The Candle and the Name

Posted on June 18, 2026 by Luke Ford

On a Friday afternoon in west Los Angeles, in a home a few blocks off Pico, a folding table goes up in a living room that already has a dining table. Women arrive. One carries a foil pan of kugel. One carries a baby on her hip and a diaper bag that cost more than the table. They set down salads and a tray of cut melon and a bakery box tied with string. The host has been doing this for thirty years.

Chana Heller directs the Jewish Women’s Initiative at Aish Los Angeles. She holds a master’s in social work, studied two years at Neve Yerushalayim in Jerusalem, married a psychotherapist named Rabbi Dov Heller, and raised five children who now have children, nineteen grandchildren, most of them in Israel. Her work brings Jewish mothers, many of them raised with almost nothing of the tradition, into its practice. The brochures lean on three words. Love. Warmth. Home.

A newcomer stands at the kitchen island. A friend asked her to come, and the email said dinner, and so she came. She runs a small business. She has a Peloton, a therapist, and a calendar app that color-codes her children’s swim meets. She thinks she is here to learn something, or to get a free meal, or to be a good friend, and she has not settled on which.

“You light two candles,” Chana says, to the room more than to her. “Some add one for each child. Your great-grandmother lit them. Your daughter will light them after you.”

The newcomer thinks, that is a lovely idea, and reaches for a cracker. She has heard the sentence. She has not heard what was said.

Ernest Becker (1924-1974) spent his last books on a single claim. A man knows he will die, and the knowledge is unbearable, and so he builds his life as a defense against it. In The Denial of Death and then in Escape from Evil, Becker argues that culture supplies the defense. Every culture hands its members a hero system, a scheme that tells a man what counts as a life worth having lived, what counts as significance, what part of him might outlast the grave. The hero system answers the terror. It says: do these things, become this kind of man, and you will not have been nobody. You will have mattered against the dark.

The scheme differs from place to place and people to people. A Viking earns his name in battle and drinks in a hall after death. A Mandarin earns it through the examination and the ancestral tablet. A Silicon Valley founder earns it by building a thing that did not exist and seeing his name in the press. Each scheme is a separate bet on how to beat death, and each draws a man toward a separate picture of the good life. Becker’s point cuts deeper than tolerance or taste. The hero systems do not merely prize different things. They load the same words with different cargo. A word like freedom, a word like home, a word like strength, points at one structure inside one scheme and at another structure inside another, and the men who use the word rarely notice they are not talking about the same thing.

This is the room the newcomer has walked into. Chana Heller hands her words she already owns. Home. Freedom. The hidden. The newcomer hears them in the only scheme she has, and assumes she has understood.

Take home first.

For the newcomer, home is the place she returns to after the part of life where things happen. The office is where she is judged. The gym is where she improves. The home is the soft interior, the recovery room, the set for the photographs she posts. It holds her. She does not expect it to mean much beyond her own span. When she is gone the house will sell.

For Chana Heller, home is the engine. The Hebrew calls the woman akeret habayit, the foundation of the home, and the phrase carries no scent of the recovery room. The home she describes produces the next link in a chain that runs back through every grandmother to Sinai and forward past her own death through grandchildren she watches grow up over video calls from a suburb of Jerusalem. The candles, the table, the bread, the rhythm of the week, these are not comforts laid on top of life. They are the place where the people of Israel renew themselves once every seven days, in ten thousand kitchens at once, and have done so under emperors and commissars who are now dust. The home is where the dead stay alive and the unborn arrive. A woman who keeps it well has reached past her own grave with both hands.

Now hand the word to other men and watch it change shape again.

Give it to a venture founder in Santa Monica. Home, for him, is a base of operations, an address, an asset class, the thing the second liquidity event pays for. His hero system locates his value in what he ships and what the market says it is worth. Home is overhead. The good life is the cap table.

Give it to a French chef who holds three stars. Home is the dining room he built and the kitchen behind it, and the lineage is real to him, the mother sauces, the masters he trained under, the cooks he sends out who open rooms of their own. His chain runs through technique. The chef and the rebbetzin both speak of a line that outlasts the man, and both mean it, and the lines do not touch. His passes through the plate. Hers passes through the womb and the covenant.

Give it to a long-distance sailor who crossed two oceans alone. Home is the boat, forty feet of teak and Kevlar, and beyond it the open water, which he calls the only place he feels at home, by which he means the only place no one can reach him. For him the word points away from people. For Chana Heller it points at nothing but people, generations of them, stacked.

One word. Four schemes. Four bets on what a man does with the years before the dark, and the word bends to the bet every time.

Take freedom.

The newcomer prizes it above almost everything, though she would struggle to say what she means. She means options. She means the right to leave, to choose, to revise. Her hero system, the one the culture issued her, makes the unencumbered self the hero, and freedom is the self with the fewest cords on it. A constraint is a small defeat. A vow frightens her. She kept her maiden name and her own bank account and a clause about the dog.

Chana Heller will spend a class on Shabbos, and what she offers the newcomer under the name of freedom looks at first like the opposite. For one day in seven, no phone. No car. No buying, no selling, no fixing, no scrolling, no work of any kind. To the newcomer this is a list of things taken away. Then the rebbetzin says the word the newcomer thought she owned. This, she says, is the freedom. One day a week the market cannot reach you and the self that must always produce is sent out of the room. You stop being a worker and a brand and a set of metrics. You sit at a table with people who knew you before any of that and will love you after it. The cords the newcomer guards against turn out, in this scheme, to be the thing that frees her from a harder master, the one who lives in her phone and counts.

Now run freedom through other men.

A Marine gunnery sergeant means something near the rebbetzin and far from the founder. He earned his freedom, he will tell a recruit, by giving it up, by submitting to the unit until the submission became a kind of power, and the recruit who guards his autonomy hardest is the one who will get men killed. Freedom, in his scheme, lives on the far side of discipline, not in its absence.

A dissident poet who wrote in a Soviet kitchen and passed his pages hand to hand means freedom as the uncensored line, the sentence the state could not make him unsay. His hero system stakes everything on the word that survives the regime, and the regime did fall, and some of the lines are still read. For him, to keep silent for safety is the one death that counts. Tell him that one day a week he should put down the pen and the argument and rest, and he hears a betrayal of the only immortality he trusts.

Set the poet beside the rebbetzin and the gap opens wide. He bets his deathlessness on the named work, the line with his name under it, the monument of language that points back at the man who made it. She bets hers on the opposite move, and here the essay reaches the thing worth saying.

Take the hidden.

Chana Heller teaches tzniut, usually rendered modesty, and the rendering misleads. The newcomer hears modesty and thinks of hemlines and a slightly punitive committee. What the rebbetzin describes is a claim about where the real lives. The holiest objects in the tradition sit behind a curtain. The most intimate parts of a life are guarded, not posted. A diamond is not left on the sidewalk. The teaching holds that what a man keeps hidden he treats as precious, and what he displays he cheapens, and that the interior life, unseen, is the weightier one. The unseen is the more real.

Set that against the scheme the newcomer arrived with, where visibility is the asset and the unseen barely exists. Her hero system runs on the post, the profile, the brand, the metric, the public mark. To be unseen is to be nobody. The founder agrees. The poet agrees, for his own reasons, the witness who keeps quiet has failed. Three schemes, and all three locate the hero in the seen, the named, the recorded.

Now Becker’s whole argument turns over.

Every hero system answers death, and almost every one the newcomer knows answers it by making the self large. Leave a mark. Build the thing. Sign the work. Be remembered. The founder’s name on the building, the poet’s name under the line, the athlete’s record in the book, the influencer’s archive of a thousand posted days. The bet is that if enough of me is recorded and seen, some of me will not die. It is a brave bet and a fragile one. The building gets a new name. The record falls. The archive scrolls off the feed. The man who staked his deathlessness on being remembered has staked it on the one thing he cannot control, the memory of strangers, which is short.

Chana Heller’s scheme makes the opposite bet, and the strangeness of it is easy to miss because she is so warm and the kugel is so good. Her hero system reaches for the same prize, a life that outlasts the grave, and reaches for it by making the self small on purpose. The candle she lights is the same flame her great-grandmother lit, and the point is that it is the same flame and not a new one. She does not sign it. She adds no improvement. She wants her name to vanish into the chain so completely that her granddaughter in Jerusalem, lighting the same two candles in fifty years, will feel no seam where Chana Heller used to be. The erasure of her name is not the price of her immortality. It is the method.

This inverts the founder’s bet at the root. He needs to be remembered, and so his project dies the day the last person forgets him, which is soon. She needs only the chain to continue, and the chain does not need to recall any single link by name to carry the flame past her. Her scheme survives the thing that destroys his, the forgetting of the individual, because it never asked the individual to be remembered. She trades a personal immortality, brittle and loud, for a shared one, durable and quiet. A Trappist monk who took a vow of silence and lies in an unmarked grave made a cousin of this trade, gave up his name to disappear into something that does not die, and the cousin marks the difference too, because the monk has no children and the line he joins runs through the cloister and the liturgy rather than through the womb. The rebbetzin’s chain is made of bodies. Hers continues in flesh that calls her Bubbe.

Becker thought the religious solution was the boldest of the hero systems, because it does not pretend the self is enough and does not flinch from the size of the problem. He admired it without being able to take it. Watching Chana Heller is watching a version of that solution worked out by a woman in a kitchen, in real time, on a mother who came for the food. The mother guards her name, her brand, her options, her visibility, all the deathless-making goods her own scheme prizes, and the rebbetzin is teaching her, gently, over kugel, to want the opposite goods, the hidden, the bound, the unsigned, the merely continued. Neither of them states it as a contest between two schemes for beating death. They use the same warm words and assume the words agree.

Late in the evening the newcomer helps carry plates to the sink. She has eaten well. She has laughed. Something has reached her that she cannot name, and on the drive home, alone with the phone she did not touch for four hours, she notices the quiet and does not reach for it.

“You’ll come back?” Chana asked at the door, holding both her hands.

“I think I will,” the newcomer said, and meant it, and still did not know what she had agreed to, which is that she had been offered a different way to not die, and had liked the taste of it before she understood the terms.

The candle burns down. No one wrote her name on it. That is the whole idea.

Posted in Aish HaTorah | Comments Off on The Candle and the Name

Gates of Hope: The Hero System of Rabbi Yael Aranoff

Posted on June 18, 2026 by Luke Ford

The room fills at a quarter past nine on a Sunday. Ventura Boulevard runs flat and bright outside, Encino in its weekend hush, the synagogue set back behind its own lot at 15739. Inside, the light runs softer than a classroom’s. Someone has thought about the light. The chairs sit in a loose circle, and the noise floor stays low, and a boy comes in with his mother’s hand on his shoulder. He does not want the hand there. She keeps it a beat longer than he wants. Then she lets go. A teacher trained in special education drops to his height and says good morning by name. A second adult stands near the door, ready, doing nothing yet. The count of grown-ups to children runs high here, and that is the point.

