why Yehoshua and Kaleiv's insight was greater even than that of Moshe

After hearing the report of the spies, Moshe and Aharon reacted with nefilas apayim  (14:5):

 וַיִּפֹּ֥ל משֶׁ֛ה וְאַֽהֲרֹ֖ן עַל־פְּנֵיהֶ֑ם לִפְנֵ֕י כָּל־קְהַ֥ל עֲדַ֖ת בְּנֵ֥י יִשְׂרָאֵֽל:

 

which usually connoted tefilah.

 

Yehoshua and Kaleiv, on the other hand, reacted by rending their clothes:

 

וִֽיהוֹשֻׁ֣עַ בִּן־נ֗וּן וְכָלֵב֙ בֶּן־יְפֻנֶּ֔ה מִן־הַתָּרִ֖ים אֶת־הָאָ֑רֶץ קָֽרְע֖וּ בִּגְדֵיהֶֽם:

 

which is essentially an act of yei'ush, of abandoning hope.  You can't tear kri'ah in aveilus before the person is dead.  So long as their is any sign of life, there is no kri'ah.

 

In this case, Kaleiv and Yehoshua got it right.  When it came to the sin of the spies, there was no hope of forgiveness.  That entire generation was doomed to wander in the wilderness until every last person died. 

 

R' Shlomo Kluger in Imrei Shefer asks: How is it that Kaleiv and Yehoshua were able to intuit what Moshe and Aharon could not? 

 

He offers a number of answers to this question. 

 

The gemara (Kesubos 75) relates:

 

לציון יאמר איש ואיש יולד בה והוא יכוננה עליון' (תהלים פז, ה), אמר רבי מיישא בר בריה דר' יהושע בן לוי, אחד הנולד בה ואחד המצפה לראותה, אמר אביי וחד מינייהו עדיף כתרי מינן, אמר רבא וחד מינן כי סליק להתם עדיף כתרי מינייהו, דהא רבי ירמיה דכי הוה הכא לא הוה ידע מאי קאמרי רבנן, כי סליק להתם קרי לן בבלאי טפשאי

 

R' Yirmiyah was not an accomplished scholar, but when he went to learn in Eretz Yisrael and then came back to Bavel, he far surpassed his colleagues.  "Avira d'Eretz Yisrael machkim."

 

Those high school kids who left in September for a year of yeshiva in Eretz Yisrael are now returning home.  Some of them at least are not the same people that they were when they left.  There learning is a different learning, their interests are different, they suddenly are focused on more important things that the nonsense of high school.  Sure, they are a year older, a year more mature, they have had a full year away from their parents to grow up.  But that's not the full story.  The difference between who they were in Sept and who they are in June is because they had a year of "avira d'Eretz Yisrael."  The kedushas ha'aretz has made an imprint.

 

Says R' Shlomo Kluger: Yehoshua and Kaleiv had spent 40 days in Eretz Yisrael.  Moshe and Aharon never stepped foot there.  Therefore, Yehoshua and Kaleiv's insight surpassed even that of Moshe and Aharon.

R' Yehudah bar Ila'i, Tzelafchad, and the connection between tzitzis and shabbos

 The gemara (Shabbos 25b) records the kabbalat shabbat practice of R' Yehuda bar Ila'i:

 דאמר רב יהודה אמר רב כך היה מנהגו של ר' יהודה בר אלעאי ע"ש מביאים לו עריבה מלאה חמין ורוחץ פניו ידיו ורגליו ומתעטף ויושב בסדינין המצוייצין ודומה למלאך ה' צבאות והיו תלמידיו מחבין ממנו כנפי כסותן אמר להן בני לא כך שניתי לכם סדין בציצית בית שמאי פוטרין וב"ה מחייבין והלכה כדברי בית הלל ואינהו סברי גזירה משום כסות לילה

 

After he would bathe, RYb"I would wrap himself in a cloak that had tzitzis.  He resembled a holy angel as he sat, waiting for Shabos to arrive. 

 

It sounds like how we start Yom Kippur -- everyone comes to shul just before nightfall and puts on their talis -- but this was not Yom Kippur; this was a regular Shabbos.  Why was donning tzitzis such an integral part of RYb"I's preparations for Shabbos?

 

The appearance of the parsha of tzitzis at the end of our sedra can be read as a response to the meraglim.  The prohibition of "lo tasuru" comes to warn us against making the missteps made in the meraglim's mission "'la'tur ha'aretz." However, Chazal draw another connection as well.  Immediately before the parsha of tzitzis we have the story of the mekoshesh who violated Shabbos.  The Yalkut Shimoni (see Ohr haChaim as well) writes:

 

 תָּנָא דְּבֵי אֵלִיָּהוּ, (לעיל פסוק לב) וַיִּמְצְאוּ אִישׁ מְקֹשֵׁשׁ עֵצִים, אָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְמֹשֶׁה, חִלֵּל זֶה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, אָמַר לְפָנָיו רִבּוֹנוֹ שֶׁל עוֹלָם, אַתָּה יוֹדֵעַ בְּכָל יוֹם תְּפִלִּין בְּרֹאֹשׁוֹ, תְּפִלִּין בִּזְרוֹעוֹ, וְרוֹאֶה אוֹתָן וְחוֹזֵר בּוֹ, עַכְשָׁו שֶׁאֵין עָלָיו תְּפִילִין חִלֵּל זֶה אֶת הַשַּׁבָּת, אָמַר לוֹ הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְמֹשֶׁה, צֵא וּבְרֹר לָהֶם דָּבָר שֶׁיִּנְהֲגוּ בּוֹ בְּשַׁבָּת וּבְיָמִים טוֹבִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר ״וְעָשׂוּ לָהֶם צִיצִת לְדֹרֹתָם״ אֵין לְדֹרֹתָם אֶלָּא לְדוֹר תָּם וְאֵין תָּם אֶלָּא יַעֲקֹב, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (בראשית כ״ה:כ״ז) ״וְיַעֲקֹב אִישׁ תָּם״, תָּם מִגֶּזֶל, תָּם מִגִּלּוּי עֲרָיוֹת, תָּם מִשְּׁפִיכוּת דָּמִים.

  

Since we lack the protection afforded by tefillin, tzitzis is our protection against chilul Shabbos. 

