Balak: Looking Through a Different Lens

According to Jewish law,1 the Haftarah for a Torah reading reflects the content of that Torah reading, and more precisely, its conclusion.2

Seemingly, the connection between Parshas Balak and its Haftarah is direct. The Haftarah relates3 that G‑d commanded the Jewish people, “My nation, remember the counsel given by Ba­lak, King of Moav, and the response Bilaam the son of Beor gave him from Shittim.” This relates to the content of Parshas Balak.

It is, however, understood that the connection between the Haftarah and the Torah reading is not confined to a single verse but relates to its general theme. This is reflected in the well-known concept that the Haftarah was originally instituted in place of the entire Torah reading.4 According to the recognized general principle5 that a subject’s theme is alluded to in its beginning, it is clear that there is a connection between (the conclusion of) Parshas Balak and the beginning of the Haftarah,6 “The remnant of Yaakov will be in the midst of many nations... they will not hope from man, nor look forward [for help] from a mortal.”

The Haftarah is speaking about the time at the beginning of the Redemption; the time before Mashiach’s identity will be definitely established. To establish Mashiach’s identity definitively, it is required that he complete waging all the wars and “transform the nations... so that they serve G‑d with a single purpose.”7 However, the Haftarah speaks about a preliminary stage, when Mashiach will wage wars against the nations, as it is written,8 “The remnant of Yaakov will be in the midst of the nations... like a lion among the animals of the forest... who tramples and preys.”

Moreover, not only will the era that the Haftarah speaks about involve conflict with external evil – wars against non-Jewish nations – there will also be internal evil, i.e., degeneracy within the Jews themselves, as it is written,9 “I will cut away witchcraft from your hand.... I will cut away your idols.... I will uproot your Asherah trees.”10 Implied is that the evil will be so powerful that it will be necessary for there to be assistance from Above to eliminate it, as the verse states, “I will cut away.... I will uproot.” The existence of such evil indicates that the Haftarah is speaking about the time at the beginning of the Redemption when the last preparations for the complete Redemption will take place.

Similarly, the Torah reading, Parshas Balak, speaks of a comparable phase in history, the time directly before the Jews’ entry into Eretz Yisrael for the first time as a nation. The Jews were “in the plains of Moav, across from Jericho at the Jordan,”11 ready to enter Eretz Yisrael. This resembles the Jews’ state before entering Eretz Yisrael at the time of the ultimate Redemption. In particular the connection is apparent according to the well-known concept12 that had the Jews not sinned, the ultimate Redemption would have come when they first entered Eretz Yisrael.

At the beginning of the Haftarah, the Prophet Michah13 relates that part of the spiritual preparation necessary for the Redemption is “not [to] place our hope in man, nor [to] look forward [for help] from a mortal.” Even before the Redemption blossoms into complete fulfillment, we will not pin our hopes on any man, not even on our fellow Jews, as it is written,14 “Cursed is the mortal who trusts in man (adam).”15 Rather, we will rely on G‑d alone, as it is written,16 “Blessed is the man who puts his trust in G‑d.”

Since the above prophecy – that we will “not place our hope in man” – relates to the time of the beginning of the Redemption, it is obviously not speaking of forbidden conduct, that one act in opposition to the Torah’s directive, “Cursed is the mortal who trusts in man.” Rather, it foretells how at that time we will rise above reliance on man even in a manner permitted by the Torah.

To explain: It is written,17 “And G‑d your L‑rd will bless you in everything that you do.” In explanation of this verse, Sifri writes, “Lest a person think that he should sit idly,18 the verse comes to teach us that G‑d’s blessing is bestowed ‘in everything that you do.’ ” This means that the Torah instructs a person to create a natural conduit19 for his livelihood,20 and that “one should not rely on a miracle.”21 Hence, since according to the natural order, making a living requires that one have dealings with mere mortals (including those who are not fellow Jews), “placing our hope in man” is well within the Torah’s guidelines.