Rabbi Yael Aranoff directs this program. She spent a decade on stages before she stood at an ark, an actor and singer and director out of U.C. Berkeley who led High Holiday services at UCLA Hillel for fifteen years and took ordination at the Ziegler School of Rabbinic Studies in May 2024. She knows what a performance is. She knows the lights, the marks on the floor, the held breath of a room waiting to see whether the person at the center will deliver the thing they came to watch. She now runs a room built for children who will never perform on those terms, and that turn, from the stage to the soft-lit circle, sits near the center of what she does.

The program carries a name in Hebrew, Shaare Tikva, the gates of hope. It is the inclusive arm of a large Conservative synagogue, founded in 1982, open to any neurodivergent child from three to eighteen, no membership required, no fee required of a family that cannot pay. The children learn the prayers, the holidays, the acts of repair the tradition calls tikkun olam. Some of them prepare, over years and at their own pace, to stand before the Torah as a bar or bat mitzvah. To understand what Aranoff guards, and why it runs against the grain of almost every other gate a person can stand before, it helps to borrow a single instrument and use nothing else.

Ernest Becker (1924-1974) argued in The Denial of Death and in its posthumous sequel Escape from Evil that the human animal lives with a knowledge no other animal carries, that it will die, and that culture exists to manage the terror of that knowledge. Every society hands its members a script for being a person who counts. Becker called these scripts hero systems. A hero system tells you what a worthy life looks like, what you must do to earn the feeling that you are an object of primary value in a scheme larger than your own body, and therefore larger than your own death. Self-esteem, in this reading, is the private sense that you have qualified. You have done the things your people honor. You will be remembered, or absorbed into something that outlasts you, or counted among the saved. The terror recedes by the width of your standing.

Now notice what every hero system shares. Each one has a gate, and each gate has an exam. The script that confers significance also withholds it. There are people who pass and people who do not, and the people who do not become a problem the system would rather not look at, because they are the living reminder that the whole arrangement is provisional, that the gate can close, that significance can be revoked. Becker’s harder book, the one about evil, follows this thread to its end. Communities purchase their own sense of immortality, and they often pay for it with someone else’s exclusion. The surplus person, the one who fails the exam, carries the death the rest agree not to see.

The standard rite of Jewish adulthood is, among the things it is, a performance test. A child reads from the scroll in an old language, chants a portion to a fixed melody, stands and speaks before the assembled. A boy with a developmental difference, a girl who cannot hold the cantillation or the crowd, fails that exam as it is ordinarily set. In an achievement culture she becomes the surplus child. The mother feels it in the supermarket, in the cousins’ milestones, in the photographs of other people’s simchas. The gate she expected for her child has a sign on it her child cannot read.

Aranoff’s sacred values gather around a single word the program itself uses without flinching. Belonging. Set beside it the older Hebrew claim that a person is made b’tzelem Elohim, in the image of God, and a second claim that the covenant binds the whole people and not only its capable members. Hold those together and you get her working creed. The child belongs before he demonstrates anything. The image of God in him is not a prize for the fluent. The community is the thing that must bend.

That word, belonging, sounds like a soft word, a greeting-card word. It is nothing of the kind. It is the most contested currency in any hero system, and it means a different thing at every gate. Walk the gates and listen.

A drill instructor stands on the line at Parris Island in the wet heat. To belong to the Corps a recruit pays in the only coin the Corps accepts, shared suffering carried to the far side of a crucible most men cannot finish. The instructor’s voice does not soften, and the softness would be an insult, because the belonging on offer is precious in proportion to its cost. A recruit who cannot carry the pack washes out, and the washing out is not cruelty. It guards the meaning of the thing. Here belonging is earned at the body’s limit, and it can be lost, and its worth comes from the men it turns away.

A founder runs a stand-up meeting in a glass room above a parking structure in Mountain View. The cap table on the screen lists who belongs and by how much, measured in points of equity, in commits shipped, in the velocity the venture partners watch. “We move or we die,” he says, and he means it the way a Marine means the pack. Belonging here is contingent and quarterly. A man who slows the build belongs less by Friday than he did on Monday, and everyone in the room knows the arithmetic, and the arithmetic is the meaning.

A monk rises at the Grande Chartreuse before the world is light, in a silence held for nine hundred years. He belongs to God and to a community that has renounced the very currencies the founder lives by. He owns nothing, ships nothing, performs for no one. His belonging comes through subtraction, through the long erasure of the self that wants applause, and a novice who cannot bear the silence leaves, and the leaving costs the house nothing, because the gate guards a thing that crowds would only spoil.

A Pashtun elder sits in a jirga in the hills and speaks the unwritten code his people call Pashtunwali. To belong is to be of the lineage and to keep its honor, to offer melmastia to the stranger at the door and to answer an insult with badal so the name stays clean. A man cast out of this belonging suffers a death the body survives. Here the currency is honor and blood, and the gate has stood longer than any state that tried to close it.

A coach watches a small girl chalk her hands at a national training center, the scoreboard the only god in the room. The pipeline belongs to the ones who land it, and the body that grows wrong or breaks at fourteen is cut without malice, the way you retire a tool. The flag, the podium, the record book confer a kind of immortality, and the girls who do not reach them vanish from the story the sport tells about itself.

Five gates, five meanings of one word, each of them coherent inside its own house, each of them guarding something real. The Marine guards courage. The founder guards the future he is trying to build. The monk guards God. The elder guards the name. The coach guards excellence. None of them is a villain, and a person could spend a life honoring any one of them. But every one of these belongings is a wage. You belong because of what you can do, and you stop belonging when you can no longer do it, and the surplus person stands outside the gate holding the death the insiders agree not to look at.

This is the grain that Aranoff’s small Sunday room runs against. She has detached belonging from the exam. In her hero system the covenant comes first and the capacity comes after, or never, and the order does not change the standing. The child belongs because he was made in the image, and the image is not graded. The work, then, falls on the community rather than the child. The lights get softened. The ratio of adults gets raised. The melody gets simplified, the portion shortened, the years of preparation stretched to whatever length the child needs, and the boy who cannot chant says his blessing in the words he has, and the room receives it as a man’s full entry into his people. The exam has not been failed. The exam has been moved.

A skeptic could call this a lowering of the bar, and the skeptic would be standing at one of the other gates when he said it. Inside her house the claim runs the other way. The bar was always in the wrong place. A people that counts a man only when he performs has confused the wage with the worth, and the tradition she serves holds, at its root, that the worth comes first. She is not softening the rite. She is making an argument about what the rite was always for, and she is making it on a Sunday morning in Encino where almost no one will see it.

The parents sit in their own room down the hall, in a circle the program calls Coffee ‘N’ Chat, and Becker has something exact to say about them. A child is often a parent’s own bid against death, the vessel that carries the name forward, the achievement that proves the parent’s life added up. The neurodivergent child threatens that bid at the root. He might not carry the name in the expected way. He might not vindicate. And so the parents arrive carrying a grief they have learned not to name in public, the grief for the immortality project that will not run as planned. What Aranoff offers them is not a cure and not a consolation prize. She offers a different and older immortality. The child belongs to a people that has outlasted every empire that tried to end it, a covenant far older than achievement and indifferent to it, and the child’s place in that covenant is as secure as any prodigy’s. The parent who takes that in stops measuring the child against the gate and starts seeing him inside the circle. That shift, accomplished over weeks in a room that smells of coffee, may be the heaviest work the program does.

Aranoff comes to all of this from inside the lineage and from inside the theater both. Her grandparents, Rabbi Paul and Esther Dubin, belonged to this synagogue, so she stands in a kinship the building remembers. The synagogue itself was shaped across decades by Harold Schulweis (1925-2014), who taught that the congregation exists as a moral community, a place that organizes care, and that the holy shows itself in the acts people perform toward one another. The inclusive program fits that inheritance the way a hand fits a glove worn smooth. And the actor in her, the woman who knows the cost of the lights, has chosen to spend her gift standing at a gate that asks the child for no performance at all. She rehearses children who will never need to be flawless. She directs a production whose only review that counts is the look on a mother’s face.

Come back to the morning the boy stands at the Torah. The scroll lies open. The tallit sits new on his shoulders, and he is thirteen, and the room is full of people who decided, in advance and on purpose, to honor whatever he can give. He says his words. They might be few. The congregation answers amen as if a king had spoken, and for the length of that morning the entire room agrees to believe a thing the founder’s glass office and the coach’s scoreboard would file under sentiment. They agree that this life counts at full value, that it was always counted, that no exam stood between this boy and his place among his people.

A hero system is whatever a community will agree to honor as significant. That is its whole power and its whole frailty. Most communities agree to honor the strong, the fluent, the productive, and they pay for that agreement with the surplus people left at the gate. Aranoff has built a small room where a community agrees to honor a child the other gates would turn away, and the agreement holds, week after week, with almost no one watching and nothing at stake but a soul. Print the whole of it on the front page tomorrow and there is nothing to take back. The gates of hope, it turns out, are the ones with no exam at the door.

Posted in Rabbis | Comments Off on Gates of Hope: The Hero System of Rabbi Yael Aranoff

