top of page
Anchor 1
Yesodos Maharal On True Beauty & Teshuva
Rabbi Yehuda Levi Ben Bezalel, also known as the Maharal, served as the leading Rabbi in Prague. He was a famous commentator on Jewish philosophy and mysticism. The Maharal was prodigious and legendary for many of his theories.
In his seforim, משנת מהר״ל and the גור אריה, the Maharal writes about true beauty. The Maharal analyzed the pasuk ("ויהיו חיי שרה מאה שנה ועשרים שנה ושבע שנים שני חיי שרה״ (בראשית כג:א“. This means, “And the life of Sarah was 127 years old, and that was the life of Sarah.” Rashi and Chazal interpret that at a hundred years old, Sarah had the spiritual level of a twenty year old, as she was pure of sin. At twenty years old, she had the beauty of a seven year old.
The Maharal asks why would the Torah care to talk about beauty as if it is something important? What is the meaning of true beauty? The Maharal explains that true beauty comes from within. It depends on the cleanliness of a neshama. Beauty is not externally based, but is wholly reliant upon the spiritual level and מדרגה one is on. Therefore, at twenty years old, Sarah did not actually look like a seven year old. However, she had the same refinement and pureness of soul that a seven year old would have.
In addition, the Maharal uses a quote from Mishlei to support that the essence of real beauty is really from internal spirituality. He quotes, “ואם תאמר למה משבח (משלי לא:ל) “שֶׁ֣קֶר הַ֭חֵן וְהֶ֣בֶל הַיֹּ֑פִי אִשָּׁ֥ה יִרְאַת־יְ֝הֹוָ֗ה הִ֣יא תִתְהַלָּֽל
This means, “Favor is a lie, fake beauty is nothingness, and a woman is praised for her fear in Hashem.” The Maharal explains a person is beautiful from their spiritual state. They are שלם, or complete, in both their body and soul. This is how the Maharal explains how Sarah was שלם, complete, in both her body and her soul. She did not have a lack in either, and through this, she achieved true beauty.
The Maharal refers to the lashon hakodesh in the pasuk of Mishlei like the word “יופי”. This refers to the fake beauty that is vanity and thus, worthless. Unfortunately, this is the kind of beauty many people chase after.
The idea of being שלם connects to another piece of the Maharal where he describes being complete after doing teshuva. As people repent and get rid of their sins, they are complete (ספר נצח ישראל פרק יא). This same principle can be applied to Sarah. She was also complete because she did not have a חיסרון in her body or soul of goodness as she was pure in both. Throughout her life, Sarah became complete through teshuva. According to the Maharal on Mishlei, this granted her true beauty.
Sarah is also proved to be beautiful in the Gemara. The Talmud in Megillah 15a writes about the beautiful women of Tanach. It is said that, ״תנו רבנן ארבע נשים יפיפיות היו בעולם שרה ואביגיל רחב ואסתר״. This means that, “Rav said four extremely beautiful women in the world were Sarah, Avigail, Rachav, and Esther.” Sarah was truly beautiful. Her inner beauty played an intrinsic role in that.
Besides true beauty, teshuva is also one of the most interesting and profound Jewish topics the Maharal wrote about. Many of these teachings on repentance are alluded to in the Talmud Bavli. The Maharal explained these concepts further in various works such as נתיבות העולם, חידושי אגדות למהר״ל, משנת מהר״ל, ספר נצח ישראל, דרשות מהר״ל, and the גור אריה.
In general, the common interpretation of teshuva is repentance. Though the Maharal clarifies that teshuva can also mean many other things. First, teshuva means to heal. Second, achieving שלמות. Third, the effect of one’s sins or act of teshuva on the whole world. Fourth, the interesting cycle of teshuva which is found in the root of the word תשובה. Fifth, the connections between teshuva and Yom Kippur. Sixth, the need for Bnei Yisroel to stay holy. Finally, for the seventh, the Maharal illustrates why מיתה serves as an atonement.
First, the meaning of doing teshuva to heal was extensively discussed in the Talmud Bavli and by the Maharal. The Talmud started off on how teshuva brings healing to the world (תלמוד בבלי מסכת דף פו עמוד א). The Maharal teaches that in the beginning of a person's life, they are born without sin. Humans are born healthy, balanced, and pure. However, sometimes mistakes are made and sins are committed. So, they need to return back to Hashem and to return to this balance. Teshuva means getting back to the perfect state each person was in on the day of their birth. As such, through teshuva, or returning, it would be as if they are going back to the beginning of their lives when they were pure of sin. Here, teshuva means experiencing healing by being pure of sin and getting back into balance as they once were when they were born (נתיבות עולם נתיב התשובה פרק ב).
Second, we know that Hashem is שלם and He chose Am Yisroel because they are שלם too. Moreover, Am Yisroel has completeness when they are “healthy” and “healed”. This is something achieved by doing Hashem’s mitzvos. However, when they sin, they become deficient and sick. Furthermore, it nullifies this special choice made by Hashem since with sins, we are not longer in a state of completeness (ספר נצח ישראל פרק יא). It almost severs our relationship to our Creator. Therefore, we see the connection between getting healed by doing no more sins and thus, being שלם is drawn.
Third, the Maharal comments on the Talmud’s illustration when it alludes to how an individual’s teshuva affects the world’s repentance. Rabbi Meir explained, one’s teshuva enables the whole world to be forgiven for that crime (תלמוד בבלי מסכת יומא דף פו, עמוד ב). Incorporated into the Maharal’s approach, not only is the whole world forgiven, but also the world is brought back to the day it was born. That is, when they were pure of sins. They are brought back to the beginning of time when the whole world was its most pristine. As such, just as the יחיד is atoned for his sin, so is the entire world atoned for it (משנת מהר״ל ליום כיפורים).
Fourth, very fascinatingly, the word teshuva alludes to the nature and cycle of teshuva. The root of the word תשובה is שב״”, meaning “return”. The ש is the second to last letter in the aleph-beis. It refers to the fact that even if a person is far off the derech, there is still hope for return. This is because he did not go completely off, where there would be no hope for return. Rather, the person reached only the ש, and not the ת, the end of the aleph-beis. In actuality, they could go all the way back to ב, the second letter of the Hebrew alphabet. They are capable of returning back to Hashem. However, teshuva is only possible for someone who has not fully gone off the derech. For example, it would not be possible for Pharaoh or אחר to do teshuva because they fully strayed off the path of Hashem (חידושי אגדות למהר״ל עבודה זרה דף י״ז עמוד א).
Fifth, Yom Kippur and teshuva play out against a whole new backdrop with unique opportunities for spiritual endeavors. Chazal say that on this day, teshuva atones for all sins (תלמוד בבלי מסכת יומא גף פו עמוד א). However, Rashi comments that Yom Kippur forgives some wrongdoings, while some wrongdoings need יסורים for them to be atoned for (רש״י מסכת יומא דף פו עמוד א). The Maharal thinks that wrongdoings on Yom Kippur are just gotten rid of. Our neshamah was carved out directly from the throne of Hashem. Therefore, on Yom Kippur our teshuva arrives right in front of the throne of the מלך המלכים. As such, one’s crimes are immediately and completely eliminated (נתיבות עולם נתיב התשובה פרק ב).
Also, according to the Maharal, not only does the day of Yom Kippur itself atone, but Yom Kippur allows for teshuva because of the איסורים that the Jewish people cannot do. Sin usually comes from physical actions and desires. Therefore, the five prohibitions on Yom Kippur sets up the occasion that allows one to remove their physical body from the equation and only focus on their neshama. The less גוף and גשמי of every individual in Bnei Yisroel, the more spirituality they will have. In return, the five bodily prohibitions serve as a כפרה for their sins (גור אריה במדבר פרק כ).
Not only does Yom Kippur atone by making more room for the נשמה, and less on the גוף, but also, the practice of the שעיר לעזאזל is מכפר for Klal Yisroel’s crimes. During the Beis Hamikdash, the שעיר לעזאזל was commanded to be given each year to atone for Bnei Yisroel’s wrongdoings. This animal was used as if it was “holding” all of Bnei Yisroel’s sins. Therefore, the goat is pushed off a cliff to atone for those transgressions to be forgiven for and no longer counted. The Maharal adds that the goat's blood is very similar to human blood. This reveals that though Klal Yisroel may have sinned in the past, it is not who the nation truly is. Rather, they are pure and holy. Thus, this animal, which has similar blood to humans, will be thrown off a cliff to represent that these sins are not who בני ישראל are and it will never be a part of them. With this, they will be able to go into the קודש הקודשים as they are all forgiven and atoned for (גור אריה במדבר פרק כ).
Sixth, Hashem chose Am Yisroel because of their holiness and we must do teshuva to help maintain that holiness. Since Hashem our Master is pure, His human servants must be pure as well (תלמוד בבלי מסכת נדה דף ל עמוד ב). The Maharal further adds that not only must we be pure, but we have to not think that just because our holy neshamas are contained in physical bodies, humans are automatically impure. Rather, the holiness that we were born with can be maintained if people cling to Hashem and His mitzvos (חידושי אגדות למהר״ל נדה דף ל עמוד ב). In fact, Am Yisroel is commanded to be pure: ״קדושים תהיו” (ויקרא יט: ב רש״י). As servants of Hashem, Am Yisroel must be pure. If not, according to the Maharal, their neshamas are worthy of being burned (חידושי אגדות למהר״ל נדה דף ל עמוד ב).
Seventh, the ultimate idea on teshuva presented by the Maharal is how passing away brings great atonement. When the body is relinquished, the sins are relinquished. This idea hearkens back to the Yom Kippur concept mentioned above on how eliminating our physical bodies from being a factor, gets rid of our sins. Therefore, death brings כפרה to the person who passed. Even more so, the death of righteous people allows for atonement for the whole entire world. This is because the tzaddikim are the “עיקר המציאות”. This term refers to the main essence of why the world was created, simply for people to serve Hashem. Since צדיקים are extremely proficient in that, their death is considered to be a loss to the entire world. Therefore, their death only brings immense penance (גור אריה במדבר פרק כ).
In conclusion, teshuva can be achieved by returning back to balance and healing, acquiring completeness, reaching holiness, and when we do not stray totally off the derech of Hashem. These opportunities are always available, but are most acutely open to us on Yom Kippur and at death. Furthermore, all this returning back to Hashem has ripples throughout the entire world for bringing about universal forgiveness.
In his seforim, משנת מהר״ל and the גור אריה, the Maharal writes about true beauty. The Maharal analyzed the pasuk ("ויהיו חיי שרה מאה שנה ועשרים שנה ושבע שנים שני חיי שרה״ (בראשית כג:א“. This means, “And the life of Sarah was 127 years old, and that was the life of Sarah.” Rashi and Chazal interpret that at a hundred years old, Sarah had the spiritual level of a twenty year old, as she was pure of sin. At twenty years old, she had the beauty of a seven year old.
The Maharal asks why would the Torah care to talk about beauty as if it is something important? What is the meaning of true beauty? The Maharal explains that true beauty comes from within. It depends on the cleanliness of a neshama. Beauty is not externally based, but is wholly reliant upon the spiritual level and מדרגה one is on. Therefore, at twenty years old, Sarah did not actually look like a seven year old. However, she had the same refinement and pureness of soul that a seven year old would have.
In addition, the Maharal uses a quote from Mishlei to support that the essence of real beauty is really from internal spirituality. He quotes, “ואם תאמר למה משבח (משלי לא:ל) “שֶׁ֣קֶר הַ֭חֵן וְהֶ֣בֶל הַיֹּ֑פִי אִשָּׁ֥ה יִרְאַת־יְ֝הֹוָ֗ה הִ֣יא תִתְהַלָּֽל
This means, “Favor is a lie, fake beauty is nothingness, and a woman is praised for her fear in Hashem.” The Maharal explains a person is beautiful from their spiritual state. They are שלם, or complete, in both their body and soul. This is how the Maharal explains how Sarah was שלם, complete, in both her body and her soul. She did not have a lack in either, and through this, she achieved true beauty.
The Maharal refers to the lashon hakodesh in the pasuk of Mishlei like the word “יופי”. This refers to the fake beauty that is vanity and thus, worthless. Unfortunately, this is the kind of beauty many people chase after.
The idea of being שלם connects to another piece of the Maharal where he describes being complete after doing teshuva. As people repent and get rid of their sins, they are complete (ספר נצח ישראל פרק יא). This same principle can be applied to Sarah. She was also complete because she did not have a חיסרון in her body or soul of goodness as she was pure in both. Throughout her life, Sarah became complete through teshuva. According to the Maharal on Mishlei, this granted her true beauty.
Sarah is also proved to be beautiful in the Gemara. The Talmud in Megillah 15a writes about the beautiful women of Tanach. It is said that, ״תנו רבנן ארבע נשים יפיפיות היו בעולם שרה ואביגיל רחב ואסתר״. This means that, “Rav said four extremely beautiful women in the world were Sarah, Avigail, Rachav, and Esther.” Sarah was truly beautiful. Her inner beauty played an intrinsic role in that.
Besides true beauty, teshuva is also one of the most interesting and profound Jewish topics the Maharal wrote about. Many of these teachings on repentance are alluded to in the Talmud Bavli. The Maharal explained these concepts further in various works such as נתיבות העולם, חידושי אגדות למהר״ל, משנת מהר״ל, ספר נצח ישראל, דרשות מהר״ל, and the גור אריה.
In general, the common interpretation of teshuva is repentance. Though the Maharal clarifies that teshuva can also mean many other things. First, teshuva means to heal. Second, achieving שלמות. Third, the effect of one’s sins or act of teshuva on the whole world. Fourth, the interesting cycle of teshuva which is found in the root of the word תשובה. Fifth, the connections between teshuva and Yom Kippur. Sixth, the need for Bnei Yisroel to stay holy. Finally, for the seventh, the Maharal illustrates why מיתה serves as an atonement.
First, the meaning of doing teshuva to heal was extensively discussed in the Talmud Bavli and by the Maharal. The Talmud started off on how teshuva brings healing to the world (תלמוד בבלי מסכת דף פו עמוד א). The Maharal teaches that in the beginning of a person's life, they are born without sin. Humans are born healthy, balanced, and pure. However, sometimes mistakes are made and sins are committed. So, they need to return back to Hashem and to return to this balance. Teshuva means getting back to the perfect state each person was in on the day of their birth. As such, through teshuva, or returning, it would be as if they are going back to the beginning of their lives when they were pure of sin. Here, teshuva means experiencing healing by being pure of sin and getting back into balance as they once were when they were born (נתיבות עולם נתיב התשובה פרק ב).
Second, we know that Hashem is שלם and He chose Am Yisroel because they are שלם too. Moreover, Am Yisroel has completeness when they are “healthy” and “healed”. This is something achieved by doing Hashem’s mitzvos. However, when they sin, they become deficient and sick. Furthermore, it nullifies this special choice made by Hashem since with sins, we are not longer in a state of completeness (ספר נצח ישראל פרק יא). It almost severs our relationship to our Creator. Therefore, we see the connection between getting healed by doing no more sins and thus, being שלם is drawn.
Third, the Maharal comments on the Talmud’s illustration when it alludes to how an individual’s teshuva affects the world’s repentance. Rabbi Meir explained, one’s teshuva enables the whole world to be forgiven for that crime (תלמוד בבלי מסכת יומא דף פו, עמוד ב). Incorporated into the Maharal’s approach, not only is the whole world forgiven, but also the world is brought back to the day it was born. That is, when they were pure of sins. They are brought back to the beginning of time when the whole world was its most pristine. As such, just as the יחיד is atoned for his sin, so is the entire world atoned for it (משנת מהר״ל ליום כיפורים).
Fourth, very fascinatingly, the word teshuva alludes to the nature and cycle of teshuva. The root of the word תשובה is שב״”, meaning “return”. The ש is the second to last letter in the aleph-beis. It refers to the fact that even if a person is far off the derech, there is still hope for return. This is because he did not go completely off, where there would be no hope for return. Rather, the person reached only the ש, and not the ת, the end of the aleph-beis. In actuality, they could go all the way back to ב, the second letter of the Hebrew alphabet. They are capable of returning back to Hashem. However, teshuva is only possible for someone who has not fully gone off the derech. For example, it would not be possible for Pharaoh or אחר to do teshuva because they fully strayed off the path of Hashem (חידושי אגדות למהר״ל עבודה זרה דף י״ז עמוד א).
Fifth, Yom Kippur and teshuva play out against a whole new backdrop with unique opportunities for spiritual endeavors. Chazal say that on this day, teshuva atones for all sins (תלמוד בבלי מסכת יומא גף פו עמוד א). However, Rashi comments that Yom Kippur forgives some wrongdoings, while some wrongdoings need יסורים for them to be atoned for (רש״י מסכת יומא דף פו עמוד א). The Maharal thinks that wrongdoings on Yom Kippur are just gotten rid of. Our neshamah was carved out directly from the throne of Hashem. Therefore, on Yom Kippur our teshuva arrives right in front of the throne of the מלך המלכים. As such, one’s crimes are immediately and completely eliminated (נתיבות עולם נתיב התשובה פרק ב).
Also, according to the Maharal, not only does the day of Yom Kippur itself atone, but Yom Kippur allows for teshuva because of the איסורים that the Jewish people cannot do. Sin usually comes from physical actions and desires. Therefore, the five prohibitions on Yom Kippur sets up the occasion that allows one to remove their physical body from the equation and only focus on their neshama. The less גוף and גשמי of every individual in Bnei Yisroel, the more spirituality they will have. In return, the five bodily prohibitions serve as a כפרה for their sins (גור אריה במדבר פרק כ).
Not only does Yom Kippur atone by making more room for the נשמה, and less on the גוף, but also, the practice of the שעיר לעזאזל is מכפר for Klal Yisroel’s crimes. During the Beis Hamikdash, the שעיר לעזאזל was commanded to be given each year to atone for Bnei Yisroel’s wrongdoings. This animal was used as if it was “holding” all of Bnei Yisroel’s sins. Therefore, the goat is pushed off a cliff to atone for those transgressions to be forgiven for and no longer counted. The Maharal adds that the goat's blood is very similar to human blood. This reveals that though Klal Yisroel may have sinned in the past, it is not who the nation truly is. Rather, they are pure and holy. Thus, this animal, which has similar blood to humans, will be thrown off a cliff to represent that these sins are not who בני ישראל are and it will never be a part of them. With this, they will be able to go into the קודש הקודשים as they are all forgiven and atoned for (גור אריה במדבר פרק כ).
Sixth, Hashem chose Am Yisroel because of their holiness and we must do teshuva to help maintain that holiness. Since Hashem our Master is pure, His human servants must be pure as well (תלמוד בבלי מסכת נדה דף ל עמוד ב). The Maharal further adds that not only must we be pure, but we have to not think that just because our holy neshamas are contained in physical bodies, humans are automatically impure. Rather, the holiness that we were born with can be maintained if people cling to Hashem and His mitzvos (חידושי אגדות למהר״ל נדה דף ל עמוד ב). In fact, Am Yisroel is commanded to be pure: ״קדושים תהיו” (ויקרא יט: ב רש״י). As servants of Hashem, Am Yisroel must be pure. If not, according to the Maharal, their neshamas are worthy of being burned (חידושי אגדות למהר״ל נדה דף ל עמוד ב).
Seventh, the ultimate idea on teshuva presented by the Maharal is how passing away brings great atonement. When the body is relinquished, the sins are relinquished. This idea hearkens back to the Yom Kippur concept mentioned above on how eliminating our physical bodies from being a factor, gets rid of our sins. Therefore, death brings כפרה to the person who passed. Even more so, the death of righteous people allows for atonement for the whole entire world. This is because the tzaddikim are the “עיקר המציאות”. This term refers to the main essence of why the world was created, simply for people to serve Hashem. Since צדיקים are extremely proficient in that, their death is considered to be a loss to the entire world. Therefore, their death only brings immense penance (גור אריה במדבר פרק כ).
In conclusion, teshuva can be achieved by returning back to balance and healing, acquiring completeness, reaching holiness, and when we do not stray totally off the derech of Hashem. These opportunities are always available, but are most acutely open to us on Yom Kippur and at death. Furthermore, all this returning back to Hashem has ripples throughout the entire world for bringing about universal forgiveness.
Rav Kook Advises To Seek Good In All Philosophies & Institutions
Rav Abraham Issac Kook was the famous first Ashkenazi chief Rabbi of Israel during the British Mandate. In addition to this leading role, he wrote many works of philosophy. This included two very inspirational ideas which are found in his works ספר עין יעקב and שמונם קבצים.
For the first idea, Rav Kook explained in ספר עין יעקב how to approach the world’s movements, opinions, or ideas. To quote, he wrote, “כשמתנגדים לאיזה שיטה אבל התנגדותם היא בשלילה…אבל כ״ז שלא ימלאו ידם לבנות שיטה אחרת שתנהיג את העולם בדרך רצוי וטוב ממנה״. This means, that “when people oppose a certain system, but their opposition is in the negative…they should fill their hands with building another system that will lead the world in way that is pleasing and better (הרב קוק מלחמות הדעות #3, ספר עין יעקב).” In other words, the Rav made it distinctly clear that when we combat bad people or bad philosophy, we need to do it with our own good ideas to fight the bad back with. We must replace the void left by removing the negativity with something positive. In addition, to a negative institution or idea, there is good to be taken from it. This way, with our good solution and the good taken from the bad, we increase the good exponentially by using both. In actuality, this is a higher level than settling on only our favorable idea, as we are adding more good to the mix.
Rav Kook brought the story of סדום as an example to the philosophy above. סדום was the quintessential city of anti-chesed. Any chesed act in the city of סדום was censored. Clearly, this city’s foundational ideas were unacceptable. Meanwhile, Avraham, who was living in ארץ כנען, was the quintessential pro-chesed doer. Any chance he got, he and his wife Sarah would perform amazing acts of chesed. Yet, when סדום was going to be destroyed, Avraham tried his best to save the city, especially because his nephew Lot lived there. While סדום was an evil place, as were its inhabitants, Lot had something in him that was worth saving. So, with G-do’s help, Avraham successfully took Lot out of this chaotic city.
In this very example, Avraham achieved all of what Rav Kook spoke about. He agreed that eradicating evil was necessary, but made sure to rescue that which was worth saving. At the same time, he replaced corruption with his own brand of good – chessed. The same chessed he taught Lot saved his life. Avraham Avinu was perfect for the job since he embodied the exact opposite ideology of סדום. As Rav Kook wrote, “והנה ההיפך ממדת סדום ממש היי אברהם בעל חסד” (הרב קוק מלחמות הדעות #3, ספר עי יעקב). The spark of goodness in Lot was intertwined with Avraham’s incredible middah of chesed. Avraham combated the evil of סדום with his strong base of chesed.
In the second idea, Rav Kook wrote in שמונה קבצים how important it is to let go of our forefathers’ transgressions as well as our own. To quote, “הוא טרוד הרבה בהוצאת האורים מעצמיותו, ואינו יכול לפנות לכל האור המנצל, אשר הורישוהו אבות שבדורות שעברו…שההוצאה מן מקור עצמו תבא לו בלא טרח, רק כמעין המתגבר מעצמיות הטבעית…ואז יהיה משחרר מכבלי העצמיות״. This means, that “by extracting the light from one’s self, and not turning to the bad light, [the sins] of one’s ancestors and the source of his own source will not be difficult, but he’ll overcome his natural self…and then he will be will be freed of the shackles of himself” (שמונה קבצים ג, רצו). This can be understood that everything done in the past by one’s father and forefathers need not apply at all. It is not a given that people have to be held back from the sins of their forefathers or necessarily repeat them. Even if the evil inclination for the sins is embedded in them, people have the capability to wipe the slate clean and start over. They can establish new patterns and any sins committed in the past do not matter. They can be freed from the shackles of sin they thought were holding them back. They are free to become their own fine and upstanding person.
I find both the first and second piece of Rav Kook’s writing relevant to myself because it allows me to view the world in a more positive and hopeful light:
According to the first idea, a movement or idea does not have to be completely wrong and eradicated. There usually is, even if small, some amount of good to be taken from it. Therefore, the ideas I have encountered, or will encounter, do not have to be absolutely judged as destructive or unacceptable. Rather, I can parse out the good from it. Therefore, I would be looking at all the seemingly lousy ideologies in this word in a more positive light. I find hope in the idea that most things are not all bad and that there is good to be found in the most unlikely of places.
The second work of logic, by the Rav of how we can have a clean slate no matter our forefathers past and how that does not have to affect us by having to continue it is extremely comforting. Even if they or I have sinned before, I can return back to Hashem and do בעזרת ה׳ תשובה גמורה. I am not a prisoner of my past or my upbringing or the negative parts of my heritage. Furthermore, as Chazal so Insightfully wrote, ״במקום שבעלי תשובה עומדין- צדיקים גמורים אינם עומדין״ (Brachos 34B). This wrinkle enable me to conceptualize the past sins of my ancestors and myself as something that made me greater instead of something that held me back. For example, רבי אליעזר בן דורדיה indulged in grave sins against Torah. However, he prevailed in doing teshuva in an instant right before his death. This is how he gained the title רבי. It is truly never too late to turn a new page AND succeed grandly.
In conclusion, Rav Kook’s works of writing affected me only for the good. By understanding and integrating these ideas, my outlook on the world was flipped to see much good and value in my past and everything around me.
For the first idea, Rav Kook explained in ספר עין יעקב how to approach the world’s movements, opinions, or ideas. To quote, he wrote, “כשמתנגדים לאיזה שיטה אבל התנגדותם היא בשלילה…אבל כ״ז שלא ימלאו ידם לבנות שיטה אחרת שתנהיג את העולם בדרך רצוי וטוב ממנה״. This means, that “when people oppose a certain system, but their opposition is in the negative…they should fill their hands with building another system that will lead the world in way that is pleasing and better (הרב קוק מלחמות הדעות #3, ספר עין יעקב).” In other words, the Rav made it distinctly clear that when we combat bad people or bad philosophy, we need to do it with our own good ideas to fight the bad back with. We must replace the void left by removing the negativity with something positive. In addition, to a negative institution or idea, there is good to be taken from it. This way, with our good solution and the good taken from the bad, we increase the good exponentially by using both. In actuality, this is a higher level than settling on only our favorable idea, as we are adding more good to the mix.
Rav Kook brought the story of סדום as an example to the philosophy above. סדום was the quintessential city of anti-chesed. Any chesed act in the city of סדום was censored. Clearly, this city’s foundational ideas were unacceptable. Meanwhile, Avraham, who was living in ארץ כנען, was the quintessential pro-chesed doer. Any chance he got, he and his wife Sarah would perform amazing acts of chesed. Yet, when סדום was going to be destroyed, Avraham tried his best to save the city, especially because his nephew Lot lived there. While סדום was an evil place, as were its inhabitants, Lot had something in him that was worth saving. So, with G-do’s help, Avraham successfully took Lot out of this chaotic city.
In this very example, Avraham achieved all of what Rav Kook spoke about. He agreed that eradicating evil was necessary, but made sure to rescue that which was worth saving. At the same time, he replaced corruption with his own brand of good – chessed. The same chessed he taught Lot saved his life. Avraham Avinu was perfect for the job since he embodied the exact opposite ideology of סדום. As Rav Kook wrote, “והנה ההיפך ממדת סדום ממש היי אברהם בעל חסד” (הרב קוק מלחמות הדעות #3, ספר עי יעקב). The spark of goodness in Lot was intertwined with Avraham’s incredible middah of chesed. Avraham combated the evil of סדום with his strong base of chesed.
In the second idea, Rav Kook wrote in שמונה קבצים how important it is to let go of our forefathers’ transgressions as well as our own. To quote, “הוא טרוד הרבה בהוצאת האורים מעצמיותו, ואינו יכול לפנות לכל האור המנצל, אשר הורישוהו אבות שבדורות שעברו…שההוצאה מן מקור עצמו תבא לו בלא טרח, רק כמעין המתגבר מעצמיות הטבעית…ואז יהיה משחרר מכבלי העצמיות״. This means, that “by extracting the light from one’s self, and not turning to the bad light, [the sins] of one’s ancestors and the source of his own source will not be difficult, but he’ll overcome his natural self…and then he will be will be freed of the shackles of himself” (שמונה קבצים ג, רצו). This can be understood that everything done in the past by one’s father and forefathers need not apply at all. It is not a given that people have to be held back from the sins of their forefathers or necessarily repeat them. Even if the evil inclination for the sins is embedded in them, people have the capability to wipe the slate clean and start over. They can establish new patterns and any sins committed in the past do not matter. They can be freed from the shackles of sin they thought were holding them back. They are free to become their own fine and upstanding person.
I find both the first and second piece of Rav Kook’s writing relevant to myself because it allows me to view the world in a more positive and hopeful light:
According to the first idea, a movement or idea does not have to be completely wrong and eradicated. There usually is, even if small, some amount of good to be taken from it. Therefore, the ideas I have encountered, or will encounter, do not have to be absolutely judged as destructive or unacceptable. Rather, I can parse out the good from it. Therefore, I would be looking at all the seemingly lousy ideologies in this word in a more positive light. I find hope in the idea that most things are not all bad and that there is good to be found in the most unlikely of places.
The second work of logic, by the Rav of how we can have a clean slate no matter our forefathers past and how that does not have to affect us by having to continue it is extremely comforting. Even if they or I have sinned before, I can return back to Hashem and do בעזרת ה׳ תשובה גמורה. I am not a prisoner of my past or my upbringing or the negative parts of my heritage. Furthermore, as Chazal so Insightfully wrote, ״במקום שבעלי תשובה עומדין- צדיקים גמורים אינם עומדין״ (Brachos 34B). This wrinkle enable me to conceptualize the past sins of my ancestors and myself as something that made me greater instead of something that held me back. For example, רבי אליעזר בן דורדיה indulged in grave sins against Torah. However, he prevailed in doing teshuva in an instant right before his death. This is how he gained the title רבי. It is truly never too late to turn a new page AND succeed grandly.
In conclusion, Rav Kook’s works of writing affected me only for the good. By understanding and integrating these ideas, my outlook on the world was flipped to see much good and value in my past and everything around me.
Sefer Mishlei Demands Justice!
The book of Mishlei was written between the years 1015 and 975 B.C.E by Shlomo Hamelech, who was arguably one of the wisest people who ever lived. It is fitting he wrote it since Mishlei consists of advice. When delved into deeply enough, the lessons are eye-opening. One of the most interesting topics in Mishlei is the topic of truth and falsehood. From a selection of pasukim on truth and falsehood, Shlomo teaches when to be truthful in certain situations and not lie. This includes, being truthful in court, selling Torah for profit, servants serving an untruthful master, as well as the attitude of tzaddikim towards שקר. Being entrenched in falsehood in each of the situations is wrong and should be absolutely avoided. Furthermore, it is only worth it to act and speak with אמת because if you do not, Hashem will take retribution on you. This is why tzaddikim only speak the truth as they despise lies. To help convince you, Shlomo Hamelech provides enough examples and encouragement to act in truth.
As stated above, Shlomo expounded on the fact that people must be truthful in court. As Mishlei writes, ״יפיח אמונה ידיד צדיק ועד שקרים״. This means, “He who testifies faithfully tells the truth, but a false witness deceit” (Mishlei 12:17, translated from Sefaria.) One must be באמת as a witness in court or they are just deceitful people. Ibn Ezra explains the word ״יפיח״ to mean that the one who speaks the truth in general will speak the truth in court. ״עד שקרים״ are the bitter men who testify with lies (Mishlei 12:17, Ibn Ezra). Ralbag explains that lying men are used to spewing lies, whereas truthful men are used to only speaking the truth (Mishlei 12:17, Ralbag.) Malbim writes that the truth teller will speak in a calming and almost silent voice. A liar will speak with a loud, noisy, and unsettled voice. The court will be able to tell the difference (Mishlei 12:17, Malbim). In essence, truthful men will speak justice in court, with a calming tone, just as he is used to speaking in all areas of life. On the other hand, the false speaker will lie in court, with an upset voice, as that is the way he usually conducts his life. Shlomo warns to be like the אמת speaker and not the שקר sayer.
Shlomo Hamelech also warns of not learning or teaching Torah for profit. For example, when learning or teaching Torah, it should be only לשמע and not for profit or reward from Hashem. The pasuk in Mishlei states, “אמת קנה ואל תמכר חכמה ומוסר ובינה”. This means, “Buy truth and never sell it. And wisdom, discipline, and understanding” (Mishlei 23:23, translated by Sefaria). In other words, one should only obtain truth and never sell their wisdom, discipline, and understanding for money or a specific reward even from Hashem. Since Torah is called emes, Rashi learns this pasuk that people should learn Torah לשמע and not to just get שכר (Mishlei 23:23, Rashi). Ibn Ezra writes that people should only buy books and buy into philosophy that is correct (Mishlei 23:23, Ibn Ezra). Rabbeinu Bachya explains that no men should teach Torah for the sake of profit (Mishlei 23:23, Rabbeinu Bachya). All in all, the meforshim explain this pasuk in Mishlei to means to not learn or teach Torah for profit, and to not buy into false ideas. They advise to learn and teach Torah for the sake of Heaven.
Mishlei goes on to alert that the servants within a lying institution whether it be a business, academy, or government, will also be full of lies and deceit. To quote, Shlomo writes, ״משל מקשיב על דבר שקר כל משרתיו״. This means, “A ruler who listens to lies, all his ministers will be wicked” (Mishlei 29:12, translated by Sefaria). Metsudos David explains that the servants turn into liars when lies and sins enter the soul (Mishlei 29:12, Metsudos David.) Ralbag defends them as he says that the servants are only doing their job, following their master (Mishlei 29:12, Ralbag.) Malbim explains that with falsehood, the evil spirits arise on the master and the servants. Eventually, the master will turn out to be a real fool (Mishlei 29:12, Malbim). In essence, Shlomo Hamelech is trying to warn of corrupt leaders and their administrations. If the top is corrupt, so are their employees. In fact, this is a known business idea that businesses are run from the top down. If the top of the organization is motivated, corrupt, happy, or sad, so will be the rest of the organization. Be careful of these lying places and people, and do not get involved or else those involved will be cursed with lies, sins, and an evil spirit.
