[Par-reg] Balak - questions for self study

Mon Jul 2 04:17:12 EDT 2012

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

     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/20120702/70b163b2/attachment-0001.pdf 