 

Based on this, the gemara in Sotah 17a takes on a new meaning:

 

דרש רבא בשכר שאמר אברהם אבינו אם מחוט ועד שרוך נעל זכו בניו לב' מצות חוט של תכלת ורצועה של תפלין בשלמא רצועה של תפלין דכתיב וראו כל עמי הארץ כי שם ה' נקרא עליך ותניא ר"א הגדול אומר אלו תפלין שבראש אלא חוט של תכלת מאי היא דתניא היה ר"מ אומר מה נשתנה תכלת מכל מיני צבעונין מפני שהתכלת דומה לים וים דומה לרקיע ורקיע דומה לכסא הכבוד שנאמר ויראו את אלהי ישראל ותחת רגליו כמעשה לבנת הספיר וכעצם השמים לטהר וכתיב כמראה אבן ספיר דמות כסא

 

Techeiles is davka paired with tefillin because these two go hand in hand.  When one is missing, the other takes its place.

The failure of the mekoshesh to keep Shabbos is not the end of that story.  The gemara Shabbos 150b relates:

 

תנו רבנן מעשה בחסיד אחד שנפרצה לו פרץ בתוך שדהו ונמלך עליה לגודרה ונזכר ששבת הוא ונמנע אותו חסיד ולא גדרה ונעשה לו נס ועלתה בו צלף וממנה היתה פרנסתו ופרנסת אנשי ביתו

 

The Shaar haGilgulim quotes a tradition that the person this story is speaking about was a gilgul of the mekoshesh brought back to the world to fix that sin of chilul Shabbos.  

According to one opinion in Chazal, the identity of the mekoshesh was צלפחד.  In the gemara's story, it was עלתה בו צלף that protected the field.   צלפחד  = צלף חד  , a sharp, thorny צלף plant.  This is a known characteristic of the caper bush, which is native to Israel.

Who was this "chassid" who was the gilgul of Tzelafchad who came back to the world to fix the mitzvah of Shabbos?  Ben Yehoyada writes that it is none other than ר' יהודה בר אלעאי.

 

Now we can understand why ר' יהודה בר אלעאי was so careful to greet Shabbos by putting on his tzitzis.  ר' יהודה בר אלעאי was a gilgul of the mekoshesh, a gilgul of צלפחד.  The first time around through history he lacked the protection afforded by the parsha of tzitzis, which was given only after his death, and so he was mechalel Shabbos.  The second time around he took full advantage of the mitzvah of tzitzis's special protection and avoided the same transgression.

the medicine of kedushas ha'aretz -- R' Nosson Ra'anan on the meraglim

There were indications from the get-go that the spies mission would not be successful, and Moshe, Yehoshua, and Kaleiv suspected as much:

1) Hashem's response of, "Shlach lecha if you think it is a good thing to do but I am not going to tell you to do it," was an obvious clue that this was a bad idea, otherwise why would Hashem not commanded Moshe to take action.

 

2) Moshe changed Yehoshua's name and davened that he be spared from being negatively influenced by the other spies.

 

3) Kaleiv took a detour to daven at the kever of the Avos for help, indicating he suspected something was awry with this mission.

 

Why then did Moshe go through with it? 

 

One can easily make the mistake in reading the parsha that things were hunky-dory, and the spies  mission to Eretz Yisrael is what stirred the pot and created havoc.  The truth is 180 degrees the opposite.  The mission to Eretz Yisrael was not the problem; it was the potential solution.  We already saw in last week's parsha that Bn"Y were grumbling.  There was the episode of the misoninim, the episode of kivros ha'taavah, Miriam's mistaken criticism of Moshe.  The wheels were coming off the bus.  The problem facing Moshe was what to do about it.  The people needed something to boost their spiritual energy enough to get them across the finish line.  Just being in the midbar, albeit surrounded by ananei ha'kavod, the be'er, the mon, was not enough.  This is why Moshe decided to sent shluchim into Eretz Yisrael.  Rav Nosson Ra'anan, R' Kook's son in law, explained that Moshe's hope was that a taste of kedushas ha'aretz would have the needed impact.  You see 17, 18 year old kids who go off to Eretz Yisrael and they come back after a year and they are completely transformed.  Ain hachi nami, it's being away from home, it's a time ripe for maturation, it's being immersed in yeshiva, that makes an impact, but above and beyond all that, it's the effect of kedushas ha'aretz.  If kedushas ha'aretz has such an effect on a 18 year old growing up in our society, kal v'chomer hu that it would rub off and have an effect on the dor dei'ah.  Whatever the flaws of the spies, whatever the flaws within the nation, Moshe saw the experience of tasting Eretz Yisrael as the one thing that could save them.  If only the people had been receptive to the medicine...

the connection between the meraglim and the humility of Moshe

Rashi writes that the connection between parshas shlach and the previous parsha's concluding story of Miriam speaking against Moshe is that the spies failed to learn the dangers of lashon ha'ra from what happened to Miriam: למה נסמכה פרשת מרגלים לפרשת מרים? שלקת על עסקי דיבה שדיברה באחיה, ורשעים הללו ראו ולא לקחו מוסר.  I want to suggest a slightly differnt connection between the two.  To get there, I want to start with a different question, one raised by R' Noson Gestetner.  The Rambam paskens at the end of hil rotzeiach (12:14):

וכן כל המכשיל עור בדבר והשיאו עצה שאינה הוגנת או שחיזק ידי עוברי עבירה שהוא עור ואינו רואה דרך האמת מפני תאות לבו הרי זה עובר בלא תעשה שנאמר ולפני עור לא תתן מכשול הבא ליטול ממך עצה תן לו עצה ההוגנת לו:

 Rashi tells us that Moshe asked Hashem whether he should send meraglim or not.  Hashem responded, "I'm not going to tell you what to do -- it's up to you."  לדעתך, אני איני מצוה לך, אם תרצה שלח  Why did Hashem not tell Moshe that this was a bad idea?  What happened to the principle of הבא ליטול ממך עצה תן לו עצה ההוגנת לו? 

 

R' Gestetner answers that the catch in this case, as in many other cases, is that  עצה ההוגנת לו really depends on the free choice of a person.  By way to analogy, if a person is sick and asked what they should do, we would almost without thinking say to go to a doctor.  However, that's not really always true.  Rambam writes in Bechukosai (26:11)

 

והכלל: כי בהיות ישראל שלמים והם רבים לא יתנהג ענינם בטבע כלל, לא בגופם ולא בארצם, לא בכללם ולא ביחיד מהם, כי יברך השם לחמם ומימם ויסיר השם מחלה מקרבם עד שלא יצטרכו לרופא ולהשתמר בדרך מדרכי הרפואות כלל,

 

If our spiritual level is high enough, Ramban says that we don't need doctors.  What the עצה ההוגנת לו for a person is very much depends on where they choose to be holding in ruchniyus (if you want to be nitpicky, Ramban is speaking about where the entire nation lives up to that level, not just individuals, but you get the idea.)

