Produced from the shiur delivered at Beit Knesset HaGadol – Bnei Brak on תמוז תש ע״ח ט״ז / June 28, 2018.
Sponsored by Yehuda Behar of Woodmere, New York, in honor of Rav Rosenblum shlit”a, and in appreciation for all the Rav's words of Torah, chizuk, and inspiration.
Dedicated in the merit of all our heroic soldiers, הי״ד, who gave their lives in defense of Israel; and in the merit of a refuah shleima for all those injured, both physically and emotionally.
Why did Balak merit having a Parsha named for him? The question is direct and simple, and one asked by nearly every commentator who point to Balak being the only individual outside of the tribe – i.e. a non-Jew – to receive such an honor. (Noach and Yitro came before the time of Yetziat Mitzrayim and Matan Torah, and the latter did convert.) What was it about Balak, the king of Moav and a wicked person who endeavored to curse Bnei Yisrael, that saw his name wind up on the top of each page in this week’s Parsha? There is an oft-quoted lesson found throughout the Talmud:
לְעוֹלָם יַעֲסוֹק אָדָם בְּתוֹרָה וּמִצְוֹת אֲפִילּוּ שׁ ֶ ל ּ ֹ א שׁ ֶ ל ּ ֹ א ל ִ שׁ ְ מ ָ ה ּ , שׁ ֶ מּ ִ תּ ו ֹ ך לִשׁ ְ מָ הּ בָּ א לִשׁ ְ מָ הּ .
A person should always engage in Torah study and mitzvot, even if not for their own sake, as through (the performance of mitzvot) not for their own sake, one comes to perform them for their own sake.
This idea appears several times as is, with no continuation or addendum. However, there are also instances where proof is given (Sanhedrin 105b; Nazir 23b; Horayot 10b):
שׁ ֶבִּשְׂכַר אַרְבָּעִים וּשְׁנַיִם קׇרְבָּנוֹת שׁ ֶהִקְרִ יב בָּלָק הָרָשׁ ָע — זָכָה וְיָצְ אָ ה מִמֶּנּוּ רוּת. וְאָמַר רַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא: רוּת, בַּת בְּנוֹ שׁ ֶל עֶגְלוֹן מֶלֶך מוֹאָב הָיְתָה.
That in reward for the forty-two offerings that the wicked Balak sacrificed, he merited that Ruth descended from him. And this is as Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said: Ruth was the daughter of the son of Eglon, king of Moav (who descended from Balak, king of Moav).
In some of these instances containing the proof point of Ruth, no further explanation is added by Rashi, whereas in others – such as Nazir 23b, quoted above – he does explain the rationale:
ָצָא מִמֶּנָּה דָּוִד שׁ ֶרִיוָּהוּ להקב"ה בְּשִׁירוֹת וּבְתִשְׁבָּחוֹת – She had the privilege that David, who inundated Hakadosh Baruch Hu with songs and praises, would descend from her.
However, there is one unique location where the Gemara, and Rashi’s comments, differ from the others (Sotah 47a):
לְעוֹלָם יַעֲסוֹק אָדָם בְּתוֹרָה וּבְמִצְוֹת, וְאַף עַל פִּי שׁ ֶלֹּא לִשְׁמָהּ. שׁ ֶמִּתּוֹך שׁ ֶ ל ּ ֹ א ל ִ שׁ ְ מ ָ ה ּ — בָּא לִשְׁמָהּ. שׁ ֶבִּשְׂכַר אַרְבָּעִים וּשְׁנַיִם קׇרְבָּנוֹת שׁ ֶהִקְרִיב בָּלָק מֶלֶך מוֹאָב, זָכָה וְיָצְתָה מִמֶּנּוּ רוּת ָצָא מִ מֶּנָּה שׁ ְ ל ֹ מ ֹ ה, שׁ ֶכָּתוּב בֵּ יהּ ״אֶלֶף עֹלוֹת יַעֲלֶה שׁ ְלֹמֹה״.
...As in reward for the forty-two offerings that Balak, king of Moav, brought, he merited that Ruth descended from him, from whom King Solomon descended, about whom it is written: A thousand burnt-offerings did Solomon offer up.
