Post by Rabbi Neil on Jan 26, 2018 16:57:38 GMT
Being a Rabbi gives a person a unique perspective on a number of things. Of course, it provides a unique perspective on life, because a Rabbi gets to share important life events with many people – baby blessings, Bar or Bat Mitzvah, Marriage, possibly divorce, and death, being present at the highs and lows of people’s lives. Being a Rabbi also adds interesting extra responsibilities – decisions of Jewish law, sometimes life-changing decisions for someone else, being one of them. Being a Rabbi gives a person an interesting perspective on personal boundaries, how some people like to cross them, and how the Rabbi has to sometimes defend them vigorously for the sake of themself or their family. But most profound for me today is the insight that being a Rabbi gives on this week’s sidrah, and because it’s a unique and personal experience, I’ll share it with you.
Based on my own experience of being a Rabbi for nearly fifteen years, I think the entire leadership system set up in the Torah is essentially flawed, and that copying it could
potentially lead to disaster. In fact, I think it’s a system that is set up in such a manner that the leader is always bound to fail. Let me explain why.
Moses is God’s emissary. If God wants to talk to the people, God normally talks to Moses and then Moses talks to the people. As the religious leader, Moses is the people’s conduit to God. I think that’s mistake number one. While it may be possible that the leadership system as described in the Torah was created to justify a religious monopoly by certain priests as the Torah was written down, I think there’s a more significant problem to the system than its possible misuse by power-hungry priests, which is something we certainly see later on in the Bible. I think that using a person as direct access to God is profoundly flawed, because I think we all have access. It reminds me of the story of the traveller who goes to the Pope, and if you’ve heard it before, then I hope you’ll forgive hearing it again. The God-hungry traveller seeks an audience with the Pope, and finally is lucky enough to get to see him. He sits in the Vatican talking to the Pope and notices on his desk a black ‘phone and a red ‘phone. The Pope explains that the black ‘phone is for normal conversations, and the red ‘phone is for talking to God. The man is amazed, and asks if he can use the red ‘phone. The Pope says it’s possible, but it will cost the man the equivalent of $1000 per minute. The temptation to talk to God is too much, so he picks up the red ‘phone and holds the most amazing conversation of his life. Five minutes later he hangs up, radiant, and pays the Pope the equivalent of $5000. He travels on. Eventually, his travels take him to Israel, where he seeks an audience with the Chief Rabbi. On the Chief Rabbi’s desk, there too is a black ‘phone and a red ‘phone. “That’s amazing,” says the man, “The Pope has a black ‘phone and a red ‘phone.” “Ah yes,” says the Chief Rabbi, “the black ‘phone is for normal everyday conversations and the red ‘phone is for talking to God.” He can’t resist. He picks up the ‘phone, talks to God for five minutes, and again it’s an amazing call. He goes for his wallet and asks “How much do I owe?” “At ten cents per minute, that will be fifty cents.” “Fifty cents?!?!?” cries the man, “The Pope in Rome charged me $5000!” “Ah yes,” said the Chief Rabbi, “but here in Jerusalem it’s a local call!”
The story may be amusing, but only because it is nonsensical. The idea that God can be accessed easier through one place, or through one person, doesn’t make sense to our modern minds, so the notion of Moses, or even of a Rabbi, having a closer connection to God seems difficult. True, a Rabbi may have discussed God and may have tried more often to encounter God in their life than some members, but that doesn’t mean they actually have a stronger connection to God.