 

Hashem therefore could not answer Moshe, because the answer really depended on where the people chose to be holding in their ruchniyus.  If the people chose to live with full bitachon, then there was no need for meraglim.  There was no need for war.  If the people chose to go about things b'derech ha'teva, then the proper course of action was indeed to send the spies.   Hashem could not answer without interfering with free choice, and so Moshe was left to his own thoughts.

 

Here is where I would like to part ways a bit with Rav Gestetner.  Perhaps Hashem did in fact answer Moshe.  Unlike Rashi who because of that extra word לְךָ reads שְׁלַח לְךָ as Hashem merely allowing Moshe to do as he pleases, Ramban sees it as a command.  I'll take the best of both worlds.  Maybe it was a command, but it was a command only לְךָ, for "you," for Moshe.  Meaning, on the spiritual level of Moshe Rabeinu, sending spies would have been a mitzvah -- the mitzvah of kibush ha'aretz, as that is the normal way to set out to co   a land.  There would be no danger involved.  However, if the project is carried out by those with less bitachon, then the project will lead to failure and tragedy.

 

Rashi tells us that when the spies were sent, כלם אנשים – כל אנשים לשון חשיבות הוא, ואותה שעה כשירין היו, yet later in that same perek (13:26) Rashi himself tells us להקיש הליכתן לביאתן, מה ביאתן בעיצה רעה, אף הליכתן בעצה רעה.  Sounds like a contradiction.  Maharal answers:

 

אבל משנשלחו, והיו שלוחיהם של רשעים, למדו ממעשיהם, ונעשים כמו המשלחים עצמם. לפיכך כאשר נתמנו – כשרים היו, ואחר המינוי מיד – רשעים היו.

 

The spies were כשירין , but as soon as they becamed agents of the people, they absorbed and took on the character and midos of those sending them, and became corrupted.

 

That's what Hashem was telling Moshe.  שְׁלַח לְךָ  For YOU, Moshe, there is a ttzivuy to send spies, to make them your agents, because in that case nothing bad will happen.  However, what happened is that Moshe appointed the spies to be agents of the people, not just his own shluchim.  Because of that, as Maharal tells us, we ended up with a different story entirely.

 

So why didn't Moshe make the spies his and only his shluchim?  We read in last week's parsha, and I think this is the connection between the parshiyos:  וְהָאִישׁ מֹשֶׁה עָנָו מְאֹד מִכֹּל הָאָדָם אֲשֶׁר עַל פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה.  Moshe did not view himself as special.  It was Hashem, not Moshe himself, who told Miriam and Aharon that Moshe was head and shoulders above them, but those words would never have come out of Moshe's own mouth.  When Moshe heard  שְׁלַח לְךָ he understood the YOU not as referring to himself alone -- after all, was he better than anyone else? -- but as referring to the collective YOU of the nation as a whole.  And so he sent the spies not as his personal agents, but as agents of the people, and that led to tragedy.    

rehabilitating the reputation of the meraglim

There is a custom quoted in SA (OC 580) to fast on 17 Elul as this is the anniversary of the day the meraglim died.  The MB (sk 8) quotes the Beis Yosef as asking why we should commemorate their death.  We have fasts for the death of tzadikim, e.g. Aharon's death, Miriam's death.  However, when it comes to reshaim,  וּבַאֲבֹ֖ד רְשָׁעִ֣ים רִנָּֽה.  We should celebrate their death, not mark the day with a taanis.  

The Beis Yosef answers ואפשר דמסתמא שבו ולא זכו שיקובל תשובתם ולכן מתענים.  It's hard to understand what he means.  If their teshuvah was not accepted, then that means they remain reshaim and הדרא קושׁיא לדוכתא.  But even if they had succeeded in doing teshuvah, does that now make them tzadikim deserving of their own fast day?

R' Moshe Tzuriel answers that the fast of 17 Elul is a fast not for the meraglim, but for ourselves, for Klal Yisrael, because it was our acceptance of the meraglim's report and our rejection of Eretz Yisrael that led to the bechiya l'doros of future churban and galus.  You might argue that we already have a fast of 9 Av for that, but there is a need for both days.  9 Av is a day of mourning over the final outcome of churban, which came as a result of sinas chinam.  17 Elul is a day to reflect on וימאסו בּארץ חמדה, the sin that got the ball rolling.

Maybe we can salvage the reputation of the meraglim and explain why we fast in their honor with the help of a Chasam Sofer.  There is a puzzling Yalkut Shimoni that says:

 מֵעִיד אֲנִי עָלַי שָׁמַיִם וָאָרֶץ שֶׁלֹּא הָיְתָה בְּדַעְתּוֹ שֶׁל הַקָּדוֹשׁ בָּרוּךְ הוּא לְהָמִית עֲשָׂרָה נְשִׂיאֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל, אֶלָּא שֶׁרָצוּ אַחַר מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן עַד שֶׁנִּכְנְסוּ תַּחַת כַּנְפֵי הַשְּׁכִינָה.

Somehow the death of the meraglim is attributed to their following Moshe and Aharon, which is very hard to understand.  How would following Moshe nd Aharon cause someone to die?  On the alhatorah.org website they quoted this Yalkut and add a few words in brackets: שֶׁרָצוּ אַחַר מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן [לִרְגֹּם אוֹתָם בַּאֲבָנִים]  I'm not sure where the bracketed words come from, but they obviously come to address this difficulty by saying it wasn't following Moshe and Aharon that led to their death, but rather trying to kill Moshe and Aharon.  Quite a difference!  The Chasam Sofer quotes the Yalkut and the Tana d'Bei Eliyahu without those words, and has a few different suggestions to explain what Chazal mean.  

