Pensamiento judío sobre Números 23:10

Divine intervention when applied to the Jewish people is the norm rather than the exception. Divine intervention, when applied to gentiles is restricted to a small segment of the people and occurs at rare intervals. Examples are: the deluge, Sodom, Nineveh, Avimelech and Pharaoh being punished on account of Abraham, Egypt's ten plagues and the kings of Canaan in their war against Joshua. We read in Psalms 33, 14, "G-d looks down from the heavens and relates to all the inhabitants of earth from His residence...the eye of the Lord is directed towards those who fear Him." Clearly, the application of Divine intervention when dealing with the gentiles has as its objective the protection of His people. When Isaiah 44,28, quotes G-d as saying "who says about Cyrus "He is My shepherd," it refers to Cyrus' dream in which he had seen himself as rebuilding Jerusalem and the temple in G-d’s honour. This is an instance of Divine intervention in the life of a gentile for the sake of the Jewish people. Since the tabernacle became the seat from which Divine intervention would emanate, we understand the Midrash which states that until the building of the tabernacle, prophecy was found amongst the nations of the world, only to be removed from them once the tabernacle had been erected. When Bileam prophesied, it was only for the benefit of Israel. The problem with the Midrash is that we do not really find gentile prophets either prior to or subsequent to the erection of the tabernacle. The few instances of visions in a dream that Pharaoh and Avimelech or Laban had experienced, are not to be equated with prophecy. (Maimonides Moreh section three, chapter 2) On the other hand, were we to assume that such prophets did exist, it seems unfair to remove such powers from them merely because of the erection of the tabernacle. Regarding Moses’s prayer (Exodus 33, 16) to withhold the shechinah from non Jews, and G-d’s acquiescence, this too seems a case of an improper request by a student, and a response by his teacher that hardly seems appropriate. One must consider however that the very paucity of Divine intervention until that time, had made it difficult for people to recognise G-d and His power, since people had only seen natural law at work. They believed these laws to be inexorable. For that reason, G-d had to allow prophets among the nations, so that people would become aware of an alternative to natural law, namely G-d’s Personal intervention in the affairs of man. Prophecy at that time, meant that astrology and such would be used by wise men to forecast the future. Once the string of miracles that had preceded the building of the tabernacle and continued afterwards became the norm, the relative wisdom of the astrologers, soothsayers etc. faded into insignificance. This is why Bileam said "Jacob has neither charms nor enchantments." (Numbers 23,33.) What he meant was that those who had the powers of charms and enchantments could not bring them to bear upon this nation, since that people was not subject to the rule of natural law as evidenced in horoscopes and the like. This is the removal of prophecy from the nations of the world that Moses had prayed for. In other words, Moses prayed that such enchantments become irrelevant to Israel's fate. He did not ask that real prophetic powers which the nations never possessed be removed from them. Moses wanted veniflinu, let us be distinguished; G-d responded "I shall do wonderful things." Israel, on the other hand, would be guided only by hashgachah peratit, and astrologers, enchanters etc. should not exist among them. This realisation came to the gentiles in stages. First, the Egyptians acknowledged "a finger of G-d." Vitro came to acknowledge "for I know that G-d is greater than any other deity." Rahav, who had harboured the spies that Joshua had sent to Jericho, expressed herself in similar fashion.

