Click HERE to return to main site

The Choosing of the Leaders

       The word "harmful” in Hebrew is open to multiple interpretations; it might mean "to wear away;" or it can imply confusion, foolishness or debasement. All of those meanings are relevant here-- if Moses persists as the sole leader, he will himself be worn down, and the people, lacking leadership and instruction, will descend to base behavior, adopting foolish practices based on their incorrect understanding. The giving of the Torah would both mitigate and aggravate the crisis. On one hand, putting the law in the hands of the nation creates a community that is knowledgeable and empowered. And yet, at the same time, each new law would raise even more opportunities for disagreement and opportunities for interpretation. The creation of an infrastructure of leadership is therefore a necessary prerequisite for the giving of the Torah. Yitro suggests that almost 15 percent of the eligible population be deputized, whether as leaders of tens, fifties, hundreds or thousands. The selection process is bound to be difficult, and Yitro offers detailed guidelines, which are still relevant for us today. He says (Exodus 18: 21), "You should choose mikol ha'am - from among all the people anshei hayil - men of valor yir'ei Elohim - God-fearers, anshei emet - men of truth v'sonei betza - haters of ill-gotten gain."

       Each of these criteria is vital not only for the tribal chieftains of Moses' day, but also for the leadership of our own communities. First, Yitro suggests that leadership be drawn from amongst all the people. Leadership is not to be determined by one's parents or social station, but by one's own abilities. Of course, we are fortunate to live in a generation which has taken this principle one step further and recognizes the leadership capabilities of both men and women. The next criterion, anshei hayil (men of valor), is translated by many commentators, including Rashi, to mean wealth, rather than the valor in battle that is sometimes associated with the word hayil. This meaning of the word is reflected in the last chapter of Proverbs (31:10-31), which describes an eshet hayil , a phrase usually translated as "a woman of valor."

       A surprising number of the meritorious attributes ascribed to her are financial in nature, spinning, weaving, and selling the resultant textiles, skill in trade and in bringing bread from afar. Yitro would say that a leader must have the financial security to, at the very least, be immune to financial temptation or even more than that, the resources to put his money where his mouth is. Yirei Elohim (God-fearers) evokes those who have a rich theological sensitivity and can exercise spiritual leadership--in our own day, the rabbis, cantors, educators and born agains who ideally serve as models of piety. With the phrase anshei emet (men of truth), Yitro was speaking, on the most basic level, of those who were known for their honesty. People who you could honestly trust with everything you had and know it was safe with them.

        The last category, sonei betza (haters of ill-gotten gain), is perhaps the most basic. It is more than just a hatred of graft or corruption. Rather, it reflects a commitment to social justice, and the ability to appreciate moral distinctions, which might not be discernable from the letter of the law. Each leader would have to be a spiritual leader, a sage, a righteous person and wealthy enough that he could not be swayed by financial pressure and could even engage in acts of philanthropy. This is a difficult standard to apply: the Talmud (Gittin 59a) teaches that from Moses' day to the end of the Talmudic era, there were but three leaders who combined "greatness and Torah in one personage."

        Instead, people with different strengths must join together to create a vital community. It is not easy to harmonize these different interests. Religious and intellectual truth, social justice and financial responsibility each proclaim their own absolute values, and often a community or organization will value one model over the others, sometimes with unfortunate results. The giving of the Torah was a defining moment in the formation of the Hebrew people, but it could not take place until the nation was ready to receive it. It is only when we work together and acknowledge the gifts that others bring to the joint effort that we, like our ancestors at Sinai, become worthy of the gifts of Torah.