On Being a Jewish Leader: 
Biblical Models

JCC Lecture Feb. 16, 1999

Intro

When I came to the first Tuesday evening and saw the great crowd, I still wondered how the crowd would look 7 weeks later. Well, here we are, and it is a great tribute to you that you are still here.

But then I thought, well, all the other topics sound so attractive: family, love, marriage, menchlechkeit, and other exciting topics. How is a lecture on leadership going to drum up communal enthusiasm? But then I thought again. After all, isn’t it a crisis of leadership which has had all of America glued to their TV sets for the last year? Hasn’t the nation been vociferously debating the question of the relationship between leadership and morality?

And then think about our brethren in Israel. They have an election coming up in May, with a seeming myriad of candidates ostensibly prepared to lead Israel. The basic question there is whether anyone is capable of leading such a fractious society.  We need leadership there so badly. We need leaders who can shape public opinion, not leaders who are born of public opinion.  

In my own movement, in Orthodoxy, we often bemoan the lack of Torah giants that we became so accustomed to earlier, up until the last decade. The great Rabbi Joseph B. Soloveitchik and Rabbi Moshe Feinstein, of blessed memory are gone and few if any command the respect they once did. Leadership is not then a ho-hum topic. It is a vital one, which addresses one of the greatest needs of our time. This lost generation craves and longs for true leadership. It behooves us to understand what leadership is all about so that we can best address this loss of confidence in leadership as we head into the next century.  

We need first of all to turn to our history and tradition and determine what was leadership and then ask ourselves how we can foster leadership and be better leaders today. 

Abravanel; Distinction, melech, shofet,

What form of leadership is advocated in the Torah? Throughout our early history, we basically had two forms of leadership, Melech and shofet, king and judge.

(figure 1)                                 King, Melech

                                                Judge, Shofet

The period of the judges, generally associated with the biblical book of Judges, could be said to have run from Moses to Samuel and the period of Kings began with Saul and David and continued up until the destruction of the Holy Temple in Jerusalem in 586 BCE. Examples of judges were Joshua, Deborah, and Samson, and we all know the famous Jewish kings, Solomon, Hezekiah, the lesser known but equally great Josiah.  

What’s the difference between a king and judge? Samuel and Joshua ruled as much as David did. What is the difference? Don Isaac Abravanel, who served as treasurer to King Alfonso V of Portugal and later served with King Ferdinand and Isabella of Castille, was certainly in a good position to comment on leadership.  He outlined 5 similarities and dissimilarities of a king and a judge.

(figure 2)  

Similarities

1.      Both are appointed by the court and the people

2.      Both judge cases and fight wars

3.      Both can punish arbitrarily- emergency powers

4.      Both can demand death for a traitor

5.      Both are continuous

       Differences:

1.      Only the king is anointed

2.      Only the judge is involved in normative judging

3.      Only the king is constrained by  laws vs. excess and must  carry  a Torah with him

4.      Only the king is afforded certain special honors

5.      Only the king has hereditary transmission

In short, there is no great advantage in kingship. Abravanel argues that we don’t need kings. He points to the city states in Florence, Venice and other places as better off with elected officers than those with kings. Israel, he argues, certainly does not require a king since a) G-d is king, and b) we don’t need someone to write just laws. We already have our laws from the Torah. A Jewish king could never be like a Pope, making new edicts and articulating new philosophies from time to time. One might argue that in Judaism, we don’t need leadership, but rather we encourage “followership,” obedience, and submission to G-d. One author suggests that what we have is what he dubbed a “nomocracy,” the rule of law, the Torah.

As an aside, although I am speaking of Judaism’s notion of a state run by G-d and by the Torah, I am not advocating a theocracy in 1999 in the State of Israel. Religious coercion is counterproductive. However, in an ideal state, in which the people, the masses follow the Torah, then Torah should be the ultimate authority.

Well, if Kings are not the ideal, at least according to the Abarbanel, then what is the idea of a judge, which somehow is a superior form of leadership? If one looks at the judges, from Joshua, a student of Moses, to Deborah and Samuel, the prophets, to Samson, the son of an inspired woman, judges arise out of a deep sense of spiritual awakening. A king is appointed, anointed, inherits his throne,  but a judge simply is moved by the spirit of the moment to go and save the Jewish people. It is a form of prophecy or inspiration.  