After understanding that if the top of an organization is false, so is the rest of the organization, Shlomo Hamelech emphasizes in the fact that Hashem runs the world and will anyway know who is being truthful and who is being false. With this, He will pay back the people with what they deserve. As Mishlei states, ״כי תאמר הן לא ידענן זה הלא תכן לבות הוא יבין ונצר נפשך הוא ידע והשיב לאדם כפילו״. This means, If you say, “we knew nothing of it”, surely He who fathoms hearts will discern the truth, He who watches over your life will know it, and He will pay each man he deserves (Mishlei 24:12, translated by Sefaria). Hashem knows everything in your heart and mind. There is no fooling Him about what you knew and your motivations. Malbim explains that Hashem understands everything and will save everyone who deserves to be saved. This is because Hashem works in מידה כנגד מידה, measure for measure (Mishlei 24:12, Malbim). The Ralbag adds that Hashem knows how much one has tried in everything they do (Mishlei 24:12). Therefore, as long as people do their due diligence to speak the truth, He will pay them back with only rewards. As such, people should keep to the truth not only because it is right, but also because Hashem is watching and will pay you back!
While it can be a challenge to be truthful in court, not seek Torah for profit, remain true in whatever institution one belongs to, or be mindful Hashem is watching, tzaddikim have perfected being truthful in everything. As Mishlei states, ״דבר שקר ישנא צדיק ורשע יבאיש ויחפיר״. This means, “Tzaddikim despise falsehood, but a rasha dirties and insults” (Mishlei 13:5, translated by Nafshi.org). This pasuk explains plainly and simply that tzaddikim live and breathe truth and stay completely away from lies. However, rasha’im use falsehood for everything and anything. The Metsudos David writes that tzaddikim are so sensitive that they cannot even handle lies (Mishlei 13:5, Metsudos David). The Rabbeinu Yonah says that a tzaddik would not use the methods used by the rasha, which in this case is lying (Mishlei 13:5, Rabbeinu Yonah). The Meiri adds that tzaddikim loathe falsehood so much that they will reject the people who spew lies (Mishlei 13:5, Meiri). Rav Shimshon Rafael Hirsch notes that lying is a tool that is employed by evil people and so lying itself becomes a crime (Mishlei 13:5, Rav Shimshon Rafael Hirsch). Ibn Yechyei explains that in a situation, there are many lies, but there is only one truth (Mishlei 13:5, Ibn Yechyei). Ultimately, tzaddikim detest שקר and the people of שקר to the degree that they do not speak it or interact with people who do. In every which way, they have become proficient in the trait of אמת.
In other parts of Mishlei, this conduct of how tzaddikim stay away from liars is similar to when Shlomo Hamelech warns to stay away from bad people in general. In Mishlei perek beis, the idea is written to avoid spiritually harmful people who can influence others. This includes, everyone who can influence people to not do mitzvos or do avodah zarah. We should absolutely separate from these people (Mishlei 2:16, Rashi). The tzaddikim got it right as they abhor deceitful humans (Mishlei 13:5). Clearly, they fulfill the idea to steer away from bad influential people as they steer clear from liars.
Ibn Yechyei comments on a pasuk in Mishlei perek יג that there are many lies, but only one truth to every story. This connects this to a משל in Mishlei perek ב that there is a wide path and a narrow path. The wide path, or the דרך, is a path in avodas Hashem that anyone can get to. Whereas, the narrower path, the אורח, is a path that not necessarily everyone can reach (Mishlei 2:20, Gra). Seemingly, this a perfect parable for the idea that to every situation there is one truth and a variety of lies. The דרך is the wide path with many lies that anyone can be on and directed towards. The אורח is the narrow path that holds the one piece of truth. This is likely why the famous mussar sefer is entitled אורחות צדיקים. It teaches the path to follow to be a tzaddik. Though this path is not easily obtainable for everyone, perhaps the tzaddikim have had the zechus to walk on it if they only believe and act in truth. The parable brought down in perek beis of Mishlei connects to the idea of Mishlei perek yud-gimel that while there is a wide path with a selection of lies in a story, there is only one truth on a narrow path. Ultimately, that one truth will stand.
While the connection between tzaddikim staying away from bad people and on the אורח and narrow path is all very fascinating, I find the מידה כנגד מידה idea brought down in Mishlei as it says, ״כי תאמר הן לא ידענן זה הלא תכן לבות הוא יבין ונצר נפשך הוא ידע והשיב לאדם כפילו״ (Mishlei 24:12) to be the most comforting and beneficial to me. This is because sometimes we think we try our best to do the most correct and truthful thing, but we do not feel like we are reaping the rewards. Yet, this pasuk in Mishlei comes to show that Hashem remembers all deeds- good and bad. Therefore, as long as we continue to strive towards אמת and steer away from שקר, Hashem will repay us back with good. Whether at a later date in העולם הזה or in העולם הבא, I now know that speaking, believing, and incorporating truth into my life will all be worth it when the reward is finally reaped.
In conclusion, being truthful only benefits us. Let us try to emulate tzaddikim who detest falsehood and oppose rasha’im who literally live on lies. We can do this by the few examples Shlomo Hamelech presented to us; being truthful in court, being truthful in teaching Torah, and being truthful in a group that we belong to. It will all work out for the good people in the end because the liars will be paid back with punishment and the truth tellers will be rewarded. Hopefully, with the scenarios and chizuk Shlomo Hamelech presents in Mishlei about אמת, we will only strive for true emes.
As stated above, Shlomo expounded on the fact that people must be truthful in court. As Mishlei writes, ״יפיח אמונה ידיד צדיק ועד שקרים״. This means, “He who testifies faithfully tells the truth, but a false witness deceit” (Mishlei 12:17, translated from Sefaria.) One must be באמת as a witness in court or they are just deceitful people. Ibn Ezra explains the word ״יפיח״ to mean that the one who speaks the truth in general will speak the truth in court. ״עד שקרים״ are the bitter men who testify with lies (Mishlei 12:17, Ibn Ezra). Ralbag explains that lying men are used to spewing lies, whereas truthful men are used to only speaking the truth (Mishlei 12:17, Ralbag.) Malbim writes that the truth teller will speak in a calming and almost silent voice. A liar will speak with a loud, noisy, and unsettled voice. The court will be able to tell the difference (Mishlei 12:17, Malbim). In essence, truthful men will speak justice in court, with a calming tone, just as he is used to speaking in all areas of life. On the other hand, the false speaker will lie in court, with an upset voice, as that is the way he usually conducts his life. Shlomo warns to be like the אמת speaker and not the שקר sayer.
Shlomo Hamelech also warns of not learning or teaching Torah for profit. For example, when learning or teaching Torah, it should be only לשמע and not for profit or reward from Hashem. The pasuk in Mishlei states, “אמת קנה ואל תמכר חכמה ומוסר ובינה”. This means, “Buy truth and never sell it. And wisdom, discipline, and understanding” (Mishlei 23:23, translated by Sefaria). In other words, one should only obtain truth and never sell their wisdom, discipline, and understanding for money or a specific reward even from Hashem. Since Torah is called emes, Rashi learns this pasuk that people should learn Torah לשמע and not to just get שכר (Mishlei 23:23, Rashi). Ibn Ezra writes that people should only buy books and buy into philosophy that is correct (Mishlei 23:23, Ibn Ezra). Rabbeinu Bachya explains that no men should teach Torah for the sake of profit (Mishlei 23:23, Rabbeinu Bachya). All in all, the meforshim explain this pasuk in Mishlei to means to not learn or teach Torah for profit, and to not buy into false ideas. They advise to learn and teach Torah for the sake of Heaven.
Mishlei goes on to alert that the servants within a lying institution whether it be a business, academy, or government, will also be full of lies and deceit. To quote, Shlomo writes, ״משל מקשיב על דבר שקר כל משרתיו״. This means, “A ruler who listens to lies, all his ministers will be wicked” (Mishlei 29:12, translated by Sefaria). Metsudos David explains that the servants turn into liars when lies and sins enter the soul (Mishlei 29:12, Metsudos David.) Ralbag defends them as he says that the servants are only doing their job, following their master (Mishlei 29:12, Ralbag.) Malbim explains that with falsehood, the evil spirits arise on the master and the servants. Eventually, the master will turn out to be a real fool (Mishlei 29:12, Malbim). In essence, Shlomo Hamelech is trying to warn of corrupt leaders and their administrations. If the top is corrupt, so are their employees. In fact, this is a known business idea that businesses are run from the top down. If the top of the organization is motivated, corrupt, happy, or sad, so will be the rest of the organization. Be careful of these lying places and people, and do not get involved or else those involved will be cursed with lies, sins, and an evil spirit.
After understanding that if the top of an organization is false, so is the rest of the organization, Shlomo Hamelech emphasizes in the fact that Hashem runs the world and will anyway know who is being truthful and who is being false. With this, He will pay back the people with what they deserve. As Mishlei states, ״כי תאמר הן לא ידענן זה הלא תכן לבות הוא יבין ונצר נפשך הוא ידע והשיב לאדם כפילו״. This means, If you say, “we knew nothing of it”, surely He who fathoms hearts will discern the truth, He who watches over your life will know it, and He will pay each man he deserves (Mishlei 24:12, translated by Sefaria). Hashem knows everything in your heart and mind. There is no fooling Him about what you knew and your motivations. Malbim explains that Hashem understands everything and will save everyone who deserves to be saved. This is because Hashem works in מידה כנגד מידה, measure for measure (Mishlei 24:12, Malbim). The Ralbag adds that Hashem knows how much one has tried in everything they do (Mishlei 24:12). Therefore, as long as people do their due diligence to speak the truth, He will pay them back with only rewards. As such, people should keep to the truth not only because it is right, but also because Hashem is watching and will pay you back!
While it can be a challenge to be truthful in court, not seek Torah for profit, remain true in whatever institution one belongs to, or be mindful Hashem is watching, tzaddikim have perfected being truthful in everything. As Mishlei states, ״דבר שקר ישנא צדיק ורשע יבאיש ויחפיר״. This means, “Tzaddikim despise falsehood, but a rasha dirties and insults” (Mishlei 13:5, translated by Nafshi.org). This pasuk explains plainly and simply that tzaddikim live and breathe truth and stay completely away from lies. However, rasha’im use falsehood for everything and anything. The Metsudos David writes that tzaddikim are so sensitive that they cannot even handle lies (Mishlei 13:5, Metsudos David). The Rabbeinu Yonah says that a tzaddik would not use the methods used by the rasha, which in this case is lying (Mishlei 13:5, Rabbeinu Yonah). The Meiri adds that tzaddikim loathe falsehood so much that they will reject the people who spew lies (Mishlei 13:5, Meiri). Rav Shimshon Rafael Hirsch notes that lying is a tool that is employed by evil people and so lying itself becomes a crime (Mishlei 13:5, Rav Shimshon Rafael Hirsch). Ibn Yechyei explains that in a situation, there are many lies, but there is only one truth (Mishlei 13:5, Ibn Yechyei). Ultimately, tzaddikim detest שקר and the people of שקר to the degree that they do not speak it or interact with people who do. In every which way, they have become proficient in the trait of אמת.
In other parts of Mishlei, this conduct of how tzaddikim stay away from liars is similar to when Shlomo Hamelech warns to stay away from bad people in general. In Mishlei perek beis, the idea is written to avoid spiritually harmful people who can influence others. This includes, everyone who can influence people to not do mitzvos or do avodah zarah. We should absolutely separate from these people (Mishlei 2:16, Rashi). The tzaddikim got it right as they abhor deceitful humans (Mishlei 13:5). Clearly, they fulfill the idea to steer away from bad influential people as they steer clear from liars.
Ibn Yechyei comments on a pasuk in Mishlei perek יג that there are many lies, but only one truth to every story. This connects this to a משל in Mishlei perek ב that there is a wide path and a narrow path. The wide path, or the דרך, is a path in avodas Hashem that anyone can get to. Whereas, the narrower path, the אורח, is a path that not necessarily everyone can reach (Mishlei 2:20, Gra). Seemingly, this a perfect parable for the idea that to every situation there is one truth and a variety of lies. The דרך is the wide path with many lies that anyone can be on and directed towards. The אורח is the narrow path that holds the one piece of truth. This is likely why the famous mussar sefer is entitled אורחות צדיקים. It teaches the path to follow to be a tzaddik. Though this path is not easily obtainable for everyone, perhaps the tzaddikim have had the zechus to walk on it if they only believe and act in truth. The parable brought down in perek beis of Mishlei connects to the idea of Mishlei perek yud-gimel that while there is a wide path with a selection of lies in a story, there is only one truth on a narrow path. Ultimately, that one truth will stand.
While the connection between tzaddikim staying away from bad people and on the אורח and narrow path is all very fascinating, I find the מידה כנגד מידה idea brought down in Mishlei as it says, ״כי תאמר הן לא ידענן זה הלא תכן לבות הוא יבין ונצר נפשך הוא ידע והשיב לאדם כפילו״ (Mishlei 24:12) to be the most comforting and beneficial to me. This is because sometimes we think we try our best to do the most correct and truthful thing, but we do not feel like we are reaping the rewards. Yet, this pasuk in Mishlei comes to show that Hashem remembers all deeds- good and bad. Therefore, as long as we continue to strive towards אמת and steer away from שקר, Hashem will repay us back with good. Whether at a later date in העולם הזה or in העולם הבא, I now know that speaking, believing, and incorporating truth into my life will all be worth it when the reward is finally reaped.
In conclusion, being truthful only benefits us. Let us try to emulate tzaddikim who detest falsehood and oppose rasha’im who literally live on lies. We can do this by the few examples Shlomo Hamelech presented to us; being truthful in court, being truthful in teaching Torah, and being truthful in a group that we belong to. It will all work out for the good people in the end because the liars will be paid back with punishment and the truth tellers will be rewarded. Hopefully, with the scenarios and chizuk Shlomo Hamelech presents in Mishlei about אמת, we will only strive for true emes.
Parshas Emor Introspection
Parshas Emor
In Parshas Emor, the pasuk explains, “וספרתם לכם ממחרת השבת מיום הביאכם את עמר התנופה שבע שבתות תמימת תהיינה”. This means, “And you counted from shabbos, from the day I brought you the omer gift and seven shabboses you will be pure” (ספר ויקרא פרק כ"ג פסוק ט"ו). From the following meforshim and sources, the amazing understanding of sefiras ha’omer and the gift of Torah will be explained.
The Sefer Hachinuch explains how we await the day we receive the Torah with the counting of the Omer. The reason for such emphasis on receiving the Torah is because the main part of Bnei Yisroel is Torah. The reason they left Mitzrayim was so they could accept the Torah. The Torah is so imperative and necessary to Am Yisroel that in order to learn at all hours of the day, there are different time zones so Torah and mitzvos can be learned and performed all the time. By counting the sefira everyday, Bnei Yisroel awaits with excitement to commemorate the day the Torah was received. The day should be celebrated with fervent love for Hashem as He redeemed us and gave us the tremendous gift of Torah. The best thing every Jew can do is to learn Torah and perform the Mitzvos to their fullest extent.
According to a Gemara in Nedarim (נדרים דף פא), unfortunately, Bnei Yisroel failed to appreciate the Torah and Hashem’s mitzvos. They did not value the Torah enough because they did not make a bracha upon limud Torah. Therefore, the second Beis Hamikdash was destroyed. Bnei Yisroel should learn from this generation's mistake to uphold the Torah with value and gratitude that it was ever given to us.
The Pachad Yitzchak quoted Mishlei as it said, "מצרף לכסף וכור לזהב ואיש לפי מהללו". This means, “you can tell if silver and gold is pure, and you can tell about a person by what he praises” (משלי פרק כז פסוק כא). Rabeninu Yonah further explained that it does not matter how people praise a person, but rather what the person himself praises. For example, does the person praise a nice house or new possession? Or, does the person praise learning Torah and finishing siyumim? From what a person praises it is clear what he values in life. As Jews, Torah and performing mitzvos should be the main thing praised and looked at highly. Torah should be the main desire and highly appreciated in a yid’s life.
It is written in a gemara in Brachos (ברכות דף סח) of the Roman decree against learning Torah and performing mitzvos. However, Rabbi Akiva was still holding gatherings for it. When they questioned Rabbi Akiva why he was continuing and not afraid of them, he gave them a mashal; It is about a fisherman who was trying to catch a fish. Someone who does not know about fish will think that a fish out of the water is having fun because they are flopping around. However, if a fish is out of the water, they will flop around and eventually die. This is like Bnei Yisroel without Torah. If Bnei Yisroel stop learning, they will also die. With this, Rabbi Akiva explains how he was willing to risk his life for it during the Roman reign, and thus the importance of every Jew learning Torah and doing mitzvos.
Sefrias ha’omer is crucial to the Jewish people to count because it shows their connection to Torah. Each day another day is crossed off, awaiting the receiving of the Torah. As seen in Sefer Hachinuch, Pachad Yitchak, and the gemara in Brachos, Torah and performing mitzvos is the priority a Jew should have throughout his daily life, while also appreciating its immense worth. That is, unlike the Jews mentioned in the gemara in Nedarim. Bnei Yisroel should be excited to accept this priceless present of Torah. The counting of the omer prepares them to get excited for Har Sinai and feel a deep connection to limud Torah and being shomer ha’mitzvos.
The Reason For Tribulations Explained
The concept of nisyonos is a very complex and thought-provoking idea. For example, How should one deal with life-challenges? Does Hashem give nisyonos according to what the person can handle? Why does Hashem test us if He knows the outcome anyway? These are some of the questions that come to mind when thinking of the tests Hashem puts people through (Beraishis Rabbah).
In general, the idea behind nisyonos is that Hashem only tests tzaddikim, and not resha’im. Rabbi Yonason brings a mashal of a pot banger who will only bang the strong pots because the weak pots are weak and would break easily. Rabbi Yosi tells of a flax worker who knows that the more he works the flax, the more they will improve. However, if the flax is bad, the worker will not bang on the flax. Lastly, Rabbi Eliezer explains of a cow worker who put a yoke on the weak cow versus the strong cow to increase the weak cow’s strength. All these mashalim allude to the nimshal that Hashem makes the tzaddikim work hard by giving them nisyonos. However, the resha’im, He does not bother to work or try to improve since they are already bad (Beraishis Rabbah).
Still, each of these three mashalim tells of a different nimshal. The nimshal of Rabbi
Yonasan’s story is to show how strong the pots, or tzaddikim are, and so Hashem tests tzaddikim to show the world their greatness. They display what a person can become and achieve. Rabbi Yosi’s demonstrates that like the flax, through nisyonos the person’s deeds will improve and it will ultimately strengthen the person. Finally, Rabbi Eliezer’s is about bettering the world, as the yoke does to the weak cow. The individual’s struggles better the klal, make the world more pure, and is set up as an atonement for the world (Peirush Maharag).
Hashem מנסה, tries us, to put our potential into action. He does this so people can have schar for good deeds, and not only a good heart. In reality, people have the capability to achieve each great middah. When Hashem hands out a nisayon, there is an opportunity to harness those good middahs. Actually, Hashem set it up that in order to survive a nisayon, a good middah needs to be attained (Ramban).
The purpose of a nisayon is to elevate the person and is what is best for them. In the word nisayon, there is נס which means to raise, like a flag or a banner. Everyone needs to get through the nisayon, raising themselves up as they grow through it and grasp the good middah. Therefore, experiencing a nisayon is not about simply checking off a box. Rather, it is going through the nisayon experience to gain a new and positive character trait. Through all nisyonos and keeping all of this in mind, it is imperative to know that Hashem does only what is good. He does not hand out nisyonos to trick His creations, but to bring out the kochos we all possess (Ohr Eliyahu).
Interestingly, children may inherit traits from their parents and mirror their parents to help them finish their tafkid. For example, for generations a family may struggle financially if that is the tafkid that needs to be completed and needs generations to serve. This connects to the fact that Hashem sends the right atmosphere, kochos, middos, and people to help them finish their nisyonos. Sometimes, the tests can seem really hard, but Hashem is the greatest Baal Chesed and Knows exactly what He is doing as it is all awesomely planned out. The key is to just have bitachon and trust in Hashem (Michtav M’eliyahu, Rav Dessler).
The idea that strikes me is how we inherit middos and tafkidim from our parents. At the same time, Hashem is also our Father. Perhaps, a connection can be made that just as we inherit character traits and tafkidim from our parents, this also happens with us and Hashem. We inherit G-dly traits from Hashem as every person in Bnei Yisroel is a tzelem Elokim. We inherently have the same character traits as Hashem. Also, our tafkidim are passed down from Him because He runs the world and uses us to be a shaliach to complete the job. This idea, along with all the others, gives me great chizuk that Hashem will be by Bnei Yisroel’s, and by my side as He is our father and we instinctively have His essence to guide us along. Like any good parent, He only wants what is best for us. We have the tremendous zechus to be the receivers for the tafkidim He hands down to Bnei Yisroel, His children.
In general, the idea behind nisyonos is that Hashem only tests tzaddikim, and not resha’im. Rabbi Yonason brings a mashal of a pot banger who will only bang the strong pots because the weak pots are weak and would break easily. Rabbi Yosi tells of a flax worker who knows that the more he works the flax, the more they will improve. However, if the flax is bad, the worker will not bang on the flax. Lastly, Rabbi Eliezer explains of a cow worker who put a yoke on the weak cow versus the strong cow to increase the weak cow’s strength. All these mashalim allude to the nimshal that Hashem makes the tzaddikim work hard by giving them nisyonos. However, the resha’im, He does not bother to work or try to improve since they are already bad (Beraishis Rabbah).
Still, each of these three mashalim tells of a different nimshal. The nimshal of Rabbi
Yonasan’s story is to show how strong the pots, or tzaddikim are, and so Hashem tests tzaddikim to show the world their greatness. They display what a person can become and achieve. Rabbi Yosi’s demonstrates that like the flax, through nisyonos the person’s deeds will improve and it will ultimately strengthen the person. Finally, Rabbi Eliezer’s is about bettering the world, as the yoke does to the weak cow. The individual’s struggles better the klal, make the world more pure, and is set up as an atonement for the world (Peirush Maharag).
Hashem מנסה, tries us, to put our potential into action. He does this so people can have schar for good deeds, and not only a good heart. In reality, people have the capability to achieve each great middah. When Hashem hands out a nisayon, there is an opportunity to harness those good middahs. Actually, Hashem set it up that in order to survive a nisayon, a good middah needs to be attained (Ramban).
The purpose of a nisayon is to elevate the person and is what is best for them. In the word nisayon, there is נס which means to raise, like a flag or a banner. Everyone needs to get through the nisayon, raising themselves up as they grow through it and grasp the good middah. Therefore, experiencing a nisayon is not about simply checking off a box. Rather, it is going through the nisayon experience to gain a new and positive character trait. Through all nisyonos and keeping all of this in mind, it is imperative to know that Hashem does only what is good. He does not hand out nisyonos to trick His creations, but to bring out the kochos we all possess (Ohr Eliyahu).
Interestingly, children may inherit traits from their parents and mirror their parents to help them finish their tafkid. For example, for generations a family may struggle financially if that is the tafkid that needs to be completed and needs generations to serve. This connects to the fact that Hashem sends the right atmosphere, kochos, middos, and people to help them finish their nisyonos. Sometimes, the tests can seem really hard, but Hashem is the greatest Baal Chesed and Knows exactly what He is doing as it is all awesomely planned out. The key is to just have bitachon and trust in Hashem (Michtav M’eliyahu, Rav Dessler).
The idea that strikes me is how we inherit middos and tafkidim from our parents. At the same time, Hashem is also our Father. Perhaps, a connection can be made that just as we inherit character traits and tafkidim from our parents, this also happens with us and Hashem. We inherit G-dly traits from Hashem as every person in Bnei Yisroel is a tzelem Elokim. We inherently have the same character traits as Hashem. Also, our tafkidim are passed down from Him because He runs the world and uses us to be a shaliach to complete the job. This idea, along with all the others, gives me great chizuk that Hashem will be by Bnei Yisroel’s, and by my side as He is our father and we instinctively have His essence to guide us along. Like any good parent, He only wants what is best for us. We have the tremendous zechus to be the receivers for the tafkidim He hands down to Bnei Yisroel, His children.
The Transformative Power Shmoneh Esrei Holds
Shemoneh Esrei is the centerpiece of our tefillah. Everything in the davening before it is a warm up to it, and everything in the davening after it is a cool down. The structure of Shemoneh Esrei is שבח, בקשה, והודאה. The first 3 brachos are praise, the middle 12 are requests, and the last 3 are brachos of thanking (Rambam).
People daven the tefillah written by anshei knesses hagedolah because there is no one else who can write as a wonderful tefillah where there are so many tikunim, holy components. Everytime a person davens in Shemoneh Esrei, they are accessing and affecting different spiritual aspects. Once their tikunim are fixed, the person is fixed. In other words, each Shemoneh Esrei will allow more shefa and bracha to be rained on the person. A person does not necessarily know what they are asking for from Hashem, but it is something a person wants and is necessary. The Anshei Knesses Hagedolah knew exactly what to write so it would fit what the person who is davening is asking for or needs. This is something a person’s own words would not be able to do (Nefesh Hachaim).
Many daven when there is a time of tzarah, which on daily occurrence, people need to daven to Hashem to prevent. Everything can change in a moment (Kinas Sofrim). If someone really wants something, but the person does not deserve it, the person may think there is no point to the tefillah because they have no zechus anyway. This is wrong because davening may create the zechus for the person to be worthy of their request! Yet, Hashem is in charge and a person may daven for things, but if they do not deserve it, they may not get it (Rav Pinchus).
When davening Shemoneh Esrei, one must be in the right makom. This applies both physically and spiritually (Shulchan Orech). They are standing right in front of the Shechinah. Hashem is actually directly opposite the person who is davening. This may be difficult to comprehend because a person’s five senses do not aid in detecting Hashem. However, one with שכל will be able to detect Him nevertheless (Mesillas Yesharim). The Shulchan Orech alludes to the fact that Hashem is right in front of us as the halachos when davening Shmoneh Esrei are to not be within four amos of someone. Also, at the end of tefillah, people must bow to the left, center, and to the right. Perhaps, this is to ignite Hashem’s chesed as a person’s right side is dominant with chesed (Kabbalah). People must have the bitachon to believe Hasehm is standing right in front of them and is listening.
I felt specifically struck with these concepts on Shemoneh Esrei because I did not realize the koach and earnestness this tefillah must be approached with. The idea that every Shemoneh Esrei accesses and harnesses for us another bracha and gift from Hashem in our life is truly amazing. Even more so, since this can be the case even when we do not deserve it, portrays the immense chesed Hashem has for us. Also, the emphasis on how Hashem is right in front of us is eye-opening. You are actually standing in front of the בורא עולם. This allows me to really bask in Hashem’s Shechinah during davening as I am more aware of His presence. All in all, these messages on Shemoneh Esrei are incredible.
People daven the tefillah written by anshei knesses hagedolah because there is no one else who can write as a wonderful tefillah where there are so many tikunim, holy components. Everytime a person davens in Shemoneh Esrei, they are accessing and affecting different spiritual aspects. Once their tikunim are fixed, the person is fixed. In other words, each Shemoneh Esrei will allow more shefa and bracha to be rained on the person. A person does not necessarily know what they are asking for from Hashem, but it is something a person wants and is necessary. The Anshei Knesses Hagedolah knew exactly what to write so it would fit what the person who is davening is asking for or needs. This is something a person’s own words would not be able to do (Nefesh Hachaim).
Many daven when there is a time of tzarah, which on daily occurrence, people need to daven to Hashem to prevent. Everything can change in a moment (Kinas Sofrim). If someone really wants something, but the person does not deserve it, the person may think there is no point to the tefillah because they have no zechus anyway. This is wrong because davening may create the zechus for the person to be worthy of their request! Yet, Hashem is in charge and a person may daven for things, but if they do not deserve it, they may not get it (Rav Pinchus).
When davening Shemoneh Esrei, one must be in the right makom. This applies both physically and spiritually (Shulchan Orech). They are standing right in front of the Shechinah. Hashem is actually directly opposite the person who is davening. This may be difficult to comprehend because a person’s five senses do not aid in detecting Hashem. However, one with שכל will be able to detect Him nevertheless (Mesillas Yesharim). The Shulchan Orech alludes to the fact that Hashem is right in front of us as the halachos when davening Shmoneh Esrei are to not be within four amos of someone. Also, at the end of tefillah, people must bow to the left, center, and to the right. Perhaps, this is to ignite Hashem’s chesed as a person’s right side is dominant with chesed (Kabbalah). People must have the bitachon to believe Hasehm is standing right in front of them and is listening.
I felt specifically struck with these concepts on Shemoneh Esrei because I did not realize the koach and earnestness this tefillah must be approached with. The idea that every Shemoneh Esrei accesses and harnesses for us another bracha and gift from Hashem in our life is truly amazing. Even more so, since this can be the case even when we do not deserve it, portrays the immense chesed Hashem has for us. Also, the emphasis on how Hashem is right in front of us is eye-opening. You are actually standing in front of the בורא עולם. This allows me to really bask in Hashem’s Shechinah during davening as I am more aware of His presence. All in all, these messages on Shemoneh Esrei are incredible.
Rebbe Nachman Validates Craziness
Rebbe Nachman is all in all a fascinating person who teaches unique ideas on Torah. One of the most interesting methods he uses to spread his Torah is stories. A collective of these stories usually have two main characters who are of extreme opposites. Rebbe Nachman uses these protagonists to portray the life story of each person who is on two sides of a spectrum. With that, it is up to the readers to take to heart the lessons Rebbe Nachman tries to convey. Most people use stories to put people to bed, but Rebbe Nachman uses stories to wake them up!
One of the most striking Rebbe Nachman stories is the Turkey prince (ר״ש הורביץ,מעשים ומשלים״, סיפורים נפלאים, תרצ״ה, 1935). One day, a prince strips off his clothes, slides underneath a table, flaps his arms as wings, and eats the crumbs off the floor. Then, he proclaims himself a turkey. All kinds of prominent doctors and specialists were brought in, but were not of any help. The prince continues to act in his turkey ways thinking he is a turkey. Yet, one day, a wise man came. He, too, strips his clothes, slides underneath the table, flaps his wings, and eats the crumbs off the floor. The wise man told the prince, “I am a turkey too.” The wise man continues to educate the turkey prince saying that we can still be turkeys even if we wear clothes, sit at the table, and eat food from on the table. Slowly, but surely, the prince came to be a regular acting person and a great king, but never forgetting that he is still a turkey.
From this interesting story, it teaches that craziness is subjective. It could be self identity, mental, or being an idealist. To every person, a person’s craziness is another person’s regular day. Being a turkey underneath the table, flapping arms, eating crumbs off the floor can mean many things today that people would call “crazy”. Still, the prince in the story does not conform. He adapts a little bit of societal norms, but all in all, he stays true to his turkey self. For that, the prince must get a lot of credit for being able to express himself in such a bold way, but also knowing when to subdue it a little, as he is on his way to becoming king. Even with the doctors, specialists, and kingdom who may have doubted his turkey ways, he did not extinguish them, but stuck to his genuine belief.
Chanan Ben Ari, a famous Israeli singer wrote a song based on the turkey prince story (חנן בן ארי, הינדיק, מתוך סיפורי מעשיות של רבי נחמן). The song suggests that we need to be with a wave, but not be lost. Meaning, you can act normal, but still be true to your true self. Do not be afraid that conformity will affect you or what you are passionate about, but make sure to not drown it out. Like the turkey story, Chanan Ben Ari explains the same idea, but in the metaphor of a wave. On one hand, we need to have the freedom and ability to behave as ourselves and for what we believe in. Yet, we also need to take into account that conforming to societal norms should be upheld as this is the life we operate in. This is the balance that needs to be struck.
This all connects to Rambam’s idea on שביל הזהב, or striking a balance in one’s life. In Hilchos Teshuva, 7:3, he explains “Let the evil person forsake his path, and the iniquitous person his thoughts.” This means that whatever a person’s bad actions are, he should totally forsake them. Rambam alludes to the idea that if someone is on one end on the spectrum with their extremism, they should flip to the other side. Eventually, they will migrate to the middle of the spectrum emulating elements of both sides or extremes. This is exactly what the turkey prince did as he was totally enveloped being a turkey; on the floor, eating off the floor, and swapping his arms. He totally switched to a normal acting person; sitting at the table, eating off the table, and keeping his hands to himself. While he grew up to be a successful acting human being and monarch, he always remembered he is still a turkey. From here, the balance of knowing and behaving he is a turkey and behaving as a traditional human, is reached.
These ideas especially connect and are alluring to me because it teaches me that sometimes we have to stop looking at other people and think that what they are doing is crazy just because we do not act like that ourselves. Rather, sometimes, we must put ourselves into their shoes and connect with them to try and understand their behavior. This way, we allow ourselves to be more empathetic. We can empathize with others without losing sight of ourselves. Perhaps, we will find ourselves learning a more proper and sensible way of doing things.
One of the most striking Rebbe Nachman stories is the Turkey prince (ר״ש הורביץ,מעשים ומשלים״, סיפורים נפלאים, תרצ״ה, 1935). One day, a prince strips off his clothes, slides underneath a table, flaps his arms as wings, and eats the crumbs off the floor. Then, he proclaims himself a turkey. All kinds of prominent doctors and specialists were brought in, but were not of any help. The prince continues to act in his turkey ways thinking he is a turkey. Yet, one day, a wise man came. He, too, strips his clothes, slides underneath the table, flaps his wings, and eats the crumbs off the floor. The wise man told the prince, “I am a turkey too.” The wise man continues to educate the turkey prince saying that we can still be turkeys even if we wear clothes, sit at the table, and eat food from on the table. Slowly, but surely, the prince came to be a regular acting person and a great king, but never forgetting that he is still a turkey.
From this interesting story, it teaches that craziness is subjective. It could be self identity, mental, or being an idealist. To every person, a person’s craziness is another person’s regular day. Being a turkey underneath the table, flapping arms, eating crumbs off the floor can mean many things today that people would call “crazy”. Still, the prince in the story does not conform. He adapts a little bit of societal norms, but all in all, he stays true to his turkey self. For that, the prince must get a lot of credit for being able to express himself in such a bold way, but also knowing when to subdue it a little, as he is on his way to becoming king. Even with the doctors, specialists, and kingdom who may have doubted his turkey ways, he did not extinguish them, but stuck to his genuine belief.
Chanan Ben Ari, a famous Israeli singer wrote a song based on the turkey prince story (חנן בן ארי, הינדיק, מתוך סיפורי מעשיות של רבי נחמן). The song suggests that we need to be with a wave, but not be lost. Meaning, you can act normal, but still be true to your true self. Do not be afraid that conformity will affect you or what you are passionate about, but make sure to not drown it out. Like the turkey story, Chanan Ben Ari explains the same idea, but in the metaphor of a wave. On one hand, we need to have the freedom and ability to behave as ourselves and for what we believe in. Yet, we also need to take into account that conforming to societal norms should be upheld as this is the life we operate in. This is the balance that needs to be struck.
