|
INTRODUCTION TO
PARASHAT HASHAVUA
PARASHAT
SHELACH
Two Leaders for
the Time
By Rabbi Yaakov
Beasley
Our parasha begins with the
precise listing of twelve men appointed by Moshe Rabbeinu to scout the
land of
Israel. Each one, a leader of his tribe,
entrusted with the most vital mission given to the people since they received
the Torah. Unfortunately, we read
with sadness and horror, bystanders powerless to affect any change, of the
greatest tragedy in the history of the Jewish people – the rejection of the
land of
Israel and the
wanderings. It is not for naught
that Chazal describe the counter-actual scenario – if Moshe Rabbeinu had
led the people into the land at that moment – as ripe with messianic
possibilities. The purpose of
leaving Egypt as a free people, the lessons
in the desert about social justice and Hashem’s providence, all these would have
come to their most glorious fruition.
Instead, we must wait forty years of purposeless meanderings through the
desert, with only the deaths of the ungrateful people and the emergence of a new
generation allowing the reentry into the land. Only two men would survive – Yehoshua
bin Nun, the people’s new leader, and Kalev ben Yefuneh, the leader of Shevet
Yehuda who bravely stood in the breach to defend Hashem’s honor. This week, we shall survey how these two
heroes avoided the pitfalls that befell their comrades and earned the eternal
gratitude of a people. Along the
way, we shall also note how the reactions of the two differ, and attempt to
explain why.
Upon the return from the land of
Israel, we read how the ten spies attempted to sway the minds of the people that
the task before them was impossible.
The first to speak up in defense of the land was Kalev:
[The spies declared] - "However, the
people that dwells in the land are strong, and the cities are fortified and very
great, and we also saw the children of Anak there. Amalek lives in the land of the
Negev, and the Chitti and the Yevusi and the
Emori dwell in the mountain, and the Canaani dwell by the sea and alongside the
Yarden"
And Kalev silenced the people before
Moshe and said, 'Let us go up and possess it, for we are well able to prevail
over it'" (verses 28-30).
After the people are persuaded by the
spies, with Moshe and Aharon powerless before them, then Yehoshua also
speaks:
"And Yehoshua bin-Nun and Kalev
ben-Yefuneh, of those who had spied out the land, tore their garments. And they said to all of the congregation
of Bnei Yisrael, saying: The land which we passed through to spy it out is an
exceedingly good land. If God
favors us then He will bring us to this land and give it to us; a land that
flows with milk and honey. Only do
not rebel against God, and have no fear of the people of the land, for they are
bread for us. Their guard has
departed from them and God is with us; do no fear them. But all the congregation said to stone
them with stones" (verses 6-10).
Both Yehoshua and Kalev speak
forcefully, passionately. Together,
they present the truth of the land’s goodness, though the people are longer
willing to listen. This leads to
the following question – why did Yehoshua remain silent at first, only to speak
out later when it appeared that the battle was already
lost?
That the two behaved differently is
already apparent from the descriptions of their journey to the land. First, Yehoshua has his name changed by
Moshe – Rashi notes that this change was a form of sanctuary blessing from a
teacher to his closest disciple – something that Kalev (and none of the other of
the spies) received. Second, we
note that apparently only Kalev made it into Chevron. Why didn’t the others go? Chevron, after all, was not only the
city of their forefathers, it was the closest major population center to the
Jews, who would have entered the land from the south. Rav Medan suggests that the other spies
saw the large inhabitants that dwelled in the vicinity, and the resulting fear
caused them to lose heart. Yet,
once again, we find ourselves asking – why didn’t Yehoshua
go?
Finally, we note that when Hashem
punishes the people, he mentioned them twice – again differentiating between
Yehoshua and Kalev:
"For all of these people who have seen
My glory and My wonders which I performed in Egypt and in the wilderness, and
who have tried Me these ten times, and have not listened to My voice – they will
not see the land which I promised to their fathers, nor shall those who have
provoked Me see it. But My servant
Kalev, since a different spirit was with him, and he followed Me fully –
therefore I shall bring him to the land into which he went, and his seed will
possess it." (14:22-24)
"Say to them: As I live, says God, as
you have spoken in My ears, so I shall do to you. Your carcasses will fall in this
wilderness, and all those of you who were counted, by your numbers, from twenty
years old and upward, who have complained against Me – you will not come to the
land concerning which I swore to make you dwell there, except for Kalev ben-Yefuneh and
Yehoshua bin-Nun… and the men whom Moshe sent to spy out the
land, and then returned and complained about it to the entire congregation,
speaking evil of the land – those men, who spoke evil of the land, will die in a
plague before God. But Yehoshua bin-Nun and Kalev
ben-Yefuneh lived, of those men who had gone to spy out the
land." (28-38)
As Rav Tamir Granot points out:
“Kalev alone is spared the punishment of not entering the land; he alone is
promised that he will possess the land. Were the story to end here, we could
regard that as confirmation of our feeling that Yehoshua indeed fell short of
God's expectations when he remained silent during the buildup of the
crisis.”[i] The addition of
Yehoshua in the later verses appears to be an afterthought, as if his final
words were somehow enough to make up for his earlier silence.
