Two survivors -- just two -- make it to the end. All of the Exodus seems to have been worth it, the Midrash says, for two people, Kalev and Yehoshua. They are the only two who make it from servitude in Egypt to independence in the land of Israel. From them, perhaps we can learn what it takes to make it through an ordeal of Biblical proportions, and to help lead others through as well.
Kalev and Yehoshua are distinct from one another. Moshe recognizes this, as he blesses only Yehoshua in the beginning. They recognize it too. During the journey, only Kalev goes to Chevron, where Rashi says that he prayed for fortitude during the 40 days in Eretz Yisrael. Why does one need Moshe’s prayer while the other needs to pray himself? Also, why is Kalev ready to stand up to the other spies at the crucial moment while Yehoshua is silent?
The explanation is that they have different methods of resistance. There are two ways to voice dissent, one loud and one much more reserved. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. The loud way keeps the person strong in his or her opposition but it’s not always effective in persuading others and can even be dangerous for the vocal one. The quiet way can garner an audience but it can also leave the person vulnerable to persuasion. This is why Moshe prays for Yehoshua’s protection and it is why Kalev goes to Chevron to Daven for internal fortitude.
How did this play out among the spies? Because Yehoshua was vocal throughout in his opposition to the others, he was a known entity. But the rest of the spies thought that he could be safely ignored. It was, they believed, 11 to 1. In the group dynamic, that means that there was “consensus minus one.” Parenthetically, this is also why Yehoshua’s objections are not written in the Chumash, according to the Chafetz Chaim. Only words which find an audience are recorded in the Chumash while Yehoshua’s words are simply dismissed.
On the other hand, Kalev’s method gives him a chance to be heard. When he speaks up on behalf of conquest, he is granted the floor. He throws off the spies’ message and turns it into a debate.
When describing these two methods, the Torah uses related but ultimately different terms. In both cases, they are seen as possessing Ruach, or spirit. That means that they have both maintained a spirit of resistance, a spiritual fortitude, despite their minority status. Eventually, they will express it, which is also a power of spirit.
But their spirits are described differently. Here in our Parasha Kalev is called one who possesses Ruach Acheret, “another spirit.” This is what steels him against the spies and then against the nation’s outcry. This is his ability to go against the current.
To some extent, one imagines that Yehoshua possesses this as well. But that’s not how it will be described. He will be called Ish Asher Ruach Bo, “a man who has spirit in him.” The difference is crucial, especially as this is why Yehoshua will be chosen as Moshe Rabenu’s successor. Almost forty years later (27:16-21), Moshe will ask Hashem to find a replacement who will be a true shepherd for the people, caring for them and leading them. Hashem will respond that Moshe should take Yehoshua. In explaining what spirit means here, the Midrash says that the phrase means one who can “go with or against [as needed] the spirit of each one.” Kalev’s Ruach allows him to resist but it also leaves him too out of touch with others to be a leader. Yehoshua’s Ruach can be effective in resistance as long as he is vocal about it. Bu it will also allow him to relate to the people, which will be different than Moshe Rabenu and Kalev.
Clearly, a staunch Ruach is what both needed to survive. But what the nation needs is different. This is why Yehoshua will be the more fitting leader as they go into Eretz Yisrael. It is to him that the people will be able to relate.
