It's not just about giving orders. There's a fascinating idea tucked away in Sifrei Devarim that illuminates this. It says, regarding the Israelites following Moses's command, "and they did as the L-rd had commanded Moses," but then it adds a twist. God hadn't yet placed the people in awe of Moses. Real authority wasn't just about divine commands, but about the people's perception of that authority.

How did that change? Well, the text points us to Joshua 4:14: "On that day the L-rd exalted Joshua" – it was on that day that God placed the fear of Joshua upon them. So, leadership, in this view, is about divine mandate combined with the people's recognition and respect. It's a two-way street, a sacred contract almost.

Now, let's shift gears to another intriguing comparison. Deuteronomy 34:10 states: "And there shall not arise in Israel again a prophet such as Moses." A pretty definitive statement, right? But the Sifrei Devarim throws a curveball: "...But among the nations, there did arise." And who was this gentile prophet? None other than Bilam, son of Beor.

Wait a minute... Bilam? The same Bilam who tried to curse the Israelites? The very same! But the text isn't finished. Just because Bilam achieved prophecy doesn't mean he was on the same level as Moses. The text highlights some crucial differences.

First, Moses "did not know who was speaking to him," meaning he was so close to the Divine, he wasn't always aware of the source of the communication. Bilam, on the other hand, did know, as Numbers 24:16 says: "The speech of the hearer (Bilam) of the words of the Almighty." Bilam was more aware of the process of prophecy.

Second, Moses "did not know when He would speak to him until He did so," suggesting a spontaneous, direct connection. Bilam "did know" when the Divine would communicate. He had a schedule, a system. He was "the knower of the knowledge of the Most High." Moses's connection was immediate and intuitive, Bilam's was studied and anticipated.

Third, and perhaps most striking, Moses "did not speak with Him unless he was standing," a posture of respect and readiness. Deuteronomy 5:28 emphasizes this: "And you, here, stand with Me." Bilam, however, "spoke with Him when he was fallen," as described in Numbers 24:4: "The vision of the Almighty shall he see, fallen and his eyes uncovered." What a stark contrast! Moses, in a state of uprightness, dignity; Bilam, in a state of debasement.

The Sifrei Devarim then offers a powerful analogy: Bilam is compared "to the king's cook, who knows the expenses of the royal table." He may have access to the inner workings, the ingredients, the quantities, but he's not the king. He understands the mechanics, but lacks the true authority, the vision, the essence.

So, what does all this tell us? Maybe it's about the different ways we can connect to something bigger than ourselves. Moses represents a pure, unadulterated, almost unconscious connection to the Divine. Bilam, a more calculated, intellectual, even compromised connection. Both receive prophetic insight, but the manner and the meaning are worlds apart. Perhaps, in our own lives, we can strive for the uprightness of Moses, while acknowledging that even in our fallen states, like Bilam, we can still glimpse the vision of the Almighty. The key, perhaps, is to recognize the difference.