Category Archives: Contemporary Life

Just say NO

The American request that Israel “freeze’ construction in “settlements” permanently, for one year, for six months, or for six days is insulting, disrespectful, ill-fated and a smokescreen that Israel should forcefully and immediately reject – for a number of reasons.

Recall Nancy Reagan’s campaign in the mid-1980’s to discourage children from recreational drug use, entitled: “Just Say No.” Well, the allure of ‘peace” is also a narcotic that dulls the mind and precludes rational thinking – and this request (demand?) deserves the same response. There are several critical reasons why such a rejection – phrased in as diplomatic but unequivocal language as possible – is both warranted and appropriate.

Firstly, Israel has long resisted such a step at every stage of the interminable negotiations over Mideast peace. Now it is posited that Israel should make this good-will gesture (www.jewishpress.com/pagerroute.do/38306) in order to induce the Arabs to make similar gestures, such as a “commitment to fight terror.” Hmm…does that sound familiar ? In other words, Israel should make another tangible concession in exchange for another Arab concession to stop killing innocent Jews ? It is the same rug being sold again by these bizarre merchants, who assume that Jews have no historical memory. The approach itself is laughable in the extreme, and only the extremely foolish would even consider it.

Secondly, the request – which, if acceded to, will never be withdrawn – is a direct attack on Israel’s sovereign decision-making power and prejudges the outcome of negotiations by effectively delegitimizing Israel’s claims in Judea and Samaria. But Israel’s claim there – as the only sovereign nation in the vicinity with “rights,” rights obtained when it conquered the land from the previous sovereign – Jordan – in a defensive war – is compelling and lawful, even if it is politically unpopular with Israel’s enemies and those who seek to curry favor with them.

Thirdly, the request is unenforceable and will be the source of unending tension between Israel and the United States. How does one inform a family that the world will not allow you to add a bedroom or a den to one’s own home ? Or that Jews – only Jews, of course – are barred from building on Jewish-owned land in the land of Israel, of all places ? When Menachem Begin agreed to such a freeze at Jimmy Carter’s insistence, relations between the two countries were strained when Begin contended that the freeze was for several months only, and not permanently as Carter maintained. To allow the world to micromanage Israeli home-building would be a grievous insult, and to a large extent would imply our acquiescence to the world’s denial of any Jewish rights in the region. It is tantamount to an admission that building in the Jewish heartland is wrong, and that Jews should feel guilty about doing it. And Israel should eschew the diplomatic cleverness implicit in finding language that both sides will accept but interpret in different ways. Honesty is the best policy.

And how ironic is it that Jews are being told they cannot build in…Judea ? We are only called “Jews” because of our roots in Judea, “Jew” being a shortened form of “Judean.” This nomenclature is most clear in Hebrew – we are “Yehudim” because our roots are in “Yehuda.” Indeed, Israel should market to the American people its objections to Obama’s ultimatum with such slogans: “No Jews in Judea is like no New Yorkers in New York,” or “Judea for Jews” or something similar. Nothing would point out more the absurdity of this dictate. And the current “let my people grow” campaign is also attractive.

Fourthly, it is a smokescreen, a red herring, a deliberate attempt to weaken Israel that will not advance the moribund (and farcical) “peace process” one centimeter. As Congressman Eric Cantor noted today in Jerusalem, President Obama is focused too much on settlements and too little on Iran. Certainly if Israel intends to retain most settlements in any final agreement, then what difference can it possibly make if it continues to build in those settlements ? To stop – even momentarily – is to signal weakness, denigrate Jewish rights in the area, and whet the Arab appetite for even more concessions from Israel. So even from a diplomatic perspective, such a move is illogical.

