Parashas Shelach: The Meraglim, Self-Interest, and Ahavas Eretz Yisrael

Topics

• Parashas Shlach and the Story of the Meraglim
• The Connection to Miriam
• The Question of Lashon Hara About Land
• The Basic Kashya in Parashas HaMeraglim
• What Did the Meraglim Do Wrong?
• The Zohar on Atzas Meraglim
• The Slippery Slope of Self-Interest
• Divorce and the seriousness of loss
• Distance Between People
• Divorce as a Catastrophic Event
• The Kenas for Divorcing Without Cause
• A Pshat in the Gemara
• Love Changes What You See
• The Meraglim and Two Ways of Seeing
• Tone of Voice and How Things Are Seen
• The Meraglim and Tone of Voice
• Moshe Rabbeinu’s Concern
• Shlach Lecha and the Frame of Mind
• Moshe Rabbeinu's Love for Eretz Yisroel
• Seeing Eretz Yisrael with the Right Mindset
• Kalev and the Meaning of Tefillah
• Eretz Yisrael, Torah, and Yissurim
• Zahav and the Value of Torah
• Akdamus, Mishush HaKel, and Perspective
• Question Two: What Was Wrong with the Meraglim?
• Rashi and the Rambam on Miriam
• Love, Respect, and Exalting Others
• The Breakdown in Kavod
• The Root of the Problem
• Self-Esteem, Approval, and Love
• Moshe Rabbeinu and Humility
• The Meraglim and How They Saw Themselves
• The Real Problem in the Meraglim
• The Connection to Churban
• Inner Soundness and Outer Ruin
• Closing Phrase

Transcript

# Parashas Shlach and the Story of the Meraglim

This Torah class is brought to you by TorahAnytime.com.

This week’s parashah is Parashas Shlach, the story of the meraglim. A great deal has been written about the meraglim, to understand and to delve into the shoresh, the root, of the aveirah, the sin of the meraglim. They were anashim, great people. Chazal say that anashim always means chashuvim. Rashi brings it: kol anashim shebamikra, lo shol chashivus. They were very clean, kosher, great people, anashim. Yet they fell so far, dragged all of Klal Yisrael down to such a low level, and brought such catastrophe. How does such a thing happen?

There is so much in the mefarshim. I would like to introduce today an angle that I came across in my mind as I tried to understand the pashut of the meraglim. It is something I feel I came to over the years. It developed; the older you get, the more you understand, and the more insight and experience you have. I think that over the years I have come to understand another part, another yesod, in the ענין of the meraglim: how and what, how could such a thing happen, and what actually did happen? What was the aveirah?

# The Connection to Miriam

I begin with the kashya that all the mefarshim ask. Rashi already points out that Shlach follows Beha’aloscha, and there is a connection, because Beha’aloscha ends with the story of Miriam speaking lashon hara against Moshe Rabbeinu, and she is struck and punished for it. Right away the Torah continues with the story of the meraglim, to point out that the meraglim should have taken a lesson from Miriam and been careful with what they said and what they spoke when they came back from spying out Eretz Yisrael. They did not do that.

So the Torah puts the two stories together: they should have learned from Miriam, but they did not. Rashi says, “Lamah nismachah parashas meraglim leparashas Miriam? L’fi shelaksa al iskei dibah shedibrah ba’achah, resha’im halalu ra’u v’lo nilkchu musar.” They saw, and they did not take musar.

# The Question of Lashon Hara About Land

The mefarshim all ask a question. Lashon hara on a person is an issur lashon hara. What did they do? They spoke lashon hara about land. Is there an issur lashon hara about that? I am talking about a person, a human being against another human being. Hurting another human being is the issur lashon hara, and all the dinim that are involved in lashon hara, rechilus, motzi shem ra, and so on. At the end of the day, they spoke against a land.

So even if there is a problem with what they did, even if it is true that it was something very evil and very wrong, how would they learn this as a musar from Miriam? Miriam spoke against Moshe Rabbeinu. Miriam spoke against a person. Miriam was over what in the Torah and in halachah is called lashon hara. The meraglim—was it lashon hara? There are many...

# The Basic Kashya in Parashas HaMeraglim

Many, many terutzim have been offered for this kashya, and it opens up a number of different suggestions about what Lashon Hara is and where Lashon Hara applies. I have discussed this in the past; I have given shiurim on it in the past. And, as I said, I would like to introduce something new, a different teretz, a different pshat.

What was the mussar they could have taken, and should have taken, but did not take? What was it? I also want to introduce another shailah, and between the two shailos to give you the pshat that I came up with this year to understand the parashah of the meraglim.

## What Did the Meraglim Do Wrong?

Many mefarshim deal with the shailah. They raise the question that the meraglim were sent to spy, to see, and to come back and tell what they saw. Is that not what they did? They came back and brought information with proof. They brought the fruits of Eretz Yisrael, and they reported what they saw. It is not a very fair thing to blame them for doing their job. They did their job; they were sent to spy, and they came back. If you do not want to spy, then do not do it. Shlach lecha. Rashi tells us, lecha — the Ribono Shel Olam said, I do not think it is such a good idea. Ledeiatcha means, you want Moshe Rabbeinu to do it? Okay, do it. Shlach lecha — okay, ledeiatcha, I do not agree with it. But at the end of the day, Moshe made a decision to send them, and they were sent, so why are you blaming them? How are they to blame for doing their job?

