Small tidbits and Sparks of wisdom

—

I. The Changing Nature of Rabbinic Leadership

Historically, a rav was the central authority of a town or kehillah. Appointed through formal process and backed by communal structure, he served not only as a spiritual guide but also as dayan, administrator, posek, and community overseer. In towns across Europe, especially from the 11th century onward, a rabbi was hired to represent the entire Jewish population of the city, usually supported by taxes or communal dues. His responsibilities were broad, and his authority was respected — because it was defined and backed.

Today, especially in the Orthodox world, the picture has drastically changed. The modern rav often operates in a fragmented ecosystem, surrounded by multiple shuls on a single block, each with different customs, expectations, and patrons. His authority may be respected, but it’s rarely formalized. His responsibilities may be assumed, but they’re not always matched by infrastructure, funding, or clarity.

—

II. Two Models of the Modern Shul Rabbi

In the contemporary Orthodox landscape, we witness two dominant models of rabbinic leadership — both profoundly different from the centralized kehilla structures of pre-war Europe.

1. Kehilla-Hired Rabbi

This model attempts to mirror the classical community structure — a shul board or kehilla organization formally hires a rabbi. He receives a contract, salary, and clear expectations. He functions as the communal representative, delivering derashos, answering shailos, offering pastoral care, and performing life-cycle events. The boundaries are clearer, the roles better defined — but the Rav must answer to the board, to donors, to a governing body that may or may not understand Torah priorities.

This model is common in smaller cities or older shuls with a long-standing governance model. The Rav is a respected employee — empowered, yes, but always under review.

2. The Self-Starter or Private Rav

Far more common today is the independent model, where the Rav is not hired by anyone, but instead builds his own beis medrash or shul from scratch. This is especially prevalent in Lakewood, Monsey, Brooklyn, Beit Shemesh, and other dense Torah centers.

Often, this Rav is backed by a few loyal friends or patrons. He may be financially independent or semi-independent, and is motivated to create his own Torah hub, with a unique style, spiritual flavor, or personal brand.

This isn’t a job — it’s a mission. The Rav is not submitting a résumé or being vetted by a board. He plants his flag, opens the doors, and people begin to gather — drawn by the personality, the energy, the warmth, or the Torah.

But people don’t always come for strict halachic leadership. They come for a relationship, a chevrah, or a space that reflects their values. And in this sense, the private Rav operates like the owner of a private home. He sets the tone. He decides the decorum. He picks the nusach, the schedule, and the structure.

He is responsible for everything — from the garbage removal to kiddush sponsorships. But he answers to no one, because there is no formal board, no legal contract, and no defined communal authority above him.

If you don’t like how he runs the place, you can leave.

—

The Turning Point: When Membership Is Introduced

However, there is a critical turning point that often transforms the nature of this model.

Once the private Rav begins asking for formal membership dues, and people begin contributing regularly as members, the dynamic changes.

If the Rav makes it clear from the outset: “Your money is welcome, but decisions are mine — I do not want your input,” then he retains full autonomy. He remains the sole authority, with donors functioning like supporters of a personal kollel or private shtiebel.

But if this boundary is not made explicit — if the Rav starts collecting dues, inviting people to take roles, or letting members believe they’re stakeholders — then the Rav has, by default, created a partnership.

At that point, the members are no longer just daveners or donors — they become baalei batim, and the Rav can no longer ignore them. Now, decisions about expansions, programming, schedule, and even hashkafa may require discussion. Tensions over ownership, vision, and authority can emerge. The Rav may be unintentionally boxed into a leadership structure he never formally agreed to — but which took root simply by virtue of shared financing and participation.

Money without boundaries becomes influence. And influence, left unchecked, becomes control.

So long as the Rav is clear and transparent — defining exactly what participation means — he can preserve his independence. But once he opens the door to shared ownership, he must expect shared expectations.

—

III. Who Is a “Member”?

In the Reform and Conservative worlds, membership is everything. You don’t pay, you don’t enter. The entire system is built around dues and benefits, structured like a religious country club.

In Orthodox communities, the opposite is true. Shuls are open to all. You can walk in, get an aliyah, hear a shiur, and walk out — and no one will ask for a check.

So what does “membership” mean?

Is it the man who shows up daily?
The family who davens on Yamim Noraim?
The donor who writes a check once a year?
The learner who attends shiurim but never gives?

Often, there is no answer — and that’s the problem.

The Rav may be pouring his life into 100 people, only to find that when the rent is due, only 5 support the shul. The rest assume “someone else is taking care of it.”

