Parshat Balak5 min read

What Balak Saw That Doomed the Flood Generation Too

It would have been better for the wicked if they had been blind. Midrash Tanchuma traces every catastrophe to the same act: looking at what they should not.

Curated by Arthur · Told by Maggid ·
Table of Contents
  1. The Word That Started It
  2. The Three Times the World Broke
  3. Balaam Before Balak
  4. A Weapon With a Human Mouth

The Word That Started It

The parasha of Balak opens in Numbers 22:2 with three Hebrew words: vayar Balak ben Tzipor. And Balak son of Zippor saw.

Midrash Tanchuma could not let those words stand without tearing them open. What did he see? What is so catastrophic about seeing? The Tanchuma's answer comes in the form of a devastating rule pulled from the entire span of human history: it would have been better for the wicked if they had been blind, for their eyes bring a curse to the world.

Three catastrophes. One pattern.

The Three Times the World Broke

First: the generation of the flood. Genesis 6:2 records it in a single clause - the sons of God saw how beautiful the human daughters were and took whomever they chose as their wives. They looked. They wanted. They took. The world drowned.

Second: Ham, son of Noah, returning from the ark to find his father lying drunk and uncovered in his tent. The text says Ham saw his father's nakedness. He did not look away. He did not cover what he found. He went to his brothers and reported it with something that was not grief. Canaan, Ham's son, was cursed for what his father's eyes had done.

Third: Balak himself. He looked out from his position as king of Moab and saw Israel's military victories over Sihon and Og, the two kings whose territories had just been consumed. He did not see a nation passing through. He saw a threat to his own survival, and his response was to import a weapon: a prophet from outside Israel capable of destroying through words what could not be destroyed through armies.

The Tanchuma treats these three seeing-events as a single phenomenon. Each one begins with eyes that take in something they should not have pursued, and each one produces destruction on a scale that bears no proportion to the original act of looking. The sons of God looked at women and produced the Nephilim and the conditions for a flood. Ham looked at his father and produced generations of cursed descendants. Balak looked at Israel and launched the episode of Balaam, which came closer to destroying Israel than any military campaign.

Balaam Before Balak

The tradition behind the Legends of the Jews, Ginzberg's synthesis of midrashic and Talmudic material, places Balaam much earlier in the historical sequence. He was not a contemporary figure who happened to be available when Balak needed him. He had been present, in various forms, before and after the flood, in the councils of nations that faced Israel across multiple generations.

Shem, son of Noah, was commissioned as the first prophet to the nations after the flood. He went out among the peoples and shared what God had revealed. For four hundred years. The nations would not listen. After Shem's mission failed, the gift of prophecy was eventually withdrawn from the nations entirely - except for Balaam, who received it as a last and destructive grant. He was given prophetic power so that no nation could complain that God had never given them a prophet comparable to what Israel had. The gift was genuine. What he did with it was not.

A Weapon With a Human Mouth

Balak's insight was correct in its analysis and wrong in its hope. He understood that Israel could not be defeated militarily by normal means - they had just eliminated Sihon and Og, both formidable kings with established territories. He understood that a curse from the right prophet could damage Israel spiritually in ways a sword could not. He found the one man alive with the prophetic capacity to attempt it.

What he could not account for was that Balaam's gift had been given by the same God Balak wanted destroyed. When God put words in Balaam's mouth, they were the words God wanted said, not the words Balak had paid for. Balak had bought a mouth he could not own.

BalakCreationNoahFloodVisionSin
← All myths

From the tradition

Sources

2 sources

The texts this telling draws on, in full. Open a card to read inline, or expand it for a wider, quieter read.