Before getting to his hesber, let me preface it with acomment from a talmid of CS in a footnote citing a vort from his rebbe the CS.  He writes that R' Akiva's view in Sanhedrin 108a  דּוֹר הַמִּדְבָּר אֵין לָהֶם חֵלֶק לָעוֹלָם הַבָּא וְאֵין עוֹמְדִין בַּדִּין שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר {במדבר י״ד:ל״ה} בַּמִּדְבָּר הַזֶּה יִתַּמּוּ וְשָׁם יָמוּתוּ דִּבְרֵי רַבִּי עֲקִיבָא should not be taking at face value.  In potential, the dor ha'midbar might have theoretically been at risk of losing olam ha'ba.  In reality, however, the opposite is the case.  Read the entire pasuk:

 אֲנִ֣י ה׳ דִּבַּ֒רְתִּי֒ אִם⁠־לֹ֣א׀ זֹ֣את אֶֽעֱשֶׂ֗ה לְכׇל⁠־הָעֵדָ֤ה הָֽרָעָה֙ הַזֹּ֔את הַנּוֹעָדִ֖ים עָלָ֑י בַּמִּדְבָּ֥ר הַזֶּ֛ה יִתַּ֖מּוּ וְשָׁ֥ם יָמֻֽתוּ׃

What Hashem is saying is  אִם⁠־לֹ֣א׀ זֹ֣את אֶֽעֱשֶׂ֗ה -- if not for the fact that they are going to be punished, then  בַּמִּדְבָּ֥ר הַזֶּ֛ה יִתַּ֖מּוּ וְשָׁ֥ם יָמֻֽתוּ.  They are, however, going to be punished.  That punishment is therefor in effect their salvation.

Here is the hesber of the CS to the Yalkut (there are different editions of CS, so it's not so easy to find):

In this piece the CS is saying that the dor ha'midbar were punished, but there was a silver lining.  No one died before age 60, giving them each the opportunity to grow to shleimus.  יִתַּ֖מּוּ = achieve temimus, and only then  יָמֻֽתוּ.  (See the chiddush if the Akeidah in this post.)

Does that mean that the meraglim who were killed on the spot were denied that opportunity and were doomed forever?  Quite the contrary, says the CS.  The meraglim were the only members of dor ha'midbar who had the zechus of walking 4 amos in Eretz Yisrael.  The meraglim were the ones who when Moshe and Aharon asked for volunteers to go ahead and spy out the land, they raised their hands and took the mission knowing full well the dangers that would be involved.  These people didn't need 40 more years in the desert to achieve shleimus before they died.  They had achieved shleimus already!  True, upon their return they sinned in bringing a false report, but that sin does not outweigh the merit of their accomplishment. 

What Chazal in the Yalkut are asking is why did the meraglim, unlike anyone else, **merit** immediate death in a state of shleimus?  The answer is אֶלָּא שֶׁרָצוּ אַחַר מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן.  Because they were the pioneers who trusted Moshe and Aharon, who embarked on an uncertain mission, and were thereby the first ones since the Avos to have the zechus of walking in Eretz Yisrael.  Their sin may have been great, but their merit is even greater.

We fast on 17 Elul to celebrate the greatness of Eretz Yisrael, to celebrate the fact that the heroism and faith of being willing to enter the land in the face of risk and uncertainty can overcome and erase other faults and failures.  

Moshe gave the meraglim answers, not questions

The Ch haRI"M is medayek that the pasuk does not say that the job of the meraglim was to investigate אם טוֹבָ֥ה הִ֖וא אִם רָעָ֑ה or אם שְּׁמֵנָ֨ה הִ֜וא אִם רָזָ֗ה.  It's not either/or -- Moshe was not giving the spies multiple choice test where their job was to investigate and find the right answer.  Moshe was telling them the right answer up front!   הֲטוֹבָ֥ה הִ֖וא אִם רָעָ֑ה means that if to you the land looks bad, אִם רָעָ֑ה, then you should know it's a problem with your vision and הֲטוֹבָ֥ה הִ֖וא, it's really good.   הַשְּׁמֵנָ֨ה הִ֜וא אִם רָזָ֗ה, if the land appears to you to be poor, then you should know that in truth הַשְּׁמֵנָ֨ה הִ֜וא and it can produce an abundance and you are not looking at it the right way.  Reality is not distorted -- your vision is.  

וַתֵּ֣רֶא הָֽאִשָּׁ֡ה כִּ֣י טוֹב֩ הָעֵ֨ץ לְמַאֲכָ֜ל וְכִ֧י תַֽאֲוָה ה֣וּא לָעֵינַ֗יִם  The first sin of eating from the eitz ha'daas started with Chavah looking at the tree is the wrong way, looking at it as something delicious and beneficial to eat.  Once Adam and Chavah ate,  וַתִּפָּקַ֙חְנָה֙ עֵינֵ֣י שְׁנֵיהֶ֔ם, their eyes were opened, meaning, they now saw the world in a different way, in a way that distorts reality (see here). 

Moshe was telling the meraglim that entering Eretz Yisrael is the beginning of the ultimate tikun, and it all starts with correcting our vision, with seeing things the right way again.  The mitzvah of tzitzis which closes our parsha teaches us this same lesson.  Techeiles reminds us of the sea, which reminds us of the sky, which reminds us of the kisei ha'kavod.  When you look at your tzitzis, do you see just a little blue string, or do you see so much more?  

Hashem declares that the meraglim will be punished  וְכׇל מְנַאֲצַ֖י לֹ֥א יִרְאֽוּהָ ( Ohr haChaim: ומנאציו הם המרגלים) by being deprived the privilege of seeing Eretz Yisrael.   What do you mean לֹ֥א יִרְאֽוּהָ -- the cat's already out of the bag; they already saw Eretz Yisrael when they were spying?  

Sefas Emes answers: seeing through the lens of our preconceived notions is not really seeing at all.  The meraglim may have passed through Eretz Yisrael, but they really did not see it, just as many of us pass though the world without really seeing things in the way we are supposed to.