In this last example, Chazal are clear: As a result of the 42 Korbanot offered by Balak, many Korbanot were later offered by Shlomo HaMelech. If so, why in many of the previous instances of this idea does Rashi state the reward as being David HaMelech who offered praise to Hakadosh Baruch Hu? In those cases, the Gemara only tells us the reward is proven by Ruth, and it specifies neither David HaMelech nor his actions. Only in this one spot does it add detail, which is also noted by Rashi – namely, that Shlomo, and his father (David), would offer Korbanot. Why does Rashi add the element of David and his praise in his explanation for when no such detail is provided? And why does Rashi not add the detail provided regarding David and Shlomo offering Korbanot, especially since it is the only secondary detail (beyond Ruth) appearing anywhere in the Gemara?
I believe there is an answer to this question, but I have not yet found it in any sefer. The Gemara (Shabbat 30a) describes David HaMelech asking Hakadosh Baruch Hu how much longer he had to live:
רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם, הוֹדִיעֵנִי ה׳ קִצִי – Master of the Universe, let me know my end; in how long will I die?
Hakadosh Baruch Hu replied that such information is not given out to man:
גְּזֵרָה הִיא מִלְּפָנַי שׁ ֶאֵין מוֹדִ יעִין קִצ וֹ שׁ ֶל בָּשָׂר וָדָם.
David HaMelech pressed to know on what day it would occur, and upon being told it would be on Shabbat, he asked if it was possible for Yom Rishon to be the day. His request was denied though, because it was not possible for his kingdom to extend an extra day and overlap with that of his son’s. David HaMelech then asked if Yom Shishi could be the day but was told:
כִּי טוֹב יוֹם בַּחֲצֵרֶ יך מֵאָלֶף – For a day in your courts is better than a thousand – i.e., a single day in which he’d sit and engage in Torah was preferable to Hakadosh Baruch Hu than the thousand burnt-offerings his son offered.
I believe the reason Rashi consistently brings the proof of David HaMelech rather than that of Shlomo and his 1000 Korbanot, is because one day of David and his praise are worth more to Hakadosh Baruch Hu than all the Korbanot combined!
Let us carry forward this idea of there being a distinction between performing a Mitzvah שׁ ֶ ל ּ ֹ א ל ִ שׁ ְ מ ָ ה ּ (not for its own sake) and לִשׁ ְ מָ הּ (for its own sake), and Balak having merited a great reward through his offering of Korbanot שׁ ֶ ל ּ ֹ א ל ִ שׁ ְ מ ָ ה ּ.
Bilaam arrived on the scene and was offered all sorts of riches in exchange for agreeing to curse Bnei Yisrael. Before getting started, however, he put forth a demand:
וַיֹאמֶר בִּלְעָם אֶל־בָּלָק בְּנֵה־לִי בָזֶה שִׁבְעָה מִזְבְּחֹת וְהָכֵן לִי בָּזֶה שִׁבְעָה פָרִ ים וְשִׁבְעָה אֵילִים׃ ַעַל בָּלָק וּבִלְעָם ַעַשׂ בָּלָק כַּאֲשׁ ֶר דִּבֶּר בִּלְעָם וַי פָּר וָאַיִל בַּמִּזְבֵּחַ׃
Bilaam said to Balak, “Build me seven altars here and have seven bulls and seven rams ready here for me.” Balak did as Bilaam directed; and Balak and Bilaam offered up a bull and a ram on each altar.
An entire shiur could be given on the exact nature of their Korbanot, and who performed which step, but we’ll save those insights from the Rishonim for another day. We’ll just ask a few very basic questions, the first of which is: Why seven altars? All sorts of sevens can be offered up in response, including the total number of avot (3) and imahot (4), the days of the week, Shemitah years, and more. The Rokeach adds the seven Noahide Laws to what this number symbolized.
Our next question focused on the series of Korbanot: How many animals were offered? Generally, there is a set when it comes to Korbanot: פּ ָ ר (bull), אַ יִל (ram), and כֶּבֶ שׂ (sheep). Why did Bilaam not include sheep in his offering? Was there a shortage of sheep in Moav at the time? Chazal say, he brought only Korbanot corresponding to Avraham and Yitzchak, but not Yaacov who is represented by sheep. What did he have against Yaacov Avinu? We’ll return to this question very soon.
Allow me to ask another very simple question: How many Korbanot did Bilaam offer in total? There were three rounds of Korbanot described in the Parsha, with each consisting of the two aforementioned animals on the seven aforementioned altars. 3 x 2 x 7 = 42. Bilaam offered a total of forty-two Korbanot. So far, so good – everything is straightforward. We’ll now move on to the next stage, however, which requires a bit of concentration.