What then is ideal Jewish leadership? Inspired leadership. Leadership by those moved to action, by those who wish to make a difference, to change the way life is. We have to stop looking only to paid employees, functionaries, and start looking for leadership from the ranks, from lay people who are moved to make a difference, who are genuinely inspired. We shouldn’t seek inspiration from Jewish communal and religious leaders who are in it for the power, the glamour, the wrong reasons, and we have to seek inspiration from the truly inspired. And it won’t always be the people in the limelight.  Natan Sharansky was truly inspired and inspiring, sitting there in the Gulag.  Steven Speilberg has had his moments of true inspiration and was moved to help many causes. Recently, Leon Wieseltier, editor of the New Republic wrote a great book on the Kaddish. He is not a rabbi or a preacher. Esther Wachsman whose son was kidnapped by terrorists, moved the nation in her passionate plea for her son, and her call for peace after he was killed. You don’t have to be Prime Minister to make a difference.  

The first message of Jewish leadership is that it comes from those most inspired, with or without the title. Rav Soloveitchik pointed out that Moses did not possess the official title of king, or Cohen Gadol, High Priest but was simply known as Moshe Rabbeinu, Moses our teacher, and with that title he was able to change the world. Ironically, Rav Soloveitchik himself held no title as the head of Yeshiva University or chief rabbi or any other title, but nonetheless, as a simple teacher, he led thousands of Rabbis to become Jewish leaders.  Rabbi Moshe Feinstein was the virtually uncontested decisor of Jewish law between 1950 and 1980. He too was never appointed as such. His leadership arose naturally. It was inspired and spontaneous.  

If we’re looking for leadership only in official circles we make the first mistake about leadership.

Melech, navi, and cohen, Rabbis

Whether the king or the judge, the melech or the shofet stands at the center of Jewish leadership, he stands not alone. Together with him, leading the Jewish people side by side are always two partners, the Priest and the Prophet, the Cohen and the Navi. This  triangle of leadership goes back to the famous sibling threesome- Moshe the leader, Miriam the Prophetess, and Aharon the High Priest. Even Moses could not hold all three offices. Judges are sometimes prophets, as were Deborah and Samuel, but rarely was a king a prophet, or so much as communicated directly with G-d. Only in the failed case of Solomon did he directly hear the word of G-d. He could have used a good prophet to set him straight. He came to think he could understand everything on his own. He had no one to admonish him when he went off the path. Even David, holy as he was, was not a prophet. The ability of someone with as much power as the king to claim to speak in the authority of G-d is too much for one individual.  

We have then in Judaism a separation of powers. The king or judge is in charge of civic and military matters. The Cohen Gadol or High Priest is in charge of the Holy Temple, and the Navi, the prophet is in charge of communicating the will of G-d at the time. In this triangle or triumvirate of leadership, clearly the prophet stands at the top.

(figure 3)

                                                            Navi-Prophet  

                                    Melech-King                            Cohen-Priest

For instance, The prophet Natan may give deference to the king, as he does when he bows often to king David, but ultimately, the prophet chastises the king, and conveys G-d’s will, whether it pleases the king or not. 

In the Jewish system, no one is the ultimate authority, only G-d. Unlike Plato, in his great work, the Republic, who thought the king should be a philosopher king who learns and knows the true good, in Judaism it is the Torah, in other words G-d, who decides what is good and correct, not any mortal. Even the king must carry the Torah with him always, a reminder that he is still accountable, that it is ultimately a theocracy, in which G-d Himself is perceived as king, not just a theocracy in which the Rabbis or Priests are in charge, and not a monarchy.  

Many Americans are concerned what moral tenor our President is setting. In Judaism, we do not allow the leader to set the moral tone by himself. The prophet and priest are the voice of ethics, not necessarily the leader. If we want moral leadership we have to look for it in our Shuls, Temples, and churches. If we want moral leadership, we should turn to the Torah and its followers.  

