Wednesday 3 May 2023

Real Wealth? Sophie Tucker v Abba and The Beatles

Much of Rabbi Chaim Volozhin’s classic commentary on Avot, Ruach Chaim, has a distant and detached feel to it. Written by a major Torah scholar for a generation where the pursuit of Torah and commitment to its precepts required neither excuse nor apology, it sometimes seems that many of his explanations of the practical impact of Avot’s mishnayot lie beyond the grasp of contemporary readers who do indeed value Torah but still must struggle to accommodate it within their busy, compartmentalised lives.

If we can overcome our feeling of distance between ourselves and Ruach Chaim, there is much in it that speaks directly to us. A good example is the author’s position on that most unfashionable of concepts, that of the need to be satisfied with what one has, to be truly appreciative of it rather than focus on what one does not possess. This principle is stated overtly in Avot 4:1 (“Who is the person who is wealthy? The person who rejoices in his portion”) and echoed in a baraita at Avot 6:6. But Reb Chaim finds further support for it elsewhere.

In Avot 4:11 Rabbi Yonatan says:

“Anyone who fulfils the Torah in poverty will ultimately fulfil it in wealth, while anyone who neglects the Torah in wealth will ultimately neglect it in poverty”.

As Reb Chaim points out, these words cannot be taken literally. As he puts it,

“We witness that many righteous people live their entire lives in grinding poverty, while wicked people enjoy a lifetime of prosperity”.

So what does the mishnah mean? He explains:

“This mishnah needs to be understood on a different level. Me’oni (“in poverty”) literally means “from poverty” or “due to poverty”. If someone realizes that his lack of wealth is a blessing, an opportunity to focus on service of Hashem without the distractions that accompany wealth, then he will be able to fulfil the Torah in wealth”.

He then references Ben Azzai (Avot 4:1, above). A person who is satisfied with his lot will not regard himself as being poor, even though he may be objectively regarded as such in purely material terms. Further comments then follow, regarding the dangers of wealth and the pursuit of it.

Today we are culturally attuned to be poverty-averse and this is quite understandable. Reb Chaim himself speaks of “grinding poverty” and we are only too aware of its impact on lives of ourselves and others. But we must still ask if, when we have the chance, we go too far and continue to flee poverty long after it has ceased to pursue us. Much of what we today label poverty would not be viewed us such in previous generations, when expectations were far lower and provision for relief was far less.

In past generations, singers could allude to poverty and strike a note with their audiences. Thus in our grandparents' time Sophie Tucker (My Yiddishe Mamma) could sing lyrics like this:

"How few were her pleasures, she never cared for fashion's styles
Her jewels and treasures she found them in her baby's smiles
Oh I know that I owe what I am today
To that dear little lady so old and gray
To that wonderful yiddishe momme of mine".

Lyrics such as this once helped to affirm social values, but they sound embarrassingly mawkish and sentimental today. In contrast, the past half-century has resounded to the compelling chorus of Abba:

Lyrics such as this once helped to affirm social values, but they sound embarrassingly mawkish and sentimental today. In contrast, the past half-century has resounded to the compelling chorus of Abba:
“Money, money, money
Must be funny
In the rich man's world
Money, money, money
Always sunny
In the rich man's world
Aha
All the things I could do
If I had a little money
It's a rich man's world
It's a rich man's world”.
Let's not forget The Beatles. Back in 1964 they expressed a similar ideal in Can't Buy Me Love:
"Say you don't need no diamond rings
And I'll be satisfied
Tell me that you want the kind of things
That money just can't buy
I don't care too much for money
Money can't buy me love."
However, by the time they released their Revolver album only two years later, in 1966, they had quite literally changed their tune and were singing, in Money (That's What I Want):
“Now give me money (That's what I want)
That's what I want (That's what I want)
That's what I want, (That's what I want), oh, yeah (That's what I want)
Money don't get everything, it's true
What it don't get, I can't use
Now give me money, (That's what I want)
That's what I want”.
These lyrics lead one to revisit the age-old question: is it better to remain an active participant in wider society and learn to resist the insistent messages we absorb effortlessly through the media, or to retreat into a smaller, safer society in which we hear only the messages coined by our sages?

No comments:

Post a Comment