We opened with the question of how a Parsha in the Torah could be named for Balak. He was a non-Jew, and a wicked one at that! He wasn’t righteous nor did conversion ever enter his mind. All he wanted to do was to curse, and destroy, Bnei Yisrael! As brought by the Gemara earlier, the fact that Ruth (and David HaMelech) descended from him could be a possible answer, along with the fact that Balak was seen as a genuine wicked man, in that what he thought he spoke, as opposed to lying or covering up his true intentions. Either way, a beautiful question can be asked, leading to an extensive idea from Rabbi Tzadok HaKohen of Lublin of which I only understand the nigleh part while the rest that deals with Kabbalah, I’m not privy to grasp even אֶ פֶ ס קָ צֵ הוּ.
Generally, Chazal do not refer to the Parshiot by name. When discussing what sections we read on each holiday, the Gemara never refers to a Parsha’s name as we now know it. Massechet Megillah, where most of these discussions are found, says:
קוֹרִין בְּפָרָשׁ ַת מוֹעֲדוֹת שׁ ֶבְּתוֹרַת כֹּהֲנִים – we read the section of festivals found in Torat Kohanim on the first day of Succot. This refers to the section of "שׁ וֹר אוֹ־כֶשֶׂב אוֹ־עֵז כִּי יִוָּלֵד” found in Parshat Emor. If so, why is Parshat Emor not mentioned as the location? It is because the names of Parshiot are not used. There is no Emor. There are, however, times when the names we’re familiar with do appear and are referenced for their location, but not as names or titles. It just happens to be that the section alluded to begins with those exact words. An example of this is with regards to the reading of Yom Kippur:
אַ חֲ רֵ י מו ֹתבְּיוֹם הַכִּפּוּרִים קוֹרִין – alluding not to the Parsha we know by that name, but rather to the opening aliyah that begins with the words אַ חֲ רֵ י מו ֹת. This is evident from how the Gemara continues:
וּבַמִּנְחָה קוֹרִין בָּעֲרָיוֹת – in the afternoon of Yom Kippur we read the section pertaining to prohibited relations. This section, too, is found in Parshat Acharei Mot, yet there is no reference made to the words or name. Instead, we’re told the topic and it’s on us to find it. The same is true for Acharon shel Pesach:
ו ַ י ְ ה ִ י ב ּ ְ שׁ ַ ל ּ ַ חיוֹם טוֹב הָאַחֲרוֹן שׁ ֶל פֶּסַח קוֹרִין.
The section is referred to by its opening words and not by how we refer to Parshat Beshalach. This is evident by the reference to Purim’s reading:
ָבֹא עֲמָלֵק – בַּפּוּרִ ים וַי. This section is also in Parshat Beshalach, but if you want to know where it’s found, the Gemara tells you to go search for it!
Rabbi Tzadok asks a question related to the stature of the Parsha we read this week. The Gemara states (Brachot 12b):
בִּקְּ שׁ וּ לִקְ בּוֹעַ פָּרָ שׁ ַת בָּלַק בִּ קְ רִ יאַת שׁ ְ מַ ע, וּמִ פְּנֵי מָ ה לֹא קְ בָעוּהָ — מִשּׁ וּם טוֹרַח צִבּוּר.
The Sages sought to establish the blessings of Bilaam from Parshat Balak, as part of the twice-daily recitation of Shema. And why did they not establish it? Because extending Shema would be an encumbrance on the congregation.
Look at the incredible respect given to Parshat Balak, with the Gemara suggesting it be elevated to the level of none other than Kriyat Shema! The Gemara (Bava Batra 14b) also tells us:
מֹשׁ ֶה כָּתַב סִפְרוֹ וּפָרָשׁ ַת בִּלְעָם וְאִי וֹב – Moshe wrote his own book – i.e., the Torah – and the portion of Bilaam, and the book of Iyov. Moshe Rabbeinu! No less than Parshat Bilaam! Once again, look at the degree to which this section is exalted! Two wicked non-Jews who set out to curse Bnei Yisrael are referenced in ways texts focused on Avraham Avinu and Matan Torah are not! How does this make any sense?!
