Numbers 22

Hook

Ever wonder why God seems to change His mind? In Numbers 22, Balaam gets a divine green light to go curse Israel, only for God to be "incensed" at his going. What's going on here?

Context

The story of Balaam is unique in the Torah, presenting a non-Israelite prophet with direct divine communication. This narrative challenges our assumptions about who can access prophecy and how God interacts with those outside the covenant, highlighting a universal aspect of divine revelation.

Text Snapshot

• "But God said to Balaam, “Do not go with them. You must not curse that people, for they are blessed.”" (Numbers 22:12)
• "That night God came to Balaam and said to him, “If the men have come to invite you, you may go with them. But whatever I command you, that you shall do.”" (Numbers 22:20)
• "But God was incensed at his going; so an angel of GOD took a position in his way as an adversary." (Numbers 22:22)

Close Reading

Structure: The Shifting Divine Command

The repetition of Balak’s invitation, followed by God’s initial refusal ("Do not go," v.12) and then conditional permission ("you may go," v.20), creates a powerful dramatic arc. This structural shift forces us to question the nature of Balaam’s motivations and God's intentions.

Key Term: "Incensed"

The word "incensed" (וַיִּחַר־אַף אֱלֹהִים֙) in Numbers 22:22 is striking. If God explicitly said, "you may go," why is He then angry? This isn't just a nuance; it's a direct contradiction if we read God's commands as purely literal directives without accounting for human will.

Tension: Permission vs. Approval

The core tension lies between God's explicit permission for Balaam to go and His subsequent anger. Is "permission" always an endorsement, or can it be a concession to free will, particularly when one's heart is set on a path?

Two Angles

Classic commentators grapple with this tension. Rashi (based on Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 5, echoed by Siftei Chakhamim on Numbers 22:10:1) suggests that Balaam's initial report to Balak's dignitaries ("GOD will not let me go with you," v.13) revealed his desire to go, implying a certain pride in being sought by kings. God then acceded to his desire, allowing him to pursue his inclination, but this permission wasn't an endorsement of the action, only of the choice.

Another perspective is that God's "permission" was a test. Balaam was told, "But whatever I command you, that you shall do" (v.20). His eagerness to go, despite the initial prohibition, indicated a spirit not fully aligned with God's will. God allows him the path, but doesn't approve of the journey's intent, setting the stage for the donkey incident as a wake-up call.

Practice Implication

This passage reminds us that just because we can do something, or are even permitted to do it, doesn't mean it's the wisest or most righteous path. We should constantly examine our intentions, not just our actions, to ensure they align with what God truly desires, not just what He allows.

Chevruta Mini

1. How do you discern between divine permission that is an endorsement and permission that is a concession to free will?
2. In what situations might pursuing a 'permitted' path actually be detrimental due to underlying intentions?

Takeaway

Divine permission doesn't always equate to divine approval; intention matters as much as action.

Sefaria Source: Numbers 22