In this week's parsha we are introduced to Bilaam, a man who many believed had special powers that enabled him to bless people or curse them, as the need arose. Bilaam is asked by Balak, king of Moav, to curse Israelites, because they are approaching his land and he fears that they will wage war against him and defeat him, just as they defeated Sichon and Og. Bilaam tells Balak that he will do what he can, but ultimately can only say that which God places in his mouth. Although Bilaam does intend to curse the Israelites, God bestows prophecy upon him and converts his curses into blessings. Interestingly, from the time we first meet Bilaam until the time that he leaves Balak and returns to his home, there is no gap in the parsha, meaning that there are no internal breaks - no parshiyos either pesuchos (open) or setumos (closed) - in parshas Balak. This is a very rare occurrence in the Torah. The Chofetz Chaim, noting this peculiarity, explained that it is an indication of Bilaam's character - he did not change from the beginning until the end, despite the fact that God appeared to him in prophetic visions several times. Why didn't he change? Rashi in the beginning of Vayikra writes that the interruptions in the Torah text there, indicated by pesuchos and setumos - empty spaces - represented time given to Moshe to reflect on the divine teaching he received, before God taught him more. The fact that there is no gap in the narrative regarding Bilaam indicates that Bilaam never stopped to reflect on the message God was giving him, that Israel is blessed and God would not acquiesce to his attempts to curse them.

Rav Nisson Alpert, in his commentary Limudei Nissan, although he does not refer to the lack of pesuchos and setumos, also notes that Bilaam remained the same throughout the parsha. He explains this on the basis of the mishnah in Avos (5:22), which states that the students of Bilaam, reflecting the character of their role model, have three outstanding traits : a bad eye, a haughty spirit and a desirous soul, in contrast to the students of Avrohom, who have a good eye, a humble spirit and a contented soul. Rabbi Alpert explains that if someone has bad character traits, then he will not be impressed by an experience of spirituality, even if it consists of a prophetic vision. In order to bring God and spirituality into one's life, he needs to work on himself, to purify himself so that he is the kind of person who is ready to receive that inspiration and elevate himself as a result of it. Bilaam retained his bad character traits, and, so, he was not changed by the prophetic visions which he was granted.

I would like to suggest another explanation of the continuity of parshas Balak, as indicated by the lack of pesuchos and setumos, based on an understanding of who Bilaam was, in reality. The Targum Yonasan, based on a midrash, writes that Bilaam was really Ya'akov's father-in-law, Lavan. As Rabbi Avigdor Nebenzahl writes, it is unclear if this is to be taken literally, or in a figurative sense. What we do know about Lavan is that he tried to prevent Ya'akov from returning to Eretz Yisroel with his family, and that his ultimate goal was to influence Ya'akov and his family to worship idols, just as he did. This is the meaning, according to Rabbi Menachem Mendel Kasher, behind the statement in the Passover Haggadah, that Lavan wished to uproot everything. Rabbi Ya'akov Moshe Charlop, in his opening essay to parshas Balak, in his work Mei Marom, writes that it was the intention of Balak and Bilaam to prevent the Israelite nation from entering the Holy Land, because this would be the place where they would be able to fulfill the Torah in a full sense, and thereby influence all the nations of the world to serve God, which was exactly what Balak and Bilaam feared. In this way, Bilaam who tried to use his special powers to prevent Ya'akov from returning to Eretz Yisroel, was a spiritual heir of Lavan. This motive of Balak and Bilaam, according to Rabi Charlop, is implicit in Balak's message to Bilaam, " Behold a people has come out of Egypt. Behold it has covered the eye of the land and it rests opposite me" (Bamidbar 22:5).

How was Ya'akov able to withstand the efforts of Lavan to demoralize him and bring him down to his own level? We mentioned in Netvort to parshas Vayeitzei, 5764 (available at Torahheights.com), that there are no gaps of pesucha or setuma in that parsha, as well. According to Rav Shlomo Yosef Zevin, in his LeTorah U'LaMoadim, the thought indicated thereby is Ya'akov's uninterrupted concentration on Eretz Yisroel, throughout his stay in Lavan's house, and beyond, until he eventually returned. We also noted that Ya'akov prepared for his years of exile by sleeping on the dust and stones of Eretz Yisroel the night before he left. Rabbi Yehudah HaLevi ends his classic book of Jewish thought, Kuzari, by saying that the time for the Jews to return to their land will come when they express their love for it, as King David wrote in Tehillim (102:14-15) : "You will arise and show Zion mercy, for {there will come} the time to favor her, for the appointed time will have come. For Your servants have cherished her stones, and favored her dust." The Talmud in Kesuvos records that when certain rabbi were about to leave Eretz Yisroel, they would kiss the stones of Akko (Acre) to demonstrate their love for the land, as articulated in these verses. Interestingly, during Rav Kook's eight month stay in America in 1924, he carried stones from Eretz Yisroel around with him and held them in his hand while talking to people, in order to keep maintain his connection to the land while away from it. In a similar way, Ya'akov slept on the stones and dust of Eretz Yisroel before leaving, in order to endear the land to him and remind him of it while he was away.

The Torah tells us that Bilaam rose up in the morning to curse the Israelites, as we read, "Bilaam arose in the morning and saddled his she-donkey and went with the officers of Moav" (Bamidbar 22:21). Rashi writes that we learn from here that hatred causes people to deviate from their usual form of behavior, because here, Bilaam saddled his she donkey himself, rather than having his servant do so. However, continues Rashi, God responded to this action by saying that Avrohom, their forefather, preceded him in that, as it is written, " And Avrohom arose early in the morning and saddled his donkey" (Bereishis 22:3). The idea here, as pointed out by the super-commentators to Rashi, is that in regard to Avrohom, the word 'vayashkeim', meaning that he rose up early, is used, in contrast to Bilaam's merely rising in the morning, but not early in the morning. Thus, Avrohom rose earlier in the morning to carry out God's will than Bilaam rose to counteract God's will. Perhaps this, too, is hinted at in the words placed into Bilaam's mouth by God when he prophesied, " Who has counted the dust of Ya'akov?" (Bamidbar 23:10). Although Rashi, citing the midrash, explains this to refer to the mitzvos that the Jewish nation performs with dust, such as the prohibition of Kilayim, which forbids the planting of mixed seeds, dwelling in Eretz Yisroel in and of itself also constitutes a mitzvoh. Moreover, according to Ramban, our forefathers, Avrohom, Yitzchok, and Ya'akov, performed the mitzvos strictly in Eretz Yiroel, and, even today, all of the mitzvos take on greater meaning in Eretz Yisroel (for more on this, see Netvort to Vayeitzei, 5764). Thus, although Bilaam, throughout the parsha, had an uninterrupted desire to thwart the nation's efforts to enter Eretz Yisroel, live a life guided by the Torah and influence all nations to follow in God's ways, Ya'akov preceded him by immersing himself in the dust of Eretz Yisroel before leaving it, and keeping the land in his thoughts uninterruptedly, as indicated by the absence of any gap in the Torah, until he returned to the land. Therefore, just as our forefather Avrohom's efforts in serving God counteracted Bilaam's efforts, so too did our forefather Ya'akov's efforts ensure our entry to Eretz Yisroel, despite Bilaam's efforts to prevent it from happening.