Of course, we could say that they did not actually do their job, and they exaggerated and lied. We have discussed that in the past as well. But these are the two basic yesodos, the kashyos in the parashah of the meraglim. One is: what lesson could they have and should they have taken from Miriam? And what exactly did they do wrong if they came back to repeat what they saw?

## The Zohar on Atzas Meraglim

There is an interesting Zohar. The Zohar says that they had atzas meraglim. There was some evil conspiracy, atzah. We find in Chazal the wording atzas meraglim, kol yoishveiha me’atzas, which means they went with a pre-notion, a plan, some kind of conspiracy. What was their conspiracy?

The Zohar tells us that they were afraid that if they would come into Eretz Yisrael, they would lose their positions. Here they were the yeshivah lamateh, they were nasi’im, heads of their shevet, honorable, in a high position. And if they came to Eretz Yisrael, there would be changes, democratically elected new officials, right? And therefore they were afraid to leave the midbar and go to Eretz Yisrael.

That is pretty sinister. It means that there was really atzah, which means they tried to throw off, which is in pretty much an open rebellion. I mean, they are trying, in Yiddish you would say, to thwart the democracy. I send you to Eretz Yisrael, and your kavanah is: you know what? Let the whole Eretz Yisrael and the whole Klal Yisrael, who cares? Let them all go jump back into the ocean. Who cares about everybody and anything? I want my position.

It is pretty sinister. Anashim — they were supposed to be chashuvim. Chashuvim usually do not talk that way. Something got lost. Again, we have spoken about this in the past: you see what kavod can do to people. Kavod can take honorable people and really corrupt them greatly, and maybe that is what the Zohar wants us to know: corruption, negi'as atzmo. When a person has interests, he is blinded to the...

# The Slippery Slope of Self-Interest

Going to do the most sinister, evil things. Let me tell you: Eid HaHara zeis. Rabbi Yerushalayim calls them the Eid HaHara. They were bad, they were evil. The Brisker Rav even learns that they started off speaking badly against Eretz Yisrael, but in the end they would call you for him. In the end they were heretics. In the end they were mamash, I pick course them against the Ribbono Shel Olam. They spoke against Hashem.

It is a slippery slope downhill when you see everything from the perspective of zich, me, my gain, what I want, what is good for me, and not seeing what is good for Klal Yisrael. We have spoken about this in the past. Today we are going to put it all together, the questions and the Zohar, from a different angle, and take out a different lesson. A lesson that, I think, is not only a lesson to me, but uplifting and touching my heart. I think it will help everyone live better lives, live more fulfilled lives, be more sound from within as a Jew and as a person.

I think there is a great lesson to be learned in understanding and answering the above questions. I begin with a Gemara, an interesting, interesting Gemara. After I bring you this Gemara and the pshat in this Gemara, I am going to show you a word in Rashi and a word that the Rambam also picks up on. It really is eye-opening. It is something that needs to be analyzed, an interesting hadgasha, an emphasis found in the words of Rashi and in the Rambam.

## Divorce and the seriousness of loss

Let me begin with a Gemara. The Gemara discusses divorce. Divorce is never a good thing. Chazal tell us that when there is a divorce, Mizbeach meiru'dol of damois, the Mizbeach cries. Judaism, Torah, takes divorce very seriously. It is not something like, you know, today it is easy come, easy go. We change husbands and wives as quickly as we change, you know, glasses. No pun intended, I am sorry. I saw some people walking in today with new pairs of glasses. Okay, so that is the first thing that came to mind. Is there any water maybe? Can I have some water, if you do not mind? Yeah, thank you very much. It is about time.

Today, American society, bifrat, everything is disposable. There was a time and a place where people had respect for objects. They had respect for objects, and the respect for the object caused them not to want to just throw it away if they were able to fix it or preserve it. Today, everything is disposable goods. You notice they even use the word goods. You imagine disposable. It is not even disposable plates, goods, yet it is still disposable. It is almost contradictory. If it is goods, then what is disposable? But it is a broader symptom of society today. And that is: next, out; I raise my finger, gang invite her. It is what it is.

It is possible that it actually speaks to the mentality of society. People do not get attached to things. People have no feelings for anything. I remember my bubba lashul. Even when she spoke about objects, it was with love. A tish aleh, a bank aleh. A tish aleh is a table, a bank aleh is a chair. But it is not because a tish is a table and a bank is a chair. She did not say it that way. She used the lamed, the leh, which is a Hebrew, it is Yiddish, it is love: a tish aleh. Same way, chayimul, davidul, ber aleh. There is tish aleh, bank aleh.

# Distance Between People

Today, people have feelings for objects. Nobody has feelings for anything. Forget about objects—we don’t have feelings for people. We get on a train, right, and sit next to the other person. We try to stay a little bit away so we shouldn’t touch. On a train, I can understand why, because you never know what you could catch. But we live our lives that way, and we are trained to keep this distance from one another. It is almost taught. A person has to learn to maintain a certain distance between two people.