Balak was not a simple man, says Rabbi Tzadok. The Torah does not generally reference ordinary people, but rather the exceptional ones. Both Balak and Bilaam were two central sorcerers, with Balak being at a much higher level than his hired hitman. Balak had a bird with which he would consult, according to the Ohr HaChaim Hakadosh (whose hilulah we observe next week – 15 Tammuz), and since he listened to the direction of this bird, he’s referred to as בָּלָק בֶּן־צִפּ וֹר. Rabbi Tzadok asks what the meaning is of our opening Pesukim:
וַיִּשְׁלַח מַלְאָכִים אֶל־בִּלְעָם בֶּן־בְּעֹר פְּתוֹרָה אֲשׁ ֶר עַל־הַנָּהָר אֶרֶץ בְּנֵי־עַמּוֹ לִקְרֹא־לוֹ לֵאמֹר הִנֵּה עַם יָצָא מִמִּצְרַיִם הִנֵּה כִסָּה אֶת־עֵין הָאָרֶץ וְ הוּא י ֹשׁ ֵ ב מִ מֻּ לִ י׃
Balak sent messengers to Bilaam be Be’or in Pethor, which is by the Euphrates, in the land of his kinsfolk, to invite him, saying, “There is a people that came out of Egypt; it hides the earth from view, and it is settled next to me.
הִנֵּה כִסָּה אֶת־עֵין הָאָרֶץ – Rashi explains this to mean Bnei Yisrael took out Sichon and Og who were the eyes of the land and who protected Balak. However, Rabbi Tzadok says it is far deeper and more complicated than that.
כִּי נִיצוֹץ קְדוֹשׁ ָה דְּדָוִד הַמֶּלֶך ע"ה הָיָה מְכַשְׁכֵּשׁ בְּמֵעָיו וְלֹא הָיָה מַנִּיחוֹ ל ִ שׁ ְ ק ו ֹ ט מִ ז ּ ֶ ה .
Because a holy spark of King David was rumbling in his innards and did not let him rest.
At the thought of David HaMelech having descended from him, Balak’s stomach constantly turned. Somewhere deep inside he felt Jewish, and he now had a plan for what to do about it as he watched a nation leave Egypt and begin to cover the land. We learn in the Mishna (Sanhedrin 10:1):
כָּל יִשְׂרָאֵל יֵשׁ לָהֶם חֵלֶק לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא, שׁ ֶנֶּאֱמַר וְעַמֵּך כֻּלָּם צַדִּ יקִים לְעוֹלָם יִירְשׁ וּ אָרֶץ נֵצֶר מַטָּעַי מַעֲשֵׂה יָדַי לְהִתְפָּאֵר.
All Jews have a share in the World to Come, as it is stated: “And your people also shall be all righteous, they shall inherit the land forever; the branch of My planting, the work of My hands, for My name to be glorified.”
ל ְ ע ו ֹ ל ָ ם י ִ י רְ שׁ ו ּ א ָ רֶ ץ – Forever they shall inherit the land. Which land does this refer to? Not a physical land, but a spiritual one. The true inheritance which comes at the end: Olam Haba. Every member of Bnei Yisrael has a share of that World to Come, but what about the nations of the world? Is there perhaps a light version that awaits them? The righteous among the nations – Chasidei Umot HaOlam – do have a portion, but the Gemara (Sanhedrin 90a) lists two exceptions:
שְׁלֹשׁ ָה מְלָכִים וְאַרְבָּעָה הֶדְ יוֹטוֹת אֵין לָהֶן חֵלֶק לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא – Three kings and four commoners have no share in the World to Come. The three kings are Yerovam, Achav, and Menashe. And who are the commoners? Doeg the Edomi, Achitophel, Gechazi, and none other than Bilaam! As far as I know, Bilaam was not a Satmar chassid, leading to the obvious conclusion that even non-Jews have a share of Olam Haba. Perhaps there’s a separate section for them, somewhere special where Raoul Wallenberg and other righteous individuals reside.
