Rabbi David E. Ostrich, Congregation Brit Shalom
Clergy Column for The Centre Daily Times
Published July 2, 2023
Whether God commands us or circumstances urge us, change can be very difficult. We have patterns in our lives that—be they good or bad—hold us in a kind of psychological and societal inertia that keeps us plodding down the same path. When a different path is suggested, do we respond enthusiastically, or do we hesitate?
The Bible provides us several stories in which the Lord’s commands about change are greeted with different human responses—sometimes obedient and other times resistant. Two Torah portions stand out to me—perhaps because they have similar sounding names. In Shelach Lecha (Numbers 13-15), God tells Moses to shelach lecha / send forth scouts to reconnoiter the Promised Land. In Lech Lecha (Genesis 12-17), God instructs Abram and Sarai to lech lecha / go forth from Haran to Canaan.
In Shelach Lecha, God says to Moses, “Send forth men to scout the land of Canaan, which I am giving to the Israelite people; send one man from each of their ancestral tribes, each one a chieftain among them.” (Numbers 13.1) The twelve men selected go forth on their mission, but, when they return, only two of the scouts, Joshua and Caleb, are enthusiastic: “Let us by all means go up, and we shall surely conquer the land.” (13.30) The other ten scouts are pessimistic and “spread calumnies among the Israelites about the land they had scouted, saying, ‘The county that we traversed and scouted is one that devours its settlers.’” (13.32) The people believe the pessimistic ten and reject God’s mission.
Things go very differently in Lech Lecha when God tells Abram and Sarai, “Lech lecha / Go forth from your native land and from your father’s house to the land that I will show you.” (Genesis 12.1) There is no discussion analysis or negotiating. They just do as God commands and “go forth.”
Why does one sending-forth work and the other fail—and how might the differences be instructive in our own struggles with change?
Perhaps the problem is in bringing the people into the discussion. Abram and Sarah are not asked to scout the land and then move there. They are just told to go. In Numbers, however, the scouts report their opinions to the whole Israelite people, and a discussion ensues. The conversation turns into a debate, and then cynicism and anxiety seize the day. Democracy is important, but unguided and unmanaged discussions can go awry and derail constructive thinking.
Another possible explanation is the psychological state of the people being commanded. Abram and Sarai are full of faith and ready for adventure, but the Israelites in the desert are still so traumatized by slavery—“their spirits crushed by the cruel bondage” (Exodus 6.9)—that embarking on God’s conquest is just too much. When we want change, how much is practical and reasonable for the people involved?
Or the different results could be a matter of the difference between the two missions. Abram and Sarai are just asked to dwell in the land (alongside the other inhabitants), while the Israelites are asked to conquer the Land and its fearsome peoples. Some jobs or changes are harder than others.
We usually hold up Abram and Sarai as the ideal receivers of God’s instructions, and they are. However, perhaps the story in Numbers represents a learning curve for the Lord: dealing with humans requires understanding, patience, and grace.