Commento su Numeri 22:6

נכה בו (this may mean, “we may smite them”) I and my people may smite them. — Another explanation is that this is a Mishnaic Hebrew expression as in (Bava Metzia 105b) “he deducts (מנכה) for him something from the price”, so that it means: [perhaps I may be able] to reduce them a little in numbers (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 4).

THAT WE MAY SMITE THEM — the meaning [of the plural “we,” although it is only Balaam who is speaking], is “I and Midian my ally.”³¹This is unlike Rashi, who explains the plural “we” as meaning “I and my people.”

אולי אוכל, after you have cursed them.

ועתה לכה נא, "and now please come, etc." Balak used the word ועתה, "and now," to indicate that he did not want Bileam to delay before he would come as he felt himself in danger every moment. He pleaded by using the word נא, "please," adding that Bileam should curse this people לי, "for me." By this he meant that the effectiveness of Bileam's curse should not be delayed until after the Israelites had a chance to revenge themselves on him and Moav for having called in Bileam to curse them. By using the word לי, Balak also hinted that although -according to the Midrash- Bileam had already blessed Balak personally so that he had no reason to fear the Israelites himself, he wanted the Israelites cursed and was not content with being blessed. In the event Bileam were to say that there was no need for this, Balak added כי עצום הוא ממני, "for it is more mighty than I." Balak had two things in mind when he said these words. 1) Israel's natural strength; 2) the matter of the blessing. He felt that Israel had received more powerful blessings than he had received from Bileam. When he went on אולי נכה בו, "perhaps we can smite it," he meant that even after Bileam would do all that he requested him to do he would still not feel confident to take on the Israelites by himself. At best, he might be able to inflict a defeat on them, certainly not to wipe them out. He might also have drawn a line between the righteous Israelites and the average ones. Of the former he expressed the hope that he could expel them from the region, ואגרשנו מן הארץ, whereas concerning the less pious Israelites he entertained hopes of defeating them, נכה בו.

את אשר תבורך, by means of prophetic inspiration. Balak also knew that Bileam was a prophet and practiced foretelling future events by resorting to such tools of his trade as קסמים, charms of different sorts. This is the reason why in Joshua 13,22 Bileam is described as a קוסם, a sorcerer, someone working with charms. Up until now Balak had thought that his prayers and sacrifices would be enough to ward off the danger he thought the Jewish people posed for him and his country.

ארה לי, “curse for me, etc.” In using the superfluous pronoun “לי,” Balak trapped himself as in the end Bileam cursed him. [Predicted the annihilation of the people of Moav. Ed.]

My people and I. Rashi is answering the question: אולי אוכל [lit. "perhaps I will be able"] is in the singular form, while נכה [lit. "we will strike"] is in the plural form.

V. 6. ארה לי וגו׳ .ועתה לכה נא, vernichte den inneren Lebenskeim dieses Volkes, treffe es vernichtend in seinem Innern (siehe Bereschit 12, 3). כי עצום הוא ממני, denn es lediglich durch meine äußere Macht zu besiegen, dazu bin ich zu schwach. נַכֶה könnte Infinitiv vom פיעל sein, wie, נֻכו נֻכָתָה (Schmot 9, 31 u. 32) vom פועל. Allein regelmäßig müsste es dann נַכֶה heißen. נַכֶה ist vielmehr Futur הפעיל, und heißt es daher wohl: vielleicht werde ich es dann vermögen, das wir, ich und mein Volk (Raschi), oder dass wir, ich und du, נכה בו. Einen Feind im Kriege schlagen, besiegen, wird nur mit dem Akkusativ konstruiert, נכה ב־ ,נכה אותו heißt wohl nur, ihm einen Schlag versetzen, ihm eine Niederlage beibringen, ואגרשנו מן הארץ, nicht, dass es durch uns vernichtet, sondern nur in andere Gegenden hin vertrieben werde. Selbst mit Bileams Beihilfe wagt Balak nicht, von einer gänzlichen Vernichtung zu sprechen.

וארגשנו מן הארץ, “so that I will be able to expel them from the land.” He did not mean to exterminate them but merely to chase them away from land which was his. According to Rashi, he referred specifically to that part of Moav which Sichon had many years earlier conquered from Moav.

