Post by Rabbi Neil on Jul 19, 2024 19:15:44 GMT
“Ma Tovu Ohalecha Ya’akov, Mishkenotecha Yisrael – How good are your tents, O Jacob, and your homes, O Israel”. When Bilaam finally goes to curse the Israelites in this week’s Torah portion, out of his mouth pours the blessing that we recite at the beginning of the morning prayer service, indeed traditionally the words that we recite as we enter the synagogue. Why do we quote the non-Jewish prophet, intent on cursing the people, defying God’s command, at the opening of our service?
Perhaps it is because Bilaam is a non-Jew, and when we come in from the streets we’re not yet ready to speak the language of Jewish prayer. We are still at one with the outside world, mixing amongst Jewish and non-Jewish people. It’s not, by this logic, until we reach the Bar’chu, that we finally get to speak in the traditional language of Jewish prayer. Perhaps this explanation is true, but I believe that there’s an important dynamic occurring in the story of Bilaam that better explains the inclusion of the words that Bilaam, and we, recite.
In this extraordinary section of Torah, Balak, the king of Moab, is alarmed because of the enormous number of Israelites marching toward his territory, so he sends messengers to Bilaam, apparently a famous non-Jewish prophet, to get him to come and curse the Israelites. Bilaam asks them to stay the night while he consults with God, who in turn asks what the men want with Bilaam. But why? If God is omnipotent - and I appreciate that that’s a big “if” predicated on later Rabbinic theology and not on the theology of Torah itself - surely God knows who the men are and what they want. The answer seems to be to enable the other party to give an honest response, which Bilaam obligingly does. Honest communication between Bilaam and God is established. It’s the same as when God asks Adam and Eve “Where are you?” It seems to be a rhetorical question that opens up an honest conversation.
God tells Bilaam that he must not go with the men and that he cannot curse the Israelites because they are blessed. Bilaam does what he is told. When Balak sends more dignitaries and thus more money, God appears to Bilaam to say that he now can go with them but he must only bless the people. But how did Bilaam even receive Balak’s second set of emissaries? God was very clear that he must not go with them. Does Bilaam really think that the ban only applies to the first set of Moabite officers? Is Bilaam really that naïve? I think he is. Why else does Bilaam consult with God a second time even though God was very clear the first time? Bilaam just doesn’t get what God means, that is, communication between the two has already broken down.
I believe that Bilaam is being set up as a comparison with Abraham, although he doesn’t realize it. When the second set of emissaries arrive, Bilaam subtly hints at a pay-off by saying “Even if Balak were to give me his house full of silver and gold, I still couldn’t do anything against God.” (Num. 22:18). In other words, I’ll consult with God after you fill my house with silver and gold. That compares strongly with Ephron the Hittite during the negotiations of the Cave of Machpelah back in Genisis 23. There, Abraham offers to buy land and Ephron replies, that he gives it to him for free. Abraham again asks for a price, and Ephron replies, “No, this land worth four hundred shekels (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) what is that between us?” It’s a subtle connection for sure, but an interesting one about hearing what people are saying and what is behind their words. There are other comparisons between Bilaam and Abraham that are not even vaguely subtle, though. God speaks to Bilaam at night, just as with Abraham before the Akedah – the Binding of Isaac [Gen. 22:2]. Bilaam takes with him two young lads and a donkey, just as did Abraham [Gen. 22:3] – indeed, he saddles the donkey himself, just as Abraham did [ibid.]. He rises in the morning to answer God’s word, just like Abraham [ibid.]. Finally, the angel of the Eternal appears in front of Bilaam with sword drawn, contrasting exactly with the angel of the Eternal who appeared before Abraham as he himself lifted the knife against his son [Gen. 22:11]. The comparison is clear.
So if Bilaam is being compared with Abraham, how does he fare in the comparison? Why is God angry with him? As you may have guessed, Bilaam fares badly when compared with Abraham. Abraham only needs to be told once to go and sacrifice his son, and he gets up early and sets off to perform God’s will. Bilaam is only eager when God’s will coincides with his will. Indeed, we know that he cannot have been very eager to fulfil God’s first command – to send the men away – because they keep coming back and he invites them in to stay!
Indeed, he says that he will inquire of God once more, as if somehow God would have made a mistake the first time. But the second time, God gives Bilaam another message – permission to go with them. Just like Abraham, Bilaam saddles his own donkey in the morning, implying haste, and he rushes off to do this. God is justifiably angry. It’s not just that Bilaam is so keen to perform this act, but why does he not argue with God? Why does he not challenge God over the inconsistency between the two prophecies?
