What Is A Leader?
In this week’s parsha, Pinchas, Moses asks God to appoint his successor. This is the first transfer of leadership, and it is momentous. Moses offers his descriptors of the individual
יִפְקֹ֣ד יְהֹוָ֔ה אֱלֹהֵ֥י הָרוּחֹ֖ת לְכׇל־בָּשָׂ֑ר אִ֖ישׁ עַל־הָעֵדָֽה׃ “Let יהוה, Source of the breath of all flesh, appoint someone over the community
אֲשֶׁר־יֵצֵ֣א לִפְנֵיהֶ֗ם וַאֲשֶׁ֤ר יָבֹא֙ לִפְנֵיהֶ֔ם וַאֲשֶׁ֥ר יוֹצִיאֵ֖ם וַאֲשֶׁ֣ר יְבִיאֵ֑ם וְלֹ֤א תִהְיֶה֙ עֲדַ֣ת יְהֹוָ֔ה כַּצֹּ֕אן אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֵין־לָהֶ֖ם רֹעֶֽה׃ who shall go out before them and come in before them, and who shall take them out and bring them in so that יהוה’s community may not be like sheep that have no shepherd.”
Moses requires that the new leader:
Go out before Bnei Yisrael and come in before them
Take them out and bring them in
Many commentators discuss what exactly that means. Rashi’s understanding is perhaps the best known.
אשר יצא לפניהם ONE WHO MAY GO BEFORE THEM — not as is the way of the kings of the nations who sit at home and send their armies to battle, but as “I” have done — I who fought against Sihon and against Og, as it is said, (Numbers 21:34) “Do not fear him: “[for I have delivered him into thy hand … and thou shall do to him as thou didst unto Sihon, etc.]” and as is the way that Joshua followed, as it is said, (Joshua 5:3) “And Joshua went to him and said, Art thou for us [or for our adversaries]”. And so, too, in the case of David, it says, (I Samuel 18:16) “For he went out and came in before them” — went out at their head, and came in at their head (Sifrei Bamidbar 139:2).
ואשר יוציאם AND WHO WILL LEAD THEM OUT, safely through his merits,
ואשר יביאם AND WHO WILL BRING THEM IN, safely through his merits (Siphre). Another explanation: ואשר יביאם AND WHO WILL BRING THEM IN — I ask that You should not do to him, as You have done to me' for I may not bring them into the Land. (cf. Yalkut Shimoni on Torah 776).
The leader should be willing to risk himself, endanger himself and be a role model to the nation. He should have just as much to lose as the rest of them. He should be at the head of the people, bringing them out to battle, then bringing them safely home again.
In short, he should be brave and courageous.
Additionally, Moses states that he does not want Bnei Yisrael to be “like sheep without a shepherd.” This immediately evokes the death of King Ahab. Ahab was struck by an arrow, but he remained in his chariot, standing upright while he bled out, as long as humanly possible. He did this because he knew that as long as he remained steadfast at the helm, the nation would not be flustered and dismayed.
In a prophecy prior to Ahab’s ill-fated foray into battle, the prophet Michaihu predicted his defeat.
וַיֹּ֗אמֶר רָאִ֤יתִי אֶת־כׇּל־יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ נְפֹצִ֣ים אֶל־הֶהָרִ֔ים כַּצֹּ֕אן אֲשֶׁ֥ר אֵין־לָהֶ֖ם רֹעֶ֑ה וַיֹּ֤אמֶר יְהֹוָה֙ לֹֽא־אֲדֹנִ֣ים לָאֵ֔לֶּה יָשׁ֥וּבוּ אִישׁ־לְבֵית֖וֹ בְּשָׁלֽוֹם׃ Then he said, “I saw all Israel scattered over the hills like sheep without a shepherd; and the LORD said, ‘These have no master; let everyone return to his home in safety.’”
So part of a leader’s responsibility is to be steadfast and stay the course. Even at cost to themselves. At cost to their own life. They are meant to remain the shepherd. (Think of Jon Snow, and of the oath of all who serve in the Night’s Watch. You are there to the end. The bitter end.)
But this expression does not only occur in a military context. It also occurs in Ezekiel 34:1-6.