The verse, “Cursed is the mortal who trusts in man,” does not contradict the above course of action. For making a natural conduit for a livelihood does not mean that one relies on the natural order as it exists in its own right. Rather, one trusts that G‑d will grant His blessings through the natural conduit that He has prepared.22

This represents the new development that will come about in the era of the Redemption: Blessings will then come “like dew from G‑d,” which “does not come to the world through mortal efforts, nor does man request it. Similarly, we will not hope to be helped by man, but by G‑d.”23

A related verse states,24 “It is preferable to rely on G‑d than to trust in man.” As understood in the teachings of Chassidus,25 this means that although “trust[ing] in man” is also permitted by the Torah, it is preferable “to rely on G‑d.”

In this context, “to trust in man” can be understood as a mystical allusion to the Sublime Man, i.e., the Divine energy that “permeates all the worlds” (memale kol almin).26 From the perspective of this level of spirituality, a person must endeavor to make a conduit within the natural order on which G‑d’s blessings will rest.27 Therefore it is “preferable to rely on G‑d,” on the level of G‑dliness that “transcends all the worlds” (sovev kol almin).28 At this level, a person has no need to ground his endeavors in the natural order. Rather, “He (G‑d Himself) will provide for you ( יכלכלך ) i ,29 by providing the conduit ( כלי ) as well.16

The ultimate Divine intent is not that the natural order should cease to exist, but that it should be refined and elevated30 to the extent that it is apparent to everyone that nature is one with G‑d. With regard to the concept at hand – not to place one’s hope in man – the Divine intent is not that help via mortals will cease to exist. Rather, the natural order will then be so utterly fused with G‑dliness that we will perceive the assistance we receive not as help from man, but only as help from G‑d.

The requirement to do6 – i.e., to create a natural conduit through which one’s living is to be earned – may be approached in either of two ways:

(a) One knows that nature per se has no independent existence and is no more than “an ax in the hand of the woodchopper.”31 Nevertheless, since G‑d commanded that one should do – i.e., one should create a natural conduit for one’s livelihood – nature acquires a certain standing in one’s mind. Not that this status derives from nature in its own right. Instead, it is only by virtue of G‑d’s command that one sees the natural order as significant.32

(b) One engages in natural ways and means only because G‑d so commanded. The natural order in and of itself is of no importance in the person’s eyes; he perceives it as nothing more than a means to fulfill G‑d’s will.33

This explains34 the teaching of our Sages35 on the verse,36 “He shall be the faithfulness of your times....” The Sages teach that here, emunas (“faithfulness”) alludes to Seder Zera’im which is the section of the Mishnah that deals mainly with the laws applying to agriculture, for a Jewish farmer “believes in Him Who is the Life of all the worlds – and sows.”

True enough, the fact that germination follows sowing is a natural phenomenon. It does not matter whether the farmer is Jewish or not, nor even if the seed fell to the ground without any human agency. The earth by nature promotes germination. (Indeed, this intrinsic nature of the earth is constant, as in the verse,37 “seed time and harvest... will not cease.”) Nevertheless, though cognizant of all the above, nature does not acquire status in the mind of a Jew. When he sows, he does not do so because the laws of nature dictates that sowing leads to germination, but only because “he believes in Him Who is the Life of all the worlds – and sows.” That is why he sows.

The difference between the above two approaches is not only a matter of how one experiences and feels the attribute of trust in G‑d. Instead, the manner in which one experiences this attribute of bitachon leads ultimately to differences in one’s actual conduct in the realms of thought, speech, and action.

When what one has to do is perceived as a value in its own right,38 i.e., when the laws of nature enjoy a certain standing in one’s mind, then one’s obligations in the realm of Torah and its commandments (on one hand) and the requirement to do (on the other hand) are perceived as two separate entities. In such a case, what happens if the two interests conflict?

(A person might fear, for example, that if he invests more time in meditation during prayer, he will lose contacts necessary for his business affairs. Likewise, if he fulfills the mitzvah of tzedakah generously, he may worry that he will be left with less money to invest in his business or the like.) The tension between the two contrary approaches can then be metaphorically described by the phrase,39 “Two nations will contend for the upper hand.”

Let us even suppose that one foregoes involvement in activities mandated by the natural order (knowing that “it is G‑d’s blessing that bestows wealth,”40 and that these natural processes are only a conduit and a channel for G‑d’s blessing) and involves himself in studying Torah and observing mitzvos. Even then, doing so involves an inner war and a struggle to overcome his animal soul. Moreover, there is always the possibility that the balance of power will shift and the “other nation” will gain the upper hand (G‑d forbid!).