2) There is a piece on our parsha in a small collection of sichot by R' Gershon Edelstein called Kuntres Darko Shel Ben Torah.  I just wanted to mention one point that he makes.  The Torah identifies the sin of the meraglim and Bn"Y as a lack of emunah  וְעַד אָ֙נָה֙ לֹא יַאֲמִ֣ינוּ בִ֔י בְּכֹל֙ הָֽאֹת֔וֹת אֲשֶׁ֥ר עָשִׂ֖יתִי בְּקִרְבּֽוֹ׃ (14:11)  Yet it would seem the opposite is true.  Bn"Y did believe that Hashem controlled their fate, as we read earlier in that same perek that the people cried,  וְלָמָ֣ה ה׳ מֵבִ֨יא אֹתָ֜נוּ אֶל הָאָ֤רֶץ הַזֹּאת֙ לִנְפֹּ֣ל בַּחֶ֔רֶב נָשֵׁ֥ינוּ וְטַפֵּ֖נוּ יִהְי֣וּ לָבַ֑ז  The question, "Why did G-d do this to us?" presupposes a belief in G-d, i.e. emunah.  Similarly, in Devarim (1:27) the Torah tells us that the people complained וַתֵּרָגְנ֤וּ בְאׇהֳלֵיכֶם֙ וַתֹּ֣אמְר֔וּ בְּשִׂנְאַ֤ת ה׳ אֹתָ֔נוּ הוֹצִיאָ֖נוּ מֵאֶ֣רֶץ מִצְרָ֑יִם.  It's not that they did not believe in G-d; it's that they thought G-d had it in for them and would deliver on the promise of bringing them into Eretz Yisrael.

R' Gershom suggests that the flaw in belief was in thinking that G-d would not carry out his promise to a generation that had sinned in cheit ha'eigel and had already rebelled in the desert.  (We discussed this idea before and it is something the Sefas Emes speaks about on our parsha as well.)  This too is a lack of emunah and is something we need to work on.

The gemara says that after 120 a person will be asked whether they fulfilled tzipisa l'yeshu'a.  A person lichora can say back to Hashem that they have an excuse.  What if they just did not live in a time which is fit for yeshu'a?  Not their fault. 

I recently posted from R' Charlap that what Chazal are telling us is that tzipisa l'yeshu'a means that we have to believe that every dor, with all its problems, with all its issues, is fit for yeshu'a.  That's what you will be held accountable for after 120. Did you believe in the potential of even our generation to experience redemption?  

mitzvos lav le'henos nitnu - tzitzis

 1) Rambam paskens hil tzitzis 1:11

ואין עושין אותן מצמר הגזול ולא משל עיר הנדחת ולא משל קדשים ואם עשה פסול.

Kesef Mishne comments:

מ"ש רבינו ולא משל עיר הנדחת. טעמא לאו משום דאיסור הנאה הוא דהא מצוות לאו ליהנות ניתנו אלא טעמא משום דכיון דלשריפה קאי כתותי מיכתת שיעוריה וציצית יש לו שיעור למטה

We see an interesting chiddush din here, that the concept of מצוות לאו ליהנות ניתנו not only applies to a mitzvah chiyuvis that you have no choice other than to do, but it applies even to a mitzvah like tzitzis, where you have the option of not wearing a 4 cornered garment and not being obligated to do the mitzvah (Pri Megadim OC 11).

2) There is a machlokes Rashba and the Ran whether the principle of מצוות לאו ליהנות ניתנו means that just the hanaah from the mitzvah does not count as הנאה or whether it means all  הנאה, even physical benefit not connected to the mitzvah, does not count.  For example, if someone goes to mikveh on a hot day in a pool of water, the הנאה of becoming tahor does not count as הנאה, but what about the enjoyment of cooling off?  

Achronim ask: according to the Rashba that holds all הנאה that comes about in the performance of a mitzvah is ignored, why do we need aseh doche lo taaseh to allow kilayim in tzitzis?  The issur of kilayim prohibits getting הנאה through wearing linen/wool garments.  Since מצוות לאו ליהנות ניתנו, whatever הנאה you get from wearing linen/wool tzitzis does not count for anything, so there should be no issur.

same facts, opposite conclusions

Sometimes the same facts can lead to opposite conclusions.  Why did Moshe daven for Yehoshua more than any of the other meraglim?  R' Yosef Sorotzkin quotes his father, R' Eliezer Sorotzkin, as explaining that in last week's parsha we saw Yehoshua's sharp reaction to the news that Eldad and Meidad were saying nevuah.  Yehoshua did not need Moshe to tell him וּמִ֨י יִתֵּ֜ן כׇּל־עַ֤ם ה׳ נְבִיאִ֔ים -- this he understood -- but what he objected to was the content of that prophecy, that he would lead Bn"Y into Eretz Yisrael instead of Moshe.  (According to some this is why Yehoshua said to lock up Eldad and Meidad, as he assumed they were false prophets given what they were saying.)  Yehoshua could not bear to hear that his beloved rebbe would no longer be there.  Notice how the pasuk last week's describes Yehoshua: מְשָׁרֵ֥ת מֹשֶׁ֛ה מִבְּחֻרָ֖יו -- meaning, from the time Yehoshua was a young man, he had always been at Moshe's side.  His entire existance was wrapped up in his relationship to Moshe. Therefore, Moshe thought that serving as one of the meraglim would be especially challenging for Yehoshua, as the temptation to give a bad report and stay in the midbar, prolonging Moshe's life, prolonging the time he would have with his rebbe, would be too great a burden.  Moshe thought Yehoshua more than anyone else needed his prayers in order to have a chance at success.

Now for the opposite side of the coin.  וְעַבְדִּ֣י כָלֵ֗ב עֵ֣קֶב הָֽיְתָ֞ה ר֤וּחַ אַחֶ֙רֶת֙ עִמּ֔וֹ וַיְמַלֵּ֖א אַחֲרָ֑י וַהֲבִֽיאֹתִ֗יו אֶל־הָאָ֙רֶץ֙ אֲשֶׁר־בָּ֣א שָׁ֔מָּה וְזַרְע֖וֹ יוֹרִשֶֽׁנָּה (14:24) The Ohr haChaim asks why Kaleiv alone and not Yehoshua is called avdi and gets special reward (see Ibn Ezra, Ramban).  (See Meshech Chochma in last week's parsha 11:28 re: the term avidi.)  O.C. answers that the challenge Yehoshua faced in not going along with the meraglim was less than that of Kaleiv because Moshe had davened on his behalf.  L'fum tzaara agra, so Yehoshua did not earn the same reward.  This also explains why Kaleiv alone went to daven in Chevron at the kivrei Avos and Yehoshua did not feel the same need to -- Yehoshua knew he had an ace up his sleeve, he had the tefilah of Moshe protecting him.  Abarbanel makes a similar argument, but adds an additional point: ובהיותו משרת משה ותלמידו ונשאר במקומו בידוע שלא יהיה נוטה לרשעת המרגלי׳ ולא היה צריך לשבחו על זה.  Since Yehoshua was the משרת משה, the expectation is that he would not go along with the meraglim.  As a talmid of Moshe, he would be more inclined to do the right thing.  The very same factor of Yehoshua being the meshareis Moshe which R' Sorotzkin used to explain why Yehoshua faced a greater challenge than anyone else is used here by Abarbanel to explain why Yehoshua faced less of a challenge than anyone else.

