Now, I am as in favor of universal brotherhood as the next guy, but I have a particular problem preaching the expected message about the indomitable human spirit and its quest for freedom, at least in the context of Chanuka. We all know better. The Macabees were not patriots rising to protect flag, country, and the right to their own national anthem. The Syrian-Greeks did not endeavor to physically annihilate them, but to ban the practice of Judaism The Macabees fought to live like Jews, not like free people. At last, though, I've discovered a theme that will delight the media mayvens of Hollywood. It has to do with Dracula.

Various sources associate the four oppressor-nations that rose against the Jewish people with four serious Torah transgressions. They link the Greek enemy with murder, which is surprising, given the preoccupation of the latter with culture and refinement.

Murder, says the Maharal of Prague, does not always mean the physical destruction of another person, Many victims remain organically whole in death, robbed only of their inner life force. Rav Gedalia Schorr, z"l, points out that the Greeks "murdered" us in this manner. They were perfectly content to allow an external evidence of Jewish life. They could tolerate the Temple in Jerusalem - as a national monument, as an impressive piece of architecture. They appreciated the Torah enough that Ptolemy Philadelphius commissioned a panel of sages to translate it into his native tongue, so that his library should not lack this important literary work. It was the profound, inner life of the Jewish people that threatened them, and that they attempted to extirpate by force. Like so many vampires, they tried to leave the body of Jewish life intact, while draining it of its life-giving fluid - the practice of Torah.

This should not be surprising. It was, shall we say, in their blood. The Hebrew word for Greece is Yavan, named according to tradition, after the son of Yafet, himself one of the three sons of Noah. The paterfamilias, having indulged in too much of his home-made brew, fell in a state of dishabille in his tent. Cham, one of his sons, mockingly reported the news to his brothers. They in turn, discretely covered their father with a blanket after walking in backwards, so that they would not see their father in his debased condition.

Surprisingly, while the Torah uses the plural "and they placed" in regard to the blanket, it uses a singular form of the verb when describing how they took the covering in the first place. The Talmud explains that in fact it was only one of the brothers - Shem - who immediately understood how to protect the honor of his father. Yafet joined him only after observing the behavior of his brother, and deciding that this was the proper way to act.

Shem understood. Yafet saw. Shem reached the inner core of the matter; and there discovered the difference between right and wrong. His brother was impressed with the external, esthetic propriety of Shem's conduct relative to the mockery of Cham. He discerned the difference between the attractive and the ugly. Shem practiced morality; Yafet showed good manners and good form.

(The difference between them is illustrated in a story about ten proper English gentlemen sitting around the dinner table. One scrumptious serving of cake remains in the middle. "After you, sir," says one to his neighbor. "Oh, no. Please take it yourself." Then the lights go out, ever so briefly. When they come on again, you see one hand covering a piece of cake, pierced through by nine forks.)

And so it continued through history. Yafet's descendants would celebrate the majesty of the work of the gods, by displaying the naked human form in an athletic arena a stone's throw from the Holy Temple. In sharp contrast, we, the descendants of Shem, would there celebrate the internal. The holier the place in the Temple, the more layers of covering enveloped it. The most important part of our tefillin and mezuzot are the inner scrolls that are usually obscured from view. As the other Arnold (Matthew, not Benedict) put it, "The Greeks worshipped the holiness of beauty. The Jews found beauty in holiness."

Parents in particular have to be sensitive to the distinction between manner on the one hand, and right-and-wrong on the other. Manners, to be sure, are important, but they often fall short of the moral strength and certitude we want to convey to our children. As Jews, we are committed to doing the right thing not just because of what people will otherwise say or think, but because we are passionately involved with Truth for its own sake.

Many in the general community teach their young ones that "honest is the best policy," and mean that you usually come out ahead by owing up to the truth. But is this really what we want to teach our children? What happens when the child discovers a situation in which being truthful really isn't the best policy, where lying is a sure bet, and honesty might mean a good deal of discomfort? Should our educational message settle on a superficial pragmatism, or should we be telling them that "G-d's seal is truth," and we must always strive to imitate G-d?