Jewish leadership is diffuse. There are many models in the community. As in a family, it is through multiple influences that we learn and grow. If a person has a detached or abusive parent, it is often by the alternate role models that we learn to form our own sense of self. Thank G-d for grandparents, teachers, principles, uncles and aunts. It is among the various authority figures in our community that we become human, not by mimicking only the President, civil authority or even a parent.  

Navi: Cohen.

We spoke so far of a two-pronged religious leadership, headed by the Priest and the Prophet. What is the difference between the two? Achad Ha-am, alias Asher Ginsburgh- the contemporary and critic of Herzl, who advocated for cultural Zionism, wrote an essay entitled Priest and Prophet.

(figure 4)

                        Priest & Prophet                     Cohen & Navi       

In it he outlines the difference between these two religious models. The Prophet, the navi, he says, is the visionary. He hears G-d’s word and is uncompromisingly devoted to the cause of Justice. The Cohen, the priest, on the other hand, is the functionary. He just carries out what the prophets have laid out. He lives in the real world, meets real people, and must at times bring his lofty ideas down to earth.  

From this distinction we learn an important lesson. First, if at times we are not inspired within our own context of worship, don’t attribute the problem to the Torah or the prophet, it just may be that we are seeing the torah through the eyes of the functionary. We are not necessarily seeing Judaism through the eyes of the purists, the ideologues. They sit in the study halls, in the great seminaries, Yeshivas, and universities. The religion we are exposed to is primarily from the hands of the modern day Priests, the Rabbis. We cannot often experience the influence of the prophets, zealots, or visionaries.  

I disagree a bit with Achad Ha-am. A Cohen is not inferior to a prophet. He may not have any new visions, but at times, leadership does not have to innovate but to carry out, to execute. Leadership doesn’t have to be only for the most extreme positions. Humane, down to earth, even at times compromised leadership, even one like the leadership of Aharon, who felt so close to the people, is also leadership.  

2 Modes of Leadership: Come to the people or the people come to the leadership

Thus far we have spoken of leadership as if it were of one cloth. There are different Biblical models for leadership. In the Midrash known as the Mechilta, it states that there were three leaders who each represented different models of leadership.

(figure 5) 

Some demand the honor of the Father and the son. Some demand the honor of the son and not the Father. Some demand the honor of the Father and not the son. Jeremiah demanded the honor of the Father and the son. Elijah demanded the honor of the Father and not the honor of the son. Jonah demanded the honor of the son and not the Father.

Jeremiah was concerned with the welfare of G-d and the Jewish people. He preached hard to the people but adjures G-d to save His people. Elijah the prophet was concerned only with the honor of G-d. He would rather the Jews starve than to think that G-d is not vigilant against sinners. He demanded that G-d punish the nation. Jonah the prophet was only interested in the welfare of the Jewish people, not that of G-d. He would rather violate his charge from G-d than to offend the Jewish People.

One form of leadership is to advocate for the Jewish people against any would be accusers, even G-d. One form of leadership is to advocate for G-d to serve as representative of G-d on earth to demand honor for Him. The ideal leader such as Jeremiah finds that perfect balance, making demands both on G-d and the people.  

Steven Bayme, of the AJC says that the Synagogue leadership has to demand more of its congregants. Synagogue leaders who demand more get more. The leadership should not merely seek numbers and membership dues if we are to be a vital force in American life, he says, Synagogues must lower the limbo bar to challenge the masses to make the mark.  

Clearly we are today faced with a great challenge. The Jewish people in America and Israel have largely strayed from traditional living, sometimes even from their Jewish identity. We can lead by going down to meet the masses at their level or we can set high standards to live up to. Which is true leadership? Is it leading if no one is following? Is it leading if you really haven’t challenged the followers that much? I leave these questions for you to ponder. What do you think is the balance? 

Which of the above models is ideal- that in which the leader comes closer to the people or to G-d? Moses had found the perfect balance. A story is told in the mystical work of the Zohar that as a shepherd, Moses had tremendous empathy for the sheep. He saw a lamb was missing. He chased it down and found it drinking. He said, “Oh, you poor thing, you must be thirsty. Here, let me carry you back to the flock.” G-d said to him, you care so about the sheep, you should be the shepherd of the Jewish people.  

