Out of Egypt: Lot, Michah & the Ten Lost Tribes

This is the final installation of a three-part series on the Biblical roots of Jewish assimilation in exile - and the long-term consequences thereof. Begin the series here. 

In the previous post we cited the Talmudic tradition that the Jews brought "Michah's Idol" with them across the Red Sea (Sanhedrin 103b). Who was Michah?

The Book of Judges tells the story. Generations after the Exodus, a man named Michah established a pagan temple in Northern Israel after his mother commissioned a silversmith to forge an idol (Shoftim 17:1-5). Although Michah's idol obviously did not literally cross the Red Sea, nonetheless, the Vilna Gaon believes that the Talmud is referring to this very same idol. When the Talmud says that Michah's idol crossed the sea, it means the pagan theology of Egypt crossed the sea. And many years later, this imported Egyptian paganism found expression in Michah's idol. 

This, says the Vilna Gaon, is what Moshe was referring to when he questioned the nation just before they entered Israel. 

"You know how we lived in the Land of Egypt and how we passed through the midst of the nations that you crossed. You saw their disgusting things, their idols of wood, stone, silver and gold that they had. Perhaps there is a man, a woman, a family or a tribe amongst you whose heart is turning away from Hashem our God today to go and serve the gods of those nations? Perhaps there is amongst you a root growing gall and wormwood?"  (Devarim 29:15-17) 

Moshe's concerns were well-founded. A poisonous root was growing among the Jews - the idolatry of Michah (Aderes Eliyahu ad loc.).

The temple founded around Michah's idol was located in the territory of the tribe of Dan and it stood there for centuries. It was a pagan house of worship until גלות הארץ, "the exile of the land" (Shoftim 18:30), when the Assyrian king Sancheriv invaded Northern Israel and exiled the Ten Tribes (Rashi ad loc.). 

The implication is clear. The exile and ultimate disappearance of the Ten Lost Tribes was due to paganism. But not just any paganism. This paganism was foreign and ancient. The Jews picked it up during their long stay in Egypt and then they transported it from Egypt to Israel. "Michah's Idol crossed the Sea." Unwilling to cleanse themselves of Egyptian culture, the Jewish return to Israel was flawed from the get-go, and the seeds of a future exile were planted even before they returned to their homeland.

All of this tragic history was foreshadowed by the character of Lot. Like Yaakov and his sons, Lot was forced by famine to leave Israel and move to Egypt. As we saw in part-one, Lot was seduced there by Egyptian materialism and he carried his new-found desires back with him to Israel. His longing for the Egyptian lifestyle draws him to Sodom and ultimately proves to be his undoing. Despite Avraham's best efforts to save his nephew, Lot is lost forever. Such was the cost of Lot's visit to Egypt and such was the cost of the Ten Tribes' visit to Egypt. This gives us a new appreciation for the prophets' comparison of the Jews to the people of Sodom (cf. Yeshaya 1:9-10; Yechezkel 16:48-49).

This parallel between Lot and the Ten Tribes is all the more compelling in light of the fact that Lot was in the running to be one of the forefathers of the Chosen Nation. It wasn't just Lot's shepherds who thought so (cf. Rashi to 13:7). Lot's descendants, the nation of Moab, thought the same. That is why they, more than other nations, were so frustrated with the selection of the Jews as the Chosen Nation at the Exodus. אילי מואב יאחזמו רעד - "Moab's heroes were seized with trembling" (Shemos 15:15; Gur Aryeh ad loc.). The truth of this notion is further indicated by Lot's granddaughter Ruth who converted to Judaism and became the matriarch of King David. (For more on Moab's claim, see this post.) Lot was supposed to be part of our people, just like the Ten Tribes. But he, like they, was lost.

When Sodom is conquered by the armies of the four kings and Lot is taken captive, Avraham goes to war, quickly overrunning the enemy. וירדף עד דן - "He pursued [them] until Dan" (Bereishis 14:14). "There [at Dan] his strength was drained, for he foresaw that in the future his descendants would set up an [idol in the form of a] calf there" (Rashi ad loc.). Here the forces arranged against Lot are related to the future idolatry of Dan! This is no coincidence, for Lot is indeed the predecessor of both Michah and the Ten Tribes. Both were guilty of importing Egyptian ideology to Israel, both were taken captive by invading armies, both could not be saved by their brethren, and both are ultimately doomed to disappear from the pages of Jewish history. 