The Corner of the Field

Posted on June 18, 2026 by Luke Ford

A boy named Hillel lived around the corner from the Rav-Noy home. This was the 1970s, and Hillel had Down syndrome. He talked different and he looked different, and the neighborhood and the era kept such children where they kept them then, at the edge of the street and the edge of sight, and the word people used for him is a word we have since retired. Michy Rav-Noy was a boy himself. He looked at Hillel and saw a full set of emotions housed in a body the world had marked down. The memory held. He took a degree in special education at Cal State Northridge. He became a rabbi. He joined the Chabad movement as a shliach with Miriam, and the two of them built an organization around the thing he saw on that street.
The Friendship Circle of Los Angeles runs out of an office on South Robertson Boulevard, in the stretch of Pico-Robertson thick with kosher markets and shtiebels. Michy Rav-Noy is co-founder and executive director. Miriam Rav-Noy is co-founder and program director. He teaches a class for the boy volunteers called Wings and Wisdom. They study Torah and eat chicken wings, and the rabbi keeps up a running search for the kosher kitchen that fries the best ones. He tells the boys they cannot order from KFC. Before the pandemic the Circle drew almost six hundred volunteers from seventy schools, Jewish and public, and matched them with children and adults whom the rest of the city would rather not picture.
Ernest Becker (1924-1974) gives us a way to read this. In The Denial of Death and Escape from Evil, Becker argues that man is the animal who knows he will die and rot, and that he cannot bear the knowledge. So he builds. Every culture is a hero system, a scheme of worth that lets a man feel he counts beyond his body and outlasts it. The scheme tells him what heroism is and how to earn it, and in the earning he buys a stake in something that does not die. Religion, career, nation, art, the ledger of good deeds, the follower count: each is a way of refusing the worm.
The disabled child sits at the pressure point of every such scheme. He is the body that will not pretend. He cannot be optimized, cannot be hidden behind achievement, cannot perform the denial the rest of us perform without noticing. He returns the onlooker to the creature, to the flesh that breaks and fades. The 1970s answer was the institution. Put the reminder out of the house. A hero system under threat hides its threat.
The Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson (1902-1994), gave a different answer, and the answer was a name. In the 1970s a group of disabled Israeli veterans came to him, known then as the handicapped of Zahal. He told them the name was wrong. Call them the special ones of Zahal. To rename is to move a person from one scheme of worth into another. In Chabad’s scheme every Jew carries a soul that is a portion of the divine, a spark, and the body’s condition does not reach the spark. A disabled child might carry a higher soul than the rabbi who teaches him. Worth comes before capacity and stands apart from it. Heroism is the revealing of a hidden spark, the doing of a commandment that hastens Moshiach and the repair of the world. The teen who gives his Sunday to a child does a deed that ripples toward redemption and toward the resurrection of the dead, which Chabad holds as a literal promise. The scheme denies death by a stake in a cosmic story whose last chapter is life returning to the body.
So friendship in this scheme is not the helper above and the helped below. The Circle is a circle. Two souls complete a circuit. The child receives a companion. The teen receives a hero’s task. The parent receives a Sunday to breathe. The rabbi receives a soldier for the work of redemption. One hour of board games and song, four stakes in permanence braided together.
The rabbi reaches for the Mishnah. The Torah tells the farmer to leave the corner of his field for the poor, and the man who cannot walk well takes first, or he takes nothing. ADA compliance from the time of the Mishnah, the rabbi says. The line is a joke and a claim. The claim is that his scheme ranked the broken body high long before the state wrote it into law.
His words travel badly. Carry them across a border and they change meaning, because each system mints its own coin and stamps familiar faces on different metal.
Set the rabbi beside a young man who measures the good in units. He funds the interventions that buy the most welfare per dollar, and he can show you the math. To him help means the largest reduction of suffering a budget can purchase, and a teenager spending a Sunday afternoon with one child fails the test, because the hour does not scale and the child’s tally of healthy years runs low. He might move the money to bed nets in countries he will never see. His scheme denies death by the sum. He leaves the world with less pain than he found in it, and the figure stands after him. The word special names a softness he has trained himself to distrust.
Set the rabbi beside a woman who has spent her life on access and law. To her inclusion means the curb cut, the ramp, the statute, the clearing of barriers an unthinking society built around bodies like her brother’s. Love makes her wary, because love bends easily into pity, and pity seats the child below the table while calling it kindness. She wants power for him, not affection. Her scheme denies death through justice. She bends the law so it honors these bodies after she is gone. The word special lands on her ear as an old insult in soft clothes, a way to set the child apart from the common claim of equals.
Set the rabbi beside a Reformed pastor who reads the child inside the secret counsel of a sovereign God. The condition is not a problem awaiting a fix. It is a providence to be borne, a weight that drives the soul off its own strength and onto grace. Friendship to him means walking beside a brother under the same hard mercy. He and the rabbi stand closer to each other than either stands to the man with the spreadsheet, and still they part at the engine. The rabbi piles up deeds to hasten the appointed day. The pastor distrusts the deed as a lever on God, who saves by grace alone and moves on no man’s schedule. The same hospital visit, two cosmologies.
Set the rabbi beside a Theravada monk. The monk sees the child inside a long chain of births, and he answers with compassion, and he holds no eternal soul to rescue. Where the rabbi reveals a spark, the monk loosens a knot. The word special dissolves for him, because the separate self is the illusion he works to release. He offers presence and lets go of the result, since the grip on an outcome breeds the suffering he came to end. He sits with the child and wants nothing from the hour.
Set the rabbi beside a young woman whose worth runs through the feed. The unfilmed act did not occur. Help that no one sees earns nothing in her ledger, because her scheme denies death through the scroll, the self turned into a property that might outlast the body and keep earning. The Circle’s quiet weekly labor, the kind that rarely reaches a headline, reads to her as waste left on the floor. She might film the child. The rabbi does not.
The disabled child is the figure Becker’s whole argument points toward and rarely names. He is creatureliness with the costume off. Every hero system must say what he is worth and why, and the answer it gives is the shape of its denial. The optimizer cannot make him pay. The activist cannot let him be pitied. The pastor folds him into providence. The monk dissolves the self that suffers. The Rebbe renames him and seats his soul above the rabbi’s own. Michy and Miriam Rav-Noy built a circle on that renaming, and they fill it every week with teenagers who will carry the meaning of the word friend for the rest of their lives without knowing they learned a theology with it. The work rarely reaches the front page. The Rebbe taught that the front page is the wrong measure. The measure is the soul in the room, and whether anyone came to sit with it.

Posted in Chabad | Comments Off on The Corner of the Field

Nearer to What?

Posted on June 18, 2026 by Luke Ford

Sarah Flower Adams (b. 1805, d. 1848) wanted the stage. Her lungs ruled against her. She turned to verse, and in 1841 she handed her minister thirteen hymns for a collection he was assembling, Hymns and Anthems. One of the thirteen retells Genesis 28, the night Jacob lays his head on a stone and dreams of a ladder set on the earth with its top in heaven. Adams called it “Nearer, My God, to Thee.”

She wrote it inside a small and radical world. Her congregation met at South Place Chapel in London under William Johnson Fox (1786-1864), a Unitarian who had broken with orthodox Christianity and would sit in Parliament. Unitarians of his stripe kept the moral example of Jesus and dropped the Trinity, the blood atonement, and the threat of hell. They trusted reason. They trusted the conscience. They held that a man climbs toward God by growing better, not by being washed in a sacrifice he did not make. Adams had already worked the theme at length in her verse drama Vivia Perpetua, about a Christian martyr who rises to God through her own death.

Read the hymn and you find that creed in it. There is no Christ in the verses. There is no cross of Calvary, only the personal cross the singer carries, the “cross that raiseth me.” There is a stone for a pillow, griefs called stony, and a ladder of steps to heaven that the singer climbs by taking what God sends. Hymnodists noticed the absence and some complained of it. A hymn about drawing near to God that never names the Son struck Trinitarian ears as thin, but the thinness has a use.

Eliza Flower (1803-1846), Sarah’s older sister, set the words to music. Eliza was the better-known artist in her day. Then consumption took her. Sarah nursed her and caught it. Sarah died two years after her sister, in London, in 1848, at forty-three. The woman who wrote the hymn of ascent watched ascent fail to lift a body off a sickbed, and then went the same way. No ship. No band. No crowd. A room, a cough, a sister already in the ground.

Hold that picture and bring in Ernest Becker (1924-1974). In The Denial of Death and Escape from Evil, Becker argues that a man knows he will die, cannot bear the knowledge, and so builds a scheme that lets his life count past the grave. Becker calls these schemes hero systems. A hero system tells a man what counts as a life worth having lived and what counts as a death worth dying. It hands him a part in a drama larger than his body. Cultures script the part in different ways. The warrior earns his place by courage, the saint by holiness, the father by his sons, the builder by his works. Each system answers the same question. How do I count for something when I am food for worms.

Adams answered it in four stanzas. Loss raises you. The cross, the stone, the dark, the wandering, each becomes a step. Suffering builds the stair. That is a hero system in miniature, and it belongs to a particular world, the dissenting, reasoning, Romantic Protestantism of South Place Chapel.

Sixty-four years after she wrote it, the hymn met the death the twentieth century would not stop retelling. The RMS Titanic struck an iceberg late on April 14, 1912, and sank in the small hours of April 15. Of the 2,224 aboard, around 1,500 died. The legend holds that the ship’s band, led by Wallace Hartley (1878-1912), played “Nearer, My God, to Thee” as the deck tilted and the water climbed.

Truth before comfort, so say the doubtful part first. Survivors disagreed. Some heard ragtime to the end. Some named a waltz, “Songe d’Automne.” Some recalled a different hymn, “Abide with Me.” Those who named Adams’s hymn could not settle on the tune, since three compete, Bethany by the American Lowell Mason (1792-1872), Horbury by John Bacchus Dykes (1823-1876), and Propior Deo by Arthur Sullivan (1842-1900), and Hartley the Methodist might have known the British two and not the American one. Six years before, the band and passengers of the SS Valencia sang the hymn as that ship broke up off Vancouver Island, and some historians think the Valencia handed the Titanic its script.

Set the doubt down and keep it in view. Whatever the band played, the hymn became the sound the disaster carries in memory, and the reason it can carry that weight is the reason to read it through Becker. On that deck many hero systems waited for the same water, and the same four stanzas meant a different thing to each man who might have heard them. Nearer, the hymn promised. Nearer to what, each system answered on its own terms.

Start with the men who held the instruments. Hartley led seven other musicians. They had no duty to play. They chose to. A working musician on a White Star liner ranked as hired help, brought aboard to fill the first-class evening with light airs and ragtime. On the tilting deck the job ended and the men kept doing it. For the craftsman the hero system runs through the work. A man is the quality of what he makes and the steadiness of his hands while he makes it. To keep playing as the bow goes under is to die at the bench, tools in hand, the job not dropped. Hartley is said to have told a friend that if he ever went down with a ship he would play “Nearer, My God, to Thee.” For him nearer meant the post. Stay at it. The music is the man, and the man does not run.

Up among the first-class staterooms a different system dressed for the occasion. Benjamin Guggenheim (1865-1912) had gone to bed and come up to a sinking ship. He sent his life belt away, returned to his cabin, and put on white tie and tails. He told a steward to carry word to his wife: “We have dressed in our best, and are prepared to go down like gentlemen.” He added that he would not die like a beast. John Jacob Astor IV (1864-1912), the richest man on the ship, saw his wife into a boat and stepped back. For the Edwardian gentleman the hero system runs on the code and the witness of his peers. Manners outlast the body. Bearing is the soul. A man earns his standing past death in the verdict of the others who will tell the story, and the story must record that he stood aside, kept his collar straight, asked for a brandy, and did not push past a woman to a seat. Nearer, for Guggenheim, meant nearer to the code, and the code held that how a man dies is the last sentence the world writes about him.

On A Deck an old couple took two deck chairs. Isidor Straus (1845-1912) had built Macy’s into a great store and served a term in Congress. Ida Straus (1849-1912) had been his wife for forty-one years. Men pressed her toward a boat. They offered the old man a seat beside her, an exception to the rule of women first, on account of his age. He refused while younger men stood on the deck. She refused to go without him. Where you go, I go, she is said to have told him, and they sat down together to wait. Their hero system runs through the marriage. The thing that does not sink is the bond, four decades of it, and to step into a boat alone drowns the one thing worth keeping afloat. Nearer, for the Strauses, meant nearer to each other. A heaven without the other was no heaven they wanted.

