I worry that these words will be offensive. I
worry that the contents of this essay will be misconstrued and misinterpreted. I
worry that people will scoff, mock, and ridicule these attempts. But too many
have worried and not enough has been done.
Change is not an easy and comfortable endeavor;
but the time has come and it is now. Catalysts for social movements are not
individuals who are nice and gentle; Ben Gurion was not nice, Lyndon B. Johnson
was not nice, Churchill was not nice. Even the great torah "movers and
shakers" were not known to be the pleasant type. Rabbis Kotler, Shach, and
Yosef had their fair share of fights. Perhaps, pleasantness and amiability displace
courage and ambition, and the only way around this it to avoid one or the
other. I choose the latter.
In basic economics, one ascertains the
assorted uses that one can obtain from an object and attempts to receive the
most utility he can. In an economical perspective, do people use their time wisely?
Who has decided that writing blogs about social issues is more important than
collecting money for the poor? Who decided that reading academic journals and intellectual
publications override the responsibilities to a community? For every several
dollars we spend on a book and newspaper, we could have helped another child dying
of starvation? Are we really so selfish? Can we fathom, can we understand
and penetrate the meaning, of the cries of pain across the globe?
Please,
someone tell me, that this logic has some fallacy. Albeit true that our
first obligation is to ourselves; are our secondary and tertiary interests more
important than another's primary? We create a fanciful value system in
which we place intellectual pursuits on a lofty plane, and yet as we scour
obscure academic sources the pangs of hunger resound in silence. We justify our
pursuit as the path of the divine, yet the road of humanity lies flagging.
I agree, it
is a bit gauche, a bit tactless and lack social grace, to admonish the
very life and behavior I display. But since when does hypocrisy negate truth,
fault negate merit. I am attempting to foment, incite, and stir up, a
movement of "do gooders", an attitude in which reading sophisticated
books, writing rigorous prose, and theorizing about the existential matters do
not trump the basic needs of humanity.
This does
not mean living frugal, thrifty, and inexpensive. This does not mean to impede,
hold back or obstruct, the pursuit of desirable pleasure. It does mean that inasmuch
as one has this altruistic desire to do what is right, to improve oneself, and
his relationship to G-d, the focus should not be on self development but rather
the needy. It is not my wish to implicate anyone; if anything, the
desire for social change is evidenced throughout much writings and arguments.
It is merely a wish that we focus our efforts to the more practical as opposed
to the theoretical.
We talk
about whether yeshiva students should go to the army. It is an important and critical juncture of
our history. But so it the lonely widow down the street. Should we not focus on
issues more germane, more relevant and appropriate! We sit and attempt
to foreshadow the future of Iran, to suggest beforehand election results
and Supreme Court decisions, while the poor go hungry and the depressed remain despondent.
But is not the future of world Jewry of most intense concern, the vitality of
Israel our focus? It is; but, really, really, how does all the talk and
conversation affect the results.
No comments:
Post a Comment