Melakhim II Chapter 12 | Fundraising

One of the most critical roles in any initiative is that of the fundraiser. Without funding, the initiative lacks the power to move forward. As Chazal have said, “If there is no flour, there is no Torah.” When it comes to the Temple — or the Tabernacle in earlier times — fundraising serves an additional purpose. Beyond enabling the Temple to function properly — renovating its walls, purchasing animals and libations, and covering water, heating, and lighting expenses — fundraising allows the people to feel connected. The Torah introduces the commandment of the Tabernacle not with “They shall make Me a sanctuary” but with “To take an offering for Me.” The goal is for all of Bnei Yisrael to feel like partners in the Tabernacle; contributing makes them feel it belongs to them.

In our chapter, King Yehoash addresses the issue of fundraising for the Temple. After years of neglect during Atalya’s reign, the need is double: to secure funds to repair the Temple and to draw the people back to the Temple, away from worship at high shrines and Baal worship.

Yehoash’s initial model is decentralized: "Yehoash said to the priests, 'All the dedicated money brought to the House of the Lord — the money from the census, the money equivalent to a person's worth, or any money that a person is moved to bring to the House of the Lord — let the priests accept it, each from his donor, and they will see to the repair of the House wherever damage may be found.'" (12:5–6) Instead of having one designated fundraiser, the responsibility is divided into very small responsibilities. Each priest collects money from people he knows, and together they are all responsible for the Temple’s repairs.

We see a similar model in modern charity events held by institutions. Each student is tasked with calling family or friends to request donations. This approach can result in larger total contributions because, beyond the simple question of whether someone wants to donate, factors like social pressure and the relationship between the donor and the fundraising priest come into play.

While this model can be more effective, Harav Mosheh Lichtenstein, in his book "Paths of Prophecy : An Analysis of the Haftarot", highlights two weaknesses:

1.    The mediation between donors and the Temple reduces the donors' sense of connection. If donations stem from social pressure rather than a genuine desire to contribute to the Temple, the emotional impact of the contribution diminishes. Furthermore, as described, donors might feel their money isn’t directly going toward the Temple’s repairs but is instead being taken by the priest. The Tanakh states “let the priests accept it, each from his donor, and they will see to the repair of the House,” leaving it unclear whether the money truly goes directly to repairs or remains with the priests, who merely commit to addressing issues if necessary.
2.    The risk of burnout in fundraising efforts. It is easier to raise funds for a new project or building than for ongoing operational expenses. Here, the risk is double: the priests may stop asking people for money, and they might fail to forward funds properly to the repair fund or fail identify structural issues.

After several years, the model indeed proves ineffective. Yehoash introduces a new system that eliminates the intermediaries. A single chest is placed in the Temple, and all contributions from Temple-goers are deposited directly into it. This model eliminates interpersonal social pressure, but every contribution allows the donor to feel connected. The money mixes together in the chest, and collectively, all donors become co-owners of the Temple. This system’s strength lies in its simplicity and inclusivity, and it successfully sustains the Temple for many years.