This all connects to Rambam’s idea on שביל הזהב, or striking a balance in one’s life. In Hilchos Teshuva, 7:3, he explains “Let the evil person forsake his path, and the iniquitous person his thoughts.” This means that whatever a person’s bad actions are, he should totally forsake them. Rambam alludes to the idea that if someone is on one end on the spectrum with their extremism, they should flip to the other side. Eventually, they will migrate to the middle of the spectrum emulating elements of both sides or extremes. This is exactly what the turkey prince did as he was totally enveloped being a turkey; on the floor, eating off the floor, and swapping his arms. He totally switched to a normal acting person; sitting at the table, eating off the table, and keeping his hands to himself. While he grew up to be a successful acting human being and monarch, he always remembered he is still a turkey. From here, the balance of knowing and behaving he is a turkey and behaving as a traditional human, is reached.
These ideas especially connect and are alluring to me because it teaches me that sometimes we have to stop looking at other people and think that what they are doing is crazy just because we do not act like that ourselves. Rather, sometimes, we must put ourselves into their shoes and connect with them to try and understand their behavior. This way, we allow ourselves to be more empathetic. We can empathize with others without losing sight of ourselves. Perhaps, we will find ourselves learning a more proper and sensible way of doing things.
A Walk To Remember
The music floated through the air. As a violin student, I could hear the horse hair bows as they rode the strings of the cellos and violins. It was played deep, yet sweet with vibrato. I thought the musical craft was flawless until I was more amazed. The violinists played high notes of vibrato to low notes of staccato accelerating into sentimental medium notes. They were all very touching to the heart while the pianist was playing rich songs on the snow white keys, causing affectionate vibrations to the heart.
We had sixth row seats at the Israel Philharmonic in the capital city of Jerusalem. We could actually see the faces of all the musicians. They played the music swiftly and intently while each had a passionate face. The concert lasted about an hour, but it felt much shorter. Peace of mind can be enacted through many methods. However, I now realize the smooth tunes of classical music are among the best at our disposal.
The instruments almost had my full attention, but I couldn't help but notice what and who was around me. The arena was clean, yet dated and had a mid-century feel. The walls and seats were a beige or khaki brown and arranged in levels. There were box seats, but they were rows in the balcony. Most of the concert attendees were about 65 and above. Just as I was taking in the scene, I quickly swung my head to the front of the stage because everyone, including me, began enthusiastically applauding the orchestra on stage. As I stood clapping for the bowing ensemble, I knew I’d walk out of the Israel Philharmonic building feeling like a new person, feeling luminous and free.
My mother and I got up from our seats and serenely strolled to the exit and front door as if exiting a spa treatment. As we took our first steps outside, I immediately felt the crisp air and winter chill. As we began our walk, I observed the neon city lights that sleepy Long Island did not have on display. I felt as if I was in Manhattan walking home from a performance at Lincoln Center instead of Jerusalem. I was struck by the new kinds of people to look at. In New York, many people looked the same with their overly dressed outfits and haughtiness as they held their heads high. However, in Israel, everyone had a different backstory. There were many cultures since people came from every corner of the earth to live in this state. Therefore, there were those who dressed more upscale, and some more lowbrow. Some had more of an attitude than others, while some had an out-of-town sweetness you may not have necessarily found in New York. Apart from the people watching, I was focused on the famous Jerusalem stone on each and every building. The Jerusalem stone is a pale stone with natural indents on it. It is a native stone to Jerusalem and a building code requirement to use them to maintain a uniform look in the city. Everything was very exotic and new to me.
From having been in New York for most of my life with few vacations, to a new country, new school, and a new language, this evening of these realizations made me feel exceedingly cultured. I went from a sheltered and provincial community on Long Island where everyone did the same thing, at the same time, to picking up and leaving to assimilate into a new metropolitan culture where I knew no one except for the family who moved with me. Having survived about 3 months living in Israel, and thinking of the challenges I had recently endured, I felt empowered. Sure, it was arduous adjusting to a new school where half the people could not make out a sentence of English, but no matter how tough it was living in Israel, this night was a night like no other. A new mature confidence within me was born that no one could take away from me.
There I was in the thick of it all. The walk from the Philharmonic in the center of town to my apartment was only twenty minutes. In November, the frosty Jerusalem night left both my feet, hands, and especially my nose feeling quite chilled. We might have been in the Middle East, but it could certainly get chilly during the winter. I could imagine each toe turning pink thinking about it. I knew my mother felt the same piercing chill as she said, “Let’s get some hot chocolate.”
While walking to M’afeh Ne’eman, the bakery that serves scrumptious hot chocolate, I saw teenagers in the street, reminding me of the independence I now had access to. In Israel, children of all ages seem to possess an increased sense of self-reliance.
“Mommy,” I said, “in school today, I experienced something fairly fascinating. My class and I had time to paint the school. We were given full opportunity to make colossal works of art in the courtyard, hallway, and our classroom. We never did anything like that in New York.”
My mother listened with intent curiosity. Then, a stream of realization struck her face as she said, “Interesting how you bring up their independence because I was just telling my friend Ilana, how I see teenagers in the street a lot. I think it is because the apartments here in the city are not very big, and therefore not accommodating for a group of friends like the suburban houses we are used to. Therefore, they hang out in the street.
“Also, when I called your math teacher, she was shocked at how I called her instead of you calling her yourself. Independence sure seems like a theme in this country.”
“Oh,” I said. “Speaking of math, I have a math extra-curricular tomorrow night, but don’t worry, I know how to get there myself. My bus card is charged.”
At first, a sigh of sorrow filled me because even though I lived in Israel, I still wanted to act like an American teenager, to hold onto my Yankee culture where my parents would drive me everywhere I needed to go. After giving it a moment’s thought, I interpreted this independence as a new way to grow. However, this sparked a feeling of trepidation within me. At first, I relied on my parents for everything. Now, I have the opportunity, and responsibility, to travel to my study and hang-out outings since there is a handy and safe bus system which I am learning to navigate by myself. It is a new beginning which is fearful, as they all are. Thinking back now, I have grown because I now feel I can do things on my own without the over reliance from my parents. I appreciate this because I feel more confident and mature from this life lesson.
Upon drinking the first sip a deep comfort and security struck within me. We had established the tradition of a talk over hot chocolate when I used to get off the school bus to my old home in Woodmere.
Here, I felt a comforting nod to the past, a taste of home. We spoke about my feelings and perceptions of the move, the new neighborhood, the girls in my classes. She smiled and nodded. We laughed about how we came from New York, an empire state, to Israel, halfway around the globe, now our new home. We planned our upcoming week, school, Hebrew language classes, and meeting with new friends. We spoke of future plans for university. From this, I felt heard as well as optimistic because I knew this was just the beginning of my new life, the beginning of something great.
As we were walking home and my mother took her last sip of hot chocolate, she tossed her cup into the public garbage can, looked up at me intently, and said, “You're doing a fantastic job and I am so proud of you. Everything is going to be okay.”
I was all choked up, but I managed to croak out, “thank you.”
In that aspect, my future seemed bright and secure because I had a feeling everything would just work itself out for the best even with the challenges I had been experiencing at the time. Until this day, my mother and I talk of this enchanting experience. All my troubles were forgotten. It was a transformative night I will never forget. It was a wonderful walk.
We had sixth row seats at the Israel Philharmonic in the capital city of Jerusalem. We could actually see the faces of all the musicians. They played the music swiftly and intently while each had a passionate face. The concert lasted about an hour, but it felt much shorter. Peace of mind can be enacted through many methods. However, I now realize the smooth tunes of classical music are among the best at our disposal.
The instruments almost had my full attention, but I couldn't help but notice what and who was around me. The arena was clean, yet dated and had a mid-century feel. The walls and seats were a beige or khaki brown and arranged in levels. There were box seats, but they were rows in the balcony. Most of the concert attendees were about 65 and above. Just as I was taking in the scene, I quickly swung my head to the front of the stage because everyone, including me, began enthusiastically applauding the orchestra on stage. As I stood clapping for the bowing ensemble, I knew I’d walk out of the Israel Philharmonic building feeling like a new person, feeling luminous and free.
My mother and I got up from our seats and serenely strolled to the exit and front door as if exiting a spa treatment. As we took our first steps outside, I immediately felt the crisp air and winter chill. As we began our walk, I observed the neon city lights that sleepy Long Island did not have on display. I felt as if I was in Manhattan walking home from a performance at Lincoln Center instead of Jerusalem. I was struck by the new kinds of people to look at. In New York, many people looked the same with their overly dressed outfits and haughtiness as they held their heads high. However, in Israel, everyone had a different backstory. There were many cultures since people came from every corner of the earth to live in this state. Therefore, there were those who dressed more upscale, and some more lowbrow. Some had more of an attitude than others, while some had an out-of-town sweetness you may not have necessarily found in New York. Apart from the people watching, I was focused on the famous Jerusalem stone on each and every building. The Jerusalem stone is a pale stone with natural indents on it. It is a native stone to Jerusalem and a building code requirement to use them to maintain a uniform look in the city. Everything was very exotic and new to me.
From having been in New York for most of my life with few vacations, to a new country, new school, and a new language, this evening of these realizations made me feel exceedingly cultured. I went from a sheltered and provincial community on Long Island where everyone did the same thing, at the same time, to picking up and leaving to assimilate into a new metropolitan culture where I knew no one except for the family who moved with me. Having survived about 3 months living in Israel, and thinking of the challenges I had recently endured, I felt empowered. Sure, it was arduous adjusting to a new school where half the people could not make out a sentence of English, but no matter how tough it was living in Israel, this night was a night like no other. A new mature confidence within me was born that no one could take away from me.
There I was in the thick of it all. The walk from the Philharmonic in the center of town to my apartment was only twenty minutes. In November, the frosty Jerusalem night left both my feet, hands, and especially my nose feeling quite chilled. We might have been in the Middle East, but it could certainly get chilly during the winter. I could imagine each toe turning pink thinking about it. I knew my mother felt the same piercing chill as she said, “Let’s get some hot chocolate.”
While walking to M’afeh Ne’eman, the bakery that serves scrumptious hot chocolate, I saw teenagers in the street, reminding me of the independence I now had access to. In Israel, children of all ages seem to possess an increased sense of self-reliance.
“Mommy,” I said, “in school today, I experienced something fairly fascinating. My class and I had time to paint the school. We were given full opportunity to make colossal works of art in the courtyard, hallway, and our classroom. We never did anything like that in New York.”
My mother listened with intent curiosity. Then, a stream of realization struck her face as she said, “Interesting how you bring up their independence because I was just telling my friend Ilana, how I see teenagers in the street a lot. I think it is because the apartments here in the city are not very big, and therefore not accommodating for a group of friends like the suburban houses we are used to. Therefore, they hang out in the street.
“Also, when I called your math teacher, she was shocked at how I called her instead of you calling her yourself. Independence sure seems like a theme in this country.”
“Oh,” I said. “Speaking of math, I have a math extra-curricular tomorrow night, but don’t worry, I know how to get there myself. My bus card is charged.”
At first, a sigh of sorrow filled me because even though I lived in Israel, I still wanted to act like an American teenager, to hold onto my Yankee culture where my parents would drive me everywhere I needed to go. After giving it a moment’s thought, I interpreted this independence as a new way to grow. However, this sparked a feeling of trepidation within me. At first, I relied on my parents for everything. Now, I have the opportunity, and responsibility, to travel to my study and hang-out outings since there is a handy and safe bus system which I am learning to navigate by myself. It is a new beginning which is fearful, as they all are. Thinking back now, I have grown because I now feel I can do things on my own without the over reliance from my parents. I appreciate this because I feel more confident and mature from this life lesson.
Upon drinking the first sip a deep comfort and security struck within me. We had established the tradition of a talk over hot chocolate when I used to get off the school bus to my old home in Woodmere.
Here, I felt a comforting nod to the past, a taste of home. We spoke about my feelings and perceptions of the move, the new neighborhood, the girls in my classes. She smiled and nodded. We laughed about how we came from New York, an empire state, to Israel, halfway around the globe, now our new home. We planned our upcoming week, school, Hebrew language classes, and meeting with new friends. We spoke of future plans for university. From this, I felt heard as well as optimistic because I knew this was just the beginning of my new life, the beginning of something great.
As we were walking home and my mother took her last sip of hot chocolate, she tossed her cup into the public garbage can, looked up at me intently, and said, “You're doing a fantastic job and I am so proud of you. Everything is going to be okay.”
I was all choked up, but I managed to croak out, “thank you.”
In that aspect, my future seemed bright and secure because I had a feeling everything would just work itself out for the best even with the challenges I had been experiencing at the time. Until this day, my mother and I talk of this enchanting experience. All my troubles were forgotten. It was a transformative night I will never forget. It was a wonderful walk.
Delving Into P'nimiyus Ba'Sadeh; A Chassidic Outlook On Torah
Dear potential upcoming student of P’nimiyus BaSadeh,
If you are the kind of bas Torah that loves to delve into chassidus, meforshim, and midrashim on the parsha, this class is for you! You will have a well-rounded education on these topics for every parsha. Every week, two divrei Torah are given. For most of your lives, you may have learned parsha using mostly pshat. While that is very worthwhile for a Torah education, תורה שבעל פה needs to be touched upon just as much as תורה שבכתב. You will understand new heights, depths, and meaning all from one word or a theme encaptured in the parsha. Truly, the Torah taught in this class is so geshmak and sweet. Also, the teaching execution for these lessons do not fall short. Taught by the one and only Mrs. Field, a renowned speaker and teacher. Mrs. Field offers a well-rounded knowledge on Torah and chassidus that will help achieve your ruchani goals. This makes for the perfect hisorarus wake-up call at 8:30am!
This week is Parshas Ki Sisa where the kohanim prepare in the שבעה ימי המילואים for hakamas hamishkan. One of the kelim used in this hachana, is the kiyor. The kiyor is singled out and written separately from the other kelim in the Torah. Many meforshim ask, what is the purpose of preparing for seven days prior to the mishkan inauguration? Also, what is so special about the kiyor that it should be written separately from the other kelim (Seforno, Shemos 30:18 & Chizkuni, Shemos 30:18)?
The seven days and the kiyor was used for the hachana of the avodah in the mishkan to clean the kohanim. Some say it was specifically for Ahraon, Elizer, Itmar, and Pinchus (Rambam, משנה תורה, הלכות ביאת מקדש). However, according to the pasuk, it was for Aharaon, Elazar, Itmar, and Moshe Rabbeinu. If Moshe Rabbeinu was included in the four preparing for chanukas hamishkan that were to use the kiyor, why would Moshe Rabbeinu be counted as one of the kohanim? Moshe Rabbeniu is only teaching them how to do the avodah before the fourth kohen, Pinchus, comes in (Zevachim 19:2).
Likutei Sichos explains that the kiyor is a remez to Moshe Rabbeinu (ליקוטי שיחות, ע557, תשא ג). First, the kiyor is for hachana to inaugurate the mishkan. The steps that need to be taught and done before the main event is by Moshe Rabbeinu. This is the same kind of teaching that Moshe Rabbeinu does for all of us as he introduces Torah and avodas Hashem, teaching us to do it on our own. Second, Moshe Rabbeinu thought we cannot use the מראות הצובאות, the mirrors the women used in Mitzrayim to attract their husbands, to make the kiyor. He thought that it would not be appropriate seeing as how those mirrors were formally used. However, Hashem explains that adaraba, these mirrors are His most beloved mirrors and should be used to make the kiyor. These mirrors are truly tahor and represent real avodas Hashem. The mirrors stand for clarity as the women knew the ratzon Hashem. They knew that Hashem wanted them to continue פרו ורבו to keep Am Yisroel alive (Rashi, Shemos 38:8 & Yevamos 49:2). They kept to this even under their distress in Mitzrayim and the risk for their baby boys to be thrown into the Nilus - This is true mesiras nefesh. They had an “אספקלריא המאירה“, clear vision, of what needed to be done. This is the same clear vision that Moshe has had all along as he taught Torah from clear nevuahs and the same kind of clear vision the kohanim reach upon after finishing the seven days of groundwork for kedusha.
We learn from these meforshim and the Likutei Sichos that preparing ourselves for Kedusha is necessary for kedusha to exist. We need to cut out all the bad within us before we can start focusing and preparing for the good. This is what kohanim did in the שבעה ימי המילואים and by using the kiyor for the start of the mishkan. They had to follow a series of steps before their holy work. The fact that the kiyor was made from the mirrors from the women in Mitzrayim perhaps shows the kind of sacrifice and mesiras nefesh that may have to take place in our tafkid and needs hachana. This is the kind of preparation we should have to reach kedusha. We need to have immense clarity and complete investment in our plan to reach genuine and absolute kesusha.
It is very interesting that the kiyor is made from the mirrors which connects to Baal Shem Tov’s mirror approach. The kiyor caused many people to have clarity; the Jewish women in Mitzrayim, Moshe Rabbeniu, and the kohanim while they truly invested in hachana. In a nutshell, the mirror theory is whatever imperfections you see in someone, to some degree, you carry that imperfection as well. According to the Baal Shem Tov, the mirror approach is based on the chazal, “וְאַל תָּדִין אֶת חֲבֵרְךָ עַד שֶׁתַּגִּיעַ לִמְקוֹמוֹ”. This means, “Do not judge your fellow until you have stood in his place” (Avos; 2,4). One of the Baal Shem Tov’s great disciples, Rabbi Nachum of Tcheranbil encapsulated this idea with, “Your fellow is your mirror. If your own face is clean, the image you perceive will also be flawless. But should you look upon your fellow man and see a blemish, it is your own imperfection that you are encountering---you are being shown what it is that you must correct within yourself” (Meor Einayim Parshas Chukas). If we see a blemish in someone else, that should be taken and reflected back to us, just like a mirror. We need to look inward and see what we are doing wrong. Of course, we should always look at people in a positive light, but if that becomes more difficult, look inside yourself. Essentially, the flaws you notice in other people is because at some level, you hold the same flaw as well.
In a sense, this connects to what the Rebbe was saying in Likutei Sichos about having the right intentions for the seven days of hachana. The kohanim had to fully immerse themselves to get into the right mindset and plan for the upcoming kedusha. They had to look inward at themselves into a ‘mirror’, to think of what to fix, and fully cut out the bad and leave room for the upcoming kedusha. This is also similar to what the women in Mitzrayim did as they looked at themselves and their nation and saw that the baby boys were dying off and Am Yisroel was at risk of chas v'shalom not surviving and lasting. They knew this had to be stopped and something they were doing was not right. They shifted their ways to do the mitzvah, פרו ורבו, which in hindsight was one of the most beautiful things ever done in Jewish history. While we need to engross ourselves in full devotion for our hachana in kedusha, we need to also look in the mirror and do a cheshbon hanefesh; What about ourselves do we need to fix? We need to reflect that bad we see, and eliminate it to make room for purity. Only then with the hachana and the mirror theory can we reach the tzidkus in its entirety.
If one thing cannot be taken for granted, it is Torah. Torah is such an amazing gift. The smallest pasuk, word, or even letter can say a universe of wisdom and philosophy. Hashem created such an amazing world in which we get to keep by the Torah guiding us along the way. Sometimes in life it can be hard to know what the next step will be and what we should be working on. Yet, by opening Torah and learning it from all angles, peshat and drash, you will have your tafkid from here until the rest of your life. Somehow, Torah always is said at the right place and right time to the exact person who needs to hear it. It never fails to do the best for each and every ehrliche yid. With that, it is up to us to perform what Hashem wants and to learn from His Torah what is best. We must be the shaliach to bring down all the shefa and bracha we all have the potential of meriting. If at times it can be challenging to live through whatever nisyonos one may be going through, it must also be acknowledged that Hashem has a chunky reward waiting for us at the end of this journey, ‘עד מאה ועשרים אם ירצה ה!
May you have all the bracha and hatzlacha to make this easy decision!
From,
A grown and forever thankful student - - Rachael Lehman
If you are the kind of bas Torah that loves to delve into chassidus, meforshim, and midrashim on the parsha, this class is for you! You will have a well-rounded education on these topics for every parsha. Every week, two divrei Torah are given. For most of your lives, you may have learned parsha using mostly pshat. While that is very worthwhile for a Torah education, תורה שבעל פה needs to be touched upon just as much as תורה שבכתב. You will understand new heights, depths, and meaning all from one word or a theme encaptured in the parsha. Truly, the Torah taught in this class is so geshmak and sweet. Also, the teaching execution for these lessons do not fall short. Taught by the one and only Mrs. Field, a renowned speaker and teacher. Mrs. Field offers a well-rounded knowledge on Torah and chassidus that will help achieve your ruchani goals. This makes for the perfect hisorarus wake-up call at 8:30am!
This week is Parshas Ki Sisa where the kohanim prepare in the שבעה ימי המילואים for hakamas hamishkan. One of the kelim used in this hachana, is the kiyor. The kiyor is singled out and written separately from the other kelim in the Torah. Many meforshim ask, what is the purpose of preparing for seven days prior to the mishkan inauguration? Also, what is so special about the kiyor that it should be written separately from the other kelim (Seforno, Shemos 30:18 & Chizkuni, Shemos 30:18)?
The seven days and the kiyor was used for the hachana of the avodah in the mishkan to clean the kohanim. Some say it was specifically for Ahraon, Elizer, Itmar, and Pinchus (Rambam, משנה תורה, הלכות ביאת מקדש). However, according to the pasuk, it was for Aharaon, Elazar, Itmar, and Moshe Rabbeinu. If Moshe Rabbeinu was included in the four preparing for chanukas hamishkan that were to use the kiyor, why would Moshe Rabbeinu be counted as one of the kohanim? Moshe Rabbeniu is only teaching them how to do the avodah before the fourth kohen, Pinchus, comes in (Zevachim 19:2).
Likutei Sichos explains that the kiyor is a remez to Moshe Rabbeinu (ליקוטי שיחות, ע557, תשא ג). First, the kiyor is for hachana to inaugurate the mishkan. The steps that need to be taught and done before the main event is by Moshe Rabbeinu. This is the same kind of teaching that Moshe Rabbeinu does for all of us as he introduces Torah and avodas Hashem, teaching us to do it on our own. Second, Moshe Rabbeinu thought we cannot use the מראות הצובאות, the mirrors the women used in Mitzrayim to attract their husbands, to make the kiyor. He thought that it would not be appropriate seeing as how those mirrors were formally used. However, Hashem explains that adaraba, these mirrors are His most beloved mirrors and should be used to make the kiyor. These mirrors are truly tahor and represent real avodas Hashem. The mirrors stand for clarity as the women knew the ratzon Hashem. They knew that Hashem wanted them to continue פרו ורבו to keep Am Yisroel alive (Rashi, Shemos 38:8 & Yevamos 49:2). They kept to this even under their distress in Mitzrayim and the risk for their baby boys to be thrown into the Nilus - This is true mesiras nefesh. They had an “אספקלריא המאירה“, clear vision, of what needed to be done. This is the same clear vision that Moshe has had all along as he taught Torah from clear nevuahs and the same kind of clear vision the kohanim reach upon after finishing the seven days of groundwork for kedusha.
We learn from these meforshim and the Likutei Sichos that preparing ourselves for Kedusha is necessary for kedusha to exist. We need to cut out all the bad within us before we can start focusing and preparing for the good. This is what kohanim did in the שבעה ימי המילואים and by using the kiyor for the start of the mishkan. They had to follow a series of steps before their holy work. The fact that the kiyor was made from the mirrors from the women in Mitzrayim perhaps shows the kind of sacrifice and mesiras nefesh that may have to take place in our tafkid and needs hachana. This is the kind of preparation we should have to reach kedusha. We need to have immense clarity and complete investment in our plan to reach genuine and absolute kesusha.
It is very interesting that the kiyor is made from the mirrors which connects to Baal Shem Tov’s mirror approach. The kiyor caused many people to have clarity; the Jewish women in Mitzrayim, Moshe Rabbeniu, and the kohanim while they truly invested in hachana. In a nutshell, the mirror theory is whatever imperfections you see in someone, to some degree, you carry that imperfection as well. According to the Baal Shem Tov, the mirror approach is based on the chazal, “וְאַל תָּדִין אֶת חֲבֵרְךָ עַד שֶׁתַּגִּיעַ לִמְקוֹמוֹ”. This means, “Do not judge your fellow until you have stood in his place” (Avos; 2,4). One of the Baal Shem Tov’s great disciples, Rabbi Nachum of Tcheranbil encapsulated this idea with, “Your fellow is your mirror. If your own face is clean, the image you perceive will also be flawless. But should you look upon your fellow man and see a blemish, it is your own imperfection that you are encountering---you are being shown what it is that you must correct within yourself” (Meor Einayim Parshas Chukas). If we see a blemish in someone else, that should be taken and reflected back to us, just like a mirror. We need to look inward and see what we are doing wrong. Of course, we should always look at people in a positive light, but if that becomes more difficult, look inside yourself. Essentially, the flaws you notice in other people is because at some level, you hold the same flaw as well.
In a sense, this connects to what the Rebbe was saying in Likutei Sichos about having the right intentions for the seven days of hachana. The kohanim had to fully immerse themselves to get into the right mindset and plan for the upcoming kedusha. They had to look inward at themselves into a ‘mirror’, to think of what to fix, and fully cut out the bad and leave room for the upcoming kedusha. This is also similar to what the women in Mitzrayim did as they looked at themselves and their nation and saw that the baby boys were dying off and Am Yisroel was at risk of chas v'shalom not surviving and lasting. They knew this had to be stopped and something they were doing was not right. They shifted their ways to do the mitzvah, פרו ורבו, which in hindsight was one of the most beautiful things ever done in Jewish history. While we need to engross ourselves in full devotion for our hachana in kedusha, we need to also look in the mirror and do a cheshbon hanefesh; What about ourselves do we need to fix? We need to reflect that bad we see, and eliminate it to make room for purity. Only then with the hachana and the mirror theory can we reach the tzidkus in its entirety.
If one thing cannot be taken for granted, it is Torah. Torah is such an amazing gift. The smallest pasuk, word, or even letter can say a universe of wisdom and philosophy. Hashem created such an amazing world in which we get to keep by the Torah guiding us along the way. Sometimes in life it can be hard to know what the next step will be and what we should be working on. Yet, by opening Torah and learning it from all angles, peshat and drash, you will have your tafkid from here until the rest of your life. Somehow, Torah always is said at the right place and right time to the exact person who needs to hear it. It never fails to do the best for each and every ehrliche yid. With that, it is up to us to perform what Hashem wants and to learn from His Torah what is best. We must be the shaliach to bring down all the shefa and bracha we all have the potential of meriting. If at times it can be challenging to live through whatever nisyonos one may be going through, it must also be acknowledged that Hashem has a chunky reward waiting for us at the end of this journey, ‘עד מאה ועשרים אם ירצה ה!
May you have all the bracha and hatzlacha to make this easy decision!
From,
A grown and forever thankful student - - Rachael Lehman
Anne Frank Underneath The Hide-Out In The Attic
I. Thesis & Introduction
I imagine that all Anne could think of was walking the streets of Amsterdam on a summer day, eating ice cream cones, smelling the baked goods from the kosher bakery, holding onto the smooth walkway railing as she walked with her friends from school, laughing and joking. Yet, in reality, she is now surrounded by a small, putrid-smelling, rat-ridden, pitch-dark attic, trying to hold on to the life she had before this utter torment.
In that Secret Annex, Anne Frank experienced psychological, physical, and social development. Psychological development occurred through her experiences with anxiety, hope, and love. Physical development resulted from her limited diet, becoming a woman, and lack of personal space. Lastly, social development happened through her experience of loneliness, her need to seek out relationships, and her awareness of anti-semitism. Now I will explore further how each of these experiences caused development to occur.
Psychologically, Anne developed anxiety from her small confines in which she could not leave. However, she had hoped that she would take comfort in writing in her diary and believed life would go back to the way it was before the war. In the meantime, she developed a love for Peter Van Pel, a boy who also stayed in the Secret Annex. The anxiety, hope, and love she felt during these experiences prompted psychological development to take place.
Physically, Anne was maturing as a woman, a topic she wrote in depth about in her diary. In addition, although Anne had sufficient nutrition she did not have access to many things she was accustomed to while in hiding. Thirdly, she lacked personal space, which by nature she needed as was clearly shown in the incident when she shared her bedroom with Fritz Pheffer. Anne’s physical developments were a direct result of these experiences.
Socially, she experienced loneliness. Therefore, naturally, she developed a desire for relationships, ones like the great friendships she had before the war. When she wrote about these friendships, describing in great detail the many friends and classmates she had, she was using the left side hemisphere of her brain. Remembering the times she had with her classmates, before going into hiding, also activated her acetylcholine, or ACh, levels. She described their appearances, personalities, and their relation to her. As a Jew, she knew she was socially isolated and targeted for killing. During this time Anne went through a lot, but fortunately, she wisely took note of every detail for us to experience everything with her.
However, to properly understand what she went through, we must understand her history. When was she born? What was her family dynamic? Where did she live before the war? How did she end up in the Secret Annex? What happened after she left the Secret Annex? How did she pass away? How did the diary come out to the public? Answers to these questions are essential if one is to gain a true picture of Anne Frank as a total person.
Background and Facts
Anne Frank was born on June 12, 1929, in Frankfurt Germany to Otto and Edith Frank. Anne had one sister, Margot. Otto was a skinny, tough-looking man with a pronounced mustache. Edith had brown hair and a strict-looking face. Their daughter Margot was a happy-looking person with short brown hair and glasses. Otto was, as Anne wrote, “a sweetheart” (Full text of "Anne Frank The Diary Of A Young Girl).
The family lived in Frankfurt Am Main, Germany (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.com). At this time Anne attended school. Anne’s school in Germany was great. She had many friends whom she wrote about extensively in her diary (National Geographic Kids). She felt she could have fun and confide in her feelings with them (Enotes.com). Psychologists explain that preschool and elementary school have at least a temporary, if not long-term, effect on the child’s intelligence.
However, their life in Germany came to an end as Otto saw the Nazi regime rise and sought to leave for Amsterdam. Unfortunately, his escape was not successful. Eventually, the Nazis reached Amsterdam too, and started sending Jews to deportation camps. Margot was called for deportation which caused the family to go into hiding on July 6, 1942.
They hid in the Secret Annex in the warehouse of Otto’s food business with another family, the Van Pels. The house was a light brick house, with forest green doors, and six big windows on the front (Getty Images.com). Inside, the house is quaint. It contains wooden floors, wooden shelves and features, low ceilings, and modest colorful decorations (Anne Frank House.org).
Before going into hiding, Edith Frank worked in her family business after high school. The family business traded in scrap metals, machinery parts, boilers, half-finished products, and other appliances (Anne Frank.org). The father of the Van Pel family was named Herman, the mother was named Auguste, and their sons were named Peter and Fritzs. They were able to get food and supplies through the help of their non-Jewish friends.
Anne wrote her diary in Dutch. She wrote there daily with all her emotions, concerns, and details of her life in the Secret Annex. She wrote about her relationships with her family.
Margot was at first unkind, especially to Anne, but as everyone grew older and more mature, Margot became “nicer” and their relationship grew into a more pleasant one (Full text of "Anne Frank The Diary Of A Young Girl). As Anne put it, “[Margot had] gotten much nicer. She seems a lot different than she used to be. She's not nearly as catty these days and is becoming a real friend. She no longer thinks of me as a little kid who doesn't count” (Full text of "Anne Frank The Diary Of A Young Girl).
Anne’s father seemed to favor an authoritative parenting style, which involves imposing rules and standards but not without talking to the child first. These parents will express their reasoning and have a conversation with their child to determine if their rules are acceptable. They respect their children and maintain a balance of power, as such, many believe this to be the most effective parenting style. Otto seemed to take this approach as he would sympathize with Anne and hear her complaints. However, at the same time, if Edith thought something was to be done and it made sense to Otto, then in spite of what Anne wanted Otto would go along with it. He had reached that level of balance in his parenting style and as a result, Anne’s relationship with her father was rather good. He was the “only one who [understood] her” (Full text of "Anne Frank The Diary Of A Young Girl).
However, her relationship with her mother was just the opposite. Edith was a woman who liked to rebuke Anne and had the need to comment on things negatively. One morning, Anne had to hear one of her mother’s “dreadful sermons” (Full text of "Anne Frank The Diary Of A Young Girl). Anne described it as if they were “caught in a vicious circle of unpleasantness and sorrow” (Full text of "Anne Frank The Diary Of A Young Girl). Their relationship was usually made up of fights, hurt feelings, and cries. From Anne’s point of view, her mother seemed to take the authoritarian parenting style. This is when parents put rules in place because they “said so”. They simply expect their children to listen. According to some psychologists, this approach is too hard for children. In this case, Anne’s dopamine and serotonin levels were increased because of the intense emotions and shift to a sad or angry mood. Also, her adrenal glands & pancreas went into a fight or flight mode from the nervous system response due to arguments happening at this time with her mother.
Throughout her writing, Anne was adamant that she did not particularly like the people around her. In fact, it seemed she felt a kind of superiority over those around her which made her confident in her assertions about them. This feeling of superiority enabled her to create an inner calm, which led to a decrease in the stress and anxiety caused by going from freedom to being hidden and locked away, with Nazis walking the streets.
Three days after her last diary entry, on August 3, 1944, the hide-out was discovered by the Gestapo from Dutch informers. The whole family went to the camp in Westerbork, and then to Auschwitz. Anne and Margot were transferred to Bergen-Belson, but their mother Edith died in Auschwitz. In 1945, Anne and Margot were infected with typhus and died a month before their evacuation by the Soviet Union. Only Otto, still located in Auschwitz, survived. He was given Anne’s diary by friends since the Gestapo left it in the Secret Annex the night they were deported. He took the diary and sent it out for publishing. It has become famous as, “Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl'' (Britannica).
Now that we have a better understanding of Anne’s history, we are able to explore the developments that occurred within her during her time in the Secret Annex. First, we will explore Anne’s psychological development while in hiding. From her diary entries, we learn that this development was prompted by her experiences with anxiety, hope, and love.
Anxiety, Hope, and Love
During Anne's stay in the Secret Annex, she understandably developed anxiety, a fervent wish for hope, and a desire to explore love. Her anxiety was due to the war. She hoped to find comfort in writing in her diary and that eventually life would go back to how it was. Finally, she developed a feeling of love for Peter Van Pel.