Balak saw how this all plays out and asked, “Master of the World, please explain to me one thing. Until the point at which the Torah was given to Am Yisrael, individuals such as Adam HaRishon, Noach, Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaacov, all had seven Mitzvot to observe – the seven Noahide Laws. They may have volunteered to take on more, and some had individual commandments tacked on to their personal lists, but it was only seven basic that mankind was commanded to observe during those all those generations. Everyone was equal in that sense. But as soon as Bnei Yisrael were taken out of Egypt and given 613 exclusive commandments, the entire paradigm shifted, a private Gan Eden was reserved uniquely for them, and it was game over for the rest of us. We all used to have a seat on the plane, seated all together, but now Am Yisrael are up there in first class with their own tickets and their own world while the rest of us are sent to the back.”
The king of Moav couldn’t tolerate this new reality, one where Bnei Yisrael covered the land – הִ נֵּה כִ סָּה אֶ ת־עֵין הָאָ רֶ ץ. They left Egypt and now covered, or concealed, the land of Olam Haba, precluding him and the nations of the world from reaching the front of the plane. The door of Gan Eden was now closed and locked on them, and their new world was in the United Nations, not in Olam Haba. Rabbi Tzadok says (Resisei Laila, 44), Balak could not come to terms with this new paradigm because he could not understand it.
I will translate his dilemma into modern parlance and subjects to bring out its essence. You all know Donald Trump. Is he with the Jews or with the nations of the world? When his day arrives, will he be in Gan Eden with the tzaddikim of Am Yisrael or in another section designated for those outside the tribe? Clearly, it’s the latter. His daughter who converted, and her husband, will be in the Olam Haba reserved for Bnei Yisrael, but Trump himself will be a small distance away with the righteous of the nations. Let’s shift over to another well-known individual, a politician named Henry Kissinger. A Jew. Tell me, does Kissinger put on Rabbeinu Tam tefillin every morning? Doubtful. Does he eat only Vizhnitz matza on Pesach? Also doubtful. So, Mr. Balak would like to know how it is that Kissinger has a seat reserved for him at the front of the plane, in Olam Haba, whereas Trump cannot advance past the back rows? He understands that one who accepts the 613 unique Mitzvot and does their best to observe them should have a special access to Olam Haba, but how can it be that a righteous gentile has less privilege than a heretic or am ha’aretz? “Master of the World, does it not make more sense to place Trump up front and bump Kissinger back?! How can it be that enemies and haters of Bnei Yisrael can have a share of Olam Haba?!”
The answer is quite simple. Kissinger is a Jew, and the Mishna states that all Yisrael have a share of Olam Haba. And when did they become Yisrael? When they were taken out of Egypt. Balak lamented, “הִ נֵּה עַ ם יָצָ א מִ מִּ צְ רַ יִ ם – Here is a nation that left Egypt and shut the door to Olam Haba on the rest of us!” And why did it bother him so much? Was he not Balak, the leading member of the United Nations? No, Balak was different. Knowing deep down inside that David HaMelech would stem from him, he could not accept that his descendant would be the fourth leg of the Merkava – the Divine Chariot of Hakadosh Baruch Hu – while he was relegated to the rear, barely even a wheel! The thought of this discrepancy left his stomach turning and left him in a constant state of desiring attachment to Bnei Yisrael and a place in Olam Haba.
So why did Balak not simply convert? Why did he not follow the path laid out by Yitro, who also has a Parsha in his name? Who was stopping him if he desired it so much and being left out bothered him endlessly? Except he didn’t want to join Bnei Yisrael. The slightest thought of it would result in Bnei Yisrael telling him how difficult it is, how demanding the Mitzvot are, and how persecution is always around the corner. There’s no way anyone would allow him in, even if he played the David HaMelech card. Balak didn’t want to join Bnei Yisrael; he wanted what he believed was the best of both worlds: A simple set of seven Mitzvot to follow, along with full rights to Olam Haba just as he’d receive before Matan Torah.
שׁ ִבְעַת הַמִּ זְבְּחֹת עָרַכְתִּ י אֶ ת – The Midrash says, the seven altars correspond to Adam HaRishon, Hevel, Noach, Avraham, Yitzchak, Yaacov, and Moshe. Six of the seven lived in a time before Matan Torah when the seven Noahide Laws were all there were to observe, and Balak wanted to cling to Hakadosh Baruch Hu in the same way, limited to seven commandments.
