English translation — בלק א

A.

One has already spoken many times¹

about the names of the sedras,

that since the names were determined according to the custom of Israel,

and the custom of Israel is <b>Torah</b>,

they are Torah-like names.

According to this, it is difficult to understand in our parshah: the Gemara says²,

that a person should not call his son with a name of a wicked person

("The name of the wicked shall rot³...

we do not mention them by their names")

— it is not smooth: how did they establish to call a sedra in the Torah with the name "Balak"⁴,

who was a wicked person,

until that Chazal say⁵

that he hated Jews "more than all enemies"?

One cannot answer that “there is no choice” because the name of the sedra must be according to the beginning of the “sedra” — for on the contrary, according to this a major question becomes: why is the sedra not called by the <b>first</b> word of the sedra, Vayeira,

on the matter of Vayeira

(with a kamatz),

Vayeitzei A.

Z.

V.

Also one must understand: the name of a sedra

(as the Holy Tongue name of every thing⁶)

expresses the <b>content</b> of the sedra¹

— and in our matter, <b>most</b> of the sedra is about matters and prophecies

Balaam,

and also in importance of content they are according to the simple meaning of the verse — the blessings that he blessed the Jews

(which are blessings of the highest order),

and moreover: this includes also his prophecy about the "end of days"⁷,

and in particular — as the Rambam elaborates in his book Yad HaChazakah⁸

that "he prophesied about the two messiahs, about the first messiah who is David ..

and about the final messiah" —

What connection do the blessings and prophecies have to Balak,

who hated Jews and wanted to do them harm?

He was after all no more than an external cause that brought Balaam into all this.

2.

Seemingly one can answer

(the first question),

that this is in the manner of the law regarding the prohibition to mention a name of idolatry

("And the name of other gods you shall not mention etc."&lt;sup&gt;9&lt;/sup&gt;)

— that "any idolatry written in the Torah is permitted to mention its name"&lt;sup&gt;10&lt;/sup&gt;

; and likewise in our case,

that the prohibition "we do not mention them by name

(of the wicked)

" does not apply to a name that is written in the Torah&lt;sup&gt;11&lt;/sup&gt;.

One must still understand: this is after all no more than the negation of the prohibition,

that

By a name of a wicked person written in the Torah there is no prohibition,

But there is no reason for an obligation to use that name — so why did they specifically choose the name

(of a wicked person)

"Balak"¹²?

It is even harder to understand according to the opinion of the Baalei HaTosafos who ask on the verse¹³

"Speak to Bnei Yisrael etc. and they shall encamp etc. before Baal Tzefon" — "How could He tell him to encamp by the sea before Baal Tzefon, and we say¹⁰

It is forbidden for a person to say to his friend, 'Wait for me next to a certain idol'?" — and they answer,

that the prohibition is "specifically for a person",

but not for the Holy One, blessed be He¹⁴.

What is seemingly perplexing

(as later authorities ask&lt;sup&gt;15&lt;/sup&gt;)

: the law is indeed that a name of an idol written in the Torah is permitted to mention&lt;sup&gt;16&lt;/sup&gt;

— also an "Adam",

as above&lt;sup&gt;17&lt;/sup&gt;?

One must distinguish and say,

that according to the Baalei HaTosafos, that which it is permitted to mention a name of an idol written in the Torah is specifically when it is a mere mention,

without a need

(importance)

; but a mention for a need

(like "wait for me by such-and-such idol")

which thereby gives it substance&lt;sup&gt;18&lt;/sup&gt;

is forbidden even regarding an idol written in the Torah&lt;sup&gt;19&lt;/sup&gt;.

And based on this it is more difficult: How was the name "Balak" established as a name of a parshah in the Torah,

which is certainly a matter of importance,

and especially that through this the name is perpetuated

(the Torah is eternal)?

3.

One will understand this by prefacing the explanation of the aforementioned answer of the Baalei HaTosafos — that the prohibition to mention the name of an idol is "specifically for a person, but not for the Holy One, blessed be He,"

for at first glance this is perplexing:

Since the reason for the prohibition is

(as above)

so as not to thereby give a reality to the idol — so what is the difference whether this is through a human being or through the Holy One, blessed be He?