a period of transition

The gemara (Sota 34) darshens that the names of the meraglim reveal their flawed character:

תניא, א״ר יצחק, דבר זה מסורת בידינו מאבותינו, מרגלים על שם מעשיהם נקראו, ואנו לא עלתה בידינו אלא אחד, סתור בן מיכאל, סתור – שסתר מעשיו של הקב״ה, מיכאל – שעשה עצמו מך א״ר יוחנן, אף אנו נאמר, נחבי בן ופסי (פ׳ י״ד) נחבי – שהחביא דבריו של הקב״ה, ופסי – שפסע על מדותיו של הקב״ה

It seems that these were not very nice guys.  However, Rashi tells us

כלם אנשים – כל אנשים לשון חשיבות הוא, ואותה שעה כשירין היו.

Indeed, if the meraglim were as bad as their names suggested, it begs the question of why Moshe selected them for the mission. Why invite trouble by choosing the bad apples?

Furthermore, why would Moshe have davened only for Yehoshua if he knew that the other mergalim were going to cause mischief? Aderaba, he should have davened for them, as they were more in need for his tefilos than Yehoshua!  

Transitions are difficult.  Ibn Ezra famously writes that even though Bn"Y at Yam Suf vastly outnumbered the mere 600 chariots Pharaoh had, they would not have been able to fight.  Psychologically, they could not stand up to the people who had been their masters just a short time earlier.  The transition from slavery to freedom is not so simple.  Bn"Y in the midbar were surrounded by the miracles of the mon, the be'er, the ananei ha'kavod.  All their needs were miraculously taken care of.  The transition to life in Eretz Yisrael, a life of working the land, a life that would require their effort, not miracles, to create a all the trappings of a functioning country, was bound to be difficult as well.

The gemara does not mean that the spies were at that moment flawed individuals.  What the gemara means is that the 12 spies were flawed individuals who had managed to overcome the defects inherent in who they were and become better people.  Each one of them, as their name indicates, had a weakness.  Each one of them managed to make the transition to greatness.  

Who better, writes the Tiferes Shmuel (Aleksander), to lead when facing a period of national transition?  Who better to see and explain how a wasteland inhabited by immoral, antagonistic enemies can become gan Hashem?

This is why Moshe prayed for Yehoshua alone.  It was davka Yehoshua's great piety which gave rise to Moshe's concern that he, more than the others, would not be successful.  Not having to overcome any inherent flaw, not having to make a transition to become something better than who he was "meant" to be, was in this case, in Moshe's view, a defect.

tzitzis worn without kavanah - lack of kiyum mitzvah or bitul aseh?

The M.B. in Biur Halacha (siman 60) says a big chiddush: if a person puts on tzitzis but fails to have kavanah to be yotzei the mitzvah, they are mevateil a mitzvas aseh.  Therefore, he writes, a person needs to be careful when they are called up for an aliyah and they grab a talis, to make sure to have kavanah l'shem mitzvas tzitzis.  (He then backtracks a bit and suggests that since the talis in this case is being worn momentarily only for the sake of getting an aliya, it may not really be a "levisha" which is chayav in tzitzis.)

I saw some assert that this chiddush contradicts a Minchas Chinuch.  The gemara darshens that "v'asu LAHEM tzitzis" excludes using a stolen item for the mitzvah.  Why do we need a derasha to give us this new din when we already have a principle of mitzvah ha'baah b'aveira?  Minchas Chinuch answers that mitzvah ha'baah b'aveira negates the kiyum mitzvah.  It is as if the person did nothing, and therefore gets no credit.  The derasha goes a step further and teaches us that using stolen goods results in a bitul aseh.  It's worse than doing nothing -- it's like wearing a 4 cornered garment with no tzitzis.  (M.C. says the same chiddush by sukkah where there is a derasha to pasul a stolen sukkah on top of the din of mitzvah ha'baah b'aveira.)  

According to MB, failure to get credit for the kiyum mitzvah, e.g. where there is a lack of kavanah, results automatically in a bitul aseh.

R' Elchanan in Koveitz Shiurim (Kesubos 250) questions whether tzitzis worn without kavanah is doche kilayim.  This safeik should hinge in part on whether you accept the chiddush of the MB.  If a lack of kavanah is equivalent to being mevateil the mitzvah, there is no aseh to be doche the lav of kilayim.  According to MC, however, the gavra may get no credit for the mitzvah, but l'maaseh he wearing a garment with tzitzis, and perhaps the issur of kilayim does not apply to a garment that has proper tzitzis on it.

we have a yerusha

 וַיִּסְעוּ֙ מֵהַ֣ר ה׳ דֶּ֖רֶךְ שְׁלֹ֣שֶׁת יָמִ֑ים  Rashi comments in last week's parsha (10:33) מהלך שלשת ימים הילכו ביום אחד, שהיה הקב״ה חפץ להכניסן לארץ מיד that Bnei Yisrael were on the express train and covered three days distance in one because Hashem was trying to get them into Eretz Yisrael as quickly as possible.  Next chapter the wheels fall off the bus and everything starts to go wrong.    וַיְהִ֤י הָעָם֙ כְּמִתְאֹ֣נְנִ֔ים  Seforno comments: על טורח הדרך  And then we go from one complaint to the next, until we get to our parsha of the meraglim and then it's 40 years in the desert.  

