What are the implications of Bil'am's statement "Im Yiten li Balak M'lo Beiso Kesef ve'Zahav ... "?
Rashi: It implies that Bil'am was a greedy man, who coveted the money of others. 1
Ramban: He meant that no matter how much Balak offered him, he was unable to do anything that contravened Hashem's wishes. 2
Oznayinm la'Torah: See answer #1. And just in case Balak thought that he would get away with giving him just Kavod, he dropped a hint that money meant a lot to him too.
Rashi: He was hinting that Balak really ought to give him everything that he owned, since, if he were to hire mercenaries, it would cost him a fortune - with no guarantee of victory, whereas his curses were guaranteed to work.
Ramban: Since Hashem was His G-d and he was his servant. Oznayim la'Torah: On the other hand, he did not say 'Lo A'avor', but "Lo Uchal La'avor", intimating that if he could transgress Hashem's command, he would. See Oznayim la'Torah, DH 'Im Yiten li Balak' #2/
What are the connotations of Bil'am's statement "Ki Lo Uchal La'avor es Pi Hashem"?
Rashi: Here he was forced to admit that he was not his own boss; 1 moreover it was a prophecy that he would not be able to negate the B'rachos that the Avos had received from the Shechinah.
Refer to 22:13:1:1*.
Since the first emmisaries were called "Sarei Mo'av," why are these emissaries,who were more important, referred to as "Avdei Balak"?
Moshav Zekenim: Perhaps because Bil'am was conceited he did not consider them to be nobles, therefore it says "El Avdei Balak," whereas above, since the Torah already called them Sarim (in Pasuk 8), they are called Sarim also when Bil'am spoke to them (in Pasuk 13).
Refer to 22:18:152:2.
Here, the second emmisaries are called "Avdei Balak." Why, in Pasuk 21, are they called "Sarei Mo'av"?
Moshav Zekenim #1: The great nobles who see the king's face are called Avdei ha'Melech, for they stand to fulfill his word more than others. The Pasuk proves that they were more important than the first ones.
Moshav Zekenim #2: Here, Bil'am was ashamed to give a feeble answer to the nobles (that he must ask Hashem), so he told them via the slaves. Below, when he went together with them, they are called Sarim.
Since Bil'am was unable to transgress to do "Ketanah", why did he need to add that he could not do "Gedolah"? Is it not obvious?
Kol Eliyahu (citing Midrash Peli'ah) and Divrei Eliyahu: There are two opinions, whether Hashem put in Bil'am's mouth a Resen 1 (a bit) or a hook. A Resen forces the tongue out, and a hook pierces the tongue and prevents it from leaving. Bil'am wanted to mention Elokim and Yud-Kei, which are names of Din 2 , for the curse to take effect. When he started to say Elokim, Hashem stopped him at Keil, which is Chesed ("Chesed Keil Kol ha'Yom"- Tehilim 52:3). When he said Yud-Kei, Hashem forced him to add ''Vov-Hei', so he said Shem Havayah (mercy). Bil'am said, I cannot transgress Pi Hashem Elokai, to say a small name (Yud-Kei) or a big name (Elokim) against His will. 3
In Sanhedrin 105 and Yalkut Shimoni, the former opinion says 'an angel.' The Vilna Gaon's Drashah fits best according to Rashi (23:16), that he put a Resen and a hook in his mouth. (PF)
Kol Eliyahu: It says "Ashrei ha'Gever asher Teyasrenu Kah" (Tehilim 94:12).
Divrei Eliyahu: "Mah Ekov Lo Kaboh Keil u'Mah Ez'om Lo Za'am Hashem" (23:8) ? I cannot curse with the names Keil and Hashem!