Lot and those who follow in his footsteps, surrendering to the natural forces of assimilation, are doomed to fall before the natural forces of attrition. Like all peoples and all societies of the earth, it is only natural that they will be erased by the winds of time. But those who follow the footsteps of Avraham and Yosef, transcending nature and maintaining their identity in the face of foreign influence, such people merit the blessing of historical transcendence - membership in the eternal nation of Israel.

Out of Egypt: Yosef's Bones & Michah's Idol

Part-one of this post dealt with the foreshadowing of our story back in Parshas Lech Lecha. Read it here.

When the time comes for the Jews to leave Egypt, the state of their spiritual health is the question of the hour. After so many years of slavery, what remains of their faith and identity? Actually, this is the central question for all the rest of Chumash. How much damage has Egypt inflicted on the soul of the Jew?

The answer is sad. At the Red Sea, the angels of heaven famously questioned God, "Both the Jews and the Egyptians are idolators! Why are You saving the Jews and killing the Egyptians?!" The Jews were so assimilated, even the angels couldn't tell them apart from Egyptians. But in order for the Jews to merit an Exodus from Egypt, they must first get Egypt out of their system. How is this going to be accomplished?

First, they will have to disavow Egyptian culture. Second, they must affirm their Jewish identity. And indeed, Hashem commands them to do these two things before they leave the country. First they were commanded to slaughter a sheep - an animal sacred to the Egyptians - and place its blood on their doorposts (12:6-7). In this way, they rejected Egyptian paganism. And then they were told to circumcise themselves, affirming their identity as Jews (12:48). It was due to the merit of these two mitzvos that the Jews were able leave Egypt (cf. Rashi to 12:6).

As we have seen, this was unfortunately insufficient. At the Red Sea the angels still couldn't tell the difference between the Jew and the Egyptian. For the sea to split, the merit of an even greater rejection of Egyptian culture was needed and this was found in none other than the bones of Yosef.

"The Sea saw and fled" (Psalms 114:3). It saw the coffin of Yosef descending into the sea. Hashem said, "Flee before the one who fled!" As the verse states, "He left his garment with her and fled and went outside" (Bereishis 39:12). (Yalkut Shimoni 873)

Like his forefather Avraham before him, Yosef was a man of steel, uninfluenced by the fleshpot of Egypt. And in the end, it was the bones of Yosef HaTzaddik, the bones which withstood the seductions of exile, that split the sea.

It is perfectly natural to be seduced. But when man refuses to be assimilated into his environment and transcends his nature, then man is truly free - and nature itself will transcend its laws in his service and deliver him to freedom.

But the bones of Yosef was not the only unusual baggage the Jews carried across the sea. The Talmud tells us that the spoils of Egypt included some contraband as well.

"A rival crossed the sea..." (Zechariah 10:11). R. Yochanan said, "This refers to idol of Michah."

Sanhedrin 103b

The Red Sea was not amused.

The administering angels were astounded. "People who worship idols walk on dry land in the midst of the sea?!"

How do we know that even the sea itself was filled with anger? For the verse states והמים להם חמה  - "The water was a wall for them" (Shemos 14:29). Don't read it חומה, "wall," rather read it חימה, "anger." ["The water was angry at them."]

Mechiltah; see Baal HaTurim ad loc. that the anger was due to the presence of Michah's idol.

[The word for wall - חומה - is spelled here in abbreviated form without a ו (as opposed to just a few verses earlier (14:22) where it is spelled with a ו). This allows the word to be vowelized in a way which transforms its meaning from "wall" to "anger."]

We learned that the sea split before the bones of Yosef, for Yosef withstood the seductions of Egypt. The Red Sea is willing to violate the laws of nature in deference of one who transcends human nature, but it is rightly incensed to have to stand as a wall before Jews who succumb to paganism and dare carry the idols of Egypt across its seabed.

Read part-three here.

Escape to Yeshiva

If you work out the years of Yaakov's life, there are fourteen years unaccounted for. Tradition tells us that between Parshas Toldos and Vayeitzei Yaakov spent  fourteen years hiding out in yeshiva (cf. Rashi at the end of Toldos citing Megillah 17a).

