A point from the weekly D’var Malchus for Parshas Shlach with a relevant message * What connection is there between Moshe’s spies and Yehoshua’s spies, division and unification?
As with many things, so too with the episode of the spies, Chassidus emphasizes the good and the positive. The spies were emissaries of Moshe Rabbeinu (already something special) and were the leaders of their respective tribes, “anashim” – important people, “k’sheirim,” “selected,” “they were on a very high level and did not want to lower themselves to doing practical mitzvos.” Even after they were punished by “having no share in the World to Come” – Chassidus explains that this too is an advantage “because their level is higher than that of the World to Come and the World to Come does not provide a reward for them.”
The way Moshe’s spies would look in our times would be: shluchim of the Rebbe, select, Chassidim, G-d fearing and scholars. And the main thing, carrying out Moshe’s wishes and realizing his dream of uniting the material and the spiritual.
Wonderful! What’s missing?
Despite all the fine qualities of Moshe’s spies, the Jewish people did not achieve the goal. They still needed the avoda of Yehoshua’s spies in order to enter the land. What was lacking in Moshe’s spies?
Apparently, the main point that Moshe’s spies failed to achieve was achdus. But not just any unity, they were lacking a specific kind of unity. This is what is also demanded of us now: another sort of achdus. Something altogether different.
TWO PATHS TO UNITY
The avoda of Moshe’s spies was mainly in hischalkus (division). They also merited to draw down the level of “unity which is above division” – within the division, but their avoda focused mainly on division. For Yehoshua’s spies, the unity was something that was alive and well.
We will use an example of a familiar enough phenomenon in order to illustrate the two types of unity. A “Kinus Achdus” is held (this is just an example and this idea can apply at home, with children, a farbrengen, an encounter, any sort of connection) which is all about “division.” You can sense it already in the advertising. This is usually in a guilt-inducing style, which calls upon people to come and unite in light of the terrible disunity etc. At the gathering itself, what is emphasized is how difficult it is when we are divided and how we must unite despite our differences and the difficulties. At the end of a kinus like this, hachlatos are made about achdus and everyone goes home. As some have said on the verse, “and Yisroel camped opposite the mountain” that we need the “opposite” in order to unite, i.e. when you see people trying to increase unity it is because there is an excess of “opposition.”
Then there is a gathering where people simply join together and unite. The people come to join forces as one without consideration for any other issue, they don’t even consider what not to think about. Attendees at such an event don’t need to be, and can’t be, pressured into coming by emergency announcements about divisiveness and its consequences. That doesn’t speak to them, because they are in a totally different space.
INTELLECT IS A COMPOUND. EMUNA IS SINGULAR
Now that we understand, more or less, the difference between the approaches, the Rebbe tells us a very interesting fact. The difference between the “unity approaches” has to do with the difference between emuna (faith) and seichel (intellect).
Moshe had ten N’siim (tribal leaders) to correspond to the ten soul powers. Yehoshua sent people described simply as “anashim” without any titles, whose kabbalas ol was their strong point. Intellect and middos add to the layers of complexity, and consequently to the lack of unity, because each person has his intellect and his feelings.
Two are enough; yes and no. “Just tell me, do it or don’t do it.” In simple Jews, Hashem Himself is revealed without limitations. As the Rebbe put it (see footnote 115 in the sicha), “On the contrary, in the simplicity of simple people, the simplicity of Atzmus is revealed.” The “compound” must be divested of its complexity in order to unite with another complex entity. The simple one, however, simply reveals that he is united with the simple one. And these spies do everything quietly, without announcing their presence.
The greatest gathering in history, which will take place in the third Beis HaMikdash, will be of the second sort. There will be no “Kinus Achdus” sign and no fiery speeches about what is lacking because of our divisions. All will meet, hug, and kiss one another and dance with joy.
To conclude with a thought provoking question: which of our children do we view as successful – the bright ones who get good grades and fulfill their academic obligations or the ones whose success is mainly in their behavior?
Simplicity will reveal unity. The simple ones will bring about the hisgalus. The message of this sicha is clear.