And it shall be, when he sits upon the throne of his kingdom, he shall write for himself a copy of this Torah in a scroll, out of that which is before the priests, the Levites. And it shall be with him, and he shall read therein all the days of his life; that he may learn to fear the LORD his G-d, to keep all the words of this Torah and these statutes, to do them; so that his heart be not lifted up above his brethren, and that he turn not aside from the commandment, to the right hand, or to the left; to the end that he may prolong his days in his kingdom, he and his children, in the midst of Israel. (Devarim 17:18-20)

The Torah is to guide the King; to direct him; keep him humble; keep him focused (See Ramban to v. 19 and 20).

Rashi (ad loc), based on Sanhedrin 21b, explains that in fact the King is to write two Torah scrolls. This is implied by the word “mishneh,” which renders “double.” One copy is to accompany him at all times. The other is to be left in his treasury.

But why two? And why keep one hidden away in the King’s treasury?

I believe the Torah is teaching us something profound.

As the leader of the Jewish People, the King needs a Torah by his side. (It’s almost like the yeshivah bochur who brings his Gemara everywhere. Everywhere! Even weddings!) The King looks to the Torah for counsel. He guides his flock with its sage advice. He binds it to his arm and constantly refers to it. The Mishnah (Sanhedrin 2:4) teaches: “ …when he goes to war- he brings it with him, when he returns- it returns with him, when he sits in judgment- it sits with him, when he sits down to eat- it sits with him…”

This Torah is constantly “in use.” It represents how Torah informs our daily lives. It is a Torah that speaks to modern man; to the human condition. It is a Torah that responds to this ever changing world; a Torah which exists not in “theory,” but rather in practice. It is “applied Torah.”

The King has to be able to roll his sleeves up and address the real needs of the people (See King David’s rhetoric in Berachot 4a). The danger in working “down in the trenches,” is that one may make accommodations; modify or adapt the Torah. One may be tempted to fit the Torah to his needs.

There is a story about a shul that needed a new Torah scroll. The best sofer who could be found was commissioned to do the work. The synagogue board got together and decided to hold a contest for a torah scroll cover. The best cover would be displayed on the scroll when the scroll was completed and ready to be used for the first time. The other entries would be used throughout the year. Many scroll covers were submitted. The winning entry had a beautifully embroidered picture of Jerusalem. Gold, silver, copper, red, blue, crimson, white and purple were skillfully used. It was magnificent. When it came time to put the cover on the scroll, a slight problem came up. The cover was too small. Oy! Now what? The board said, unfortunately, we can’t use it. The woman who made the cover was not about to see her hard work be for naught. She asked, “Can’t we just cut the Torah to make it fit the cover?”

This is why the King needs the second Torah. This second Torah, which symbolically stays unused in his treasury, represents unbending principles that never change; the tried and true tradition that does not accommodate nor is modified. This is a Torah that is left in the King’s genizah, his storehouse. It is pristine; untouched; unsullied by the rigors of “practical application.” The King returns to it and it guides him as well. It ensures that his “day to day Torah” is in consonance with the “eternal Law.” It ensures that he remains true to the mesorah.

In reality there are not “two Torahs,” but one.

We engage the modern world, but we do so with the age old principles of our Torah. No, we cannot “cut the Torah to make it fit the cover.” We respond to the needs of our community and its individuals with great sensitivity but remain solid and steadfast in our commitment to Torah values. It is a delicate balance, a tightrope of sorts. It provides a great challenge, but what appears to be a dialectic, or a tension, is in reality a glorious harmony; an elegant synthesis.