A friend of mine used to be mortified when shopping with his mother over her insistence on haggling over each and every item purchased. She would negotiate with everyone: storeowners, door-to-door salesmen, even the check-out clerks at the supermarket. Poor kid would be absolutely squirming with embarrassment every time his mother went through her "is this the best price you can offer?" routine.
He must have picked up something though, because now he's the one intimidating shop assistants and bargain hunting his way through life. He claims it's not Jewish to pay retail and the only thing better than 50% off, is 2 for the price of 1.
Strange then that the archetype Jew, our ancestor Abraham, turned down an even better bargain. After his beloved wife passed away, Abraham went plot shopping. He discovered the perfect piece of real estate, a burial cave in Hebron, and enquired about the purchase price.
He was offered the "bargain" of a lifetime: free landHe was offered the "bargain" of a lifetime: free land. The locals held him in such high regard that they begged him to accept the burial plot, free of charge. Incredibly, not only did he refuse this gift, Abraham insisted on paying full price on his eventual purchase (Genesis 23:9).
But why be so high-principled? Would it have made a difference had he graciously accepted their offer? Why should the way in which he assumed possession affect the end-use of the land?
What's wrong with it?
My wife Leah and I recently noticed something peculiar about the functions we organize for our synagogue. Over the years we've played around with a number of formats and systems to attract locals and members to Torah classes and activities. When we first started, we believed that advertising free-entry was a sure catch to draw in the locals. After all, aren't we here to demonstrate the accessibility and appeal of Judaism?
On reflection, we've noticed that those lecture-series and programs for which we advertise a cover charge seem to attract almost double the turnout than for those where we charge no entry fee, and rely on outside sponsorship to make up the shortfall. Of course we make certain to publicize that no one will ever be turned away for lack of funds, but in general we now charge at least a token fee for most activities.
Not only does this not seem to deter attendance, but I honestly believe people value their time more for having paid for it. It is almost as if when people shell out for entertainment, they give themselves the liberty to drain the cup of amusement to the full, and make certain to gain as much as possible from the lecture and classes they've paid for. Economists have some fancy formula describing how people are influenced by the "sunk-cost," but from my observation, people become suspicious when offered something for free.
Abraham was not just looking for a cheap plot in which to bury his wife; he was investing in the future. His children and grandchildren visit that burial site till today and when we pray to G-d there, and ask our zeida and bubbe to intercede on our behalf, we're demonstrating our appreciation for his priorities.
Bargain hunting for luxuries may be fun, but when it comes to the fundamentals of life: our professional pride, choice of spouse, and commitment to G‑d, everyone wants to know that they've put in maximum effort to succeed, and that the final reward will be worth the price.
I don't see the connection with owning our bodies. After we pass on the body is no longer ours.
Petach Tikva, Israel
FAR, KALIF.
Today in Israel the price of land is so high that many people are homeless and others pay excessive rent and have to manage with very little less-vital things. Had Abraham set a precedent of paying an anual fee (lease) for the continued right of occupancy, all of our present excesses in land would no longer apply.
In patrticular there was a later attempt in Leviticus 19 and 25 to right this wrong by distributing the land of Canaan to the Israelite tribes and families according to the value and productive-power of the various plots. It is unfortunate this principle is no longer recognized as being of ethical significance.
petach Tikva, Israel
FAR , KALIF.
The text is, in my opinion, drawn verbatim from the purchase deed from Ephron to Avraham. It almost exactly corresponds with the style of a modern-day Transfer used to acquire the legal estate of land within England & Wales and to register the purchaser as Her Majesty's Land Registry.
Sheffield
DC, USA
chabadsilverspring.com
u value something more when you've made a contribution to it.
sydney, nsw
Las Vegas, NV
It is also true that receiving somwething for free is problematic as it may have hidden strings attached, if you cannot read the small print before you leave with what you receiveid fro free.
So ti seems that apying even a small amount of money for something assures the person that it is really a legitimate acquisiton.
Scottsdale, AZ/USA
chabadaz.com
I've never really figured out why people won't accept something for nothing but I work with a multi-level marketing company, one that is listed on the NYSE and has been in business for 37 years. When we charge more for a franchise, people buy in; when we offer it for a pittance, the folks who join are underachievers. Interesting indeed.
Hurst, TX
arlingtonchabad.org