“How good are your tents, Yaakov” (Bamidbar 24:5). Why did Bilam praise the “tents” of the Children of Israel? “Because he saw their doorways, which did not face each other” (Rashi, based on Bava Basra 60a). This is hinted at when the Torah introduces Bilam’s prophecy by telling us that “he saw Israel dwelling by its Tribes” (24:2, see Rashi). Apparently, either he hadn’t noticed this the first two times he attempted to curse Israel, or, since the words Bilam spoke were “put in his mouth by G-d” (23:12), it was only this third time that G-d wanted him to mention it, even though Bilam had taken note of the special way the tents were set up earlier. Why didn’t Bilam notice this earlier, or, alternatively, why did G-d wait to have him say it until the third time?

Rav Yitzchok Sorotzkin, sh’lita (Rinas Yitzchok I) quotes the Baal HaTurim (22:5, also see Midrash Lekach Tov), who says that Balak’s initial message to Bilam included the fact that even though the nation that came out of Egypt could see him (and his nation), he couldn’t see them because of the Ananim, the “clouds of glory“ that covered the Children of Israel from all sides. The topic of the Ananim is a fascinating one; books have been written either devoted to the topic or that spend a good portion of its pages discussing them. The Talmud (Taanis 9a) tells us that these protective clouds were in the merit of Aharon, left upon his death, and returned in Moshe’s merit. It is unclear exactly when they returned (opinions include: after Aharon’s shiva, after the 30 days the nation cried for him, and after the incident of the deadly snakes), but it is rather clear that they returned before Bilam attempted to curse the nation they were protecting. [Aside from the above-quoted Baal HaTurim, Midrash HaGadol and Targum Yonasan say that Balak took Bilam to a place where he could see those who had been expelled from the Ananim (22:41), and Rashi tells us (25:4) that they knew who had sinned at P’or because the Ananim “rolled back” and let the sun beat down on the sinners; it is unlikely that the Ananim returned when the nation started sinning just to help the leaders figure out who to prosecute.] If the Children of Israel weren’t visible because of the Ananim, how could Bilam have seen the way their tents were set up? (Rav Sorotzkin leaves this question unanswered.)

Yefeh To’ar (on Sh’mos Rabba 25:7, in order to explain the Midrash saying that the other nations could see the Children of Israel “eating the manna and praising G-d for it” even though, as the Midrash itself mentions, they were covered by the Ananim) describes the effect of the covering provided by the Ananim as a “screen” or “veil,” allowing something to be seen, just not with any detail. Putting aside why not seeing them clearly would be so bothersome to Balak (so much so that it was part of his reason for needing Bilam), or how it prevented Bilam from cursing them (necessitating his focusing only on those who were expelled from the Ananim), even if the “cloud covering” didn’t make the nation invisible, it surely wouldn’t have allowed Bilam to see exactly where the doors of each tent were facing.

[Although the Midrash could be explained differently, that the other nations only saw those who were outside the Ananim (who also ate the manna), Bamidbar Rabba 2:4 describes how impressed the other nations were with the “D’galim” (the formation of the Tribes). If the effect of the “cloud covering” was like a screen, the “formation” could have been made out. However, if outsiders couldn‘t see anything, they shouldn’t have been able to see the formation either (unless the shape of the Ananim, which covered each part of the formation, was enough to impress). Additionally, even though Midrash Lekach Tov says explicitly that the Ananim prevented the nation from being seen, it also says (22:41) that Bilam could see the entire nation even during his first attempt to curse them. If they could be somewhat seen, just not clearly, these two statements wouldn’t contradict each other. It should be noted that Or HaChayim  (Bamidbar 10:31) says that the Ananim prevented other nations from even knowing where they were camped. Nevertheless, being that some (those who sinned, as well as the “Eirev Rav,” plus all the animals) were not covered by the Ananim, and there are several places where “tagarim” (traveling merchants) are said to have offered their wares to the nation, I find it hard to accept that it was impossible to see where they were camped. The very fact that Balak knew they were “dwelling opposite me” (22:5) indicates that he could see where they were, even if they were covered by the Ananim.]

Taz (Divray Dovid), discussing why Rashi (24:2) first says that Bilam wanted to affect the nation through an “evil eye” by his third attempt to curse them, suggests that it would have been futile to try to use the “evil eye” earlier, since the nation was covered by the Ananim and the “evil eye” doesn’t work on anything that is covered. Now, however, after Bilam invoked the sin of the “golden calf” (see Unkoles on 24:1, referenced by Rashi), the Ananim left (as they had done after the sin actually occurred, returning when the Mishkan project was started), and Bilam therefore thought he could invoke the “evil eye.” (Taz says it didn’t work because the nation was still considered “covered” because they were careful not to have their doorways facing each other.)

If the Ananim left when Bilam reminded G-d about the “golden calf,” it would explain not only why Bilam didn’t try to invoke the “evil eye” until now, but also how he could see the orientation of their tents, and why he first noticed them now. Additionally, it would add another dimension to the Bilam narrative, a narrative which would not be known to us had G-d not told Moshe about it. The Bilam narrative teaches us how much G-d loves us (see Micha 6:5, see also <http://www.aishdas.org/ta/5767/balak.pdfand provides a context for the daughters of Midyan and Moav trying to entice us; based on this Taz it would have also explained why, seemingly out of nowhere, the Ananim disappeared (we surely would have noticed that they were gone for a short while). However, it is highly unlikely that G-d was upset at us and removed His protective coverings, since He put very positive words in Bilam’s mouth. It is also unlikely that Bilam merely “reminding” G-d of our sin would cause the Ananim to leave, especially since Chazal (B’rachos 7a) say that G-d purposely had no moments of anger during that time period so that Bilam’s plan wouldn’t work. As I previously alluded to, the notion that the Ananim left then and returned just in time for the nation to sin at P’or seems rather farfetched as well.

In order to explain how Bilam could see “the edge of the people” (22:41) if they were covered by the Ananim, Or HaChayim says that the “covering affect” could be countered with black magic, which Bilam was using. However, as Or Hachayim himself implies (by providing another answer later), this approach does not suffice for Bilam’s third attempt, where he didn’t use any sorcery (see 24:1). In order to explain the expression “lifting his eyes” and the repetition of his name, Or HaChayim (24:2) says that Bilam could not (without using black magic) have “seen” the nation because of the Ananim, if he hadn’t become “raised” to the level of prophecy. If Bilam was only able to “see” the nation through prophecy, the fact that the Ananim prevented anyone from physically seeing the doors of the nation’s tents would not have prevented Bilam from seeing them in a prophetic vision (baruch she’kivanti).

Aside from this Or HaChayim explaining how Bilam could see their tents despite the Ananim, as well as why Bilam only noticed this the third time, coupled with an aspect of Taz’s approach, an interesting possibility emerges. If despite being able to see through the Ananim (via his prophetic vision) Bilam still couldn’t inflict his “evil eye” because their tents were “covered” by the modest way the doorways were set up, since G-d wouldn’t have allowed Bilam to have such a vision if it would bring harm to His chosen people, it was the nation’s modesty that allowed Bilam to have this prophecy. Obviously, the “Ma Tovu Ohalecha” that is part of our daily prayers was a direct result of our “tents being good.” Based on this, though, every aspect of Bilam’s prophecy, which was on the level of a full prophecy (see Sifre on D’varim 24:10), including his (and/or His) sharing with us a prophetic vision of our glorious future, was only made possible because of the modest way that our forefathers set up their tents.