He doesn’t challenge God because he doesn’t see an inconsistency and he doesn’t see an inconsistency because he wasn’t listening. How easily Bilaam falls into the trap of only listening to someone when they say something that we want to hear. It shows that Bilaam was not listening properly - a lesson that his donkey has to teach him. The donkey behaves uncharacteristically three times and each time Bilaam strikes her. The donkey explains to Bilaam that she is behaving uncharacteristically, and therefore implies that he should try to work out why. He does so. He realises that if a humble donkey always remains constant in her behaviour, then surely God, the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, will always remain constant in prophecy! Noting that the donkey has not been constant, therefore, shows Bilaam that God had changed message, and he had not responded to that fact because he was not listening. God changed the message to test whether or not Bilaam was listening, and he now realises that he failed the test. In a wonderful comedic twist, the donkey helps the man realize that he’s the ass.
From here on, Bilaam is a new man, keen to listen to God’s word whenever God spoke to him, even though he acts questionably later on when God is not speaking to him. And thus finally we can understand why we read the Mah Tovu at the beginning of the morning service.
Conversation, communication is an incredibly difficult task – an art, as it were, that requires practice. We all know how to speak, but conversation involves listening truly to the other party and hearing what they are trying to express to us, whether or not we want to hear what they have to say.
The same can be said of prayer. Prayer is also incredibly difficult and also requires practice. Even though we know how to recite liturgy, prayer involves truly listening to the other party – God – and hearing what God is trying to express to us, whether or not we want to hear what God has to say to us.
The story of Bilaam is one of realisation of the subtleties of communication with God. It shows that when we turn to God with preconceived ideas, we will only hear what we want to hear, and not necessarily what God is trying to say. Only when we really listen to God, through every communication channel, will we hear what God is trying to say to you.
And this is why we start the morning prayer service with the words of Bilaam, because Bilaam is each one of us – the person who can be tempted by financial incentives, who speaks but doesn’t always listen, who rebukes without wondering why a certain behaviour choice was made. But most importantly, and the reason why we quote Bilaam at the beginning of the morning prayer service, is that his story teaches us that to pray, just as to speak, we have to transcend our egocentric selves, and learn to listen to others and to God. “Ma Tovu Ohalecha Ya’akov, Mishkenotecha Yisrael – How good are your tents, O Jacob, and your homes, O Israel” – as we speak words of prayer, let us listen so we can learn what treasures you have inside. So, may we all transcend what we want to hear and may we open ourselves up in prayer not just to speak but also to honestly receive, and let us say, Amen.
Perhaps it is because Bilaam is a non-Jew, and when we come in from the streets we’re not yet ready to speak the language of Jewish prayer. We are still at one with the outside world, mixing amongst Jewish and non-Jewish people. It’s not, by this logic, until we reach the Bar’chu, that we finally get to speak in the traditional language of Jewish prayer. Perhaps this explanation is true, but I believe that there’s an important dynamic occurring in the story of Bilaam that better explains the inclusion of the words that Bilaam, and we, recite.
In this extraordinary section of Torah, Balak, the king of Moab, is alarmed because of the enormous number of Israelites marching toward his territory, so he sends messengers to Bilaam, apparently a famous non-Jewish prophet, to get him to come and curse the Israelites. Bilaam asks them to stay the night while he consults with God, who in turn asks what the men want with Bilaam. But why? If God is omnipotent - and I appreciate that that’s a big “if” predicated on later Rabbinic theology and not on the theology of Torah itself - surely God knows who the men are and what they want. The answer seems to be to enable the other party to give an honest response, which Bilaam obligingly does. Honest communication between Bilaam and God is established. It’s the same as when God asks Adam and Eve “Where are you?” It seems to be a rhetorical question that opens up an honest conversation.
God tells Bilaam that he must not go with the men and that he cannot curse the Israelites because they are blessed. Bilaam does what he is told. When Balak sends more dignitaries and thus more money, God appears to Bilaam to say that he now can go with them but he must only bless the people. But how did Bilaam even receive Balak’s second set of emissaries? God was very clear that he must not go with them. Does Bilaam really think that the ban only applies to the first set of Moabite officers? Is Bilaam really that naïve? I think he is. Why else does Bilaam consult with God a second time even though God was very clear the first time? Bilaam just doesn’t get what God means, that is, communication between the two has already broken down.