אולי אוכל נכה בו, “perhaps I can inflict a defeat on it;” the plural mode in the word נכה i.e. “we will inflict a defeat,” is not as surprising as it appears at first glance. We find a parallel in Song of Songs: 1,4: משכני אחריך נרוצה, “draw me after you, let us run.”An alternate interpretation: “Let us inflict a defeat on it, you and me by engaging it in war; “I will wage war, and you will do the cursing.” The use of the word הכאה, “striking” in the sense of cursing is also not unique, as we find it in Jeremiah 18,18: לכו ונכנו בלשון, “come and let us strike him with the tongue.

כי ידעתי וגו׳ FOR I KNOW etc., through the war of Sihon against Moab, because you assisted him to smite Moab (Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 4; cf. Rashi on 21:27).

נכה בו, I militarily and you by means of curses.

To diminish them a little. Meaning that this was what the Moavites were saying about Yisroel, that they would diminish them a little (Accordingly נכה is the infinitive and it means "[I will be able] to diminish"). The other interpretation is necessary because according to the first reason there is the difficulty that one had to ‘emend’ the text to read “my people and I.” Thus Rashi brings the other interpretation. However, according to the other interpretation, there is the difficulty that it should have said נכה ממנו [lit. "to diminish from him"] like the language of the Mishnah מנכה מן הדמים [lit. "reduce from the price"]. Thus the first reason is also necessary.

There is also a moral/ethical message in Balak's words. His words boomeranged upon himself. When he said ארה לי, "curse for me," this turned out to be "curse me." Had he not used these words his daughter Kosbi would not have been killed by Pinchas. Bileam's coming to Moav and failing to curse the Israelites also became the reason that Balak was forced to return to Midian and be killed by the sword during the punitive expedition involving 12.000 Israelites as described in 31,8. If Bileam had not travelled all the way to Moav and assured these people that they were safe from the Israelites until the distant future, Balak would have remained on the throne in Moav, secure from all the wars the Israelites would be involved in. As it was, he became the personification of Psalms 37,15: "their swords shall pierce their own hearts."

כי ידעתי את אשר תברך מבורך, “for I know that the ones whom you bless will be blessed.” Bileam (one of the people speaking in parables) had prophesied earlier that Moav would become a victim of Sichon, as we know from Numbers 21,27)

ואגרשנו מן הארץ, “so that I may drive them out of the land.” Balak is referring to the land that Sichon had taken from Moav during the rule of Moav’s first king.

אשר תברך מבורך, actually Bileam’s power did not consist in blessing but in cursing people by mentioning their failings at a critical moment in G’d’s timetable, as elaborated on by our sages in B’rachot 7. This is why Balak did not demand a blessing from Bileam to make him victorious in war, or at least to be blessed so that he could fight the Israelites to a standstill. But when he nonetheless added the words ידעתי את אשר תברך מבורך, he did so only as a way of flattering Bileam.

כי ידעתי את אשר תברך מברך, "for I know that if you bless someone, etc." We may understand this as a reference to another statement in the Midrash we quoted earlier that Bileam had foretold Balak that he would become a king. Balak acknowledged that Bileam's blessing had indeed come true for him. This was something only he was aware of as he had experienced it personally. On the other hand, it was common knowledge that Bileam's curse was effective for when Sichon went to war against Moav he had hired Bileam to curse Moav (compare Tanchuma on this paragraph). As a result, Sichon had captured large parts of Moav. [land which the Israelites had now captured from Sichon. Ed.] We have to mention here that the reason Bileam's curses had seemed effective to people who hired him was 1) he possessed the power of the evil eye; 2) he knew when to exploit the precise moment when G'd was angry and he chose that moment to utter his curse. (compare Berachot 7). He did not have parallel powers to make his blessings effective for any length of time.

As a matter of fact, a blessing by Bileam was about as effective as a blessing by a donkey. Bileam merely pretended to bless after he had observed that the horoscope of the person in question fore-shadowed that he would be successful. All Bileam did was to match his blessing to what he foresaw in that person's horoscope. When the blessing appeared to have been fulfilled, Bileam claimed credit for it as if he had been the cause and not horoscopic forces. This was precisely how he came to bless Balak and predicted that he would become king. He had consulted Balak's horoscope and found that it foretold that Balak would become a king. He had deceived Balak by letting him believe that he, Bileam, had been the cause of his becoming king.