Click here to receive the weekly parsha by email each week.

Parshat Balak

How goodly are your tents, o Jacob,

Your dwellings, o Israel!

(Bemidbar 24:4)

 

How goodly are your tents, O Jacob - Two tents of Jacob's multitude. These are tents of men and tents of women.

Your dwelling, O Israel - 'Dwelling' is the gathering of the people's leadership which exits in two forms; the assembly of those appointed to deal with public needs in worldly matters, and the gathering of the great scholars of Israel to deal with matters of [religious] instruction and message, and this is "your dwellings O Israel". And he said "How goodly", a term of high praise; God exhibited the highest possible praise for each body as is further detailed.

(Haamek Davar, ibid., ibid.)

 

How goodly are your tents O Jacob etc. This refers to the Tents of Appointment in the desert and in Shilo and in Nov and in Giv'on; your dwellings O Israel - do not read 'mishknotecha' - 'your dwellings', but rather - 'mashknotecha', 'your collateral'…

[The author of this midrash notes that, lacking niqqud - the diacritical marks which indicate vowels - the Hebrew 'mishknotecha' may also be read 'mashknotecha'. Thus the author has God promise (through Balaam) that His dwellings (the Tabernacles and Temples) will serve as collateral for Israel's sins. Should Israel sin, God will destroy His dwellings rather than the Jewish people].

(Bemidbar Rabba 12:14)

           

 

Two donkeys - one male and one female

Leah Shakdiel

Said Rav Zeira in the name of Rabba bar Zimona: If the ancients were angels - we are but human beings, and if the ancients were human beings - we are like donkeys. And not like the donkey of Rabbi Chanina ben Dosa or of Rabbi Pinchas ben Yair, but like other donkeys. (Bavli, Shabbat 112b)

The above presents the famous paradigm of "weakening of the generations" by constructing the hierarchy which positions human beings between angels and asses. The Talmud remarks incidentally that there were once extraordinary donkeys, but these are not those referred to by R' Zeira. Rashi refers us to the stories of these two donkeys. First we meet the donkey of R' Chanina, or, as in variant readings - R' Yossi of Yokerat:

He owned a donkey that, when hired for a full day, would be sent home with his wages on his back. If they would add or detract [from the wages], she would not appear on the morrow. One day, they forgot a pair of sandals on her. She refused to leave until they removed them, and then she departed. (Taanit, 24b)

In the beginning of the story, the verb form establishes that the donkey is male [hamor] . Immediately after, it becomes - grammatically - a female [hamorah]. Is this happenstance? A minor phenomenon of Hebrew and/or Aramaic of the Talmudic period? Let us examine the sources pertaining to the second donkey, that of R' Pinchas ben Yair. We know of two such stories - Rashi refers us to the Bavli version with which he was acquainted, but the version in the Yerushalmi seems closer to the context of the above-quoted excerpt from Tractate Shabbat:

R' Abba bar Zvina said in the name of R' Zeira: If the ancients were angels, we are but humans, and if they were humans, we are asses. Said R' Mana: At that time, they said: We are not even comparable to the donkey of R' Pinchas ben Yair. The donkey of R' Pinchas ben Yair was stolen by robbers. It was hidden for three days during which she ate nothing. After three days, they had a change of heart, and returned her to her owner, saying, Let us send her to her owner, lest she die here and stink up the cave. They released her, she stood at the entrance to her owners property and began to bray. He said to them [to his workers]: Open up for this wretched being [aluvah] who has not eaten for three days. They opened for her and she entered. He said to them: Give her something to eat. They gave her barley, but she did not want to eat. They said to him: Master! She does not want to eat! He said to them: Has the barley been properly tithed? They replied: Yes! He said to them: Have you also set aside demaii [produce regarding which there is doubt as to it having been tithed]? They replied: Did not our master [you] teach us that "one who takes grain for an animal [...] is exempt from tithing demaii"? He said to them: What shall do for this aluvah, who accepts upon herself many stringencies... They tithed the demaii, and she ate. (Yerushalmi Demaii 1;3)