Below, in the steerage, the Church did its work. Father Thomas Byles (1870-1912), an Englishman and a convert, had said Mass that Sunday morning and preached on the need for a lifebelt of faith against spiritual shipwreck, not knowing the hull already had its hours numbered. When the water came he went down to the third-class passengers, many of them Irish and Catholic, raised his hand, and called for calm. He heard confessions. He gave absolution. He refused a seat in a boat twice. As the stern rose he stood among more than a hundred kneeling people and led the Rosary, and the responses came back loud, Catholic and not, while the last boats pulled away. For the sacramental system the soul rises by the Church’s grace, confessed and anointed before the end. A good death is a death in a state of grace, the soul handed up to God through the priest. Nearer, in steerage, meant nearer to absolution. The hymn’s Protestant ladder and the priest’s Rosary aim at the same heaven and ask different things of the dying.

Keep going down, past the priest, to the people the hymn could not reach. The Titanic carried more than seven hundred in third class, Irish, Scandinavian, Italian, Syrian, most of them bound for American work and American children. Their hero system ran through the future. A man crosses an ocean so his name goes on in a new country, in sons and daughters who will have what he never had. The barriers that kept steerage from the boat deck, whatever their exact working that night, fell hardest on these passengers, and many died below the waterline with the future they had crossed the ocean to build still locked on the decks above them. Here the hymn turns cruel. It promises that loss raises you. For the drowned emigrant loss took the one ascent he believed in, the climb out of the old country into the new. Nearer, for him, meant nearer to nothing he could name, the dream cut off behind a gate.

Go up again, to the men who built the ship and believed in her. Thomas Andrews (1873-1912) drew her lines at Harland and Wolff and sailed on her maiden voyage to watch her perform. He went below after the collision, counted the flooded compartments, and knew the sum before anyone else. He spent his last hour helping passengers into belts and boats. The age that built the Titanic had a hero system of its own, the faith of the machine and the engineer, the trust that man rises by what he can make, that steel and rivets and watertight doors push back the sea and push back death with it. The ship was the cathedral of that faith. They called her practically unsinkable and half forgot the practically. For Andrews, nearer carried no comfort the hymn could give. He knew his arithmetic had failed and the water was honest. If a hero system can break on a single night, his broke at twenty past two in the morning, and he met it sober, counting boats, finding them too few.

Stand back and the deck holds more systems than one night can sort. A Jewish passenger who knew the Genesis chapter in Hebrew would hear something the hymn leaves out. In the Torah the stone at Bethel and the ladder belong to Jacob, and the promise God makes him is no private ladder to a private heaven but a covenant, a land, a people as many as the dust of the earth. The same stone pillow, and a heaven made of descendants and a homeland rather than a soul’s solo climb. A Stoic on that deck might reach past God for composure, the only thing left in his power as the water rose. A revolutionary might hear the hymn as the old lie, the drug that teaches the steerage to climb a ladder in the next world instead of demanding a seat in this one. A man with no god at all might hear only a tune from childhood, his mother’s parlor, and grieve for a comfort he could not believe. Each of them faces the same water. Each carries a different account of what a death is for.

Return to the thinness of the verses, the missing Christ that troubled the Trinitarians. The gap is the reason the hymn could do all this. A creed thick with one tribe’s doctrine dies with that tribe. A hymn that names almost nothing in particular can be filled by anyone. Adams wrote a vessel. Into it a Methodist bandleader, a Catholic priest’s mourners, an Edwardian agnostic, a grieving secular son, even a queen and three American presidents could each pour his own heaven. Victoria (1819-1901) favored it. President William McKinley (1843-1901) is said to have whispered its lines as he died of an assassin’s bullet. It played at the burials of Garfield and Ford. Becker’s harsh point fits here. The hero system that spreads widest wins by portability. It lets the most people feel heroic before the same darkness, and truth has little to do with the spread. Adams’s near-empty ladder beat thicker, prouder creeds at the deathbed for the plain reason that it asked the dying to believe almost nothing and let them feel they climbed.

Which returns to the doubt set down earlier. The historians may be right that the band played a waltz, or “Abide with Me,” or nothing anyone could later fix in memory. The legend grew anyway, and its growth is the last piece of evidence. A civilization that had built the unsinkable ship and watched it sink needed a scene in which men chose how to die, in which order and dignity and faith survived the failure of the machine. The hymn supplied the scene. The story of the band playing “Nearer, My God, to Thee” gave the public the assurance it required, that the death meant something, that the steerage and the millionaire and the bandsman all climbed the same ladder in the end. The hero system did more than tell men how to die. It went back afterward and wrote the death it needed.

Sarah Flower Adams never saw any of it. She died in a London room in 1848 with her sister two years in the ground, both of them taken by the same slow illness, no orchestra, no headlines, four stanzas of hers loose in a Unitarian hymnal that asked the reader to believe the cross might raise him. She wrote about the only ascent she could still picture from a sickbed, the climb a soul makes while the body fails. Sixty years on, strangers on a sinking ship, or strangers who needed to believe strangers had, turned her private prayer into the anthem of a public death, and filled her empty ladder with a hundred heavens she never named. The stone is always the same stone. The pillow under the head of the dying man is hard, and the dream above it is whatever his hero system lets him see. Adams gave the dream no fixed shape, and so it fit them all.

Posted in Christianity | Comments Off on Nearer to What?

A Hero System Essay on St. Andrews Cathedral Music Director Ross Cobb

Posted on June 18, 2026 by Luke Ford

In the autumn of 2020 the cathedral on George Street stood empty and Ross Cobb kept playing. The choristers could not gather under one roof. The law forbade it. So they sang into phones and laptops in scattered homes across Sydney, and the parts came back to be stitched into one sound, and the sound went out on YouTube to people who sat alone in their kitchens. A man at a great organ, in a sandstone room built to hold a thousand, playing to no one in the room.

Set that scene against the tradition Cobb came from and you have the whole question. In the high English cathedral world that trained him, the empty room is the tragedy. Beauty with no witness is beauty wasted. The point of the King’s College sound, of Herbert Howells (1892-1983) writing his Collegium Regale, of the stones piled up over centuries, is that men touch the eternal through what they hear, in that room, together. Take away the room and the gathered hearers and you have taken away the thing.

Cobb played anyway, and the playing changed nothing for him, because by his own account the music was never for the room. That is the argument of this essay, and it runs through Ernest Becker (1924-1974).

Becker’s book The Denial of Death (1973) makes one claim and worries it from every side. A man knows he will die. He cannot live with that knowledge, so he builds, or inherits, a hero system: a scheme of cosmic significance that lets him feel he is more than meat, that his short life counts on some stage that outlasts his body. Every culture is one of these schemes. Each tells a man how to be a hero, how to earn a place that death cannot cancel. Self-worth is the private sense that you are succeeding inside your own scheme. The schemes compete. When one runs into another, each unsettles the other’s defense against the grave, and that collision is where Becker locates a good deal of human cruelty.

Apply this to a church musician and the first move undoes the obvious reading. The obvious reading says music is Cobb’s hero system. He is an organist of the front rank. He has given recitals at Notre Dame de Paris, the Royal Albert Hall, St Paul’s in London. He trained at the Royal Academy of Music and King’s College London. He chairs the New South Wales branch of the Royal School of Church Music and presides over its Australian body. In 2017 the Archbishop of Canterbury honored him for service to church music. In 2020 the RSCM gave him an award for promoting the highest musical standards. By the measure of the cathedral-music hero system, a measure that runs from the Tudor composers through the Victorian organ lofts to the Cambridge chapels, Cobb is a hero. He has the equipment and the honors. The name goes on the program.

But that is not the scheme he serves, and the gap between the two is the man.

Cobb serves in the Anglican Diocese of Sydney, which holds, with a force matched almost nowhere in the Anglican world, that the gospel ranks above everything, including the church, including beauty. The diocese descends from the Reformation and the Thirty-Nine Articles and the 1662 prayer book. It reads the Bible as God’s Word written. Its college, Moore, has trained generations of men in expository preaching and biblical theology. Its temper traces to the Billy Graham (1918-2018) crusade of 1959, after which a wave of young converts went to Moore and then into the parishes, carrying with them the conviction that the central act of a church is to preach Christ crucified and call men to repentance and faith. John Stott (1921-2011) taught Sydney to work through the text verse by verse and resist the topical and the merely moving. The hero, in this scheme, is the man who reaches another man with the news that Jesus died and rose, and so wins him eternal life. The immortality is not symbolic. It is the thing itself.

Cobb arrived in November 2005, hired by the then Dean, Phillip Jensen (b. 1945), brother of the then Archbishop, Peter Jensen (b. 1943). Phillip Jensen carried a reputation as a Calvinist iconoclast who distrusted the old sacred music and the vestments and the smells and bells, who had replaced Sunday evensong with a contemporary gathering, and under whom the previous music director had left after the choir’s chances to perform were cut back. Into that came an Englishman with a Cambridge-chapel pedigree, the exact pedigree the diocese eyed with suspicion. The hire looks strange until you read what Cobb said when he took the post. He loved the best of traditional church music where it “sheds light on the written Word of God,” and the best of contemporary church music where it did the same, and he held that the two were not opposed. There is the line, and there is why he could thrive where his predecessor could not. He had already subordinated his art before he walked in the door.

That subordination is his heroism in the Sydney scheme, and it asks of him the hardest thing an artist of his rank can be asked. He must make the music point past the notes to Christ, and at the moment the beauty starts to draw the ear to the beauty, to the performer, to the soaring vault and the held chord as ends worth having on their own, he must check it, because at that moment the music has set up as a rival scheme. The Reformed evangelical fear is exact and old. A man comes to the cathedral for the Bach and the architecture and the hush, mistakes the feeling for God, and walks out unconverted, his soul lost down a beautiful road. So the music gets demoted on purpose. Cobb is the man who can build the cathedral sound at the top of the craft and who has, by confession and by daily practice, bound it to a master. He turned what looked like an artist’s defeat into the highest service. He instigated the liturgical performance of Bach cantatas with orchestra inside the Sunday services, and he ran them not as concerts but as the Word sounded.

Now watch the central word do its work in other lives, because the same word changes its whole meaning when it moves between schemes.

Take a master drummer in a Yoruba town in southwest Nigeria, his hands on the talking drum, the pitch bending under the squeeze of his arm until the drum speaks the praise names of the dead. For him music is the wire to the ancestors. The drum keeps the fathers present, keeps the line from breaking, holds off death by refusing to let the dead go silent. The note is not beauty offered to a transcendent God. The note is the family reaching backward through the grave and finding the grave answered.

