I am reading Jos. Teluskin's Biblical Literacy (ISBN 0-688-14297-4, Wm. Morrow & Co., 1997).
Most of Rabbi Teluskin's comments on various Biblical portions present a new twist on the “straight text.”
One that I found particularly interesting was on Essau and Jacob. Has Essau been treated fairly by the rabbis of old? Teluskin, following the rabbis' admonishment to turn the Torah over and over again, turns the Essau story over and speculates that maybe, just maybe, Essau's actions might be – if not justified, then mitigated by circumstances.
He takes a psychological approach to the sibling conflict; as he does with Joseph and his brothers.
Unlike the Torah, which simply lays out a personality's life, the good and the bad, the rabbis of old often work hard to make a person “almost” all good (e.g., Abraham and Moses) or absolutely evil (Essau, Korach, Balaam).
I've always thought Korach, Aviram, Dotan, and Balaam got an undeserved bad press. There was no Paul Harvey to intone “the rest of the story.”
Bilaam especially.
He is, according to the Torah, a prophet of G-d and a man who publicaly acknowledges HaShem's authority (B'Midbar/Numbers 22, 8-13).
When the Moabites and Midianites send a relatively low-level delegation to Balaam, the prophet tells the visitors to stay the night while he (Balaam) inquires of G-d (v 8). G-d tells Balaam to stay home; the message is relayed to the delegates and they are sent on their way.
When Balak, Moab's king at the time (v4) and his Midinaite associates heard Balaam's response from the messengers, Balak decided to “up the ante.”
This time, a high level delegation visits Balaam and offers all manner of inducements that the prophet should return with them to curse the people (Israel).
Again, Balaam tells his visitors to cool their heels while he checks with his Boss.
This time G-d tells Balaam to go with the delegation, but to say only what HaShem tells him to say.
Both Teluskin and I agree that at this point Balaam seems to have G-d's OK to make the trip.
The rabbis of old, and many today who only can echo the old, severely castigate Balaam for even entertaining the delegation.
Wasn't it enough that G-d already told Balaam to stay home, they challenge? Balaam should not have bothered G-d again, they opine.
But that simply is not logical, nor is it the way of several of the Torah's greatest heros.
Abraham argrued with G-d over the destruction of Sodom and Gemorra. Argued with Him!!Moses argued with G-d many times for many different reasons. First, he didn't want to be G-d's representative to the Hebrews or to go before the reigning pharaoh.
He argued with G-d more than once over the destruction of the multitude that left Egypt using the typical parents' refrain “What will the neighbor's think” (people will say You led them into the wilderness to die).
He argued with G-d over his death – he was human after all and who really wants to die when there are “things to do, people to see, and – especially in Moses' life – places (across the Jordan) to go.”
As you get older your willingness to come to terms with your own demise drastically changes.
Besides, if G-d had really wanted to keep Balaam home, He could have prevented the second delegation from arriving at Balaam's home office. Nothing very big – a storm, perhaps. Constant, absolute darkness, maybe. Both pretty much Standard Operating Procedure for HaShem.
From my perspective, I think Balaam acted exactly as HaShem expected him to act.
He acted properly and with full respect to G-d.
Despite the offers presented to him, he told the delegation to wait while he asked G-d what to do. The Torah doesn't even suggest that Balaam was seeking permission to go; he certinly wasn't begging to go. He told the delegation that he had to inquire of G-d . . . to ask G-d what he should do.
I do that when I need “another opinion.” I'll wager that most of us – including the rabbis of old – also turned to G-d to help them resolve a thorny question. Moses cerainly did – again and again and again. Just ask the daughters of Zelophehad (B'Midbar/Numbers 27 v 1) .
I think Balaam got a bad press.
So what about the donkey he beat?
In the whole story of Balaam, from the time he is introduced until the time he blesses Israel, there is nothing that makes him fully human; where are the failings listed in the Torah? Is he perfect; better than Moses? Moses had his faults. Abraham, Yitzak, Yakov all had their faults; the emmahot (mothers) likewise were less than perfect.
So maybe, just maybe, the story of Balaam's donkey was introduced to make sure we understand that, as all the other personalities, he was just human and had his failings. The rabbis – and PITA – sieze upon the incident as a sign that HaShem really did NOT want Balaam to make the trip.
That doesn't make sense to me . . . Balaam already had “work experience” with HaShem; the Boss knew Balaam would do as he was instructed, regardless of promises of riches and fame. (Fame he already had, and one suspects wealth, too.)
I understand that the rabbis base some of their feelings toward Balaam on one verse (B'Midbar/Numbers 31 v8) that states “… Balaam the son of Peor they (the Israelites under Pinehas) slew with the sword.” The rabbis insist that Balaam was still in town working as a prophet for Ba'al Peor, but given his apparently long-standing relationship with a very jealous G-d, the rabbi's suspicion has a false ring to it.
By the way, how many animals speak to humans in the Torah?
Just two. Havah's (Eve's) snake and Balaam's donkey.
Yohanon
Yohanon.Glenn at gmail dot com
No comments:
Post a Comment