When, however, a person gives no importance to the conduit that he makes for G‑d’s blessing, and involves himself with it only in order to fulfill the Creator’s will, that involvement in itself becomes a mode of Divine service and therefore acquires significance.

Our Sages41 teach that “all your actions should be performed for the sake of Heaven,” and it is written,42 “Know Him in all your ways.” When one’s service of G‑d is such that he engages in natural ways and means only in order to fulfill His will, “all his actions” and “all his ways” are not distinct from “the sake of Heaven” and from the obligation to “know Him.” They are so utterly permeated by those ideals that they all become one. Accordingly, the person’s activities to establish a conduit for G‑d’s blessings become regarded differently.

Since in such a person’s mind nothing is considered of any significance other than G‑d’s will, there can obviously be no conflict between one mitzvah and another. Indeed,43 “One mitzvah draws another in its train” and the person’s involvement in spiritual and material spheres complement each other.

The difference between these two approaches does not begin with a distinct point of conduct. At the outset, the yetzer hara does not try to convince a person that he should transgress G‑d’s will outright. It begins with a hair’s-breadth. As our Sages teach,44 “This is how the yetzer hara plies his craft: Today, he tells a man, Do this; the next day he tells him, Do that; until ultimately he tells him, Serve idols – and he goes and serves them.” At first, the yetzer hara concedes, as it were, that this person’s involvement in making a living via a natural conduit should not conflict with his observance of the Torah and its mitzvos. It merely emphasizes that even the Torah agrees activities within the natural order should be given their due standing. Ultimately, “tomorrow,” however, it causes these activities within the natural order to be considered of primary importance.

My revered father-in-law, the Rebbe Rayatz, interpreted45 the above Talmudic teaching as follows: At the beginning, the yetzer hara does not try to convince a person to do the opposite of his true will46 (and thereby violate G‑d’s will, Heaven forbid). On the contrary, it tells him to “Do this”; it agrees that he should observe the Torah and its commandments. It even explains to him how that observance makes sense according to the understanding of the animal soul and the yetzer hara. In this way, by projecting itself into this person’s observance of the Torah and mitzvos, and by habituating his listener to thinking that the listener needs his consent, the yetzer hara draws him along to the point at which “the next day he tells him, Do that; until ultimately it tells him, Serve idols.”

Therefore, the way to defend oneself properly against the wiles of the yetzer hara is not to gear one’s Divine service to the dictates of mortal reason, because mortal reason gives weight to nature as a significant consideration. Rather, one should go about his avodah by subjugating his own will – to the point of self-sacrifice – to G‑d’s will,47 in a manner that transcends mortal reason, for then, the only consideration that exists for him is G‑d’s will.

The difference between these two possible approaches to Divine service parallels the above-mentioned distinction48 between “relying on G‑d” and “trusting in man.” The level of Divine service at which one “trusts in man” relates to the G‑dly light that “permeates all the worlds.”26 In terms of our Divine service, this mode of Divine influence corresponds to Divine service that is directed by mortal logic and that requires worldly involvement according to the natural order, for with regard to this level of G‑dly light, logic and the natural order are significant.

The level of Divine service at which one “relies on G‑d” relates to the G‑dly light that “transcends all the worlds.”28 In terms of a person’s Divine service, this mode of Divine influence corresponds to Divine service that is directed by bittul, transcending mortal reason, and ascribing no independent importance to the conduits of the natural order. For a person who lives at this level of trust, the appropriate expectation is that “He will provide for you” (( יכלכלך– G‑d Himself will provide the conduit (כלי) as well. There will be conduits, but they will come from Above. As mentioned previously,49 even when such a person employs natural means, he does not grant them any independent importance. It is not appropriate to say that he receives “help from man,” because in his perception, the conduits of the natural order are one with G‑d.

This explains why in the above-quoted prophecy of Michah, the preparation for the Ultimate Redemption is that we will “not place our hope in man.” At that time, the veil of concealment will be entirely lifted from nature and we will see with our fleshly eyes that nature itself is G‑dly. Hence the pattern will be that blessings will come, unasked for, “like dew from G‑d.” At that time, we will “not place our hope in man, nor look forward to help from a mortal,” but “He will provide for you.”