Take a qawwal at a Sufi shrine in Sindh, leading the long devotional climb of the song until the self thins out and the singer feels himself dissolve toward union with God. For him music is the road to fana, the burning away of the ego. The aim is to lose the I. Set him beside Cobb and the contrast sharpens. Cobb keeps the self intact and points it outward to a Word that stands over against him. The qawwal wants the self gone. Same act, two opposite cures for the same fear.

Take a techno DJ in a Berlin club at six on a Sunday morning, four hours into a set, the room moving as one body, the drop landing and the floor lifting. For him the all-night set is communion and the dance floor a brief deathlessness, a few hours where the dancers are pure present tense, alive and sure of next weekend. The eternity on offer lasts till the lights come up.

Take a session player in Nashville cutting a track he did not write for a singer he will not meet. For him music is craft and the check and the song that keeps getting played on the radio after he is gone. His shot at outliving himself is a hook in a stranger’s car.

And take the old chorister, English, eighty now, who sang treble in a cathedral as a boy and lost his God somewhere in his thirties and never lost the music. He still goes to evensong. He weeps at the Howells. The beauty is the only church he can still enter. He is Cobb turned inside out. Same sound, opposite scheme. In him the beauty became the idol the Sydney men warned of, and then, when the faith burned off, the beauty was all that was left, and it held. The thing Cobb labors to keep in second place, this man has put first, and it is the last thing standing between him and the dark.

Then there is the woman in the cathedral pew whom both schemes claim. A widow, say, who started coming for the Bach after her husband died, who knew nothing of the diocese or its theology, who came for the cantata and the cool stone and the hour out of the week. The Sydney scheme worries over her. She is the soul who might love the music and never hear the gospel. Cobb’s answer, the answer his whole position depends on, is that the cantata can carry the Word into a heart the sermon alone might not reach, that the beauty can be the open door and not the closed one. Whether the music delivered her or only consoled her is the question his life turns on, and it is a question no honor from Canterbury can settle.

The same split runs through his other sacred word, excellence. He has spent a career at the highest standard and has been decorated for it. In the concert-artist scheme excellence is the path to a personal immortality, the recording that outlasts the man, the name that goes down. In Cobb’s scheme excellence is an offering, the best brought because God is owed the best, and it carries a danger the concert artist never feels, because the better the offering, the more it tempts the man offering it to admire his own gift and forget whose altar it sits on. He walks that line every Sunday. He has to be very good and stay unimpressed with being good.

This is the cost, and it is the meaning. Cobb can do the great thing and has tied it to a lord. He directed the music at state funerals and at royal visits, played for Queen Elizabeth II (1926-2022), led the cathedral choir on a European tour for its bicentenary, ran what was called the largest festival of sacred music Australia has staged. And the logic of his own scheme tells him that none of it saves him. The choir will sing at his funeral as it sang at the funerals of the great, and the singing will be magnificent, and the magnificence will not raise him. Only Christ will, by his lights. So his music is honest about its own smallness in a way the cathedral tradition rarely asks its music to be. The beauty admits it is a servant and not a savior. That admission, made by a man who could plausibly believe the opposite, is the heroism. The denial of death sits at the center of it, named and faced. He does not pretend the music is the answer to the grave. He points past the music to the only answer his scheme allows, and he keeps the music from getting above its station even as he makes it as glorious as he can.

Which returns us to the empty room in 2020. To the cathedral tradition, a man playing to no one is a man robbed of his reason. To Cobb the empty room exposed what was always true. The room was never the point and the gathered hearers were never the point. The point was the news reaching all, and the wire that day carried it past the locked doors and the sandstone and out to the kitchens, further than the stones ever threw it. He played to an empty house and lost nothing, because in his hero system the house was only ever a means, and the music was only ever a servant, and the servant does its work whether or not anyone in the room is watching.

Posted in Sydney | Comments Off on A Hero System Essay on St. Andrews Cathedral Music Director Ross Cobb

The Two Monuments of Yorba Linda

Posted on June 18, 2026 by Luke Ford

The Chabad campus Rabbi David (Dovid) Eliezrie (b. 1951) built sits a mile and a half from the Richard Nixon Presidential Library. Nixon (1913-1994) lies buried there, beside the small frame house where he was born, under a slab of black granite cut with a line from his first inaugural about the peacemakers. Down the road stands Beth Meir HaCohen, a synagogue, an education center, a mikvah. Two men raised two monuments on one stretch of Orange County. Each monument says the same thing in stone. A man can outlast his body. Each man meant a different world by it.

Ernest Becker (1924-1974) gave us the word for what they share. In The Denial of Death and Escape from Evil he argued that a man knows he will die and cannot live with the knowledge, so every culture hands him a hero system, a scheme for earning a place that death cannot cancel. The hero system tells him what counts, what a life is for, how to win significance and hold it past the grave. Religions do this. Nations do this. Armies and markets and guilds do this. Becker’s claim ran wide. The immortality project is the human animal’s first business, and most of what looks like piety or politics or ambition is a man trying to feel he will not simply rot.

Set the two neighbors side by side and the point comes clear. Each spent his best decades on a project against oblivion. Nixon ran his through the nation. He wanted History to seat him among the men who shaped the century, and when the country threw him out he spent twenty years writing books and granting interviews to plead his case before the only judge he recognized, the future. The library a mile and a half from Eliezrie’s shul is the closing brief in that case. Eliezrie runs his project through a different court. He does not address History. He addresses the Almighty, and behind the Almighty the long file of Jews who came before him and the longer file he believes will come after, out to the day of redemption.

Watch the words the two projects share. Then watch them split.

Take the word service. Nixon served his country, and service meant the arena, power held and used and lost and defended in print. To Eliezrie service means avodah, the work a man owes his Maker, kept in a different ledger, where one act done for Heaven can outweigh a public career. The two men could stand at a microphone and say I have given my life to service and agree on nothing beneath the sentence.

Now say the word soul to Eliezrie. You name a piece of God. Chabad teaches that the Jewish soul is chelek eloka mimaal, a portion of the Divine above, and a portion of God does not die, does not get lost, does not finally corrupt. Every Jew carries one. The gangster carries one and the law professor carries one and the boy who has never seen a Sabbath candle carries one, and the spark in each waits to be brought home. Here is the reason a young couple agrees to spend a life in a town with few Jews and fewer who want them. The Rebbe, Menachem Mendel Schneerson (1902-1994), sent young men out the way a general sends scouts. Eliezrie went to the University of Miami in 1973, to Anaheim in 1981, to Yorba Linda in 1988. He did not choose the post. A shliach does not choose. He is sent, and the sending is the honor.

Say the same word, soul, to a field geneticist and he hears a story the brain tells about itself, a serviceable fiction stitched from memory and appetite and gone when the tissue cools. He builds his own hero system out of the work, a paper that holds up, a finding that carries his initials into the literature after he is ash. He counts that as enough because he has decided nothing else is on offer.

Say it to a Trappist in his Kentucky abbey and the soul is real and made by God and bound for judgment, and still his road runs opposite to Eliezrie’s. He saves his own by leaving the world. He keeps silence, tends the bees, prays the hours, and treats the streets full of strangers as the danger, not the harvest. Eliezrie combs those same streets for sparks. Same God, same word, two heroisms that would not recognize each other across a dinner table.

Say it to a man in the Arizona desert who has paid to have his head frozen at the moment of death. To him the soul is a pattern of information and death an engineering problem the century has not yet solved. He bets his whole significance on a future technician who will read the pattern back into a body or a machine. His monument is a steel flask of liquid nitrogen and a contract. He and Eliezrie both refuse to grant death the last word. One waits on the Messiah. One waits on the upload.

A Comanche on the southern plains two centuries back heard, in the nearest word his tongue had, a name kept alive in the songs of the band, immortality measured in valor and held in the mouths of the living. A hospice nurse in Long Beach makes no claim about any of it. She holds a hand. Her hero system asks one thing, that the dying not die alone, and she counts her life in those hours. None of these people is confused. Each lives inside a working answer to the same fear, and the answers do not translate.

The land tells the story too. To the agent who sold the Eliezries their lot, Yorba Linda reads as a market, square footage and school ratings and the cachet of a presidential neighbor. To Eliezrie the same ground is galus, exile, the long scattering of his people among the nations. Exile is not empty country to him. It holds sparks, and a place with sparks in it is a place worth a life. The agent and the rabbi walk the same cul-de-sac and stand in two different cosmologies.

He coordinates Chabad relief when the earth breaks. After the Nepal quake, after the storm that drowned the Rockaways, Chabad men arrive with food and cash and hands. Rescue, to a Coast Guard swimmer, ends when the body reaches the deck. No rescue ends there for Eliezrie, because the body pulled from the water carries a soul, and the soul travels a longer road toward a world made whole.

He wrote the movement down. The Secret of Chabad came out in 2015 and won a National Jewish Book Award, and now he labors on a life of the sixth Rebbe, Yosef Yitzchak Schneersohn (1880-1950), the man who carried Chabad out of Soviet prisons and across an ocean. A skeptic might read the books as Eliezrie’s own bid for permanence, ink against the grave, the same wager Nixon made with his memoirs. The skeptic would not be wrong about the wager. He would be wrong to think Eliezrie hides it. The tradition states the terms in the morning prayers. The body is dust and returns to dust. The soul does not. Eliezrie has spent his life on the second half of that sentence, and a book that hands the next generation the chain he received is the point of the chain.

Becker would not rank the two monuments. He would say only that he can see them both for what they are, two men who could not bear to vanish and built against it with the materials their cultures gave them, one a granite slab and a presidential seal, one an eternal light over an ark. The candor he asks of his reader is to look at one’s own project the same way, to know it for a project and not flinch. Eliezrie would not flinch. His whole creed rests on the wager that the project is no project at all but the truth of things, that the soul he chases through Orange County is a real piece of God and the redemption he works for will arrive. Nixon staked everything on the verdict of a future that cannot speak. Eliezrie staked everything on a Judge he believes already has.

A mile and a half apart, the slab and the lamp. Both burn for the same reason. Each man would tell you the other has the reason wrong.

Posted in Chabad | Comments Off on The Two Monuments of Yorba Linda

Eternity in Chalk

Posted on June 18, 2026 by Luke Ford

Arthur Stace (1885-1967) woke at four in the morning and went out into the dark with a stick of yellow chalk in his coat. He knelt on the cold pavement. He bent his head. He wrote one word in a flowing copperplate hand, the kind a clerk learns over years of practice, and then he stood and walked on and wrote it again two hundred yards down the street. Eternity. He did this several mornings a week for thirty-five years. He wrote the word perhaps half a million times. The workers coming into the city at dawn found it fresh on the footpath and never saw the writer. He was gone before the light.

He could barely read. He could not spell the word he wrote. As a boy in Redfern he stole bread and searched the bins for scraps, and his parents drank, and the state took him at twelve. He went to the trenches of the first war and came home and drank methylated spirits cut with water, the White Lady, and slept rough in the lanes. He was forty-five before any of this changed.