From the outset it is clear that this exceptional donkey, of a higher spiritual plane than humans such as ourselves, is female. Now let us read the story in a different context, as it appears in the Bavli:

Surely if the Holy One, Blessed Be He, would not permit the beast of the righteous to sin in error, how much less the righteous themselves!... What was the incident       involving the beast of the righteous? Once, R. Phinehas b. Jair was on his way to redeem captives, and came to the river Ginnai. 'O Ginnai' , he said to her, 'divide           thy waters for me, that I may pass through thee'. It replied. 'Thou art about to do the will of they Maker; I, too, am doing the will of my Maker. Thou mayest or mayest not           accomplish thy purpose; I am sure of accomplishing mine'. He said: 'If thou wilt not divide thyself, I will decree that no waters ever pass through thee'. It, thereupon,           divided itself for him. There was also present a certain man who was carrying wheat for the Passover, and so R. Phinehas once against addressed the river; 'Divide thyself for this man, too, for he is engaged in a religious duty'. It, thereupon, divided itself for him too. There was also an Arab who had joined them [on the journey], and so R. Phinehas once again addressed the river, 'Divide thyself for this one, too, that he may not say, "Is this the treatment of a fellow traveler?"' It, thereupon, divided itself for him, too.

R. Josef exclaimed: How great is this man! Greater than Moses and the sixty myriads of Israel! For the latter [the sea divided itself but once, whilst for the former thrice! May it not be, however, for the former also only once? - Rather say. As great as Moses and sixty myriads of Israel [but not 'greater']!

R. Phinehas happened to come to certain inn. They placed barley before his ass, but it would not eat. It was sifted, but the ass would not eat it. It was carefully picked; still the ass would not eat it. 'Perhaps', suggested R. Phinehas, 'it is not  tithed"? It was at once tithed, and the ass ate it. He, thereupon, exclaimed, 'This poor creature is about to do the will of the Creator, and you would feed it with  untithed produce'!

In this story, the Talmud Balvi tries to prove that this exceptional beast is not on the level of super-human humans who resemble angels, but she does belong to a sage of the "righteous and doers of good deeds" type, one has the ability to perform miracles like the prophets: We must remember that Chazal identify the Biblical Pinchas - the zealot who repairs that which Balaam did to Israel - with Elijah, the "disciple" who competes with the "Master" and takes into his own hands the keys to rain and also the keys to the resurrection of the dead... but here I wish to focus on the elements common to all the stories which I have brought: Here too, the wider context is the discussion of the question of the difference between man and beast (ibid, 5a-b): Who are the humans who resemble beasts? And is every comparison of man to animal necessarily to our denigration? And I say: In all these sources, of all animals, focus is particularly upon the donkey, and the incidental switch, as it were, from the male donkey to the female, is not coincidental.

Of all cultured beasts that served man in the ancient east and were an inseparable part of his household and daily life, the donkey held a special place in the Bible, and much has been written about it: Its name in Semitic languages, derived from the word "chomer" [clay, material] places it in obvious contrast to Man who was created in His image, and raises the question about the difference between Man who realizes his divine mission in the world, and Man who remains on the level of "a living being" alone, like all the beasts.

Perusal of our sources reveals, on the one hand, the attribution of this difference as essentially one between Jews and Canaanite idolaters; on the other hand there is a willingness to technically condemn Jews who descend not only to the level of idolaters but also behave bestially, just as the donkey. A different aspect of the donkey is the place assigned it alongside the ox in the Sabbath-observant Jewish family, that household which is also careful not to pain living creatures - but, being an unclean animal, he is both similar to the ox but also different from it: in contrast to the ox, which is ritually clean, the donkey may not serve as a sacrifice or as food. In this sense he is similar to Man, whose firstborn is not sacrificed but is redeemed (Massechet Bechorot, Chap. 1). This synopsis sheds light also on the hierarchy prevalent in our sources: angel, Man, chamor [donkey]-who-is-but-chomer [material, clay].