Finally, a polite but firm “no” to Obama is something to which he has become accustomed. Since taking office, his requests on a variety of matters have been rebuffed by the G-8 and the G-20, the Russians, the Arabs, the Chinese and a host of other countries. Obama, a true believer in diminishing the projection of American power globally, has succeeded remarkably well, and in his quest to be liked by everyone (especially America’s recent foes like Venezuela, North Korea, and the Arab world) is respected or feared by no one. It is entirely clear that the price Obama is willing to pay for improved relations with a billion Muslims is detaching the United States from its traditional alliance with Israel. The legacy of “shared values” between the two countries does not amount to much, in Obama’s estimation, because he is not at all impressed with America’s traditional values. In fact, he is attempting to denigrate and escape from them.

So the President is intent on strengthening America’s ties with the Arab world while weakening Israel, but as a skilled politician and rhetorician, he recognizes that he cannot be perceived as doing same. Several weeks ago he enlisted the help of more than a dozen “Jewish leaders” to discuss Israel’s policies and his efforts to impose a solution (i.e., Israel’s surrender of its vital interests), and to solicit their support – while excluding, in true liberal fashion, Jews who hold more right-wing views. Media reports, and statements from the participants, indicated that the meeting was a love fest, with none of the leaders present even attempting to defend Israel’s policies or voice support for the right of Jewish settlement throughout the land of Israel, and reluctant even to disagree with President Obama on his demand that Israel stop building in Jerusalem.

If those reports are true, then that meeting with the highest elected officials in the land represented the sorriest display of obsequiousness and uselessness by American Jewish “leaders” since the Holocaust. And, if capable of shame, they should be ashamed of themselves. They chose to rally around Obama at the expense of the people of Israel, revealing once again the distressing truism of the politics of American Jews – who have long preferred safe abortions to a safe Israel. (American Jews, more liberal than any other ethnic group, will not vote for a candidate who is overtly anti-Israel but will vote for an anti-Israel candidate who mouths the right clichés and platitudes, as long he supports abortion rights.) Or, to judge some favorably, the lure of the presidential photo op is too enticing to risk not being invited to the next sit-down.

As President Bush once said to me, America and Israel share a friendship even more than an alliance. But neither a friendship nor an alliance imply symmetrical views on all issues. There were crucial times in the past when Israel defied America (declaring statehood in 1948, launching a pre-emptive war in 1967, bombing the Iraqi nuclear reactor in 1981, and, most pertinent here, building Har Homa in southern Jerusalem in 1996 – now a community of more than 6,000 residents) and not only lived to talk about it but was also vindicated in its decisions. Each of those times required courageous leadership – leaders of values and vision – to look beyond the politics of the moment and see the eternal interests of the Jewish people.

Indeed, relations between the United States and Israel are so strained that it would behoove Israel to seek a goodwill gesture from the Americans – even before considering a discussion of a freeze. Israel can make demands as well; in fact, weak countries often make demands, a negotiating tool familiar in the Middle East. Perhaps, finally, a pardon for Jonathan Pollard ? That would show some good will, not as a quid pro quo, but simply as a humanitarian gesture to smooth fences. Israel can then agree to freeze construction in all settlements one day a week (Shabbat).

     And while making demands, Israel should not shy away from ruling out any negotiations with Syria until the Sultan Yaakov prisoners (Baumol, Katz and Feldman) are accounted for – after 27 years (!), and any relaxation on the Gaza embargo until Gilad Shalit is freed – and in exchange for…nothing. Arabs can be pressured too, and Jewish life is too precious to acquiesce in the mistreatment of its prisoners, again.

    But a rejection of a settlement freeze is a no-brainer. To agree to even a momentary freeze undermines Israel’s negotiating position and gravely weakens Prime Minister Netanyahu’s political standing in Israel (that also an American interest, apparently). That concession is lose-lose – a loss on the substance and a loss on the politics. So however pleasantly it can be said – perhaps with a smile, a wistful embrace or even over a beer – there is only one response justified to this American dictate: Just Say No. And the earth will continue to spin on its axis, the sun will rise and set on the day after, and new politicians and diplomats will meet to find some other way to keep the “process” going, and going, and going.

