A persistent canard, not held exclusively by anti-Semites, claims that Jews are a uniquely unaesthetic people. Prohibited by the second commandment from making likenesses—so the myth goes—Jews cultivate literature, law, and theology, but shun the visual arts. While everything from ancient synagogue mosaics to the work of such modern masters as Marc Chagall give the lie to these claims, Raphael Zarum looks at the actual differences that distinguished ancient Israelite aesthetics from those of their contemporaries. He finds evidence in the British Museum’s exhibit Luxury and Power: Persia to Greece.

On display is a dazzling range of lavish artifacts spanning the 500 years before the Common Era. They tell a story of Persian decadence that demonstrated political authority, defining a style that resonated across their vast empire, from Egypt to India. The exhibition then shows how this was reproduced, adapted, and occasionally reviled by the succeeding empires of Greece and Rome. Their kings would drink from only the finest vessels, wear glamorous and exclusive clothes, and surround themselves with sweet-smelling incense that created a heady atmosphere.

You will not find one Jewish artifact in the entire exhibition and yet comparisons and contrasts abound. The period it covers coincides with when the Second Temple stood in Jerusalem. This housed ceremonial objects fashioned with gold such as the candelabra, washbasin, table, and ark. . . . Thus, many of the luxuries of the Persian royalty could be found in the Jewish Temple, but with a significant difference. One gave honor to man, the other to God.

The truth is that aesthetics are important in Judaism. The Talmud states, “Ten measures of beauty were given to the world; nine were taken by Jerusalem, and one was distributed all over earth” (Kiddushin 49b). . . . The Torah teaches us to marry our [human] predilection for aesthetics with the recognition of the divine. In this sense, luxury is not about acquiring and owning expensive things; it is about appreciating them for what they are and realizing they can also be used for something of even higher value.

For some time, opponents of U.S support for Israel have been urging the White House to end the war in Gaza, or simply calling for a ceasefire. Douglas Feith and Lewis Libby consider what such a result would actually entail:

Ending the war immediately would allow Hamas to survive and retain military and governing power. Leaving it in the area containing the Sinai-Gaza smuggling routes would ensure that Hamas can rearm. This is why Hamas leaders now plead for a ceasefire. A ceasefire will provide some relief for Gazans today, but a prolonged ceasefire will preserve Hamas’s bloody oppression of Gaza and make future wars with Israel inevitable.

For most Gazans, even when there is no hot war, Hamas’s dictatorship is a nightmarish tyranny. Hamas rule features the torture and murder of regime opponents, official corruption, extremist indoctrination of children, and misery for the population in general. Hamas diverts foreign aid and other resources from proper uses; instead of improving life for the mass of the people, it uses the funds to fight against Palestinians and Israelis.

Moreover, a Hamas-affiliated website warned Gazans last month against cooperating with Israel in securing and delivering the truckloads of aid flowing into the Strip. It promised to deal with those who do with “an iron fist.” In other words, if Hamas remains in power, it will begin torturing, imprisoning, or murdering those it deems collaborators the moment the war ends. Thereafter, Hamas will begin planning its next attack on Israel:

Hamas’s goals are to overshadow the Palestinian Authority, win control of the West Bank, and establish Hamas leadership over the Palestinian revolution. Hamas’s ultimate aim is to spark a regional war to obliterate Israel and, as Hamas leaders steadfastly maintain, fulfill a Quranic vision of killing all Jews.

Hamas planned for corpses of Palestinian babies and mothers to serve as the mainspring of its October 7 war plan. Hamas calculated it could survive a war against a superior Israeli force and energize enemies of Israel around the world. The key to both aims was arranging for grievous Palestinian civilian losses. . . . That element of Hamas’s war plan is working impressively.