This is difficult on several levels. Firstly, wouldn't that be the first place Eisav would look? Secondly, long ago Yaakov was described as יושב אוהלים, "one who dwells in tents." Rashi explains, "the tent of Shem and the tent of Ever." Yaakov was always in yeshiva, and now he goes there to hide?! What did he do, change his seat? Thirdly, when Rivka was having a difficult pregnancy, she went לדרוש את השם to find out what was going on. Rashi explains that she asked Shem, which means the Yeshiva was in her neighborhood! (In her condition, she could not have traveled far.) So Yaakov hid from Eisav for fourteen years in a yeshiva down the block? The very same yeshiva he had been learning in his whole life?!

I believe the answer can be found in the Gemorah itself. The Gemorah does not say Yaakov went to hide in the Yeshiva of Shem. Nor does the Gemorah say he went to the Yeshiva of Shem & Ever. The Gemorah says Yaakov went to hide in בית עבר. (See מהרש"א מגילה שם.)

There were two different Yeshivos! Shem had a Yeshiva and Ever had a Yeshiva. This is indicated by the very first reference - יושב אהלים - "tents." "The tent of Shem and the tent of Ever." The Midrash is unequivocal: "[Yaakov] left the Beis Medrash of Shem and went to the Beis Medrash of Ever" (Tanchuma Yashan, Vayishlach 9).

There was never "one big Jewish tent." There were always (at least) two different tents.

Yaakov spent his entire life studying under his master, the Alter Zeide Shem. The Midrash says he served Shem for fifty years. When Shem passed away thirteen years earlier, Yaakov undoubtedly became the Rosh Yeshiva of Beis Shem. But now he had to hide. Where to run? To the last place Eisav would expect him to be. As a rank-and-file student in the competing, second-tier Yeshiva, the Yeshiva of Ever, Shem's great-grandson.

It never occurred to Eisav that Yaakov would go to Ever, for Eisav's arrogant mind could never understand the humility that Torah study engenders. But it was this humility that saved Yaakov's life, broadened his outlook by exposing him to a different דרך הלימוד, and - מעשה אבות סימן לבנים - became the hallmark of the true בן ישיבה.

Avraham's Finest Hour?

I heard a question this past Shabbos that gave me pause. Rabbi Kupfer spoke at Adas Torah on Friday night and he asked as follows.

Why did Avraham wait until his wife died before purchasing the Machpelah Cave? He clearly knew what he wanted (cf. 23:8-9); according to the Midrash he had known for years that the Machpelah Cave was the burial site of Adam and Chavah (cf. Baal HaTurim to 18:7). Wouldn't the responsible thing be to buy it in advance? What would Avraham do if Efron was out of town when Sarah died? In short, why wait?

This is an excellent question that I have never heard anyone ask before.

Rabbi Kupfer explained that the Machpelah Cave was a very sacred site, on the border between Heaven and Earth. Avraham and Sarah would not be worthy of it before Avraham passed the ten tests. He therefore did not buy it before passing the Akeida - which happened to coincide with Sarah's death.

I believe there is a simpler answer.

The Talmud in Sanhedrin (111a) (quoted by Rashi Shemos 6:8) reports Hashem's sharp response when Moshe complained:

What a shame for what is lost and no longer extant! ... I told Avraham "Get up and travel the length and breadth of the land for I will give it to you" (Bereishis 13), [but when] he searched for a burial site for Sara and couldn't find one for less than 400 silver shekels he didn't question me.

According to the Talmud in Baba Basra (16b), even the Satan was impressed:

Master of the World, I have wandered the entire earth and I have not found another like your servant Avraham.You said to him, "Get up and journey through the land, its length and width, for I will give it you..." (13:17). But when he wanted to bury his wife he couldn't find a place to bury her! Yet he didn't question you.

(The Ramban makes reference to this Gemora in his final comments on this episode and, in his commentary to Avos, Rabbeinu Yona counts the burial of Sarah as Avraham's tenth test.) 

This explains why Avraham never bought the Machpelah Cave - it would have demonstrated a lack of faith in Hashem's promise to give him the entire Land of Israel! The very fact that in the end Avraham was forced to pay for it and yet didn't question God was, in the Satan's view at least, Avraham's finest hour.