Anne lived with her family in the Secret Annex where they received food and drink from her father’s non-Jewish workers. This arrangement was in line with their goal of remaining hidden from the Nazis. They were never allowed to go outside. For this reason, Anne felt anxious. She so desperately wanted to leave and go out into the real world as she used to, but of course, could not. The concept of nurture tells us that a person’s environment profoundly impacts their development. Before now, her environment nurtured a sense of freedom and curiosity within her. Having that taken from her resulted in the anxiety she experienced.
In addition, Anne felt fear and was distressed due to the possibility of getting caught in the Secret Annex. She explained in her July 11, 1942 diary entry, “The fact that we can never go outside bothers me more than I can say, and then I'm really afraid that we'll be discovered and shot, not a very nice prospect, needless to say” (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.com). Sundays were particularly tough for Anne since they were so boring and she could not go “outside [for some] fresh air and laughter”. She explains further, “A voice inside me screams; I don’t even try to answer anymore, I lie down on a divan and sleep in order to shorten the time, the silence, the terrible fear too, because there is no question of killing them” (Anne Frank.com) She describes in a great metaphor, how she “feel[s] like a songbird that has had its wings torn off and flies against the bars of its cage in total darkness” (Anne Frank.com). From here, we understand her immense desire to leave when she absolutely could not, and her fear of getting discovered by the Nazis. Discovery, she knew, would lead to terrible consequences for all of them.
At age 11, Anne’s mind was still developing. According to Jean Piaget, at that age concrete operations can be performed, such as analogies like, “My brain is like a computer.” An example of this is when Anne made up the metaphor of flying on the wings of a songbird, so she could fly away and be free from the Nazis. This statement also showed the development of her cognition. Cognition is utilized in problem-solving, figuring out how the world works, developing models and concepts, storing and retrieving knowledge, understanding and using language, and using self-talk and inner thoughts. Anne clearly used most, if not all of these tools during her stay in the Secret Annex, due to her need to get out and be free. Finally, humans often create mental images to help us experience a concept. Using her imagination, Anne was able to feel as if she could free herself from the Secret Annex where she wanted to leave, to be free like a bird.
Despite Anne’s anxiety due to her surroundings, Anne had hoped she would find peace of mind when writing in her diary and hoped that life would return to the way it was before Hitler and the Nazis took over most of Europe. When Anne received her diary on June 12, 1942, she wrote, “I hope I will be able to confide everything to you, as I have never been able to confide in anyone, and I hope you will be a great source of comfort and support” (Britannica.com). She exclusively used her writing in the diary as an outlet to comfort herself, no matter what life had put her through. In addition to her hope that her diary would be a “source of comfort”, Anne thought about life after the war. She believed the war would dissipate and she would be able to continue on her life’s journey as she had planned. She explained in her July 15, 1944 entry, “I think that it will all come right, that this cruelty too will end, and that peace and tranquility will return again” (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.com). Anne displayed no overconfidence when she said “I think that it will all come right, that this cruelty too will end, and that peace and tranquility will return again”. She knew it was only a prediction and not a fact. Still, she dreamed about her future despite the cost of what her family could afford. On May 8, 1944, she wrote in her diary, ''We're far from rich now, but I've pinned all my hopes on after the war…I'd like to spend a year in Paris and London learning the languages and studying art history” (Study.com). She aspired to a normal life after the war. In summary, Anne was optimistic and used her diary to express hopes of life after WWII. Anne wrote intensely about her thoughts, feelings, and intuitions in the midst of the challenges she was facing. From this, we understand her constant use of the right side of her brain, which controls these aspects of human emotion.
Lastly, Anne’s love grew for Peter Van Pel, the son of the Van Pels who were hiding the Franks. She was very affectionate with him and enjoyed their conversations considerably. On March 19, 1944, Anne wrote in her diary “We told each other so much, so very very much, that I can’t repeat it all, but it was lovely, the most wonderful evening I have ever had in the ‘Secret Annex’” (Anne Frank.com). She loved Peter and their time together very much. However, in her rewrite of the diary, she omitted her writings about Peter. She did this because her love for Peter turned into disappointment (Anne Frank.com). Nevertheless, for a period of time in Anne’s life in the Secret Annex, she became infatuated with Peter and grew to love him. Here, you can see Anne utilizing and developing her cognition skills. After much thought about her feelings towards Peter, Anne finally realized she loved him. This was a sudden realization, a flash of insight that gave her the “aha” moment. Anne clearly used her cognition during her talks with Peter to arrive at this conclusion.
Additionally, aside from Anne’s peaks and valleys psychologically, she progressed physically. Anne spent two years in the Secret Annex, over which time she grew and matured. However, from her writing we see that her diet was limited, she noticed changes in becoming a woman, and she lacked personal space.
Nutrition, Becoming a Woman, and Lack of Personal Space
While in the Secret Annex, Anne developed physically due to changes in her diet, becoming a woman, and lack of personal space. At first, her diet was composed of lunch, dinner, coffee, and at one point, strawberries. Luckily, she had access to adequate nutrition. Second, she became a woman as she advanced in maturity, womanhood, and attractiveness. Lastly, Her lack of privacy was threatened as she shared a room with Fritz Pheffer, and he made remarks to her which made her want to be alone by herself or with Peter.
The nutrition Anne and the other people in the Secret Annex received was sufficient. As stated earlier, they would receive their food from the non-Jewish workers in the shop below in the Secret Annex. In day-to-day life, lunch would be at about 12:30 pm. At around 4:00 pm, they would have coffee. Lastly, they had dinner around 7:00-8:00 pm. Dinner was usually cooked by Auguste Van Pel and Edith Frank. Sometimes, they would have a coffee on Sunday after cleaning all day.
In early July 1944, John Brooks, a representative of Opekta, succeeded in purchasing over twenty-four crates of strawberries at an auction. It was apportioned among the office staff, Brooks, and the families in the Secret Annex. This was an extraordinary treat because it was hard to get strawberries. There was such a surplus that Anne, along with those in the Secret Annex, made and ate strawberry jam, strawberry sandwiches, strawberries with porridge, and strawberries dipped in sugar for the next few days. They even made some extra strawberry jam that they could use over the course of the next few months (Anne Frank.com). Upon receiving the strawberries, Anne and the attic residents thought quickly and came up with numerous ways they could utilize the strawberries before they spoiled; and they did so despite having no previous knowledge about what to do when you have a strawberries surplus. This skill is called fluid intelligence, when one problem solves quickly without having any previous knowledge of the subject. The result was the variety of dishes they created, proving they could be versatile when necessary.
The strawberries were the answer to one of Anne’s motivations, hunger. She loved having the strawberries because while she had a fine diet and quantities of food, having the strawberries was a true treat. Also, having so many strawberries allowed her to have a nice-sized portion to enjoy. This can be called unit bias when we eat more because there is more served in front of us. It is clear from the way Anne described the experience how happy she felt. In psychology, this can be referred to as a feel-good moment. When this occurs, we can get a do-good phenomenon, when we do good for others when we ourselves are feeling good. The reverse is true as well since doing good feels good. Perhaps, this explains one of the factors that drove Anne to do good in that time in the Secret Annex. The strawberries made such an impact on Anne that it became the memory in her mind of a time when she had plentiful food, compared to the other times when her diet was just sufficient, or nonexistent when she was in Bergen-Belsen. It would be incorrect to say that Anne had an abundance of food, but it would seem she had enough to keep her going in the Secret Annex as there were no complaints in her diary about her nutrition. This nutrition was sufficient for Anne because by nature, she did not need a lot of food intake. For many others that was not the case.
Another physical change that Anne experienced was her acceleration in becoming a woman. She progressed in maturity, womanhood, and attractiveness throughout her stay in the Secret Annex (Spark Notes.com). She grew a total of 13 centimeters during her stay in the Secret Annex (Anne Frank.com). Unfortunately, she did not feel she could confide in her mother about her developing womanhood and physical changes. As such, she turned to her diary and imaginary friend Kitty to ponder over these physical changes. Anne did not feel she could talk to her mother because of her authoritarian parenting style. Here, she used the right side of her brain when she expressed her feelings to Kitty and had a rise in dopamine levels with the intense emotions she was experiencing. In addition, it was natural for Anne to have these physical changes. It was quite amazing how Anne endured these experiences on her own, with only Kitty and her diary to express it to and guide her through it (Spark Notes.com).
In addition to going through her physical transformations alone, she also felt she had a lack of personal space (History.com). She shared her bedroom with Fritz Pheffer, who not only invaded her intimate and very private space, but he also complained about her, denounced her, and castigated her. He criticized her by saying she made “too much noise” while she was in the bedroom. Also, she complained that he “switch[ed] on the light at the crack of dawn to exercise” and “pushes and bumps [chairs]” into the wall, Anne sleeps against from the room next door. Anne started to understand the hypocrisy of Fritz Pheffer. In addition to rebuking her for making “too much noise”, he frequently stigmatized her about her gender and age (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 34). Therefore, when Anne justly desired to get away, she would “go up to the loft almost every morning to let the stuffy indoor air blow out of my lungs”, she wrote on February 23, 1944. She did this because the attic was the exclusive space she could be in unaccompanied or could speak with Peter uninterrupted (Anne Frank.com). Despite Anne’s frequent and abundant inconveniences she thankfully had the attic to escape to.
In addition to processing her physical changes, socially she experienced changes as well. She was cut off from the world and as such experienced profound loneliness. As a result, she sought relationships and became even more aware of the antisemitism around her.
Lonely, Seeking Relationships, and the Nazi’s Antisemitism
With respect to Anne’s social life, she felt lonely because she did not have many people to talk to. This isolation provided her with relatively little nurturing and, as a result of being isolated, she felt the need to seek relationships. Furthermore, she felt hated in her country as antisemitism in Europe continued to grow.
Anne felt desperately lonely while in the Annex because she did not feel she could confide her feelings to anyone except her diary, and sometimes Peter. Her mother and sister did not provide the emotional support she desired (Spark Notes.com and Enotes.com). Anne wrote in her diary about her mother explaining how she should,“[t]hink about all the suffering in the world and be thankful [her mother is] not part of it [the suffering]” (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 38). As Anne wrote, they are “caught in a vicious circle of unpleasantness and sorrow” (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 38). During interactions with her mother, Anne often reacted emotionally in anger, using expressive behavior to demonstrate her feelings. She considered her mother a threat, also known as a stressor. She probably experienced high serotonin and dopamine levels, and a fight or flight response due to the fights she was having with her mother.
As a coping mechanism, Anne visualized an image in her head of someone who would listen, which is how her relationship with her diary, and Kitty, developed. Because she was unable to talk to anyone else about her troubles, she turned mainly to Kitty, and to Peter on occasion. Anne was ripped-away from her loving friends with whom she had already established strong bonds. Upon moving into the attic, she may have felt grief and physical pain, from the isolation from her friends. Yet, she coped by having found Peter and Kitty to talk to.
Anne was emotionally aware and she knew she was not getting emotionally satisfied by her relationships in the Secret Annex. It is because of this emotional intelligence, that she turned to Peter and Kitty, who she knew were more reliable for such things. For this reason, she religiously wrote her sentiments in her diary, the second version of which totaled 324 pages (Ranker.com). In these pages, she detailed everything she would have told her mother and sister had they been available for emotional support. She longed for the time before the Nazi occupation when she had close friendships. She realized, after organizing her thoughts, that she wanted to be with her friends because they provided her with emotional support, and her mother and sister did not. She recalled her joyful and amusing times with them in her diary.
These recollections contrasted sharply with her time in hiding. There she suffered through remarks about every little thing she did (Enotes.com). There was one occasion that Anne wrote in her diary of how her mother “hurl[ed] at [her] day after day…[and] pierce[d] [her] like arrows from a tightly strung bow” (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 38). Because of these hostilities, Anne felt she could not talk to anyone about anything, including her reflection on life so far, her changing body physically, and all other topics she wanted to talk about (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 35). Therefore, she primarily turned to her diary, and intermittently Peter (Spark Notes.com). As she so articulately wrote, “Paper has more patience than people” and as a result, her detailed diary provided us with a superb glimpse into her life while she lived in hiding (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 35).
As a female, Anne had complex emotions that needed to be expressed. By expressing these emotions to Kitty or Peter, she utilized the right hemisphere of her brain and she had increased dopamine levels from the feelings and emotions she was discussing. It appears that Anne made the best of her situation, using her diary as an important tool and speaking to Peter whenever he was available. It was quite an unfortunate situation, especially knowing how happy she had been with her friends and the emotional support they provided before the war.
Finally, Anne Frank was socially subjugated in an unjust manner under the Nazi reign. In 1940, when Germany invaded the Netherlands, where Anne and her family escaped from Nazi Germany, the killing sprees of Jews increased (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 36). Anne, and all Jews, faced extreme prejudice due to the negative stereotypes about Jews being perpetrated across Europe. This was precisely the reason Anne and her family hid in the Secret Annex, but the worrying and need for affirmation of one’s self-worth came with them. At that time, the Jews in Eastern Europe were in severe danger. The Nazis took away all Jews’ rights one by one, regulation by regulation. As Anne wrote, “…Our freedom was severely restricted by a series of anti-Jewish decrees” (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 36).
Throughout Anne’s stay in the Annex, she experienced many things. Psychologically, she went through bouts of anxiety, and moments of tremendous hope, and experienced a desire for love. Physically, she was concerned about nutrition, was becoming a woman, and longed for privacy. Socially, she felt isolated, had a need to explore relationships, and was cognizant of the antisemitism around her.
Unfortunately, through all of this, her authoritarian mother, her long stay in the small Annex, and the other people in the attic who she would fight with from time to time were constant stressors. Children who are emotionally abused may have difficulty forming attachments, as well as increased anxiety and depression. However, in spite of the lack of a nurturing, and affectionate caretaker, Anne remained resilient. Ronnie Goldstein-van Cleef, a holocaust survivor, met the Frank family at Westerbork and was close with Anne in the Birkenau labor camp. She described her as “very calm and quiet and somewhat withdrawn” (Times Of Israel). It would seem Anne remained resilient until the end of her life, despite the emotional abuse she suffered in the Secret Annex.
Anne put faith in G-d which had an indirect effect on her health. Anne wrote in her diary entry for February 23, 1944, testifying her pure faith. She wrote, “The best remedy for those who are frightened, lonely or unhappy is to go outside; somewhere they can be alone, alone with the sky, nature, and G-d. For then and only then can you feel that everything is as it should be and that G-d wants people to be happy amid nature’s beauty and simplicity” (Holocaust Rememberance.com). Some psychologists claim that religion promotes better behavior, increased social support, positive emotions, and an enhanced immune system. After living in an attic for two years, with people she did not particularly like, only basic nutrition, and some run-ins with rats, Anne did pretty well. It is possible her faith in G-d led her to make friends with who she could, Kitty and Peter, and have an overall positive outlook on life, allowing her to have survived this far in the war.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Anne experienced more in fifteen years than what most people experience in a lifetime. Her whole life was turned upside down by WWII. It destroyed her world of good friends, a free life, and normalcy. She hid in the Secret Annex for two years where she progressed psychologically, physically, and socially. Psychologically, her feelings of anxiety, hope, and love grew greatly. Physically, she was barely able to meet her nutritional needs while becoming a woman and lacking personal space. Socially, she was lonely, sought relationships, and was fully cognizant of the antisemitism that encroached on Europe. Even so, for those two precious years, she had been better off than most victims of the Holocaust. Still, this all came to an end in 1944 when the Nazis discovered her and the families hiding in the Secret Annex. From there, she was sent to a concentration camp where she experienced worse degradation and suffering. There, she passed away in 1945 from typhus. What a life Anne Frank lived and what a legacy she left behind.
From delving deeply into Anne Frank’s life and feelings, I see Anne as a clever, witty, and emotional person. However, she was not able to utilize these character traits for very long as she died at the young age of 15. Like anyone, she had so much potential, if she only had more time to fulfill it. Therefore, I have immense appreciation for the privilege of being able to live a longer life. Thank G-d, I can get up in the morning and accomplish many things, bringing me to my fullest potential. I have learned that gratitude is key, and thankfulness is a critical value for me to strive toward.
Works Cited:
"ANNE FRANK BIOGRAPHY: WHO WAS ANNE FRANK?." US Holocaust Memorial Museum MUST READS, 18 Apr. 2023, https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/anne-frank-biography#:~:text=She%20was%20born%20Annelies%20Marie%20Frank%20on%20June,in%20an%20apartment%20on%20the%20outskirts%20of%20Frankfurt.
"Anne Frank Character Analysis in The Diary of Anne Frank | SparkNotes." SparkNotes: Today's Most Popular Study Guides, 14 Feb. 2023, www.sparknotes.com/lit/annefrank/character/anne-frank/
"Anne Frank: Diary ." United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 9 Feb. 2023, https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/anne-frank-diary
"Anne Frank ." Encyclopedia Britannica | Britannica, 9 Feb. 2023, www.britannica.com/biography/Anne-Frank
"Anne Frank House, Amsterdam, Netherlands stock photo." iStock by Getty Images , 2 May. 2023, https://media.istockphoto.com/photos/anne-frank-house-amsterdam-netherlands-picture-id1165568007
"Anne Frank facts ." National Geographic Kids, 18 Apr. 2023, www.natgeokids.com/uk/discover/history/general-history/anne-frank-facts/.
"Anne Frank – #NotSilent." A world that remembers the Holocaust | IHRA, 28 May. 2023, www.holocaustremembrance.com/sites/default/files/anne_frank_not_silent_extracts.pdf.
"Anne Frank's family home - Entry, Amsterdam, Netherlands — Google Arts & Culture." Google Arts & Culture, 2 May. 2023, https://artsandculture.google.com/streetview/anne-frank-s-family-home-entry-floor/2QHvMIIZ-TGBBw?sv_lng=4.884227096520752&sv_lat=52.375157891378855&sv_h=25.4768252247121&sv_p=-5.83403876866835&sv_pid=S5FwIamfO5cAAAQrDCFOjg&sv_z=0.3599319888479122
"Anne Frank." HISTORY | Watch Full Episodes of Your Favorite Shows, 9 Feb. 2023, www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/anne-frank-1
"Anne Frank: Motifs." SparkNotes: Today's Most Popular Study Guides, 9 Feb. 2023, www.sparknotes.com/lit/annefrank/motifs/
"A typical day in the Secret Annex | Anne Frank House." Home | Anne Frank Stichting, 9 Feb. 2023, www.annefrank.org/en/anne-frank/go-in-depth/typical-day-secret-annex/
"Edith Frank | Anne Frank House." Anne Frank House, 18 Apr. 2023, www.annefrank.org/en/anne-frank/main-characters/edith-frank/#:~:text=Her%20parents%20ran%20a%20family%20business%2C%20trading%20in,and%20parts%2C%20boilers%2C%20other%20appliances%2C%20and%20semi-finished%20products
"Full text of "Anne Frank The Diary Of A Young Girl"." Internet Archive: Digital Library of Free & Borrowable Books, Movies, Music & Wayback Machine, 18 Apr. 2023, https://archive.org/stream/AnneFrankTheDiaryOfAYoungGirl_201606/Anne-Frank-The-Diary-Of-A-Young-Girl_djvu.txt
"Hope in Anne Frank's Diary of a Young Girl: Quotes & Examples." Study , 9 Feb. 2023, https://study.com/academy/lesson/hope-in-anne-franks-diary-of-a-young-girl-quotes-examples.html
"The attic: rats, cats, and a place to be alone." Home | Anne Frank Stichting, 9 Feb. 2023, www.annefrank.org/en/anne-frank/secret-annex/attic/#trap-naar-vliering-op-zolder
"The Complicated History Of Anne Frank's Diary." Ranker - Lists About Everything Voted On By Everyone, 14 Feb. 2023, www.ranker.com/list/history-of-anne-franks-diary/erin-mccann.
"The office kitchen and toilet." Home | Anne Frank Stichting, 9 Feb. 2023, www.annefrank.org/en/anne-frank/front-section/office-kitchen-and-toilet/
"The Posterity of Hiding: A Psychoanalytic Reading of The Diary of Anne Frank | Bankirer | Gramma: Journal of Theory and Criticism." Βιβλιοθήκη ΑΠΘ - Προθήκη, 9 Feb. 2023, https://ejournals.lib.auth.gr/gramma/article/view/6589/6328
"The two versions of Anne’s diary." Home | Anne Frank Stichting, 9 Feb. 2023, www.annefrank.org/en/anne-frank/go-in-depth/two-versions-annes-diary/#:~:text=On%2019%20March%201944%2C%20Anne%20wrote%20in%20her,rewritten%20version%2C%20she%20left%20out%20this%20entire%20letter
"What happened to Anne Frank after the Secret Annex? | The Times of Israel." The Times of Israel | News from Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World, 16 May. 2023, www.timesofisrael.com/what-happened-to-anne-frank-after-the-secret-annex/
"Why did Anne Frank feel lonely and neglected? - eNotes.com." Study Guides, Lesson Plans, Homework Help, Answers & More - eNotes.com, 14 Feb. 2023, www.enotes.com/homework-help/why-did-anne-frank-feel-lonely-neglected-1318627#:~:text=Anne%20Frank%20feels%20lonely%20and%20neglected%20throughout%20her,why%20she%20so%20diligently%20wrote%20in%20her%20diary
I imagine that all Anne could think of was walking the streets of Amsterdam on a summer day, eating ice cream cones, smelling the baked goods from the kosher bakery, holding onto the smooth walkway railing as she walked with her friends from school, laughing and joking. Yet, in reality, she is now surrounded by a small, putrid-smelling, rat-ridden, pitch-dark attic, trying to hold on to the life she had before this utter torment.
In that Secret Annex, Anne Frank experienced psychological, physical, and social development. Psychological development occurred through her experiences with anxiety, hope, and love. Physical development resulted from her limited diet, becoming a woman, and lack of personal space. Lastly, social development happened through her experience of loneliness, her need to seek out relationships, and her awareness of anti-semitism. Now I will explore further how each of these experiences caused development to occur.
Psychologically, Anne developed anxiety from her small confines in which she could not leave. However, she had hoped that she would take comfort in writing in her diary and believed life would go back to the way it was before the war. In the meantime, she developed a love for Peter Van Pel, a boy who also stayed in the Secret Annex. The anxiety, hope, and love she felt during these experiences prompted psychological development to take place.
Physically, Anne was maturing as a woman, a topic she wrote in depth about in her diary. In addition, although Anne had sufficient nutrition she did not have access to many things she was accustomed to while in hiding. Thirdly, she lacked personal space, which by nature she needed as was clearly shown in the incident when she shared her bedroom with Fritz Pheffer. Anne’s physical developments were a direct result of these experiences.
Socially, she experienced loneliness. Therefore, naturally, she developed a desire for relationships, ones like the great friendships she had before the war. When she wrote about these friendships, describing in great detail the many friends and classmates she had, she was using the left side hemisphere of her brain. Remembering the times she had with her classmates, before going into hiding, also activated her acetylcholine, or ACh, levels. She described their appearances, personalities, and their relation to her. As a Jew, she knew she was socially isolated and targeted for killing. During this time Anne went through a lot, but fortunately, she wisely took note of every detail for us to experience everything with her.
However, to properly understand what she went through, we must understand her history. When was she born? What was her family dynamic? Where did she live before the war? How did she end up in the Secret Annex? What happened after she left the Secret Annex? How did she pass away? How did the diary come out to the public? Answers to these questions are essential if one is to gain a true picture of Anne Frank as a total person.
Background and Facts
Anne Frank was born on June 12, 1929, in Frankfurt Germany to Otto and Edith Frank. Anne had one sister, Margot. Otto was a skinny, tough-looking man with a pronounced mustache. Edith had brown hair and a strict-looking face. Their daughter Margot was a happy-looking person with short brown hair and glasses. Otto was, as Anne wrote, “a sweetheart” (Full text of "Anne Frank The Diary Of A Young Girl).
The family lived in Frankfurt Am Main, Germany (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.com). At this time Anne attended school. Anne’s school in Germany was great. She had many friends whom she wrote about extensively in her diary (National Geographic Kids). She felt she could have fun and confide in her feelings with them (Enotes.com). Psychologists explain that preschool and elementary school have at least a temporary, if not long-term, effect on the child’s intelligence.
However, their life in Germany came to an end as Otto saw the Nazi regime rise and sought to leave for Amsterdam. Unfortunately, his escape was not successful. Eventually, the Nazis reached Amsterdam too, and started sending Jews to deportation camps. Margot was called for deportation which caused the family to go into hiding on July 6, 1942.
They hid in the Secret Annex in the warehouse of Otto’s food business with another family, the Van Pels. The house was a light brick house, with forest green doors, and six big windows on the front (Getty Images.com). Inside, the house is quaint. It contains wooden floors, wooden shelves and features, low ceilings, and modest colorful decorations (Anne Frank House.org).
Before going into hiding, Edith Frank worked in her family business after high school. The family business traded in scrap metals, machinery parts, boilers, half-finished products, and other appliances (Anne Frank.org). The father of the Van Pel family was named Herman, the mother was named Auguste, and their sons were named Peter and Fritzs. They were able to get food and supplies through the help of their non-Jewish friends.
Anne wrote her diary in Dutch. She wrote there daily with all her emotions, concerns, and details of her life in the Secret Annex. She wrote about her relationships with her family.
Margot was at first unkind, especially to Anne, but as everyone grew older and more mature, Margot became “nicer” and their relationship grew into a more pleasant one (Full text of "Anne Frank The Diary Of A Young Girl). As Anne put it, “[Margot had] gotten much nicer. She seems a lot different than she used to be. She's not nearly as catty these days and is becoming a real friend. She no longer thinks of me as a little kid who doesn't count” (Full text of "Anne Frank The Diary Of A Young Girl).
Anne’s father seemed to favor an authoritative parenting style, which involves imposing rules and standards but not without talking to the child first. These parents will express their reasoning and have a conversation with their child to determine if their rules are acceptable. They respect their children and maintain a balance of power, as such, many believe this to be the most effective parenting style. Otto seemed to take this approach as he would sympathize with Anne and hear her complaints. However, at the same time, if Edith thought something was to be done and it made sense to Otto, then in spite of what Anne wanted Otto would go along with it. He had reached that level of balance in his parenting style and as a result, Anne’s relationship with her father was rather good. He was the “only one who [understood] her” (Full text of "Anne Frank The Diary Of A Young Girl).
However, her relationship with her mother was just the opposite. Edith was a woman who liked to rebuke Anne and had the need to comment on things negatively. One morning, Anne had to hear one of her mother’s “dreadful sermons” (Full text of "Anne Frank The Diary Of A Young Girl). Anne described it as if they were “caught in a vicious circle of unpleasantness and sorrow” (Full text of "Anne Frank The Diary Of A Young Girl). Their relationship was usually made up of fights, hurt feelings, and cries. From Anne’s point of view, her mother seemed to take the authoritarian parenting style. This is when parents put rules in place because they “said so”. They simply expect their children to listen. According to some psychologists, this approach is too hard for children. In this case, Anne’s dopamine and serotonin levels were increased because of the intense emotions and shift to a sad or angry mood. Also, her adrenal glands & pancreas went into a fight or flight mode from the nervous system response due to arguments happening at this time with her mother.
Throughout her writing, Anne was adamant that she did not particularly like the people around her. In fact, it seemed she felt a kind of superiority over those around her which made her confident in her assertions about them. This feeling of superiority enabled her to create an inner calm, which led to a decrease in the stress and anxiety caused by going from freedom to being hidden and locked away, with Nazis walking the streets.
Three days after her last diary entry, on August 3, 1944, the hide-out was discovered by the Gestapo from Dutch informers. The whole family went to the camp in Westerbork, and then to Auschwitz. Anne and Margot were transferred to Bergen-Belson, but their mother Edith died in Auschwitz. In 1945, Anne and Margot were infected with typhus and died a month before their evacuation by the Soviet Union. Only Otto, still located in Auschwitz, survived. He was given Anne’s diary by friends since the Gestapo left it in the Secret Annex the night they were deported. He took the diary and sent it out for publishing. It has become famous as, “Anne Frank: The Diary of a Young Girl'' (Britannica).
Now that we have a better understanding of Anne’s history, we are able to explore the developments that occurred within her during her time in the Secret Annex. First, we will explore Anne’s psychological development while in hiding. From her diary entries, we learn that this development was prompted by her experiences with anxiety, hope, and love.
Anxiety, Hope, and Love
During Anne's stay in the Secret Annex, she understandably developed anxiety, a fervent wish for hope, and a desire to explore love. Her anxiety was due to the war. She hoped to find comfort in writing in her diary and that eventually life would go back to how it was. Finally, she developed a feeling of love for Peter Van Pel.
Anne lived with her family in the Secret Annex where they received food and drink from her father’s non-Jewish workers. This arrangement was in line with their goal of remaining hidden from the Nazis. They were never allowed to go outside. For this reason, Anne felt anxious. She so desperately wanted to leave and go out into the real world as she used to, but of course, could not. The concept of nurture tells us that a person’s environment profoundly impacts their development. Before now, her environment nurtured a sense of freedom and curiosity within her. Having that taken from her resulted in the anxiety she experienced.
In addition, Anne felt fear and was distressed due to the possibility of getting caught in the Secret Annex. She explained in her July 11, 1942 diary entry, “The fact that we can never go outside bothers me more than I can say, and then I'm really afraid that we'll be discovered and shot, not a very nice prospect, needless to say” (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.com). Sundays were particularly tough for Anne since they were so boring and she could not go “outside [for some] fresh air and laughter”. She explains further, “A voice inside me screams; I don’t even try to answer anymore, I lie down on a divan and sleep in order to shorten the time, the silence, the terrible fear too, because there is no question of killing them” (Anne Frank.com) She describes in a great metaphor, how she “feel[s] like a songbird that has had its wings torn off and flies against the bars of its cage in total darkness” (Anne Frank.com). From here, we understand her immense desire to leave when she absolutely could not, and her fear of getting discovered by the Nazis. Discovery, she knew, would lead to terrible consequences for all of them.
At age 11, Anne’s mind was still developing. According to Jean Piaget, at that age concrete operations can be performed, such as analogies like, “My brain is like a computer.” An example of this is when Anne made up the metaphor of flying on the wings of a songbird, so she could fly away and be free from the Nazis. This statement also showed the development of her cognition. Cognition is utilized in problem-solving, figuring out how the world works, developing models and concepts, storing and retrieving knowledge, understanding and using language, and using self-talk and inner thoughts. Anne clearly used most, if not all of these tools during her stay in the Secret Annex, due to her need to get out and be free. Finally, humans often create mental images to help us experience a concept. Using her imagination, Anne was able to feel as if she could free herself from the Secret Annex where she wanted to leave, to be free like a bird.
Despite Anne’s anxiety due to her surroundings, Anne had hoped she would find peace of mind when writing in her diary and hoped that life would return to the way it was before Hitler and the Nazis took over most of Europe. When Anne received her diary on June 12, 1942, she wrote, “I hope I will be able to confide everything to you, as I have never been able to confide in anyone, and I hope you will be a great source of comfort and support” (Britannica.com). She exclusively used her writing in the diary as an outlet to comfort herself, no matter what life had put her through. In addition to her hope that her diary would be a “source of comfort”, Anne thought about life after the war. She believed the war would dissipate and she would be able to continue on her life’s journey as she had planned. She explained in her July 15, 1944 entry, “I think that it will all come right, that this cruelty too will end, and that peace and tranquility will return again” (United States Holocaust Memorial Museum.com). Anne displayed no overconfidence when she said “I think that it will all come right, that this cruelty too will end, and that peace and tranquility will return again”. She knew it was only a prediction and not a fact. Still, she dreamed about her future despite the cost of what her family could afford. On May 8, 1944, she wrote in her diary, ''We're far from rich now, but I've pinned all my hopes on after the war…I'd like to spend a year in Paris and London learning the languages and studying art history” (Study.com). She aspired to a normal life after the war. In summary, Anne was optimistic and used her diary to express hopes of life after WWII. Anne wrote intensely about her thoughts, feelings, and intuitions in the midst of the challenges she was facing. From this, we understand her constant use of the right side of her brain, which controls these aspects of human emotion.
Lastly, Anne’s love grew for Peter Van Pel, the son of the Van Pels who were hiding the Franks. She was very affectionate with him and enjoyed their conversations considerably. On March 19, 1944, Anne wrote in her diary “We told each other so much, so very very much, that I can’t repeat it all, but it was lovely, the most wonderful evening I have ever had in the ‘Secret Annex’” (Anne Frank.com). She loved Peter and their time together very much. However, in her rewrite of the diary, she omitted her writings about Peter. She did this because her love for Peter turned into disappointment (Anne Frank.com). Nevertheless, for a period of time in Anne’s life in the Secret Annex, she became infatuated with Peter and grew to love him. Here, you can see Anne utilizing and developing her cognition skills. After much thought about her feelings towards Peter, Anne finally realized she loved him. This was a sudden realization, a flash of insight that gave her the “aha” moment. Anne clearly used her cognition during her talks with Peter to arrive at this conclusion.
Additionally, aside from Anne’s peaks and valleys psychologically, she progressed physically. Anne spent two years in the Secret Annex, over which time she grew and matured. However, from her writing we see that her diet was limited, she noticed changes in becoming a woman, and she lacked personal space.
Nutrition, Becoming a Woman, and Lack of Personal Space
While in the Secret Annex, Anne developed physically due to changes in her diet, becoming a woman, and lack of personal space. At first, her diet was composed of lunch, dinner, coffee, and at one point, strawberries. Luckily, she had access to adequate nutrition. Second, she became a woman as she advanced in maturity, womanhood, and attractiveness. Lastly, Her lack of privacy was threatened as she shared a room with Fritz Pheffer, and he made remarks to her which made her want to be alone by herself or with Peter.
The nutrition Anne and the other people in the Secret Annex received was sufficient. As stated earlier, they would receive their food from the non-Jewish workers in the shop below in the Secret Annex. In day-to-day life, lunch would be at about 12:30 pm. At around 4:00 pm, they would have coffee. Lastly, they had dinner around 7:00-8:00 pm. Dinner was usually cooked by Auguste Van Pel and Edith Frank. Sometimes, they would have a coffee on Sunday after cleaning all day.
