A sign in the main square of Skala, right in front of the Post Office, solicits donations for the Health Center. Apparently, like most hospital, the Health Center has a booster organization. The sign with the appeal includes Greek, English and French – interestingly, not German, Turkish or Spanish. It makes clear that the Health Center needs friends as the only healthcare facility on the island. Despite the fact that it's a government facility paid for by the Greek taxpayer, it remains in need of more to improve its resources and availability to meet the island's full healthcare needs.
While Patmos doesn't have it's hat out looking for donations left and right, I have seen signs for an ecology-minded organization dedicated to keeping the island clean and recycling. The island also has an arts foundation that runs the annual Patmos Sacred Music Festival in September – which Emily and I have attended twice – and a community center with theater, music and local arts that seems mostly active in summer. The monastery solicits donations from visitors in addition to the cost of its tickets to visit and does whatever well-funded monasteries on small islands do with donations.
Yesterday, I wrote about what a good life for me might look like. During this time, people I love – or perhaps more importantly, who love me – have encouraged me to figure out what I want. What life I want to live. That is an essential and natural thing for this juncture and I have been grateful for their advice and support. As soon as I was done writing yesterday's post, I realized there's another layer. Living a good life for me also involves living a Good life. But what exactly is a Good life?
Doing something for one's community - as even a tiny community on Patmos does – seems essential for a Good life. In Judaism – as in many other religions – charitable giving is a commandment, a baseline requirement to lead a Good life. In fact, at a certain base level, it's not even considered a particularly amazing things to give – because sustaining the bonds of community through charitable action are more of a given than a virtue. The Talmud says, "Charity is equal in importance to all other commandments combined."
Maimonides worked out the meaning and depth of giving a long time ago. To borrow from him and the Jewish Virtual Library:
Maimonides defines eight levels in giving charity (tzedakah), each one higher than the preceding one.
On an ascending level, they are as follows:
8. When donations are given grudgingly.
7. When one gives less than he should, but does so cheerfully.
6. When one gives directly to the poor upon being asked.
5. When one gives directly to the poor without being asked.
4. Donations when the recipient is aware of the donor's identity, but the donor still doesn't know the specific identity of the recipient.
3. Donations when the donor is aware to whom the charity is being given, but the recipient is unaware of the source.
2. Giving assistance in such a way that the giver and recipient are unknown to each other. Communal funds, administered by responsible people are also in this category.
- The highest form of charity is to help sustain a person before they become impoverished by offering a substantial gift in a dignified manner, or by extending a suitable loan, or by helping them find employment or establish themselves in business so as to make it unnecessary for them to become dependent on others.
In other words, preserving someone's dignity is a top priority as is giving of yourself through acts of help.
Through my 20's and 30's finding my path was my biggest concern. What do I want? How do I get ahead? How do establish myself? What do I need to do to feel secure, independent and be able to have a wife and family? These are important and understandable things for this age range, although admittedly I was not someone who wanted to work for a nonprofit, volunteer in Africa, take on a cause – which is a wonderful thing some young people take up while they are at their most idealistic and energetic – with the least to lose. It's a wonderful time in life for activism and passion. For better and worse, I was not that person, although I like to think I contributed to the lives of those around me in my ways.
In my 40's, having achieved a level of financial stability and success that takes the edge off, my thoughts turn more to what kind of life I'm living – and how my children will see it. I have become involved in our synagogue – originally having Co-Chaired the Rabbinic Search Committee for two years, then becoming the VP of Youth, now the Executive VP and in another month and change – the Temple President. I was definitely fast-tracked and am pretty sure I'll be the youngest temple president in the synagogue's 55-year history as well as the only one to be B'nai Mitzvah'd there (which is my favorite part). We donate to charity a fair amount – both cash and in-kind. I always feel we could and should do more in cash donations, but we're not schlubs. We recently pledged to our synagogue's capital campaign to renovate the facilities and pay-off the mortgage.
I want my children to see us donate and volunteer – not to think we're great people – but because I want them to be great people. They need to know their parents value giving both money and of themselves. Emily and I have both volunteered regularly in both kids' kindergarten and first grade classrooms for several reasons: so we knew what was going on (which is cool because we end up knowing all the kids most of whom continue traveling through the grades with our kids), so our kids knew we cared and as examples of community volunteering. Moreover, a lot if not most of the parent volunteers are stay-at-home parents while we're both working parents – so our kids know we cleared our schedules and made volunteering a priority.