Out of Egypt: Avraham vs. Lot

This is the first installation of a three-part series on the Biblical roots of Jewish assimilation in exile - and the long-term consequences thereof.

Soon after Avram's arrival in Israel a famine forces him to head for Egypt in search of food. After a brief - and traumatic - stay in Egypt, Avram, Sarai and Lot return to Israel. At this point in the story, it would be fair for us to wonder what effect, if any, their trip had on them. The Torah does not disappoint.

Avram went up from Egypt, he and his wife... and Lot was with him... He journeyed on from the south to Bais El to the original site of his tent between Bais El and Ai, to the site of the first altar that he had made. And Avram called there in the name of Hashem.  (Bereishis 13:1-4)

The Torah goes out of its way to emphasize the fact that Egypt had absolutely no effect on Avraham. Despite exposure to the indulgences and immorality of Egypt, despite the drama in the King's palace and despite his new-found wealth and power, Avraham returns to his humble tent in desert and continues in his mission of teaching monotheism as if nothing happened. His nephew Lot, however, is another story.

Lot raised his eyes and viewed the entire Jordan plain. It was completely fertile - this was before Hashem destroyed Sodom and Amorah - like a garden of Hashem, like the land of Egypt... Lot chose the entire Jordan plain for himself...  (13:10) 

How could the Torah, in the very same breath, compare the region of Sodom and Amorah to both the Garden of Eden and the land of Egypt?! I heard the answer to this question from Lisabeth Kaplan o"h in the Hillel House of UCSC. She explained that the Torah here is not describing reality. It is describing what Lot saw when he "raised his eyes." And after his trip to Egypt, Lot was one confused individual.

Lot missed Egypt. He loved the time he spent there and on his return to Israel he was searching not only for the Garden of God, but for the fleshpot of Egypt too. He wanted both, and when he saw the blessed, fertile plains of Sodom and Amorah he found exactly what he was looking for - or so he thought. Thus did Lot depart from his uncle Avram to meet his doom in Sodom.

Lot's conflicted value system comes to the fore when a mob surrounds his home and demands that he hand over his two guests for sodomy. Lot refuses their demands and valiantly protects his guests - offering the mob his two daughters in their place! (Apparently, Lot learned from Avraham the proper care and treatment of guests, but never learned the wisdom of Jewish parenting, for he left Avraham's home before Avraham had children.) Here we can see the influence of Egyptian promiscuity (cf. Rashi to 12:19) on Lot's behavior. Another example, no less troubling, is Lot's consensual incest with his second daughter (cf. Rashi to 19:33).

Avram's descent into Egypt and his return to Israel foreshadows the future national exile of the Jewish people in Egypt and their subsequent Exodus and return to Israel (cf. Ramban to 12:10). (This is obviously more than a mere literary device. As the Midrash says, "The events of the forefathers are a sign for the descendants.") If we can take this idea one step further, it stands to reason that the diametrically opposed behaviors of Avraham and Lot - behaviors which ultimately tore them apart - parallel divergent attitudes of Jews at the time of the Exodus. Unfortunately, this is indeed the case. Not all the Jews wanted to leave Egypt (cf. Rashi to Shemos 10:22). And even among the Jews who did want to go, there were those who wished to take Egypt with them... but we are getting ahead of ourselves. The second half of our story must wait for Parshas B'shalach.

Read part-two here.

Sarah the Punisher II

Pharaoh is punished for taking Sarai and the verse says he is punished על דבר שרי אשת אברהם (Bereishis 12:17). Artscroll renders it "because of Sarai," but Rashi quotes a fascinating Midrash that translates the phrase literally: "by the word of Sarai." Hashem sent an angel who did Sarai's bidding. When she said "strike," the angel attacked Pharaoh. (For an explanation of the unusual punishment chosen by Sarai, see this post.)

This Midrash begs the question. Why? Why didn't Hashem just stop Pharaoh directly? Why does He put it into Sarai's hands to mete out Pharaoh's punishment?

The answer can be found between the lines of a Midrash (B.R. 53:6, cited by the Ohr HaChaim to 12:13) which relates our episode to the parsha of Sotah, the suspected adulteress:

Rabbi Yitzchok said, "Hashem said 'If the woman did not adultery and is pure and innocent, she will have a child' (Bamidbar 5:28). This woman [Sarai] entered the house of Pharaoh and the house of Avimelech and left pure - certainly she should be blessed with a child! 