It changed at a meeting he went to for a cup of tea and a rock cake. The Reverend R.B.S. Hammond (1870-1946) preached to a hall of hungry men at St Barnabas on Broadway on August 6, 1930, and Stace crossed the road afterward and knelt under a Moreton Bay fig in Victoria Park and gave his life to Christ. He liked to say he went in for the tea and met the Rock of Ages. Two years on, on November 14, 1932, he sat in the Burton Street Baptist Tabernacle and heard the evangelist John Ridley (1896-1976), a returned soldier with a throat wound from Fromelles and a Military Cross from Bullecourt. Ridley laid his notes aside and cried the one word. Eternity, eternity, I wish I could sound or shout that word through the streets of Sydney. You have got to meet it. Where will you spend eternity? Stace felt a call. He found chalk in his pocket. He went out and knelt and wrote the word, and the hand that could not sign a clean name produced a flawless copperplate, and he never understood how it came.

Ernest Becker (1924-1974) gives the frame for what Stace was doing on his knees in the dark. In The Denial of Death and Escape from Evil, Becker argues that man is the animal who knows he will die, and that this knowledge sits under everything he builds. The terror of it has to be managed, and culture manages it by handing each man a hero system, a scheme of meaning that lets a life count for something against the blank fact of death. Inside the scheme a man earns a sense of his own cosmic worth. He becomes, in his own eyes and the eyes of his fellows, a small hero. Some schemes promise this through what survives the body. A name on a building. A child. A book. A nation. A cause. Becker calls these immortality projects, the bids a man makes to outlast his own corpse.

Most men hide the bid. They build the tower and put a name on it and tell themselves the name is incidental. Stace did the opposite and the same. He took the immortality symbol and made it the whole content of the work. The word he wrote names the thing every hero system reaches for in code. Then he left out the one part Becker says a man cannot surrender. He left out his name.

This is the strange center of Arthur Stace. The hero, in Becker’s account, wants to stand out, to be marked, to be known to have counted. Stace wrote the word that names the longest reach past death and signed none of it. He vanished before the readers arrived. His scheme placed all the worth outside the man, in God, in the heaven and hell Ridley had thundered about, and so the more completely Stace disappeared the better the work served him. The erasure was no modesty laid over the project. The erasure was the project. The text Ridley preached from speaks of a contrite and humble spirit, the man who counts for nothing pointing at the everything.

Now set the word on the footpath and watch who reads it.

A young astronomer comes down off the hill before his shift ends, tired, and the chalk catches the light under the streetlamp. Eternity. To him the word has a length. He thinks of the long cooling, the stars burning down to iron and the iron going cold, of time running so far past the last living thing that the number loses its sense. His hero system rewards the man who sees the true scale of things and reports back. Eternity is a horizon you measure. It promises nothing and asks nothing. The clerk’s hand that wrote it would not have known the second law of thermodynamics existed, and the astronomer half pities the hope in the lettering.

A widow reads it on her step. Her husband went down at sea four years back and her son has gone to Melbourne. She has tended two graves and a garden. For her the word means the table set again, the faces returned to her on the far side, the home unbroken at last. Her hero system runs through blood and love and the family, and what it asks of death is reunion. The word on her step tells her the people are not lost for good. She presses a hand to her mouth and steps around it so she will not smear it.

A man in a good suit steps over it on his way to the site office. He builds. He has three towers going up along the harbor, and his name will sit on none of them, but the towers are his, the concrete is his, the skyline he is making will stand after he is in the ground. Eternity, in chalk, on a footpath he means to dig up next year. He grins at it the way a rich man grins at a busker. His hero system is poured and reinforced. What lasts is what you build heavy enough, and the city around him is busy razing its old sandstone to pour the new, dissolving its own past to make room for him. The chalk washes off in the first rain. His concrete has a fifty-year warranty. He knows which of the two is the better bet.

A Chinese grocer raises his shutter in Haymarket and finds the word at his threshold. He reads English well enough. The promise in it puts a small cold weight in his chest. He was raised to see endless duration as the trap, the wheel that turns and turns and brings the soul around again to hunger and loss without rest, and the work of a life is to step off the wheel, to want nothing, to come at last to peace. The white man’s word offers more of the turning and calls it good news. For the grocer the gift and the sentence have changed places. He sweeps the step. The chalk goes with the dust.

A reporter walking off a long night sees it and feels the old irritation. He buried the idea of a soul along with his father, who died hard and afraid, and he holds that the one honesty left to a man is to face the nothing without a story laid over it. His hero system is the cleared eye and the printed truth, the byline that outlives the lie. The word on the pavement is the lie, in his account, the comfort men reach for so they need not look at the dark. And yet he stands over it longer than he means to. Some phantom writes it fresh every night and the city cannot find him out, and the not knowing works on the reporter, and he half wants to chase the story and half does not, because the story might give the word more life than he thinks it has earned.

A Dharug man crosses the same ground on his way to the early shift at the markets. He reads the word and lets it pass. He carries his own deep time, the country under the concrete, the ancestors who shaped the rivers and the headlands and who are present still in the places the city has paved without knowing what it paved. His forever runs not forward into a heaven but down into the land, the everywhen that holds the living and the dead in one country. The chalk word lies on taken ground that already keeps a longer record than any chalk. He has heard the white God’s eternity preached at him. He keeps his own and says nothing.

One word. Six hands cannot hold it the same way. The chalk does not change. The reader brings the scheme that tells him what the word can mean, and the scheme decides whether the word reads as a promise or a measurement or a sentence or a lie or a country. Becker’s argument runs that no neutral reading lies open to any of them, the astronomer no more than the widow, because no man stands outside a hero system and looks at death plain. Each of them manages the same terror by a different route, and each route makes the others look like error. There Becker locates the trouble between men. My scheme can keep its worth only if yours is wrong. The widow’s reunion and the grocer’s release cannot both be the shape of forever. The reporter’s nothing unwrites them both.

Stace seemed to step out of that war by stepping out of the picture. He made no argument. He did not plant himself on the corner with the word and demand you take it his way, though he preached on corners too. The chalk pressed no case. It set the word down and left, and what you did with it fell to you and the dark. A man who removes his name removes the target. There is no rival to beat when no one knows who you are. For a while it held. For twenty-seven years the city argued over who wrote the word and could not find him, and the word floated free of any man’s bid, which let it land in each reader as that reader’s own.

Becker’s logic lets no man off so cheap, and it did not let Stace off. The contest he stepped out of came back through the door. A minister caught him with the chalk in his hand and asked if he was the man, and Stace said, guilty, your honor, but you won’t tell anyone, will you. The minister told. The papers ran it in June 1956 and the vanished man turned into a Sydney celebrity, and the word stopped being everyone’s and became his. Then he died, and the thing went further. On the first morning of the year 2000 the city he had crept across in the dark hung his one word on the Sydney Harbour Bridge in his own copperplate, sixty feet high, in fire, for two billion people watching screens around the world. The developers’ city, the one that razed its sandstone and poured its concrete and dissolved its own past, had found a use for the word. Sydney made the contrite man’s sermon into the town’s own bid for cosmic worth, a brand for a waterside city that wanted the cameras and the new century. The word that pointed away from every man now pointed at Sydney. Becker’s circle closed. Even the hero who erased himself got drawn back in and set to serve a scheme that was not his.

Stace might not have minded. By his own account the work was never his. He wrote the word and the rain took it and he wrote it again, and the washing off was the part that fit his scheme best, because a thing that survives on the footpath tempts a man to admire his own hand, and chalk in the Sydney weather does not survive. He knelt in the dark and gave away the one word a hero system tells a man to keep for himself, and he gave it to a God he trusted to keep the account. The poet Douglas Stewart (1913-1985) called him a shy mysterious poet whose work was one single mighty word. He wrote it half a million times. He signed it none.

Posted in Sydney | Comments Off on Eternity in Chalk

The Heroism of Surrender: Bill Wilson and the Founding of Alcoholics Anonymous

Posted on June 18, 2026 by Luke Ford

The room at Towns Hospital smells of paraldehyde. It is December 1934. Bill Wilson (1895-1971) lies in the bed where Manhattan sends its drinking men to dry out, and the doctor who runs the place, William Silkworth (1873-1951), has already given him the verdict no one else will say to a proud man. The body cannot tolerate the alcohol. The mind cannot leave it alone. Wilson has heard this and gone back to the gin anyway, three times, four. He is thirty-nine. He has nothing. Lois Wilson (1891-1988) works a department store floor to pay their rent. The Wall Street that took him in during the boom has thrown him out. He came down from East Dorset, Vermont, a tall man who meant to be somebody, and the somebody he became lies in a charity bed dosed with belladonna and henbane.

His old school friend Ebby Thacher (1896-1966) has visited him, sober, which Wilson cannot account for. Ebby drank worse than he did. The Oxford Group has gotten hold of Ebby now, and Ebby talks about God, and Wilson, who trusts engineers and ledgers and the proxy fight, wants none of it. Then in the bed, lower than the proud man has ever let himself sink, he quits. He says it out loud. If there is a God, let Him show Himself. The room fills with light. He feels a wind off no window, a presence, a peace he will spend the rest of his life trying to describe and never improve on. He reads William James (1842-1910) soon after, The Varieties of Religious Experience, and finds his own night written down in advance: the conversions that come through collapse, through the man at the end of his own resources. Wilson never takes another drink.

What dies in that bed is a hero system.

Ernest Becker (1924-1974) gave culture that name. A hero system is the set of stories a society hands a man so he can feel he counts, so he can earn a place that outlasts his body and hold off the knowledge that he will die. Each system keeps its own ledger and prints its own currency. In one, you grow significant by conquering. In another, by obeying. In another, by being seen. The terms feel like nature to the man inside them. They are bookkeeping.

Wilson’s first ledger was the oldest American one. The big shot. The man who comes from a small town and makes himself large, who reads the market, who wins the proxy battle, whose name means money and whose money means he matters. Drink belonged to that project at the start, the confidence and the deal closed at the bar, and then drink ate the project whole. At Towns Hospital he reaches the bottom of that system. There is no win left to chase. So he builds another, and the first move of the new one is to declare the old one dead. I am powerless. I cannot run the show. I am not the center. He writes it into the First Step, the gate every man must pass before the rest of it opens. We admitted we were powerless over alcohol, that our lives had become unmanageable.

Read that sentence to a Marine on the drill field and watch his face. In the warrior’s hero system surrender is the one act past forgiveness. A man who lays down his rifle has handed away the only thing that made him a man in that world, and the dishonor follows him into the ground. The same word that saves Wilson would end the Marine. Read the First Step to a founder in a glass office on Sand Hill Road, the one who sleeps under his desk and tells his people to never give up, and he hears the loser’s confession. His whole creed is control, the will that bends the market, the all-nighter that beats the competitor who slept. Powerlessness is the enemy he organized his life against. To him Wilson’s gate is a trapdoor.

