By Rabbi Joshua (unacceptably known as The Hoffer) Hoffman z"l
The Shabbos before Tisha B’Av is referred to as “Shabbos Chazon”, because of the words “Chazon Yeshayahu” at the beginning of the haftarah, taken from the first chapter of the book of Yeshayahu, which deals with the reason behind the destruction of that time. Many commentators (see, for example, Toras Gavriel by the famed Rav Gavriel Zev Margolis) try to find connections between the Torah reading of that week – Parshas Devarim – and Tisha B’Av as well. The most prominent connection is the account of the report of the spies and its aftermath, which led to the decree for the nation to remain in the wilderness for thirty-eight years. The incident is first related in Parshas Shelach, and repeated, with some change, in Parshas Devarim.
After the decree was issued, some of the people spoke up and said that they had sinned to God, and would now go ahead and do battle to enter Eretz Yisroel. God, however, told Moshe to tell them not to do so, and that they would fall before their enemies. They persisted with their plan, and were, in fact, defeated. Moshe recalls to them that after their defeat, “you wept before the Lord, but the Lord did not listen to your voice and He did not give ear to you” (Devarim 1:41). Rabbi Genack writes that this verse is reminiscent of a verse in Eicha (3:8), which says “Even when I cry and call for help He shut out my prayer.” This verse, noted Rav Yosef Dov Soloveitchik, zt”l, is the source for a number of practices on Tisha B’Av in relation to prayer. Because of it, for example, we do not say the words “tiskabel tzloshon,” – let our prayers be accepted – in the kaddish following Shemoneh Esreh, beginning on Tisha B’Av night, until after Mincha on Tisha B’Av day. In addition, we do not pray, on Tisha B’Av the special prayer of neilah, for acceptance of our prayers, as we do on Yom Kippur, even though many of the laws of Tisha B’Av are patterned after those of Yom Kippur. On Tisha B’Av, Rav Soloveitchik explained, we are, as it were, confronted with a wall of separation between God and the people, reflecting the distance in the relationship that was created by the incident of the spies and its aftermath, so that our prayers are not as effective as before.
Rabbi Aharon Dovid Goldberg, in his Shiras Dovid, in explaining our verses in Parshas Devarim, cites some very interesting comments of Ramban and Seforno. Ramban says that even though the people, before attempting to do battle, repented of their sin, their repentance was not accepted, because the punishment was accompanied with an oath. Seforno says that the repentance was not complete, because it came from fear of God, rather than love of Him. The implication, says Rabbi Goldberg, is that, had they repented out of love, the decree would have been rescinded, even though it had been accompanied by an oath. Seforno, however, does not explain how he knows that the repentance of the people did not come from love of God and was therefore not complete. In what way is this indicated in the Torah’s account of this episode?
Perhaps we can suggest that the sin of the spies, which consisted of lashon hora, or evil talk, about the land, generated a lack of unity among the people, whether to follow the pleadings and encouragement of Caleiv and Yehoshua or the discouragement of the other ten spies. The lack of unity thus generated, brought about sinas chinam, or baseless hatred, which, as we know, the Talmud tells us (Yoma 9) is a cause for destruction. The Ari taught that before morning prayers, people should accept upon ourselves the mitzvah to love our friend as ourselves. Rav Yitzchok David Grossman of Migdal HaEimek recently related that someone asked him why we don’t begin by accepting upon ourselves the mitzvah to love God? He answered that we show our love of God by loving His children. The lack of unity among the people, then, as reflected in the sin of the spies, betrayed a lack of love for God, in this context, the repentance of the people was not complete, and was therefore not effective in rescinding the decree made against them.