Rabbi Tzadok says this phenomenon is not limited to Balak. In every generation, he says, the nations of the world claim they want to be like Am Yisrael. The Greeks are a prime example, as they translated the Torah and claimed to actually be Yisrael! Why did they desire to be Yisrael? Because all of Yisrael have a share of Olam Haba. Balak wanted the same reward for observing the seven Noahide Laws as Bnei Yisrael receive for observing 613 Mitzvot. Hakadosh Baruch Hu would have none of it, however, not desiring the strife that Balak was looking to introduce. The Midrash says, He responded to Balak (Bamidbar Rabbah 20:18):
הֱשִׁיבוֹ רוּחַ הַקֹּדֶשׁ : טוֹב פַּת חֲרֵבָה, טוֹב מִנְחָה בְּלוּלָה בַּשֶּׁמֶן וַחֲרֵבָה , מִבַּיִת מָלֵא זִבְחֵי רִיב , שׁ ֶאַתָּה רוֹצֶה לְהַכְנִיס מְרִיבָה בֵּינִי וּבֵין יִשְׂרָאֵל.
The Divine Spirit answered: Dry bread is better, a meal offering that is mixed with oil or dry, than a house full of offerings of strife, as you seek to introduce strife between Me and Israel.
The Ba’al HaTurim notes, יב'רִ בְ חֵ י 'זִ לֵא 'מָ בַּיִת 'מִ stands for מַ מְ זֵר. Who is Balak and what right does he even have to talk! He’s an illegitimate child, descendant of Lot and his daughter!
Following that idea from Rabbi Tzadok of Lublin, I’d like to share another beautiful idea. Bilaam and Balak offered up seven Korbanot on their seven altars. Why seven? As mentioned earlier by the Rokeach, seven corresponds to the seven Noahide Laws. The Ibn Ezra says:
יש סודות עמוקים לא יבינום כי אם מתי מספר ושביעי בימים ובחדשים ובשנים ושבעה כבשי העולה ושבעה הזאות גם אמר השם לאיוב קחו לכם שבעה פרים ושבעה אילים ובתת שלם לשלם אז תתחדש רוח בינה והמשכיל יבין:
There are deep secrets which only a few can fathom. The number seven occurs with regards to days, months, years; the seven lambs offered for a burnt offering; the seven sprinklings. G-d also told Iyov, take seven bullocks and seven rams. When the complete is added to the complete, then a spirit of understanding is newly created. The intelligent will understand what I speak of.
When someone tells you something is a sod, a secret, what do you usually do? You search for it! You want to know! Thankfully, the Ibn Ezra reveals some of it to us. The seventh is beloved, as demonstrated with the seventh day (Shabbat), the seventh month (Tishrei), and the seventh year (Shemitah), and when a complete Korban of seven – i.e., seven bulls, seven rams, seven altars – is added to the Completeness of Hakadosh Baruch Hu, the understanding of this sod will be reached. The Ramban comments on these words of the Ibn Ezra, saying the sod is that Bilaam wanted to become close with Hakadosh Baruch Hu through these Korbanot, and therefore he offered sacrifices that are burned in their entirety – completely – while desiring Balak join him in together offering them, with one slaughtering the animals and the other sprinkling their blood.
Another thought offered by Oznaim Latorah, is that both Balak and Bilaam knew the number seven was חָ בִ יב – beloved, to Hakadosh Baruch Hu. They determined this through וַיְ בָ רֶ ך ל ֹהִ ים אֶ ת־יוֹם הַ שׁ ְּ בִ יעִ י- אֱ – concluding the blessings of Hakadosh Baruch Hu come through the seventh day, and therefore they offered their Korbanot in sevens as well.
An entire shiur can be given on the number seven, one that would take seven days to get through. I will bring two quick examples. The Ba’al HaTurim says, in the first Pasuk of the Torah – בְּ רֵ אשׁ ִ ית בָּ רָ א אֱ לֹהִים אֵת הַשָּׁמַיִם וְאֵת הָאָרֶץ – we find a total of seven words, corresponding to seven days of the week, seven years in a Shemitah cycle, seven Shemitah years in a Yovel, seven רְ קִ יעִ ים – firmaments (Chagigah 12), seven אֲ רָ צו ֹת – names for land (Vayikra Rabbah 29:11), seven seas that surround Eretz Yisrael (Bava Batra 74b), and seven spheres or heavens (חנכ״ל שצ״ם). For this reason, Chazal established that we recite יְהֵא שׁ ְ מֵהּ רַ בָּא מְ בָרַ ך לְעָלַם וּלְעָלְ֒מֵ י עָלְ֒מַ י seven...