This is an extraordinary Midrash. It understands that a Sotah who turns out to be innocent is rewarded with a child not due to some mysterious power of Sotah water but simply because she withstood the test of being alone with a man. It certainly follows, says the Midrash, that Sarai, who withstood the advances of the King of Egypt, should be blessed with a child. Indeed she was and they named him Yitzchok.

(Not that this was a difficult test for our mother Sarai. She was a Tzadeikes and never entertained the thought, ח"ו. But she is rewarded nonetheless. Just because it's easy doesn't mean it doesn't count. On the contrary, if a test is easy for you, you should get extra credit!)

This explains why Hashem did not stop Pharaoh. To stop Pharaoh would undermine the test that ultimately created Yitzchok. Hashem put it in Sarai's hands. If she wants, she can drop Avraham and become the new Queen of Egypt. Or, if she so chooses, she has an angel at her disposal that will stop Pharaoh in his tracks. The decision is hers.

Why Bilaam Failed

Dedicated for the refuah shleima of 
Nechama Batya bat Tziporah

Parshas Balak is a difficult parsha. From Hashem’s first prohibiting and then permitting Bilaam to go with the King’s officers, to the episode of the talking donkey, to the obscure, poetic verses of Bilaam’s curses turned blessings, there is much here in need of explanation and commentary. But these problems all pale before the Big Question that hangs over the entire parsha:

What was Bilaam thinking?

Bilaam wants destroy the Jews – it is nothing less than total destruction that he is after (cf. Rashi to 22:11; Tosfos to Berachos 7a) – and he thinks he can do this… with Hashem’s permission?! Bilaam knows the Jews are God’s Chosen People, he knows Hashem took them out of Egypt, gave them His Torah and is now bringing their unstoppable army into the Land of Israel, and Bilaam thinks that Hashem will allow him – a hired mercenary – to reverse the will of God and destroy the Jews? Why? Because Balak is paying him handsomely? This question is the white elephant of Parshas Balak, but before we can address it we must first raise another problem.

In a bizarre act of unspeakable chutzpah, Bilaam asks God for permission to destroy the Jews. But God’s response is even stranger than the request. No, you can’t curse them, says God, “for they are blessed” (22:12).

Just “Blessed”? What about the covenant of Sinai? What about God’s utopian society, the Chosen People in Israel, the Light unto the Nations? Strangely enough, it seems the only protection we have against Bilaam’s curses is not God’s plan for the world, but our own blessedness.

It has been quite some time since the Jews received a blessing. In fact, they have not been blessed since the days of the forefathers. Hashem is telling Bilaam that he is doomed to fail for his curses will hit the wall of divine blessings received centuries earlier by Avraham, Yitzchok and Yaakov. 

When the second set of emissaries try to convince him to take the job, Bilaam’s initial response is negative, “[Even] if Balak would give me [enough] gold and silver to fill his house, I am unable to violate the word of God my Lord” (22:18). Rashi notes, “Here he prophesies his inability to nullify the blessings that the forefathers were blessed by Hashem.” Bilaam says as much a second time, in his first attempted curse: "From the top of the rocks I see him" (23:9), by which he means, "I gaze at their beginnings, at their earliest roots, and I see them as well-founded and powerful as these rocks and hills through their patriarchs and matriarchs" (Rashi ad loc.). It is the forefathers who are saving us here, and Bilaam knew it.

Nonetheless, the subtext of the forefathers – Avraham in particular – repeatedly expresses itself in ways that get harder and harder to understand.

“Bilaam got up in the morning and he saddled his donkey” (22:21).

God said, “Rasha! Avraham their father beat you to it!” “Avraham got up early in the morning and saddled his donkey (to go to the Akeida)” (Bereishis 22:3) (Rashi ad loc.).

Is this some kind of race? It is one thing to say that Bilaam can’t curse the Jews because of the Abrahamic blessings, but this Midrash sounds like Bilaam and Avraham are in a competition! 

What does it mean?

