Behar | Obligations and the Land

The Conditionals Associated With The Land

INTRODUCTION

 

Parashat BeHar, frequently joined to Parashat BeChukotai, constitutes the penultimate reading of Sefer VaYikra.  It begins with a lengthy discussion of the Sabbatical year, associated Yovel cycle and their provisions, and then introduces other laws that pertain to the land, its financial value, and our tenuous hold over them.  Thus, the text details regulations about the purchase and sale of ancestral land, buying and selling houses in walled, unwalled, or Levitical cities, and basic laws of usury and indenture.  Though the tenor of the narratives may strike us as quaint, seemingly more suited to primitive agrarian economies than to our own marvelously complex systems of commerce and capital, the thrust of the Torah's message is perhaps more relevant today than ever before:

 

The land shall not be sold in perpetuity for the land is Mine, for you are but sojourners and impermanent dwellers upon it with Me…The people of Israel are servants to Me, they are My servants for I took them out of the land of Egypt, I am God your Lord (25:23, 55).

 

In these two brief passages that serve as the summary statements for the main topics of the Parasha as outlined above, the Torah provides us with a most important key to achieving any meaningful spiritual development: the sobering recognition that our material lives are temporary and that physical mortality awaits us all.  Six thousand years of recorded history have yet to produce an account of any human being who succeeded in taking their wealth with them to the grave or else managed to exercise authority over their erstwhile underlings from beyond.  We crave to have power over the land but the land is not ours forever; we yearn for control over others but we must ultimately surrender that control to someone else. 

 

So many of our strivings, then, if they are narrowly focused upon the material and the concrete, the immediate and the extant, are doomed to disappoint us in the end.  Could there be a more pertinent message for our modern societies that are so stiflingly steeped in material excess and submerged in the life of the moment?  Life in this world is indeed precious, indicates the Torah, and the needs and wants of the body must not be denigrated, but if there is no higher spiritual purpose that informs our mortal existence then it is a passing dream and nothing more.  But cling to God and perform His will, respect His world and the others with whom we share it, and immortality may yet be within our grasp.

 

 

A CURIOUS INTRODUCTORY PHRASE

 

God spoke to Moshe at Mount Sinai saying: Speak to the people of Israel and say to them that when you enter the land that I give to you, then the land shall cease (being worked) and have a Sabbath to God.  For six years you may sow your field and for six years you may prune your vineyard, and gather in their bounty.  But in the seventh year the land shall have a Sabbath of cessation, a Sabbath unto God; you shall not sow your field nor shall you prune your vineyard…(25:1-4).

 

While the commentaries dwell at length upon the provisions of the Sabbatical year as well as its underlying symbolism, they are also occupied with the unusual introductory phrase of the section: "God spoke to Moshe AT MOUNT SINAI…"  Rashi (11^th century, France), paraphrasing the Rabbis, introduces the query that was to later become a proverb to describe any situation in which two completely disparate things are mentioned in a single breath: "What is the matter of the Shemitta (the Sabbatical year) next to Mount Sinai?!"  In other words, why does the Torah state here and nowhere else that the laws of the Sabbatical year were communicated to Moshe at Mount Sinai?  Weren't all of the mitzvot communicated to Moshe at Mount Sinai?  Is the Shemitta somehow different than the rest, that the Torah sees fit to emphasize its provenance in this way?  The difficulty is exacerbated by the fact that the contents of Sefer VaYikra are associated not with God's communications to Moshe at Mount Sinai but rather at Ohel Mo'ed – the Tent of Meeting.  This is how the book begins ("He called to Moshe, and God spoke to him from the Tent of Meeting saying…," 1:1) and nowhere in it is there any indication that God conveyed His words to Moshe at any other location.

 

 

A REVIEW OF THE CHRONOLOGY

 

Before we consider some of the resolutions put forth by the commentaries, perhaps a brief review of the relevant chronology is in order (in accordance with the view of the Ramban, 13^th century, Spain, on Shemot 24:1 and 33:7 presented with some simplifications).  Recall that the people left the slavery of Egypt during the month of Nissan "of the first year" and arrived at Mount Sinai in "the third month" (Shemot 19:1).  There they prepared and later heard God's Decalogue (20:1-13), and to Mount Sinai Moshe was bidden to ascend in order to receive the remainder of His revelation (20:17).  There he briefly remained, and then he descended to invoke God's covenant with the people (24:1-11).  Afterwards, he ascended once again, this time to receive the inscribed tablets of stone, and he remained upon Sinai's summit for a period of forty days (24:12-18).  During those forty days God communicated to him many more laws, but while he was absent the people fashioned the golden calf (Shemot 32:1-6).  While yet on Sinai, Moshe averted God's wrath and then he descended, smashed the tablets, destroyed the golden calf and rebuked the people (Shemot 32:7-30). 