Sefas Emes asks (last piece in 5648): Ha'yad Hashem tiktzar?  Here Hashem was rushing them along, He was kavyachol so anxious to have Bnei Yisrael finally achieve the dream of coming to Eretz Yisrael, so couldn't He make the trip a little more pleasant so there would be no complaints?  My wife and I once flew Aeroflot to go to Eretz Yisrael because the tickets were relatively inexpensive and it made the budget easier, but trust me, when you fly Aeroflot, וַיְהִ֤י הָעָם֙ כְּמִתְאֹ֣נְנִ֔ים you will have what to complain about.  Hashem doesn't have a budget! -- he can bring us first class all the way and even allow an extra bag too with no surcharge.  Ramban comments on וַיְהִ֤י הָעָם֙ כְּמִתְאֹ֣נְנִ֔ים that והנכון בעיני: כי כאשר נתרחקו מהר סיני שהיה קרוב ליישוב, ובאו בתוך המדבר הגדול והנורא במסע הראשון, היו מצטערים בעצמם לאמר: מה נעשה, ואיך נחיה במדבר הזה, ומה נאכל, ומה נשתה, ואיך נסבול העמל והענוי, ומתי נצא ממנו.  When you are flying first class there is no question of ומה נאכל, ומה נשתה, ואיך נסבול העמל והענוי.  True, Bnei Yisrael's complaining was unjustified, but Hashem could have pampered them so that there would not even have been a hava amina of an unjustified complaint.  Why didn't He do that?

This episode reinforces a basic yesod: "Ain Eretz Yisrael nikneis elah b'yissurim."  Chazal tell us that Eretz Yisrael is one of three things that can only be aquired with tribulations, the other things being Torah and olam ha'ba.  Hashem could speed up Bnei Yisrael's journey, but Hashem could not take away the yissurim completely, as without them, it is impossible to be koneh the Land.  

Some people like to hold a mortgage for 30 years and pay off a lot of interest slowly, and other people bite the bullet and take a 10 year payment plan, putting in a little more each month, but getting to the finish line quicker.  Hashem offered us a quick payment plan, all the yissurim wrapped up in one package for just a few days, and then Eretz Yisrael.  We turned it down, and as a result, we ended up on the 40 year payment plan.  

So we get to our parsha and the spies bring back their terrible report.  Kaleiv gets up and responds:   וַיֹּ֗אמֶר עָלֹ֤ה נַעֲלֶה֙ וְיָרַ֣שְׁנוּ אֹתָ֔הּ!  How does that address the concerns of the people or the details of the report?  He says that they can conquer the land, but 11 of his colleagues say that they can't, as they immediately respond וְהָ֨אֲנָשִׁ֜ים אֲשֶׁר־עָל֤וּ עִמּוֹ֙ אָֽמְר֔וּ לֹ֥א נוּכַ֖ל לַעֲל֣וֹת אֶל־הָעָ֑ם כִּֽי־חָזָ֥ק ה֖וּא מִמֶּֽנּוּ.  if it's a screaming match of one against eleven, then the eleven are going to win, so how was Kaleiv hoping to persuade anyone?

Two people finish business school and want to run a giant department store.  One is nervous, wondering how he is going to get the business off the ground, how he is going to compete with established competitors.  The other is cool and calm, his attitude is "We can do it!"  What's the difference between the two?  The difference is that the last name of the latter happens to be Macy, the great-great grandchild of R.H. Macy.  He doesn't need to start building from scratch -- his alter-alter zeyde already got things going.  He is just the latest in the line to take over.  Yes, there will be challenges, but those are the challenges of maintaining a legacy, not the challenges of a startup.

עָלֹ֤ה נַעֲלֶה֙ וְיָרַ֣שְׁנוּ אֹתָ֔הּ -- Eretz Yisrael is a YERUSHA, said Kaleiv.  We may be the start up nation when it comes to business, but as for the country itself, that is an inheritance.  It belongs to us because it belonged to our forefathers.  We are just the ones coming to collect what is due.    

I could not agree with this statement more:

I don’t know if I believe that another Holocaust is possible in America in 2021. But after what I’ve seen in the past few weeks, I do believe that at some point the Jews of the United States will no longer be welcome here. Even if our (very) fragile democracy manages to uphold its basic tenets of freedom for all citizens, it’s almost irrelevant; Americans no longer look to their government for what is true and right. They look to Facebook, to Instagram, to Bella Hadid and Jimmy Fallon. We are governed by public opinion, and the American opinion of Israel – and by turn, Jews – is darkening by the day.  

Fortunately, we have a yerusha.  

a worthwhile trade-off

Rashi comments on "shelach lecha" that Hashem told Moshe that he already said that Eretz Yisrael is a fantastic country and no more should be needed, but if the people demand spies and Moshe wants to send them, then the choice is his.  

It seems from Rashi that the sending of spies shows a lack of bitachon.  Ramban asks: if that is the case, then not only are the people guilty of not trusting Hashem's promise, but Moshe is guilty as well, as in Parshas Devarim the Torah tells us that he also thought sending spies was a good idea, "va'yitav b'einay ha'davar."

Ramban answers:

ויתכן, כי משה בעבור שידע כי היא שמנה וטובה, כמו שנאמר לו: אל ארץ טובה ורחבה וגו׳ (שמות ג׳:ח׳), בעבור כן אמר להם שיתנו לב לדעת כן, כדי שיגידו לעם וישמחו ויחליפו כח לעלות שם בשמחה.

Moshe did trust that the land was good and fantastic, exactly as Hashem said.  That belief in Hashem's promise is precisely why he thought sending the spies was a good idea -- let the people see for themselves just how good Hashem is going to make it for them, and then they will be happy and excited to enter the land.

R' Zilberstein (in NIfleosecha Asicha) points out that we see from this Ramban the tremendous importance of doing a mitzvah b'simcha and with hislahavus.  Even if sending the spies showed a lower level of bitachon, even if it carried with it certain risks, the net result of being able to fulfill the mitzvah of yishuv ha'aretz with greater joy made it a worthwhile trade-off.

seeing is believing

In response to the cheit ha'meraglim Hashem tells Moshe that (וְכׇל־מְנַאֲצַ֖י לֹ֥א יִרְאֽוּהָ (14:23 all those who rebelled will not get to see the land, with the one exception of Kaleiv,  וְעַבְדִּ֣י כָלֵ֗ב עֵ֣קֶב הָֽיְתָ֞ה ר֤וּחַ אַחֶ֙רֶת֙ עִמּ֔וֹ וַיְמַלֵּ֖א אַחֲרָ֑י וַהֲבִֽיאֹתִ֗יו אֶל־הָאָ֙רֶץ֙ אֲשֶׁר־בָּ֣א שָׁ֔מָּה וְזַרְע֖וֹ יוֹרִשֶֽׁנָּה.  

Sefas Emes asks (5645): What do you mean, "Not see the land?"  The 10 bad spies already saw the land -- they spent 40 days there touring in order to report back to Moshe!

