Bilaam, d’Oraysa and Derabannan
A most profound and illuminating perspective on the role of Rabbinic mitzvos in Judaism is found in the writings of Rav Elchanan Wasserman.[1] He prefaces by drawing our attention to a verse in Yirmiyahu, which describes the idolatrous practices to which the Jewish People had descended in his time:
ובנו את במות הבעל לשרוף את בניהם באש עולות לבעל אשר לא צויתי ולא דברתי ולא עלתה על לבי.
They built altars to Baal, upon which to burn their children in the fire, which I have not commanded and have not spoken and have not contemplated.[2]
The verse has mentioned three areas in which the Baal sacrifices are antithetical to Hashem’s Will:
- צווי — Command
- דיבור — Speech
- עלה על הלב — Contemplation
The Targum on this verse elaborates on these three terms:
- “דלא פקדית באורייתא — I did not command in the Torah.”
- “ודלא שלחית בידי עבדי נביאייא — And I did not transmit through My servants, the Prophets.”
- “ודלא רעוא קדמי — And was not desired by Me.”
These words of the Targum teach us that the Divine Will can exist in one of three levels:
- Something Hashem commands in the Torah.
- Something Hashem communicates to a prophet to instruct the Jewish People.
- Something that is neither commanded in the Torah nor spoken to a prophet, but nonetheless represents the way Hashem desires that we should act.
As Rav Wasserman explains, not every aspect of Torah and mitzvos is spelled out in the Torah, which means the sum total of our relationship with Hashem is not contained within the explicit commands alone. Accompanying every mitzvah that has been “commanded” and “spoken,” there is an element that Hashem “desires” in terms of the level of care and devotion that should accompany the mitzvah.
In any meaningful relationship, one does not seek merely to fulfill what the other side has requested, but to fathom what it is that they want and to act accordingly. Torah is no different. By contemplating what Hashem has commanded and spoken, we should be able to fathom what it is that He wants. This is the basis of the mitzvos d’rabbanan. The Rabbanan are looking to ensure that our observance of the mitzvos in the Torah exists on all three levels.
Just how important is factoring Hashem’s Will in to our mitzvah observance, in addition to obeying His express command? Rav Wasserman continues:
Upon reading the relevant verses in a straightforward manner, it appears that this was the sin of the wicked Bilaam. For seemingly, one may ask, once he has stated, “If Balak were to give me his entire house full of silver and gold, I could not transgress the word of Hashem, my God,”[3] in what way is he nonetheless a wicked person? However, in truth, even though Bilaam knew full well that going to curse the Jewish People was antithetical to Hashem’s Will, he was not concerned with this as long as there was no explicit command forbidding him to go.[4] Thus, he says, “I could not transgress the Word of Hashem,” i.e., an explicit command; but Hashem’s Will was of no significance in his eyes, and therein lay his wickedness.
Bilaam is not in the Torah for our entertainment. He represents, albeit to a pathological degree, a dysfunctional relationship with Hashem, whereby Hashem is not Someone he is looking to connect with, but to navigate around. Even a little reflection, through the personality of Bilaam, as to where this approach can leave a person, should be ample encouragement and inspiration for us to pursue our relationship with Hashem in the fullest sense of the word.
[1] Kuntres Divrei Sofrim 1:23–24.
[2] 19:5.
[4] For although Hashem subsequently gave him permission to go to Balak, he should have known full well that this did not represent Hashem’s will; see Meshech Chochmah, Bamidbar 22:20.