In the past we have discussed how the book of Bamidbar really consists of three books, with our Sages recognizing two verses surrounded by upside down nuns as its own book. This idea of expanding the bandwidth of the Torah seems to be trending. Please give your attention to the following Talmudic passage which suggests a heretofore unknown book written by Moshe Rabbeinu.

The Talmud (Bava Basra 14b) in a sugya (textual topic) devoted to the canonization of the Bible and the authors of its 24 Books, notes that Moshe wrote “His book, Parshas Bilaam” and the book of Iyov (Job).” The Yerushalmi (Jerusalem Talmud Sotah end of chapter 5) writes “Moshe wrote the Five Books of the Torah, and returned and wrote Parshas Balak and Bilaam.”

All the commentaries ask the obvious question. The story of Bilaam and Balak can be found in the book of Bamidbar, (or at least one of its three books) which is one of the Five Books Moshe wrote. What then is this “Parshas Bilaam” or, according to the Yerushalmi, Parshas Balak uVillam? If it is a new book, why have we never heard of it? If it refers to the Torah, why are the chapters regarding Billam and Balak singled out in this Gemara?

Rashi (Bava Basra 14b) begins his commentary by noting “Although Parshas Bilaam is part of the Torah…” i.e. clearly assuming it is indeed the contents of Parshas Balak. Why then does it receive its own name? Rashi answers because Bilaam’s parables were somewhat irrelevant to Moshe and the Torah. What does Rashi’s answer mean?

Rabbi Yeshaya Halevi Horowitz, the Shla”h Hakadosh, puts into words his struggle to understand this Rashi.

"ולא זכיתי להבין דברי הרב פה קדש. הלא כל הסיפורים שבתורה כמו הריגת קין להבל וכיוצא בהן אינם לכאורה צורך התורה וסדר מעשיו. אבל כולם תורת ה' תמימה כמו שכתוב 'ותמנע היתה פלגש וגו' (בראשית ל"ו:י"ב) הוא תורת ה' כמו שמע ישראל וגו' ואם דבר רק הוא לכאורה ובאמת לא הוא רק רק הוא ממנו…"

I have not merited understanding the words of the rabbi, the sacred mouthpiece. There are many stories in the Torah, such as the story of Kayin’s murder of his brother Hevel. These stories are not critical for the Torah and its chronology. But all of these stories are part of the perfect Torah, such as the story of Timna, Eisav’s concubine (Bereshis 36:12). These are all part of Hashem’s Torah just as is Shma.

So what is Sefer Bilaam and what can we learn from it?

The aforementioned Shla”h Hakadosh seems to think that “Moshe’s Book” referenced in the Talmud is not the Torah, but rather, a volume of his that was not dictated by God, that we have lost. While this would answer why Parshas Bilaam is singled out, this theory is hard to corroborate historically. Rabbi David Dov Levanon opines that “The Book of Moshe” refers to the book of Devarim, the fifth of the books of the Torah,” which Moshe wrote more freely and personally. The Talmud (Megillah 31b) suggests that Moshe said the words from his mouth, which Tosafos understand to mean not via prophecy but from ruach hakodesh, a slightly lower level of clairvoyance.

Both Rabbi Yehoshua Ibn Shu’aib (1280-1340) and the Ritva (R. Yomtov Ibn Avraham Asibili (Seville, 1260-1320), Spanish students of the Rashba (Rabbi Shlomo ben Aderes, (1235-1310, Barcelona, one of the most prominent students of the Ramban) independently suggest that Moshe wrote an additional book with greater detail about Bilaam which we no longer have. Or maybe we do! In 1967 Dutch archaeologists in 1967 found at an excavation at Deir Alla ( in modern day Jordan, where the Biblical city of Sukkot may have been) a document in fragments. In English they call it Deir Alla Inscription or in Hebrew Ketovet Billam. It describes a man named Bilaam Bar Be’er (bar is son of in Aramaic/Semetic languages and Be’er sounds like Be’or the father of Bilaam. Perhaps this is the origin of the word Barbarian?) The contents of the scroll are similar to the facts described in the Torah. Wikipedia reports that “The Oxford Handbook of Biblical Studies describes it as "the oldest example of a book in a West Semitic language written with the alphabet, and the oldest piece of Aramaic literature." Bilaam is identified as an Aramean. Targum Yonasan identifies Bilaam as none other than Lavan, Yaakov’s father/uncle, whom many/most commentaries identify as the subject of the passage Arami oved avi, an Aramean tried to destroy my forefather.

