Watch videos with subtitles in your language, upload your videos, create your own subtitles! Click here to learn more on "how to Dotsub"

Balak 1987 by Rav Berg

0 (0 Likes / 0 Dislikes)
This week we're going to discuss the portion of the week which is known as Balak. And included within this discussion, will be what I consider to be, from a personal aspect, my most controversial lecture. It will probably come as a shock to most, and little comfort to very few. But nevertheless I think that the time has come when we have to face up to not the illusion but the reality. And as much as we are connected with the age of Aquarius, and in this age, everything is going to become revealed, in one way or another. The Parasha is known as Balak, {.....Hebrew.....} And Balak who is one of the formidable enemies of the nation of Israel, and who was, according to the Zohar, a very powerful mystic, but from the dark side. Very powerful, in other words, his strength did not lie in the numbers, in the amount of people that surrounded themselves, within his presence, but, that he was an individual, this is according to all of the commentaries on the Torah, that his power was profound and that the world feared him. And throughout this Parasha of Balak, we come to a realization that he was out to destroy the Isrealites, not on a physical level, but on a metaphysical level. And the Zohar describes much of the battle between Balak, and also his associate, who's known as Bilaam, and both of them gather together to possibly bring about the end of the nation of Israel - Chas v'shalom. There aren't many weekly portions that are named after people. We have Noach. We don't have a portion named after Abraham, neither after Isaac, it says "ele Toldot", but not Isaac. We do have a woman mentioned, which is Sarah, but we have one named after Yitro, who is also one of the chieftans of the tribe of Midian, and now we have Balak. Certainly the Torah could have seen fit to name this portion of the Torah in any number of ways. Yet it chose to name it Balak. Another starnge, and this is chapter 22 of Numbers, another strange section within this portion of the week of Balak, is when, in chapter 24, he then somehow gets lost in his objective, as some might say, and in chapter 24, verse 5, praises them by saying: How goodly are thy tents, oh Jacob, thy dwellings, oh Israel. {.....Hebrew.....} Which is recited by every congregant who enters the synagogue and recites this verse. It's the first verse upon entering the Beit Knesset. Indicating that this verse has some unduly and possibly, enormous power that it should be recited at the very beginning of all prayers. And yet, the same prayer was uttered by the foremost and archenemy of Israel, Bilaam. How can we explain that? How do we explain it away? And there are many other aspects to this Parasha, Balak because we see, and even the way the Torah declares, and states that he had a direct connection with the Lord, Bilaam that is, because it says in chapter 22 of Balak, verse 20, The Lord came on to Bilaam at night and said to him: and whatever he said to him. And we see mentioned throughout the chapter 22, verse 31 where not only the word 'Elokim' is not mentioned but Tetragrammaton is associated with, in verse 31: Then the Lord opened the eyes of Bilaam and he saw the angel of the Lord. Now we know that, we have discussed this on many occasions, that the Tetragrammaton, meaning the Yud Kei Vav Kei, and Elohim, which also means the Lord, are merely expressions or different expressions, of levels of consciousness or revelation of Light. And the Tetragrammaton is considered to be on a much higher level than the Elokim. And here we see that the Tetragrammaton is referring Itself to Bilaam. And if that is not sufficient, concerning these two people, there is, not only in the Talmud, but in the Midrash, where it says that in the nation of Israel there shall never rise a prophet as Moses, however, says the Midrash, only in the nation of Israel shall there never rise a prophet greater than Moses, but amongst the nations of the world there will arise a prophet on that level of Moses, and that is Bilaam. And just to confuse the issue just a bit more, the Ari tells us, on the verse in Balak, when after the disaster of Bilaam, in other words, his words were somehow twisted and he did not succeed. However he pleaded with the Lord that he should not be punished or he should not die an unnatural death and he says: {.....Hebrew.....} He prayed to the Lord that his death should be a death of natural causes. Because he felt what he had in his behaviour in the way he conducted himself, that he was deserving of an unnatural death, and what happened was that he was praying that it should not happen. The truth of the matter is that it is not true, says the Ari and the Zohar, because it says that Bilaam was strucked down by a sword. He did not died a natural death, which seems to be a contradiction within the verse. And so the Ari prepares us by saying: in {.....Hebrew.....}, which is volume 17 of the (.....) edition, {.....Hebrew.....} know the secret of this matter {.....Hebrew.....} {.....Hebrew.....} And Bilaam, says the Ari, was Lavan, the father in law of Jacob and therefore the letters of Lavan is 'Lamed Bet Nun', the letters of Naval are identical, 'Nun Bet Lamed". Therefore we shall continue the rest of this Ari, which is so unsual, and that he says Bilaam's wish was granted. But while, as I said before, all of the commentators express the view that he was speared, and that's the way he died. Yet he had asked for a natural death and the Ari says since, he askes this in the form of a question, also in the (.....), since these words were not decisive, {.....Hebrew.....} because Bilaam did not die a natural death as it says in the Midrash: {.....Hebrew.....} Pinchas did not want to kill Bilaam Why didn't he want to kill him? {.....Hebrew.....} he didn't want for him to draw this kind of energy because even in death the victim, in a way, is drawing energy which is a subject by itself, would be drawing energy from Pinchas, because the act of murdering somebody means that act is a transfer of the (....), of the murderer in effect being transfered now into the victim. Pinchas did not want that {.....Hebrew.....} because if Pinchas had speared him, then that would be considered a natural death. Because he would have in effect had been the recipient of this enormous power that was within Pinchas. That itself would have been considered (.......) a justfiable, a righteous kind of death. Therefore the Torah says: {.....Hebrew.....} Chas v'shalom. How come the request of Bilaam is even mentioned if he was not going to die a natural death. It should not mentioned it at all. The Ari concludes that he did die a (.....), not at the hands of Pinchas, not a natural death as it is stated, but in his incarnation through the years into Naval who suffered a speared death, then again was incarnated where a death was a natural death. So the verse is not without reason. Bilaam died a natural death, he died a non-natural death and both are correct.

Video Details

Duration: 14 minutes and 26 seconds
Country: United States
Language: English
License: All rights reserved
Genre: None
Views: 7
Posted by: yosef.farnoosh on Jun 30, 2014

Balak 1987 by Rav Berg

Caption and Translate

    Sign In/Register for Dotsub to translate this video.