[Par-reg] BALAK - questions for self study

Sun Jun 20 02:52:48 EDT 2010

**********************************************************
***

     THE TANACH STUDY CENTER [http://www.tanach.org]

          In Memory of Rabbi Abraham Leibtag

     Shiurim in Chumash & Navi by Menachem Leibtag

**********************************************************
***

              PARSHAT BALAK

PART I - QUESTIONS FOR THE 'SHABBOS TABLE'

WHO WROTE THE BIBLE?

1. In Mesechet Baba Batra (14b), we find the famous
passage

where the Gemara identifies the author of each of the '24

books' of the Bible.  In regard to Chumash itself, we find

what there a very puzzling statement:

  "Moshe katav sifro... - Moshe wrote his book - i.e.
Chumash,

  the parsha of Bilam, and sefer Iyov (Job)."

     In summary, the Gemara states that Moshe wrote the

following three 'books':

     1) His own book:

    Clearly, this refers to Chumash (that's why we call it
the

    five books of Moses)

     2) "parshat Bilam":

    This most probably refers to chapters 22->24 in Sefer

    Bamidbar - i.e. the main section of Parshat Balak.

     3) The book of Iyov (Job)

     The Gemara's observation concerning "parshat Bilam"
is

rather baffling. Considering that these three chapters are
an

integral part of Chumash, shouldn't parshat Bilam simply
be

considered part of his own book?

  It is understandable why we must be told that Moshe
wrote

Sefer Iyov, but if Moshe wrote the entire Chumash, is not

superfluous for the Gemara to tell that he also wrote
Sefer

Bilam?

     Furthermore, if Moshe didn't write it, who did?

     First, try to answer these questions on your own.

2.  Next, review that Gemara in Baba Batra (14b), and
Rashi's

commentary:

  "Moshe wrote Parshat Bilam: this refers to his [Bilam's]

  prophecies and parables, even though they are not his

  [Moshe's] needs, his laws, nor the story of his life."

     Be sure that you can explain how Rashi understood the

Gemara's "haava amina" [a possible original understanding]
for

why Moshe may not have written that section of Chumash.

     According to that "haava amina" - if it wasn't Moshe,

who's authorship would have that section been accredited
to?

3. Finally, see Rabeinu Gershom's short commentary on
this:

     "u'parshat Bilam: Even though Bilam himself was a

prophet"

  What underlying question does Rabeinu Gershom answer?

     Based on the content of this entire "parsha" (i.e.

chapters 22-24), what other reasons would there be to
assume

that Bilam may have written this entire section (and not

Moshe)?

  [Relate to who is aware of all the details of the

  conversations between Balak and Bilam.]

BETWEEN BILAM & AVRAHAM AVINU

1. The Mishnah in Pirkei Avot compares Bilam to Avraham
Avinu,

citing the altruistic traits of Avraham in direct contrast
to

the selfish traits of Bilam. (See Chapter 5 Mishneh 22)

     What textual parallels can you find in this week's
Parsha

that support this parallel?

     Can you think of any thematic parallels as well?

     Relate as well to Devarim 23:4-7 & Breishit 24:1-10!

     [Be sure that you noted Breishit 12:1-3 & Bamidbar
22:6.]

2. You may remember as well a Midrash that compares
Bilam's

journey with his donkey to Balak with Avraham Avinu's
journey

to Har Ha'moriah (and the story of the Akeydah).

     Attempt to find both textual and thematic support for

this parallel.

VA'YACHEL - TO BEGIN - OR TO DEFILE

1. In regard to 25:1, how did you translate the word

"va'yachel"? Note Seforno on 25:1, pay attention to what
he

learns from the Torah's use of this word.

     Next see Ibn Ezra in this regard (i.e. his commentary
on

25:1, the last line). How would he translate "va'yachel"?

     Compare this with the same (or similar) usage in
Breishit

9:20 (in regard to Noach and his vineyard).

     Compare as well with Breishit 4:26 (see the dispute
among

the commentators); 6:1; and 11:6.

     In your opinion, does the Torah use this word

intentionally due to the dual nature of its meaning?

THREE KEY UNITS - [for those who enjoy serious study]

1. Between 23:1 and 24:14 we find the three instances
where

Bilam plans to curse Yisrael, but finally blesses them

instead.

     Review these psukim, and attempt to understand how
they

divide into three distinct units.

     [If you didn't figure it out, try 23:1, 23:23:13,
23:27]

2. Note the textual similarities and parallel structures
that

exist between each of these three units.