Moses went to the sheep where they were. But when he got there, he brought them back to where he was. But he didn’t just lead them. He carried them, gingerly, with compassion, with empathy and understanding.  (Even our own President has won the hearts of many American by being the ultimate empathizer.)

The role of the leader is to unite the people with G-d. The question is whether to bring the leadership to the people or the people to the leadership. The leader has to know the polls but if the leader is just following the polls then he is the follower not they. But the leader has to know when to listen empathetically to the masses and when to give more direction. This was the quandary faced by the republican leadership during the impeachment crisis which felt compelled to lead, but which had little following. This too is not leadership.

The Role of the People

But so far we have left the burden of leadership in the hands of the leaders. Truth be told, there is a role the people can play as well in bringing about successful and strong leadership. In the Torah we are told that when Amalek attacked, Moses and the Priest and Prophet stood on the mountain.

(figure 7)  

                        Priest-Aharon             Leader-Moses              Prophet-Hur

                                                            /\          l

                                                            l           l

                                                            l           \/

                                                            People

Moses encouraged the people by raising his hands to heaven. As Moses’ hands grew weary, Amalek was victorious. As he grew strong and raised his hands, Israel was victorious. Usually we interpret this passage to mean that Moses’ strength as a leader determined how the Israelites performed. One of the Hassidic Rebbes, the Gerer Rebbe, known as the Sefat Emet wrote that the opposite is true. Moshe grew weary when the people didn’t give him the moral backing for his leadership. When they seemed to have faith and courage, Moshe was moved to keep his hands up. The leaders of Israel can only elevate others with the power of the people behind them. The leader leads, but the people can help the leader be a leader.

Sefer Hasidim is a medieval work which gives a lot of advise about life and outlines an entire way of life. It states there that if a generation sees its leaders are bad, they must have had a good leader in the past whom they had mocked and abused. Congregations need to be supportive. The leader will usually rise to the occasion. People can affect the leadership as much as the leadership affects them. Leadership must be empowered by the masses but not driven by them. 

The Torah states in last week’s portion that “Do not follow the majority for bad purposes… we should follow the majority.” It is a paradox. We should follow the majority, but only when it is a majority for truth and righteousness. In short, it is not easy to be a follower or a leader. One has to know when to follow and when to lead. 

There are many great leaders, Rabbis, and teachers who didn’t get the support and publicity necessary to make them effective. There are mediocre people who do get support who can achieve great things. . Thank G-d, here in Memphis, congregations are very supportive of their leadership. One problem with many American Rabbis is that they are told what to do instead of being allowed to lead. Your turnout for each of the Memphis rabbis shows your leadership, that you are doing your part to make your leaders be and feel like leaders. Your coming here makes a statement that you wish to be taught and led by your Rabbis. For this we applaud you.  

How leader deals with people

But, having outlined the responsibility of the masses toward the leadership, this does not absolve the leadership of their responsibilities if and when the flock does not respond so generously. Rashi, (Num. 27, 19) the primary commentator on most of the Torah, writes, that Moses said to Joshua, know, they, the Israelites, are bothersome and  stubborn. On these conditions accept the leadership. 

Leadership is being able to deal with people as they are, not in an ivory tower. Leadership is being able to be not just the prophet but the priest, the one who ministers to the people.  

Popular leadership

We have spoken of kings, of G-d as the true Jewish king. Someone might walk away from here feeling that Judaism was anti democratic, in support of a country led by an elite rule.  Nothing could be farther from the truth.

(figure 8)

All of Israel were fitting to have led eaten off the altar, except that they had sinned with the Golden Calf.

The midrash known as the Mechilta states that when the Torah writes that we should be a Mamlechet cohanim, a priestly nation, that re-u-yin kol yisrael le-echol min ha-kadashim, that in an ideal world, every Jew was worthy of offering the offerings on the altar, and consuming the sacrifices like a Priest.  Every Jew could be a Cohen, a priest. In one Biblical episode Joshua was concerned that some unauthorized people became prophets, to which Moses responds,

“Let it be that all of G-d’s people were  prophets.”  