Yidden, throughout the doros, were almost attached at the hip, one to another. American society is: no, don’t get attached to anything or anybody. You shouldn’t have any connection—not emotional, not physical—and therefore it is easy come, easy go. That is where it comes from. When you start unraveling where human behavior, and the failings in human behavior, come from, you realize that sometimes it is just simple things that go wrong. They are basic, and then they go wrong further and deeper until they come to bad, difficult, almost unfixable situations.

# Divorce as a Catastrophic Event

Chazal are telling us that divorce has to be taken seriously. It is cutting one person in half. You are taking a person, your being, and cutting him in half. The Mizbeach is my rhythm. There is such a thing as a korban. Why does the Mizbeach cry over a gate? Why? It is very simple. The Mizbeach sees the shechita of animals. But to see the shechita of human beings, to see how a human being gets cut to pieces—ish v’isha, the rib of a person. A person and his wife are echad, v’hayu l’basar echad. Could you imagine seeing basar echad? Let’s say someone came in front of you today and took an axe and split a man in half in front of your face. Tell me, how would you react? You would be shocked. You would be moved in pain and anguish. That is what it means: Mizbeach, mar’eh el b’morim. It is so many korbanos, slaughter of animals. But this, this is the slaughter of people, the dismemberment of an ish v’isha. It is tremendous.

So the Torah views divorce as a very, very serious, a very catastrophic event. Which brings us to a Gemara that is perplexing. The Gemara says: what would be a reason for divorce? One mand’amar says, ki matza bah ervas davar. The only reason for divorce is if you see that your wife is not faithful. The Gemara brings another mand’amar that says: no, you do not have to be that bad of a wife to get thrown out from your husband. Afilu igdiach tafshila. Even if she went and burnt the soup, you could get rid of her.

Is that really what the Gemara is telling us? That every husband should get off the handle—what do they say? The right expression in English is, you know, thrown off the handle. Is that the expression in English? Whatever, go off the handle. I think that is the expression. Okay, we are getting the English right eventually. You should go off the handle every time his wife cooks him a bad meal? What is going on here? And please do not shake your heads yes. Please, please, okay? Because she cooked a bad meal, she cooks you out of the house? The point of the Gemara is very, very questionable. How could a person talk about divorce because his wife burnt the meal?

# The Kenas for Divorcing Without Cause

What the Gemara is really trying to say is that you have the right to divorce her for no reason as well. That is the reason for the kenas: the Gemara asks why the Chachamim acted this way, and answers that it is so that he should not be קל בעיניו להוציאה. Every time he gets angry, he will get rid of his wife. This way he knows it is going to cost him a big buck; it is going to cost him a lot of money. Therefore, he is going to think twice and calm down before he gets rid of her.

That itself is difficult to understand. Is that what is holding you back? I do not know. It is difficult. The money—that is what has to hold him back? So maybe all it means is that you need that one-minute break, which is a lesson in life, by the way. It is called the one-minute breather. Whenever you get very angry, if you can react in a second, you can do terrible things. But if you have to think for a minute, you will come to your senses.

It is possible to speak about this when we talk about shalom bayis and issues of isha.

# A Pshat in the Gemara

There is a pshat that I heard from my rabbi, which is very, very interesting in this Gemara, and I think the basis of it, the yesod of it, is very apikors in the parashah of the meraglim. A rav told me something beautiful, and I believe that the word itself comes from the ocean, from the Bermuda. A famous author of the Bermuda gave a beautiful drush.

He said that Chazal understood that if this is what is bothering a husband to the point that he wants to divorce his wife because she burnt a supper, that means he does not really love her. That is what Chazal are saying. Chazal are saying that if a person can reach such animosity over something so small, that means he actually could not care less about her anyway, and that would be a good enough reason for a divorce. He motzi ba’al davar means you found the good cause.

Chazal are saying the opposite. The other side is saying: if there is no cause, and the cause is weak, that is even more of a reason that you should not be together with this person. When a person gets angry for the right reasons and has a legitimate complaint, all right, that is a legitimate complaint. But where there is no legitimate complaint and he is still complaining, and he still is angry, and he still does not want, that means what? You are missing something a lot deeper than this, deeper than the soup. The problems are a lot deeper than the supper.

# Love Changes What You See

The meraglim came back. It is possible that they said over what they saw. But I want to tell you something: when somebody loves, he sees something completely different. Chazal tell us, every kallah—what are you supposed to say about her? Kol kallah na’ah v’chassudah. How beautiful and how perfect she is. How could it be such a thing? Every kallah is beautiful and every kallah is perfect. It is a perfect world. Everybody is perfect, everybody is gorgeous.

The truth is, maybe every kallah today, with makeup and clothing, could look like a kallah. But that is not what the mefarshim tell us. The mefarshim say that in the eyes of her husband, who loves her, she is kolah na’ah v’chassudah. When you love, everything is beautiful. Everything is flowery, roses, gorgeous. So it is not a lie: kol kallah na’ah v’chassudah. You are saying it in front of the husband because the husband, who loves her, only sees kolah na’ah. And if he does not, then we have a problem.

If the husband gets up and says, “Wait a minute, do not exaggerate,” or if he gets up and says, “Listen, you have to meet my shadchan,” I would suggest quickly to call the local rav and get him down there very quickly, either to work on the shalom bayis or to write a divorce, one of the two.