In early July 1944, John Brooks, a representative of Opekta, succeeded in purchasing over twenty-four crates of strawberries at an auction. It was apportioned among the office staff, Brooks, and the families in the Secret Annex. This was an extraordinary treat because it was hard to get strawberries. There was such a surplus that Anne, along with those in the Secret Annex, made and ate strawberry jam, strawberry sandwiches, strawberries with porridge, and strawberries dipped in sugar for the next few days. They even made some extra strawberry jam that they could use over the course of the next few months (Anne Frank.com). Upon receiving the strawberries, Anne and the attic residents thought quickly and came up with numerous ways they could utilize the strawberries before they spoiled; and they did so despite having no previous knowledge about what to do when you have a strawberries surplus. This skill is called fluid intelligence, when one problem solves quickly without having any previous knowledge of the subject. The result was the variety of dishes they created, proving they could be versatile when necessary.
The strawberries were the answer to one of Anne’s motivations, hunger. She loved having the strawberries because while she had a fine diet and quantities of food, having the strawberries was a true treat. Also, having so many strawberries allowed her to have a nice-sized portion to enjoy. This can be called unit bias when we eat more because there is more served in front of us. It is clear from the way Anne described the experience how happy she felt. In psychology, this can be referred to as a feel-good moment. When this occurs, we can get a do-good phenomenon, when we do good for others when we ourselves are feeling good. The reverse is true as well since doing good feels good. Perhaps, this explains one of the factors that drove Anne to do good in that time in the Secret Annex. The strawberries made such an impact on Anne that it became the memory in her mind of a time when she had plentiful food, compared to the other times when her diet was just sufficient, or nonexistent when she was in Bergen-Belsen. It would be incorrect to say that Anne had an abundance of food, but it would seem she had enough to keep her going in the Secret Annex as there were no complaints in her diary about her nutrition. This nutrition was sufficient for Anne because by nature, she did not need a lot of food intake. For many others that was not the case.
Another physical change that Anne experienced was her acceleration in becoming a woman. She progressed in maturity, womanhood, and attractiveness throughout her stay in the Secret Annex (Spark Notes.com). She grew a total of 13 centimeters during her stay in the Secret Annex (Anne Frank.com). Unfortunately, she did not feel she could confide in her mother about her developing womanhood and physical changes. As such, she turned to her diary and imaginary friend Kitty to ponder over these physical changes. Anne did not feel she could talk to her mother because of her authoritarian parenting style. Here, she used the right side of her brain when she expressed her feelings to Kitty and had a rise in dopamine levels with the intense emotions she was experiencing. In addition, it was natural for Anne to have these physical changes. It was quite amazing how Anne endured these experiences on her own, with only Kitty and her diary to express it to and guide her through it (Spark Notes.com).
In addition to going through her physical transformations alone, she also felt she had a lack of personal space (History.com). She shared her bedroom with Fritz Pheffer, who not only invaded her intimate and very private space, but he also complained about her, denounced her, and castigated her. He criticized her by saying she made “too much noise” while she was in the bedroom. Also, she complained that he “switch[ed] on the light at the crack of dawn to exercise” and “pushes and bumps [chairs]” into the wall, Anne sleeps against from the room next door. Anne started to understand the hypocrisy of Fritz Pheffer. In addition to rebuking her for making “too much noise”, he frequently stigmatized her about her gender and age (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 34). Therefore, when Anne justly desired to get away, she would “go up to the loft almost every morning to let the stuffy indoor air blow out of my lungs”, she wrote on February 23, 1944. She did this because the attic was the exclusive space she could be in unaccompanied or could speak with Peter uninterrupted (Anne Frank.com). Despite Anne’s frequent and abundant inconveniences she thankfully had the attic to escape to.
In addition to processing her physical changes, socially she experienced changes as well. She was cut off from the world and as such experienced profound loneliness. As a result, she sought relationships and became even more aware of the antisemitism around her.
Lonely, Seeking Relationships, and the Nazi’s Antisemitism
With respect to Anne’s social life, she felt lonely because she did not have many people to talk to. This isolation provided her with relatively little nurturing and, as a result of being isolated, she felt the need to seek relationships. Furthermore, she felt hated in her country as antisemitism in Europe continued to grow.
Anne felt desperately lonely while in the Annex because she did not feel she could confide her feelings to anyone except her diary, and sometimes Peter. Her mother and sister did not provide the emotional support she desired (Spark Notes.com and Enotes.com). Anne wrote in her diary about her mother explaining how she should,“[t]hink about all the suffering in the world and be thankful [her mother is] not part of it [the suffering]” (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 38). As Anne wrote, they are “caught in a vicious circle of unpleasantness and sorrow” (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 38). During interactions with her mother, Anne often reacted emotionally in anger, using expressive behavior to demonstrate her feelings. She considered her mother a threat, also known as a stressor. She probably experienced high serotonin and dopamine levels, and a fight or flight response due to the fights she was having with her mother.
As a coping mechanism, Anne visualized an image in her head of someone who would listen, which is how her relationship with her diary, and Kitty, developed. Because she was unable to talk to anyone else about her troubles, she turned mainly to Kitty, and to Peter on occasion. Anne was ripped-away from her loving friends with whom she had already established strong bonds. Upon moving into the attic, she may have felt grief and physical pain, from the isolation from her friends. Yet, she coped by having found Peter and Kitty to talk to.
Anne was emotionally aware and she knew she was not getting emotionally satisfied by her relationships in the Secret Annex. It is because of this emotional intelligence, that she turned to Peter and Kitty, who she knew were more reliable for such things. For this reason, she religiously wrote her sentiments in her diary, the second version of which totaled 324 pages (Ranker.com). In these pages, she detailed everything she would have told her mother and sister had they been available for emotional support. She longed for the time before the Nazi occupation when she had close friendships. She realized, after organizing her thoughts, that she wanted to be with her friends because they provided her with emotional support, and her mother and sister did not. She recalled her joyful and amusing times with them in her diary.
These recollections contrasted sharply with her time in hiding. There she suffered through remarks about every little thing she did (Enotes.com). There was one occasion that Anne wrote in her diary of how her mother “hurl[ed] at [her] day after day…[and] pierce[d] [her] like arrows from a tightly strung bow” (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 38). Because of these hostilities, Anne felt she could not talk to anyone about anything, including her reflection on life so far, her changing body physically, and all other topics she wanted to talk about (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 35). Therefore, she primarily turned to her diary, and intermittently Peter (Spark Notes.com). As she so articulately wrote, “Paper has more patience than people” and as a result, her detailed diary provided us with a superb glimpse into her life while she lived in hiding (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 35).
As a female, Anne had complex emotions that needed to be expressed. By expressing these emotions to Kitty or Peter, she utilized the right hemisphere of her brain and she had increased dopamine levels from the feelings and emotions she was discussing. It appears that Anne made the best of her situation, using her diary as an important tool and speaking to Peter whenever he was available. It was quite an unfortunate situation, especially knowing how happy she had been with her friends and the emotional support they provided before the war.
Finally, Anne Frank was socially subjugated in an unjust manner under the Nazi reign. In 1940, when Germany invaded the Netherlands, where Anne and her family escaped from Nazi Germany, the killing sprees of Jews increased (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 36). Anne, and all Jews, faced extreme prejudice due to the negative stereotypes about Jews being perpetrated across Europe. This was precisely the reason Anne and her family hid in the Secret Annex, but the worrying and need for affirmation of one’s self-worth came with them. At that time, the Jews in Eastern Europe were in severe danger. The Nazis took away all Jews’ rights one by one, regulation by regulation. As Anne wrote, “…Our freedom was severely restricted by a series of anti-Jewish decrees” (Yael Pilowsky Bankirer, page 36).
Throughout Anne’s stay in the Annex, she experienced many things. Psychologically, she went through bouts of anxiety, and moments of tremendous hope, and experienced a desire for love. Physically, she was concerned about nutrition, was becoming a woman, and longed for privacy. Socially, she felt isolated, had a need to explore relationships, and was cognizant of the antisemitism around her.
Unfortunately, through all of this, her authoritarian mother, her long stay in the small Annex, and the other people in the attic who she would fight with from time to time were constant stressors. Children who are emotionally abused may have difficulty forming attachments, as well as increased anxiety and depression. However, in spite of the lack of a nurturing, and affectionate caretaker, Anne remained resilient. Ronnie Goldstein-van Cleef, a holocaust survivor, met the Frank family at Westerbork and was close with Anne in the Birkenau labor camp. She described her as “very calm and quiet and somewhat withdrawn” (Times Of Israel). It would seem Anne remained resilient until the end of her life, despite the emotional abuse she suffered in the Secret Annex.
Anne put faith in G-d which had an indirect effect on her health. Anne wrote in her diary entry for February 23, 1944, testifying her pure faith. She wrote, “The best remedy for those who are frightened, lonely or unhappy is to go outside; somewhere they can be alone, alone with the sky, nature, and G-d. For then and only then can you feel that everything is as it should be and that G-d wants people to be happy amid nature’s beauty and simplicity” (Holocaust Rememberance.com). Some psychologists claim that religion promotes better behavior, increased social support, positive emotions, and an enhanced immune system. After living in an attic for two years, with people she did not particularly like, only basic nutrition, and some run-ins with rats, Anne did pretty well. It is possible her faith in G-d led her to make friends with who she could, Kitty and Peter, and have an overall positive outlook on life, allowing her to have survived this far in the war.
Conclusion
In conclusion, Anne experienced more in fifteen years than what most people experience in a lifetime. Her whole life was turned upside down by WWII. It destroyed her world of good friends, a free life, and normalcy. She hid in the Secret Annex for two years where she progressed psychologically, physically, and socially. Psychologically, her feelings of anxiety, hope, and love grew greatly. Physically, she was barely able to meet her nutritional needs while becoming a woman and lacking personal space. Socially, she was lonely, sought relationships, and was fully cognizant of the antisemitism that encroached on Europe. Even so, for those two precious years, she had been better off than most victims of the Holocaust. Still, this all came to an end in 1944 when the Nazis discovered her and the families hiding in the Secret Annex. From there, she was sent to a concentration camp where she experienced worse degradation and suffering. There, she passed away in 1945 from typhus. What a life Anne Frank lived and what a legacy she left behind.
From delving deeply into Anne Frank’s life and feelings, I see Anne as a clever, witty, and emotional person. However, she was not able to utilize these character traits for very long as she died at the young age of 15. Like anyone, she had so much potential, if she only had more time to fulfill it. Therefore, I have immense appreciation for the privilege of being able to live a longer life. Thank G-d, I can get up in the morning and accomplish many things, bringing me to my fullest potential. I have learned that gratitude is key, and thankfulness is a critical value for me to strive toward.
Works Cited:
"ANNE FRANK BIOGRAPHY: WHO WAS ANNE FRANK?." US Holocaust Memorial Museum MUST READS, 18 Apr. 2023, https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/anne-frank-biography#:~:text=She%20was%20born%20Annelies%20Marie%20Frank%20on%20June,in%20an%20apartment%20on%20the%20outskirts%20of%20Frankfurt.
"Anne Frank Character Analysis in The Diary of Anne Frank | SparkNotes." SparkNotes: Today's Most Popular Study Guides, 14 Feb. 2023, www.sparknotes.com/lit/annefrank/character/anne-frank/
"Anne Frank: Diary ." United States Holocaust Memorial Museum, 9 Feb. 2023, https://encyclopedia.ushmm.org/content/en/article/anne-frank-diary
"Anne Frank ." Encyclopedia Britannica | Britannica, 9 Feb. 2023, www.britannica.com/biography/Anne-Frank
"Anne Frank House, Amsterdam, Netherlands stock photo." iStock by Getty Images , 2 May. 2023, https://media.istockphoto.com/photos/anne-frank-house-amsterdam-netherlands-picture-id1165568007
"Anne Frank facts ." National Geographic Kids, 18 Apr. 2023, www.natgeokids.com/uk/discover/history/general-history/anne-frank-facts/.
"Anne Frank – #NotSilent." A world that remembers the Holocaust | IHRA, 28 May. 2023, www.holocaustremembrance.com/sites/default/files/anne_frank_not_silent_extracts.pdf.
"Anne Frank's family home - Entry, Amsterdam, Netherlands — Google Arts & Culture." Google Arts & Culture, 2 May. 2023, https://artsandculture.google.com/streetview/anne-frank-s-family-home-entry-floor/2QHvMIIZ-TGBBw?sv_lng=4.884227096520752&sv_lat=52.375157891378855&sv_h=25.4768252247121&sv_p=-5.83403876866835&sv_pid=S5FwIamfO5cAAAQrDCFOjg&sv_z=0.3599319888479122
"Anne Frank." HISTORY | Watch Full Episodes of Your Favorite Shows, 9 Feb. 2023, www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/anne-frank-1
"Anne Frank: Motifs." SparkNotes: Today's Most Popular Study Guides, 9 Feb. 2023, www.sparknotes.com/lit/annefrank/motifs/
"A typical day in the Secret Annex | Anne Frank House." Home | Anne Frank Stichting, 9 Feb. 2023, www.annefrank.org/en/anne-frank/go-in-depth/typical-day-secret-annex/
"Edith Frank | Anne Frank House." Anne Frank House, 18 Apr. 2023, www.annefrank.org/en/anne-frank/main-characters/edith-frank/#:~:text=Her%20parents%20ran%20a%20family%20business%2C%20trading%20in,and%20parts%2C%20boilers%2C%20other%20appliances%2C%20and%20semi-finished%20products
"Full text of "Anne Frank The Diary Of A Young Girl"." Internet Archive: Digital Library of Free & Borrowable Books, Movies, Music & Wayback Machine, 18 Apr. 2023, https://archive.org/stream/AnneFrankTheDiaryOfAYoungGirl_201606/Anne-Frank-The-Diary-Of-A-Young-Girl_djvu.txt
"Hope in Anne Frank's Diary of a Young Girl: Quotes & Examples." Study , 9 Feb. 2023, https://study.com/academy/lesson/hope-in-anne-franks-diary-of-a-young-girl-quotes-examples.html
"The attic: rats, cats, and a place to be alone." Home | Anne Frank Stichting, 9 Feb. 2023, www.annefrank.org/en/anne-frank/secret-annex/attic/#trap-naar-vliering-op-zolder
"The Complicated History Of Anne Frank's Diary." Ranker - Lists About Everything Voted On By Everyone, 14 Feb. 2023, www.ranker.com/list/history-of-anne-franks-diary/erin-mccann.
"The office kitchen and toilet." Home | Anne Frank Stichting, 9 Feb. 2023, www.annefrank.org/en/anne-frank/front-section/office-kitchen-and-toilet/
"The Posterity of Hiding: A Psychoanalytic Reading of The Diary of Anne Frank | Bankirer | Gramma: Journal of Theory and Criticism." Βιβλιοθήκη ΑΠΘ - Προθήκη, 9 Feb. 2023, https://ejournals.lib.auth.gr/gramma/article/view/6589/6328
"The two versions of Anne’s diary." Home | Anne Frank Stichting, 9 Feb. 2023, www.annefrank.org/en/anne-frank/go-in-depth/two-versions-annes-diary/#:~:text=On%2019%20March%201944%2C%20Anne%20wrote%20in%20her,rewritten%20version%2C%20she%20left%20out%20this%20entire%20letter
"What happened to Anne Frank after the Secret Annex? | The Times of Israel." The Times of Israel | News from Israel, the Middle East and the Jewish World, 16 May. 2023, www.timesofisrael.com/what-happened-to-anne-frank-after-the-secret-annex/
"Why did Anne Frank feel lonely and neglected? - eNotes.com." Study Guides, Lesson Plans, Homework Help, Answers & More - eNotes.com, 14 Feb. 2023, www.enotes.com/homework-help/why-did-anne-frank-feel-lonely-neglected-1318627#:~:text=Anne%20Frank%20feels%20lonely%20and%20neglected%20throughout%20her,why%20she%20so%20diligently%20wrote%20in%20her%20diary
To Flee Or Not To Flee?
To flee or not to flee? That is the choice.
Civil war is here so shall I afear?
The Union is near armed with new rifles.
Still, Nationalism persuades me.
Yet, to fight, I risk losing my young life.
So it appears more certain to run far.
I would simply hold my clothes on my back.
However, nonetheless slaughter is near.
Therefore, I shall not smolder my fierce pride
then, triumph will be in my rival’s eyes.
I can defeat because I have the South,
those of us in the same trepidation.
Thus, I shall fight the war against the North.
Though still, the angel of death shall be near.
To run for my life, or fight to my death?
To flee, or not to flee? The choice is clear.
Civil war is here so shall I afear?
The Union is near armed with new rifles.
Still, Nationalism persuades me.
Yet, to fight, I risk losing my young life.
So it appears more certain to run far.
I would simply hold my clothes on my back.
However, nonetheless slaughter is near.
Therefore, I shall not smolder my fierce pride
then, triumph will be in my rival’s eyes.
I can defeat because I have the South,
those of us in the same trepidation.
Thus, I shall fight the war against the North.
Though still, the angel of death shall be near.
To run for my life, or fight to my death?
To flee, or not to flee? The choice is clear.
Father Of Economics
Adam Smith, an economist and philosopher is known as the father of capitalism. His signature work, The Wealth of Nations, is viewed as a classic economic text. In it, he describes the first system of political economy (Biography.com editors, 2014). Adam Smith is also famously known as the Father of Modern Economics. Smith’s ideas were influenced by his upbringing and molded by the movements of his day.
During the mid 1700s the manufacturing industry evolved through capital intensive innovations in production as part of the industrial revolution. This primarily occurred in England because it was one of the few countries with metals and water which factories depended upon for energy. Instead of using labor, factories were relying on James Watt’s and Thomas Newton’s steam engine invention as a source of power. With this technology, goods were produced at a much faster rate enabling mass production. The textile industry accelerated as well through new inventions such as the Spinning Jenny, the Spinning Mule, and the Power Loom. These helped textile production increase at a faster rate and with improved efficiency. All this meant more money was generated.
Even though between 1763–1775, England’s economy and revenues were growing from the industrial revolution, the imposition of high taxes and trade regulations, limited English prosperity. Parliament set a high tax rate for many basic goods in order to obtain revenue and reduce its debt. The high tax rate and regulations resulted in raising the price of products, so that many of the English population could not afford these goods.
These taxes may have caused many English people to immigrate to the new colonies in America. A direct outgrowth of this was the American Revolution which was fought because colonists felt their liberties were being taken away by the British. The Americans were paying high taxes, but did not receive the same rights enjoyed by their English counterparts. They felt compelled to break away from England and rebelled. The separation of the colony from the mainland made it both more desirable and easier to import illegal goods. Finally, the Americans beat the British, and gained independence in 1776.
During this period, mercantilism was a very popular economic movement in England. A main idea of mercantilism is to gain power through the “wealth of a nation by a strict governmental regulation of the entire national economy usually through policies” (Merriam Webster Dictionary, 2022). The goal of the government policies in mercantilism is to acquire more capital for the government. In turn, capital is one the most important factors necessary for mercantilism to work. Some methods to increase capital were increasing exports and minimizing imports or putting military troops in the marketplace so the goods were protected.
In the 17th century, England put fiscal policies in place that minimized the ability of colonists to import goods or make foreign purchases. They were encouraged to only buy products made in England. For example, the Sugar Act of 1764 which put a high tax on foreign sugar (US History, n.d.). This way, the English would be forced to buy the sugar produced in its colonies. This was enacted for other English products as well in order to increase the supply of financial and physical capital. Thus, the rise of mercantilism in England, brought an increase in trade limitations, slavery for bartering, inflation because of excessive monetary growth, and acts of taxation.
Adam Smith argued that “this vast mercantilist” edifice was folly. He argued that in a free exchange, both sides became better off (Adam Smith Institute, n.d.). The lack of equal access to goods as well as the high taxes influenced his thinking and philosophy. In 1759, Adam Smith published The Moral of Sentiments, largely a philosophical work where he advanced one of his most famous economic philosophies, the “invisible hand”. The “invisible hand” is the idea that the market will solve economic problems and allocate goods on its own. This is based on the idea that individuals free from government intervention, acting in their own self-interest, will make decisions that enable the free exchange of goods and services and yield profits (Corporate Finance Institute).
In 1776, Adam Smith laid out many of his economic principles in his book, The Wealth of Nations. In this book, he describes that a free-market economy is the most productive and beneficial to society and its economy (Biography.com). His theories apply to all aspects of the economy including government, poverty, GDP, gold and silver, specialization, and foreign exchange.
Smith believed governments were co-conspirators with the unions and both were the enemy of the free market. If the government was to intervene at all, it should be rare. The market is an automated system that works itself out when there is no government interference such as tariffs or granting monopolies or subsidies. Smith determined that benefits that producers receive from the government such as monopolies and tax preferences, endanger competition and free exchange (Adam Smith Institute). Therefore, the government should only intervene in the cases of law and order, national defense, property rights, building infrastructure, and encouraging education. If the government interferes more than that, the poor will not be able to afford life essentials (Adam Smith Institute).
A country’s GDP, as noted by Smith, gives us a picture of its fiscal health. The amount and quality of goods and services illustrates the country’s productive capabilities. Additionally, it is important for the government to keep the balance of trade by making sure more goods and services are being exported than imported (Reed). Furthermore, government taxes should be proportional to the population's income to avoid a tax burden on the population. The government should be aware that their taxation and expenditures will reduce the country’s capital (Adam Smith Institute). Therefore, government expenditures should be made cautiously. The government should avoid large debts because it reduces future production (Adam Smith Institute). However, at the same time, we can acquire great wealth if we invest more in productive investments. As Andrew Carnegie once said, “money makes money”.
In contrast to Smith, many other prominent thinkers at this time measured a country’s wealth by the amount of gold and silver it had and not its productive capabilities. However, gold means nothing if you cannot purchase anything with it, goods and services are key (Reed). Smith believed in specialization through the division of labor.
Specialization results in greater productivity through the division of labor where each laborer masters the technique related to their own individual job (Biography.com). The specialization of labor is an improvement over an individual producing everything themselves and having to work through each technique (Reed). Also, specialization results in a product surplus that can be used productively by bartering or to fund new machinery that would save labor wages (Adam Smith Institute).
Smith also defended his idea that restrictions on foreign exchange makes countries poorer. He felt, countries should simply trade their products freely and with no restrictions. Smith understood that legislators felt they could control the market with legislation better than the actual market forces (Adam Smith Institute).
The function, policy, and culture of America's economy has evolved with Smith’s influential philosophies. The U.S. economy, based on capitalism, is an economic system where the production of goods and services is largely undertaken by private citizens or businesses who produce and sell the goods and services according to demand and supply with almost no governmental interference. Today in America, GDP, which Smith stresses as an essential barometer of the country’s wealth, is $20,937 USD billion (Trading Economics). The United States is in large part driven by many privately owned global corporations such as Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Facebook.
Over the time however, the pure capitalist tendencies of the country have given way to increased government intervention, regulating and undermining Smith’s principles. The current state of the U.S. economy is constrained by legislative intervention. A prime example is the insurance industry with insurance not allowed to be sold across state lines. Furthermore, the country’s debt is out of control which is something Smith never would have approved of.
America has followed through with a progressive income tax. Smith advocated a similar tax structure where taxes are proportionate to one’s income. A progressive income tax are taxes that increase as income increases. In 2022, income tax rates vary from 10% up to 37% depending on filing status (single, married, etc.) and earnings. The higher the earnings, the higher the marginal tax rate. In accordance with one of Smith’s principles, America taxes its citizens according to their income (The Balance).
In the United States, specialization is a key tool in the labor market economy resulting in increased production and efficiency. Especially because many citizens are highly specialized through the education they receive. By and large, America started out as a solid example of copying and imitating Smith’s theory of capitalism.
In my opinion, Adam Smith’s theories of a nation’s economy are correct and moral. Unfortunately, America has corrupted many of his principles over the course of its history and changes in its administration. Generally, America has followed in the path of Smith’s contributions to capitalism in terms of a progressive tax rate and specialization. This has led to the development of high quality and an abundance of goods in the U.S. market as compared to other countries. This has made America’s economy very successful because they have had the highest GDP rate of goods and services in the world from 2003 to 2018.
Many might say that China will have the largest market by 2033. However, China’s population outweighs America’s exponentially. Therefore, to get a better comparison between America’s and China’s economy, GDP per capita is the best measure. According to Statistics Time, based on the International Monetary Fund, China’s economy does not come close to America’s. China’s GDP was placed 70th in the world, at $10,099 per capita, whereas America’ s GDP was placed higher at $65,112 per capita (Tures, Observer). Seeing as how America is the strongest country economically in the world as of 2018, Smith’s theories could have been proven to be correct.
Conversely, the high degree of regulation in fields such as healthcare means that competition is largely non-existent, prices are bloated and there is a lack of access to the poorer segments. Also, national debt of $30 trillion (U.S. National Debt Clock) is the opposite of all Smith held dear such as fiscal responsibility and capital acquisition. There is no way higher taxes could ever cover its repayment. Given that the U.S. has veered from Smith’s principles in these areas, it would appear to have fallen and to be headed for ruin.
In conclusion, had the U.S. remained true to the principles of Adam Smith, it would have stayed on a profitable path with more equitable distribution of capital and assets. Because it has been pulled and compromised over time, it was not given the chance to do what it was supposed to do, to be the fairest economy system where everyone has a chance to succeed and profit. The only real way for the U.S. to find its’ “way back home” is to deregulate and cut spending that does not add to the GDP. Give the power back to the people, and the market using the invisible hand, to make their own way and control their own destinies.
During the mid 1700s the manufacturing industry evolved through capital intensive innovations in production as part of the industrial revolution. This primarily occurred in England because it was one of the few countries with metals and water which factories depended upon for energy. Instead of using labor, factories were relying on James Watt’s and Thomas Newton’s steam engine invention as a source of power. With this technology, goods were produced at a much faster rate enabling mass production. The textile industry accelerated as well through new inventions such as the Spinning Jenny, the Spinning Mule, and the Power Loom. These helped textile production increase at a faster rate and with improved efficiency. All this meant more money was generated.
Even though between 1763–1775, England’s economy and revenues were growing from the industrial revolution, the imposition of high taxes and trade regulations, limited English prosperity. Parliament set a high tax rate for many basic goods in order to obtain revenue and reduce its debt. The high tax rate and regulations resulted in raising the price of products, so that many of the English population could not afford these goods.
These taxes may have caused many English people to immigrate to the new colonies in America. A direct outgrowth of this was the American Revolution which was fought because colonists felt their liberties were being taken away by the British. The Americans were paying high taxes, but did not receive the same rights enjoyed by their English counterparts. They felt compelled to break away from England and rebelled. The separation of the colony from the mainland made it both more desirable and easier to import illegal goods. Finally, the Americans beat the British, and gained independence in 1776.
During this period, mercantilism was a very popular economic movement in England. A main idea of mercantilism is to gain power through the “wealth of a nation by a strict governmental regulation of the entire national economy usually through policies” (Merriam Webster Dictionary, 2022). The goal of the government policies in mercantilism is to acquire more capital for the government. In turn, capital is one the most important factors necessary for mercantilism to work. Some methods to increase capital were increasing exports and minimizing imports or putting military troops in the marketplace so the goods were protected.
In the 17th century, England put fiscal policies in place that minimized the ability of colonists to import goods or make foreign purchases. They were encouraged to only buy products made in England. For example, the Sugar Act of 1764 which put a high tax on foreign sugar (US History, n.d.). This way, the English would be forced to buy the sugar produced in its colonies. This was enacted for other English products as well in order to increase the supply of financial and physical capital. Thus, the rise of mercantilism in England, brought an increase in trade limitations, slavery for bartering, inflation because of excessive monetary growth, and acts of taxation.
Adam Smith argued that “this vast mercantilist” edifice was folly. He argued that in a free exchange, both sides became better off (Adam Smith Institute, n.d.). The lack of equal access to goods as well as the high taxes influenced his thinking and philosophy. In 1759, Adam Smith published The Moral of Sentiments, largely a philosophical work where he advanced one of his most famous economic philosophies, the “invisible hand”. The “invisible hand” is the idea that the market will solve economic problems and allocate goods on its own. This is based on the idea that individuals free from government intervention, acting in their own self-interest, will make decisions that enable the free exchange of goods and services and yield profits (Corporate Finance Institute).
In 1776, Adam Smith laid out many of his economic principles in his book, The Wealth of Nations. In this book, he describes that a free-market economy is the most productive and beneficial to society and its economy (Biography.com). His theories apply to all aspects of the economy including government, poverty, GDP, gold and silver, specialization, and foreign exchange.
Smith believed governments were co-conspirators with the unions and both were the enemy of the free market. If the government was to intervene at all, it should be rare. The market is an automated system that works itself out when there is no government interference such as tariffs or granting monopolies or subsidies. Smith determined that benefits that producers receive from the government such as monopolies and tax preferences, endanger competition and free exchange (Adam Smith Institute). Therefore, the government should only intervene in the cases of law and order, national defense, property rights, building infrastructure, and encouraging education. If the government interferes more than that, the poor will not be able to afford life essentials (Adam Smith Institute).
A country’s GDP, as noted by Smith, gives us a picture of its fiscal health. The amount and quality of goods and services illustrates the country’s productive capabilities. Additionally, it is important for the government to keep the balance of trade by making sure more goods and services are being exported than imported (Reed). Furthermore, government taxes should be proportional to the population's income to avoid a tax burden on the population. The government should be aware that their taxation and expenditures will reduce the country’s capital (Adam Smith Institute). Therefore, government expenditures should be made cautiously. The government should avoid large debts because it reduces future production (Adam Smith Institute). However, at the same time, we can acquire great wealth if we invest more in productive investments. As Andrew Carnegie once said, “money makes money”.
In contrast to Smith, many other prominent thinkers at this time measured a country’s wealth by the amount of gold and silver it had and not its productive capabilities. However, gold means nothing if you cannot purchase anything with it, goods and services are key (Reed). Smith believed in specialization through the division of labor.
Specialization results in greater productivity through the division of labor where each laborer masters the technique related to their own individual job (Biography.com). The specialization of labor is an improvement over an individual producing everything themselves and having to work through each technique (Reed). Also, specialization results in a product surplus that can be used productively by bartering or to fund new machinery that would save labor wages (Adam Smith Institute).
Smith also defended his idea that restrictions on foreign exchange makes countries poorer. He felt, countries should simply trade their products freely and with no restrictions. Smith understood that legislators felt they could control the market with legislation better than the actual market forces (Adam Smith Institute).
The function, policy, and culture of America's economy has evolved with Smith’s influential philosophies. The U.S. economy, based on capitalism, is an economic system where the production of goods and services is largely undertaken by private citizens or businesses who produce and sell the goods and services according to demand and supply with almost no governmental interference. Today in America, GDP, which Smith stresses as an essential barometer of the country’s wealth, is $20,937 USD billion (Trading Economics). The United States is in large part driven by many privately owned global corporations such as Apple, Microsoft, Amazon, Google, and Facebook.
Over the time however, the pure capitalist tendencies of the country have given way to increased government intervention, regulating and undermining Smith’s principles. The current state of the U.S. economy is constrained by legislative intervention. A prime example is the insurance industry with insurance not allowed to be sold across state lines. Furthermore, the country’s debt is out of control which is something Smith never would have approved of.
America has followed through with a progressive income tax. Smith advocated a similar tax structure where taxes are proportionate to one’s income. A progressive income tax are taxes that increase as income increases. In 2022, income tax rates vary from 10% up to 37% depending on filing status (single, married, etc.) and earnings. The higher the earnings, the higher the marginal tax rate. In accordance with one of Smith’s principles, America taxes its citizens according to their income (The Balance).
In the United States, specialization is a key tool in the labor market economy resulting in increased production and efficiency. Especially because many citizens are highly specialized through the education they receive. By and large, America started out as a solid example of copying and imitating Smith’s theory of capitalism.
In my opinion, Adam Smith’s theories of a nation’s economy are correct and moral. Unfortunately, America has corrupted many of his principles over the course of its history and changes in its administration. Generally, America has followed in the path of Smith’s contributions to capitalism in terms of a progressive tax rate and specialization. This has led to the development of high quality and an abundance of goods in the U.S. market as compared to other countries. This has made America’s economy very successful because they have had the highest GDP rate of goods and services in the world from 2003 to 2018.
Many might say that China will have the largest market by 2033. However, China’s population outweighs America’s exponentially. Therefore, to get a better comparison between America’s and China’s economy, GDP per capita is the best measure. According to Statistics Time, based on the International Monetary Fund, China’s economy does not come close to America’s. China’s GDP was placed 70th in the world, at $10,099 per capita, whereas America’ s GDP was placed higher at $65,112 per capita (Tures, Observer). Seeing as how America is the strongest country economically in the world as of 2018, Smith’s theories could have been proven to be correct.
Conversely, the high degree of regulation in fields such as healthcare means that competition is largely non-existent, prices are bloated and there is a lack of access to the poorer segments. Also, national debt of $30 trillion (U.S. National Debt Clock) is the opposite of all Smith held dear such as fiscal responsibility and capital acquisition. There is no way higher taxes could ever cover its repayment. Given that the U.S. has veered from Smith’s principles in these areas, it would appear to have fallen and to be headed for ruin.
In conclusion, had the U.S. remained true to the principles of Adam Smith, it would have stayed on a profitable path with more equitable distribution of capital and assets. Because it has been pulled and compromised over time, it was not given the chance to do what it was supposed to do, to be the fairest economy system where everyone has a chance to succeed and profit. The only real way for the U.S. to find its’ “way back home” is to deregulate and cut spending that does not add to the GDP. Give the power back to the people, and the market using the invisible hand, to make their own way and control their own destinies.
“My Humble Perceptions”
~1965~
“They say we're young and we don't know we won't find out until we grow…I got you babe” is all I heard when I clicked play on the ride to a brand-new community in New York coming back from Westover Air Force Base, Massachusetts. I flick to the next station. Once again, another song by the new duo, Sonny and Cher. Can’t they play something decent like Mozart or Beethoven? I like the classics, whereas most of my fellow servicemen, as well as most Jews, like the new modern music…or what they call music!
I really miss Borough Park and my family but I am excited to be a founding member of this new community on Long Island. So many Jews from Brooklyn are moving to various Long Island towns anyway. On that note, I wonder what it would be like to settle in our homeland, the State of Israel. Even with the Arabs giving them trouble, I yearn to go there. I most certainly do. Ever since the Holocaust, Jews have been so scattered and have no home to return to. Even when Jews left the DP camps and returned to their homes in Eastern Europe, they were shunned or even slaughtered. Therefore, we Jews need our own country. Haven’t we gone through enough already with the barbaric Nazis? Jews, especially European Jews, need a home they can feel safe in and feel that they can live for all the generations to come. We need Israel.