בֶּן־אָדָ֕ם הִנָּבֵ֖א עַל־רוֹעֵ֣י יִשְׂרָאֵ֑ל הִנָּבֵ֣א וְאָמַרְתָּ֩ אֲלֵיהֶ֨ם לָרֹעִ֜ים כֹּ֥ה אָמַ֣ר ׀ אֲדֹנָ֣י יֱהֹוִ֗ה ה֤וֹי רֹעֵֽי־יִשְׂרָאֵל֙ אֲשֶׁ֤ר הָיוּ֙ רֹעִ֣ים אוֹתָ֔ם הֲל֣וֹא הַצֹּ֔אן יִרְע֖וּ הָרֹעִֽים׃ O mortal, prophesy against the shepherds of Israel. Prophesy, and say to them:
To the shepherds: Thus said the Lord GOD: Ah, you shepherds of Israel, who have been tending yourselves! Is it not the flock that the shepherds ought to tend?אֶת־הַחֵ֤לֶב תֹּאכֵ֙לוּ֙ וְאֶת־הַצֶּ֣מֶר תִּלְבָּ֔שׁוּ הַבְּרִיאָ֖ה תִּזְבָּ֑חוּ הַצֹּ֖אן לֹ֥א תִרְעֽוּ׃ You partake of the fat, you clothe yourselves with the wool, and you slaughter the fatlings; but you do not tend the flock.
אֶֽת־הַנַּחְלוֹת֩ לֹ֨א חִזַּקְתֶּ֜ם וְאֶת־הַחוֹלָ֣ה לֹֽא־רִפֵּאתֶ֗ם וְלַנִּשְׁבֶּ֙רֶת֙ לֹ֣א חֲבַשְׁתֶּ֔ם וְאֶת־הַנִּדַּ֙חַת֙ לֹ֣א הֲשֵׁבֹתֶ֔ם וְאֶת־הָאֹבֶ֖דֶת לֹ֣א בִקַּשְׁתֶּ֑ם וּבְחׇזְקָ֛ה רְדִיתֶ֥ם אֹתָ֖ם וּבְפָֽרֶךְ׃ You have not sustained the weak, healed the sick, or bandaged the injured; you have not brought back the strayed, or looked for the lost; but you have driven them with harsh rigor,
וַתְּפוּצֶ֖ינָה מִבְּלִ֣י רֹעֶ֑ה וַתִּהְיֶ֧ינָה לְאׇכְלָ֛ה לְכׇל־חַיַּ֥ת הַשָּׂדֶ֖ה וַתְּפוּצֶֽינָה׃ and they have been scattered for want of anyone to tend them; scattered, they have become prey for every wild beast.
יִשְׁגּ֤וּ צֹאנִי֙ בְּכׇל־הֶ֣הָרִ֔ים וְעַ֖ל כׇּל־גִּבְעָ֣ה רָמָ֑ה וְעַ֨ל כׇּל־פְּנֵ֤י הָאָ֙רֶץ֙ נָפֹ֣צוּ צֹאנִ֔י וְאֵ֥ין דּוֹרֵ֖שׁ וְאֵ֥ין מְבַקֵּֽשׁ׃ My sheep stray through all the mountains and over every lofty hill; My flock is scattered all over the face of the earth, with none to take thought of them and none to seek them.
Here, being the shepherd means healing the sick, bandaging the injured, bringing back those who stray, looking for the lost and speaking to people with kind words.
So there is a military responsibility and a spiritual responsibility. The sum of what we have read describes a leader who is brave, willing to lead by example. It describes a man who is steadfast, willing to stay the course even when it means he will lose his life. It also speaks to a man who is caring and compassionate, viewing the people as his responsibility, and seeing it as his job to tend to his flock. Materialism should not sway him. Instead, he should be focused on improving the lives of his people.
This is the leader Moses wants.
And God gives this to him. God says
וַיֹּ֨אמֶר יְהֹוָ֜ה אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֗ה קַח־לְךָ֙ אֶת־יְהוֹשֻׁ֣עַ בִּן־נ֔וּן אִ֖ישׁ אֲשֶׁר־ר֣וּחַ בּ֑וֹ וְסָמַכְתָּ֥ אֶת־יָדְךָ֖ עָלָֽיו׃ And יהוה answered Moses, “Single out Joshua son of Nun, a man of spirit, and lay your hand upon him.
What does it mean to be a man of spirit?
Here, too, there are many different interpretations. Rashi says that he needs to be able to “deal with the character of each one/ שֶׁיּוּכַל לַהֲלֹךְ כְּנֶגֶד רוּחוֹ שֶׁל כָּל אֶחָד וְאֶחָד.” This suggests he needs to be persuasive, or a team player, or able to continue even in the face of disapproval from others.
This is made more explicit by Rabbeinu Bachya, who says “איש אשר רוח בו. כתרגומו. ודרשו רז"ל שיוכל להלוך כנגד רוחו של כל אחד./ “a man in whom there is spirit.” A reference to Holy Spirit. Our sages in Sifri Pinchas 140 understand this to mean that he has the emotional fortitude to brave all opposition.”