# The Meraglim and Two Ways of Seeing

Let us talk about the meraglim. There are two ways to see the same thing. A stranger sees a kid...

# Tone of Voice and How Things Are Seen

Yeah? How wild, how difficult. The father looks and says, wow, look how great my son is. He could break something. And you know what the father is going to say? Wow, look how cute he is. Look, he’s such a cute little one, such a vil d’chaiya, a cheverman. The principal is going to say he’s a vil d’chaya. You know what the father is going to say? Cheverman.

They are both addressing the same bad behavior, the same bad behavior. The principal sees it as wild, as a wild goat, a vil d’chig, okay? Yiddish—you have to know the Yiddish—a vil d’chig. All right? And what is the father? He sits there smiling with his wife. Wow, what a great, so, so. Same act, same deviant behavior, so to speak. One sees it in glowing terms, and one doesn’t. And what is it based on? One loves, one doesn’t. The principal likes the child, he cares for the child, it’s all true. But the father, achever, achever mechalkeles es ashura. It’s the way you see things.

# The Meraglim and Tone of Voice

Let’s go back to the meraglim. The meraglim’s tone of voice. Tone of voice. Tone of voice, yeah? You could say the same thing, and it’s all about how you bring it out. Give me an example. Ba’alei Mussar, my zayde used to say it over all the time, used to say: take a look at an interesting difference between how a father and a mother read a particular letter.

A child goes to yeshiva. In Europe they used to go for months at a time. He sends a letter to his parents. He needs money, because he needs clothing and he needs food. The father gets the letter in the mail, reads it, and starts getting furious. “I will never send him money. I will never support him ever again. What a chutzpah—that’s how you write to your father? Tata, shik gelt. Tata, chamish ken esen. That’s how you talk to your father? Terrible. That’s it. Cutting the support line. Done.”

The mother says, “Let me see that letter. I can’t believe he would talk like that.” She picks up the letter: “Tata, shik gelt. Tata, chamish ken esen.” Same words, right? She says, “Why are you so sweet? What are you talking about?” Same words. It’s all on the song. It’s all on the facial expression, on how you present it. On how you present it.

# Moshe Rabbeinu’s Concern

Moshe Rabbeinu was afraid that Yehoshua would fall into the trap. How would he fall into this trap? The answer is that it’s pretty clear there was a fine line between the two. Which means, if we were to understand that it was corruption out in the open, and it was evil out in the open, it’s hard to understand Yehoshua. Kol Yeshachom hatsas meraglim. Kalev had to go daven. Man nafshach, let’s talk. If Kalev knew there was something wrong, so why does he have to go daven that he shouldn’t fall into it? We know what’s wrong.

So that means you’re not on board with the deviant plan, with the corruption, with the conspiracy. This taught me that it wasn’t simple. It wasn’t as simple as you think, that it was black and white. And it never is, Rabbi Yisrael. Never is. When you read the Chumash, you imagine, after reading it, yeah, it’s poshut: it’s Korach, Moshe, Moshe Rabbeinu, the meraglim. You go there and just throw all this away. These were big people. And Moshe Rabbeinu was afraid that Yehoshua would fall into it, that Kalev is afraid, yes, he needs to feel us always. What do you mean, if you know there’s something wrong, why would you fall in? You know that it’s deviancy; you stay away. It’s never black and white, Rabbi Yisrael. It’s always.

# Shlach Lecha and the Frame of Mind

It's always possible to make the mistake and fall into it. Even the Rabbeinu Sholeilam tells Moshe Rabbeinu, I am not with you on this. Not a good idea.

I always wanted to say, perhaps—again, it is drush, but I think there is some truth to it—that when it says, "Shlach lecha anashim," it means "l'da'atcha." What does l'da'atcha mean? It means according to your own way of deciding. I am not with you on it, but if this is your decision, then l'da'atcha—your decision.

But maybe l'da'atcha does not mean decision. Maybe l'da'atcha means your frame of mind. "Shlach lecha anashim" means you need to send people who think the way you think. They can go to Eretz Yisroel and come back and tell us what is really going on there. And you know why? Because we are looking for different things in Eretz Yisroel.

If you love Eretz Yisroel, and you love the Rabbeinu Sholeilam, and you love the opportunities that Eretz Yisroel can give you, then you can go as a spy and bring back an accurate assessment of what Eretz Yisroel really is. It depends what you are going for. If you are going to have a good time in Eretz Yisroel, you might come back with a bad, mistaken interpretation of what Eretz Yisroel really has to offer.

Eretz Yisroel is chemdah. There is love in Eretz Yisroel. The Rabbeinu Sholeilam's love is so strong in Eretz Yisroel. But you have to be searching and understanding in that frame of mind in order to love. And when you love, you see it differently. "Shlach lecha"—it has to be people like you, "l'da'atcha," with your frame of mind.

Moshe Rabbeinu loved the Eibeshter. He had lib d'Rabbeinu Sholeilam, so he saw things differently.

# Moshe Rabbeinu's Love for Eretz Yisroel

We find that Moshe Rabbeinu's love for Eretz Yisroel was so strong that when the Rabbeinu Sholeilam told him that he could not go into Eretz Yisroel, in V'eschanan, he had so many tefillos that he should be able to enter Eretz Yisroel.

