The Gemara records that Menasheh challenged Yeshayah ha'Navi with apparent
contradictions between what is written in the Torah and what Yeshayah had said. One
of those contradictions was that Yeshayah said that he saw a vision of Hashem, while
the Torah states, "No person can see Me and live" (Shemos 33:20).
The Gemara answers that Yeshayah saw Hashem through "an unclear Aspaklariya." He
thought that he saw a vision of Hashem, but he really did not.
The MAHARITZ CHIYUS quotes the AKEIDAH who uses this Gemara to explain the verses in
Yeshayah.
The verse (Yeshayah 6:5) states, "And I said, 'Woe is me that I am going to be
Nidmeisi!'" Yeshayah exclaims, upon seeing the vision of Hashem, that he is going to
be eternally silenced ("Nidmeisi", or put to death) because he saw such a vision.
This is how RASHI and the other Rishonim explain the word "Nidmeisi" in the verse.
The Akeidah explains, based on our Gemara, that "Nidmeisi" means not "I am going to
die," but "I have been imagining."
Yeshayah was saying that until now, he thought his prophecies were accurate, but now
that he sees a vision of Hashem, he knows that he must be imagining, because it is
not possible to see a vision of Hashem. And if he is imagining now, then all of his
other prophecies in the past must also have been part of his imagination
("Nidmeisi"). That is why Yeshayah exclaims, "Woe is me, for *I have been
imagining*." He continues that since I was imagining and not having real Nevu'os, it
must be "because I am a man of impure lips, and I live among a nation with impure
lips," and that is why I cannot properly perceive a Nevu'ah.
The Gemara records that Menasheh challenged Yeshayah ha'Navi with apparent
contradictions between what is written in the Torah and what Yeshayah had said. One
of those contradictions was that Yeshayah said that he saw a vision of Hashem, while
the Torah states, "No person can see Me and live" (Shemos 33:20).
The Gemara answers that Yeshayah saw Hashem through "an unclear Aspaklariya." He
thought that he saw a vision of Hashem, but he really did not. Moshe Rabeinu, on the
other hand, saw what he saw through "a clear Aspaklariya."
Based on this Gemara, we can better understand a cryptic statement of Chazal. The
Gemara in Bava Basra (14b) states that "Moshe transcribed 'his Torah' (the Chumash)
and the Parshah of Bil'am." Why does the Gemara distinguish between the section
dealing with Bil'am and the rest of the Torah? The Parshah of Bil'am is just one part
of the Torah, and thus it is obvious that Moshe transcribed it!
There is another cryptic Midrash that discusses the extraordinary level of prophecy
that Bil'am attained. The Midrash quotes the verse, "In the nation of Israel, there
never arose another prophet like Moshe" (Devarim 34:10) and comments, "'In the nation
of Israel' there did not arise [a prophet like Moshe], but among the other nations
there *did* arise [such a prophet] -- Bil'am" (Sifri, end of Sefer Devarim, see also
Bamidbar Rabah 14:34).
How is it possible to suggest that Bil'am, the embodiment of evil character traits
(Avos 5:19), prophesied on the same level as Moshe, the greatest of Tzadikim?
(Moreover, the Midrash goes on to explain that in certain ways Bil'am's revelation
was *greater* than that of Moshe's!) (See Midrash ha'Zohar Shemos 22b and Bamidbar
193b; Ba'al ha'Turim to Shemos 18:19.)
RAV YEHOSHUA LEIB DISKIN, zt'l, in Teshuvos Maharil Diskin (end of Kesavim) presents
a particularly interesting approach to this question which also resolves our first
question.
The Maharil Diskin asks that after Hashem explicitly told Bil'am, "Do not curse the
nation, for they are a blessed nation" (Bamidbar 22:12), Bil'am carried on with his
mission to curse the Jewish nation. What did Bil'am think he was going to accomplish
(see Rashi to Bamidbar 22:20)? Rav Diskin answers by proposing an important concept
in understanding prophetic revelation, based on our Gemara.
Our Gemara says that Yeshayah saw Hashem through "an unclear Aspaklariya," while
Moshe Rabeinu, on the other hand, saw what he saw through "a clear Aspaklariya." In
what way is a prophet's vision unclear, or clouded? Why is Hashem's message not
clearly revealed to a prophet?
Rav Diskin explains that when Hashem delivers a prophetic message to a prophet, it
must first "materialize" into a worldly vision, one that is within the grasp of the
prophet. The prophet must then work at understanding the meaning of the vision.
Ultimately, the accuracy of his interpretation will depend on how closely he grasps
the ways of the Creator, or how much he has subordinated himself to the Divine Will.