Another example: When Bilaam’s donkey is blocked repeated by an angel, Rashi asks, “Why did [the angel] block him in three different locations? He was showing him a sign of the forefathers” (Rashi to 22:26). The Maharal of Prague ‘explains.’ The first time the angel stood in his way it was symbolic of Avraham. Here Bilaam’s donkey can easily circumvent the angel, for many nations come from Avraham: Yishmael, the children of Ketura and Eisav. The second time the angel blocked the path it was symbolic of Yitzchok. Here it is more difficult to pass him, with only two tight options on either side, for Yitzchok allows for only Yaakov or Eisav. But the final time the angel blocks Bilaam there is no way through. This corresponds to Yaakov whose children were all Jewish.

Bilaam can get past Avraham and Yitzchok, but not Yaakov? The mysterious words of the Maharal shall soon become clear, but only after another appearance of the forefathers in our parsha.

Our final example deals with what must be the most bizarre scene in a parsha filled with the bizarre. When Bilaam finally meets Balak and accepts the job of cursing the Jews, he instructs the pagan Moabite king to build an altar and offer kosher sacrifices to the God of Israel! Seven altars, no less. What can this possibly mean? Is Balak a Kohen?! Rashi’s comments only compound the mystery. 

[Bilaam said to Hashem,] “the forefathers of these [Jews] built before you seven altars and I have set up [seven] corresponding to all of them!” Avraham built four… Yitzchok built one… and Yaakov built two…

How are we to understand this? What exactly is Bilaam doing here?

Bilaam has a problem. He knows that God has a plan for the world and the Jews are the centerpiece of God’s plan. He knows that God wants a people who will recognize Him, serve Him and provide a model society for the nations of the world – and God has chosen the Jews. This is Bilaam’s conundrum: How can he successfully destroy God’s people? It sounds impossible, but Bilaam comes up with a plan. His plan is radical and ambitious, frightening in its simplicity. Even if you can’t beat the Jews, maybe you can replace them.

God wants humanity to recognize Him? Fine. Balak, King of Moab, together with his dignitaries, will build altars and offer sacrifices to the One God. Who needs the Jews? God can make a new testament. The Nation of Moab shall build a sanctuary for the God of Israel and become the New Jews.

Bilaam's plan is laid bare by his curses. When Bilaam tries to curse the Jews, “Hashem turned the curse around into a blessing” (Devarim 23:6). It follows, says the Talmud, that from the blessings we can infer Bilaam’s intended curses. Jewish prayer begins every morning with Bilaam’s most famous line: “How goodly are your tents, Yaakov, your sanctuaries, Israel” (Bamidbar 24:5). Bilaam must have been trying to say that the Jews should have no houses of worship and no houses of study. Hashem turned this curse into a positive statement about our “tents” and “sanctuaries” (Sanhedrin 105b). But how could have Bilaam possibly thought he could get God’s permission for a curse that would leave God bereft of the only places on Earth dedicated to His service? Unless, of course, Bilaam intended to replace those sanctuaries. This is why the king of Moab is bringing offerings to God. 

Madness, you say. There is no way Bilaam could have ever entertained the thought that Moab could replace the Jews. But you forget one thing. King David and his descendant King Moshiach come from Moab! David’s grandmother was Ruth, the granddaughter of Balak himself. If the Redeemer can come from Moab, why can’t Moab be the Chosen Nation? Moreover, Moab  already has “Jewish” blood, for the nation of Moab is descended from Lot, Avraham nephew. There was a time, before Yitzchok was born, that people thought Lot would be the inheritor of Avraham’s legacy (cf. Rashi to Bereishis 13:7). Moab thus comes from the same great hereditary line of Shem that produced our three patriarchs and four matriarchs. Who says they can’t replace us?

Hashem understands what Bilaam is trying to do and His response is simple. Maybe you’re right. Maybe the Jews are theoretically replaceable. But you are too late. Avraham, Yitzchok and Yaakov beat you to it. You can’t curse the Jews for they are already blessed.

This is what the Maharal was saying. Maybe there is room to get around Avraham and Yitzchok. At that stage there may have been other contenders for the crown. But after Yaakov, the game is over. The Chosen People are chosen, and it’s the Jews.

Nonetheless, Bilaam’s decides to move forward with his plan. In order to succeed, he must convince Balak to accept God and convince God to reject the Jews. He fails at both.

