Timeless Torah

Torah is succinct. Each and every word is precise. Indeed if this was the Torah, rather than someone’s thoughts on Torah, the second sentence in today’s TIMELESS TORAH would be deemed unnecessary.

With that in mind, we raise the following question, why does the Torah tell us that, “Jacob left Be’er Sheva and went to Charan?” At first glance, this is Biblical writing at its worst; sloppy and repetitive. If the narrative merely informed us that Jacob went to Charan, we would ourselves know that he left his previous location which we already know is Be’er Sheva.

Rashi, ever ready to explain every nuance of the text, explains that the Torah is telling us that the departure of a holy person has a negative effect on the standards of a city and its inhabitants. Therefore the Bible says, “Jacob left,” and “Be’er Sheva” was worse for it.

The Chasam Sofer (1762-1838) wonders why the Torah first teaches this important lesson when talking about Jacob. Was not Jacob’s grandfather, Abraham, a great traveler? The first of the Patriarchs had two generations prior packed his bags and left home. And yet no mention of this weighty message: Why?

Quite simple, remarks the Chasam Sofer. In Abraham’s case, he was surrounded by idolators. Those few, who Abraham and Sarah did influence, went with them to the Land of Canaan. Those left behind, (i.e., the majority) were not interested in Abraham’s persuasive arguments. Indeed they were glad he left, and any glory, brilliance, and splendor (Rashi’s words) that left with the departure of the righteous Abraham, was a blessed relief. Jacob however lived with his parents, Isaac and Rivkah, and they were deeply affected by his departure, not just on an emotional level because he was their son, but also spiritually, because of how saintly and devout Jacob was.

This first answer compares Abraham’s and Jacob’s immediate societies and their reactions to the holy men in their midst. There is another solution. But here we distinguish between the two Patriarchs themselves. In the case of Abraham, it was obvious that he would affect his surroundings: after all he devoted his greatest efforts towards that very goal. As the Midrash points out, Abraham in particular was very involved with upgrading the moral conduct of his peers and introducing them to the belief in one G-d.

In contrast Jacob represented the opposite extreme. He was a, “Dweller in tents,” involved primarily in his own program of study and self-improvement. It is specifically at this juncture that the Torah has a surprise for us. Even Jacob, a person who spends his day in the local study hall and does not venture too far afield also influences and enhances the conduct of his friends and neighbors.

This past week, my own 6 feet 4 inches tall Yacov (of whom it is said, “He is like any other boy...just a little more so,”) telephoned from South Africa. His call was all about his shlichus, that wonderful program started by the Rebbe that affords older Yeshiva students the opportunity to further develop themselves and shape other younger students.

On a practical level, we need to strike a balance between taking care of our own spiritual needs and affecting others around us. This is not always so easy. But one thing comes clear from the shlichus project. Focus your energy on positively changing your immediate surroundings and there is less danger of them influencing you.

Ever wonder on which end of the influence cycle you’re on? Read this amazing study. The book To Kindle a Soul devotes an entire chapter to the most common babysitting device in US society, the television. The University of Washington compared the behavior-modifying effects of television upon children.

In 1950, the US and South Africa had nearly-identical homicide rates. By 1956 the vast majority of US families owned a television, and within 15 years (when those children were old enough to become criminals) the homicide rates in the US rose 92%, while South Africa experienced no change. Fourteen years after South Africa’s white families purchased televisions, the white homicide rate had moved 130%.

There was further confirmation of this startling revelation when the study correlated when different US regions started watching television. No less than the prestigious Journal of the American Medical Association wrote that, “The evidence indicates that if television technology had never been developed, there would today be 10,000 fewer homicides each year in the United States, 70,000 fewer rapes, and 700,000 fewer injurious assaults.”

This week’s Fax of Life should not be construed as a diatribe against TV (though it may deserve one). It’s just raises two issues. (#1) Who and what are the influences in our homes? Are we importing spiritual values, via books, tapes, discussions, into our homes or not? Either will change us. (#2) From Jacob the Patriatrch to Yacov the Yeshiva bochur, and everyone else who cares for his fellow Jew...you can be the positive force in your community.

You can make a difference. So don’t walk away from your ‘Be’er Sheva’. We’ll all be the worse for it.