This is a man who does not seek approval from others. He can weather their dissent and complaints.
Putting it all together, here is a list of qualities needed for Moses’ successor:
Brave
Steadfast
Risk-taker (willing to lead by example, risk his life taking the people to battle- note this is not the same as impulsive, as these can be calculated risks)
Other-focused (shepherd to the flock, usually a hallmark of servant leadership)
Can weather opposition and disapproval (emotional fortitude)
Yesterday I read the book Talent: How to Identify Energizers, Creatives, and Winners Around the World by Tyler Cowen and Daniel Gross. I was struck, but not surprised, by how many of the qualities inherent in our ancient text are exactly what they seek when they look for outsized talent in individuals who will assume positions of leadership.
Since they are largely looking for people who will found start-ups and otherwise change the world, bravery and risk-taking are inherent to the job. You don’t launch a start-up if you aren’t willing to take risks, and bravery is involved as well since often you are launching without a safety net if your venture fails.
Here are some excerpts regarding the other qualities. In this first one, they are referencing the Five Factor personality theory.
Commonly, the very top venture capitalists, when seeking a hitherto undiscovered founder, will look for high disagreeableness and also high openness. The disagreeableness will motivate the individual to charge full steam ahead with a new idea, even when others are not convinced. The openness will make that person more of an innovator and more willing to accept feedback when needed.
-page 101
What they call disagreeableness is similar to emotional fortitude/ ability to weather opposition and disapproval. Joshua will need to be able to do what is required even if the nation is not interested or on his side; this is similar to the founder who will proceed even if not everyone on his team is convinced.
Then there’s stamina, which appears similar to what I refer to as being steadfast.
We find it useful to contrast the concepts of conscientiousness, grit, and what we call stamina. We see stamina as one of the great underrated concepts for talent search, especially when you are looking for top performers and leaders and major achievers.
On stamina, economist Robin Hanson wrote: “It wasn’t until my mid-30s that I finally got to see some very successful people up close for long enough to notice a strong pattern: the most successful have a lot more energy and stamina than do others…I think this helps explain many cases of ‘why didn’t this brilliant young prodigy succeed?’ Often they didn’t have the stamina, or the will, to apply it. I’ve known many such people.”
Robin also points out that many high-status professions, such as medicine, law and academia, put younger performers through some pretty brutal stamina tests in the early years of their career. In essence, they are testing to see who has the requisite stamina for subsequent achievement. (You might feel those tests are wasteful in some way, but still, those tests seem to survive in some very competitive settings.)
I think King Ahab choosing to stay strong and stand in his chariot while bleeding out is exactly demonstrative of this kind of stamina. There is a steadfastness and tenacity in this that is admirable, and this is what Moses wants for his successor- someone who will lead the people no matter the cost, refusing to abandon them, and thus won’t allow them to become sheep without a shepherd.
Servant leadership did not appear in this book. This is unsurprising because I do not think corporate America has done a very good job of modeling servant leadership, let alone respecting it. However, other-focused leadership does appear in many other books that talk about building a warm, welcoming and supportive culture (such as Bob Iger’s The Ride of a Lifetime or Ed Catmull’s Creativity, Inc. They both explain that your focus needs to be on your employees and helping them grow (in the context of Moses and Joshua, this would involve a focus as to what is actually good for the nation and its welfare), not merely padding your pockets.
The concept of semicha, laying hands in order to transfer leadership, is also essential to understanding what Joshua’s role entails. The Kli Yakar has an incredible explanation as to what it means.
וסמכת את ידך עליו. ידך אחת במשמע, ובמעשה כתיב ויסמוך את ידיו עליו פירש רש"י יותר ממה שנצטוה כו', ולפי דבריו קשה איך עבר משה בבל תוסיף, ומצינו עוד סמיכה כזו שנאמר (ויקרא א ד) וסמך ידו על ראש העולה. ידו אחת במשמע ובמעשה כתיב (שם טז כא) וסמך אהרן את שתי ידיו על ראש השעיר ולמעלה פר' ויקרא פרשנו שהכל ענין אחד כי מנהיגי העם צריכין לקבל עליהם על מנת שיהיו כפרה ואשם על כל העם כמ"ש (דברים א יג) ואשימם בראשיכם. ולמדו רז"ל מכאן (דב"ר א ט) שאשמת העם תלויה במנהיגיהם, וכמו שסמיכת יד על הקרבן היינו ליתן שמץ ודופי של הסומך על הנסמך והוא הקרבן, כך סמיכות יד זו ליתן שמץ ודופי של כל ישראל על מנהיגיהם לאמר שאשמת העם תלוי בהם, והנה בסתם קרבן של החוטא יש ב' מיני סמיכה כי החוטא במעשה חטאו כפול כי אין מעשה בלא מחשבה הקודמת למעשה, ע"כ נאמר אצל שעיר המשתלח וסמך אהרן את שתי ידיו כי הוא בא לכפר על חטא המעשה וההרהור, אבל העולה באה על חטא ההרהור לבד ע"כ נאמר וסמך ידו על ראש העולה ידו אחת במשמע.