Crisis in Orthodoxy ? Perhaps Not

   The recent arrests of several New Jersey Rabbis, coming on the heels of a variety of other scandals in Jewish life that also resulted in prominent arrests, have led many to conclude that Orthodoxy is in crisis and its entire world view under siege and perhaps unsustainable. Some have asked: “what is the value of Torah study and Mitzvot – like Shabbat, prayer, kashrut, tzniut – if the human product is no more ethical or moral than one who eschews those divine commandments and just lives a life of integrity ?” Others have decried the “overemphasis” on certain Mitzvot to the exclusion, or at least the minimization, of other Mitzvot.

    All valid questions, to be sure, but they also miss the point, and in their justified concern for the reputations of G-d, His Torah and the Jewish people, they overlook one essential dimension of Torah, and fail to put this tragic waywardness in perspective. In short, there is no crisis; there is only…life, people and human frailty. The nostalgia for the perfect world of the past, where all Jews, especially Rabbis, were decent, honest, ethical and upright, is a fantasy, and a dangerous fantasy. Human nature remains human nature, and as a people we are defined by the majority, not by the exceptions, even if the exceptions grab the media spotlight. And the majority of religious Jews – and Rabbis – are decent, honest, ethical and upright people, and even among the accused wrongdoers, the overwhelming majority of their actions also reflect the values that they profess. And to the extent they do not, well, that is why there are courts, laws, prosecutions and public opprobrium.

     The phenomenon of “religious sin” or the “sins of the religious” is quite ancient. The genre of “how could they, of all people?” questions might well have been asked of Korach, Datan, Aviram and a host of others who stood at Sinai. The prophets were well aware of people who performed Mitzvot by rote, who did not seem to be on the inside what they looked like on the outside. The personality, in one context, is referred to as the “ish navuv” – the “hollow man” (Iyov 11:12), what Rav Shimon Schwab there called “a person with a righteous façade who has a hollow interior.” In another context, it was the subject of Sinclair Lewis’ acclaimed 1927 novel “Elmer Gantry” about a hypocritical, womanizing preacher – a book that created such a furor (much like the one in our world today) that it was literally banned in Boston.

     But none of this is new, and neither are the challenges of ethical behavior while living in the non-Jewish world (or living in Israel, for that matter) only a contemporary phenomenon either. There is a passage from the SMA”G (Sefer Mitzvot Gadol, a compendium of the 613 commandments written in the early 13th century of Rav Moshe of Coucy, France), pointed out to me by my colleague Rav Shaul Robinson of NYC, that is both frightening and, oddly, comforting. In Mitzvat Aseh 74 – the laws of returning lost objects, which technically only apply to Jews – he states:

      “I have already expounded to the exiles of Jrusalem who are in Spain and to the other exiles of Edom that now that the exile has been prolonged, we must separate ourselves from the corrupt values of the world and grasp the seal of Hashem, which is truth. We are not to lie either to Jews or to non-Jews, nor to cause them to err in any matter, but rather to sanctify ourselves through what is permissible. As the verse says (Tzefania 2:13): “The remnant of Israel shall do no crookedness, not speak falsehood, and not have any deceit in their mouths.” And when Hashem comes to redeem us, they (the nations) will then say, ‘G-d acted justly [in redeeming them], because they are people of truth, and the Torah of truth is in their mouths.’”

     “But, if we treat the nations with trickery and deceitfulness, they will say instead, ‘Look what G-d has done, choosing for His portion in the world a nation of thieves and swindlers…’  And, indeed, G-d scattered us about the globe so that we should attract converts, but as long as we deal with the nations with deceit, who will want to cleave to us ? We see [from the story of the flood] that G-d was concerned even about stealing from the wicked.”