In fact, since according to our sages, Moses had been handed the keys to all G'ds treasure chambers, he is criticized when he resorts merely to prayer instead of action, deed. At the sea, when threatened by the Egyptians who were close on his heels, G'd says to him "why are you crying out to Me, tell the Jewish people to get going!" (Exodus 14,15) Not for nothing did G'd say to him "see I have made you Lord over Pharaoh." (Exodus 7,1) Moses was like a deity who would employ Aaron as his prophet to impose his will upon Pharaoh. The contrast with Bileam is striking. The latter, by his own admission, had no idea when G'd would respond to his requests, and was certainly quite powerless to act on his own and display supernatural powers. Every utterance made by Bileam in his capacity as seer, needed approval by G'd. He did not even have latitude to depart from his prepared text. (Numbers 22,38) His utter lack of vision is best demonstrated when he said to his she-ass "if I had a sword in my hand I would kill you now." (Numbers 22,29) The Midrash that stated that among the nations there did arise a prophet, did not mean to compare Bileam with Moses, but to point out the contrast between the two. Even when a prophet does arise among the gentiles, there is no comparison at all. In every vital matter, Moses was far superior to Bileam. (see Sifri on Deut. 34,10) In order to convey G'ds messages, Moses did not need to hear them spelled out, since he always found himself on the right wavelength. Bileam, on the other hand, had to stress that what he conveyed was the word of G'd. The meaning of the Sifri in Deut. 34,10, that Moses did not know who was going to talk to him, whereas Bileam knew, is, that Moses did not need to prepare himself for an encounter with G'd, whereas Bileam had to. Moses communicated with G'd from an upright position, Bileam only while he was prostrate. The fact that Bileam was uncircumcised was a further impediment to his receptiveness for Divine communication. Prior to circumcision, even an Abraham received the word of G'd only while falling down. Not until after the circumcision when G'd addressed him, (Genesis 18,1) do we find him remaining seated. The gentile is communicated with only at night, since he is compared to a mistress, someone whom one visits discreetly during the hours of darkness. Israel, however, is like a wife with whom one communicates openly during all hours of the day. When Bileam describes himself as "one who hears the words of G'd, receives visions of the Almighty, (Numbers 24,4) one forms the impression that he was indeed on very familiar terms with the Almighty. However, this is misleading. Whereas the chef in the king's kitchen must be familiar with every ingredient in the king's meal, the maitre D' does not have to concern himself with every detail. When the Midrash, in apparent inexactitude, states that whereas Moses did not know "what was talking, whereas Bileam knew "what was talking," the reference is to the subject matter. Bileam who knew that a specific topic would be discussed with him without preamble, needed advance knowledge of that subject. Similarly, he knew when this subject would come up. This is why he could tell Balak's messengers to stay overnight till he would get instructions. Moses needed no advance knowledge of the subject matter, nor did he ever have to wait for an opportune moment. As soon as he entered the tabernacle, "he would hear the voice of the Lord talk to him." (Numbers 7, 89.) The somewhat peculiarly worded Midrash (Sifri) mentioned, has yet another meaning. Since Bileam's mode of communication with G'd was not on the level of "face to face," he could identify the source of what was speaking to him, since "it" assumed a certain form. Moses, on the other hand, while on the level of "face to face" communication had also been told by G'd "you cannot see My face, you can only see My rear, i.e. in retrospect." (Exodus 33,20) At the actual moment of the communication, he never knew how close to the "face to face" level the emanation from which he heard the voice actually was. Bileam had a kind of visual contact machazeh. Not so Moses, to whom a completely disembodied voice would not present a conceptual problem. The thrust of the whole commentary on the verse "there did not arise another prophet etc." is not to minimise the accomplishments of an Elijah in reviving the dead, nor to belittle Joshua arresting the sun and moon in their respective orbits. The commentary wishes to underline that no one other than Moses performed such miracles except by their own initiative. None were as privy to G'ds intentions as had been Moses. For that very reason, namely that he was on such intimate terms with G'd, it would have been practically impossible for Moses to have produced a miracle on his own initiative. If the whole portion is written to demonstrate the inadequacy of the most brilliant of gentile prophets, then we can understand Rabbi Yitzchak's statement that commencing with the functioning of the tabernacle, no more prophetic powers were granted to the gentiles.

Man's life is lived on two planes. He lives privately within the circle of his family, and he lives as a member of society, and must interact with such society in greater or lesser measure. The good he does must be divided then between the good he does within the family circle, and the good he does by contributing to the well being of the community he lives in. He will receive rewards for both his good deeds within the family circle and for the good deeds performed as part of society. To the extent that the good performed as part of society benefits everyone in that society equally, the reward can be collective. Since every member of that society benefitted equally by the input of good, so the reward is the kind that lets everyone benefit equally. Output is commensurate with input. The promise of the Jewish people living together in security, enjoying economic prosperity etc., is a reward for such good deeds performed by dint of being part of a certain society. It is a reward for the physical part of man, but it is allocated on a collective basis. Reward for the spiritual part of the input of everyone involved, is based on the degree of dedication that each person's contribution represents. It is in the nature of things that every individual brings a different degree of kavanah, intent, dedication to the performance of his mitzvoth. That is why our sages say that in the world to come everyone will occupy a level of his own. Since there are many commandments which can be fulfilled only collectively, the building of the temple for instance, the reward for such mitzvot, spiritual though it may be, will be collective. The time for receiving a reward for such mitzvot performed collectively, but not because such mitzvot benefit society (called by our sages yishuv ha-olam), is in the post-messianic era, but on this earth when ideal conditions for physical life will exist. In all cases however, the reward for the degree of the spiritual input by each individual into each mitzvah, regardless if it is of the kind that can only be fulfilled collectively or if it is fulfilled individually, is in olam haba.