This distinction between Kalev and
Yehoshua, we should note, occurs in two other places in the Tanakh; in Moshe’s
retelling of the story in Sefer Devarim, and again in Sefer
Yehoshua:
"And God heard the voice of your words
and He was angry, and He swore, saying: None of those men, this evil generation,
will see the good land which I promised to give to their forefathers. Except for Kalev ben-Yefuneh – he will
see it, and to him I shall give the land where he trod, and to his descendants,
because he followed God wholly. And
God was also very angry with me because of you, saying: you, too, will not go in
there. But Yehoshua bin-Nun, who
stands before you – he will go in there; encourage him, for he will cause
Israel to inherit it."
(Devarim 1:34-35)
"The children of Yehuda approached
Yehoshua in Gilgal and Kalev ben-Yefuneh, the Kenizi, said to him: You know the
matter of which Go-d spoke to Moshe, the man of God, concerning me and
concerning you, at Kadesh-Barne'a.
I was forty years old when Moshe, God's servant, sent me from
Kadesh-Barne'a to spy out the land, and I brought back word to him as was in my
heart. But my brethren who went up
with me caused the heart of the people to melt, but I followed the Lord my God
wholly. And Moshe swore on that
day, saying: The land where your foot trod – it shall be an inheritance for you,
and for your descendants, forever, because you followed the Lord my God."
(Yehoshua 14:6-9)
How are we to explain the
difference? I would like to make
the following suggestion, a variation of an idea that I first learned from my
teacher Rav Yaakov Medan, Rosh Ha-yeshiva of Yeshivat Har Etzion.[ii] First, however, I would
like to bring the approach that emanates from a short Rashi on the
text:
Caleb silenced: Heb. ĺÇéĚÇäÇń,
he silenced them all [the spies so that the people could what he was going to
say].
to Moshe: to hear what he would say about Moshe. He cried out, “Is
this the only thing the son of Amram has done to us?” Anyone listening might
have thought that he intended to disparage him, and since there was [resentment]
in their hearts against Moshe because of the spies’ report, they all became
silent so they could hear his defamation. But he said, “Didn’t he split the sea
for us, bring down the manna for us and cause the quails to fly down to us?” -
[Sota 35a]
According to this, the people eagerly
awaited Kalev’s version of the events, hoping that he too would describe the
dangers of the land. Why did they
not do so for Yehoshua? Clearly,
they felt that Yehoshua, as Moshe’s closest disciple, would never speak out
against his teacher. As such, his
silence is justified, as he understood that the people would have rejected
whatever he had to say anyways.
Rav Medan suggests that Yehoshua and
Kalev represent two paradigms of leaders.
One type of leader has the strength and courage to speak the truth in all
occasions, no matter the cost to personal reputation or popularity. The second type of leader is different-
while he remains passionately committed to the truth, he is also sensitive to
the effect that his words have on the people he leads. At times, silence is a preferred policy,
as difficult as it may be to remain quiet.
Behind the scenes influencing and politicking may accomplish more good
than dramatic declarations and chest thumping. This is Yehoshua, a person that the
Torah describes as “a man of spirit”, of whom Chazal
explain:
He said to Him, “Master of the
universe, the character of each person is revealed to you, and no two are alike.
Appoint over them a leader who will tolerate each person according to his
individual character.”- [Mid. Tankhuma Pinchas 10]
This style of leadership requires
acumen, discernment and judgment.
At times, this leader will be criticized for not speaking out. Others will accuse him of playing to the
crowds for popularity. This is why,
Rav Medan suggests, Yehoshua is eventually appointed leader, not
Kalev.
Along those lines, I want to revert to
the distinction that Hashem makes in his threatened punishments. Hashem suggests two punishments, with
Moshe intervening in the middle. In
the first punishment, Hashem was ready to destroy the entire people, just as he
intended to do after the sin of the Golden Calf. As such, only those who spoke out
without fear and compromise would be worthy of carrying the mantle forward. This is Kalev. However, there is a second speech,
apparently distinct from the first.
Did Moshe petition Hashem during the interval in an attempt to lessen the
punishment? Or, did Hashem
purposely distinguish between the punishment that He wished to inflict, as it
was deserved, and the actual punishment that He was going to give? Either way, we note that the lesson is
clear – in an ideal world, our leaders should be Kalevs, unafraid and
uncompromising in their devotion to truth.
He real world, however, demands that we have Yehoshuas at the helm, who
know how to navigate the difficult storms of leadership, when to head boldly
forward and when to tack in order to arrive at the objective. In either case, may we be blessed to
once again be led by leaders of that caliber, who combine the passion of Kalev
and the acumen of Yehoshua. Shabbat
Shalom.
|