I believe that Bilaam is being set up as a comparison with Abraham, although he doesn’t realize it. When the second set of emissaries arrive, Bilaam subtly hints at a pay-off by saying “Even if Balak were to give me his house full of silver and gold, I still couldn’t do anything against God.” (Num. 22:18). In other words, I’ll consult with God after you fill my house with silver and gold. That compares strongly with Ephron the Hittite during the negotiations of the Cave of Machpelah back in Genisis 23. There, Abraham offers to buy land and Ephron replies, that he gives it to him for free. Abraham again asks for a price, and Ephron replies, “No, this land worth four hundred shekels (nudge, nudge, wink, wink) what is that between us?” It’s a subtle connection for sure, but an interesting one about hearing what people are saying and what is behind their words. There are other comparisons between Bilaam and Abraham that are not even vaguely subtle, though. God speaks to Bilaam at night, just as with Abraham before the Akedah – the Binding of Isaac [Gen. 22:2]. Bilaam takes with him two young lads and a donkey, just as did Abraham [Gen. 22:3] – indeed, he saddles the donkey himself, just as Abraham did [ibid.]. He rises in the morning to answer God’s word, just like Abraham [ibid.]. Finally, the angel of the Eternal appears in front of Bilaam with sword drawn, contrasting exactly with the angel of the Eternal who appeared before Abraham as he himself lifted the knife against his son [Gen. 22:11]. The comparison is clear.
So if Bilaam is being compared with Abraham, how does he fare in the comparison? Why is God angry with him? As you may have guessed, Bilaam fares badly when compared with Abraham. Abraham only needs to be told once to go and sacrifice his son, and he gets up early and sets off to perform God’s will. Bilaam is only eager when God’s will coincides with his will. Indeed, we know that he cannot have been very eager to fulfil God’s first command – to send the men away – because they keep coming back and he invites them in to stay!
Indeed, he says that he will inquire of God once more, as if somehow God would have made a mistake the first time. But the second time, God gives Bilaam another message – permission to go with them. Just like Abraham, Bilaam saddles his own donkey in the morning, implying haste, and he rushes off to do this. God is justifiably angry. It’s not just that Bilaam is so keen to perform this act, but why does he not argue with God? Why does he not challenge God over the inconsistency between the two prophecies?
He doesn’t challenge God because he doesn’t see an inconsistency and he doesn’t see an inconsistency because he wasn’t listening. How easily Bilaam falls into the trap of only listening to someone when they say something that we want to hear. It shows that Bilaam was not listening properly - a lesson that his donkey has to teach him. The donkey behaves uncharacteristically three times and each time Bilaam strikes her. The donkey explains to Bilaam that she is behaving uncharacteristically, and therefore implies that he should try to work out why. He does so. He realises that if a humble donkey always remains constant in her behaviour, then surely God, the Supreme Ruler of the Universe, will always remain constant in prophecy! Noting that the donkey has not been constant, therefore, shows Bilaam that God had changed message, and he had not responded to that fact because he was not listening. God changed the message to test whether or not Bilaam was listening, and he now realises that he failed the test. In a wonderful comedic twist, the donkey helps the man realize that he’s the ass.
From here on, Bilaam is a new man, keen to listen to God’s word whenever God spoke to him, even though he acts questionably later on when God is not speaking to him. And thus finally we can understand why we read the Mah Tovu at the beginning of the morning service.
Conversation, communication is an incredibly difficult task – an art, as it were, that requires practice. We all know how to speak, but conversation involves listening truly to the other party and hearing what they are trying to express to us, whether or not we want to hear what they have to say.
The same can be said of prayer. Prayer is also incredibly difficult and also requires practice. Even though we know how to recite liturgy, prayer involves truly listening to the other party – God – and hearing what God is trying to express to us, whether or not we want to hear what God has to say to us.
The story of Bilaam is one of realisation of the subtleties of communication with God. It shows that when we turn to God with preconceived ideas, we will only hear what we want to hear, and not necessarily what God is trying to say. Only when we really listen to God, through every communication channel, will we hear what God is trying to say to you.
And this is why we start the morning prayer service with the words of Bilaam, because Bilaam is each one of us – the person who can be tempted by financial incentives, who speaks but doesn’t always listen, who rebukes without wondering why a certain behaviour choice was made. But most importantly, and the reason why we quote Bilaam at the beginning of the morning prayer service, is that his story teaches us that to pray, just as to speak, we have to transcend our egocentric selves, and learn to listen to others and to God. “Ma Tovu Ohalecha Ya’akov, Mishkenotecha Yisrael – How good are your tents, O Jacob, and your homes, O Israel” – as we speak words of prayer, let us listen so we can learn what treasures you have inside. So, may we all transcend what we want to hear and may we open ourselves up in prayer not just to speak but also to honestly receive, and let us say, Amen.