Parshas Balak- Change and Remain

Society today possesses an increasing appetite for change and variety. Attention spans have waned drastically. There are certainly many factors that contribute to this reality. This dynamic is detrimental in countless ways. The desire for continuously varying experiences is rooted in a principle distinction in mentality, highlighted in this week’s Parsha.

Rabbi Chelbo in the name of Rav Huna (Gemara Berachos 6b) teaches an important idea about prayer. One who establishes a fixed place for prayer will be supported by the G-d of Avraham. When he passes away, others will praise him as humble and pious, and call him a student of Avraham Avinu. In the incident of the destruction of Sedom and Amora, Avraham prayed that the inhabitants of the region be spared. Ultimately, Hashem refused his arguments, and the cities were destroyed. Nonetheless, the next day, Avraham returned to the same place in which he prayed the day prior (Vayera 19:27). Despite not being answered the day before, Avraham persevered and prayed in the same, fixed location. Thus, Avraham is the epitome of one who affixes a set place of prayer. Rabbi Yochanan in the name of Rabbi Shimon ben Yochai (Berachos 7b) emphasizes the importance of having an established place of prayer as well. He teaches that such a person will merit that his enemies will fall beneath him.

These statements place great value on having a “makom kavuah,” an affixed place for prayer. One who fulfills this idea receives great praises and benefits. What is the inherent significance of having a set place for prayer?

Rabbi Yitzchak (Gemara Rosh Hashana 16b) quotes two opinions in regards to the strategies for breaking a negative decree. The first opinion lists four methods: charity, prayer, changing one’s name, and changing one’s deeds. The second opinion adds a fifth strategy, changing one’s location. This final method is proven effective based on Hashem telling Avraham to leave Charan and travel to Eretz Yisrael. While in Charan, he could not have children. Only upon moving would he bear children. Indeed, following the move, Avraham and Sarah finally bore a child. The first opinion negates this proof, as it was the unique merit dwelling in the Land of Israel that allowed them to produce a child. However, moving elsewhere would not generally break a negative decree.

The Ben Yehoyada wonders why the first opinion does not include living in Eretz Yisrael as a way of breaking a negative decree. He explains that the first opinion doesn’t outright disagree with the proof. Rather, he is unsure whether it was the move that merited Avraham and Sarah to bear a child, or the zechus of being in Eretz Yisrael. Thus, he doesn’t include either in his aforementioned list.       

It appears that there is a value in changing location, when attempting to negate a negative decree. How can we understand the impact of this method? Furthermore, how do we resolve this idea with the prior mentioned emphasis on maintaining a makom kavuah?

The Mishna (Pirkei Avos 5:19) lists the stark contrasts between one who is considered a student of Avraham Avinu, and a student of Bilam HaRasha. When reading their storylines, it becomes clear that they have many similarities. Bilam is a hired spiritual mercenary, tasked by Balak to curse the Jewish people. He is ultimately unsuccessful in harming the Jews, using this approach. When Bilam blesses the Jews instead of cursing them, Balak suggests that they move to an alternative location, and try again (23:13). This is repeated a second time (23:27). Finally, Balak realizes that Hashem will not allow Bilam to curse the Jews.

Interestingly, Balak and Bilam seemed to be utilizing the exact opposite approach of Avraham Avinu. Avraham established a permanent place for prayer. Even after being unsuccessful in his prayers, he returned to the same location. Balak and Bilam changed places, assuming the new area would allow them to succeed in cursing the Jews. What underlying distinction in mentality is the Torah noting?

Recently, I shared a wonderful and encouraging conversation with a Jamaican-American uber driver. He said that his father came to this country with little means, and worked to achieve “the American dream.” He expressed proudly that his father was the hardest working man that he knew. He proceeded to wonder how certain groups of people who are born in America, claim that the country is inherently racist, and prevents them from succeeding in their lives. “I am,” he stated, “proof that upward mobility can be achieved, through hard work and dedication.” He contrasted this reality to life in Jamaica, where this opportunity is not prevalent.

When one prays and is not answered as he would like, he could react in one of two ways. He could recognize that he possesses certain flaws that need correcting, that are not allowing for his prayers to be answered. Such a person will persevere in his location, all while working on himself, ultimately yielding tremendous success. Alternatively, he could blame his lack of success on the place, or other external factors. He could rationalize that he is perfect, and any shortcoming should be attributed to things outside of himself. Such a person is doomed to fail, as he will never develop in the areas in which he is genuinely lacking. Avraham Avinu took personal responsibility, and returned to daven in the same location. Those who follow in his approach, indicate that they too take responsibility for their shortcomings, and ultimately overcome them. However, Bilam did the opposite. He based his inability to succeed in cursing the Jews on the location, taking no share in the lacking. This leads to a life of complete failure.

The Ritva (Rosh Hashana 16b) explains the idea of changing places to break a negative decree. When one feels too comfortable and confident in his place, it could lead him to sin. A change in location could humble him, thus preventing inappropriate behavior. This is the idea of “shinuy makom” negating a negative decree (based on Rabbeinu Chananel in Tosfos V’yaaseh, Chagiga 16a).

Ultimately, those who take personal responsibility for their own shortcomings, choose the harder path. However, this approach leads to a life full of successes and accomplishments. In stark contrast, those who incessantly blame their lacking’s on external factors, pick an easier road. The outcome is total, unequivocal failure. May we merit to choose the correct approach, living successful lives in the ways of Hashem!      

Please email yshifman1@gmail.com with questions, comments, or to be placed on the mailing list