“Here I am!” I said to Eli, a friend I haven't seen since I left Massachusetts. “It really is so depressing everything that is going on in Vietnam.” When I think about it, I get so frustrated. America joined with France to fight communism Vietnam wants by the influence of the Soviet Union and China, to not allow it to spread farther from Vietnam. The theory of “containment” is the idea to contain communism in Vietnam and not allow it to spread to other countries, such as the United States. But, also to keep communism in North Vietnam and not let it spread to South Vietnam. To fight communism, America already sent in about 500,000 American soldiers. But, why would any of this help if Vietnam will switch back to communism anyway? The U.S. is still in the middle of the “all-out limited war”. From what I can gather, it's really bad for the U.S. soldiers. Though, I don't hear much because I have not been in touch with all my friends in Vietnam. My commander tells me that the U.S. hit South Vietnam with deadly forces that caused mass destruction among the people of South Vietnam and the capital, Saigon. Also, the U.S. had so many resources to hit the Vietnamese with. We have modern technology and so much firepower to succeed. It is extremely tragic and I can't imagine the pain and suffering the U.S. soldiers and the innocent Vietnamese are going through.
I got onto the Southern State Parkway continuing my journey to my new home. Almost there! I arrive home and decide to rest by the TV. I turned on the CBS station with David Brinkly. The news I heard was horrid. Apparently, commanders are being put on trial for encouraging U.S. solders to commit murder in Vietnam. The rumor is most commanders are guilty of this and are to be put on trial. However, it is not correct for people to assume the commanders are guilty. I have first-hand experience with the kindness of the U.S. military. The “encouraging commanders” is simply a stereotype that needs to be dispelled.
~1967~
I am so happy in West Hempstead. We have a lovely new shell and more people keep moving in. I have two sons who seem to be thriving in the fresh air and big yard. Suburban life seems to suit us.
Today, I met up with an old friend from Eitz Chaim, my old yeshiva in Brooklyn. We were discussing the news of the day. The movement started in 1945, but intensified in the 1950s and 1960s. We talk about how Americans had been enthusiastic to start the Civil Rights movement because of their victory in World War II and they learned from the discriminatory laws against the Jews, and now the blacks. Also, Americans were inspired to start the Civil Rights movement because they wanted peace especially though the Cold War. Many of the Protesters like Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, and Aretha Franklin were African Americans fighting for equal rights just like the whites. They were protesting because they were still discriminated against even after slavery was abolished. Incredibly, some activists were even murdered.
Equal rights for blacks are not a big deal at this time in my community. Fighting for equal rights for blacks is important for me, but it is not my main concern. My main concern is keeping my faith, raising my family, growing my medical practice, contributing to my community, and building the state of Israel. On that note, I think it would be proper to say ‘victory is ours!’. I am overjoyed by the recent miracle that occurred in the State of Israel. G-d delivered them a victory from powerful enemies on all sides in the space of six days. Jerusalem is united and I cannot wait to visit her. Judaism is my only identification. It is the Jewish values that motivate my life the most. One value in particular that I find to be the most important one and a life lesson for all future Jews is to ensure the future of our people through education. That is why I am active on the board of the new school being formed, Hebrew Academy of Nassau County.
~1969~
“In that place Bethel, New York. You know it?” said a patient who had just come to me after breaking his wrist. I smiled. I do know it. I know it very well.
Woodstock festival is a festival Michael Wadleigh is directing to feature the new rock and roll music that's evolving. It will be a 3-day festival from what I hear.
Here’s my opinion on the whole development; I do not want anything to do with hippies, the people going, or the festival AT ALL. If they want to live that crazy life filled with drugs and illicit relations, let them. It doesn't affect me. They think life is made to have a good time and have no responsibilities. Well, I got news, ignoring life's problems will not make them go away. When I was in school, we worked hard on schoolwork and at summer jobs. These hippies are against working hard, and getting a job. Family is the main thing in life. That takes hard work, commitment and responsibility. If they were to respond, “well we do care about the world because we advocate peace”. I would reply, “But your policies do not represent peace. Advocating love for everybody does not fix the world’s problems because in this life we need to verify someone and then love someone. If the verification step is not taken, we will allow the bad in and they are the cause of no peace.” I wonder how long it will take them to learn that lesson!
This is life here in America during the 60s, and these are my most humble perceptions on life.
“They say we're young and we don't know we won't find out until we grow…I got you babe” is all I heard when I clicked play on the ride to a brand-new community in New York coming back from Westover Air Force Base, Massachusetts. I flick to the next station. Once again, another song by the new duo, Sonny and Cher. Can’t they play something decent like Mozart or Beethoven? I like the classics, whereas most of my fellow servicemen, as well as most Jews, like the new modern music…or what they call music!
I really miss Borough Park and my family but I am excited to be a founding member of this new community on Long Island. So many Jews from Brooklyn are moving to various Long Island towns anyway. On that note, I wonder what it would be like to settle in our homeland, the State of Israel. Even with the Arabs giving them trouble, I yearn to go there. I most certainly do. Ever since the Holocaust, Jews have been so scattered and have no home to return to. Even when Jews left the DP camps and returned to their homes in Eastern Europe, they were shunned or even slaughtered. Therefore, we Jews need our own country. Haven’t we gone through enough already with the barbaric Nazis? Jews, especially European Jews, need a home they can feel safe in and feel that they can live for all the generations to come. We need Israel.
“Here I am!” I said to Eli, a friend I haven't seen since I left Massachusetts. “It really is so depressing everything that is going on in Vietnam.” When I think about it, I get so frustrated. America joined with France to fight communism Vietnam wants by the influence of the Soviet Union and China, to not allow it to spread farther from Vietnam. The theory of “containment” is the idea to contain communism in Vietnam and not allow it to spread to other countries, such as the United States. But, also to keep communism in North Vietnam and not let it spread to South Vietnam. To fight communism, America already sent in about 500,000 American soldiers. But, why would any of this help if Vietnam will switch back to communism anyway? The U.S. is still in the middle of the “all-out limited war”. From what I can gather, it's really bad for the U.S. soldiers. Though, I don't hear much because I have not been in touch with all my friends in Vietnam. My commander tells me that the U.S. hit South Vietnam with deadly forces that caused mass destruction among the people of South Vietnam and the capital, Saigon. Also, the U.S. had so many resources to hit the Vietnamese with. We have modern technology and so much firepower to succeed. It is extremely tragic and I can't imagine the pain and suffering the U.S. soldiers and the innocent Vietnamese are going through.
I got onto the Southern State Parkway continuing my journey to my new home. Almost there! I arrive home and decide to rest by the TV. I turned on the CBS station with David Brinkly. The news I heard was horrid. Apparently, commanders are being put on trial for encouraging U.S. solders to commit murder in Vietnam. The rumor is most commanders are guilty of this and are to be put on trial. However, it is not correct for people to assume the commanders are guilty. I have first-hand experience with the kindness of the U.S. military. The “encouraging commanders” is simply a stereotype that needs to be dispelled.
~1967~
I am so happy in West Hempstead. We have a lovely new shell and more people keep moving in. I have two sons who seem to be thriving in the fresh air and big yard. Suburban life seems to suit us.
Today, I met up with an old friend from Eitz Chaim, my old yeshiva in Brooklyn. We were discussing the news of the day. The movement started in 1945, but intensified in the 1950s and 1960s. We talk about how Americans had been enthusiastic to start the Civil Rights movement because of their victory in World War II and they learned from the discriminatory laws against the Jews, and now the blacks. Also, Americans were inspired to start the Civil Rights movement because they wanted peace especially though the Cold War. Many of the Protesters like Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks, and Aretha Franklin were African Americans fighting for equal rights just like the whites. They were protesting because they were still discriminated against even after slavery was abolished. Incredibly, some activists were even murdered.
Equal rights for blacks are not a big deal at this time in my community. Fighting for equal rights for blacks is important for me, but it is not my main concern. My main concern is keeping my faith, raising my family, growing my medical practice, contributing to my community, and building the state of Israel. On that note, I think it would be proper to say ‘victory is ours!’. I am overjoyed by the recent miracle that occurred in the State of Israel. G-d delivered them a victory from powerful enemies on all sides in the space of six days. Jerusalem is united and I cannot wait to visit her. Judaism is my only identification. It is the Jewish values that motivate my life the most. One value in particular that I find to be the most important one and a life lesson for all future Jews is to ensure the future of our people through education. That is why I am active on the board of the new school being formed, Hebrew Academy of Nassau County.
~1969~
“In that place Bethel, New York. You know it?” said a patient who had just come to me after breaking his wrist. I smiled. I do know it. I know it very well.
Woodstock festival is a festival Michael Wadleigh is directing to feature the new rock and roll music that's evolving. It will be a 3-day festival from what I hear.
Here’s my opinion on the whole development; I do not want anything to do with hippies, the people going, or the festival AT ALL. If they want to live that crazy life filled with drugs and illicit relations, let them. It doesn't affect me. They think life is made to have a good time and have no responsibilities. Well, I got news, ignoring life's problems will not make them go away. When I was in school, we worked hard on schoolwork and at summer jobs. These hippies are against working hard, and getting a job. Family is the main thing in life. That takes hard work, commitment and responsibility. If they were to respond, “well we do care about the world because we advocate peace”. I would reply, “But your policies do not represent peace. Advocating love for everybody does not fix the world’s problems because in this life we need to verify someone and then love someone. If the verification step is not taken, we will allow the bad in and they are the cause of no peace.” I wonder how long it will take them to learn that lesson!
This is life here in America during the 60s, and these are my most humble perceptions on life.
Dear Frankenstein,
Context: In the novel Frankenstein by Mary Shelley, Victor Frankenstein is the quintessential romantic. Frankenstein embodies the values of the romantics of his day with his breathtaking awe of nature, his explosive imagination resulting in an actual creation, and his deep emotion toward the monster he creates. Frankenstein’s creator, Shelley, is deeply connected to the leading 19th century Romantic writers and poets of her day, including her husband Percy Shelley. She was well aware of the Romantic movement’s core elements emphasizing nature, imagination, and emotion. She portrays her romantic philosophies through her character Frankenstein.
On that note...
To V. Frankenstein,
Victor Frankenstein!
What is the matter with you? You dedicate two years of your life to producing a being and then don't expect to take care of it? Your monster has been left to fend for itself. He had to find his own shelter, food, warmth, and way around the land including the language. But also, he is quite an intellect. He understands nature in depth and how it “restored [him] to some degree of tranquillity” (78, Shelley) in the same way you, a learned man of science, understand nature’s serenity when you “[drank] in [all the] tranquillity” (90). You created a being with natural intelligence and promptly abandoned him. What was the point of creating him in the first place? If you were to answer me, “I did not know he would be such a ‘wretched devil’” (53), well why don't you perform a lobotomy? Then, the monster would have had the opportunity to be tamed. You seemed fine to involve yourself in such a grotesque activity as you created the monster as you “collected bones” (24) for his making, a repulsive labor. Get a grip of your life and stop thinking everything is about you. Begin to think of others such as the monster and society. You interpreted the monster’s threat of murder “I shall be with you on your wedding-night” (98) was about you! It was clearly about Elizabeth because he wants you alive to create a she-monster to keep him company. I had higher expectations from you. You appeared to be an open-minded intellect interested in “natural philosophy” (15) who I thought would better this world, not be an example of a clockwork G-d to your creation. If only you had taken responsibility for your creation and actions, the world might have been a gentler place.
With disappointment,
Rachael Lehman
To Frankenstein’s responsibility,
I'm sorry. I'm sorry for the painful experiences you had experienced during your time on earth. My heart went out to you especially when you went through all those cold nights when you could not find shelter, and the multiple rejections you got from both the aristocratic family in the forest and your very own creator, Victor Frankenstein. I agree with you. He should have taken care of you right from the start. You were deeply neglected from the very beginning of your life. You did not ask to be on earth and were put into a situation you did not have a choice to live in. But…you are a murderer! In what way, shape, or form did you think it was okay to kill William Frankenstein, Henry Clerval, and Victor Frankenstein’s wife, Elizabeth? Yes, you had a ”burning passion” (83) towards Frankenstein and a reason to hurt the ones he loves. But, murder is a border you do not cross. You are a clever person with deep thought. For example, you perceived that if the poor aristocrats were “miserable it was less strange that I, an imperfect and solitary being, should be wretched”. Also, you felt bad after committing your murders which means you have a conscience and the potential to behave morally. You had the opportunity to grow from the hardships you endured, and become a better person, but instead you turned into an evildoer. I am heartbroken by your pain, but I am equally heartbroken by the actions you took. I'm especially sorry for the way you turned out.
A former fan,
Rachael Lehman
To R. Walton,
You lost an opportunity to do your part in the world. You set out for the North pole, a “country of eternal light” (2) with the purpose to find the “secret of the magnet” that only you can find through your undertaking of this journey. Well, you got it all wrong. Your purpose is not to discover the North pole and discover a world that does not necessarily need to be discovered. You had special knowledge about Frankenstein and the monster. Your purpose is to mend the relationship between Frankenstein and his creation, the monster. You need to mend their relationship and bring justice to them, especially the monster. Frankenstein confided in you his hatred towards the monster and desire to kill him. He even told you to kill the monster upon his death. Why did you not speak up and explain to Frankenstein that he is the creator of the monster and had a responsibility to take care of him? At the very least, he should have been told that he needed to take responsibility for the monster. Any outcomes resulting from Frankenstein’s creation should have been the responsibility of Frankenstein to make right. I thought you were “courageous” (4) as you described yourself to Mrs. Saville! You had the power to bring justice to the world by not only mending a creator’s and creation’s relationship, but also by helping the victims who were murdered or harmed. Who knows where the monster could have gone off to? A rage killing? He has his emotions all over the place because he had been rejected by his creator. You should have told Frankenstein to not neglect him anymore before he died! Now, we can never save the world from a potential mass murderer. Justice could have been served to the monster by saving him from depression, Frankenstein might have taken responsibility, and humanity might have been saved from a murderer if you had interfered. I regret to inform you, but you have failed one of your life’s most important purposes.
I hope you understand your mistake,
Rachael Lehman
On that note...
To V. Frankenstein,
Victor Frankenstein!
What is the matter with you? You dedicate two years of your life to producing a being and then don't expect to take care of it? Your monster has been left to fend for itself. He had to find his own shelter, food, warmth, and way around the land including the language. But also, he is quite an intellect. He understands nature in depth and how it “restored [him] to some degree of tranquillity” (78, Shelley) in the same way you, a learned man of science, understand nature’s serenity when you “[drank] in [all the] tranquillity” (90). You created a being with natural intelligence and promptly abandoned him. What was the point of creating him in the first place? If you were to answer me, “I did not know he would be such a ‘wretched devil’” (53), well why don't you perform a lobotomy? Then, the monster would have had the opportunity to be tamed. You seemed fine to involve yourself in such a grotesque activity as you created the monster as you “collected bones” (24) for his making, a repulsive labor. Get a grip of your life and stop thinking everything is about you. Begin to think of others such as the monster and society. You interpreted the monster’s threat of murder “I shall be with you on your wedding-night” (98) was about you! It was clearly about Elizabeth because he wants you alive to create a she-monster to keep him company. I had higher expectations from you. You appeared to be an open-minded intellect interested in “natural philosophy” (15) who I thought would better this world, not be an example of a clockwork G-d to your creation. If only you had taken responsibility for your creation and actions, the world might have been a gentler place.
With disappointment,
Rachael Lehman
To Frankenstein’s responsibility,
I'm sorry. I'm sorry for the painful experiences you had experienced during your time on earth. My heart went out to you especially when you went through all those cold nights when you could not find shelter, and the multiple rejections you got from both the aristocratic family in the forest and your very own creator, Victor Frankenstein. I agree with you. He should have taken care of you right from the start. You were deeply neglected from the very beginning of your life. You did not ask to be on earth and were put into a situation you did not have a choice to live in. But…you are a murderer! In what way, shape, or form did you think it was okay to kill William Frankenstein, Henry Clerval, and Victor Frankenstein’s wife, Elizabeth? Yes, you had a ”burning passion” (83) towards Frankenstein and a reason to hurt the ones he loves. But, murder is a border you do not cross. You are a clever person with deep thought. For example, you perceived that if the poor aristocrats were “miserable it was less strange that I, an imperfect and solitary being, should be wretched”. Also, you felt bad after committing your murders which means you have a conscience and the potential to behave morally. You had the opportunity to grow from the hardships you endured, and become a better person, but instead you turned into an evildoer. I am heartbroken by your pain, but I am equally heartbroken by the actions you took. I'm especially sorry for the way you turned out.
A former fan,
Rachael Lehman
To R. Walton,
You lost an opportunity to do your part in the world. You set out for the North pole, a “country of eternal light” (2) with the purpose to find the “secret of the magnet” that only you can find through your undertaking of this journey. Well, you got it all wrong. Your purpose is not to discover the North pole and discover a world that does not necessarily need to be discovered. You had special knowledge about Frankenstein and the monster. Your purpose is to mend the relationship between Frankenstein and his creation, the monster. You need to mend their relationship and bring justice to them, especially the monster. Frankenstein confided in you his hatred towards the monster and desire to kill him. He even told you to kill the monster upon his death. Why did you not speak up and explain to Frankenstein that he is the creator of the monster and had a responsibility to take care of him? At the very least, he should have been told that he needed to take responsibility for the monster. Any outcomes resulting from Frankenstein’s creation should have been the responsibility of Frankenstein to make right. I thought you were “courageous” (4) as you described yourself to Mrs. Saville! You had the power to bring justice to the world by not only mending a creator’s and creation’s relationship, but also by helping the victims who were murdered or harmed. Who knows where the monster could have gone off to? A rage killing? He has his emotions all over the place because he had been rejected by his creator. You should have told Frankenstein to not neglect him anymore before he died! Now, we can never save the world from a potential mass murderer. Justice could have been served to the monster by saving him from depression, Frankenstein might have taken responsibility, and humanity might have been saved from a murderer if you had interfered. I regret to inform you, but you have failed one of your life’s most important purposes.
I hope you understand your mistake,
Rachael Lehman
Is Henry VIII's Corruption Shown in Shakespeare's Hamlet?
King Henry VIII of England and King Claudius of Denmark in Hamlet are actually destructive people who portray themselves as kind and caring both on the personal and political levels as they work to reinforce this dishonest impression. In the Tudor era, King Henry VIII duped many people of England into believing he was a moral person. He seemed to be a generous monarch whose personal conduct was consistent with contemporary religious values and who, as king, sought the well-being of his needy subjects. In reality, he had two of his wives executed, entered into illegitimate marriages, and fathered illegitimate children that are forbidden in the Christian religion. He actually seized power when he grabbed the English monarchy for his illegitimate family. This is very similar to King Claudius in Hamlet who also tricks many people into believing he was a decent and just person. He appears to be compassionate by joining in the mourning process with Denmark for the brother that he murdered. In fact, beside killing his brother, he married the widow, his former sister-in-law. As with King Henry VIII, this is an illegitimate marriage according to the Pope. Through this royal marriage, King Claudius is able to seize the reins of Denmark's monarchy. Interestingly, through the character King Claudius in Hamlet, Shakespeare exposes the power grabs King Henry VIII committed.
In 1577, Raphael Holinshed, an English chronicler, wrote that King Henry VIII was a “noble prince, right fortunate in all his doings” (Crowther). As a seemingly just person who was lucky enough to be born royal, King Henry VIII won control over many Englishmen who thought he had good intentions. He displayed this in 1518 when he established the Royal College of Physicians with an Act of Parliament which is still in force today. In this act, those who practice medicine without a medical license or malpractice can be punished (Roller). Henry set up medicine as a trustworthy science- based practice that made him appear to be a man who cared for his people. On the other hand, in 1540, the French ambassador Charles de Marillac said Henry was “so greedy…[that] to make him rich he has impoverished his people…and will not cease to dip his hand in blood as long as he doubts the people'' (Crowther). This proved Henry’s “bloody hand” caused by him sending England into too many unnecessary wars that cost many lives and did not result in much gain. In addition, he had 70,000 people executed during his reign (Pruitt). Though he was initially known for supposedly having the people’s best interests at heart, these actions demonstrated his lack of caring for the lives of his subjects.
King Henry's spoiled and bloody character traits were apparent on a personal level as well. Since his youth, King Henry was groomed to be king. Being a crown prince may have very well given him the idea that he could do whatever he wanted when he was anointed (Elton). When the boy who would be king could not get his way to divorce Catherine of Aragon, he decided to change the whole country’s religion to suit his whim. Furthermore, when he decided that Catherine could not have a male heir, which he felt could not possibly be his fault, he decided to marry Anne Boleyn to try fathering a male heir with another wife. Moreover, when Boleyn was not successful in giving birth to a male, Henry killed her. He did the same thing to Catherine Howard when she too could not give birth to a male. Clearly, Henry was a malevolent human being as he “dipped his hand in blood” to murder Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard to accomplish his selfish goals. Moreover, King Henry ignored any rule of law in favor of his own personal will when he executed Anne Bolyn and Catherine Howard for alleged adultery. Clearly, King Henry VIII was not the kind man he appeared to be.
King Henry VIII perpetrated many power grabs. Through his lust for women, his incestuous marriages, and the accompanying illegitimate children, he clouded the succession rules resulting in power grabs (Larson). These power grabs are similar to the power grab that takes place in Shakespeare’s Hamlet when Claudius kills King Hamlet and takes over the throne. In King Henry’s first marriage to Catherine of Aragon, the widow of Henry’s brother, they gave birth to Mary. According to church law, marrying your brother’s wife was incest. Therefore, “the allegation of incest in effect made Mary [and the marriage] illegitimate” (Simmons). Yet, in an opposing act of power seizing, the Pope did not annul the marriage since he was being held hostage by Emperor Charles, nephew of Catherine, who did not allow the annulment. Henry’s lust for women and power was in full effect as he moved on to Anne Boleyn and tangled himself up into an adulterous marriage. Ironically, when Henry decided to make himself the head of the Church of England, he himself decided his marriage to Catherine was actually illegal, and he used that decision as an excuse to divorce her and marry Anne Boleyn. Henry grabbed power for himself and succession for his children at his own personal convenience, not caring how it looked or if it contradicted his earlier actions or stands.
As for Henry’s other children, according to Rome, since there was no marriage annulment to Catherine, his subsequent illegal marriages produced illegal heirs. In that way, Henry’s next daughter with Anne Boleyn, Elizabeth, and son with Jane Seymour, Edward, could be considered illegitimate because of his illegal divorce from Catherine prior to their births. Even so, if we were to concede that his subsequent marriages were legal because they took place when Henry was a part of the Church of England, starting the Church of England in itself was a power grab to legitimize his subsequent marriages and children.
A further twist is when Henry went against his own laws in order to execute another power grab. While he was the one to declare Mary illegitimate and ineligible to rule, he later made a bargain with her to accept him as the head of the Church of England. King Henry stopped at nothing to get and keep power. When she accepted the deal, “Mary was granted permission to return to court, and in 1544, although still considered illegitimate, she was granted succession to the throne after Edward and any other legitimate children who might be born to Henry” (Simmons). Through political scheming and manipulating, King Henry VIII blatantly seized tremendous power.
Shakespeare was inspired by political current events and word on the street (BBC.com). In the Tudor era, King Henry VIII perpetuated power grabs, had a blood thirsty character trait, and lusted after women. This is all similar to King Claudius with the same actions and personality. Thus, Shakespeare had much to be inspired by with King Henry VIII, and so the playwright’s historical material came to the surface in Hamlet with King Claudius.
King Claudius’s political actions are all similar to those of Henry VIII on a political level, as he also leads the people of Denmark to believe he is a man for the people. When he says “the memory be green, and that it us befitted / To bear our hearts in grief, and our whole kingdom /” (Act 1, scene 2), Claudius allows people to believe he is mourning as the “whole kingdom.” This proves that the entire kingdom was in mourning and he play-acted in joining them. Ironically, Claudius is pretending to mourn alongside the entire kingdom and appearing as a devoted brother when in actuality, he murdered his brother, the late king in order to take over his life. Claudius appears to be a righteous man in Denmark when saying “our whole kingdom.” Such rhetoric and sentiment give him an aura of a friendly monarch and a man of the people just as King Henry VIII portrayed himself as being. There truly is “something rotten in the state of Denmark” (Act 1, scene 4) with Claudius on the throne acting as caring man of the people when in reality, Claudius is a master at deception and “rotten.” Just as King Henry reigned over and manipulated the people’s hearts, so does Claudius in Denmark’s politics.
Claudius deceives the Danish and does the same thing in his personal life with his very own wife Gertrude. He committed depraved crimes by killing his brother and through his incestuous marriage to her, his brother’s widow, Gertrude. Through marrying Gertrude, he was able to seize succession over Denmark’s monarchy, assuming it from Prince Hamlet who should have been next in line to the throne following his father’s death. By the same token, just as in real-life England under Henry VIII, incest and illegitimate succession are in full force in Hamlet’s Denmark. Far from being a benevolent king of the people, Claudius is truly depraved while a master at deception in his political life just as in his personal life.
Shakespeare shows King Henry VIII’s crimes and power grabs through King Claudius in Hamlet. Each man appears to be good, friendly, and generous, but it is evident that this is untrue because they are murderers and are lustful for power and women. Their self-indulgence and greed brought them to incestuous and illegitimate marriages and unending power. The depravity of Kings Henry and Claudius causes them to commit heinous crimes, including the murders of Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard in Henry’s case, and both Hamlet the father and Hamlet the son in Claudius’s case. They both worked above the law and their power grabs served to keep them in their positions as king. Furthermore, they stopped at nothing to stay there. Seeing the successions that took place in the Tudor family, it is evident that power grabs such as in the Hamlet family were common in these English monarchies. Perhaps, Shakespeare wrote about Claudius’s exploits that are so similar to Henry VIII’s to voice his opinion about politics. Like many playwrights would, Shakespeare likely used his play Hamlet as an outlet to express political views. Thus, Shakespeare highlights the corruption in Denmark in order to bring attention and hopefully improvement to his world in the monarchy of England. In that way he could influence his audience which, at times, included Queen Elizabeth.
Work Cited:
David Crowther, Some Opinions about Henry VIII, 2018, The History of England, online: https://thehistoryofengland.co.uk/resource/some-opinions-about-henry-viii/ (accessed May 8, 2022)
Eric Norman Simons, Mary I Queen of England, February 14, 20222, Britannica, online: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Mary-I (accessed May 8, 2022)
Geoffrey R. Elton, Henry VII King Of England, March 14, 2022, Britannica, online: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Henry-VIII-king-of-England (accessed May 8, 2022)
Rebbeca Larson, The Relationship Between Mary and Elizabeth Tudor, July 10, 2017, Tudor Dynasty, online, https://tudorsdynasty.com/relationship-mary-elizabeth-tudor/ (accessed May 8, 2022)
Sarah Pruitt, Was Henry VIII The Worst Monarch of All TIme, August 22, 2018, History, online: https://www.history.com/news/was-henry-viii-the-worst-monarch-of-all-time (accessed May 8, 2022)
Sarah Roller, Five of Henry VIII’s Greatest Achievements, September 6, 2021, History Hit, online: https://www.historyhit.com/henry-viii-greatest-achievements/ (accessed May 8, 2022)
No author given, Shakespeare Life and Expectations, No date given, BBC, online: https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/zxqsgk7/revision/3 (accessed May 8, 2022)
In 1577, Raphael Holinshed, an English chronicler, wrote that King Henry VIII was a “noble prince, right fortunate in all his doings” (Crowther). As a seemingly just person who was lucky enough to be born royal, King Henry VIII won control over many Englishmen who thought he had good intentions. He displayed this in 1518 when he established the Royal College of Physicians with an Act of Parliament which is still in force today. In this act, those who practice medicine without a medical license or malpractice can be punished (Roller). Henry set up medicine as a trustworthy science- based practice that made him appear to be a man who cared for his people. On the other hand, in 1540, the French ambassador Charles de Marillac said Henry was “so greedy…[that] to make him rich he has impoverished his people…and will not cease to dip his hand in blood as long as he doubts the people'' (Crowther). This proved Henry’s “bloody hand” caused by him sending England into too many unnecessary wars that cost many lives and did not result in much gain. In addition, he had 70,000 people executed during his reign (Pruitt). Though he was initially known for supposedly having the people’s best interests at heart, these actions demonstrated his lack of caring for the lives of his subjects.
King Henry's spoiled and bloody character traits were apparent on a personal level as well. Since his youth, King Henry was groomed to be king. Being a crown prince may have very well given him the idea that he could do whatever he wanted when he was anointed (Elton). When the boy who would be king could not get his way to divorce Catherine of Aragon, he decided to change the whole country’s religion to suit his whim. Furthermore, when he decided that Catherine could not have a male heir, which he felt could not possibly be his fault, he decided to marry Anne Boleyn to try fathering a male heir with another wife. Moreover, when Boleyn was not successful in giving birth to a male, Henry killed her. He did the same thing to Catherine Howard when she too could not give birth to a male. Clearly, Henry was a malevolent human being as he “dipped his hand in blood” to murder Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard to accomplish his selfish goals. Moreover, King Henry ignored any rule of law in favor of his own personal will when he executed Anne Bolyn and Catherine Howard for alleged adultery. Clearly, King Henry VIII was not the kind man he appeared to be.
King Henry VIII perpetrated many power grabs. Through his lust for women, his incestuous marriages, and the accompanying illegitimate children, he clouded the succession rules resulting in power grabs (Larson). These power grabs are similar to the power grab that takes place in Shakespeare’s Hamlet when Claudius kills King Hamlet and takes over the throne. In King Henry’s first marriage to Catherine of Aragon, the widow of Henry’s brother, they gave birth to Mary. According to church law, marrying your brother’s wife was incest. Therefore, “the allegation of incest in effect made Mary [and the marriage] illegitimate” (Simmons). Yet, in an opposing act of power seizing, the Pope did not annul the marriage since he was being held hostage by Emperor Charles, nephew of Catherine, who did not allow the annulment. Henry’s lust for women and power was in full effect as he moved on to Anne Boleyn and tangled himself up into an adulterous marriage. Ironically, when Henry decided to make himself the head of the Church of England, he himself decided his marriage to Catherine was actually illegal, and he used that decision as an excuse to divorce her and marry Anne Boleyn. Henry grabbed power for himself and succession for his children at his own personal convenience, not caring how it looked or if it contradicted his earlier actions or stands.
As for Henry’s other children, according to Rome, since there was no marriage annulment to Catherine, his subsequent illegal marriages produced illegal heirs. In that way, Henry’s next daughter with Anne Boleyn, Elizabeth, and son with Jane Seymour, Edward, could be considered illegitimate because of his illegal divorce from Catherine prior to their births. Even so, if we were to concede that his subsequent marriages were legal because they took place when Henry was a part of the Church of England, starting the Church of England in itself was a power grab to legitimize his subsequent marriages and children.
A further twist is when Henry went against his own laws in order to execute another power grab. While he was the one to declare Mary illegitimate and ineligible to rule, he later made a bargain with her to accept him as the head of the Church of England. King Henry stopped at nothing to get and keep power. When she accepted the deal, “Mary was granted permission to return to court, and in 1544, although still considered illegitimate, she was granted succession to the throne after Edward and any other legitimate children who might be born to Henry” (Simmons). Through political scheming and manipulating, King Henry VIII blatantly seized tremendous power.
Shakespeare was inspired by political current events and word on the street (BBC.com). In the Tudor era, King Henry VIII perpetuated power grabs, had a blood thirsty character trait, and lusted after women. This is all similar to King Claudius with the same actions and personality. Thus, Shakespeare had much to be inspired by with King Henry VIII, and so the playwright’s historical material came to the surface in Hamlet with King Claudius.
King Claudius’s political actions are all similar to those of Henry VIII on a political level, as he also leads the people of Denmark to believe he is a man for the people. When he says “the memory be green, and that it us befitted / To bear our hearts in grief, and our whole kingdom /” (Act 1, scene 2), Claudius allows people to believe he is mourning as the “whole kingdom.” This proves that the entire kingdom was in mourning and he play-acted in joining them. Ironically, Claudius is pretending to mourn alongside the entire kingdom and appearing as a devoted brother when in actuality, he murdered his brother, the late king in order to take over his life. Claudius appears to be a righteous man in Denmark when saying “our whole kingdom.” Such rhetoric and sentiment give him an aura of a friendly monarch and a man of the people just as King Henry VIII portrayed himself as being. There truly is “something rotten in the state of Denmark” (Act 1, scene 4) with Claudius on the throne acting as caring man of the people when in reality, Claudius is a master at deception and “rotten.” Just as King Henry reigned over and manipulated the people’s hearts, so does Claudius in Denmark’s politics.
Claudius deceives the Danish and does the same thing in his personal life with his very own wife Gertrude. He committed depraved crimes by killing his brother and through his incestuous marriage to her, his brother’s widow, Gertrude. Through marrying Gertrude, he was able to seize succession over Denmark’s monarchy, assuming it from Prince Hamlet who should have been next in line to the throne following his father’s death. By the same token, just as in real-life England under Henry VIII, incest and illegitimate succession are in full force in Hamlet’s Denmark. Far from being a benevolent king of the people, Claudius is truly depraved while a master at deception in his political life just as in his personal life.
Shakespeare shows King Henry VIII’s crimes and power grabs through King Claudius in Hamlet. Each man appears to be good, friendly, and generous, but it is evident that this is untrue because they are murderers and are lustful for power and women. Their self-indulgence and greed brought them to incestuous and illegitimate marriages and unending power. The depravity of Kings Henry and Claudius causes them to commit heinous crimes, including the murders of Anne Boleyn and Catherine Howard in Henry’s case, and both Hamlet the father and Hamlet the son in Claudius’s case. They both worked above the law and their power grabs served to keep them in their positions as king. Furthermore, they stopped at nothing to stay there. Seeing the successions that took place in the Tudor family, it is evident that power grabs such as in the Hamlet family were common in these English monarchies. Perhaps, Shakespeare wrote about Claudius’s exploits that are so similar to Henry VIII’s to voice his opinion about politics. Like many playwrights would, Shakespeare likely used his play Hamlet as an outlet to express political views. Thus, Shakespeare highlights the corruption in Denmark in order to bring attention and hopefully improvement to his world in the monarchy of England. In that way he could influence his audience which, at times, included Queen Elizabeth.