     “And the Yerushalmi (Bava Metzia 5:5) teaches that distinguished Rabbis once purchased a kor of wheat from non-Jews, and in the bushel of wheat they found a purse filled with money, and they returned it to the non-Jews who exclaimed, “Blessed is the G-d of the Jews.” There are many similar stories that discuss returning the lost object of non-Jews and the sanctification of G-d’s name that resulted.”

      That passage is frightening because it was written approximately 800 years ago, and so, apparently, Orthodoxy was in “crisis” then as well. But it is also comforting when we recognize that nothing is new, and that, indeed, there is no “crisis.” Money is money, temptation is temptation, and people are people. No one is perfectly good or perfectly evil, but rather hybrids of good and bad conduct. We hope that most people are mostly good, and that the rough edges that we all have can be smoothed by the ameliorating effects of the Torah. We all struggle with different elements of our nature. Different parts of the Torah challenge each of us – some are challenged by issues of personal modesty and others by arrogance, some by money (most of us, Chazal say in Bava Batra 165a) and others by Shabbat. No two people are alike, and what is asked of each of us is to control those parts of our nature that are unruly. That is the “Kabbalat Ol Malchut Shamayim” – acceptance of the yoke of G-d’s kingship – that we are obligated to experience twice a day. Our Sages therefore asserted, in loose translation (Sukka 52a) that “the greater the person (i.e., the more desires he has under control), the greater the temptation” (in those remaining areas). 

     We all understand intellectually that no one is perfect, and yet are surprised when we see any imperfections in certain people. Undoubtedly, King David (even Moshe himself) would have been vilified by our society. But spiritual greatness is not defined by an unreachable perfection, but by the spiritual giant’s capacity to overcome sin, to accept responsibility for misdeeds, and to aspire to perfection. One should no more be inclined to abandon a life of Torah (or not embrace one) because of a few alleged evildoers than one would stop eating food altogether because a few people suffer food poisoning. “For these [mitzvot] are our lives and the length of our days.” They are commandments, not suggestions. We are responsible for all our actions before G-d, and the mitzvot in totality are designed to produce a human being who strives for perfection and is answerable for any failings. No one Mitzva can guarantee perfection, because each mitzva targets a different dimension of the human personality. But pull one thread out, and the entire garment will unravel. The study of musar, and an understanding of Mitzvot, can inculcate how all mitzvot – Shabbat, kashrut, tefila, etc. – ideally make us better people, and if they do not in an individual case, we can still learn where we went wrong and what we can do to rectify it.

     So let us not rationalize nefarious conduct – but let us also not be naïve about human nature or simplistic about the Torah’s commandments. Let us continue to demand of ourselves the highest standards of fidelity to G-d’s law. As Rav Zundel Salanter reputedly said, “we should check the origin of our money to the same extent we check the origin of our food.” But we should also recognize that, for most of us, it is easier to serve G-d through Shabbat, Kashrut, tefila and Talmud Torah than it is through exhibiting – at all times – ethical behavior and decent conduct – whether in how we drive our cars or how we earn our money. And the latter is a more substantive definition of who we are as servants of G-d, and a greater challenge today and perhaps always, and therefore, as the SMA”G indicated, the route to redemption as well.

     Crisis in Orthodoxy ? I think not. It is just life, people and their challenges – and it has existed since time immemorial. The Torah is perfect; no one ever claimed all of its practitioners were also perfect. Rather than cast aspersions on others and make sweeping and smug generalizations, we should instead look in the mirror and confront our own failings (and not wait for the FBI or their informants to expose us). And then we will truly become servants of G-d, a nation renowned for its virtue and piety, and a people worthy of redemption.

Madoff vs. Dweck: Steal Cage Match

 

Who is more despicable – Bernie Madoff or Solomon Dweck ? On the surface, Madoff would seem to prevail in this match of caged stealers. After all, Madoff, the disgraced financier and “investor,” stole tens of billions of dollars, single-handedly bankrupted elderly people and ruined charitable foundations – and all to support a lavish lifestyle that he knew for years would some day come crashing down on him.