     What verb (or pair of verbs!) does the Torah use to

describe God speaking to Bilam in each?

     Is it the same verb (/verbs) in each three cases? If
not,

which case is different? Can you explain why.

  [Note the preceding pasuk to each, where Bilam
anticipates

  that God may speak to him.]

3. Compare this description of God speaking to Bilam [i.e.

"va'yiker"] to other instances in Chumash of "hitgalut"
[i.e

when God speaks to man, e.g. to the Avot or to Moshe
Rabeinu].

     In your opinion, is this linguistic difference

significant?

     If so, how and why?

3. In each of these three mini-units, note how often the

concept of "bracha" & "klala" (blessing or cursing)
appears.

     [How many different Hebrew words are used for
'cursing'?]

Is the pattern the same in each unit?

How does this relate to the beginning of the Parsha (see

22:6)?

     Relate this as well to Breishit 12:1-3.

4. Carefully note how each of these three units end?

           [i.e. see 23:12, 23:26, & 24:12-13]

     What is similar about each ending, and what is
different?

     Can you find a progression from one to the next?

     Relate your answer to God's answer to Bilam's
original

request to accept Balak's proposal in chapter 22!

     [Note especially 22:12, 18, & 20.]

5. Note what transpires from 24:14 until the end of the

chapter!  How is this section different (in content and

structure) to the three previous units (discussed in the

question above)?

  In what manner are Bilam's actions and words in this
section

different (from the previous section)?  [Is there anything

similar?]

     How does this setting (i.e. after Bilam tells him
leave

in 24:11) relate to the content of Bilam's 'prophecy' in
this

final section?

     In your opinion, are Bilam's comments in 24:14-24 his
own

opinion (or foresight), or is God telling him to say this?

[Carefully compare with 24:1-3; 23:15-18; and 23:3-7.]

     In your opinion, should these final words of Bilam be

considered a 'higher' level of "nevuah" than the first
three

times that he speaks; or is this just his own opinion (or

predictions)?

========

PART II - QUESTIONS FOR PREPARATION (for weekly shiur)

1. We all recall that Bilam is a 'bad guy', but as you
study

Parshat Balak, see if you can pinpoint any specific sin
that

Bilam commits?

     If you do find such an instance, try to be his
'defense

lawyer', i.e. attempt to explain his behavior in a more

positive light.

     In Parshat Balak, is Bilam ever punished for any of
his

'wicked ways'? If so, when, where, and how?

     Based on your conclusions, why do you think that
Chazal

reached the conclusion that Bilam is so evil [a "rasha"

according to Pirkei Avot 5:22.]?  Do you agree?

2. What city was Bilam from?  Based on 22:5, 23:7 &
Devarim

23:5, in what geographic area did Bilam live?  What river
does

"ha'nhar" (in 22:5) refer to?  Similarly, what rivers does
the

phrase "Aram Naharaim" refer to in Devarim 23:5?

     If indeed the city of Petor is located somewhere near
the

Euphrates River, approximately how far away is this city
from

Moav (and Midyan)?

          [i.e. how many days travel (approx.)]

     How would this observation affect your understanding
of

the events that transpire in Parshat Balak?

3. Based on 23:8, why wasn't Bilam able to curse Am
Yisrael?

     In your opinion and based on 24:1-9, why does Bilam

decide to actually bless Am Yisrael instead of cursing
them?

     In your opinion, does Bilam compose this blessing on
his

own, or does God 'put these words in his mouth' as well?

4. Review 24:25 (in its context, noting how it relates to

24:11). Where does Bilam return to when this incident is
over?

     How far away is this location? Does the conclusion of

this story (see 24:23-25) leave you with the impression
that

Bilam plans to return one day to either Moav or Midyan?
Based

on 24:11, how (and why) does Balak say 'good-bye' to
Bilam?

See Chizkuni on 24:25 re: where Bilam returned to. Compare

this with Rasag's interpretation. [can be found in a Torat

Chayim Mikraot Gedolot edition.]

     Note also the Ibn Ezra on this pasuk. ['cute' - isn't

it?]

5. Review now the final section of Parshat Balak (i.e.
25:1-

9). Does the sin of Bnei Yisrael with "bnot Moav" (as

described in 25:1-9) appear to be related in any manner
with

the story of Bilam?   If so, explain how it is related.

Support your answer with psukim.  Is Bilam himself ever

mentioned in these psukim?