The barrier of physicality that stands between the prophet and Hashem "clouds" the
prophet's vision.
Does this mean that a prophet can "misread" his vision? If so, how can we ever rely
on his prophecy? Rav Diskin answers that even if a prophet does not grasp all the
fine points of the Nevu'ah and interprets part of it imperfectly, his interpretation
will still come true. Once he is appointed to be a prophet of Hashem, he is entrusted
with "prophetic license" to interpret the Divine communications that reach him as he
sees fit, and Hashem will follow through based on the prophet's interpretation. The
concept of a Divine message being subject to human explication is, after all, not a
new one. With regard to a meaningful dream (which is called "a minor prophecy" in
Berachos 57b), we are told that "dreams are fulfilled according to the interpretation
that one suggests for them" (Berachos 55b; this concept in fact has parallels in the
license afforded to Talmudic scholars to interpret the Torah based on the thirteen
principles of the Oral Law).
Nevertheless, since human intervention is involved. there is some element of
"distortion" in a prophetic message. The Gemara (Yoma 73b) teaches, "A prophet's word
may be recalled, but the word of the Urim v'Tumim is never recalled." Divine messages
transferred via the Urim v'Tumim come directly from Hashem. Since there is no human
intervention involved in their delivery, they are the absolute truth of Hashem. The
word of a prophet (especially when he is cautioning others to repent in the face of
impending disaster, as with the prophet Yonah), lacks that element, and therefore may
be recalled.
Moshe, though, was different from all other prophets. He obtained the loftiest
spiritual level that man can attain. He totally subordinated his will to that of
Hashem (Bamidbar 12:3). His grasp of the Divine Will was therefore total; his visions
were through a "clear Aspaklariya."
We would have expected that when Bil'am was granted prophecy, his prophecy would be
through an "unclear Aspaklariya," like most prophets. Had Bil'am prophesied through
an "unclear Aspaklariya," though, this would have had grave consequences. Bil'am,
with his terribly unrefined character (Avos 5:19), would certainly have "seen" in his
vision a perverted view of Hashem's message. There was considerable risk that he
would interpret his vision as a sign of *calamity* for Israel instead of a sign of
their redemption! Since prophecy is fulfilled according to the interpretation of the
prophet, this could have had dire results.
This explains how Bil'am still expected to curse the Jews after Hashem explicitly
told him not to. Bil'am thought that it would *not be necessary* to curse them. He
was confident that he could "use" his gift of prophecy to foretell evil for them by
perceiving any vision that Hashem would send him in accordance with his own clouded
perspective.
In order to avoid this, Hashem changed the ordinary manner of prophecy in this case.
Bil'am was shown crystal-clear, pure visions -- he was privileged to see the
unadulterated word of Hashem. ("What Hashem puts *in my mouth*, I shall speak,"
Bamidbar 22:38.) There was nothing for him to misinterpret. His word was like that of
the Urim v'Tumim! In this manner, his prophecy was just like that of Moshe.
This also answers our second question above. The Sifri does not mean to propose that
Bil'am reached as lofty a level as Moshe. It means that there was *one particular*
aspect of prophecy that no other prophet shared with Moshe, other than Bil'am.
Bil'am's visions were as clear and unfiltered as Moshe's visions. (This also seems to
be the approach of Rabeinu Bachye, in Bamidbar 24:4.)
We can now understand why Chazal distinguished between the rest of the Torah and the
story of Bil'am. The entire Torah is termed "Moshe's Torah" (Malachi 3:22). Even
though the Torah includes stories that were not introduced by Moshe but were already
familiar to the nation, and it includes the prophecies of other prophets such as our
forefathers, nevertheless the Torah is "Moshe's." The reason for this is that when
Moshe copied down the Torah, every word of the Torah was written directly as he heard
it from the mouth of Hashem. The prophecies of the forefathers, which were originally
perceived through an "unclear glass," were now related to Moshe directly through
Hashem's narrative. It took on a new meaning as he recorded it, and it is therefore
fitting to refer to it as "Moshe's Torah."
There is one exception. Bil'am's prophetic visions were *already* received in their
purest form. There was nothing for Moshe to add to them, since they had already been
viewed "through a clear glass," as we have explained above. That is why the Gemara
tells us that Moshe recorded for us "his Torah" -- the prophecy that Moshe brought
into this world with his unclouded perception, and "the Parshah of Bil'am" --
Bil'am's prophecy which had already been brought into the world and needed only to be
recorded! (A similar approach to this matter is attributed to Rav Chaim Soloveitchik
-- see, for example, Ma'atikei Shemu'ah, vol. 2 p.81.)