By comparison, who is Dweck ? He stole “only” $25,000,000, and his claim to infamy rests on his informing on several New Jersey politicians who took hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of his bribes and laundering hundreds of thousands of dollars of other ill-gotten gains with several Rabbis – all, allegedly, of course. The amount of money Madoff stole is staggering, and perhaps may never be equaled in history; Dweck’s loot, by contrast, is a relative pittance. So where is the comparison ?

Look beneath the surface. Both Madoff and Dweck preyed on people who trusted them – Madoff for social reasons, Dweck because of his religious and ethnic ties. Both caused a massive Chilul Hashem, not least because both held positions of prominence in various Jewish communal organizations. Both appear to lack any moral scruples whatsoever, notwithstanding that Madoff issued an “apology” to his victims before being sentenced. Both have names that lend themselves to permanent ignominy – Madoff “made off” with people’s money, and Dweck rhymes with… well, Syrian Jews don’t speak Yiddish.

But on a crucial point, Dweck exceeds the venality of even Bernie Madoff. Madoff pleaded guilty, admitting everything and incriminating no one else. He did not seek a deal with the prosecution, he did not look to lure others into his criminal orbit, and he protected his family – wife and sons by taking the fall himself (assuming, of course, that there was something from which he had to shield them).

On that score, Solomon Dweck merits a special place in purgatory. Nothing excuses the alleged criminal conduct of Rabbis, but it hard to conjure a betrayal of trust greater than a Rabbi’s son, yeshiva president, and fellow Syrian-Jew (in a very tight-knit community) ensnaring others in his criminal web by wearing a wire and inducing criminal behavior – all in the hope of getting a reduced sentence.

Dweck was no whistle-blower, no crusader for justice, and no avatar of righteousness – but a lowly thief, an informant, a canary, a fink, a rat, a snitch, a stool pigeon, and a contemptible moser. The latter, an especially heinous characterization in Jewish life, is predicated on the assumption that Dweck’s criminal dealings with the Rabbis (allegedly, of course) post-dated, and not pre-dated, his arrest. If they had engaged in joint swindles before his most recent arrest, then, there is indeed no honor among thieves, and he is arguably not even a moser – saving himself by turning in his fellow larcenists. And shame on the Rabbis (alleged shame, of course) both for their criminal behavior and for not being sophisticated enough to recognize that a federal bandit out on bond, whose trial has been delayed and delayed, is likely turning state’s evidence.

But if Dweck never had criminal dealings with these Rabbis before, and solicited their involvement in his schemes to save himself, to provide the prosecution with bigger fish to fry (religious and secular) – using whatever justification necessary – then there is no honor among thieves, but also no honor among Jews. If that happened, then we are no longer an am – a people, a nation, a brotherhood who can count on each other in the crunch. It is every man for himself (and women too) and what a sad day for the Jewish people and for that community in Deal.

Imagine, for a moment, that someone in your vicinity wore a wire throughout the day – your seatmate in shul (well, you shouldn’t be talking anyway), your spouse, your best friend, your business partner – not necessarily to reveal your criminal behavior (that you shouldn’t engage in anyway) but to reveal your every personal thought – your comments about the people closest to you (and their failings, as you perceive them), or your customers (and how you really feel about some of them). Imagine if every thought you had was broadcast to an unknown audience – who then confronted you on them. The perpetrators of such intrusions of privacy are beneath contempt.

On that score, Dweck sinks to a lower level than even Bernie Madoff. Both betrayed the trust of people close to them – one for money and one for his own liberty (and money), but both have shattered the expectation that Jews can trust Jews. And can anything be more depressing than that, especially during the Nine Days ?

