, see if you can understand their answer in a slightly different way than you originally did. If you just can’t get rid of what you originally felt was a logical flaw, then go ahead and ask for clarification. I find this useful when I want to learn something, you may not.
Wolf you answered-“That’s fine, but then that reflects a personal failing on the part of Bilaam — not a collective failing on the part of the nations.”
I don’t understand Moshe was great so does that mean klal yisroel didn’t do aveiros? everyone has bechira if they want to be good/bad. Not necesarily does it always reflect on their leader.
Last try 😉
That’s fine, but then that reflects a personal failing on the part of Bilaam — not a collective failing on the part of the nations.
They were one and the same thing.
A well known Chazal from the word “yorad” ( or similar word, I don’t recall, you probably do)when Moshe came down from Har Sinai.
because the nation fell because of the chait ha eigel, Moshe went down in level as well. Some say even physically he could no longer hold up the heavy Luchos and they fell from his hands. Many similar Gemorahs and Meforshim that Moshes level was always reflective of the level of his People, as is the case with all leaders of the Jewish People throughout the generations. I would imagine the same reciprocity applies to all nations, especially in those days. Perhaps not.
Rav Avigdor Miller Zt”l was asked exactly this question and he said (approx if I remember correctly)that Bilaam wasn’t always wicked but was a fairly decent man and then he corrupted. Shiur #598
I don’t have access now to the sefarim but IIRC Rabbi Mordechai Miller in his Shabbos Shiurim series had a pretty compelling approach. (Not that he needs my haskama.)
I believe a mahalech would be like the Griz HaLevi says at the beginning of Parahsas Braishis-l’asid lavo the goyim are going to come & demand schar, The Ribbono shel Olam will want to know why, they will say we built roads, bridges, infrastucture etc. all for Klal Yisroel; He will say no, you did for your own self interest.
how can they lie to the Ribbono shel Olam? says the Brisker Rav, everything in this world is bishvil Yisroel, shenikra raishis, the oomos come to this realization & try to use it to their own advantage-we did it for them! but in truth that was not their kavana.
they didn’t accept Torah from the Ribbono shel Olam Himself when He gave them the choice, so they are phony, so He gave them a navi that was as phony as they were
Rav Hirsch, ztz”l, offers an explanation that combines and embellishes all of the above offerings, especially Mod 80’s.
Wolf and Interested Others, it’s best if you looked it up yourselves, but I’ll give it a shot:
A novi is a concentrated form of the essence of the people he represents. Klal Yisroel represents servitude to Hashem; the Umos Ha’olam represent Anochiyis- serving oneself. For them, Hashem is a Force to be reckoned with, Someone good to have on their side so they can be successful in this world.
Thus, when the Nations asked for a parallel to Moshe, they were asking for a leader who will help them achieve success in life, actualize their essence. This Bilaam accomplished to perfection; he “reckoned with G-D” and freed them to pursue their desires.
Had they truly desired greatness, they would have looked toward Moshe as their leader as Yisroel is “Ohr LaGoyim”.
(With gratitude to my husband for sharing this with me.)
“The defense is that they did NOT, in fact, get a prophet like Moshe.”
Had they more than 7 mitzvos to follow in life, perhaps they, too, would have been worthy of a prophet like Moshe. Lifum Tzeara agra. But those nations were not willing to accept the achrayus and hishtadlus of following an entire Torah in their lives, and therefore were not worthy to the exact zechuyos of nevuah that am Yisrael was.
Oomis: We had Moshe as our novi before the Torah was offered to anyone.
“However, I’ve always found that explanation to be unsatisfying”
Who do you think you are to find a maamer chazal to be unsatisfying? If they tell us the reason is so that the umos haolam cant say that they would have kept the Torah then thats it. Theres no questioning a maamer chazal. Only someone with a lot of chutzpah and azus panim would even think of doing it.
Moish: When you get to the core of what Chazal say, you appreciate their words so much more than someone who won’t question them.
Who do you think you are to find a maamer chazal to be unsatisfying?
Wolf meant “unsatisfying” as an ansatidfying answer to his question.
There is absolutely nothing wrong in asking questions so that we come to a better understanding of the Torah if we do that to pursue the truth and with the knowledge that we are like ants who cannot comprehend all of life’s answers which we will have when Moshiach comes. But as of now we can and should search for answers if we have questions and I believe that one who asks questions for the purpose of gaining clarity is not living their life as a frum robot.
“Had we had a prophet like Moshe, we too would have accepted the Torah.” So, to preempt that defense, HKBH gave prophetic powers to Moshe.
Wolf, the wording Chazal use is PROPHET – NOT LEADER. The goyim would have an excuse for not accepting the Torah if they had no prophet to tell them the truth. The issue here is not about leading.
If the goyim would not acknowledge the truth coming from their prophet and accept the Torah then why do they need a leader to lead them in their service of Hashem?
“There is absolutely nothing wrong in asking questions”
Hes not asking a question anymore. When he says the answer is unsatisfying now hes being mevazeh chazal. He had a question and chazal answerd it. If he says the answer is unsatisfying then hes saying that chazals words arent good enuf for him. Thats a bizayon of torah.
R’ mosherose-wanting to understand a maamer chazal & its depth is no bizayon of Torah, it is Torah in its classic sense. why do we have meforshim?
Mosherose- I don’t think the OP meant that it’s ‘unsatisfying’ in the literal sense – he obviously wants to understand what exactly Chazal meant with the questions he has in his mind.
And another thing – you need to ratchet down the tone of your posts if you want to accomplish anything with them. They come across as shrill and annoying cries of “my way or the highway”. You’re not going to convince anyone of anything when you come across as being shrill and preachy.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.