Although Balak plays along when it comes to Jewish ritual and he builds the altars and offers the sacrifices, he balks when it comes to the key element of Monotheism: the surrender of personal agendas before God. This kind of sacrifice Balak is unwilling to perform. Bilaam repeatedly tells him that he cannot violate God’s will and may only do what God tells him to do. The religious education of Moab is a central element of Bilaam’s strategy, but Balak just gets angry. “Balak got angry with Bilaam and he slapped his hands, ‘I called you in to curse my enemies and you have blessed them three times! Now flee…!’” (24:11). Balak’s refusal to say Naaseh V’Nishma destroys Bilaam’s plan before it gets off the ground.

It’s a catch twenty-two. In order to become the new Chosen Nation, Balak must curse the Jews and accept the God of Israel. Fortunately for us, those two things are mutually exclusive.

Bilaam also fails to convince God to reject the Jews. This he had hoped to achieve by presenting a negative perspective on the Jewish People through curses, but once again his strategy is self-defeating. 

Anyone who has the following three traits is a student of our father Avraham; three different traits and they are a student of the wicked Bilaam. [Those who have] a positive perspective (lit. "a good eye," ayin tova), a humble spirit and an unassuming soul are students of our father Avraham. [Those with] a negative perspective, an arrogant spirit and a greedy soul are students of the wicked Bilaam.

Pirkei Avos 5:22

More than anything else, it is a negative attitude that differentiates a person from Avraham. But in order to convince Hashem that Moab can replace the forefathers, Bilaam must curse and present a negative view of the Jews! Once again, he is trapped in a catch twenty-two.

Bilaam tries to curse the Jews, but “Hashem turned the curse around into a blessing because Hashem your Lord loves you” (Devarim 23:6). Hashem’s refuses to change His positive perspective on the Jewish People because He loves us. From where does this divine love come? Why does Hashem love the Jews?

You should know that it is not on account of your righteousness that Hashem your Lord gives you this good land as an inheritance, for you are a stubborn nation. Remember and do not forget how you have angered Hashem your Lord in the desert; from the day that you left Egypt until you arrived to this place you have been rebelling against Hashem…

It is just that Hashem desired your forefathers to love them, and He chose their descendants after them – you – from all the nations, as [we see] today.

Devarim 9:6-7; 10:15

Yes, it was Hashem’s love that blocked Bilaam’s curses, but we inherited that love from Avraham, Yitzchok and Yaakov. The competition between Moab and Israel thus ultimately boils down to a competition between Moab and our forefathers. Bilaam knows this and that is why he instructed Balak to build seven altars. But not only does Moab lose this dangerous game, their attempt backfires.

An Ammonite or Moabite [male convert] may not enter Hashem’s community (i.e., marry a Jew). Even the tenth generation may not enter Hashem’s community – never. This is because they did not offer you bread and water when you were on the way out of Egypt, and because they hired Bilaam the son of Beor…

 Devarim 23:4-5

Balak thinks he can replace our forefathers with his offerings, but he ignores the fundamental trait that God loved most about Avraham: chesed. Altars don’t make the Jew, kindness and a positive, caring outlook does. So at the very moment Balak was offering his oxen to the God of Israel, God wants to know why Balak isn’t providing bread and water to the Jews. Not only does Moab fail to replace the Jews, they end up worse off than they started: a Moabite convert may never even marry a Jew.

There is a deep irony here, a divine tragicomedy. The forefather of Moab is Lot, Avraham’s nephew. Lot was a student of his uncle and he learned well the art of chesed. In fact, it was Lot’s extraordinary act of inviting two strangers into his home in Sodom that led to the birth of his son Moab! (cf. Bereishis chap. 19). And Boaz, leader of the Jewish People, marries Ruth, a Moabite convert, because he is impressed by her chesed! (cf. Ruth 2:11-12; 3:10). Moab was created by chesed (cf. Vayikra 20:17) and chesed is their gift. A failure of chesed by Moab (and Ammon) is thus a failure of their national mission and suffers severe consequences. (This explains why their failure to provide bread and water is considered even worse than their crime of hiring Bilaam and is mentioned by the Torah first.)

In their desperate attempt to replace Avraham, the Moabites compromised their very own inborn trait of chesed – Avraham’s raison d’être – torpedoing their only chance at replacing Avraham.

Ironic, indeed!