&lt;b&gt;And on the contrary&lt;/b&gt;,

the speech of the Holy One, blessed be He, seemingly gives more force than the speech of a man,

and in the manner of the statement of our Sages, may their memory be blessed&lt;sup&gt;20&lt;/sup&gt;

— the speech of the Holy One, blessed be He, is considered an action?

At first glance it can appear,

that the intention of the Baalei Tosafos is,

that regarding the Holy One, blessed be He,

Is not applicable any prohibition

(as the Baalei Tosafos bring the example of this that "The Holy One, blessed be He, sits and judges the entire world even on Shabbat etc. even though for Israel it is forbidden")

— but it is completely not smooth,

for Chazal say²¹

(on the verse²²

"He declares His words to Jacob etc."),

that "what He does, He tells Israel to do and to observe."

One must say the plain meaning in the answer of the Tosafos,

that regarding the Above is not applicable the <b>reason </b>of the prohibition²³

of mentioning the name of idolatry.

4.

One can explain this according to what the "Yireim"²⁴

explains the reason why "it is permitted to mention the name of an idolatry written in the Torah" — "since the Torah mentioned it, it is certainly nullified"; and consequently there is no reason why one should not be allowed to mention its name.

When learning this reason simply, however, it is not understandable: Ha minan — from where is the proof that because "the Torah mentioned it" it is a "certainty" that "it was nullified"?²⁵

Further: one finds certain idols that are mentioned in Torah and were &lt;b&gt;not&lt;/b&gt; nullified&lt;sup&gt;26&lt;/sup&gt;,

for example: the idol of "Baal Peor"

(which is mentioned in our parshah&lt;sup&gt;27&lt;/sup&gt;)

and nevertheless it was not nullified&lt;sup&gt;28&lt;/sup&gt;.

And one may say,

that the simple meaning in Yiraim is,

that the idol "was certainly nullified" for &lt;b&gt;the Jew&lt;/b&gt;

(for every Jew is indeed his true will&lt;sup&gt;29&lt;/sup&gt;

to fulfill all commandments of the Torah)

which mentions it:

Just as the Torah mentions matters of

(and names)

idolatry,

this is indeed in order to bring out that they are naught and vanity and there is no benefit in them³⁰

and absolutely,

their <b>falsehood</b>,

and the <b>error</b> of those who served the idolatry

— to bring out how the idolatry did not help those who served it

(like “<b>perished</b> is the people of Chemosh”³¹)

; or,

that the fact that Jews served idolatry brought upon them a punishment

(as told at the end of our parshah,

that “Israel joined himself to Baal Peor”³²

brought a plague upon Jews³³).

<b>And the like</b>³⁴

It turns out,

that the mention of the name of an idol in the Torah brings the opposite and nullification of the importance of the idol,

<b>On the contrary</b>— this emphasizes the <b>falsehood</b> of the idol,

So it is regarding a Jew: when he mentions a name of an idol written in the Torah — this is in the content as it is <b>written in the Torah</b> — the opposite of the importance and reality of the idol,

such an idol

(which the Torah has already clearly brought out that it has no substance)

is for him "certainly nullified"³⁵,

and consequently

(as the Yereim continues)

— "from the same reason that the Torah mentions it

(— to bring out that it is nothing)

we are permitted to mention it"³⁶.

And one can say,

that this is in the manner of and similar to that of the ³⁷,

that "it is permitted to mock idolatry³⁸

" — because the mention of the name of idolatry in this manner,

brings about the opposite of importance to idolatry,

on the contrary — thereby one degrades the idolatry.

H.

Based on this it is also understandable what the Tosafists say that the prohibition

Mentioning the name of idolatry is "specifically for a person but not for the Holy One, blessed be He":

When a person mentions a name of idolatry, it is indeed &lt;b&gt;his will &lt;/b&gt;to mention it

(And especially when this is a mention for the sake of need&lt;sup&gt;39&lt;/sup&gt;)

he thereby gives importance to the idolatry; but from the side of the Holy One, blessed be He, there is no place, heaven forbid, for this error of idolatry,

<b>And on the contrary</b>,

the "content" of that which the Supreme God <b>truth</b> says the name of idolatry

(or it stands in the Torah of <b>truth</b>),

with this itself the idolatry becomes nullified,

speech and revelation of truth — nullifies and negates even a possibility of the falsehood of the idolatry.

but this is at any rate not a clean language?