Then there are the men who use the same word and mean something near to Wilson and still not the same. Marcus Aurelius (121-180) writes about yielding to the order of things, and the Stoic gives up his wants. He does not give up his hand on the helm. He bows to the logos and keeps his reason as the last fortress, master of himself if of nothing else. Wilson goes further down. He gives up the helm. He says a man cannot steer his own recovery at all, that the steering is the sickness. The Calvinist divine comes closer still, with his total depravity and his grace that no man earns, and yet his surrender is settled once in the decree of God before the world began. Wilson’s surrender is never banked. It is a daily reprieve, good for one day, and a man takes it again tomorrow or he drinks. The Zen teacher tells his student to let go of the self, and that sounds like the same instruction, but the teacher asks for no wreckage first, posits no rock bottom, addresses no Higher Power on the far side of the plea. Wilson’s surrender needs the gutter and needs Someone to surrender to.

So the word holds steady on the page and shifts under every reader. That is Becker’s point about the ledger. Surrender is debit in the warrior’s book and the founder’s, near-credit in the Stoic’s, doctrine in the Calvinist’s, technique in the Zen hall, and in Wilson’s it is the whole of salvation, the thing you do first and keep doing until you die.

Watch how the new system keeps a man alive in practice. May 1935. Wilson stands in the lobby of the Mayflower Hotel in Akron. The proxy fight that brought him to Ohio has failed. He is broke again and far from home. At one end of the lobby a bar runs warm and bright with the sound of men laughing, and at the other a directory of churches hangs on the wall, and Wilson feels the pull toward the bar in his chest like a tide. He has been sober five months. He understands, standing there, that he cannot hold the line alone and that reading about God will not hold it either. He needs another drunk to talk to. Not to save the other man. To save himself. He works the church directory, gets a clergyman, gets passed to Henrietta Seiberling (1888-1979) of the Goodyear rubber family, and through her to a surgeon in town who cannot stop drinking, Robert Holbrook Smith (1879-1950), the Dr. Bob the fellowship will know. They sit down for what is meant to be fifteen minutes and talk for hours. Dr. Bob takes his last drink on June 10, 1935. The fellowship dates its birth from that day.

Here the new ledger prints its second value. Service. The Twelfth Step sends the sober man back to the suffering one, and the reason given is not charity. It is survival. A man stays well by carrying it to another. The currency of the old system ran one way, upward, toward the man at the top who is served by the men below. Wilson flips the arrow. In the Traditions he writes that the movement’s leaders are trusted servants who do not govern, and he means the words. Greatness in this house comes through use, through the folding chair set out and the coffee made and the phone answered at three in the morning, work that leaves no monument and no name.

No name. That is the third value, and it cuts closest to the man himself.

In 1954 Yale University offers Wilson an honorary doctorate, a Doctor of Laws, the kind of thing the boy from East Dorset once dreamed about as proof he had arrived. He turns it down. Time wants him on the cover, face forward, the founder. He gives them the back of his head or nothing. He insists on Bill W. and keeps the surname off the record, and he writes anonymity into the Traditions as the spiritual foundation of the whole thing, the daily reminder that a man place principles before personalities and put no individual above the work.

Carry that value across the systems and watch it break apart again. To the influencer building a following, to be unseen is to be dead, and a post no one likes is a small annihilation. Her hero system runs entirely on the eyes of others, and Wilson’s discipline reads to her as suicide. To the dissident under a hard regime, anonymity is the mask that keeps a man breathing, a thing forced on him by power and resented, not chosen as a virtue. To the scholar in his field, the name on the paper is the immortality project, the citation the coin of the realm, and to publish without your name is to do the work and lose the only reward the system pays. The monk comes nearest to Wilson. For him anonymity is the self thinning out into God, the cell with no mirror, the prayer said where no one counts it. Even there the cosmology differs. The monk loses his name into the eternal. Wilson loses his to keep a fragile movement from being wrecked by the egos of its founders, his own first among them.

His own first among them. The honest reader has to hold the man against his own system, because Wilson does not always fit inside the house he built.

He stays famous while anonymous. Everyone in the rooms knows who Bill W. is, and he knows they know, and the modesty has a shape that a proud man can live inside. In the 1950s he takes LSD, supplied by Humphry Osmond (1917-2004) and discussed with Aldous Huxley (1894-1963) and Gerald Heard (1889-1971), because he wonders whether the drug might hand a man the white light of Towns Hospital without the years of wreckage that came before it. Think about what that wish does to his own teaching. The program says a man must lose everything before he can be found, that the bottom is the door. The founder goes looking for a shortcut around the bottom. He pushes niacin in his last years with the zeal of a man who has found the answer again. The board pushes back, and he steps away from these enthusiasms to keep them from cracking the fellowship, which is the surrender working one more time, late, on the surrenderer.

Then Miami, January 1971. Wilson is dying of emphysema, the cigarettes having done to his lungs what the gin never finished doing to the rest of him, the man who freed millions from one drug killed by another he carried to the end. In his last days he asks the nurse for whiskey. Three times he asks. Three times she holds the line and gives him none. He dies on January 24 without the drink.

A comfortable essay closes the man’s eyes and calls the deathbed request a sad footnote. The truth is harder and more useful. The want does not leave. Thirty-six years sober, the founder of the largest sobriety movement on earth reaches for the glass at the edge. His own system predicted this. It never promised the want would die. It promised only the daily reprieve, the surrender taken again each morning, the admission that a man is powerless and will be powerless tomorrow. The deathbed ask is not the system failing. It might be the system telling the truth about itself, that the disease is patient and the cure is never finished and the ledger never closes. It might also be the man, at the last, slipping the house he built and reaching back toward the first hero system, the one where a man does what he wants because he is somebody. Wilson states the case and lets the reader sit with both readings. He spent his life refusing to pretend a man is stronger than he is.

What he did, in Becker’s terms, was take the conqueror’s hero system, the one America hands every ambitious boy, and turn its currency inside out. In the old book a man earns his place by winning, controlling, and getting his name on the building. In Wilson’s book a man earns his place by admitting he has lost, by handing over control, by keeping his name off everything and serving the next sufferer for no monument. He built a house where the first act is to confess you are nobody of the kind you spent your life trying to be, and millions of men have found in that confession the only ground that held. He could not always stand on it himself. The man who drew the map kept losing the road. Both things are true, and the second does not cancel the first. It is the price of having drawn the map at all.

Posted in Addiction | Comments Off on The Heroism of Surrender: Bill Wilson and the Founding of Alcoholics Anonymous

Saba Is Here

Posted on June 18, 2026 by Luke Ford

On the morning of October 7, 2023, a retired major general rides south out of Tel Aviv with a pistol in his lap and his wife at the wheel. Noam Tibon (b. 1962) commanded paratroopers, a brigade in the West Bank, the northern border with Lebanon. He served thirty-five years and then he stopped. The army has other men now. This morning none of them come. His son Amir, a journalist at Haaretz, calls from a reinforced room in Kibbutz Nahal Oz and tells him the terrorists stand outside the window and that this might be the end. Tibon takes his pistol. Gali drives. The family calls him 911 because whatever you need, he does it.

Gali drives fast. Police stop them. She tells the police they are going through, and they go through the fields in the jeep. On the road they pick up a young couple who ran from the music festival, and they stop for soldiers bleeding at a roadblock, and Gali takes the wounded to a hospital while Tibon catches a ride toward the kibbutz with a friend, another old general, Israel Ziv (b. 1957). Ziv drops him at the gate and drives on to Be’eri, where the killing is worse. Tibon walks in with the first soldiers. He knows the ground. He points the way. The clearing goes house to house, and an open shelter door means the people inside are dead or gone.

Inside the safe room, Amir and Miri hold the handle of the door and keep the girls quiet. Galia is three. Carmel is one. The room is the girls’ nursery, built of the special concrete every border home keeps for the rockets. The parents speak in low voices about the chance that all four of them die in this room. The phones lose their charge. Ten hours pass.

At four in the afternoon a hand knocks on the window. Amir, it’s Dad. Then the older girl breaks the silence she has kept all day. Saba higiya, she says. Grandfather has come. That is when they cry for the first time.

Ernest Becker (1924-1974) built a whole anthropology on a single wound. Man is the animal who knows he dies. He carries the knowledge of his own end inside an animal body that wants to go on, and the terror of this drives him to build what Becker, in The Denial of Death, calls a hero system. A hero system is a scheme of cosmic significance, a set of rules that tells a man what counts as a life worth its mortality and what part of him survives the grave. Cultures are hero systems with armies. Religions are hero systems with priests. A man earns his worth by playing the local game of heroism well, and he defends the game with his life, because the game is the wall between him and the void.

Watch the word the child uses. Higiya. He has come. He arrived. The whole story turns on a man arriving in a particular room at a particular hour with his particular body. The Israeli officer trains for this word. The command an Israeli officer gives is acharai, after me. He does not send the men. He goes first, and the men follow the back of his neck. Tibon spent thirty-five years learning to be the first body through the door, and at sixty-one, with the army absent, he is the first body through the door again, now for two granddaughters asleep in a nursery.

Arrival sounds like a plain word. The word holds a different thing for each man.

For the Calvinist who waits on the providence of God, arrival is the second coming, the return no general and no jeep can hurry. The body in the room is a vapor. What comes, when it comes, comes from outside time, and a man’s work is to stand ready and leave the timing to Him.

For the Theravada monk on his mat in the forest, the craving to arrive anywhere is the rope that ties a man to the wheel of birth and death. The grandchild he loves is a knot to loosen, with tenderness, and not a line to defend with a gun. To arrive, for him, is to stop arriving. The end of the road is no road.

For the Singularitarian in the server farms of the Bay, arrival is the morning the machine wakes and a man no longer has to die. He freezes his head against that morning. He does not drive toward a window with a pistol. He waits for the curve to go vertical and carry his pattern across the gap that flesh cannot cross.

For the man who filmed himself that same morning crossing the same fields toward the same kibbutz, arrival means the gate of paradise swinging open for the martyr. He drives the opposite direction inside the same word. His hero system pays its highest wage for his death in the act of killing. Tibon’s pays its highest wage for his death in the act of shielding. The road between the two runs short. The two immortalities face away from each other.

Becker spent his last book, Escape from Evil, on this short road. The evil men do, he argued, grows out of the heroic and not against it. Men kill for their immortality. They kill the carriers of a rival scheme because a rival scheme is a rumor that their own might be false, and the rumor cannot stand. So two hero systems meet on the border of Gaza, and one sends a grandfather with a handgun to put his old body between children and the killers, and the other sends a young man with a rifle and a camera to turn the killing of children into worship. The frame does not make these equal. It tells you where to look. Both men reach for the same thing. You judge them by what the reaching costs other people.

