|
The Voice of Torah: Ki Tisa: The Responsibility of Jewish Leadership |
 |
 |
|
Written by Rabbi Chaim Goldberger
|
 Rashi tells us that Moshe's counting of the Children of Israel (which took place after the sin of the golden calf) is to be seen as an act of love, much like a sheep owner might count his flock after it was hit by a plague, so he would
know how many of his beloved sheep had been lost. But these situations are not really comparable! In order to assess his loss, wouldn't the sheep owner have had to know how many sheep he had before the plague? Yet Rashi goes on to show us that prior to this count there was no previous census, so just counting the Israelites now would not reveal how many were lost. The parable is not accurate!
Indeed, how does Rashi even know this counting was out of love. Maybe it was just for accounting purposes?
The parable fails for another reason as well. The sheep are innocent -- they did not cause the plague that struck them. Here, the Israelites were stricken because of their own sin with the golden calf. How does Rashi use such an imprecise parable?
One final question. After God decided He would destroy the Children of Israel after the sin of the golden calf, Moshe appealed and God "changed" His plan. All of Moshe's arguments were certainly ones He already knew. What in Moshe's arguments made God change His plan?
In Parshat Shemot, we learned that along Moshe's journey from Midian to Egypt, he stayed with his family at an inn. While he was there, God sought to kill him. Why? Because Moshe failed, says Rashi, to circumcise his son Eliezer. According to the Talmud, Moshe was caught between his obligations to God (get back to Egypt immediately and redeem the people) and his obligation to his son (circumcise the infant and wait until his wound heals). His decision to favor his obligation to God was the wrong decision, and God wanted to kill him for it. The message seems to be: If you bring someone into the world, not only do you bear responsibility for him, but your "bein adam la'chaveiro" responsibilities to him even outweigh your "bein adam la'makom" responsibilities to God.
In the incident with the golden calf, the instigators of the transgression were the Eirev Rav -- the mixed multitude of Egyptians who Moshe had accepted into the departing population. According to the lesson of Parshat Shemot, since Moshe was the one who brought these people into the world of the Shechina, Moshe's highest responsibility is to make sure he does not neglect the Eirev Rav and their needs. By failing to return to camp on the day they expected him back, Moshe was neglecting a key need of the Eirev Rav -- their need for his presence.
And so, just as He did at the inn, God holds Moshe liable for the resulting consequences.
The parable is perfectly precise. A good shepherd should know how many sheep are missing even WITHOUT a prior census. How? By knowing every sheep personally. A leader of a flock must have such an intimate and personal knowledge of his charges that he would know HOW MANY are missing by realizing WHO was missing. And by knowing a group of followers that well, the leader will certainly know what their needs are. What Rashi is telling us is that God is trying to impress upon Moshe just how far his responsibility to his people goes. Had Moshe been doing his job as God envisioned it, he would have known the depth of the Eirav Rav's insecurity, he would have returned when they needed to have him back, they would not have agitated for an alternative spiritual figure, the sin of the golden calf would not have taken place, and the plague would have been avoided.
The plague, says the parable, is not the fault of the flock. It is the fault of the shepherd. The blame for the golden calf is being assigned to Moshe.
And so, when Moshe takes upon himself the responsibility of praying for them, and he invokes the memory of the Patriarchs and the promises made to their children, God relents -- not because Moshe has advanced any innovative arguments but because Moshe was now displaying the attitude God had been trying to develop in him all along -- the notion that a Jewish leader is required to be simultaneously intimate with God and intimate with the people, each and every one. It is for this reason that he must count them with shekalim, not by a head count. Resist the idea of turning people into numbers and you will remain more likely to see them as individuals. The more you relate to your flock as individuals, the more likely they will stay away from sin and thus from future plagues.
This is the awesome responsibility of Jewish leadership
 |
Subscribe to this comment's feed
Subscribe