Nothing here should be construed as a defense of the Rabbis’ (alleged) wrongdoing, or in any way a rationalization of tax evasion, corner cutting, finagling, keeping separate books, money laundering or any other possible financial diablerie. They are wrong, wrong, wrong (allegedly). Their crimes (alleged) should be punished. Neither Talmud Torah nor tzedaka is a justification for stealing. But let us not sweep aside the ramifications of having potential informants in our midst – to drive a wedge between Jews and to destroy any semblance of mutual trust.

And the greatest musar from this moser, for all of us ? Whatever we do, whatever we say, and whatever we think – there always is Someone looking and listening. “Know what is above you: an eye sees, an ear hears, and all your deeds are recorded in a book” (Avot II:1). The deterrent to criminal or venal conduct should be our inner sense of right and wrong born of being Torah Jews who stand at all times before G-d, bound by His Torah. Period.

So who is worse, Madoff or Dweck ? They are both bad, in different ways. Madoff stole money, Dweck may have stolen something more valuable. But I lean slightly to Madoff as the prime villain, but slightly.

Fame

The Sages of the Talmud understood the value of entertainment, best exemplified by this passage in Masechet Taanit 22a: “Elijah the Prophet pointed out to Rav Beroka two people whom he characterized as worthy of the world-to-come. Asked by Rav Beroka what their special merit was, they answered, “Anshei badochay anan,” we are comedians, jesters. When people are sad, we cheer them up.” Sometimes, distractions are important –  comedians can even merit the world-to-come – but only as long as they are perceived as distractions.

The celebrity world took a big hit in the last few weeks – major stars have died: Michael Jackson, Farrah Fawcett, Ed McMahon, Karl Malden, and my own favorite, Billy Mays, the product hawker. All death is sad, but some of these deaths – one in particular – evoked almost a national grief that hasn’t yet ended, as if these were people of real accomplishment who were personally known to the mourners, as opposed to being just entertainers, anshei badochay, entertainers, whom we think we knew but did not at all.

Indeed, these were people who serviced particular needs that we have, and in that sense no different than the plumber or the grocer, who also service our needs. If you doubt that, then ponder this: Michael Jackson is probably the first person in history whose will was filed for probate before his body was placed in the ground. Priorites…! It is apparently more important to find out how much money he had, where he had it and who is to get it than to actually bury him, which to date – two weeks post-demise – has yet to happen. The sycophants who surrounded him used him, as he used them and an “adoring public” that tormented his life – literally made it unlivable. How exploited was he ? Well, his funeral required a producer, which could open up a new line of work for people in these troubled economic times (the polar opposite, I suppose, of the “party planner.”)

So what do we know about these – all talented, to be sure – and how are they different from the butcher or the baker, who are also talented in their own way ? One thing: fame.

They are famous, some are famous for being famous – but we think we know them because they have fame. But fame is a drug, and in America it is one of the most addictive drugs. On some level, we all want to be known; no one wants to toil in anonymity for 80 years and then disappear without a trace. But fame has become an end in itself, and not the consequence of any particular set of accomplishments. That is why America suffers occasionally from young men who mass murder perfect strangers – because, as they concede, at least they will die famous, and they lack the ability to achieve fame in a more productive or conventional way.

Thus, it is no surprise that the United States Senate now boasts a real comedian as a member, to join the other 99 comedians who are about as funny as the professional. Nor is it any surprise that Sarah Palin resigned her office; it is perfectly logical – even taking her statements at face value regarding the media torment she endured, her desire to work for her causes, write a book, etc. Celebrities, not people of real accomplishment, win elections today. The White House offers Exhibit #1 of this doctrine. Sarah Palin, if she runs for higher office, would not have even served one full term as governor – but nor did Barack Obama complete even one term – even sponsor one important piece of legislation – in the Senate. But it is unnecessary, and to an extent counter-productive to winning elections, to actually demonstrate any real achievement. She is in a much better position – if higher office is her goal – giving speeches, writing books, hosting talk shows, perhaps even doing modeling or movie cameos than by actually governing Alaska. Politicans are more advantaged by glibly talking about what they would like to do than by actually doing something. Governance is a slog.