—

IV. What Is the Rabbi Responsible For?

Without a defined structure, people often assume a Rav should be responsible for:

Shalom bayis interventions

Tuition assistance

Medical referrals

Mental health guidance

Crisis management

Employment help

Marriage or parenting issues

But the Rav is often hired (if at all) without resources, without staff, and without authority.

Halachically, unless a Rav is contractually obligated or explicitly empowered by the kehilla, he is not responsible for communal welfare like a father is for his children. He is primarily responsible to teach Torah, to answer halachic questions, and to provide moral and spiritual guidance — not to function as a catch-all social worker.

Responsibility without empowerment is slavery.
And a Rav without budget, staff, or backup is not a melech — he’s a melamed on call 24/7.

—

V. The Bank Behind the Bimah: The Donor Class

In almost every Orthodox shul or beis medrash, the true financial engine is not the general membership, but two or three wealthy individuals who keep the place afloat. These donors fund:

Construction projects

Sefer Torah dedications

Weekly kiddushes

Shul expansions

Repairs, HVAC, yom tov costs

They become the unofficial board of directors, even if they never speak publicly. Sometimes they act quietly, with true humility and l’shem Shamayim motives. Other times, their funding becomes leverage — influencing:

Who gets aliyos

Who speaks

Who gets kavod

Who gets shut out

When it works: It’s beautiful.
When it doesn’t: It’s a war zone in a tallis bag.

The Rav walks a tightrope. On one side is gratitude for support. On the other, fear of becoming a puppet. If he pushes too hard, he risks losing his donor. If he doesn’t lead, he loses his kehilla.

—

VI. Reform/Conservative vs. Orthodox: Inversion of Structure

Let’s say it plainly:

Feature Reform/Conservative Orthodox

Membership Strictly defined Undefined or voluntary
Dues Required Optional or nonexistent
Access Pay-to-enter Open to all
Rabbi’s Role Contracted employee Undefined; often overburdened
Structure Corporate Organic, fluid, and messy
Spirituality Often minimal Rich, but unregulated

In short, the Reform world has structure but little soul, while the Orthodox world has soul but little structure.

One runs like a bank. The other runs like a yeshiva dorm kitchen — everyone eats, no one pays, and somehow it keeps going.

—

VII. Conclusion: A New Path Forward?

The Orthodox world must wake up to the reality that a Rav cannot bear unlimited burden without:

Clear support

Formal structure

Defined expectations

Sustainable funding

A Rav is not a father to 100 adult men. He’s not obligated to carry every issue. Unless empowered and backed by his kehilla — financially, emotionally, and halachically — his role becomes unsustainable.

Likewise, communities should reconsider what “membership” means. If you benefit from a shul, you should support it. If you seek Torah from a Rav, you should honor him — not just with words, but with deeds.

This is especially true in the case of the self-starting Rav — the one who didn’t wait to be appointed, but instead opened a shul to serve a population that was spiritually underserved. These are the people who didn’t fit into the mold — those who couldn’t find a minyan before 9:00, or those who felt spiritually overlooked in their neighborhood’s established batei midrash. One Rav once said bluntly, “We opened this place because none of my chevrah could find a place to daven early, and when they did, no one even said hello.”

So they created their own. Their own style. Their own voice. Their own atmosphere. Their own business — in the holy sense of the word.

These Rabbanim may introduce their own flavor, their father’s derech, or a certain hashkafa that fills a gap in the current landscape. That’s not ego. That’s responsibility. That’s leadership.

And if you are davening there, growing there, learning there — even if there are no membership dues or formal obligations — you should support the Rav financially.

Whether or not you get to vote.
Whether or not you get to control.

Because he’s not doing it for honor or position. He’s doing it because he saw a need — and he filled it. For you. For your family. For your neighbor who didn’t fit in elsewhere.

In today’s fractured world, people are out of the box. And they need out-of-the-box Torah.
They need a Rav who sees them.

The least we can do is see him back.

And yes — not every Rav is called by his title. Some are called by their first names. Some are still just “Yossi” or “Chaim” or “Reb Shmuel” to their old friends. That doesn’t diminish them — it reminds us that they’re real people who took real risks.

Regardless of how he’s addressed, he should be respected as much as the gedolim and talmidei chachamim of old — because he did what they did: he stepped up. Whether or not he’s a Torah scholar, he is an askan, a builder, and a leader. He took the responsibility no one else was willing to carry.

And that’s what makes him a Rav — in the truest sense of the word.