Why did Balak and Balaam repeatedly move to another place to curse Israel? What does Balaam’s seeing only the people’s edge mean? And why did Balaam, committed to the LORD’s word, keep attempting the curse after being told before reaching Balak: “thou shalt not curse the people; for they are blessed” (Numbers 22:12)?
One explanation is that seeing only the people’s edge was necessary for a successful curse (Keli Yakar, Numbers 22:41). To curse someone, on this approach, one must see the target from a partial, narrow perspective emphasizing faults and shortcomings, allowing the curse to take hold. Balak’s words would mean this: “thou shalt see but the utmost part of them, and shalt not see them all” (Numbers 23:13).
Balaam’s description of Israel’s enormous number can similarly be read: “Who hath counted the dust of Jacob, Or numbered the fourth part of Israel?” (Numbers 23:10), hinting that he deliberately saw only a quarter to enable the curse to take hold (see BDB, entry rovaʿ).
Apparently, however, this was not the reason. Balaam, the expert in curses, never requested any particular view of Israel.
At the first attempt, the Torah says only the “utmost part of the people” was visible (Numbers 22:41), but this is a narrator’s comment, not a condition imposed by Balaam. At the second, Balak does say Balaam will see only the edge, but this can be understood as apologizing for the site’s limitations rather than deliberately showing a selected part. In fact, the third time he brought Balaam somewhere he could see Israel “dwelling tribe by tribe” (Numbers 24:2), that is, the whole people.
Nor must rovaʿ in “Who hath counted the dust of Jacob, Or numbered the fourth part of Israel?” (Numbers 23:10) mean a quarter, as though even a quarter cannot be counted, much less hint that Balaam saw only a quarter. Another meaning is possible, based on the Samaritan translation of “I am but dust and ashes” (Genesis 18:27): “va’ana qetam verabbuʿ.” Here rovaʿ means ashes, creating a complete parallel between “the dust of Jacob” and “the ashes of Israel.”
What, then, of the story’s two striking features: the moves from place to place and Balaam’s persistence after being explicitly told that the blessed people could not be cursed?
Both seem to arise from his polytheistic worldview. Mountains and hills were places for worshiping local gods (see, for example, Deuteronomy 12:2). This was certainly true of “Bamoth-baal” (Numbers 22:41) and “the top of Peor” (Numbers 23:28), where Balak took Balaam to view Israel. Although committed to the LORD’s word, Balaam also believed in other divine powers and saw no fault in trying to enlist their influence to make Him agree to curse Israel through them.
Only after the second prophecy declared the decision final and unchangeable – “God is not a man, that He should lie; Neither the son of man, that He should repent: When He hath said, will He not do it? Or when He hath spoken, will He not make it good? Behold, I am bidden to bless; And when He hath blessed, I cannot call it back.” (Numbers 23:19–20) – did Balaam understand that divination and sorcery could no longer persuade the LORD to curse Israel. On the third occasion he therefore turned toward the wilderness and blessed Israel on his own initiative under divine inspiration.
The Torah notes his partial view on the first two occasions to contrast it with the third, when he first saw all Israel “dwelling tribe by tribe,” rather than because a partial view enabled a curse. The complete camp, revealed in all its magnitude and splendor, profoundly impressed him, and he described it in wonderful, exalted words (Numbers 24:3–9).