There are people who come to Eretz Yisrael on vacation and they spend their time in its wonderful restaurants, seeing the "historic" sights, etc.  Hard to believe, but even your Yankel or your Rivkah for whom you are spending 20k+ for them to go to yeshiva or seminary and grow in avodas Hashem might be found late on a Thurs night in some bar in Yerushalayim or some other hangout.  Or maybe they are taking the opportunity to try something they would never get to do at home, like scuba diving or parasailing, or who knows what.  They are seeing the land, they are enjoying the experience!  

Says the Sefas Emes, if that was what you came to Eretz Yisrael to see and do, then you haven't really seen Eretz Yisrael.

Sure, the meraglim saw the land in the same way that we see mountains, valleys, trees, people.  But that's not what Eretz Yisrael is all about.  To see Eretz Yisrael means to see the pnimiyus of the land, to see a place that is governed by direct hashgacha, to see a place that has einei Hashem focussed on it 24x7.  If you want restaurants, museums & bars, historic sites, you can go to Paris, go to England, go elsewhere.  Eretz Yirael has all those things too, but those are just icing on the cake so you wont be deprived.  The ikar, however, is to see and experience ruchniyus.  Kaleiv went to Chevron -- a cemetery! -- and still came back giving a glowing report because he was not seeing graves in his travels, he was seeing kedusha.  The other meraglim saw and brought back the most beautiful fruits, but they saw nothing in it because if you are blind to the kedushas ha'aretz, then in truth, there is nothing to see.

Baruch Hashem I think for the most part, kids who spend a year in Eretz Yisrael do sense that there is something special about it beyond the not so wonderful things they can do and see while out from under their parent's eyes.  V'techezena eineinu b'shuvcha l'Tzion.  We have to learn how to look at things correctly.

2) וִיהוֹשֻׁ֣עַ בִּן־נ֔וּן וְכָלֵ֖ב בֶּן־יְפֻנֶּ֑ה חָיוּ֙ מִן־הָאֲנָשִׁ֣ים הָהֵ֔ם הַֽהֹלְכִ֖ים לָת֥וּר אֶת־הָאָֽרֶץ

This entire pasuk (14:35) seems unnecessary, as the previous pasuk told us וַיָּמֻ֙תוּ֙ הָֽאֲנָשִׁ֔ים מוֹצִאֵ֥י דִבַּת־הָאָ֖רֶץ רָעָ֑ה בַּמַּגֵּפָ֖ה, that those who spoke bad about Eretz Yisrael died.  It should be obvious that Yehoshua and Kaleiv who were not guilty of speaking against the land were not punished.  

Chazal explain that the "chayu" here means that the Yehoshua and Kaleiv got the portion of land in Eretz Yisrael that the meraglim would have been entitled to.  Various other meforshim (e.g. Netziv, Kli Yakar) offer different answers as well.  I want to highlight the Ohr haChaim's approach:

ויתבאר על פי מה שאמרו במס׳ בבא בתרא (קכא:) תניא יאיר בן מנשה נולד בימי יעקב, והקשו ממה שמצינו שנכנם לארץ דכתיב ויכו מהם אנשי העי כשלשים וששה איש וגו׳ זה יאיר בן מנשה ששקול כרובה של סנהדרין, ותירץ רב אחא שלא נגזרה גזירה לא על פחות מכ׳ ולא על יותר מס׳ עד כאן. והנה ממה שלא תירץ הגמרא שיאיר היה צדיק גמור הראת לדעת כי צדקת הצדיק לא הצילתו מהגזרה ההיא, והוא מאמר הכתוב ויהושע וגו׳ חיו וגו׳ פירוש טעם שחיו הוא להיותם מן האנשים ההולכים לתור היא שעמדה להם, אבל אם לא היו מהתרים והיו נשארים בכלל ישראל היתה באה הגזירה גם עליהם הגם שהם צדיקים גמורים לצד שהיו למעלה מעשרים כשיצאו ממצרים ולמטה מס׳.

He writes that it is only because Yehoshua and Kaleiv had the extra zechus of being among the spies and not being influenced by them that they escaped punishment.  However, had they not been among the spies, then despite their tzidkus, they would have still been subject to the gezeirah of death in the midbar.  When the klal is punished, then personal tzidkus is not enough.   

Chazak hu mimenu

Rashi quotes an unbelievable derasha from Chazal that when the meraglim said "chazak hu mimenu" their intention was "kavyachol k'lapei maalah," as if to say the Canaanim were stronger even kavyachol than Hashem and therefore could not be defeated.  To think that the dor dei'ah who witnessed the miracles of yetzias Mitzrayim, kri'as Yam Suf, etc should think that the Canaanim could stand up to G-d defies understanding.

Rav Chaim Hirschensohn has a very clever reading of Rashi that gives it the exact opposite meaning of how it sounds k'peshuto.  The meraglim understood that everything is in G-d's control.  If a nation has power, it's because G- d grants it to them.  When they saw the tremendous might of the Canaanim, the meraglim said "chazak hu" -- this strength is -- "mimenu," something that comes from G-d himself. "Ain Baal habayis yachol l'hotzi misham es keilav," G-d will not withdraw his "kelim," the power and might he has given the Canaanim, for our sake.

Shem mShmuel (see also Meshech Chochma, Netziv at the  beginning of the parsha) writes that the meraglim's plot needs to be seen in context of the nevuah of Eldad and Meidad at the end of last week's parsha that Moshe would die and Yehoshua would be the one leading the nation into Eretz Yisrael.  Moshe was a conduit for the miraculous, but with Yehosha in charge a b'derech ha'teva war would be required.  Recall that when Amalek attacked and Yehoshua led the people in battle, there were no overt miracles -- it was a war, plain and simple.  On the level of derech ha'teva, would people who had sinned in the misonenim episode, who had sinned at kivros ha'taavah, deserve special treatment from G-d?  

Chazal here are not coming to add more criticism on top of the sin of the meraglim, but rather to temper their sin.  The meraglim were truly acting lshem shamayim, as they felt that Hashem himself had enabled  the nations to remain in control of Eretz Yisrael. The meraglim felt that they were unworthy of geulah at this time.  

Rav Hirschensohn ends his piece with a comment no less true today than 100 years ago: "v'zeh yihiyeh mussar l'kol misnagdei hatzionus afilu ha'miskavnim lshem shamayim." Sadly, the lesson still has not penetrated.