Between angel and Man, however, there exists another category, that of the chamor hamachmir al atzmo [the donkey who accepts upon himself halachic stringencies], who resembles the angel-like tzaddik. In my opinion, it is not happenstance that particularly in stories of this category the male donkey is 'becomes' a female, just as the famous comparison of Avraham and Balaam is based not solely on the gap between Avraham the Tzaddik and Balaam the Wicked, but also on the plain meaning of the texts which describe Avraham together with his male donkey as against Balaam with his female donkey. Chazal are careful to note that the recommended human position, that of humility before the greatness of the ancients, is also the position of humility before these unique female donkeys. Balaam's (female) donkey, who sees the angel and fulfills a divine mission of changing her master's action in the world, also speaks words of moral reproach to her master. Balaam is forced to learn his mission though her in particular, and she is female.

It would seem to me that that which was created extraordinarily on Sabbath Eve at twilight (Aboth 5:8) that is to say, together with Man, is specifically the mouth of the aton [female donkey], not of the male, serves as an especially emphatic message for the nomadic patriarchal or agricultural society. T.H. Lawrence, the British leader of the Arab uprising against the Turks during the First World War, notes in his autobiography "the Seven Pillars of Wisdom" that the only females to play any role in the Arab uprising were the female camels upon which the warriors rode. This was because, in contrast to the male beast, they were easy to train. A man who lives in such a society, lives in close proximity to many female animals, much more than to the males of the species. It is upon the female, in particular, that he realizes his masterhood, his ownership, and thus the frequency of intimate relations with the household animals of said societies; the latter is indeed a practice quite foreign to the spirit our modern society in which agriculture is totally mechanized and is no longer a "household" function (which included shared living quarters). It is difficult for us to comprehend the background to the Talmudic midrashim which explain the Biblical dialogue between Balaam and the aton as a dialogue between a wife-beating husband and she who satisfies his sexual needs. It is difficult for us to grasp how the Sages explained the creation of woman (Bereishit 2) as two stages of an attempt to free Man of his solitude - in the first stage he assigns names to the animals through intercourse with them, but success comes only in the second stage, when he gives woman a name, because only she is bone of his bone and flesh of his flesh, that is to say, only her does he 'know'. It is difficult for us to understand a society in which a freeman has mastery over humans who are subservient to him, differentiating between male servant and female slave, between Hebrew and Canaanite. The Hebrew slave is Jewish in every respect, the Hebrew maidservant is intended for marriage into the master's family, the Canaanite male slave is converted to Judaism by his master, whereas the Canaanite maidservant is like a beast given by the owner to his servant for propagation of new slaves for himself... It is painful to learn that in one of the prayer books from the Medieval period, the daily male blessing "for not having made me a woman" was paralleled by the Jewish woman reciting - including Name and Kingdom-- "for not having made me a beheima - a beast"...

Against this background of beastly patriarchal hierarchies, the Torah employs the aton, and subsequently the sages employed the term chamora, in order to teach us to decry such norms. The chamora in the story is "aluvah" [wretched], a realistic reflection of the attitude of the male master towards the female, who should be protected - in the best case - in a paternalistic manner (a reminder: this description is commonly applied to unfortunate women such as poor widows). But this particular "aluvah" is on a plane higher than we, teaching us Derech Eretz - proper ethical behavior - and also how to walk humbly with our God.

Leah Shakdiel is an educator and social activist in Yerocham.

 

 

And Balaam rose in the morning and saddled his she-donkey (Bamidbar 22): We learn in the name of R. Shimon ben Elazar: Love revokes the customs of high status. [one learns this] from Abraham, for it is written And Abraham arose early in the morning [and he saddled his donkey] (Bereishit 22:3). Hate [also] revokes the customs of high status, for it is said: And Balaam rose in the morning and saddled his she-donkey.

Rav Yehudah said that Rav said: A person should always occupy himself with Torah and the commandments, even if not for their own sakes, since Balaam gained merit and Ruth was his descendent as reward for the forty two offerings that he sacrificed.

Rabbi Yosi bar Huna said: Ruth was Eglon's daughter, who was the grandson of Balak, king of Moab.

