(13:1) And Hashem spoke to Moshe, saying: Send for yourself men to explore the land of Canaan which I am giving to the Children of Yisrael, one man each for his father’s tribe you shall send, everyone a prince among them.
It says in the Midrash and also in Rashi: Why is the section dealing with the spies juxtaposed to the section dealing with what happened to Miriam? Because she was punished for a matter involving speech – she spoke against her brother, and these wicked men saw what happened to her but did not learn the lesson.
In order to understand why the Midrash was careful in its wording and wrote “they saw” – after all, if they had not seen, surely they would have heard – let us first look at the gemora in Berachos 5b, where Rabbi Yochanan taught that negaim are not afflictions of love, but rather they are a punishent.
The gemora questions this, because it teaches elsewhere that anyone who has one of these four appearances of negaim is an altar of atonement, and thus not a punishment!
The gemora answers that the other teaching is talking about where the affliction is in private – beneath the clothing, whereas the teaching of Rabbi Yochanan is talking about where the affliction is in public (on an uncovered part of the body), and when it is in public it is not an affliction of love but a punishment.
According to this gemora we now understand that if they had not seen what happened to Miriam we would not have been able to expound that the juxtaposition is teaching us that they did not learn the lesson from Miriam who was punished for matters involving speech, because anyone who slanders could argue that Miriam was a righteous woman, and therefore for her they were afflictions of love and not a punishment, and thus there was no lesson to be learned.
Because of this the Midrash was careful to say that “they saw” the affliction – on an uncovered part of her body, and if so they were public afflictions and not afflictions of love. Thus the Midrash was rightfully astonished that even though they saw and if so they knew that she had been punished for matters involving speech, nevertheless they did not learn the lesson!
(14:14) They will say about the inhabitants of this land, who heard that You, Hashem, are in the midst of this people, that eye to eye You appear to them, Hashem, and that Your cloud stands over them, and with a pillar of cloud You go before them by day, and with a pillar of fire by night.
The Midrash in Bamidbar Rabbah 16:25 teaches that Moshe said: Master of the World, “eye to eye You appear to them”. What does “eye to eye” mean? Reish Lakish explained that Moshe said: Behold, the scales are level. You say “I will smite them with pestilence and destroy them” (14:12), but I say “please forgive [the iniquity of this nation]” (14:19) – let us see whose word will prevail! And it says “And Hashem said: I have forgiven [them] in accordance with your word” (14:20).
Behold, anyone who encounters this Midrash is astonished by its words – how did Moshe know that he would win his argument?
But we can explain that Moshe’s argument was in the style of “either way you look at it” – whichever way you learn the gemora in Kiddushin 40a, which teaches “אין מקיפין when there is a profanation of Hashem’s name”. The gemora gives two explanations as to what this term means:
The first explanation is that a person who profanes Hashem’s name is not given some time before he is punished, like the expression חנוני המקיף – the shopkeeper that gives credit (gives time to pay), but rather he is punished immediately.
The second explanation is that it is like the expression אין מקיפין בבועי – we do not compare swellings. Meaning, if the scales which are weighing a person’s good deeds against his bad deeds are level, but amongst his sins there is the sin of profanation of Hashem’s name, the scales are not examined to see whether or not they are exactly equal, but rather this sin creates the assumption that the scales are leaning towards the side of the bad deeds. But since this opinion disagrees with the first opinion’s explanation of אין מקיפין, it holds that altough he is punished, he is not punished immediately.
On the other hand, the first opinion does not agree that the sin of profanation of Hashem’s name causes the scales to be negatively tilted, but rather like the gemora in Rosh Hashanah 17a which teaches that one of the thirteen attributes of Hashem “and abundant in kindness” means that He tilts the scales to the side of kindness – He presses down the side of the scales of the good deeds so that they outweigh the sins.
And finally, the commentaries explain that the word סליחה (to pardon) does not mean that a person is pardoned completely without any punishment, but rather it means that Hashem holds off on the punishment.
We now understand why Moshe thought that since the scales are level, Hashem must tilt the scales to the side of kindness, and not destroy the Children of Yisrael.
Because if you want to argue otherwise, and say that here with the sin of the spies there was a profanation of Hashem’s name, and where there is a profanation of Hashem’s name the scales should be tilted to the side of the sins according to the second explanation that we mentioned above, if so You have no choice but to “please forgive”, that is, to hold off on the punishment. Because according to the second explanation, even when there is a profanation of Hashem’s name punishment is delayed.
Thus whichever side You take Hashem – if You hold like the first explanation then You must tilt the scales to the side of kindness, and if You hold like the second explanation then You must wait and not destroy the Children of Yisrael!