6. In the ensuing war with Midyan, which is described in

detail in the remainder of chapter 25 and in Parshat Matot

(see 31:1-20), we find that Bilam was killed (see 31:8).
In

what country is Bilam killed?

     Relate your answer to the above question.

     Does it make sense why Bnei Yisrael would kill Bilam?

7. In 31:14-16, in his conversation with the military
leaders,

Moshe refers to this entire incident with "bnot Midyan" as

"DVAR BILAM". In your opinion, what specific event does
"dvar

Bilam" refer to? [Relate to 26:1-6.]

     Can you explain why this event is called "dvar
BILAM"?

     What can you infer from this concerning Bilam's

whereabouts when the sin of "bnot Midyan" took place?
How

would this relate to the level of his involvement in these

events?

  From the above questions (especially the last two), what
can

we learn about Bilam's true character? What is Chazal's

conclusion on this issue?

=====

PARSHANUT

1. In regard to Bilam's involvement in the Bnot Midyan

incident, see Rashi on Bamidbar 25:1, noting his short
comment

regarding "atzat Bilam" [Bilam's advice].

     Then see the lengthy Ramban on this pasuk, first
noting

why he blames the 'leaders' and not the women of Midyan.
Be

sure you understand how this relates to Rashi's
commentary.

     Later in the Ramban, he continues ("b'derech
ha'pshat")

to prove how Bilam was indeed involved.  What is Ramban's

primary source for this explanation?  Why do you think he
adds

this point in addition to Rashi's commentary?

     How does it relate to the above preparation
questions?

2.  Next, see Seforno on 25:1.

     In what manner in his commentary different than Rashi
&

Ramban's?

     Why do think that Seforno finds it necessary to add
this

point that the idol worship only happened at a 'later
stage'?

In your opinion, is the primary goal of this
interpretation to

explain what took place or to learn a lesson for future

generations as well!

WHAT HAPPENED TO ZIKNEI MIDYAN?

1. Review 22:1-21, paying attention to who Balak sends to

Bilam.

     Who is sent, only the elders of Moav, or also the
elders

of Midyan? [Relate especially to 22:7 & 22:8!]

     What is difficult about these psukim?

See Rashi 22:7.

     How does Rashi (quoting Midrash Tanchuma 5) resolve
this

difficulty? Does Rashi take for granted that you noticed
this

question concerning 'what happened to the elders of
Midyan'?

2. Now, see Ibn Ezra 22:13. How does he resolve this

difficulty?

     Is his answer the same or different than Rashi? Why?

     In your opinion, which approach attempts to follow

"pshat"?

3. Now see Ramban 22:7, noting how he first quotes Rashi &
Ibn

Ezra, and first attempts to support Rashi's explanation.

     Why do you think that he opens his "pirush" in this

manner?  Does he bring a proof to Rashi from pshat or
drash?

     In what manner does Ramban support (or base) his

interpretation on Moshe Rabeinu's earlier relationship
with

the people of Midyan?  Can you explain why?

     Ramban later concludes: 'but the psukim do not
mention

this'. In your opinion, does he totally reject Rashi's
view?

4. Next, Ramban quotes Ibn Ezra, claiming that he argues
with

Rashi. On what point do Rashi & Ibn Ezra argue? On what
point

to they agree? [Relate this to Ramban's own opinion.]

5. At the conclusion of his commentary, Ramban offers his
own

opinion. According to Ramban, did the elders of Midyan
ever

travel to Balak in the first place? If not, why not?

     How does this solve the discrepancy in the psukim?

     What difficulty arises according to Ramban's pirush?

          How does Ramban solve this difficulty.

     Does Ramban also attempt to explain "pshat"? In your

opinion, is he convinced that his "pshat" is 'better' than

Rashi or Ibn Ezra's?  Relate Ramban's pshat to your answer
to

question #2 (in Part Two above re: where Bilam is
from...).

  Does this support Ramban's interpretation?

6. Finally, see Chizkuni on 22:8.  How does Chizkuni solve
the

problem of why the 'elders of Midyan' are not mentioned?

        [Note from his pirush to 22:13 that he follows Ibn

Ezra.]

     According to his pirush, in what country does Bilam

live?!

     What leads him to this conclusion? [See 31:1-8!]

     Is this 'clever' pirush by Chizkuni supported or
refuted

by your answer to question #2 in Part Two above?

                                   b'hatzlacha,

                                   menachem

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: balakq.pdf
Type: application/pdf
Size: 30639 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://mail.atlchai.org/pipermail/par-reg/attachments/20100620/d867c2e7/attachment-0001.pdf 