(Sanhedrin 105b)

 

For there is no enchantment with Jacob, neither is there any divination with Israel

These practices are all false and deceptive and were means employed by the ancient idolaters to deceive the peoples of various countries and induce them to become their followers. It is not proper for Israelites who are highly intelligent to suffer themselves to be deluded by such inanities or imagine that there is anything in them, as it is said, For there is no enchantment with Jacob, neither is there any divination with Israel (Bamidbar 23:23).

(Rambam, Hilkhot Avodat Kokhavim 11: 16, Hyamson translation)

 

Never again did there arise in Israel a prophet like Moses (Devarim 34:10) - But one did arise among the nations. Which [prophet] was it? Balaam ben Be'or.

(Sifrei Ve-Zot Ha- Brakha 357)

 

The bestowal of the gift of prophecy on all human creatures was designed to impress upon the world that the choice of Israel was no arbitrary one, but the reward for Israel's readiness and willingness to accept the Torah. R. Yohanan's famous words to the effect that God offered the Torah first to all the nations, one by one, but all refused, only Israel accepting, is explained in the Gemara as the rejoinder to the arguments of the nations: Did you ever offer us the Torah that we refused it? In this way, later sources motivate the gift of prophecy to the Gentiles.

(Prof. E. E. Urbach, "Midrashot HaZaL al Nivi'ei Umot ha-Olam ve-al Parashat Bilaam" passage translated by Aryeh Newman)

 

 

Yoel Yosef Fine, z"l

On the fourteenth anniversary of Yoel's death

we will meet for an evening of study in his memory

on Tuesday the 27th of Tammuz 5772 (17.7.12) at 19:45

Mincha service at 19:30.

The lecture in his memory will be delivered

Mrs. Gilla Rosen

on the topic:

Repairing a Flawed World -

A Chazal Perspective

Ma'ariv will follow the lecture.

 

Miriam, Jonathan, Devorah, Naomi, and Ephraim Fine

 

The evening will take place in the synagogue of Kehillat Yedidya

12 Rechov Lipschitz (at the end of Rehov Gad, in the Baka neighborhood), Jerusalem.

 

To all our readers and supporters:

We need your support in order that the voice of a religious Zionism committed to peace and justice will continue to be heard through the uninterrupted distribution of Shabbat Shalom in hundreds of synagogues, on the Internet and via email in both Hebrew and English.

Donations in Israel are tax-deductible. Please send your checks made out to "Oz VeShalom" to Oz VeShalom POB 4433 Jerusalem 91043.

For a US tax deductible donation, the New Israel Fund may be used as the conduit. Contributions should be marked as donor-advised to Oz ve'Shalom, the Shabbat Shalom project with mention of the registration number 5708.

If you wish to subscribe to the email English editions of Shabbat Shalom, to print copies of it for distribution in your synagogue, to inquire regarding the dedication of an edition in someone's honor or memory, to find out how to make tax-exempt donations, or to suggest additional helpful ideas, please call Miriam Fine at +972-52-3920206 or at ozveshalomns@gmail.com

Issues may be dedicated in honor of an event, person, simcha, etc. Requests must be made 3-4 weeks in advance to appear in the Hebrew, 10 days in advance to appear in the English email.

 

About us

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom is a movement dedicated to the advancement of a civil society in Israel. It is committed to promoting the ideals of tolerance, pluralism, and justice, concepts that have always been central to Jewish tradition and law.

Oz Veshalom-Netivot Shalom shares a deep attachment to the land of Israel and it no less views peace as a central religious value. It believes that Jews have both the religious and the national obligation to support the pursuit of peace. It maintains that Jewish law clearly requires us to create a fair and just society, and that co-existence between Jews and Arabs is not an option but an imperative.

4,500 copies of a 4-page peace oriented commentary on the weekly Torah reading are written and published by Oz VeShalom/Netivot Shalom and they are distributed to over 350 synagogues in Israel and are sent overseas via email. Our web site is www.netivot-shalom.org.il.

Shabbat Shalom is available on our website: www.netivot-shalom.org.il

For responses and arranging to write for Shabbat Shalom: pleiser@netvision.net.il