If Sefer Bilaam is a lost book authored by Moshe, why did Moshe write this book? He could have written other books. The Shla”h Hakadosh mentions that Avraham wrote a 400 page book about the idolatry of the generation of Enosh. Why is a book on Bilaam required, if indeed this is the meaning?

The continuation of the Shla’h haKadosh may provide an answer. Prior to this conclusion the Shla’h Hakadosh explains the mystical difference between the pure prophecy of Moshe and the putrid prophecy of Bilaam. He then concludes:

"שלא תאמר שהגיע למשה רבנו ענין בלעם מצד כי הקב"ה הגיד לו והוא כמו שאנו לומדים ספרי הנבואה מפי רבי ואנחנו יודעים דבריהם, אבל אין אנחנו נביאים ולא בני הנביאים, ואין אנחנו משיגים מה שהשיגו הם רק שאנחנו מבינים דבריהם מפי מלמד שלמד אותנו דבריהם. לא כך אלא משה רבינו ע"ה השיג מה שהשיג בלעם בענין נבואה על העתיד לישראל וכל הברכות"

 “No one should be able to say that the prophecy of Bilaam was inaccessible to Moshe. Moshe knew all about the episode of Bilaam. When we read the books of prophets from our teachers, we understand their words. But we are not prophets, nor the children of prophets, and cannot appreciate what they perceived during the prophetic moments. We can only understand it as a story taught to us. Moshe too understood the clairvoyant ideas conveyed in Bilaam’s “blessings” and their cosmic meanings for Jewish destiny.

I believe this can help us understand this Sefer Bilaam.

In some ways Bilaam is Moshe’s foil, a non-Jewish prophet with commensurate skills and abilities (although not piety). The Midrash (Bamidbar Rabba chapter 14; Sifri, V’zos Habrachah, 16) declares that, whereas, one of the Jewish principles of faith is that no prophet arose over Israel as Moshe, one did rise over the non-Jews, namely Bilaam. The Midrash suggests that God provided such a prolific prophet to the non-Jews so they will never be able to claim that they never had a prophet. They can’t claim that had they had one, they would have behaved differently.

The story told in this week’s parsha about a Moabite king hiring a psychic to curse the successful Children of Israel differs from almost every other episode in the Torah. The story does not relate in any way to the protagonists of the Torah, namely the genetic line starting from Adam, going through Noach to the patriarchs and their descendants, the Children of Israel. The Children of Israel are not even minor characters. They are “off stage.” The Chassam Sofer famously stated that the Bilaam narrative serves as the greatest proof that the Torah is from Heaven, was Divinely penned, for it describes discussions and events that Moshe did not personally witness or hear.

Perhaps this is the point. Lest anyone think that Moshe’s abilities were any less, or that his prophecy lacked what Bilaam’s provided, think again. Moshe wrote the story of Bilaam and Balak, but according to some opinions among the Rishonim, he even penned an entire book on this man. Moshe status and abilities were so much loftier than Bilaam’s abilities.

Yes, we start off our day with the words of Bilaam that blessed the Jews by noting the beauty of our tents, of our way of life. There is a Divinely ordained reason why this particular observation and blessing was uttered by an impure prophet.

Yesterday in Jerusalem, the 20th Maccabiah Games opened yesterday amid great pomp and glitz. 10,000 athletes from 80 countries attended the opening ceremonies along with 20,000 spectators. One has to compete in their local country for a spot to represent their team. Then they compete on the international stage against the best in the world.

Bilaam may have been an All Star on the local level, but he paled in comparison when compared to Moshe, who was the superstar of superstars.

At the end of parshas Ba’haloscha, Miriam and Aharon learned the hard way how Moshe was head and shoulders above all other prophets. Maimonides codifies this belief as an article of faith. Whether one believes “Sefer Bilaam” refers to the passage in Sefer Bamidbar, or an additional work of literature lost for millennia, I think we all can agree that Moshe deserved the homage, and that as skilled and successful Bilaam was, he paled in comparison to Moshe Rabbeinu.