The Yerushalmi, quoted in the Kli Yakar, says: why was Moshe so driven to get into Eretz Yisroel? Does he need to eat Jaffa oranges? What does he need there—krenbo? What is he looking for in Eretz Yisroel? Everyone is laughing, because that is what people love in Eretz Yisroel: the Jaffa tapuzim, the krenbo, the falafel. You must be going to Geula—that is where the good falafels are. Fine. Everybody comes and tells me what they like about the food in Israel. Good, enjoy.

But that was not what Moshe Rabbeinu was looking for. What was Moshe Rabbeinu looking for? "Ha-lechayim mitzvos ha-teluyos ba'aretz." He saw Eretz Yisroel as an opportunity—the opportunity in Eretz Yisroel.

Chazal tell us that Moshe begged the Rabbeinu Sholeilam: even if I cannot go in, at least let me go as a bird into Eretz Yisroel. It is interesting—someone like Moshe Rabbeinu becoming a gilgul into a bird, a bird. He would say, I have my makom, my life, my mission; I should go to Olam Haba now. Yet he was willing to become a bird to fly into Eretz Yisroel.

The Rabbeinu Sholeilam granted him: go up on the mountain and see Eretz Yisroel. You want to see Eretz Yisroel, you want to go as a bird—though a bird is not mekayem mitzvos—but you want to be in Eretz Yisroel, to see Eretz Yisroel. So I will let you see it.

That was the love and the appreciation that Moshe Rabbeinu had for Eretz Yisroel, even just to see it: to see the kedushah, to see the Rabbeinu Sholeilam, the palace of the Rabbeinu Sholeilam, to see the glory of the Rabbeinu Sholeilam in Eretz Yisroel. That is what Moshe Rabbeinu wanted. Moshe Rabbeinu was looking with tzachzenu eineinu.

# Seeing Eretz Yisrael with the Right Mindset

"Shuvcha letzion b’rachamim"—let our eyes see You, Your malchus, Your asherah, s’ashechin, and Eretz Yisrael. That is what I want to see, al yedei chah. If that is what you go to Eretz Yisrael to see, you would not come back with twigs and stories. You would not come back with all this. You would come back with an entirely different view and perspective than the meraglim came back with.

Did they say what they saw? Yes. But it depends. If you sent me to Eretz Yisrael, you know what I would come back and say? You know what I saw? I saw the Mir Yeshiva. I saw the Gedolei Yisrael. I would come back and tell you about the Kosel. I would tell you about the Cave of Rachel. I would tell you, send another guy. You know who will come back and tell you? Eilat. The waterboarding over there, the swimming, whatever they call it over there. Right, the jet skiing on Shabbos. The jet skiing in Eilat. It is a tale of two cities, Rabboisai. A tale of two cities. Yes, I can quote Mark Twain also. A tale of two cities, right? Yerushalayim. Bnei Brak. The tale of two cities, Rabboisai.

It depends what you are going for. If you are going to see the Eibershter, that is one thing; you will see one Yerushalayim. That is not what you are going for. That is not what you have in mind. It is all the deitcha, the frame of mind. The mind, the daas, the mindset. Deitcha, deitcha—mindset. My Yisrael Beinu, not everyone is on your mindset. You have to be careful.

# Kalev and the Meaning of Tefillah

Kalev says, "Rabbi Yerushalayim, I want to daven. Davening is going to make me connected. I am going to go to the kivrei avos." What was Kalev saying? That is my connection to Eretz Yisrael: kivrei avos, the kevarim, to be mispallel. I want to see Eretz Yisrael through that light. Kalev was Kalev; that was tefillah. You go to Eretz Yisrael to daven, you will come back and see a different Eretz Yisrael.

If you are going for personal gain, like the meraglim—what they were thinking, that is what the Zohar means. The Zohar is saying that in their minds they were thinking personal. When you think personal, you will see a whole different Eretz Yisrael. If what is driving you, and what your mind is completely preoccupied with, is about you and how it affects you in your furtherance in life, then yes, we would not see him here. What is going to be when we get to Eretz Yisrael? Do not bother. Eretz Yisrael is not going to be a very exciting experience, an uplifting experience, or, for that matter, a gainful experience.

# Eretz Yisrael, Torah, and Yissurim

It is hard to live in Eretz Yisrael. There are many things that are nikneh b’yissurim. Chazal say shloshah devarim—the three things. One is Torah, and one is Eretz Yisrael. It is nikneh b’yissurim. Why does it have to be that these three things are nikneh b’yissurim? And the teretz, Rabboisai, I believe, is very simple: because you have to show true love. It has to be tested. If there were no yissurim, then I do it because I enjoy it. I enjoy it, I am interested, it excites me. But if I have yissurim, then why am I doing it? And the answer is unconditional love. There are certain things, as Rabbi Yishmael says, I can only give it to you if you show unconditional love. And the love has to be tested. If there are yissurim and you want it, that means you love.