 

Afterwards, he ascended Sinai for another period of forty days (Shemot 32:31), receiving during that time the second set of tablets.  Upon his descent, he commanded the people concerning the building of the Mishkan (Shemot 35-39), an undertaking that was not completed until the "first day of the first month (of Nissan)," almost a full year after the exodus from Egypt (Shemot 40:1-2).  After the completion of the Mishkan, God's communications to Moshe occurred exclusively from the Mishkan, known also as the Ohel Mo'ed or Tent of Meeting precisely because of that function.  In fact, in the directive to fashion the Ark of the Covenant, it was that very purpose that was singled out: "Place the cover upon the ark from above, and in the ark place the (tablets of) the testimony that I will give you.  I will encounter you there and speak to you from upon the cover, from between the two keruvim that are upon the ark of the testimony, concerning all that I will command you to say to the people of Israel" (Shemot 25:21-22).  Now it is the case that the Book of Shemot concluded with the observation that Moshe was initially unable to enter the holy space of the Mishkan, for "it was filled with God's glory" (Shemot 40:35).  But afterwards, God summoned him, the invitation constituting the beginning of Sefer VaYikra: "He called to Moshe, and God spoke to him from Ohel Mo'ed saying…" (VaYikra 1:1). 

 

Our Parasha's introductory phrase that  "God spoke to Moshe at Mount Sinai saying: Speak to the people of Israel…" therefore seems strangely anachronistic.   This is made doubly so in light of the fact that the section as well as the book both also conclude with similar pronouncements: "These are the statutes, the observances and the laws that God established between Himself and the people of Israel, at Mount Sinai by Moshe's hand" (VaYikra 26:47), and "These are the commands that God commanded Moshe to say to the people of Israel, at Mount Sinai" (VaYikra 27:34).

 

 

THE APPROACH OF THE IBN EZRA

 

Rabbi Avraham Ibn Ezra (12^th century, Spain) offers an explanation that is predicated upon a more general exegetical principle:

 

(The text says that God communicated these laws) "at Mount Sinai," but there is no concept of earlier or later in the Torah (in other words, events are not necessarily presented in chronological order).  Rather, our section precedes the section of "VaYikra' and all of the sections that follow it, because it was communicated at Mount Sinai.  The sealing of the covenant that is mentioned in our section refers to the events of Parashat Mishpatim.  It is mentioned here in order to join it with the other conditionals associated with the land.  Concerning the forbidden sexual relationships it was stated that their abrogation would lead to the land "spewing them forth" (VaYikra 18:25-30; 20:22), and so it says in Parashat BeChukotai that failure to observe the sabbatical years would bring about exile (see VaYikra 26:32-43).  This section thus mentions the laws of the sabbatical at the outset (commentary to 25:1).

 

With characteristic terseness, the Ibn Ezra sets out his theory.  First of all, he posits that the passages of the Torah are not necessarily set down in chronological order, a principle that he makes wide use of elsewhere.  Therefore, when our passage states that God spoke to Moshe concerning the laws of the sabbatical year "at Mount Sinai," it indicates that the communication took place BEFORE the building of the Mishkan.  After its construction, all of Moshe's encounters with God happened in its holy precincts, just as the concluding sections of Sefer Shemot and the opening section of Sefer VaYikra suggested. 

 

 

THE LARGER CONTEXT OF THE COVENANT

 

But when exactly did God speak to Moshe at Mount Sinai concerning the Shemitta?  Here, Ibn Ezra introduces another piece of evidence.  Our section that is really part of the larger conclusion to Sefer VaYikra not only is about the sabbatical and its related laws as spelled out above, but also concerns the sealing of the covenant between God and the people of Israel.  The "Blessings and the Curses" that form the backbone of Parashat BeChukotai spell out the terms of the agreement: should Israel observe God's laws faithfully, then they will enjoy the blessings; should they stray, then the consequences will be severe.  When the text states that "These are the statutes, the observances and the laws that God established BETWEEN HIMSELF AND THE PEOPLE OF ISRAEL, at Mount Sinai by Moshe's hand" (VaYikra 26:47) it implies a formal agreement concluded between the two parties, a covenant that seals their fates together.  And if it is covenants and agreements that our passage speaks of, then we have found our reference to the earlier encounter at Sinai, for in the aftermath of the revelation of the civil laws in Parashat Mishpatim (Shemot Chapters 21-23), Moshe sealed the treaty between the people and God:

 

…Moshe came and told the people all of God's words and all of the laws.  The people responded as one and said: we shall observe all of the things that God has spoken.  Moshe wrote down all of God's words and arose early the next morning.  He constructed an altar at the foot of the mountain and set up twelve pillars for the twelve tribes of Israel.  He sent forth the lads of Israel and they sacrificed peace offerings to God consisting of cows.  Moshe took half of the blood and placed it in basins, and he threw the other half upon the altar.  He took the SCROLL OF THE COVENANT and read it to the people, and they responded: everything that God has spoken we will observe and understand.  Moshe took the blood and threw it upon the people and he said: BEHOLD THE BLOOD OF THE COVENANT THAT GOD HAS SEALED WITH YOU concerning all of these things… (Shemot 24:3-8).

 

For Ibn Ezra, then, the covenant sealed at Sinai between God and the people of Israel that was spoken of in Parashat Mishpatim is identical to the covenant spoken of in our section.  It therefore must have included the laws of the Sabbatical year that are spelled out in our Parasha, as a fleeting parallel reference in Parashat Mishpatim may now be understood to imply: "Six years you may sow your land and gather in its bounty.  But in the seventh (year) you shall relinquish and let go of it so that the poor of your land may eat, with the remainder eaten by the beasts of the field.  So too shall you do for your vineyard and your olives" (Shemot 23:10-11).

 

 

WHY THE LINKAGE OUT OF ORDER?

 

There is, of course, one remaining question that must arise in light of the Ibn Ezra's explanation.  Why would the Torah record the matter out of chronological sequence?  Why would our text insert a topic that was not communicated to Moshe at the Mishkan as was the rest of Sefer VaYikra but rather pertains to the earlier timeframe of the Decalogue's aftermath?  For Ibn Ezra, it seems, there is a special didactic need to speak of the sabbatical years here, and that is to link up what he refers to as "the conditionals associated with the land." Last week's sections concluded with a discussion of the forbidden sexual relationships, and there it was stated that abrogation of those laws would lead to the land "spewing them forth" (VaYikra 18:25-30; 20:22).  Parashat BeChukotai (that for Ibn Ezra is the natural continuation of Parashat BeHar) indicates in a similar tone that failure to observe the sabbatical years would bring about the people's exile (see VaYikra 26:32-43), a consequence that is identical to being "spewed forth" (though the imagery is decidedly more subdued).  While the one addresses our relationships with others and the other our relationship with the land, the association is intentional: sexual immorality and working the land without respite are the very things that will cause Israel to suffer banishment from the new land.

 

Sometimes, in our less lucid moments, we think that we can (or ought) to have it all.  A different life, one lived without limits, without constraints, and without responsibilities beckons us with a siren call that is almost irresistible.  If only we could escape from the shackles of the moral conscience and society's laws, the great burdens that have been placed upon us by God and by man, we could experience true freedom and live!  We look at the vast world around us, the proverbial earth under our feet, and we know that we would possess it forever and do with it as we please.  We look at our own little intimate world, our very own bodies that are ours and ours alone, and we know that no one would dictate to us how we ought to use them and with whom.  Are there any cravings of the human heart that are more pronounced than our passions for amassing wealth and unrestricted fornication?  

 

Enter Sinai and the covenant with God, introducing a different perspective.  Freedom in its truest sense is not liberation from the constraints of ethics and morality, laws and ordinances, but rather the ability to exercise self-mastery.  If we can control our own desires, transcend every passing fad and shallow whim, then the doors are flung open to reveal a more profound freedom, one that is imbued with ultimate meaning and inestimable worth.  The spiritual fulfillment that every human heart, in its deepest recesses yearns for, can only be attained after we have secured some measure of freedom from our insatiable appetites for control.  This perhaps is the essence of Ibn Ezra's linkage that draws together the "conditionals associated with the land," the only real guarantees extended to the people of Israel to achieve security and peace.

 

Shabbat Shalom