Based on the above, we can appreciate the connection of the Haftarah to the conclusion of Parshas Balak, which relates the sin of Baal Peor and the self-sacrifice of Pinchas50 that corrected that sin (as it is written,51 “And he atoned for the children of Israel”).

Baal Peor was served by defecating in the idol’s presence.52 It is explained in Chassidus53 that the source for this sin is that one grants importance to physical pleasures which are in truth the waste product of the sublime pleasure.

What would cause a person to consider waste products (physical pleasures) of primary importance? This comes from the fact that he considers the natural order as being of consequence. Making this initial error leads him to be totally absorbed in material matters.

On this basis, we can understand our Sages’ statement54 that the atonement brought about by Pinchas is still an active force and will continue to exert positive influence in this world until the Resurrection of the Dead, for the purification and atonement for the sin of Baal Peorwill not come until that time. In that era, nature will be consummately refined and it will be obvious that nature is completely at one with G‑dliness. Thus, it will not be possible to give primacy to material concerns.

Therefore, the atonement for this sin was brought about through the self-sacrifice of Pin- chas. Torah Law does not mandate such self-sacrifice. Indeed, were Pinchas to have asked whether to have taken such an action, he would not have been instructed to do so according to Torah law.55 Nevertheless, Pinchas remained steadfast and was willing to sacrifice his life. This reflects self-sacrifice that transcends logic and reason, even logic and reason within the realm of holiness. As explained above, it is through bittul that transcends logic and reason, (even logic and reason within the realm of holiness) that it is possible to protect oneself and not make a division between nature and G‑dliness even though one carries out in nature the Torah’s directive, “And G‑d will bless you in all that you do.”

On this basis, we can also understand the connection between the above concept and the entry of the Jewish people into Eretz Yisrael. (As explained in sec. 2, the events described in Parshas Balak occurred shortly before the entry into Eretz Yisrael.)

In the desert, the Jews were sustained by manna, i.e., a miraculous pattern of existence. It was not possible to err and think that human input could have any effect on one’s fortunes, as reflected by the verse,56 “The one who gathered more did not have more, nor did the one who gathered less have less.” Moreover, only enough manna for one day descended, emphasizing how one must have absolute trust in G‑d that He will provide for his needs day by day.57

By contrast, the entry into Eretz Yisrael brought about the beginning of a new phase in Divine service,58 serving Him in a way appropriate for “a settled land.”59 Hence, as a preparation, it was necessary to confront the issue of Baal Peor, to emphasize that even though one begins to live according to the natural order, one should not “hope in man.” Instead, he should appreciate that nature is not an independent entity and the same utter reliance on G‑d that prevailed in the desert is still necessary.

This lesson is also appropriate in these last days of exile, when we are preparing to enter Eretz Yisrael, led by Mashiach. We are still living in an era characterized by the double and redoubled darkness60 of exile, the very opposite of “the beginning of the Redemption,”61 as is plainly seen. Nevertheless, all the revelations of the Future Redemption “depend on our actions and Divine service throughout the era of exile.”62 In particular, this applies in our present generation, when we are making the final preparations for the redemption to be led by Mashiach. As in the adage of the Rebbe Rayatz,63 Mashiach is “standing behind our wall,”64 and moreover, the walls of exile are already burning.65

At this time, therefore, every individual’s Divine service should have at least a foretaste of the level at which we will “not place our hope in man.” He should not place any importance on the worldly conduits of the natural order, but should place his trust in G‑d alone.

Through such an approach, every individual will be redeemed from the worries and problems that disturb him. For when he engages in “all that you do” only for the sake of fulfilling G‑d’s will, he will not be fazed nor bothered by his worldly occupations, for all that will concern him is carrying out G‑d’s will.

The individual redemption which will be experienced by each person66 will also serve as the preparation and the conduit for the all-encompassing Redemption led by Mashiach, and to “the day that will be entirely Shabbos and rest for life everlasting.”67

Adapted from a sichah delivered on Shabbos Parshas Balak, 5723 (1963) Likkutei Sichos, Volume 18, P. 293ff.