Midrash Tanchuma, Balak 2Midrash Tanchuma

(Numb. 22:2:) “Now Balak ben Zippor saw.” What is the meaning of “Now he saw?” He saw retribution which would come against Israel in the future. And he hated them more than all their enemies, as all of the [others] came with wars and subjugation which they could withstand. But this one was like a man who could extract a word from his mouth to uproot an entire nation. (Numb. 22:2:) “Now Balak [ben Zippor] saw.” It would have been better for the wicked if they had been blind, for their eyes bring a curse to the world. With reference to the generation of the flood, [it is written] (in Gen. 6:2), “The sons of God saw [how beautiful the human daughters were and took whomever they chose as their wives].” [It is also written] (in Gen. 9:22), “Then Ham, the father of Canaan, saw [the nakedness of his father and told his two brothers outside].” It is also written (in Gen. 12:15), “So Pharaoh's courtiers saw her (i.e., Abram's wife Sarah) [and praised her to Pharaoh, and the woman was taken to Pharaoh's house].” It is also written (in Gen. 34:2), “Then Shechem ben Hamor saw [Dinah].” So also [here] (in Numb. 22:2), “Now Balak [ben Zippor] saw.” The matter is comparable to someone who appointed guards to guard from an invader; and he had confidence in them, because they were warriors. When the invader came over and killed them, he trembled with fear for himself. It was the same also with Balak. When he saw what happened with Sihon and Og to whom he had been sending payment to guard him, he was afraid for himself. And in addition to that, he had seen the miracles at the Wadis of Arnon. (Numb. 22:3:) “Wayyagor mo'av.” What is the meaning of “Wayyagor (rt. ygr)?” When Israel appeared to the Ammonites, they appeared clothed for peace. But when they appeared to the Moabites they appeared armed [for battle]. Thus it is stated (in Deut. 2:19), “When you draw near the frontier of the Children of Ammon, do not trouble them.” It is written [to imply not to trouble them] with all kinds of trouble; (ibid., cont.) “and do not provoke (rt. grh) them,” with any kind of provocation. In regard to Moab, however, He said (in Deut. 2:9), “Do not trouble Moab, and do not provoke (rt. grh) them with war.” Do not make war with them, but whatever you can seize apart from [war], seize. For that reason they appeared armed, and [the Moabites] gathered themselves (rt. 'gr) to their cities, as stated (in Numb. 22:3), “Now Moab yagor (i.e., gathered).” Wayyagor (rt. ygr, here understood a form of 'gr) can only be a word for a gathering, just as it says (in Prov. 10:5), “A prudent child gathers (rt. 'gr) in the summer.” Another interpretation (of Numb. 22:3), “wayyagor”: [It is] a word for fear, in that they were afraid, as they saw the whole land in the hands of Israel. As Sihon had come and taken [part of] the land of Moab, as stated (Numb. 21:26), “and he fought against the earlier king of Moab….” And Og had taken all of the land of the Children of Ammon, as stated (Deuteronomy 3:11), “Since only Og was left from the remnant of the Rephaim….” [And] Israel came and took it from both of them; theft that has no iniquity. And [so the Moabites] saw their land in the hand of Israel and they would say, “Did the Holy One, blessed be He, not say (in Deuteronomy 2:9), ‘As I will not give you from its land as an inheritance’; and behold our land is in front of them (already in their possession).” Therefore they were afraid. (Numb. 22:3, cont.) “And Moab had a horror (rt. qwts) [of the Children of Israel],” because they saw themselves as a [mere] thorn (qwts) over against them.

Full source
Legends of the Jews 6:4Legends of the Jews

The answer, as often happens in Jewish tradition, is layered and complex, and more than a little surprising.

In Legends of the Jews, compiled by Rabbi Louis Ginzberg, the story of Balaam, the last of the non-Jewish prophets, offers a powerful explanation. Balaam's life, filled with moral failings, serves as a cautionary tale about the responsibility that comes with divine gifts. His story essentially explains why God ultimately "withdrew from the heathen the gift of prophecy."

Let’s back up a bit. The tradition tells us that Shem, son of Noah, was the first prophet commissioned to speak to the nations after the flood. Go out and share My revelations! See if they'll accept it."

For four hundred years, Shem went around as a prophet. Four hundred years! And yet, the nations wouldn't listen.

Later, others arose. The book of Job, which many scholars believe originated outside of Israel, gives us Job and his friends Eliphaz, Zophar, Bildad, and Elihu. These figures, along with Balaam himself, are said to be descendants of Nahor, Abraham's brother, from his union with Milcah.

Now, here's where it gets really interesting. The text suggests that God gave the heathens Balaam as a prophet so that they couldn't later claim they were never given a fair chance. "Had we had a prophet like Moses," they might have argued, "we would have received the Torah!" So, God provides them with Balaam, who, according to this tradition, was in no way inferior to Moses in wisdom or prophetic ability. The text is claiming that Balaam was Moses' peer among the non-Jewish world! While Moses was undoubtedly the greatest prophet among the Israelites, Balaam held a similar stature among the other nations.

Of course, there were differences. Moses was called directly by God, without any need for preparation. Balaam, on the other hand, could only receive divine revelations through sacrifices. But Balaam had one advantage: Moses had to pray to God "to show him His ways," while Balaam could declare that he "knew the knowledge of the Most High." Quite a claim!

Yet, despite his prophetic gifts, Balaam failed to use them for good. He never performed a single act of kindness. Instead, his "evil tongue" nearly brought destruction upon the world. It was this moral failing, this profound disconnect between his prophetic abilities and his ethical behavior, that ultimately led God to vow never to exchange the Israelites for another people or allow them to dwell in any land other than Palestine.

The lesson? Prophecy isn't just about receiving divine messages. It's about using those messages for good, for justice, for the betterment of the world. Balaam's story reminds us that gifts, no matter how extraordinary, are meaningless without the moral compass to guide them. And perhaps, that's why prophecy ultimately took root so deeply in the Israelite tradition, a tradition that emphasizes not just knowledge of God, but also the responsibility to act in accordance with His will.

Full source