Eretz Yisrael—there is something called ahavas Eretz Yisrael, like there is ahavas haTorah. There has to be love. There has to be love. And of course, what do you love? I do not mean the land, and I do not mean the government. I am not getting involved in that. That is not the issue. But to love the kedushah in Eretz Yisrael, to love the Eibershter who dwells in Eretz Yisrael, to love the Torah that can be learned—that is love. And when you have that love,

# Zahav and the Value of Torah

Zahav. Then you come back and see a beautiful Eretz Yisrael. You see Yerushalayim shel zahav. It is not Yerushalayim that you can make zahav over there. You are not going to make big money there. Well, I do not know today. Hashem, the economy is doing well. But it is Yerushalayim shel zahav; its essence is gold. Ka’asher kasav, ke-matminim. Torah is gold. It is diamonds. The dvar Hashem is gold. It is yekarim mipeninim; the greatest diamonds and the greatest currency is Torah. Torah is the best eschar.

If you go to Eretz Yisrael with that mindset, and you love Eretz Yisrael for the right reasons, with all the yissurim, it is nikneh. You will be koneh Eretz Yisrael. Pas b’melach tochal, u’mayim b’mesurah tishteh. The Mishnah tells us: how are you supposed to learn Torah? Toiling, pain, and suffering. V’chai tzar tichyeh. It is a life of difficulty. Yema ta’aseh kein, ashrecha ba’olam hazeh. You will be happy.

Something is not adding up. If I pre-warn you, you will have a miserable life, and you will have nothing, and you will have dried bread and water with measure, and on the floor you sleep. How can it be ashrecha ba’olam hazeh? And the answer is, it depends what you are looking for. If you are looking for Torah to bring you enjoyment in the physical sense, to bring you prestige, Chazal tell us, and the Rambam quotes it, do not think you will learn Torah and have great things in this world. It is not true.

What are you looking for? That is ahavas haTorah. Ahavas haTorah is to love Torah because you love Torah. And when you love Torah, ashrecha ba’olam hazeh, v’tov lach l’olam haba.

# Akdamus, Mishush HaKel, and Perspective

Ashkenazi Jewry on Shavuos has something called Akdamus. They say it before Kriyas haTorah on the first day of Yom Tov. Beautiful language, poetry, how to express the beauty and love for Torah. They also have something called Mishush HaKel. Before they call up Chasan Torah, the one who is going to have the aliyah that finishes the Torah, they talk about the beauty of Torah and the longing and the feelings that a Jew has for Torah, how precious it is, how much it is worth more than all the money in the world, and how much life it gives.

Oh, really? If you look at the bank account of a person who sits in kollel, have you ever seen the house that they live in? Have you ever seen the stress and da’agah—the worry—on their faces when they have to pay bills? It is not exactly what we say in Akdamus, and it is not exactly what we say in Mishush HaKel, how we glowingly paint a picture which is not realistic.

And the answer is: is it not realistic? It depends on what world, and through which glasses, we look. The meraglim came and saw a world of chayai tzar tichyeh in Eretz Yisrael. But when there is ahavas haTorah, every moment in Eretz Yisrael, and every part of Eretz Yisrael, is like Torah itself speaks of beauty and glamour and diamonds—diamonds, diamonds, beauty. It all depends on how much love you have.

So just like we have ahavas haTorah, we have ahavas Eretz Yisrael. Love is very important. The love gives the perspective that the Torah wants us to have. And without that love, you will have a bad perspective. That goes back to g’dich tavshiloi. You will complain about a bad supper. You will complain about this gashmiyus thing that went wrong, and that gashmiyus thing, both in your private lives, if you are sitting and learning and you are not holding by it, it is not ahavas haTorah. And the same in Eretz Yisrael: there will be a lot of complaints. It is a rough life, not easy. When you have ahavah, you would not be complaining about a g’dich tavshiloi. You will not be. This will not affect you.

Now, let us go back after we have answered.

# Question Two: What Was Wrong with the Meraglim?

Question number two: what did the Miraglim say wrong? The answer is: not from their perspective. From their perspective, they said exactly what they saw. Again, many mefarshim learn a little differently, but we can give them, so to speak, the benefit of the doubt, that they came back and were trying to be as honest as possible.

Honesty does not necessarily mean that you convey exactly what you saw. It is what you saw, but not necessarily what it really is, because when there is a hava, you see a whole different picture. It is a whole different way of looking at something.

With this, I go back to answer question number one. What were the Miraglim wrong about when they did not take a lesson from Miriam? What did Miriam do? She spoke lashon hara, right? Is there lashon hara on a land? We could discuss that. That is a topic, as I said, we have mentioned in the past.

# Rashi and the Rambam on Miriam

There is a word in Rashi that my eye caught this year, and I thought a lot about it also in the language of the Rambam. Rashi says, “Lamah nismecha parashas Meraglim le-parashas Miriam? Lefi she-lo siklu al iskei dibah.” It does not even say she was punished for the dibah, for what she said, but “al iskei,” on what happened. It was more about how it happened, what happened. Not lashon hara. Lashon hara has an onesh; it has a punishment. Here it is not about the chet and punishment, it is “al iskei” — on what happened. It is about the story that happened.

And Rashi says what? “She-dibrah be-achah.” She spoke against her brother. Why is it relevant that she spoke against her brother? Lashon hara is only about a brother?