Emily did a cool thing recently. We were in East LA a year ago and Ailyn was devastated by the homelessness she saw. One man in particular who was passed out on the sidewalk and had virtually nothing stuck in her mind and she has inquired about him ever since, always in tears. She feels a strong sense of injustice and compassion. When Emily learned that at recess, Ailyn led her friends in planning to make and sell clothing to raise money for the homeless (which more specifically involved recruiting their grandmothers to sew – which has some funny implications if you know Susan), Emily offered instead to organize a community garage sale for Ailyn's class. Ten or so families came to our house one Saturday morning – and twice as many that donated items – to raise money for the homeless which Ailyn then gave to an innovative organization in Los Angeles that emphasizes building and giving housing as the first step to helping homelessness, rather than the more traditional approach of concentrating on shelters and food.
I'm not sure any of this makes us exceptional or gives us much to brag about. To me, it seems like for where we are in life, we're doing okay – setting enough example without being extraordinary. It definitely isn't bad – but is it Good?
John D Rockefeller always gave at least 10 percent of his income to charity – even when he was young and poor. He kept a ledger in which he recorded his income and donations and continued that concept throughout his life. Obviously in his later life the amounts he could give were extraordinary. As his career and wealth reached a point where he was just starting to comprehend his new status, he received so much mail asking for donations and help that he began his foundation – in part to have staff to manage all the mail and sort through all the needs and potential projects. The foundation became his real passion in life. While the Rockefeller Foundation continues to be a major player in charity – during John D's lifetime, it was a force unlike the world had ever seen.
To his credit, Rockefeller recognized there was a point beyond which his staggering wealth was just ridiculous and while he did not live modestly, he was a religious and principled man who regarded the lifestyle of the Vanderbuilts - who put diamonds in beverage classes as party favors – and their cohorts as decadent. Charity was John D's passion which he passed along to his eldest son. Besides some of his best known donations such as establishing Chicago University and the Rockefeller Institute for Medical Research – his most sweeping project was done virtually anonymously. From 1909 to 1914, the Rockefeller Sanitary Commission for the Eradication of Hookworm Disease was the single largest public health project ever to take place in the United States providing both treatment and shoes to most of the Southern United States and elsewhere hookworm was prevalent. Because he understood his name was controversial in America due to the image of Standard Oil, Rockefeller worked through local public health agencies to give it the facade of a government program which fostered broad participation.
Yet for all the hookworm-free children, better-educated Mid-Westerners and millions who have beat cancer, John D Rockefeller's name was reviled by many for decades. During his lifetime he went from reserved and gentlemanly churchgoing youth to unscrupulous Robber Baron to the world's largest benefactor. Some parallel him with Bill Gates – who Rockefeller was many times richer than in today's dollars. In fact, no one has been as equivalently rich as Rockefeller who using the percentage of US GDP model, was worth between $300 billion and $400 billion in 2022 dollars. Rockefeller in his wealth-building days was a warm husband and father and night – but a ruthless business competitor who used tactics that have since been outlawed to decimate competition and ruin anyone who would not work with or join him. In short, he was extraordinarily charitable to those he did not know and those closest to him. What watch out if you were in that middle ground of known but not close!
Is that a Good life?
Recently the Showtime four-part documentary We Need To Talk About Cosby took on a much more difficult question of how to evaluate a person and a life. Personally, I found the series almost cathartic because it is such a confusing topic that socially, we have sort of swept under the rug. Bill Cosby was undoubtedly a predator. Watch the documentary and if you had any doubts, you won't any more. It's soul crushing what he did. He also shattered ceilings for black entertainers, donated generously to black causes and historically black universities and was an effective and erudite voice for equality. Bill Cosby navigated the American social scene and consciousness so adeptly that at the same time we had race riots in Los Angeles, a black man was "America's Dad" and one of the most trusted names and faces in popular culture. His gifts were powerful and extraordinary. His harm was devastating and implies he may well be a gifted sociopath.
How does one evaluate that life?
I'm often surprised at how we treat JFK and Bill Clinton. I know people who have varying political opinions and might characterize their accomplishments very differently – but I think it's safe to say that these were two skilled and effective presidents who achieved what their constituents expected from them. Without a doubt, Kennedy made a giant contribution to civil rights. Both made change in the world and for that reason as well as differences in mores in their respective times, we have largely let them off the hook for some fairly terrible things. Both were at best letches and at worst sexual predators. Kennedy was known to have felt up women in crowds and public settings with reports of what today would probably be considered date rape – or just rape. Clinton has enough allegations of sexual misconduct to merit a Wikipedia page dedicated to it. At the same time, in his post-presidency, Clinton has dedicated himself to his Clinton Foundation which does some wonderful work in the world. He also formed an unlikely bond with his successor and has been a helpful and support advisor to presidents of both parties.