This is the celebrity culture run amok, with an obvious and deleterious effect on governance, nurtured by a mass media that is as insipid as it is shallow, and by an electorate that votes based on the likeability of candidates rather than their policies.

But we are drowning in this celebrity culture, and all of us are affected by it. We all look for attention, even notoriety, as proof of our existence and worth – but in fact it is proof of neither. People are consumed by the mundane activities of “celebrities” who are hounded and harassed by photographers who give them no rest and deprive them and their families of normal lives, all to feed the insatiable appetites of the public, and the egos of the stars (many of whom would find being ignored a worse fate than being harassed). And those who cannot acquire fame themselves often seek to cultivate a false relationship with those who have fame, so they will share in the derivative glory. Hence, the institution of the “fan” – in sports, entertainment, etc. – which begs the question: is life so empty that the distractions are the focal point ? For many people, tragically, the answer is “yes.”

The paradox is that fame is often required to accomplish even important things. Unknown people can’t change the world – so how do we avoid falling into that trap ? What is the difference between good fame and bad fame ?

The answer is apparent from our daily prayers. Every morning we recite verses from Nechemia, including this statement (9:10): “Because of the signs and wonders You (G-d) imposed upon Pharaoh… You brought Yourself renown as clear as day.” G-d became famous as a result of the Exodus from Egypt ! So too, if we Jews are worthy, G-d makes us supreme over the nations “for praise, renown and glory” (Devarim 26:19). In both instances, the word shaim, literally, name, or here, fame, renown, is used. What is a shaim ?

Rav Shamshon Rafael Hirsch commented that the “name” is the essence of an entity, that which makes him sham, literally “there,” a presence; the “name” is the person’s real identity. Fame that comes naturally as a result of a person’s essence – his knowledge of Torah, his mitzvot, his good deeds, or his moral aspirations – is laudable. It is a reflection of his soul. But fame that comes as a result of a person’s incidental features is often lamentable; in a sense, it detracts from the person’s humanity. He will be perceived as caricature, as a one-dimensional distraction from what really has meaning and importance in life. That one can sing, dance, paint or act – or has twelve toes or two heads – is interesting, a talent, but they do not represent expressions of the soul, and thereby cannot reflect that person’s essence. It is the inner world that is most meaningful and has the greatest impact on the real life of others.

When the heathen prophet Bil’am looked at the Jewish people and exclaimed – “how goodly are your tents, Yaakov,” he saw that the entrances to our private homes were not aligned, so one could not gaze into another’s home from one’s own. That is, he saw that Jews – ideally – are restrained, private, modest, and not addicted to the allures of fame and glamour. He saw that real fame emerges from what an individual accomplishes in his personal tent – his home – and what his reputation is in Mishkenotecha Yisrael, the holy places of the Jewish people. That is true fame that should be celebrated.

That is what matters. All else is of little significance, all else is caricature, all else is the exterior of the person that doesn’t matter much – in the long or short term. Thus, when Micha the Prophet underscored for us, what all mankind wants to know – what is the good, and what does G-d want from us – he answered (6:8): “to do justice and love kindness and to walk humbly with G-d,” mindful that our task in life is not to fawn over the ersatz fame of the distractions but to add renown to G-d and sanctify His name, to give our lives meaning rather than to bask in the illusory achievements of others.

Perhaps this should be one goal of the thinking Jew in our world – to publicize the parameters of true fame and the objectives of the fulfilling life – for our betterment and that of all mankind. Because if we don’t, then an American society that is increasingly decadent and intellectually flabby will be even less capable of living in the real world – of terrorists, nukes, and evildoers who are uninterested in singers and dancers and those who mortgage their years on earth rejoicing in their fame and mourning their demise.