The Torah testifies that Bilaam was “yodeah daas Elyon” (he knew the thoughts of his Creator). The Talmud (Brochos 7a) explains that this means that he knew how to precisely pinpoint the times that were auspicious for invoking the wrath of Hashem. The Talmud speaks of a certain moment each day when Hashem becomes angry with the world. Bilaam knew how to gauge that moment, and this knowledge was his secret weapon. He intended to synchronize his cursing of the Jewish people with that moment of Hashem’s wrath, and thereby bring Hashem’s wrath down upon the Jewish nation.
Rav Elyakim Schlessinger asks (in his sefer, Beis Av): If, in fact, Bilaam’s power was limited to knowing the moment of Hashem’s anger, that would seem to be a far cry from the Torah’s testimony that he was yodeah daas Elyon — he knew the mind of his Creator. The Beis Av therefore cites a Rabbinic teaching regarding the creation of the world.
Hashem originally intended to create the world using only His middas haddin (attribute of justice). In such a world, if someone would do an aveira, the punishment would be delivered immediately. But when Hashem saw that human beings would not be able to exist in such a world, He partnered the middas harachamim (attribute of mercy) with the middas haddin. This does not mean that if someone does an aveira, Hashem will just forget about it. It simply means that Hashem extends a grace period. Hashem gives the sinner some slack, so to speak, giving him the ability to ultimately repent. This combination of din (judgment) and rachamim (mercy) is the way the world operates.
Bilaam knew “daas Elyon”. That means that he was aware of Hashem’s original plan. He knew that Hashem originally wanted to create the world with only the middas haddin. Bilaam knew that every single day of every single year there is one moment when Hashem returns to his original plan and looks at the world with the middas haddin. This is what the Gemara means that during one moment of the day, Hashem gets angry. At that moment, chas v’shalom, anything can happen. The middas haddin has free reign at that moment. This knowledge was Bilaam’s great strength.
Bilaam’s power was to always look at the world askance. The Mishna (Avos 5:22) teaches that Bilaam had an ‘evil eye.’ This means that Bilaam looked at the world in a non-generous fashion, rather than with an eye toward the middas harachamim. He would always look with an eye toward invoking the middas haddin.
This explains why Bilaam refers to himself as the “one eyed man.” Who would ever describe himself as delivering “the speech of a one-eyed man?” Is being blind in one eye something to brag about and be proud of? Man was given two eyes: One eye to look at things with the middas haddin and one eye to look at things with the middas harachamim. Bilaam did not see the positive, only the negative. Bilaam bragged that he was a person who always looked only with an ‘evil eye.’ “My claim to fame is that I can invoke judgment against the Jewish people because I know when the Creator utilizes only his attribute of judgment.”
Our great salvation was “lo hibit avven b’Yaakov” (He perceived no iniquity in Jacob) (Bamidbar 23:21). In all the days that Bilaam tried to invoke the attribute of judgment, Hashem in His mercy, abstained from anger and never looked at us with middas haddin.
Finally, homiletically, the Beis Av suggests that this is the intention of the Gemara in Brochos that says that if not for the tircha d’tzibbura (great trouble for the congregation), the chachomim would have instituted the recital of the parsha of Balak in the middle of the daily recitation of Shema. The standard interpretation of this Gemara is that we would have included the reading of Balak within – in addition to — the reading of Krias Shema. However, the Beis Av cites an opinion from the Satmar Rebbe that the Gemara is making an even stronger statement: We would have REPLACED the reading of Krias Shema with that of Parshas Balak. If that is the case, how would that be tircha d’tzibbura? We can understand the tircha d’tzibbura if the option was to read both the three sections of Krias Shema AND Parshas Balak. The inclusion of such an additional paragraph in Shema would take more time, creating a burden for the congregation. If, however, the alternative was to replace Krias Shema with Balak, there would not have been a net increase in the amount of time required, so how would it trouble the congregation?
The answer is that the tircha d’tzibbura is from hearing twice daily – ”Kel zoem b’chol yom” – that Hashem is angry every day at least momentarily and that at that time the middas haddin is given free reign. We would be demoralized. We would not be able to handle the thought. A smile would not appear on our faces the entire day. The thought is too chilling to contemplate daily. That is the tircha d’tzibbura to which the Gemara is referring.
Whether we recite it daily or not, this fact remains the truth. Chas v’shalom, when we see tragedies in our midst – tragedies that seemingly should not have occurred and do not seem to make any sense – we ponder and ask ourselves, ‘Why?’ Sometimes, such tragedies can be the result of the severe middas haddin that can affect anyone at any time. This is why a person must constantly examine his actions on a daily basis. Teshuva is not something that should only be relegated to the Aseres Yemei Teshuva (Ten Days of Repentance). The antidote to middas haddin is the middas harachamim, which we will be granted if we show Hashem that we are constantly introspecting and that we are willing to improve.
