Balak: Learning mussar from a donkey
Are the donkey's words important enough to take up room in the Torah? Why?
We read in Parashat Balak of one of the wonders that Hashem created at the twilight of Creation: the power of speech that He gave to Balaam’s donkey (Avot 5:6).
The Parasha relatesthat Balaam’s donkey diverted three times from the path - due to seeing the angel that Hashem had sent, to dissuade Balaam, from continuing with his evil intent to curse Bnei Israel - an angel that Hashem precluded Balaam from seeing.
In his anger, Balaam struck his donkey on each of the three occasions - whereupon (22:28-31)’Hashem opened the mouth of the donkey, and it said to Balaam:’What have I done to you that you struck me these three times?.
Balaam said to the donkey:’Because you mocked me! If only there were a sword in my hand, I would now have killed you!’. The donkey said to Balaam:’Am I not your donkey that you have ridden all your life until this day? Have I been accustomed to do such a thing to you?’. He said:’No’. Then Hashem uncovered Balaam’s eyes and he saw the angel of Hashem standing on the toad with his sword drawn in his hand.’
The Zohar Hakadosh brings the wonder of Rabbi Yehuda, as to the ‘need’ for relating these events, ‘as the donkey’s words are not ‘words of wisdom’ that we needed to know, ‘as all the donkey said was:’What did I do to you?’, and what need was there for Hashem to endow the donkey with the power of speech, to utter these words?’.
Adds Rav Zalman Sorotzkin:’In view of this, why did Hashem trouble Himself to create the miracle of the speaking donkey, at the end of Creation, for it to utter these words of so little import? Would it not have been sufficient for the angel - who spoke to Balaam in any event - to have uttered these words, and not the donkey?.
Answers Rav David Hofstedter:’Since Hashem saw the ‘need’ to create this miraculous power - of speech of the donkey - we learn that there was great importance to the matter, and, therefore, we are obligated to seek to learn what ithe ‘need’ was, and what we are to learn from it.
A wondrous Midrash gives us the opening:’Balaam could not answer the words of rebuke of his Donkey; Said Abba Kohen Bardala: Woe to us from the Day of Judgement, woe to us from the Day of Rebuke! Balaam, the sage of the nations, could not stand up to the words of rebuke of his donkey:’הסכן הסכנתי לעות לך כה ואמר: לא: Have I been accustomed to do such a thing to you? He said:’No’.
‘When Hashem will come to rebuke each one לפי מה שהוא: according to what he is, how much more so!’.
Adds the Midrash Hagadol:’Balaam said:No, against his will, and at that moment, he was greatly ashamed. Our rabbis, when they reached this passuk, would cry, and say: Woe to us from the Day of Judgement, woe to us from the Day of Rebuke.’
The Beit Halevi, elucidates the deeper meaning of the words ‘according to what he is’:’On that awesome Day, Hashem will show each one, how his own deeds contradict one another, as, for each transgression, on its own, the person finds some justification for his actions. Thus, a person who is miserly in giving charity, excuses himself, on the grounds that his other pressing needs limit his ability to give charity.
‘But, he has no answer, when he is shown, that he still managed to expend considerable sums on luxuries for his pleasure - this is the meaning of the Midrash, that his own deeds on other occasions,m give lie to his excuse:’each one will be rebuked by his own deeds!’.
Rav Yosef Salant similarly expounds:’It is human nature, that when one does something improper, or transgresses, that he makes allowances for himself, so that his action becomes ‘permissible’; however, Hashem, before Whom all is revealed, shows the person on the Day of Judgement, that the person’s own actions, on another occasion, showed that he acted in an opposite manner.
‘This is the meaning of the words of the Midrash, that ‘each one will be rebuked according to what he is’: by his own actions, on another occasion.
‘In this way, we can understand the rebuke of Balaam’s donkey, according ‘to what he is’. Theoretically, was Balaam wrong in striking his donkey, when it diverted from his instructions on the three occasions? Didn’t Hashem, at Creation, specifically empowered man to rule over all the animals - where, then, did Balaam err in this respect, and merit the rebuke of his donkey?
‘The answer is that this power was given when the person acts as ‘man’, being distinct and superior to the animals; when, however, a person descends to the level of an animal, when, like a Balaam he descends to the morass of behaviour - even, as our Sages comment, to being intimate with his donkey - he has lost the right to rule over animals - his deeds on another occasion, show his true standing.
‘This underlay the rebuke of the donkey:’Why did YOU strike me these three times?’.
Rav Azaria Figo proffers a different view on the words of our Midrash:’judge a person according to what he is’.
Expounds the Rav:’Why did the donkey - instead of explaining that she strayed three times, because the angel stood in her way - ask:What have I done to you, that you struck me these three times?.
‘However, this was her rebuke to him, her intention being:’What have I done for you, all the past years, ‘until this day’? Have I been accustomed to do such a thing to you’? apart from on this occasion - and, this being the case, you should have judged me favorably, and understood that there must be some reason - and enquire.
‘Balaam, in his rage, did not understand what his donkey was saying, and therefore thought that the donkey was denying having done anything improper on these three occasions.
‘He therefore replied:’you mocked me’, so the donkey had to explain her rebuke:’Have I been accustomed to do such a thing to you?.
Expounded Abba Kohen Bardla: if the ‘wise’ Balaam was struck mute, and unable to answer his donkey’s rebuke - that he should have judged her ‘on her deeds’ - how are we going to answer, on our Day of Judgement, for our conduct throughout our lives.’
A beautiful parting mussar insight, from Rav Avigdor Nebenzahl:’This year, after sixty years of reading this Parasha, a new thought struck me.
‘Balaam’s donkey’s unanswerable rebuke was: ‘Am I not the donkey that you have ridden all your life until this day? Have I been accustomed to do such a thing to you?’.
‘So! in your mind, Balaam, today I acted improperly, but where is your הכרת הטוב: gratitude for all my years of faithful service? And, not enough that you struck me three times today, you declared that I merited to be killed because of this:’If only there was a sword in my hand I would now have killed you!’.
‘We have to be struck by the terrible wrong that the donkey felt had been done to her, after all the years of faithful service.
‘
And even Balaam was struck dumb, and unable to respond to this awesome rebuke.’
No comments:
Post a Comment