Is that a Good life?
Clearly, a Good life is a complex recipe because people all have their dark and light sides. No one is perfect. I'm not sure what the standard is – preponderance of the evidence, beyond the shadow of a doubt, Ghandi/Mother Teresa? A Good life seems to be like Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart's definition of obscenity – "I know it when I see it."
When I think of a Good life, I think of my Grandpa. He was loyal, solid, dedicated to his family, worked hard, modest, smart, unshakable and very responsible. He worked hard to build a business that supported his family and eventually a comfortable retirement with an estate. Grandpa donated to charity – always quietly, but quite consistently and even increased it as the years went on. Not one to waste words – he led by example – often having me trail him as he tended the yard, checked the oil in his car, maintained the swimming pool and even when he voted. I don't think anyone in Grandpa's life could doubt that if they dialed his phone number, help would be on the way. Grandpa had many friends and was well respected by the entire family and beyond. I never heard him use foul language or call anyone a name. He didn't put people down. His indulgences were Laura Scudders peanut butter on Hi-Ho crackers, Dutch Masters cigars and new mid-priced cars. He wasn't an activist, I didn't know him to volunteer and he wasn't religious. But he was Good and lived a Good life.
To me, Good seems to reside in some element of congruence among how we present, what we give and how we live. Perhaps another way to sum that up is Integrity. Which is probably what brings me to Grandpa because he may well have been the most integrous person I have ever known. The reverse of that – some version of a lack of integrity is what haunts the legacies of Rockefeller, Cosby, Clinton and Kennedy.
I suppose that's also why some people are irredeemable. If you pulled out a giant scale and weighed Richard Nixon's accomplishments against his misdeeds (and keep in mind Watergate was a break-in to Democratic HQ to steal some files and a cover-up of that event which seems almost like a moving violation in today's political environment), the successes and contributions would easily outweigh the misdeeds. Unfortunately, his sins were cardinal – he wasn't cheating on his wife or abusing his power with an intern as the times might have allowed for – but he broke trust with the nation and compromised his integrity – if it hadn't been compromised in other ways earlier. More simply, he lacked integrity.
Likewise, Michael Milken who is worth $3.8 billion and is a massive philanthropist, particularly in the Los Angeles area, always bears the stain of his conviction for racketeering and fraud over his role in a junk bond scandal in the 1980's. No matter his Nobel Prize in Economics, teaching at UCLA, the amounts he gives, the buildings in his name or the fact that he's a strict vegetarian who has authored a vegan cookbook with Beth Ginsburg – Milken will never have acclaim. He is a stained figure whose life will never be seen as Good – because of his irreparable loss of integrity.
In the end, we need to make a contribution AND have integrity to lead a Good life. Some of the best people I've known are the ones who show up to volunteer weekly for community organizations they believe in. People who are good examples for their children and who support one another in times of need. People who stop whatever they're doing when higher priorities call – when someone needs them. The formula for a Good life seems to allow variance – you can be a little more or less interpersonally generous, or a little more or less financially generous. You can tell some white lies, but not so many big ones. You can be redeemed for making bad decisions, but not so much for breaking trust. You definitely don't have to be Ghandi or Mother Theresa – though there's nothing wrong with it. You can change the world in big ways if you're able – and that's amazing. However, it's also fine to change the world in small ways – because each and every interaction matters – every relationship. We can make bigger contributions through lots of little actions.
In fact, Judaism like many religions, focuses more on how we treat our families and communities – not how we impact the larger world. Few of us will solve homelessness in its entirety – but we can all be like Ailyn and force our grandmothers to sew clothes to raise money to solve homelessness little-by-little.
If I want to live a Good life, I can probably be more charitable and find places to get more involved. Maybe I will go through with my Llamas For Lamas idea – or some other project with a similar impact. I'd like to make my gifts of time and ability bigger. It doesn't feel right to address every problem in the world with money – and taking a personal stake in the world is the example I'd like to set for my children. Really, I can come up with a variety of plans and ideas – some of which may work out and others probably won't. What matters is how I go about them, with what kind of heart and that I pursue the path of integrity.
