B+

Once, when I heard Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach speak on Yom Yerushalayim and he told a moshol -parable about a guy dating a girl. "Let's call her Maxine", he said. The guy suggests they play a game in which he guesses where she lives by driving her to where he pictures thather home would be. Imagine how she'd feel if he drove to a condemned building in the worst part of the city. Yet, what a compliment it would be if he drove to a beautiful house in lovely neighborhood. Rav Shlomo explained that Israel is G-d's home on earth, so to speak. If we criticize Eretz Yisrael, we critique G-d. Thus, the meraglim were punished severely because their thoughts about Israel revealed what they felt about Hashem.

Pardes Yosef explains that suggesting that speaking against the land means that they were really speaking against G-d and this allows the kal to make sense: If Miriam who spoke against a human being (albeit the greatest ever) was punished, then the meraglim should have deduced how wrong it must be to speak against G-d himself.

II. If the first approach saw Eretz Yisrael as reflective of G-d, the next approach sees Eretz Yisrael possessing emotions of the human variety. Sitting in his Jerusalem Synagogue steps away from the Makom HaMikdash - sit of the Holy Temple, may it speedily be rebuilt, Rav Nachman Kahane told this moshol composed by Rav Kook: A girl on a date with a guy that she's "not into" holds back her qualities and shows her less appealing side. She doesn't "put herself together" as best she could, doesn't animate or smile. The result is that the fellow leaves the evening unimpressed. But the next week, when she goes out with another guy (probably the first one's friend) she is enchantingly beautiful and full of life. And this new guy thinks he's in love ,which leaves his friend the first guy confused.

Rav Kook states that Eretz Yisrael has strong feelings about who it wants to embrace and who is not it's type.


III. This is the approach that I am most taken by.

Rav Yisrael Ordman explains that the fact that the meraglim were culpable for not applying the lesson of Miriam's mistake to their case teaches us the essence of Loshon Hara. It's not simply to not damage another person with our words. Were that the case the prohibition would apply to people and not to land. The concept of Loshon HaRa at it's root, is the obligation to view all that we see in a positive light. It doesn't matter if it's a person or a piece of land. Both are the same in that both are imperfect. Nothing in this world is flawless. It is up to us to see the good in everything. A generally negative wiold view leads to viewing specific situations negatively which leads to saying negative words. That is the lesson the meraglim failed to learn.

If we do not learn this lesson the consequences are great. Rav Yehoshua ben Prachia said 3 things: Establish a Rabbi for yourself, acquire a friend, and judge everyone favorably. Rav Chaim Mivelozen explained that Rav Yehoshua ben Prachia is warning us that if we don't learn to see the good in people, we will end up without a friend and without an advisor, because no one is perfect. We must look for the good in friends and teachers and welcome people into our lives rather than shutting out those who are imperfect. We expect no less from the world.

After the Holocaust, Rav Eliezer Silver went on a mission that he called Vaad Hatzalah. He visited camps where distraught survivors remained, wondering what next. In one camp he was told that one man refused to enter the synagogue where all gathered. The people told Rabbi Silver that this man was angry at G-d. But when Rabbi Silver went to him, the gentleman informed him that he was "not mad at G-d, but at one of his servants."

Upon Rabbi Silver's request, the man shared his story. He had noticed that one man was sharing his Sidur, the only one in sight, with everyone in the camp. The man thought this was beautiful, until upon greater scrutiny he discovered that things were't as they appeared. The man wasn't sharing his prayer book, as much as renting it, charging everyone a piece of their daily bread for its use. After seeing what this man did the conscientious objector was turned off and decided he no longer wanted any part of this man's religion.

Rabbi Silver was both caring and clever. He looked the man in the eye and without missing a beat kindly asked: "Why do you focus on the negative act of one man, why not choose instead to look at the positive act of all these other people? Look at the beauty and loyalty of all these individuals who are willing to give up their meager day's rations to be able to hold a Siddur and pray to G-d!

The man, whose maner was Simon Weisenthal wrote in his diary that night that he accepted on himself at that time to always see the positive in everything. May we be as wise and blessed.