Most hero-system essays catch a man at the top of his climb. Tibon is on the way down. He did his heroism. He gave the state its thirty-five years and the state gave him a pension and a chair at the north Tel Aviv cafes. Becker has a name for what an old man wants. He wants to be the cause of himself, his own father, the source. The deepest version of that wish, when a man can no longer be a soldier, is the grandchild. The line goes on. Something of him crosses the gap. On October 7 the wish and the emergency arrive in the same phone call.

And the army does not come. This is the part the documentary about him, the one wrapped in the flag of a family and not a country, leaves a little in shadow. Tibon’s whole life rests on a promise. The Jewish state guards Jewish children so the safe room holds, so “never again” is a wall and not a prayer. At 7:22 that morning he texts the chief of staff that terrorists stand inside the kibbutz, and the answer comes back: they know, they sent troops. The troops are late by hours and short by divisions. The hero system fails at the one hour he built his life around. So the system shrinks to the size of one man. A pistol. A jeep. A wife who drives through the fields.

The morning after, Tibon says, he woke a different man. He turned on the custodians of the failed promise. He marched against the government. He went into politics and said he might fix the army that left his grandchildren ten hours behind a window. Read this as the same hero system carried on by other means. He does not leave the temple when it fails. He stays to repair it. The man who drove south with a pistol now drives at the institution that left the road empty.

The makers of the film about him insist the story is universal, family and not flags, a grandfather and not a country. They are half right, and the half they miss is the half that gives the story its weight. There is no love of family that floats free of a hero system. The room is concrete because the state poured it against rockets. The word the child cries is Hebrew. The kibbutz sits on the Gaza fence because men once decided Jews would farm that exact dirt as an answer to the century that tried to erase them. Edward R. Murrow (1908-1965) stood at Nahal Oz in the 1950s and filmed the same command post, now rusted, that Tibon passes on his way in. The love is real and the flag is real and they are the same act seen from two distances. A man does not climb out of his own hero system into a clean human universal. He loves his own, in his own tongue, on his own ground, and that local love is the universal thing.

Go back to the window at four in the afternoon. Strip away the frame and look at what is left. An old man stands in the sun outside a nursery on the worst day his country has known. He has crossed a road full of the dead. He puts his knuckles on the glass and says his name in the oldest role a man holds. Inside, a three-year-old who has not made a sound since dawn hears him and tells the room her grandfather has come. Each hero system on earth reads that knock a different way. In his, the highest thing a man can do is be the body that arrives. He arrived.

Posted in Israel | Comments Off on Saba Is Here

When Other Helpers Fail

Posted on June 18, 2026 by Luke Ford

He sits on the rocks below Berry Head on a September evening in 1847 and watches the light leave the water. Behind him stands the house his wife’s money bought, the long library that will take seventeen days to auction once he is gone. Below him Brixham harbor holds the last of the sun. The trawlers ride at anchor. The herring men are home. Henry Francis Lyte (1793-1847) is fifty-four, and he is dying, and he knows it, the way a man knows it when the cough has been with him for years and the doctors have tried blistering and bleeding and calomel and tartar emetic and large doses of Prussic acid and none of it has held the thing back.

He has preached his last sermon, or he will within days, a sermon on the Holy Communion, and he drags himself to the pulpit against his family’s pleading because, as he likes to say, it is better to wear out than to rust out. Tonight he climbs back to the study and writes eight stanzas and sets them to a tune of his own. He hands the page to a relative. Weeks later he reaches Nice and can go no farther, and there he dies, and the men who sit with him at the end report that his last words are “Peace! Joy!”

The page opens: “Abide with me; fast falls the eventide. The darkness deepens; Lord, with me abide.”

Ernest Becker (1924-1974), in The Denial of Death (1973), wrote that every culture is a hero system, a set of rules for earning the feeling that you are an object of first value in a world that will go on without you. The animal knows it will die. The terror under that knowledge is the engine beneath all the building and the praying and the fighting and the getting of sons. A hero system hands a man a way to stand past his own death, a way to feel his small life joined to something that does not end. Each system sets its own terms. The terms tell a man what a good death looks like and what the worst death would be, and the two are never the same from one hall to the next.

Lyte’s terms sit on the page he hands his relative, and read as a hero system, one word carries the load. The word is “abide.” It means stay. It comes from the road to Emmaus, where two men press an unrecognized Christ to remain with them, for it is toward evening and the day is far spent. Lyte takes their words into his own mouth at his own eventide.

What he asks for is company. He does not ask to be spared. He does not ask to be carried bodily past the grave. He asks that he not be left. “When other helpers fail and comforts flee, Help of the helpless, O abide with me.” The fear named in the hymn is not extinction. It is abandonment.

A man writes the hero system his life has prepared him to write. Lyte’s father, Captain Thomas Lyte, an army officer fonder of fishing and shooting than of his children, walked out on the family. The mother, Anna Maria, took the children to London and died there with the youngest boy. The two surviving sons were left. A schoolmaster at Portora, Robert Burrowes, took the orphan in and treated him as an adopted son, one more shelter that could be withdrawn. Then at Marazion in 1818 a brother clergyman, Abraham Swanne, fell ill, and Lyte sat with him while he died, and the dying man’s account of his own salvation, that though he had erred there was One whose death would answer for him, turned Lyte’s faith from a profession into an urgency. He went back to his Bible. He began to preach as a man who had watched a man die.

Here, then, is a life made of people leaving. The father leaves. The mother dies. The benefactor is borrowed. The friend dies in his arms. The man who has been left this often builds his whole scheme of cosmic heroism around the single Companion who changes not and will not go. “O Thou who changest not, abide with me.” Against a father who left stands a Father who stays. Becker would say the hero system takes the common dread of death and bends it to the private dread this one man carries, then answers that. Lyte’s death is abandonment. His answer is presence.

Even the triumph is leased to it. The seventh stanza reaches for Paul: “Where is death’s sting? Where, grave, thy victory?” The line that follows hands the victory back on a condition. “I triumph still, if Thou abide with me.” The conquest of the grave is rented to the Companion’s staying. Take the abiding away and the triumph falls. Few hero systems name their load-bearing term so plainly.

Carry the word into other halls and watch it lose its sense.

The Norse warrior in the hall does not fear being left. He fears dying in the straw, indoors, unwitnessed, the death no man will sing. His companion is the lord he falls beside in the shield wall, and what he wants from him is not company through a long quiet dying but a death loud enough to be carried home and made into a lay. Sing “abide with me” to him as a thing whispered from a sickbed and he hears a coward’s wish. The death Lyte is having, the slow one in the warm room with the family near, is the worst death his system can name.

The Confucian official fears another end. He fears the line closing, the ancestral tablet left undusted, no son to set out the rice and the incense and call the dead by name on the proper days. His presence runs both directions along the family, back toward the men he tends and forward toward the men who will tend him. Ask him who must abide and he does not point to Heaven. He points to his son. The companion who must not leave is the heir, and the abiding he wants is the boy who stays to bury him in order and to feed him after.

Marcus Aurelius (121-180) would read the hymn as a relapse. The Stoic spends his life training out the very wish the hymn makes. To beg a companion not to leave is to hang your peace on a thing outside your hands, and the whole labor of the Stoic is to want nothing he can lose. He rehearses the morning when he and everyone he loves will be gone, and he assents. He does not ask the cosmos to abide with him. He asks to need no one. Lyte’s cure is a Presence. The Stoic’s cure is to close the wound that wants one.

The Theravada monk turns the hymn inside out. The craving to be abided with is the sickness his whole practice treats. The wish that something stay, that the self go on attended and accompanied, is the thirst that ties a man to the wheel and brings him back and back. Release is non-abiding, the blowing out of the flame, the end of asking anyone to stay, the self included. Lyte’s last petition is the monk’s last attachment. What Lyte calls comfort the monk calls the chain.

Move to the present and find the engineer north of San Francisco who keeps a contract with a firm that will freeze his head. He does not fear abandonment, and he does not want a Companion through his dying. He wants no dying. Death is to him a fault in the equipment, a problem of preservation now and restoration later. His abiding is the pattern held intact in the cold until the machines grow good enough to run it again. Tell him the cure for the eventide is to ask Someone to sit beside you while the light goes, and he hears a man who has given up. He has not moved the victory anywhere. He still means to win the old one, the survival of the self, by other means.

Closest to Lyte stands the poet who fears ceasing before the work is done, the man who has fears that he may cease to be before his pen has gleaned his teeming brain. John Keats (1795-1821), coughing out his own lungs a generation ahead of Lyte, wants the line to outlast the body. Lyte the prize poet half shares the wager and, by his own lights, wins it twice, for the hymn outlives him and he dies sure the Companion does too.

One word. To the warrior it names a coward’s wish. To the official it names a duty owed by sons. To the Stoic it names a weakness to drill away. To the monk it names a chain. To the engineer it names surrender. To the dying curate on the rocks it is the whole of his hope, and it makes full and exact sense only inside the hall where he sings it.

The hall did not hold. Hero systems are hungry, and a sacred thing made inside one gets pulled into others and set to serve their terror instead.

William Henry Monk (1823-1889) set Lyte’s words to the tune almost everyone now hears, “Eventide,” written for Hymns Ancient and Modern in 1861. The story attached to it is that Monk wrote the melody soon after his own small daughter died, so the tune that carries a dying man’s plea carries a grieving father’s too, two deathbeds folded into one page of music.

From there the hymn went where its writer never sent it. Soldiers of empire took it up, Charles Gordon (1833-1885) and Herbert Kitchener (1850-1916) among them, men whose system feared a forgotten death, not an unaccompanied one. Edith Cavell (1865-1915) is said to have had its words with her before the German rifles. George V (1865-1936) had it sung at his funeral. Since 1927 the crowd at the English Cup Final has sung it before the kickoff, tens of thousands of men who have come to watch other men contend for a name that lasts, roaring a dying curate’s request for quiet company into a wall of sound against being nobody and being forgotten.

Becker would not be surprised. The private prayer for a Companion becomes a tribal token against oblivion. The same eight stanzas serve the man who fears being left and the stadium that fears being no one. The word stays on the page. The hall around it keeps changing, and the word comes to mean what the hall needs it to mean.

On the rocks the light has almost gone. Lyte sits a while with the harbor going dark below him and the moor black against the last of the sky. He has stopped asking to be spared. He asks only that he not go into the dark alone, that the one Companion of a life full of departures keep the appointment this once.

He goes up to the house. His family thinks he is resting. He is finishing the hymn. In a few weeks he will lie in a hotel room in Nice with strangers around the bed, and he will say “Peace! Joy!” and be gone, and the page will outlast him. Whether the Companion kept the appointment is the question his whole hero system was built to answer yes, and the one no hero system can answer from outside the hall.

Posted in Christianity | Comments Off on When Other Helpers Fail