Let me quote you the lashon of the Rambam. The Rambam actually mentions the same language, and he adds: the Torah tells me, “Shalmah ba-nega tzara’as, zachor es asher asah Hashem Elokecha le-Miriam.” Towards the end of Hilchos Tzara’as, perek tes-zayin, the last halachah, halachah yud, the Rambam says: “Zachor” — we have to remember what happened to Miriam. “Harehu omer, hisbonen.” Pay attention. “Zachor” does not just mean remember the story; more, “hisbonen.” You need to focus. You need to understand.

What should you understand? “Ma’ra la-Miriam ha-nevi’ah.” What happened to Miriam? “She-dibrah ba-achah,” that she spoke against her brother. See, the Rambam also. Why is it relevant? Is it relevant only if you speak against somebody who is not your brother? I mean, she did speak against the gadol hador. She did speak up against Av ha-nevi’im. One of the ikkarim is that you are not allowed to undermine Moshe Rabbeinu. That is where the Brisker Rav says that he was a kofer. She was ממש harboring on one of the ikkarim, that he is Av ha-nevi’im. You cannot talk against Moshe Rabbeinu.

But that is not what the emphasis is, both in the Rambam and in the one word that Rashi brings from the Chazal. It is about “achah.” She spoke against her brother. And the Rambam elaborates on this theme: “Gedolah mimenu b’shanim.” Yes, she was actually older than him. “Gidlah oso al birkoseha” — she brought him up on her knee, meaning she took care of him. “V’siknah atzmah le-hatzilo” — and she put herself in danger to save him when he was put into the little basket in the water. “V’hi lo dibrah b’gnuso.” She actually did not even say anything bad. “Ela ta’ah.” She made a mistake. “Hi shivsa’aso l’shar nevi’im.” She made him like everybody else. And he was not like that at all, as it says, “u-Moshe anav me’od,” and even so he was punished with tzara’as.

So we can learn that the Rambam means she compared him to other nevi’im, and that is a problem of one of the Yud-Gimel Ikkarim, that Moshe is Av ha-Nevi’im. By comparing, she undermined his status as the father of all the nevi’im. Or maybe we could say: “Shivsa’aso” — you do not look at that, achi. It is your brother.

# Love, Respect, and Exalting Others

Love, respect, and honor for a brother should naturally lead one to see him as exalted above anyone else. Where there is love, there is no undermining—only overappreciation and exalted respect.

R. Chaim Shmulevitz, in one of his sichos, says that when there is love and respect for a parent, it must be that there is no one smarter and greater. Otherwise, something is lacking in the *kesher*, in the connection, in the respect and the love. Something is wrong.

The fact that Miriam, even though she is like *Deborah b’gnusah*, is not bad. But what you did was compare him to others. You put him on the same playing field, on the same level as others. That shows a lack of love, respect, and appreciation. Something is wrong.

That is what these resha’im, so to speak—again, *l’shav Rashi*—should have seen and taken *mussar* from. And what is that? Even in *Hilchos Lashon Hara*, what did Miriam do? But in *Hilchos* respect and love for a brother, there has to be a certain *kesher*, a love. You should not have done this. They should have had that same awareness.

You cannot talk against Eretz Yisroel. If you love Eretz Yisroel, if you love your brother, you do not speak that way. When you love Eretz Yisroel, you do not go and say, uh...

# The Breakdown in Kavod

In life, Rabbi Yisroel, it is very important to have *harachah*, proper admiration, and proper love for the people for whom you need to have admiration. Today we find a big breakdown in *kavod*, in respect. Honor of parents is low on the to-do list, as they say. *Kavod talmidei chachamim* is almost at the lowest level. *Kavod* for Torah is not where it was. What went wrong? What is going wrong? Where is the problem?

Here we find the meraglim, who should have come back with respect for Eretz Yisroel. Here we have meraglim who should have come back with admiration for Eretz Yisroel. Here we have meraglim who should have come back with inspiration and motivation to glorify Eretz Yisroel. A lack of respect—what happened? How does it identify with our times today?

# The Root of the Problem

Let me tell you something interesting. I thought a lot about the Zohar. The Zohar wants us to know that the root of the problem by the meraglim was their seeking position and honor. What is that?

Of course, we could say it was on a technical, physical, basic level: they were looking to have a respectable job, and they were going to lose it. But tell me, were they not intelligent enough to realize that this was not the right thing to do, to put all of Klal Yisroel in jeopardy and go against Hashem’s word? And do not forget, this was the goal of what they left Mitzrayim for. I mean, were they so blinded by honor? Were they so deviant for power, power-hungry? Maybe, maybe. And again, as I said, we spoke about this in past years.

I thought a lot about it this year, and you know what I came up with? An idea: it begins with honor-seeking.

# Self-Esteem, Approval, and Love

And it blinds us, because we need to be appreciated and honored, since we lack self-esteem. When someone has self-esteem, and the proper respect for himself and love of himself, he is not going to need approval, and he is not going to need grandization from others.

That is what went wrong by the meraglim. They were not able to love properly what they were supposed to love, because they were busy with a flawed, self-seeking love for themselves. That is what niggis atzmi means. Niggis atzmi means that we are focused on what is for me, what will bring me love, and therefore, because of that, I am not healthy, I am not able, I am not capable of loving what is really supposed to be loved and what is really good. Lack of self-esteem.