Work Cited:
David Crowther, Some Opinions about Henry VIII, 2018, The History of England, online: https://thehistoryofengland.co.uk/resource/some-opinions-about-henry-viii/ (accessed May 8, 2022)
Eric Norman Simons, Mary I Queen of England, February 14, 20222, Britannica, online: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Mary-I (accessed May 8, 2022)
Geoffrey R. Elton, Henry VII King Of England, March 14, 2022, Britannica, online: https://www.britannica.com/biography/Henry-VIII-king-of-England (accessed May 8, 2022)
Rebbeca Larson, The Relationship Between Mary and Elizabeth Tudor, July 10, 2017, Tudor Dynasty, online, https://tudorsdynasty.com/relationship-mary-elizabeth-tudor/ (accessed May 8, 2022)
Sarah Pruitt, Was Henry VIII The Worst Monarch of All TIme, August 22, 2018, History, online: https://www.history.com/news/was-henry-viii-the-worst-monarch-of-all-time (accessed May 8, 2022)
Sarah Roller, Five of Henry VIII’s Greatest Achievements, September 6, 2021, History Hit, online: https://www.historyhit.com/henry-viii-greatest-achievements/ (accessed May 8, 2022)
No author given, Shakespeare Life and Expectations, No date given, BBC, online: https://www.bbc.co.uk/bitesize/guides/zxqsgk7/revision/3 (accessed May 8, 2022)
Were Jews Slave Owners In the South?
American Christian whites dominated the slave trade in the South in the mid-1800s. However, what about other ethnic groups such as Jews? Were they slave owners? The answer as to whether or not Jews were slave owners in the South is lesser known. This may be because some of the commentaries on that time were heavily influenced by either antisemitism or Jews who might have wanted to cover up their slave trade involvement. However, when we look at the facts, there is a crystal clear, even if complex, answer.
In the mid-1850s, Jews were both slave owners and a part of the slave trade. For example, men like Ansly Davis from Virginia had an advertisement in North Carolina’s Wilmington Journal in 1847 for black men and women slaves between the ages of 14-30. Another man, David Wise of New Orleans, put out an advertisement in 1894 in a
newspaper for black slaves that he sold for cash or bought to use as field
hands. Judah P. Benjamin was the first Cabinet officer of the Confederate States as well as a slave owner (Goodman). As Robert Rosen author of The Jewish Confederates wrote, “Judah Benjamin is a great example of how Southern Jews were assimilated into Southern Society. But of course, they accepted all the values of that society, including slavery” (Goodman). These are examples of men that had slaves in comparable numbers to the number of slaves who white gentiles had in the South since they were very integrated into the white society. In fact, in the 1830’s, the first of what would eventually be some 200 Jewish mayors in the South was elected. Also, over 2,000 Jews fought in the Civil War on the Confederate side. A big part of the Jews being integrated into Southern society meant that they upheld the infamous custom of slave owning (Aderet).
Though Jews were assimilated into Southern society by choice, including slave owning and slave trading, antisemitic occurrences were on the rise and Jews did what they could to avoid them. Jews were permitted in society, but only if they followed Southern customs. If not, the Jews were hit with antisemitism by being put into a lower class or looked down upon. Therefore, some Jews went along with the South’s way of life, like slave owning and trading, in order to avoid such harassment and so as to not be different. Antisemitism was real. For example, in 1862, Ulysses S. Grant expelled all Jews from the general’s military district in Tennessee (History.com). Also, in 1865, the Ku Klux Klan targeted blacks, but they targeted Jews as well (Aderet). Antisemitism was a force that strongly affected the Jews’ independence and perhaps fueled their drive to blend in and comply. This is why some Jews felt the need to participate in the slave trade (Kreitner).
In the mid-19th century, American Jewish leaders debated whether it was permissible in Jewish law to own a slave or be involved in the slave trade. Embedded in Judaism is the belief that every life matters. This is based in the notion that man was created in “G-d's image” (Genesis). Also, the Talmud, a Jewish commentary, states, “this is why G-d created Adam [first man on earth] alone: to teach that one who kills a single
human being is regarded by Scripture as having destroyed an entire world, and one who saves a single person is regarded by Scripture as having saved an entire world.” (Mishnah Sanhedrin IV 5). Thus, some Jews understood this as a principle to value racial equality.
However, there was another side. On January 4, 1861 a Swedish born Rabbi Morris Jacob Raphall spoke to the congregation of B'nei Jeshurun in New York. He rose to the bima (stage) and said, “How dare you, in the face of the sanction and protection afforded to slave property in the Ten Commandments–how dare you denounce slaveholding as a sin?” (Kreitner). Rabbi Raphall was a prominent Rabbi and someone to look up to. This shows that, Jews actually argued whether slave owning was a permissible activity.
Many Jewish leaders were against slavery and encouraged Jews not to practice it. Mordechai Manuel Noah, a playwright, journalist, and diplomate, was against slavery and began his career as against it. He explained in the mid-1850s, “How can Americans be engaged in this traffic?” (Kreitner). He referred to the Jews as “men whose birthright is liberty, whose eminent peculiarity is freedom?” (Kreitner). However, as Noah got older, he spoke out against emancipation because he felt it would put the country in danger. In fact, Freedom’s Journal, the first black newspaper, was started in 1831 to counteract Noah’s thinking. White abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison described Noah as a “Shylock”, an antisemetic slur, and a “lineal descendant of the monsters who nailed Jesus to the cross” (Kreitner). It is, therefore, fair to say there were Jews pro-slavery in the South.
There were other Jewish anti-slavery forces at work. There are many examples of
famous Jewish representatives radically against slavery. Many were rabbis of synagogues of congregations or leaders with a group following. Ernestine Rose, who also fought for women’s rights, was against Raphall’s pro-slavery stance. In fact, at one of her "Society for Moral Philanthropists" speeches around the year 1850, she remarked how a slave owner in the South declared that if she were a man, he would have her tarred and feathered. In the mid-1850s, the war known as the “Bleeding Kansas” occurred. At that time, three Jews went with John Brown to protest against settlers who were pro-slavery. Another anti-slavery protester, Reform Rabbi Bernard Felsenthal of the Sinai Congregation spoke against slavery around the year 1860. He declared “If anyone, it is the Jew, above all others who should have the most burning and irreconcilable hatred for the ‘peculiar institution’ of the South” (Kreitner). Furthermore, Felsenthal rejected a rabbinical position in Mobile, Alabama because it required him to be a slave owner. Another example is Rabbi Gustav Gottheil, a Prussian born American who said, “How can we be silent” when slavery is “one grand consistent utterance of condemnation?” (Kreitner). Though it was a mixed bag, we can clearly see that a fair numbers of Jews were against slave owning and slave trading (Kreitner).
Today, there are videos, literature, and people that claim Jews controlled most of the slave trade because of the book “The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews”,
written by the Nation of Islam in 1991. Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, and David Duke, the former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, claim Jews enslaved blacks in the South exponentially. Historians like Jacob Rader Marcus, Eli Farber, John Jay Farber, David Brion Davis, Harold Brackman and Saul Freidman all have worked on different studies and analyzed the evidence that proves Jews did not control the vast majority of buying and selling in the slave trade. In actuality, historian Jacob Rader Marcus said Jews made up a small portion of the South’s population and, therefore, controlled a small portion of blacks that were bought and sold in the slave trade. Historian, David Brion Davis said Jews were one of the many religions and ethnic groups that participated in the slave trade, but did not dominate it. It is generally accepted that those who make the claim that Jews dominated the slave trade are being antisemitic. Many historians such as David Brion Davis feel that Jews are targeted specifically because they are successful, allegedly killed the Christian’s Savior, resist the word of G-d, manipulate international trading, drink the blood of Christian children, and spread the ideas of communism and practice exploitative capitalism that causes financial inequality and greed. In summary, Jews made up a small fraction of the population and of the slave trade (MyJewishLearning.com).
In conclusion, Jews did not control the slave trade by any stretch. There were Jewish slave owners for a variety of reasons, but there were Jews who were also radically against slavery. The Jewish slave owners and Jews involved in the slave trade were miniscule relative to the rest of the population. They were proportionate to their numbers in society. Southern Jews were wholly integrated into Southern society, economy, and values. As such, there were Jews who used slaves as a way to become prosperous and did not believe it was a sin. There were also Jews who were slave owners because they believed it eased their assimilation into Southern society and thought slavery was not a sin according to Judaic law. In the same way, there were Jews who were slave owners only to avoid being different and being hit with antisemitism. However, there were many prominent Rabbis and Jewish leaders who were very against slavery and the slave trade because they felt it was wrong for the blacks to be enslaved and that it was against the Jewish bible. Like many customs among the Jewish communities, slavery is not different. Some Jews agreed with the institution and other Jews disagreed with it. However, the Jews did not control the slave trade as antisemites have liked to expound.
Work Cited:
Bonnie K. Goodman, “Judah P. Benjamin And The Jewish Goal Of Whiteness In The Antebellum South”, The Times Of Israel (11. Jan, 2019), online: https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/judah-p-benjamin-and-the-jewish-goal-of-whiteness-in-the-antebellum-south/ (accessed 1 May 2022)
David Aberbach, “Jews and Slavery: The Myths and Truth”, TheJewishChronicle (17 July 2020), online: https://www.thejc.com/news/news/jews-and-slavery-the-myths-and-the-truth-1.501677 (accessed 27 April 2022)
History.com editors, “Union General Ulysses S. Grant Expels Jews From His Military District”, History (13 Nov. 2009), online: https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/grant-expels-the-jews-from-his-department (accessed 27 April 2022)
MyJewishLearning editors, “Where the False Claim That Jews Controlled the Slave Trade Comes From”, MyJewishLearning (no date of publication given), online: https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/jews-and-the-african-slave-trade/ (accessed 4 April 2022)
Ofer Aderet, “The Uncomfortable Truth of Jews in the South,” Haaretz (22 Jun. 2021), online: https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium.MAGAZINE-slave-owners-confederates-and-wrestlers-jews-of-the-u-s-south-in-the-showcase-1.9928841 (accessed 29 Mar. 2022).
Richard Kreitner, “The Powerful Example Of The Jewish Abolitionists We Forgot”, Forward (30 Jan, 2015), online: https://forward.com/culture/213776/the-powerful-example-of-the-jewish-abolitionists-we-forgot/#:~:text=Before%20 Selma%2C%20 before%20 socialism%2C%20the%20 Jewish%20 abolitionists%20were,in%20the%20North%20and%20none%20in%20the%20South.
(accessed 1 May 2022)
In the mid-1850s, Jews were both slave owners and a part of the slave trade. For example, men like Ansly Davis from Virginia had an advertisement in North Carolina’s Wilmington Journal in 1847 for black men and women slaves between the ages of 14-30. Another man, David Wise of New Orleans, put out an advertisement in 1894 in a
newspaper for black slaves that he sold for cash or bought to use as field
hands. Judah P. Benjamin was the first Cabinet officer of the Confederate States as well as a slave owner (Goodman). As Robert Rosen author of The Jewish Confederates wrote, “Judah Benjamin is a great example of how Southern Jews were assimilated into Southern Society. But of course, they accepted all the values of that society, including slavery” (Goodman). These are examples of men that had slaves in comparable numbers to the number of slaves who white gentiles had in the South since they were very integrated into the white society. In fact, in the 1830’s, the first of what would eventually be some 200 Jewish mayors in the South was elected. Also, over 2,000 Jews fought in the Civil War on the Confederate side. A big part of the Jews being integrated into Southern society meant that they upheld the infamous custom of slave owning (Aderet).
Though Jews were assimilated into Southern society by choice, including slave owning and slave trading, antisemitic occurrences were on the rise and Jews did what they could to avoid them. Jews were permitted in society, but only if they followed Southern customs. If not, the Jews were hit with antisemitism by being put into a lower class or looked down upon. Therefore, some Jews went along with the South’s way of life, like slave owning and trading, in order to avoid such harassment and so as to not be different. Antisemitism was real. For example, in 1862, Ulysses S. Grant expelled all Jews from the general’s military district in Tennessee (History.com). Also, in 1865, the Ku Klux Klan targeted blacks, but they targeted Jews as well (Aderet). Antisemitism was a force that strongly affected the Jews’ independence and perhaps fueled their drive to blend in and comply. This is why some Jews felt the need to participate in the slave trade (Kreitner).
In the mid-19th century, American Jewish leaders debated whether it was permissible in Jewish law to own a slave or be involved in the slave trade. Embedded in Judaism is the belief that every life matters. This is based in the notion that man was created in “G-d's image” (Genesis). Also, the Talmud, a Jewish commentary, states, “this is why G-d created Adam [first man on earth] alone: to teach that one who kills a single
human being is regarded by Scripture as having destroyed an entire world, and one who saves a single person is regarded by Scripture as having saved an entire world.” (Mishnah Sanhedrin IV 5). Thus, some Jews understood this as a principle to value racial equality.
However, there was another side. On January 4, 1861 a Swedish born Rabbi Morris Jacob Raphall spoke to the congregation of B'nei Jeshurun in New York. He rose to the bima (stage) and said, “How dare you, in the face of the sanction and protection afforded to slave property in the Ten Commandments–how dare you denounce slaveholding as a sin?” (Kreitner). Rabbi Raphall was a prominent Rabbi and someone to look up to. This shows that, Jews actually argued whether slave owning was a permissible activity.
Many Jewish leaders were against slavery and encouraged Jews not to practice it. Mordechai Manuel Noah, a playwright, journalist, and diplomate, was against slavery and began his career as against it. He explained in the mid-1850s, “How can Americans be engaged in this traffic?” (Kreitner). He referred to the Jews as “men whose birthright is liberty, whose eminent peculiarity is freedom?” (Kreitner). However, as Noah got older, he spoke out against emancipation because he felt it would put the country in danger. In fact, Freedom’s Journal, the first black newspaper, was started in 1831 to counteract Noah’s thinking. White abolitionist William Lloyd Garrison described Noah as a “Shylock”, an antisemetic slur, and a “lineal descendant of the monsters who nailed Jesus to the cross” (Kreitner). It is, therefore, fair to say there were Jews pro-slavery in the South.
There were other Jewish anti-slavery forces at work. There are many examples of
famous Jewish representatives radically against slavery. Many were rabbis of synagogues of congregations or leaders with a group following. Ernestine Rose, who also fought for women’s rights, was against Raphall’s pro-slavery stance. In fact, at one of her "Society for Moral Philanthropists" speeches around the year 1850, she remarked how a slave owner in the South declared that if she were a man, he would have her tarred and feathered. In the mid-1850s, the war known as the “Bleeding Kansas” occurred. At that time, three Jews went with John Brown to protest against settlers who were pro-slavery. Another anti-slavery protester, Reform Rabbi Bernard Felsenthal of the Sinai Congregation spoke against slavery around the year 1860. He declared “If anyone, it is the Jew, above all others who should have the most burning and irreconcilable hatred for the ‘peculiar institution’ of the South” (Kreitner). Furthermore, Felsenthal rejected a rabbinical position in Mobile, Alabama because it required him to be a slave owner. Another example is Rabbi Gustav Gottheil, a Prussian born American who said, “How can we be silent” when slavery is “one grand consistent utterance of condemnation?” (Kreitner). Though it was a mixed bag, we can clearly see that a fair numbers of Jews were against slave owning and slave trading (Kreitner).
Today, there are videos, literature, and people that claim Jews controlled most of the slave trade because of the book “The Secret Relationship Between Blacks and Jews”,
written by the Nation of Islam in 1991. Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, and David Duke, the former grand wizard of the Ku Klux Klan, claim Jews enslaved blacks in the South exponentially. Historians like Jacob Rader Marcus, Eli Farber, John Jay Farber, David Brion Davis, Harold Brackman and Saul Freidman all have worked on different studies and analyzed the evidence that proves Jews did not control the vast majority of buying and selling in the slave trade. In actuality, historian Jacob Rader Marcus said Jews made up a small portion of the South’s population and, therefore, controlled a small portion of blacks that were bought and sold in the slave trade. Historian, David Brion Davis said Jews were one of the many religions and ethnic groups that participated in the slave trade, but did not dominate it. It is generally accepted that those who make the claim that Jews dominated the slave trade are being antisemitic. Many historians such as David Brion Davis feel that Jews are targeted specifically because they are successful, allegedly killed the Christian’s Savior, resist the word of G-d, manipulate international trading, drink the blood of Christian children, and spread the ideas of communism and practice exploitative capitalism that causes financial inequality and greed. In summary, Jews made up a small fraction of the population and of the slave trade (MyJewishLearning.com).
In conclusion, Jews did not control the slave trade by any stretch. There were Jewish slave owners for a variety of reasons, but there were Jews who were also radically against slavery. The Jewish slave owners and Jews involved in the slave trade were miniscule relative to the rest of the population. They were proportionate to their numbers in society. Southern Jews were wholly integrated into Southern society, economy, and values. As such, there were Jews who used slaves as a way to become prosperous and did not believe it was a sin. There were also Jews who were slave owners because they believed it eased their assimilation into Southern society and thought slavery was not a sin according to Judaic law. In the same way, there were Jews who were slave owners only to avoid being different and being hit with antisemitism. However, there were many prominent Rabbis and Jewish leaders who were very against slavery and the slave trade because they felt it was wrong for the blacks to be enslaved and that it was against the Jewish bible. Like many customs among the Jewish communities, slavery is not different. Some Jews agreed with the institution and other Jews disagreed with it. However, the Jews did not control the slave trade as antisemites have liked to expound.
Work Cited:
Bonnie K. Goodman, “Judah P. Benjamin And The Jewish Goal Of Whiteness In The Antebellum South”, The Times Of Israel (11. Jan, 2019), online: https://blogs.timesofisrael.com/judah-p-benjamin-and-the-jewish-goal-of-whiteness-in-the-antebellum-south/ (accessed 1 May 2022)
David Aberbach, “Jews and Slavery: The Myths and Truth”, TheJewishChronicle (17 July 2020), online: https://www.thejc.com/news/news/jews-and-slavery-the-myths-and-the-truth-1.501677 (accessed 27 April 2022)
History.com editors, “Union General Ulysses S. Grant Expels Jews From His Military District”, History (13 Nov. 2009), online: https://www.history.com/this-day-in-history/grant-expels-the-jews-from-his-department (accessed 27 April 2022)
MyJewishLearning editors, “Where the False Claim That Jews Controlled the Slave Trade Comes From”, MyJewishLearning (no date of publication given), online: https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/jews-and-the-african-slave-trade/ (accessed 4 April 2022)
Ofer Aderet, “The Uncomfortable Truth of Jews in the South,” Haaretz (22 Jun. 2021), online: https://www.haaretz.com/us-news/.premium.MAGAZINE-slave-owners-confederates-and-wrestlers-jews-of-the-u-s-south-in-the-showcase-1.9928841 (accessed 29 Mar. 2022).
Richard Kreitner, “The Powerful Example Of The Jewish Abolitionists We Forgot”, Forward (30 Jan, 2015), online: https://forward.com/culture/213776/the-powerful-example-of-the-jewish-abolitionists-we-forgot/#:~:text=Before%20 Selma%2C%20 before%20 socialism%2C%20the%20 Jewish%20 abolitionists%20were,in%20the%20North%20and%20none%20in%20the%20South.
(accessed 1 May 2022)
What's The Day-To-Day Life For Indians
Comparison essay
We find brutal honesty in the stories “Like The Sun” and “The Doctors Word”, both written by R.K. Narayan. The theme in both stories talk about truth, extreme truth. In “Like The Sun”, the very first words are “Truth, Sekhar reflected, is like the sun.” In “The Doctors Word” Dr. Raman is described as someone who had no “time for any kind of wavering or whitewashing.” Both stories also demonstrate that strength is necessary for telling the truth. Sekhar reflects that truth “required as much strength to give as to receive.” In the same way, in “The Doctor’s Word”, Dr. Raman is described as expressing an opinion like “a judge pronouncing a verdict.” This shows how strong you need to be to tell the truth. A technique Narayan uses in developing his theme is conflict. In “Like The Sun”, Sekhar has an internal conflict whether he should tell the truth. Through the use of similes, he describes the headmaster as, “he croaks like a dozen frogs, he is bellowing like a buffalo. Now he sounds like loose window shutters in a storm.” This is how Sekhar critiques the headmaster’s singing talent. When he tells the headmaster that he has no talent for music, he is punished by having to grade one hundred papers overnight. Still, Sekhar does what he thinks is the moral thing of being completely honest. He feels “that sitting up all night with a hundred tests papers was a small price to pay for the luxury of practicing truth.” On the other hand, when Dr. Raman is confronted with the conflict of telling his patient the truth, he chooses to lie and tells him he will live, going out of his usual character. He says, “Don’t worry about the will now. You will live.” Ironically, the patient lives even though he should have died. The story concludes that the “he will live to be ninety. He has turned the corner. How he survived this attack will be a puzzle to me all my life.” Here Dr. Raman lied, but as it turns out, the lie turned out to be true. Maybe the lesson was you do not have to tell the truth 100% of the time. Sometimes
Page 2
making exceptions may be alright. The mood that is set in both stories is accomplished with a minimum of description. They describe only what is necessary for the story. You might wish even to describe the mood as the old saying, “the truth and nothing but the truth”. The main style of the stories, show bare honesty. As we can see, these stories breathe honesty. As a result, readers can decide whether they want to tell the truth, or not.
We find brutal honesty in the stories “Like The Sun” and “The Doctors Word”, both written by R.K. Narayan. The theme in both stories talk about truth, extreme truth. In “Like The Sun”, the very first words are “Truth, Sekhar reflected, is like the sun.” In “The Doctors Word” Dr. Raman is described as someone who had no “time for any kind of wavering or whitewashing.” Both stories also demonstrate that strength is necessary for telling the truth. Sekhar reflects that truth “required as much strength to give as to receive.” In the same way, in “The Doctor’s Word”, Dr. Raman is described as expressing an opinion like “a judge pronouncing a verdict.” This shows how strong you need to be to tell the truth. A technique Narayan uses in developing his theme is conflict. In “Like The Sun”, Sekhar has an internal conflict whether he should tell the truth. Through the use of similes, he describes the headmaster as, “he croaks like a dozen frogs, he is bellowing like a buffalo. Now he sounds like loose window shutters in a storm.” This is how Sekhar critiques the headmaster’s singing talent. When he tells the headmaster that he has no talent for music, he is punished by having to grade one hundred papers overnight. Still, Sekhar does what he thinks is the moral thing of being completely honest. He feels “that sitting up all night with a hundred tests papers was a small price to pay for the luxury of practicing truth.” On the other hand, when Dr. Raman is confronted with the conflict of telling his patient the truth, he chooses to lie and tells him he will live, going out of his usual character. He says, “Don’t worry about the will now. You will live.” Ironically, the patient lives even though he should have died. The story concludes that the “he will live to be ninety. He has turned the corner. How he survived this attack will be a puzzle to me all my life.” Here Dr. Raman lied, but as it turns out, the lie turned out to be true. Maybe the lesson was you do not have to tell the truth 100% of the time. Sometimes
Page 2
making exceptions may be alright. The mood that is set in both stories is accomplished with a minimum of description. They describe only what is necessary for the story. You might wish even to describe the mood as the old saying, “the truth and nothing but the truth”. The main style of the stories, show bare honesty. As we can see, these stories breathe honesty. As a result, readers can decide whether they want to tell the truth, or not.
Can man's animalistic instincts be tamed?
The Middle age authors perspectives
Montaigne and Swift appear to say that men are equal to animals, but there is an argument to be made that man’s animal instincts can be tamed in order to elevate man to a higher level of being. Specifically, though cannibalism is widespread in the animal kingdom, man does not often stoop to that behavior. In their two essays, “Of Cannibals” and “The Modest Proposal”, Montaigne and Swift describe human societies practicing this animalistic act. Around 1600, Montaigne said that men are barbaric and described cannibalism as animal-like. In 1729, Swift wrote that cannibalism is good for economic reasons and expressed the process as an animal-like slaughter. The two authors seemed to believe the civilizations they wrote about were defined by their animalistic acts, were equal to animals, and were perhaps praiseworthy. However, there is a morality dating back to the Old Testament, an instruction book for life, which tells us we are capable of overcoming our animalistic urges and following our higher spiritual inclinations. Did these two authors not know this principle?
Montaigne writes that people with no contact from the outside world are barbaric, but also pure since they have no outside influences. He writes “these nations seem to me to be so far barbarous” because they “received but very little form of fashion from art and human intervention.” To prove their lack of modernization, he explains they have “no matter of traffic, no knowledge of letters, no science of numbers” as well as many other disciplines. Montaigne explains that these people are considered barbaric by outside civilized people because they do not have human innovations due to their lack of exposure to world influences. He thinks this is a praiseworthy lifestyle. He writes, “We have so surcharged her with the additional ornaments and graces we have added to the beauty and riches of her own works by our inventions, that we have almost smothered her; yet in other places, where she shines in her own purity and proper lustre, she marvelously baffles and disgraces all our vain and frivolous attempts.” According to this, nature in its pure form is the ultimate beauty. Montaigne continues to say that with materialism and human innovations come the traits of “lying, treachery, dissimulation, avarice, envy, detraction”. These are the bad traits of civilizations. However, the people who are close to nature, with no outside influences, are truer forms of civilization. Therefore, the so-called barbaric people and their rituals, including cannibalism, are closer to nature. Thus, it would appear that since nature is closest to the life source, Montaigne is saying this behavior is preferable.
Swift’s argument in favor of cannibalism on its face seems to be much more straightforward. He says, “I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food.” He goes on to list many reasons why cannibalism would be very beneficial to society. The reasons can be grouped mostly into economical as well as some social and political. On the economic front, it would help the beggars by selling their children since it would “support them as those who demand our charity in the streets.” For example, a one year old could be “offered in the sale to the persons of quality and fortune through the kingdom” and the parents would therefore make a great money profit. It would also help the beggar parents because they would “be rid of the charge of maintaining them after the first year.” Also, reducing the population of beggar children would be helpful since the “one hundred and twenty thousand children of poor parents annually born” were a real drain on society. The food industry would also be helped because children as food “would likewise bring great custom to taverns” since it is in “no way comparable in taste or magnificence to a well grown fat, yearling child”. Socially speaking, it would help family dynamics since “it would increase the care and tenderness of mothers toward their children” since they do not have to divide their attention between so many children. Furthermore, “men would become more fond of their wives during the time of their pregnancy” because their unborn children are now profitable crops, similar to animal breeding. Also, they would be careful to treat them well during pregnancy with “no offer to beat or kick them (as is a frequent practice) for fear of a miscarriage.” Politically, there would be fewer Catholics since “there are more children born in Roman Catholic countries.” Protestants would not have to fear that their “most dangerous enemies” would “design to deliver the kingdom to the pretender”, a Catholic leader. This is a particular concern to Protestant England that wanted to keep Catholic Ireland, Swift’s country, under their rule. They did not want to be overrun by rebellious Irish Catholic subjects with their higher birth rate. Thus, it may be Swift preaches cannibalism from all his convincing and intellectual points about how it would be serving as an advantage. He, “therefore, humbly offer(ed) ... to public consideration…advising the mother to let them suck plentifully in the last month, so as to render them plump and fat for a good table.” He seemed to feel that cannibalism was a worthwhile proposition. However, wasn’t Swift a clergyman? Didn’t religious belief have influence in that time?
There has been a lot of mention of barbarism and the depraved act of cannibalism; however, humans have a spiritual and moral side and they have the capability to conduct themselves on a higher level than just listening to their animalistic instincts. Despite what Montaigne and Swift may advocate regarding man’s cruel practice of cannibalism, the Old Testament explains that man has a spiritual essence. It states “and the L-rd G-d formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul” (Genesis, 2:7). This means that when man was created in the beginning of time, G-d blew into man’s nostrils infusing His Divineness. Therefore, man has had a natural morality instilled in him from the time of creation that should not be squashed. In contrast to what Swift and Montaigne may say about man’s naturalistic and animalistic ways, such as cannibalism, man always has the potential to grow into the godly person he was created to be. It is brought out that we have the ability to follow those spiritual yearnings, and to tame our beastly instincts. This is further proven in the Old Testament when it commands man “not to give even one of them of the flesh of his children that he will eat” (Deuteronomy 28:55). Here, is a direct commandment not to practice cannibalism. By the same token, a commandment by G-d means that man has the capability of actually succeeding in keeping it. As such, cannibalism being forbidden means it is something that man has the capability of overcoming and proves man can achieve the level to not commit this sinful act.
However, do Montaigne and Swift really think that cannibalism is good and men are beastly?
There is a case to be made that Montaigne is simply reporting that populations practice cannibalism and makes no stance of his opinion, whether he agreed with it or not. However, one might interpret his essay as agreeing with the practice, while another opinion may be that he does not. While he appreciates the natural way of the natives, he drops clues that he may not agree with this particular practice. Montaigne uses the word barbarous quite a lot with respect to describing cannibals. This word in and of itself is loaded with negative meaning. He states clearly, ”I am not sorry that we should here take notice of the barbarous horror of so cruel an action.” This means that we should take note of the cruel acts of cannibals. Montaigne also descriptively writes “the physicians make no bones of employing it to all sorts of use… We may then call these people barbarous, in respect to the rules of reason,” meaning cannibalism. Montaigne especially hates the practice that pulls limbs from living humans. “I conceive there is more barbarity in eating a man alive, than when he is dead; in tearing a body limb from limb by racks and torments…roasting it by degrees.” Obviously, he feels the practice is barbaric and inhumane.
As for Swift, his writing is a reflection of the Enlightenment period. In the Enlightenment period, writers used a satirical style to make a point. Swift’s intention is to consciously inform people of the gruesome and wicked practice cannibalism as a metaphor for English oppression of the Irish. Especially since Swift was a clergyman, he exaggerates his claim to teach a moral lesson. For example, he writes “that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee or a ragout.” This satirical claim is mostly backed by the evidence that he explicitly explains that children are the best quality to have to eat. But, for his own child he writes differently, “I have no children by which I can propose to get a single penny; the youngest being nine years old”. From here, it is clear Swift is making a mockery out of the practice cannibalism, and does not agree with it. In the same way, he is being satirical with respect to the English who “have already devoured most of the (Irish) parents.” Therefore, Swift does not agree with the practice of cannibalism or English oppression since he describes it gruesomely and has made a mockery of it.
In the beginning, Montaigne and Swift appear to advocate cannibalism; however, this turns out not to be the case upon closer reading of their essays. When looking at the simple meaning of their essays, it appears that Montaigne and Swift agree with cannibalism. However, a whole different understanding surfaces during a deeper analysis and the deeper meaning. That is, the truth, that Montaigne and Swift are in actuality against cannibalism. The suspense, satire, and lack of clarity demonstrated in this essay are the same literary elements that Montaigne and Swift use in their own essays. So, how does it feel to have been tricked in the same way?
Although Montaigne and Swift were initially proved to have claimed that men are equal to animals, contrasting the Old Testaments’s explanation of man’s goodness, a deeper analysis proved that they really thought cannibalism was in fact bad. At first, it seemed that Montaigne and Swift agreed with cannibalism. Montaigne appeared to believe that those people closer to nature were doing what was right in contrast to the outside civilizations who lead a life with materialism and amoralistic traits. Swift, at the start seemed to be enthusiastic about cannibalism with his explicit reasoning of why the practice should be accepted. The Old Testament contradicted their alleged stance by stating how men were naturally created with a higher godly power that gave them divine instincts. However, the Enlightenment period’s style of satire and Montaigne’s essay’s context clues, finally gave the two authors away. In spite of their sarcastic writing, Montaigne and Swift believe man is not an animal and cannibalism is bad.
Montaigne writes that people with no contact from the outside world are barbaric, but also pure since they have no outside influences. He writes “these nations seem to me to be so far barbarous” because they “received but very little form of fashion from art and human intervention.” To prove their lack of modernization, he explains they have “no matter of traffic, no knowledge of letters, no science of numbers” as well as many other disciplines. Montaigne explains that these people are considered barbaric by outside civilized people because they do not have human innovations due to their lack of exposure to world influences. He thinks this is a praiseworthy lifestyle. He writes, “We have so surcharged her with the additional ornaments and graces we have added to the beauty and riches of her own works by our inventions, that we have almost smothered her; yet in other places, where she shines in her own purity and proper lustre, she marvelously baffles and disgraces all our vain and frivolous attempts.” According to this, nature in its pure form is the ultimate beauty. Montaigne continues to say that with materialism and human innovations come the traits of “lying, treachery, dissimulation, avarice, envy, detraction”. These are the bad traits of civilizations. However, the people who are close to nature, with no outside influences, are truer forms of civilization. Therefore, the so-called barbaric people and their rituals, including cannibalism, are closer to nature. Thus, it would appear that since nature is closest to the life source, Montaigne is saying this behavior is preferable.
Swift’s argument in favor of cannibalism on its face seems to be much more straightforward. He says, “I have been assured by a very knowing American of my acquaintance in London, that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food.” He goes on to list many reasons why cannibalism would be very beneficial to society. The reasons can be grouped mostly into economical as well as some social and political. On the economic front, it would help the beggars by selling their children since it would “support them as those who demand our charity in the streets.” For example, a one year old could be “offered in the sale to the persons of quality and fortune through the kingdom” and the parents would therefore make a great money profit. It would also help the beggar parents because they would “be rid of the charge of maintaining them after the first year.” Also, reducing the population of beggar children would be helpful since the “one hundred and twenty thousand children of poor parents annually born” were a real drain on society. The food industry would also be helped because children as food “would likewise bring great custom to taverns” since it is in “no way comparable in taste or magnificence to a well grown fat, yearling child”. Socially speaking, it would help family dynamics since “it would increase the care and tenderness of mothers toward their children” since they do not have to divide their attention between so many children. Furthermore, “men would become more fond of their wives during the time of their pregnancy” because their unborn children are now profitable crops, similar to animal breeding. Also, they would be careful to treat them well during pregnancy with “no offer to beat or kick them (as is a frequent practice) for fear of a miscarriage.” Politically, there would be fewer Catholics since “there are more children born in Roman Catholic countries.” Protestants would not have to fear that their “most dangerous enemies” would “design to deliver the kingdom to the pretender”, a Catholic leader. This is a particular concern to Protestant England that wanted to keep Catholic Ireland, Swift’s country, under their rule. They did not want to be overrun by rebellious Irish Catholic subjects with their higher birth rate. Thus, it may be Swift preaches cannibalism from all his convincing and intellectual points about how it would be serving as an advantage. He, “therefore, humbly offer(ed) ... to public consideration…advising the mother to let them suck plentifully in the last month, so as to render them plump and fat for a good table.” He seemed to feel that cannibalism was a worthwhile proposition. However, wasn’t Swift a clergyman? Didn’t religious belief have influence in that time?