— Rather because with this itself the falsehood of Baal Zephon becomes revealed and nullified,

and consequently also becomes nullified that which the falsehood of idolatry had previously misled — in the world⁴⁰].

And so too is it by a Jew: when he mentions a name of idolatry

(that is written in the Torah)

in the manner that it is written in the Torah⁴¹

— he thereby mentions and emphasizes the nullification of the idolatry.

With this one can explain what the Gemara¹⁰

relates a story about an Amora who mentioned a name of idolatry,

And he explained thereby that he was permitted to do this because it is written in the Torah,

which is perplexing: why mention a name of idolatry,

even when he is permitted to do so,

if there is in it no benefit and purpose?

But the explanation in this is as above: the Amora,

whose entire essence is <b>Torah</b>,

saw a situation⁴²

in the world⁴³

(He found a field⁴⁴)

which <b>demands</b> nullification of the idolatry — it is not only a permission

("It is permitted to mention"),

rather there is a <b>benefit</b> and need in it — <b>his</b> mentioning the idolatry is like the mention of <b>Torah</b>⁴⁵

— nullification of the idolatry,

as above.

6.

And it can be said that regarding this, also what they call the parshah "Balak"

(although "we do not ascend by their names")

Just as that which <b>the Torah tells</b> about Balak,

is this in order to bring out how <b>destroyed</b> was his evil thought "Come now, curse for me this people etc., perhaps I will be able to strike them etc."⁴⁶,

and therefore this is no contradiction to "the name of the wicked shall rot",

because on the contrary — <b>such</b> a mention adds further to the disgrace⁴⁷

and rot of the name of the wicked;

This applies also regarding the naming of the parshah with the name Balak: When Jews use the name "Balak" as the name of a parshah &lt;b&gt;in the Torah&lt;/b&gt;,

they mean "Balak" as &lt;b&gt;the Torah &lt;/b&gt;speaks about him,

which is a remembrance

(not for remembrance,

but the opposite)

which brings out the disgrace of Balak&lt;sup&gt;48&lt;/sup&gt;.

7.

A deeper concept in this:

By Balak one finds,

that not only was his evil thought disrupted

(in the manner of the matter of nullifying idolatry),

but moreover: his hiring of Balaam brought <b>an addition</b> to Jews — that Jews should be blessed with the most elevated blessings — which is a greater achievement than that which is achieved through nullification of idolatry:

When one nullifies idolatry,

which the idolatry itself is indeed a "denial of His Oneness"⁴⁹

it must be <b>entirely nullified</b>⁵⁰.

But not so the deed of Balak,

his wickedness,

his hatred of Jews, for which he hired Balaam,

on "Come now, curse for me, etc.",

brought an <b>assistance</b> and addition⁵¹

to Jews

(most sublime blessings)⁵².

And this is also what the parshah "Balak" is called,

because through him

(and his dealings with Balaam)

an advantage came out for Jews.

Ch.

And it can be said that this is also one of the explanations that Balaam's prophecy is among the prophecies in the Chumash⁵³

which speaks

(in an explicit manner)

about "the end of days"

(and the prophecy about Moshiach is brought <b>as halachah </b>in the Rambam⁵⁴,

as above section 1)

Because one of the main matters that will occur “in the end of days” is that all the nations of the world will be rectified in a manner,

that instead of using their strength to rule over Jews,

the strength itself will be used to <b>assist</b> Jews,

as it is written⁵⁵

“And <b>kings</b> shall be your foster fathers and their queens your nursing mothers”;

And therefore this came in the prophecy of <b>Balaam</b>,

which has the same matter — that this same strength

(his power of prophecy)

with which Balak wanted to carry out the “Come now, curse for me etc.”,

Balaam had to use to <b>bless</b> Jews⁵⁶.

And therefore this is a part of the parshah "Balak"⁵⁷,

and the completeness of "and they stood"⁵⁸

Strangers will shepherd your flocks, and foreigners will be your plowmen and vintners; and you will be called priests of Hashem, etc. Their work will be done by others⁵⁹

— will be in the true and complete redemption through Mashiach our righteous one,

very soon.

(From the talk of Shabbos Parshas Balak 5724)