Kommentar zu Bamidbar 22:18

מלא ביתו כסף וזהב [IF BALAK WOULD GIVE ME HIS HOUSE] FULL OF SILVER AND GOLD — This tells us that he was avaricious and covetous of other peoples wealth. He said: He ought to give me all his silver and gold, for, behold, he would otherwise have to hire many armies to fight against them. Even then it is doubtful whether he would conquer or not conquer, but “I” would certainly conquer (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 6).

ויאמר אל עבדי בלק, ”He said to the servants of Balak, etc.” The first delegation was described by the Torah as consisting of שרי בלק, ministers of Balak. The title conferred by the Torah on the members of the second delegation is that they were עבדי בלק, ”servants of Balak.” This sounds strange seeing that they had previously been described as of even higher rank than the first delegation. Perhaps the Torah merely wanted to show us the haughtiness of Bileam who considered even the members of this delegation as merely: “Balak’s servants.” When he spoke to them he related to them as someone’s underlings, not as high-ranking officers in their own right.

ואמר אל עבדי בלק, אם יתן לי בלק, “He said to Balak’s servants: even if Balak were to give me, etc.” Earlier the first group of emissaries had been described as שרי בלק; the new delegation is described by Bileam as עבדי בלק. The first delegation who had behaved towards Bileam with deference had been rewarded by him in that he considered them as שרי בלק, Balak’s princes. The second group who related to Bileam in a peremptory manner, saying: “Balak said not to refuse to come to me,” he treated with disdain seeing they had been arrogant towards him. Hence he treated them as merely עבדי בלק “Balak’s servants.” He also wanted to allude to the fact that they who were merely the servants of a mortal king and not allowed to disobey their ruler, must surely understand that he as a servant of an immortal King, G’d, could most certainly not disobey His instructions.

We learn that he was avaricious and he coveted the money of others. Since Bil’am did not say, “If Balak would cut off my head” or do something else to me “I cannot transgress…” Rather he said “if Balak would give me silver and gold enough to fill his house.” [From here] we learn that he was avaricious…

V. 18. ויען וגו׳ אל עבדי כלק. Die זקני מואב hatte er den זקני מדין gegenüber als שרים behandelt (V. 8) und sich auch ferner (Verse 13 u. 14) also gegen sie benommen, damit vergab er sich nichts. Im Gegenteil, seine Leutseligkeit durfte ihm das Volk gewinnen, in dessen Mitte er noch aufzutreten hoffte. Die wirklichen שרים von hohem und höchstem Range behandelt er wie עבדים, das zeichnet den ganzen Mann: herablassend gegen Niedere, hochmütig gegen Hohe. אם יתן לי בלק מלא ביתו וגו׳. Auch darin zeichnet sich sein Charakter. So sehr er Ehre sucht, so gilt ihm doch Geld mehr als Ehre. Balak hatte in seiner Sendung in keiner Weise auf eine Belohnung in Geld hingedeutet, hatte nur von ungemeiner Ehre und im übrigen von Bereitwilligkeit für alle seine Wünsche gesprochen. Bileam übersetzt aber sogleich die Ehre in Geld, oder meint, wenn ihm selbst die größte Geldesbelohnung würde, so usw. Es ist ihm somit jedenfalls Geld das Höchste. So stellt auch die Charakterschilderung des Bileam in den Worten der Weisen (Abot 5) dessen Habsucht, נפש רחבה, parallel seinem Hochmut, רוח גבוהה, zur Seite.

לא אוכל לעבר I CANNOT GO BEYOND [THE WORD OF THE LORD] — Against his own will he divulged to them that he was under the control of others, and he prophesied here that he would be unable to annul those blessings with which the patriarchs had been blessed by the mouth of God (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 6).

And he prophesied here… Meaning that he prophesied but he did not know what he had prophesied. For it came forth from his mouth that he could not transgress the word of Hashem and “the word of Hashem” includes both of these matters. Re’m. Alternatively Rashi is answering the question: Why did he say “I cannot [transgress]”? Instead he should have said “I will not transgress,” which would imply that it was dependent upon his own choice. However, “I cannot” implies that he was not permitted [to do so] since he was under the authority of Hashem. Also, since he should have said “I cannot curse them.” What is meant when he said “[I cannot transgress] the word of Hashem”? Rather, he meant I cannot change the blessings which [the Patriarchs] received by the word of Hashem.