[This is an incomplete paraphrase from Sefaria.]
And lay your hand on him. The leaders of the nation need to accept upon themselves to be an atonement and a guilt-offering for the entire people, as it says (Devorim 1:13): “And I will designate them (ואשימם) your leaders.” The Sages derived from here that the guilt (אשמה) of the nation is hung on their leaders. Laying one’s hand on an offering is intended to place the disgrace and blemish of the one who is laying his hands unto the offering. In the same way, the laying of hands on a leader is to place the disgrace and blemish of the entire people of Israel unto their leaders, for the nation’s guilt is hung on their leaders.
The last quality a leader needs is a sense of responsibility.
The leader must and should feel responsible for his people, including for their choices. The leader literally carries the burden of their guilt upon himself. A leader is meant to inspire his people to do and choose better morally, but also he is meant to personally serve as a source of atonement for them. Thus, rather than the constant queue and vying for leadership that we see nowadays (literally every student and college essay revolves around supposed “leadership”), leadership is actually a very scary thing. Because to be a leader is to bear a tremendous burden. You are responsible. You are responsible for the people, and their welfare, for their choices and decisions. You can’t waive that responsibility. You can’t abdicate. When God appoints you, when you are chosen, it’s an honor, but it’s also incredibly difficult.
I think leadership of this kind is very rare.
But last year, I read an obituary of Aaron Feuerstein, also known as The Mensch of Malden Mills, and thought to myself- that’s a leader.
Here’s the part that spoke to me.
Mr. Feuerstein’s company, Malden Mills, was by the mid-1990s among the last large textile companies in Massachusetts, which had seen its manufacturing employment numbers crater from 225,000 in the 1980s to about 25,000 a decade later.
Most other companies, faced with competition from lower-wage states and cheap imports, had either closed or moved production out of the state.
Malden Mills, located just outside the old mill city of Lawrence, was a shining exception: Not only did Mr. Feuerstein refuse to move, but he and his company prospered, thanks to its proprietary fabric Polartec, which it sold to clothing brands like Patagonia and L.L. Bean. In fact, 1995 was a banner year for the company, with sales up 10 percent to more than $400 million.
Then, on the night of Dec. 11, 1995, a boiler in one of the factory’s five hulking plants exploded. The shock wave knocked out the state-of-the-art sprinkler system Mr. Feuerstein had just installed, and 45-mile-an-hour winds blew the ensuing fire to three other buildings. The blaze burned for 16 hours, injuring more than 30 workers.
Three days later, most of the plant’s 1,400 workers lined up to receive their paychecks, figuring it might be their last from Malden Mills. Mr. Feuerstein joined them. He handed out holiday bonuses and then announced an even greater gift: He would immediately reopen as much of the plant as he could, replace the buildings he had lost and continue to pay the idled workers for a month — a promise he later extended twice.
Working nonstop, he and his workers got the surviving building, the finishing plant, back in operation just one week later. Mr. Feuerstein bought an empty factory nearby to hold new equipment. By the first weeks of January, hundreds of his employees were back at work. And just 20 months later he opened a gleaming new $130 million complex.
A fitness nut who rose at 5:30 every morning to jog, read scripture and memorize poetry, Mr. Feuerstein announced the reopening with a quotation from E.E. Cummings.
“I thank you, God, for most this amazing day,” he said, “I who have died am alive again today.”
Mr. Feuerstein was a wealthy industrialist, but he was far from the Dickensian stereotype. He ate alongside his workers in the cafeteria, and he offered them no-interest loans for school.
This man bravely chose to take a risk and go against the tide, keeping his business in his state. He was rewarded by God for this with wealth. When faced with a massive setback due to the burning of his factory, Mr. Feuerstein chose to remain other-focused, caring about his workers and ensuring they would be paid, even at cost to himself. He was steadfast, paying hundreds of millions to rebuild in order to ensure jobs, and had a sense of responsibility that extended beyond what he was legally required to do.
That is a leader. That is the kind of person I would like to sit next to in Olam HaBa!