When we look in the mirror, we do not love ourselves for who we are, for being a ben Torah, for being a Yid, for being a good person. We are not capable of really loving others. Anyone who knows anything about psychology, and understands marriages even, knows there are major issues. The shoresh of it is: if you do not love yourself, you cannot love others. There is something missing.

When you are busy approval-seeking because you are lacking self-confidence, self-esteem, and self-appreciation, you lack the ability to properly love what is truly good and what truly needs to be loved. In every setting, among a group of people, the more issues they have in self-esteem and self-appreciation, the more they hate and the more they attack what is really good and what is really... Because it is all about: how much do I have? What do I have from it? What do I get from it?

# Moshe Rabbeinu and Humility

Shlach lecha hanashim l'daatcha. Moshe was healthy. V'ish Moshe anav me'od mikol ha'adam asher al p'nei ha'adamah. What does that mean? The answer is that he was enough. He did not need approval. That is part of the lesson that the meraglim maybe should have taken. It is not only al iske, it is not only the dibburim; it is the whole picture, the whole situation.

Moshe was not makpid at all. Moshe was not makpid. He did not care. Why did he not care? Because Moshe was not approval-seeking. It did not mean anything to him. V'ish Moshe anav me'od mikol ha'adam asher al p'nei ha'adamah. The more humble you are, the more you are able to love. In every relationship, the more humility—meaning you are not looking, you do not need—then the real things that love should be based on can be seen and understood and accepted, and that ahavah comes out. Ahavah comes out.

# The Meraglim and How They Saw Themselves

If you look carefully at the parashah, there is a word that all the ba'alei mussar and the mefarshim say. I believe the Baal Shem speaks about it. When they came back, a lot of what they complained about was how the people in Canaan, the giants, viewed them. It says clearly: we went, and it says in the pasuk like this, we came to the land, right, and we saw over there the giants. We looked like little grasshoppers, little insects. And so too, we were like that in their eyes. Something is missing.

# The Real Problem in the Meraglim

It says, “v’aniyah be’eineinu kechagavim.” So just say: they were big and we were small. Those are a lot of extra words that are really saying the same thing.

Ba’alei Mussar say that if you read the pasuk carefully, it is telling us what the real problem was: “v’aniyah be’eineinu kechagavim” — we were small in our own eyes. And therefore, “v’chein hayinu be’eineyhem.” When they came, instead of being proud, instead of being secure, instead of coming and saying, wow, look what we’re getting, look what Hashem is giving us, they saw themselves as small. They lacked sufficient inner acceptance and peace. And therefore, “v’chein hayinu be’eineyhem.”

A person needs to be secure. A person needs to be able to be happy. Then he can find ahavah in his Torah. He can find ahavah in Eretz Yisrael. And if not, nothing is ever good. Nothing is. And it brings churban.

# The Connection to Churban

We all know that this was the basis of all the churban, right? I always thought to myself, an interesting connection with this — I’ll stop. “Shlach miraglim b’chiel hadoros,” right? B’chiel hadoros. The Beis Hamikdash was destroyed. Why was the Beis Hamikdash destroyed? Chazal tell us: sinas chinam, there was hatred, right? Or “shelo berchu baTorah techilah.” It depends on which Beis Hamikdash. The first one — “shelo berchu baTorah techilah.” The second one — sinas chinam.

Is there any correlation between the story of the meraglim and the reason why the Beis Hamikdash was destroyed? We understand that there is a correlation in the sense that the meraglim did what they did, and this was set in stone in the calendar for the churban HaBeis Hamikdash. But what about the connection between the story of the meraglim and the chet that caused the churban HaBeis? Is there any connection to that?

With the shiur that we said today, and the understanding we have in the meraglim that we mentioned today, I think there is a strong connection. When you do not appreciate, when you do not properly love, feel, respect, and appreciate, it causes hatred toward Eretz Yisrael. And that is the same thing as “shelo berchu baTorah techilah.” The same ahavas haTorah — just like there is an ahavas Eretz Yisrael, which they lacked, which they were not mekayem — they fell in ahavas Eretz Yisrael. Ahavas haTorah and ahavas Yisrael are also ahavos. “Shelo berchu baTorah techilah” means they did not show the proper ahavah, respect, appreciation, and love. “Shelo berchu baTorah techilah” is the same as ahavas Yisrael and sinas chinam. It is all rooted in the same sugya.

# Inner Soundness and Outer Ruin

When you cannot see the good and appreciate the good and thank Hashem for the good, but instead you come back and see blemishes and see bad — u’vars blotav dem — horrible. It is destruction. That is where destruction comes from: all destruction comes from within, and automatically from around.

When the inner destruction of a person, of a Yid, starts to take hold — don’t forget, a person from within is a Beis Hamikdash himself — then if that Beis Hamikdash does not have ahavah, does not have ahavas haTorah, does not have ahavas Yisrael, then comes the churban chitzoni. The people around you, what is surrounding you, also becomes destroyed, blemished, and ruined.

This is very important, Yisrael, rabboi Yisrael: to be sound from within, ahavah p’nimis shel atzmecha for yourself, and therefore you can have ahavah p’nimis toward others, toward what you need to have ahavah for — Eretz Yisrael, kedushas Yisrael, Torah, chaverim, around you.

# Closing Phrase

And if not, it’s chur ben habayis, chur ben habayis, chur ben habayis.