As Maimonides writes, everyone can be as great as Moses.  

The whole idea of the Shofet, the judge leader is that he arises from the masses, from the simple folk, people such as Samson’s parents who couldn’t believe they actually saw an angel, or that G-d spoke to them. Or, as the Talmud states in Berachot (55a), anyone appointed to lead the community must get approval of community. Even the kings only came to power through popular demand.  

In short, leadership is not about leaders. It is the role of every individual to play a role in not only helping to form sound majorities and to support the leadership, but to be a leader. Ideally, leadership should come from every sector. Deborah’s battle, for instance, was won by her military strategy, the able assistance of her chief general, Barak, and by a stay at home mom named Yael who slew the evil enemy general with her bare hands. We can all be prophets, priests, and even warriors.  

How to be a leader

Leadership by example, Leadership in values, Leadership in family

When we think of leadership, we often think of being at a podium in front of several hundred people. It ain’t necessarily so. Leadership can also be simply setting the right example. When Moses wished to part the seas, he commanded the Jews to go forward. They didn’t require any leadership as we usually define it. Moses was the leader, and he said they should go forth. The problem was that no one wanted to take the first step. According to the midrash, only Nachshon ben Aminadav actually took those first steps. From there it was easy for everyone to follow.  

Leadership is going to minyan, attending services on Shabbat or weekdays even when it’s not so popular, buying a lulav or building a succah for Succos when not too many of one’s friends have one. Leadership is setting a standard for what an acceptable gift to a given charity is. Leadership is when Esther called for a three day fast and promised that vegam ani venaarotai atzum ken, that she too, the Princess herself would join in the fasting and prayer.  

Leadership is not accepting every value of modern culture as a given, but picking and choosing. It’s very hard to be a leader in forging values, because from the youngest age we learn to be socialized into the societal norms. Whatever society does must be ok. Society dictates how to sit, how to eat, how speak and how to eat. It’s hard to be a leader and not just a follower when it comes to deciding what is important for our children, what kinds of education, what kind of exposures and entertainment is for them. In the terms of Achad HaAm, it’s hard to be a prophet, and much easier to be a priest, harder to formulate values and easier to follow.  

Now more than ever we have trouble being leaders even in our own homes. King David was a very permissive parent. The book of Kings tells us (ch. 1) that  velo atzavo aviv miyamav (velo kiha bahem.. Eli HaCohen never chastised his son), David never wished to make his son unhappy. We feel so guilty about our meager “quality time” with our children that we sometimes have trouble disciplining them, making them sad, showing leadership, showing them the way they should act. A comedian came to town recently and said that sometimes you have a big CEO of a company and he comes home to his magnificent home, and he is so scared to ruin the new furniture, that he can’t even find a place to have a cup of coffee in his own house. We sometimes show leadership everywhere in our lives except where it is most needed, at home. How often do we hear, “Well, I’ll let the children decide. I don’t want to decide for them.” Yes, we say, good leadership doesn’t just command but it guides and cajoles, but leaders we must be, lead we must, especially if it concerns the future of our own legacy, the ones we love most, the future of our people.  

Conclusion

We began by referring to our crisis of leadership in this country. Don’t be concerned. We must look to many models in our community for leadership, whether at home or at our synagogues. We have to take responsibility and be our own leaders in our families and our community. We have to seek to cultivate and support leadership from every sector of society. We never know where leadership can come from.  In Israel they must seek a leader who understands the polls and is responsive to them,  but is not led by them. Most importantly, I have offered you a challenge to consider how to best lead those millions of American Jews who have left the fray to come back. How can we go down to the depths of secularity to get them without allowing them to lead us as we try to lead them? 

Most of all, I ask that no one squelch their leadership qualities in deference to the official leaders of the community. We need all the creative, inspired, energetic leadership we can get. The current leadership is just here to foster and cultivate those forces to be best used for our entire community.  I conclude with the parting words of King David to his son Solomon, ve-hazakta ve-hayita le-ish, be strong and be someone, be a leader.   

Bibliography

Abravanel on Introduction to the book of Judges

Achad HaAm on “Priest and Prophet”

Ari Zivotofsky in Judaism, summer 1994