The second problem inherent in the system set up in the Torah can be found when the people come to Moses complaining that they can’t find water. A good leader should help them find the water, then ask them to dig it for themselves – that is, giving them some assistance but empowering them to put in the effort and to make the breakthrough under their own power. But Moses gets frustrated, and as a Rabbi I can see why – because he doesn’t delegate. He goes to God, asks how to deal with it, and then he strikes the rock and gives the people everything they want. I’m not saying that a religious leader shouldn’t help give the community what they want, but they shouldn’t give it to them on tap either. It shouldn’t be a case of striking a rock, drawing water, and then the people will be happy, because what he’s done is set up a system whereby whenever they need anything, they’ll come straight to him, and expect him to deliver. Coming to him is one thing, expecting instant results is another. But because Moses delivers, he can be sure that the people will expect the same again at a later date. In fact, later on in Torah exactly the same thing happens – they come back and expect the same miracle and Moses is so angry that he goes overboard and strikes the rock not once but twice. But even here, at the first instance, we see the start of Moses’ anger when he asks the people “Why do you quarrel with me?” which in essence means “Why aren’t you digging for water?” You would hope that so many people stuck in the desert together with no water would start digging for themselves. Perhaps they might ask Moses where he thinks the best well might be found, while essentially the work would come from them. But that’s not the case here. Moses doesn’t help the people help themselves. If you’ll pardon the pun, he doesn’t tap into the community’s resources and say, “I’ll teach a group of people here how to draw water (which is particularly powerful as a metaphor for Rabbinics here because water often represents Torah). Then you don’t need to come to me every time for education, you can educate yourselves.” That doesn’t mean he’s abandoning the people, it doesn’t mean he’s not guiding them firmly, but he doesn’t need to hold their hand to the water every single time. In a Rabbinic model, I believe the Rabbi should help a congregation search out Jewish knowledge, not just have it poured out in front of them.
Finally, when Amalek comes out to fight the Israelites in this week’s sidrah we see the third mistake – the people get their strength from the strength of their leader who is held up high in front of them. The problem is this – not only is it dangerous to place leaders on pedestals, but while the people are fighting the Amalekites, they assume that Moses can carry the whole community by his own strength alone. I remember when I was a child at Religion School if we misbehaved we had to get “the Moses treatment” – we would be made to stand up in front of the class with arms held out horizontally, like this! I seem to remember being punished a lot like that. When the teacher decided we had had enough, we would sit back down. And it was draining. Being the leader of a community can be draining if the leadership model is as it’s set up in the Torah. Moses holds his hands up by himself. For a while his strength is evident and the community prevails. But after a while the strength of an unsupported leader starts to fade, and at that point the community fades. But in some sense, this is Moses’ fault. He is the leader who tries to go it alone – he is the one who won’t delegate, who isn’t able to empower the congregation to take on some of the work themselves. Eventually, quite naturally, he gets tired. It’s only because Aaron and Hur create supports that Moses is able to continue lifting the community. But it shouldn’t have taken the exhaustion of Moses before members of the community stepped in to give him support.
And as a Rabbi that speaks very deeply to me. Most Rabbis, regardless of the size of the community, will, if they’re allowed to, use up their very last ounce of strength to take their community further - that’s the nature and the passion of most rabbis. It’s the community’s responsibility not to let them use up that strength. How? By acting as the rocks that keeps the Rabbi’s arms high. It is a Rabbi’s duty not to do what Moses does by acting alone, but to delegate, to tell the community that if it wants to continue as a religious community, it can’t rely on one leader for all the answers and all the strength, but has to be guided by that leader to work for the communal good. If there are supports for the religious leader, the religious community prevails. If not, it fails.
This is why our Kulanu process is so exciting to me as a Rabbi. Kulanu, for those who may be visiting, is our community development process that started a couple of years ago. This weekend at the Board Retreat, Board members will be prioritizing the community’s response to the feedback, a response that will set in motion at least three years of community development. I am very excited about the possibilities of where this will take us, although the practical implementation, and the ultimate success of Kulanu, depends on the members of this community. If members step forward to get involved, Kulanu and our community will be a resounding success. And I expect it will because there’s so much there that’s exciting. For example, we’ll be creating a Temple video, which is a fairly standard thing for most communities nowadays. We’ll be creating a new committee for social events to bring members together on non-religious occasions. We’ll be setting up a new pastoral group called Chaverim so that members can support each other more through times of crisis. We’ll be offering spiritual direction for members who want help with their spiritual journey. We’ll be expanding education on topics like the rest of the Bible, Reform Judaism, and Rabbinic literature. We’ll be restarting Tot Shabbat services and actively working on ways to bring young families into the community more often. In fact, there are 75 paths being taken forward, and we will need the help of the members of the community to ensure success.
Religion of the past was centered around individuals. Religion of the future has to be centered around community. The strength of religion from the past came from passionate leaders, the strength of religion in the future has to come from passionate members. Therefore, may God give us all the strength to build and may God inspire us all to work towards the good of the community as soon as possible, and let us say, Amen.