There has been a lot of mention of barbarism and the depraved act of cannibalism; however, humans have a spiritual and moral side and they have the capability to conduct themselves on a higher level than just listening to their animalistic instincts. Despite what Montaigne and Swift may advocate regarding man’s cruel practice of cannibalism, the Old Testament explains that man has a spiritual essence. It states “and the L-rd G-d formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a living soul” (Genesis, 2:7). This means that when man was created in the beginning of time, G-d blew into man’s nostrils infusing His Divineness. Therefore, man has had a natural morality instilled in him from the time of creation that should not be squashed. In contrast to what Swift and Montaigne may say about man’s naturalistic and animalistic ways, such as cannibalism, man always has the potential to grow into the godly person he was created to be. It is brought out that we have the ability to follow those spiritual yearnings, and to tame our beastly instincts. This is further proven in the Old Testament when it commands man “not to give even one of them of the flesh of his children that he will eat” (Deuteronomy 28:55). Here, is a direct commandment not to practice cannibalism. By the same token, a commandment by G-d means that man has the capability of actually succeeding in keeping it. As such, cannibalism being forbidden means it is something that man has the capability of overcoming and proves man can achieve the level to not commit this sinful act.
However, do Montaigne and Swift really think that cannibalism is good and men are beastly?
There is a case to be made that Montaigne is simply reporting that populations practice cannibalism and makes no stance of his opinion, whether he agreed with it or not. However, one might interpret his essay as agreeing with the practice, while another opinion may be that he does not. While he appreciates the natural way of the natives, he drops clues that he may not agree with this particular practice. Montaigne uses the word barbarous quite a lot with respect to describing cannibals. This word in and of itself is loaded with negative meaning. He states clearly, ”I am not sorry that we should here take notice of the barbarous horror of so cruel an action.” This means that we should take note of the cruel acts of cannibals. Montaigne also descriptively writes “the physicians make no bones of employing it to all sorts of use… We may then call these people barbarous, in respect to the rules of reason,” meaning cannibalism. Montaigne especially hates the practice that pulls limbs from living humans. “I conceive there is more barbarity in eating a man alive, than when he is dead; in tearing a body limb from limb by racks and torments…roasting it by degrees.” Obviously, he feels the practice is barbaric and inhumane.
As for Swift, his writing is a reflection of the Enlightenment period. In the Enlightenment period, writers used a satirical style to make a point. Swift’s intention is to consciously inform people of the gruesome and wicked practice cannibalism as a metaphor for English oppression of the Irish. Especially since Swift was a clergyman, he exaggerates his claim to teach a moral lesson. For example, he writes “that a young healthy child well nursed is at a year old a most delicious, nourishing, and wholesome food, whether stewed, roasted, baked, or boiled; and I make no doubt that it will equally serve in a fricassee or a ragout.” This satirical claim is mostly backed by the evidence that he explicitly explains that children are the best quality to have to eat. But, for his own child he writes differently, “I have no children by which I can propose to get a single penny; the youngest being nine years old”. From here, it is clear Swift is making a mockery out of the practice cannibalism, and does not agree with it. In the same way, he is being satirical with respect to the English who “have already devoured most of the (Irish) parents.” Therefore, Swift does not agree with the practice of cannibalism or English oppression since he describes it gruesomely and has made a mockery of it.
In the beginning, Montaigne and Swift appear to advocate cannibalism; however, this turns out not to be the case upon closer reading of their essays. When looking at the simple meaning of their essays, it appears that Montaigne and Swift agree with cannibalism. However, a whole different understanding surfaces during a deeper analysis and the deeper meaning. That is, the truth, that Montaigne and Swift are in actuality against cannibalism. The suspense, satire, and lack of clarity demonstrated in this essay are the same literary elements that Montaigne and Swift use in their own essays. So, how does it feel to have been tricked in the same way?
Although Montaigne and Swift were initially proved to have claimed that men are equal to animals, contrasting the Old Testaments’s explanation of man’s goodness, a deeper analysis proved that they really thought cannibalism was in fact bad. At first, it seemed that Montaigne and Swift agreed with cannibalism. Montaigne appeared to believe that those people closer to nature were doing what was right in contrast to the outside civilizations who lead a life with materialism and amoralistic traits. Swift, at the start seemed to be enthusiastic about cannibalism with his explicit reasoning of why the practice should be accepted. The Old Testament contradicted their alleged stance by stating how men were naturally created with a higher godly power that gave them divine instincts. However, the Enlightenment period’s style of satire and Montaigne’s essay’s context clues, finally gave the two authors away. In spite of their sarcastic writing, Montaigne and Swift believe man is not an animal and cannibalism is bad.
Why Do Children Suffer?
Throughout the generations, children suffer and suffer, but what is the reason? There are many reasons why that could be. Usually, when a child acts out or is upset, due to their suffering, it is because he or she cannot do what they want, so people may think it is because they are rebellious. However, statistics show parents can be the cause because of their own unhappiness. When a parent is unhappy it sets a mood in the house of melancholy. Reasons for a parent’s unhappiness may include a not intact family, spousal abuse, and mental illness. These reasons impact a child’s formative years and his or her behavior and future happiness. It can also lead to rebellion which can carry through to their adulthood.
Living in a family that is broken may lead to rebellion. The National Fatherhood Initiative says that “there is a father absence crisis in America. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 18.3 million children, 1 in 4, live without a biological, step, or adoptive father in the home.” They believe that there is a “father factor” in nearly all social ills in America today. Due to many proven sources, it is safe to say that the absence of the father in many American homes is a cause of child sadness. Distressingly, according to professor Raymond Bell of Lehigh University, 70% of prison inmates come from broken homes. Therefore, we see that when the family is not whole or happy, the child might turn against society and end up in jail.
Sadly, many spouses experience abuse. The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence states, “On average, nearly 20 people per minute are physically abused by an intimate partner in the United States.” That translates into more than 10 million women and men abused in one year. In fact, 1 in 4 women and 1 in 9 men experience severe intimate partner physical violence. Abuse can include physical violence and partner stalking. You can imagine the fearfulness and post-traumatic stress disorder a child in that situation might feel. This fear can lead to frustration and a sense of anger toward the world. This causes a child to grow unhappy and often rebellious. From here we see that spousal abuse is a significant factor for many men and women throughout the world and children that live with them.
Unfortunately, many people who live in America live in a dysfunctional household. MentalHealth.org says that “starting a family is a milestone in many people’s lives. It can also be a stressful time and many parents experience mental ill health. Mental ill health of parents can have a negative impact on the development of their children.” When parents are not healthy themselves mentally, this has a direct impact on the children in the household. They are not capable of raising mentally healthy children which, obviously can have many effects on a child. Living in an unhappy family impacts a child’s emotional state and parents play a big part in that. A main effect is sadness which can often lead to despair. Furthermore, when a child is unhappy, they may become rebellious.
It is not new to the world that parents have problems. However, whatever actions they take or are victims of affects the lives of their children. The burdens the parents bear almost always burden their children. Though children have little power over the issues in their world, a child’s suffering is tragically great. These examples prove that it is the parents’ responsibility to try and create a pleasant environment for their children. Not doing so can only add to a child’s sorrow.
Living in a family that is broken may lead to rebellion. The National Fatherhood Initiative says that “there is a father absence crisis in America. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, 18.3 million children, 1 in 4, live without a biological, step, or adoptive father in the home.” They believe that there is a “father factor” in nearly all social ills in America today. Due to many proven sources, it is safe to say that the absence of the father in many American homes is a cause of child sadness. Distressingly, according to professor Raymond Bell of Lehigh University, 70% of prison inmates come from broken homes. Therefore, we see that when the family is not whole or happy, the child might turn against society and end up in jail.
Sadly, many spouses experience abuse. The National Coalition Against Domestic Violence states, “On average, nearly 20 people per minute are physically abused by an intimate partner in the United States.” That translates into more than 10 million women and men abused in one year. In fact, 1 in 4 women and 1 in 9 men experience severe intimate partner physical violence. Abuse can include physical violence and partner stalking. You can imagine the fearfulness and post-traumatic stress disorder a child in that situation might feel. This fear can lead to frustration and a sense of anger toward the world. This causes a child to grow unhappy and often rebellious. From here we see that spousal abuse is a significant factor for many men and women throughout the world and children that live with them.
Unfortunately, many people who live in America live in a dysfunctional household. MentalHealth.org says that “starting a family is a milestone in many people’s lives. It can also be a stressful time and many parents experience mental ill health. Mental ill health of parents can have a negative impact on the development of their children.” When parents are not healthy themselves mentally, this has a direct impact on the children in the household. They are not capable of raising mentally healthy children which, obviously can have many effects on a child. Living in an unhappy family impacts a child’s emotional state and parents play a big part in that. A main effect is sadness which can often lead to despair. Furthermore, when a child is unhappy, they may become rebellious.
It is not new to the world that parents have problems. However, whatever actions they take or are victims of affects the lives of their children. The burdens the parents bear almost always burden their children. Though children have little power over the issues in their world, a child’s suffering is tragically great. These examples prove that it is the parents’ responsibility to try and create a pleasant environment for their children. Not doing so can only add to a child’s sorrow.
Who Is Charlotte Lucas In Pride and Prejudice?
As Shakespeare says, “All’s well that ends well.” Unfortunately for Charlotte (Lucas) Collins, it may not be the case. Even so, in Pride and Prejudice, by Jane Austen, Charlotte exhibits intelligence, sensibility, and insecurity. Charotte portrays these three-character traits as she chose a life she did not necessarily want, but felt she had to take.
We see Charlotte’s intelligence in Netherfield with Jane Bennet. Jane and Charlotte chat about whether Jane’s first meeting with Mr. Bingley at the ball, was flirtatious enough to gain Mr. Bingley’s favor. Charlotte replies in response, “if women conceal her affection with the same skill from the object of It, she loses the opportunity of fixing him and it will be but poor constellation to believe the world equally in the dark” (Austen, 13). Here, Charlotte explains that Jane, and all women, who hold back their love for the man, whom they are trying to impress, may result in losing him. Then all women would result in viewing all men to be guilty in sins. Clearly, Charlotte is perceptive enough to make such an intelligent conclusion.
Charlotte appears to be sensible when she decides to marry Mr. Collins whom everyone found an “odious man” (Austen, 42), including Charlotte. Nevertheless, Charlotte marries him. This is found when Charllotte explains to Elizebeth “I ask only a comfortable home and considering Mr. Collin’s character, connections, and situation in life, I am convinced that my chance of happiness with him is fair, as most people can boast on entering the marriage state.” (Austen, 87) Charlotte only married him to accomplish getting married and security, not because her heart was in it. Therefore, she accepted the only proposal she knew she would get. With that, she clearly is a sensible woman who views the world realistically, knowing what she can get with what she has.
From the beginning of the book, Charlotte Lucas has been utterly insecure. From the following example, Charlotte’s insecurity is bleakly shown, at the ball held by Mr. Bingley, Charlotte is described as being “so very plain. Lady Lucas herself has often said so” (Austen, 30). Charlotte knew this about herself and it affected her outlook on life. After Mr. Collins proposed to Elizabeth and she rejected him, he made the same marriage proposal to Charlotte. Even knowing that he was a very repulsive man, she accepted. However, the marriage was “solely from the pure interested desire of an establishment” (Austen 87), Charlotte said. Therefore, Charlotte was insecure from her lack of beauty to acquire a marriage most women longed for. Instead, she instead got a marriage she did not want. In our day, we would say she settled.
Throughout the book we see Charlotte’s, intelligence through her advice to her friends, her sensibility from her decisions to make the best of her situation, and insecurity in her attitude toward the choice of a husband. In conclusion, Charlotte is a poor girl who has taken what life gave her. However, all does not have to be lost. The twist is she has the brains and good sense to determine what’s next.
We see Charlotte’s intelligence in Netherfield with Jane Bennet. Jane and Charlotte chat about whether Jane’s first meeting with Mr. Bingley at the ball, was flirtatious enough to gain Mr. Bingley’s favor. Charlotte replies in response, “if women conceal her affection with the same skill from the object of It, she loses the opportunity of fixing him and it will be but poor constellation to believe the world equally in the dark” (Austen, 13). Here, Charlotte explains that Jane, and all women, who hold back their love for the man, whom they are trying to impress, may result in losing him. Then all women would result in viewing all men to be guilty in sins. Clearly, Charlotte is perceptive enough to make such an intelligent conclusion.
Charlotte appears to be sensible when she decides to marry Mr. Collins whom everyone found an “odious man” (Austen, 42), including Charlotte. Nevertheless, Charlotte marries him. This is found when Charllotte explains to Elizebeth “I ask only a comfortable home and considering Mr. Collin’s character, connections, and situation in life, I am convinced that my chance of happiness with him is fair, as most people can boast on entering the marriage state.” (Austen, 87) Charlotte only married him to accomplish getting married and security, not because her heart was in it. Therefore, she accepted the only proposal she knew she would get. With that, she clearly is a sensible woman who views the world realistically, knowing what she can get with what she has.
From the beginning of the book, Charlotte Lucas has been utterly insecure. From the following example, Charlotte’s insecurity is bleakly shown, at the ball held by Mr. Bingley, Charlotte is described as being “so very plain. Lady Lucas herself has often said so” (Austen, 30). Charlotte knew this about herself and it affected her outlook on life. After Mr. Collins proposed to Elizabeth and she rejected him, he made the same marriage proposal to Charlotte. Even knowing that he was a very repulsive man, she accepted. However, the marriage was “solely from the pure interested desire of an establishment” (Austen 87), Charlotte said. Therefore, Charlotte was insecure from her lack of beauty to acquire a marriage most women longed for. Instead, she instead got a marriage she did not want. In our day, we would say she settled.
Throughout the book we see Charlotte’s, intelligence through her advice to her friends, her sensibility from her decisions to make the best of her situation, and insecurity in her attitude toward the choice of a husband. In conclusion, Charlotte is a poor girl who has taken what life gave her. However, all does not have to be lost. The twist is she has the brains and good sense to determine what’s next.
Is It Civilized To Hunt?
Civilized societies have been existing for centuries, but are they civilized? According to the Cambridge Dictionary, a civilized society consists of “a well-developed system of government, culture, and a way of life that treats the people who live there fairly”. In the short story The Most Dangerous Game by Richard Connell, the hypocrisy of civilized society is displayed. The main character, Rainsford, is an example of someone who thinks that they are civilized and they live in a society which is civilized, however, that is not the case.
Many people, including Mr. Rainsford himself, think they are respectable and civilized. “I’m no robber, I fell off my yacht” says Rainsford when trying to prove who he is. His yacht indicated he was not an ordinary shipwrecked sailor. His host, General Zaroff proves also to have the same opinion of Rainsford when saying as “civilized a young man as you are”. However, I believe the author is trying to display that their professions, hunting, is not as civilized as these characters thought. Connell emphasizes how civilized they appear to make his point even stronger.
The story starts off with Rainsford agreeing to the assertion that, “the world is made up of two classes- the hunters and the hunted. Luckily you and I are the hunters”. It would seem that Rainsford thought that hunting was acceptable because it was just killing animals. When he became the hunted one, he quickly came to the realization that hunting is inhumane. Through General Zaroff, the author is demonstrating to the reader how hypocritical it is for a civilized person to hunt. Zaroff explained that it was only low-life humans he was killing as an excuse to make it tolerable. Rainsford took issue and called it murder. However, Rainsford seemed to believe that killing was allowable if it was only animals.
Through the story, an example of hypocrisy of a civilized society is represented. Killing is immoral and wrong. I would hope Rainsford learned his lesson through being on the other side of hunter and hunted. However, even if he did not, the reader certainly got the message. Just as we do not accept hunting humans, so to we should feel the same toward hunting animals. Recognizing this moral would be making real progress toward being civilized.
Many people, including Mr. Rainsford himself, think they are respectable and civilized. “I’m no robber, I fell off my yacht” says Rainsford when trying to prove who he is. His yacht indicated he was not an ordinary shipwrecked sailor. His host, General Zaroff proves also to have the same opinion of Rainsford when saying as “civilized a young man as you are”. However, I believe the author is trying to display that their professions, hunting, is not as civilized as these characters thought. Connell emphasizes how civilized they appear to make his point even stronger.
The story starts off with Rainsford agreeing to the assertion that, “the world is made up of two classes- the hunters and the hunted. Luckily you and I are the hunters”. It would seem that Rainsford thought that hunting was acceptable because it was just killing animals. When he became the hunted one, he quickly came to the realization that hunting is inhumane. Through General Zaroff, the author is demonstrating to the reader how hypocritical it is for a civilized person to hunt. Zaroff explained that it was only low-life humans he was killing as an excuse to make it tolerable. Rainsford took issue and called it murder. However, Rainsford seemed to believe that killing was allowable if it was only animals.
Through the story, an example of hypocrisy of a civilized society is represented. Killing is immoral and wrong. I would hope Rainsford learned his lesson through being on the other side of hunter and hunted. However, even if he did not, the reader certainly got the message. Just as we do not accept hunting humans, so to we should feel the same toward hunting animals. Recognizing this moral would be making real progress toward being civilized.
Is TikTok Bad?
TikTok may be an offensive social media platform, but the positives far outweigh the negatives. There are political, social, and economic reasons for this. TikTok should not be banned because it is a form of speech which should be free, an outlet for joyful expression, and a potential source of revenue for the United States.
Democracies are based on freedom. In fact all Americans are entitled to the Bill of Rights which guarantees freedom of speech. TikTok may be a vehicle for inappropriate content, however it gives a voice to people’s thoughts and political views. Freedom of speech always been essential in America. Anything that starts to taking that away can lead to the of more freedoms.
Among the inappropriate videos on TikTok there are thousands of people celebrating their happy occasions. We also find people who want to express this joy. It can be expressed by dancing, and singing, which can also bring joy to those watching it as well. All this can improve the general’s public’s mental health and TikTok can play a big part in that.
The world economy is very tied to the American economy being strong. The American economy is based on businesses making money. It has been suggested that Microsoft buys TikTok from the Chinese company Bytedance. Given the fact that TikTok had over 17 billion dollars in revenue in 2019, it would seem worthwhile to have that company in America. The 3 billion dollars in profit could add to the growth of the American economy in the form of jobs and spending. Having TikTok would enrich the lives of the American people.
It might seem obvious to some that TikTok should be banned due to its inappropriate content. However, when we look deeper into the subject, we see it is a complex issue for political reason, social, and economic reasons. TikTok should not be banned because the advantages are greater than the disadvantages. TikTok is a useful tool for growing the economy and maintaining freedom.
Democracies are based on freedom. In fact all Americans are entitled to the Bill of Rights which guarantees freedom of speech. TikTok may be a vehicle for inappropriate content, however it gives a voice to people’s thoughts and political views. Freedom of speech always been essential in America. Anything that starts to taking that away can lead to the of more freedoms.
Among the inappropriate videos on TikTok there are thousands of people celebrating their happy occasions. We also find people who want to express this joy. It can be expressed by dancing, and singing, which can also bring joy to those watching it as well. All this can improve the general’s public’s mental health and TikTok can play a big part in that.
The world economy is very tied to the American economy being strong. The American economy is based on businesses making money. It has been suggested that Microsoft buys TikTok from the Chinese company Bytedance. Given the fact that TikTok had over 17 billion dollars in revenue in 2019, it would seem worthwhile to have that company in America. The 3 billion dollars in profit could add to the growth of the American economy in the form of jobs and spending. Having TikTok would enrich the lives of the American people.
It might seem obvious to some that TikTok should be banned due to its inappropriate content. However, when we look deeper into the subject, we see it is a complex issue for political reason, social, and economic reasons. TikTok should not be banned because the advantages are greater than the disadvantages. TikTok is a useful tool for growing the economy and maintaining freedom.
Challenges? I Think Not.
Joseph Campbell says, “Opportunities to find deeper powers within ourselves come when life seems most challenging.” This means that our hardships and sorrows provide a forum to grow. This crack in our universe provides an opportunity to create the best version of ourselves. Our challenges are ways for us to develop tools which help us cope with life. These challenges enable us to become a master on how to cope with life. Furthermore, we can learn how to do it with the utmost courage and kindness.
I can personally say that from my experience this is true. During my whole life in school, I have been one of the most mature students in my class, perhaps my grade. Because of this, it was difficult for me to connect with a lot of people because I found no common ground. Far from regretting this, I am grateful for this because it gave me the self-confidence that I have today. I had a deep instinct that I was on the right track and did not let the lack of validation in school interfere with that. Further challenges came when I moved to Israel because it introduced me to new knowledge, culture, and people. Through these experiences, I became more worldly and understanding of other ways of life. The first year was hard for me because I was in a school where most of my classmates were French or Israeli. At that point, I did not speak Hebrew and I did not become integrated into the school very well. I was still entrenched in my American culture, sometimes lonely, and homesick for my home in New York. I hadn’t realized until a year later when I had settled in that I had progressed tremendously in my self-improvement. I used the same lesson from my former school and trusted myself. Whatever maturity I had in the states, became so much more pronounced. Therefore, I am grateful for my life’s hardships because it made me into who I am today.
These ideas apply to today’s world because we are faced with more and more challenges. Since most of our challenges are incomprehensible to us. We need to cultivate this vital tool of digging deep into ourselves to rise to the occasion for whatever life brings us. Those of faith would say all our pain or trauma is evidently good for us since it is being orchestrated with the higher beings above us. As such, tribulation is in fact created in order to bring us to our utmost potential as human beings. These hardships feel hard now, but we have to know that it is for our benefit to deepen ourselves. In the world today, we have corona, inflation, and shortages, but we must remember that only with challenges, can we “find deeper powers within ourselves” (Campbell).
I can personally say that from my experience this is true. During my whole life in school, I have been one of the most mature students in my class, perhaps my grade. Because of this, it was difficult for me to connect with a lot of people because I found no common ground. Far from regretting this, I am grateful for this because it gave me the self-confidence that I have today. I had a deep instinct that I was on the right track and did not let the lack of validation in school interfere with that. Further challenges came when I moved to Israel because it introduced me to new knowledge, culture, and people. Through these experiences, I became more worldly and understanding of other ways of life. The first year was hard for me because I was in a school where most of my classmates were French or Israeli. At that point, I did not speak Hebrew and I did not become integrated into the school very well. I was still entrenched in my American culture, sometimes lonely, and homesick for my home in New York. I hadn’t realized until a year later when I had settled in that I had progressed tremendously in my self-improvement. I used the same lesson from my former school and trusted myself. Whatever maturity I had in the states, became so much more pronounced. Therefore, I am grateful for my life’s hardships because it made me into who I am today.
These ideas apply to today’s world because we are faced with more and more challenges. Since most of our challenges are incomprehensible to us. We need to cultivate this vital tool of digging deep into ourselves to rise to the occasion for whatever life brings us. Those of faith would say all our pain or trauma is evidently good for us since it is being orchestrated with the higher beings above us. As such, tribulation is in fact created in order to bring us to our utmost potential as human beings. These hardships feel hard now, but we have to know that it is for our benefit to deepen ourselves. In the world today, we have corona, inflation, and shortages, but we must remember that only with challenges, can we “find deeper powers within ourselves” (Campbell).
Life In Early 1800s Cornwall, England
Life in the 18th century in Cornwall, England
Starting from the Industrial Revolution, England has been the most productive country because of their hefty medal resources, and their ports. Cornwall, in the Southwestern part of England had a rich mine and port. However, the industrialization did not correspond to their governments harsh conservative law enforcement and perhaps voting. Because of this, Cornwall’s population was affected greatly onto their way of life.
Cornwall was affected by the mines because of their growth in business, rights to man, work for all gender and age, and the type of housing and institutions in their community. The website The Valley Cornall explains Cornwall’s wealth in medals. It says, “By the mid-1700s, Cornwall was producing around 12,000 tons of copper a year.” It goes on to say the type of medal which they were producing, “local copper, tin, arsenic production.” From here we see, that Cornwall’s business was doing very well because of their medalist mines affecting their business growth a lot. The mines also impacted legal actions of a miner. The Valley Cornwall says, that in the Charter of Liberties to the miners of Devon and Cornwall, a document of laws written in 1201, “allowed miners to be except from military service, granted them lower taxes, and even meant that they could ignore laws.” Here, the miner’s lives were impacted because they had the ability to be exempt from military, high taxes, and regulations from the government. Also interestingly enough, women were miners too. ‘The Valley Cornwall’ explains women were called ‘Bal Maidens’ who would separate the tin from other materials on it. Their job was not a substantial amount as the men, but yet still essential. Later on, children would become miners too in 1839. Evidently, women and children’s work life were impacted tremendously by the mining industry in Cornwell. To travel to Cornwall during the 18th century you would see the normal institutions a village has, but Cornwall had more than that. In Cornwall, “you can explore mines… towns and villages with distinctive terraced miners’ cottages, and mine owners’ country houses,” according to ‘The British Heritage Tunnel’2. These houses were “rented house in the neighborhood” the mining employees lived during their work there. The mine trade in Cornwall affected the housing for the miners in Cornwall. Evidently, the mining trade impacted the way of life of those mining in Cornwall exceedingly.
Aside from having prosperous mines, Cornwall was on the coast. This impacted the civilians of Cornwall to heir port business, weather, timely garment wearing caused by the weather, and their crops. “Port Isaac”, the name of a known port in Cornwall, “was a busy coastal port from the Middle Ages to the mid-19th century”, ‘Port Issac Corwall’3 says. From here tit can be concluded that Cornwall’s business was affected greatly by their water next to land. Being Cornwall is on the coast, the unusual weather affected its citizens. The website ‘Britannica’4 says ”the climate of Cornwall is closely affected by the proximity of the sea. High winds and sea mists are common, rainfall is frequent and heavy, especially on high ground. Temperatures are warm in summer and relatively mild in winter”. Clearly there is a lot of rain and humidity in Cornwall, as with most coastal cities. Maybe the people would have been more fortunate to embark on an eternal wood business to keep themselves warm inside their cottages. Due to the humidity, most people kept their clothes on even when sleeping due to the not yet to come, modernization of heat radiators. The ‘Britannica’4 also notes, that since there was a heavy impact of water on the soil, an advantage of being on the coast, “the vegetation is luxuriant, especially in sheltered coastal areas.” Distinctively, the water from the rain affected the crops to be of splendid value. This affects Cornwall to have nutritious, and good quality food. Evidently, the location of Cornwall, on the coast, impacted many things in Cornwall and their way of life.
Another way Cornwall’s people were affected in their prospects of life was in their rights to voting. The website ‘History extra’5 explains ”elections in the borough of Penryn a ‘scot and lot’ borough that extended the franchise to all those who paid poor rates were famously open to whichever candidate had the most money to burn. ‘Tis said money is drove about in wheelbarrows’, claimed one observer in 1761, while a newspaper report of 1825 suggested that wealthy candidates arrived periodically “to scatter gold and purchase their suffrages”. This quote explains the rich upper class ‘who had money to burn’ ran the government. It was the poor whom voted. ‘History Extra’ continues, in ”1832 Great Reform Act abolished most of these seats, slashing Cornwall’s representation by almost two-thirds to a mere 14 elected MPs.” By the time 1832 came around, half the government was cut. This caused Cornwall to only have 14 representatives in the government with no change in Cornwall’s census. This clearly took a major affect to the lives of those in Cornwall having half of the representation in government than they had before.
As most execution sentience’s in government are complicated and tough, Cornwall’s was not any different. The government executing was not so kind to the lower-class men. The website ‘Jackie Freeman Photography’6 suggest quite a few interesting points about Bodmin jail in Cornwall. “Men, women and children were caged here cell by cell in Bodmin Gaol in desperately harsh and grim conditions, often their minimal crimes being met with cruel, revengeful and unforgiving sentences demanded by the local Cornish magistrates taking care of their aristocracy own”. It continues saying how each prisoner received some bread, and rarely an onion. Not only this, but brought in an example of very harsh executions. ‘Jackie Freeman Photography’ continues “On the 11th of August in 1796 that John Hoskin aged 55, was publicly hanged for stealing a sack of wheat Redruth…heavy penalties were the norm in Cornwall back then. Public execution a grim spectacle not to be missed” Undoubtedly, the government was tough having a huge impact on the lower-class citizens actions in Cornwall. It would seem each unlawful action taken, has a catastrophic consequence.
Life in Cornwall in the 18th century was something to not dismiss. It had it succuss with the mining business and effects, and the coastal locations effects. Especially which shall not be forgotten are the hardships which would include the almost unfair voting system of the clear boundary of the upper class to the lower class, including the lack of representatives later on. We must prudently not forget the harsh executions putting people to their death ending their life.
Starting from the Industrial Revolution, England has been the most productive country because of their hefty medal resources, and their ports. Cornwall, in the Southwestern part of England had a rich mine and port. However, the industrialization did not correspond to their governments harsh conservative law enforcement and perhaps voting. Because of this, Cornwall’s population was affected greatly onto their way of life.
Cornwall was affected by the mines because of their growth in business, rights to man, work for all gender and age, and the type of housing and institutions in their community. The website The Valley Cornall explains Cornwall’s wealth in medals. It says, “By the mid-1700s, Cornwall was producing around 12,000 tons of copper a year.” It goes on to say the type of medal which they were producing, “local copper, tin, arsenic production.” From here we see, that Cornwall’s business was doing very well because of their medalist mines affecting their business growth a lot. The mines also impacted legal actions of a miner. The Valley Cornwall says, that in the Charter of Liberties to the miners of Devon and Cornwall, a document of laws written in 1201, “allowed miners to be except from military service, granted them lower taxes, and even meant that they could ignore laws.” Here, the miner’s lives were impacted because they had the ability to be exempt from military, high taxes, and regulations from the government. Also interestingly enough, women were miners too. ‘The Valley Cornwall’ explains women were called ‘Bal Maidens’ who would separate the tin from other materials on it. Their job was not a substantial amount as the men, but yet still essential. Later on, children would become miners too in 1839. Evidently, women and children’s work life were impacted tremendously by the mining industry in Cornwell. To travel to Cornwall during the 18th century you would see the normal institutions a village has, but Cornwall had more than that. In Cornwall, “you can explore mines… towns and villages with distinctive terraced miners’ cottages, and mine owners’ country houses,” according to ‘The British Heritage Tunnel’2. These houses were “rented house in the neighborhood” the mining employees lived during their work there. The mine trade in Cornwall affected the housing for the miners in Cornwall. Evidently, the mining trade impacted the way of life of those mining in Cornwall exceedingly.
Aside from having prosperous mines, Cornwall was on the coast. This impacted the civilians of Cornwall to heir port business, weather, timely garment wearing caused by the weather, and their crops. “Port Isaac”, the name of a known port in Cornwall, “was a busy coastal port from the Middle Ages to the mid-19th century”, ‘Port Issac Corwall’3 says. From here tit can be concluded that Cornwall’s business was affected greatly by their water next to land. Being Cornwall is on the coast, the unusual weather affected its citizens. The website ‘Britannica’4 says ”the climate of Cornwall is closely affected by the proximity of the sea. High winds and sea mists are common, rainfall is frequent and heavy, especially on high ground. Temperatures are warm in summer and relatively mild in winter”. Clearly there is a lot of rain and humidity in Cornwall, as with most coastal cities. Maybe the people would have been more fortunate to embark on an eternal wood business to keep themselves warm inside their cottages. Due to the humidity, most people kept their clothes on even when sleeping due to the not yet to come, modernization of heat radiators. The ‘Britannica’4 also notes, that since there was a heavy impact of water on the soil, an advantage of being on the coast, “the vegetation is luxuriant, especially in sheltered coastal areas.” Distinctively, the water from the rain affected the crops to be of splendid value. This affects Cornwall to have nutritious, and good quality food. Evidently, the location of Cornwall, on the coast, impacted many things in Cornwall and their way of life.
Another way Cornwall’s people were affected in their prospects of life was in their rights to voting. The website ‘History extra’5 explains ”elections in the borough of Penryn a ‘scot and lot’ borough that extended the franchise to all those who paid poor rates were famously open to whichever candidate had the most money to burn. ‘Tis said money is drove about in wheelbarrows’, claimed one observer in 1761, while a newspaper report of 1825 suggested that wealthy candidates arrived periodically “to scatter gold and purchase their suffrages”. This quote explains the rich upper class ‘who had money to burn’ ran the government. It was the poor whom voted. ‘History Extra’ continues, in ”1832 Great Reform Act abolished most of these seats, slashing Cornwall’s representation by almost two-thirds to a mere 14 elected MPs.” By the time 1832 came around, half the government was cut. This caused Cornwall to only have 14 representatives in the government with no change in Cornwall’s census. This clearly took a major affect to the lives of those in Cornwall having half of the representation in government than they had before.
As most execution sentience’s in government are complicated and tough, Cornwall’s was not any different. The government executing was not so kind to the lower-class men. The website ‘Jackie Freeman Photography’6 suggest quite a few interesting points about Bodmin jail in Cornwall. “Men, women and children were caged here cell by cell in Bodmin Gaol in desperately harsh and grim conditions, often their minimal crimes being met with cruel, revengeful and unforgiving sentences demanded by the local Cornish magistrates taking care of their aristocracy own”. It continues saying how each prisoner received some bread, and rarely an onion. Not only this, but brought in an example of very harsh executions. ‘Jackie Freeman Photography’ continues “On the 11th of August in 1796 that John Hoskin aged 55, was publicly hanged for stealing a sack of wheat Redruth…heavy penalties were the norm in Cornwall back then. Public execution a grim spectacle not to be missed” Undoubtedly, the government was tough having a huge impact on the lower-class citizens actions in Cornwall. It would seem each unlawful action taken, has a catastrophic consequence.
Life in Cornwall in the 18th century was something to not dismiss. It had it succuss with the mining business and effects, and the coastal locations effects. Especially which shall not be forgotten are the hardships which would include the almost unfair voting system of the clear boundary of the upper class to the lower class, including the lack of representatives later on. We must prudently not forget the harsh executions putting people to their death ending their life.
There Is a Time
There’s a time to pray to connect above.
There is a time to work for accomplishments.
There’s a time to cry to let the anger out.
There’s a time to relax for serenity.
But, most importantly, time is for one thing.
Happiness, laughter, and love is for time.
There is a time to work for accomplishments.
There’s a time to cry to let the anger out.
There’s a time to relax for serenity.
But, most importantly, time is for one thing.
Happiness, laughter, and love is for time.
bottom of page