Bilangan 22:38

22:38 Balaam said to Balak, “Look, I have come to you. Now, am I able ¹  to speak ²  just anything? I must speak ³  only the word that God puts in my mouth.”

Bilangan 23:12

23:12 Balaam replied, ⁴  “Must I not be careful ⁵  to speak what the Lord has put in my mouth?” ⁶ 

Bilangan 23:26

23:26 But Balaam replied ⁷  to Balak, “Did I not tell you, ‘All that the Lord speaks, ⁸  I must do’?”

[22:38]  ¹ tn The verb is אוּכַל (’ukhal) in a question – “am I able?” But emphasizing this is the infinitive absolute before it. So Balaam is saying something like, “Can I really say anything?”

[22:38]  ² tn The Piel infinitive construct (without the preposition) serves as the object of the verb “to be able.” The whole question is rhetorical – he is saying that he will not be able to say anything God does not allow him to say.

[22:38]  ³ tn The imperfect tense is here taken as an obligatory imperfect.

[23:12]  ⁴ tn Heb “he answered and said.” The referent (Balaam) has been specified in the translation for clarity.

[23:12]  ⁵ tn The verb שָׁמַר (shamar) means “to guard, watch, observe” and so here with a sense of “be careful” or even “take heed” (so KJV, ASV). The nuance of the imperfect tense would be obligatory: “I must be careful” – to do what? to speak what the Lord has put in my mouth. The infinitive construct “to speak” is therefore serving as the direct object of שָׁמַר.

[23:12]  ⁶ tn The clause is a noun clause serving as the direct object of “to speak.” It begins with the sign of the accusative, and then the relative pronoun that indicates the whole clause is the accusative.

[23:26]  ⁷ tn Heb “answered and said.”

[23:26]  ⁸ tn This first clause, “all that the Lord speaks” – is a noun clause functioning as the object of the verb that comes at the end of the verse. It is something of an independent accusative case, since it is picked up with the sign of the accusative: “all that the Lord speaks, it I must do.”