Parshas Beshalach - Think Like a Leader

 

💭 A Thought on the Parsha: Think Like a Leader

    The Torah relates that it was not long after the B’nei Yisroel left Mitzrayim, that Pharaoh rallied the Egyptian army to pursue them. The sight of the Egyptian army approaching with 600 chariots frightened the B’nei Yisroel prompting a natural response to cry out to Hashem for help. Understandably, they also turned to Moshe rabbeinu and said, “Are there no graves in MItzrayim that you had to take us out to the midbar to die? Did we not tell you it would be better for us to stay in Mitzrayim?” As their leader, Moshe attempted to calm them down by reassuring them that Hashem was on their side and there was therefore nothing to fear. However, the very next passuk strangely states, “Hashem said to Moshe, ‘Why are you crying out to me? Speak to the B’nei Yisroel and let them journey!” Rashi writes that you see from this passuk that Moshe too must have stopped to daven. Why? If Moshe himself was not concerned about being killed by the Egyptian army, what else was there to be worried about that prompted his tefillah of crying out?

 

            The S’forno explains that after hearing the B’nei Yisroel’s arrogant tone of sarcasm complaining “Were there no graves for us in Mitzrayim”, Moshe was concerned that they would not follow his lead into the Yam Suf. Hashem responded, “Why are you crying to Me? You are being chosheid b’keshairim (falsely accusing by assumption)!” 

            This S’forno is difficult to understand. The S’forno seems to explain the passuk as conveying Hashem’s disappointment – so to speak – with Moshe for making presumptuous assumptions about B’nei Yisroel that they would not be ready and willing to take the plunge (or in this case walk on dry land through the sea) with him. Was Moshe really making any assumptions? It was said to his face! The B’nei Yisroel’s remarks were real. They truly did approach Moshe and essentially told him that he had a bad plan and that there was no point of leaving Mitzrayim just to die here. What mistake did Moshe make that Hashem would consider this as him being chosheid b’kesheirm?

             A story is told of a certain English Minister of Parliament (M.P.) in England, Mr. Geoffrey Dickens, who would often attend events arranged by his constituents. After visiting a number of these events, he began to notice this one lady who invariably made an appearance. She certainly was devoted but, as the M.P. described, she was indescribably ugly (his words, not mine). At one point, this admirer wrote him a letter. She wrote how happy she felt for having the privilege of joining so many of his political gatherings, and how connected she felt to him and the causes he stood for. She continued her note asking if it would be possible for him to return a signed photograph of him for her to hang on her wall. At the end of her letter, she signed her name and immediately following her name, written in brackets, were the words “Horse Face”. Mr. Dickens was quite impressed. He thought to himself how not only was this admirer able to come to peace with her appearance, she actually used it to her advantage adding comic relief in the way she knew she stood out from others in the crowd. He decided he would do something special for this lady. He went out and bought a nice frame to put his photograph in and on the picture he personally inscribed, “To Horse Face, with love from Geoffrey Dickens, M.P.” After it had been sent off, his secretary said to him, “By the way, did you get that letter from the woman who attends so many of your events? I wrote “Horse Face” after her name so you would remember who she was.”

 

            Moshe Rabbeinu certainly had a harder challenge not accepting the B’nei Yisroel’s actual statements at face value, than the British M.P who probably should have confirmed that the name “Horse Face” was not put in for his convenience or out of jest. However, either way, the lesson of not defaulting to an immediate assumption is an important one indeed. Even when wrapped in circumstantial or even perhaps explicit evidence, one must approach making future predictions with intense thoughtfulness. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Interpretation is key, and interpretation should not be left to make conclusions based on what looks like the most obvious reason. The B’nei Yisroel never explicitly said to Moshe, “We are not going to listen to you”. Granted, they were being annoyingly sarcastic and pessimistic, but that did not make it appropriate for Moshe to assume that they would not follow his lead into the Yam Suf.

 

            A leader is responsible to maintain the perspective that his people can and will succeed. Certainly, one needs to be realistic and approach handling complaints and struggles with utmost sincerity, empathy, and emotional intelligence, but at the same time a leader’s attitude and approach must remain that the people want to do what is right and can succeed. Mistakes are inevitable, struggling is expected, and complaining is normal. This is all part of the growing process and experiencing any of these things by no means represents failure. On the contrary, acknowledging the experience and moving on signals growth. This is the lesson Hashem was teaching Moshe. Hearing complaints, even from the proverbial horse’s mouth, does not justify assuming that it is sourced from a “Horse Face”. The conclusion may seem rational and perhaps even be based on perceived evidence, and yet still be deemed being chosheid b’keshairim – something we must remain clear of not just in terms of our perspective of others, but also how we view and approach leading ourselves.