From:          "Yeshivat Har Etzion's Israel Koschitzky Virtual Beit Midrash"
To:            yhe-parsha@vbm-torah.org
Subject:       Parsha 46:Re'eh


                   YESHIVAT HAR ETZION
      ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH (VBM)
*********************************************************
                           
                    PARASHAT HASHAVUA
                           

       Shemitta of Loans and Shemitta of the Land
                           
                  By Rav Elhanan Samet


I.  IS  THERE  A  CONNECTION BETWEEN  THE  TWO  FORMS  
OF SHEMITTA?

   "At  the  end of seven years you shall make a Shemitta
   (release).  And  this is the manner  of  the   release:
   every  creditor  who  has lent to his  neighbor   shall
   release it; he shall not demand it of his neighbor  or
   of  his  brother, because he has declared  a  Shemitta
   unto  God.  You may demand it of a gentile,  but  that
   which  is  between  you  and your  brother  you   shall
   release." (Devarim 15:1-3)

     Is this Shemitta concerning monetary matters related
to  the Shemitta of land that occurs in the seventh year?
A  dual  connection would seem immediately apparent  from
the text. Firstly, both of these mitzvot apply during the
seventh year of every Shemitta cycle. Secondly, the  same
root  "sh-m-t"  (release) is used by the  Torah  in   both
places:

   "Six  years  shall you sow your land  and  gather   its
   produce.   And  the  seventh  you  shall   release   it
   (tishmetena) and let it lie fallow, that the  poor  of
   your nation may eat..." (Shemot 23:10-11)

      The  concern for the poor also serves as the reason
for  both  mitzvot,  as  is clear from  the  above   verse
(concerning  Shemitta of the land) and  as  explained  at
length  in  our parasha (concerning Shemitta of  monetary
debts):

   "If  there  should  be among you a  poor   person  from
   among  your  brethren... you  shall  not  harden   your
   heart  nor  shut  your hand from your poor  brother...
   Guard  yourself lest you have an uncharitable  thought
   in   your  heart,  saying:  'The  seventh   year,   the
   Shemitta  year, approaches' - such that  your  eye  is
   evil towards your poor brother..." (15:7, 15:9)

      An  additional hint at the connection  between   the
Shemitta  of  monetary  matters  and  shemittat    karkaot
(Shemitta  of the land) is to be found in Sefer  Vayikra:
in  our  parasha  we  read, "because he  has  declared   a
Shemitta  UNTO  GOD"  (15:2), while  in  Vayikra  25   the
seventh  year  (in connection with the  Shemitta  of  the
land) is twice called "Shabbat UNTO GOD."

       But  none  of  this  is   sufficient  to  prove   a
qualitative connection between the two mitzvot: there are
other mitzvot that are related to the seven-year Shemitta
cycle,  such  as the relinquishing of the  tithes  (bi'ur
ma'asrot) which occurs "at the end of three years" (14:28-
29),  and also the mitzva of "hak'hel" (gathering of  the
entire nation), which occurs  "at the end of seven years,
at the time of the Shemitta year" (Devarim 31:10).

     The root "sh-m-t" occurs only in connection with the
two  mitzvot under discussion, but it would seem that  it
refers  to  two different objects. Likewise, concern  for
the  poor  and the impoverished serves as the reason  for
several other mitzvot in the Torah.

      A  number of fundamental differences would seem   to
point to a lack of connection between the two mitzvot:

  i.The  mitzva  of Shemitta concerning monetary  matters
     is  not  related to or dependent on  the   land,  but
     rather an obligation that pertains to the individual
     and  applies  whether  he is  in  Eretz   Yisrael  or
     elsewhere.

  ii.  According to halakha, Shemitta of money  does  not
     apply  at exactly the same time as Shemitta  of   the
     land:  the  latter  applies throughout  the   seventh
     year,  while the former applies at a specific  point
     in  time - the conclusion of the seventh year.  Thus
     Chazal  understood the indication of timing  in   the
     verse,  "at  the END of seven years." In any   event,
     the  practical significance of Shemitta of debts  is
     actually felt during the eighth year (which  is  the
     first year of the next seven-year cycle).
    
      This difference concerns not only the timing of the
two  mitzvot,  but  also  their  fundamentally  different
character:  in  one,  the individual  is  prevented  from
engaging in any agricultural work, like a sort of "day of
Shabbat"  that  lasts an entire year -  "Shabbat  of   the
land." The other involves a comprehensive cancellation of
all  debts  among Am Yisrael, occurring at  one  specific
moment every seven years. The cancellation of debts would
seem  to  belong  more logically in the  Yovel  (Jubilee)
year,  when slaves are freed and fields return  to  their
original  owners.  Nevertheless, the Torah  sees  fit  to
command  the  cancellation of  debts  every  seven  years
(while  the  Yovel year contains no such  command,  other
than insofar as it is the "eighth" year, at the beginning
of  which debts are canceled because of the seventh  year
which  precedes  it), while slaves and fields  are  freed
only once in fifty years.
    
II.  IS  SHEMITTA  OF  LOANS DEPENDENT  ON  YOVEL  OR  
ON SHEMITTA OF THE LAND?
    
     Indeed,  according to the Rambam and  certain   other
Rishonim,  the  mitzva  of  shemittat  kesafim  (Shemitta
pertaining to monetary matters) is related to Yovel:

   "The  mitzva of shemittat kesafim is required  by  the
   Torah  in  the  seventh year only at a time  when   the
   Yovel   is  observed,  for  Yovel  too   involves   the
   Shemitta of land since the land returns to its  owners
   with  no  monetary  exchange... but according  to   our
   Sages   shemittat   kesafim  applies   in    our   time
   regardless, even though the Yovel is not observed,  in
   order  that  the  custom  of canceling  debts   not  be
   forgotten  from Israel." (Laws of Shemitta  and  Yovel
   9:2-3)

     The source for the Rambam's ruling is to be found in
a famous beraita (Gittin 36a):

   "We  learn:  Rabbi said, 'This is the  manner  of   the
   release:  he shall release...' - the Torah is speaking
   of  two separate shemittot. One is the Shemitta of the
   land,  and  the  other is the Shemitta  pertaining   to
   monetary  matters. At the time when  you  release  the
   land,  you also release debts. At a time when  you  do
   not release the land, you do not cancel debts."

The  Rambam  understand  the  phrase  "release   land"  as
meaning  "returning  the  land  to  its  owners   with  no
monetary  exchange." In other words, he takes the  phrase
in  a  non-literal manner as indicating Yovel rather than
shemittat karkaot.

        Rashi,    however,    understands   this   beraita
differently:

   "'At  a time when you do not release the land' -  such
   as  in  our  time, when the sanctity of  the  land   is
   canceled  -  'you do not cancel debts' -  even  though
   the  cancellation  of debts is an  obligation  on   the
   individual,  and  is not dependent  on  the  land,   we
   learn from the comparison [to shemittat karkaot]  that
   it does not apply today."

      Thus,  Rashi  perceives  a connection   between  the
release  of  the  land (letting it  lie  fallow)  IN   THE
SEVENTH  YEAR - which, in his opinion, no longer  applies
following  the  destruction  of  the  Temple  since    the
sanctity  of  the land is canceled - and the  release  of
debts. It seems that our parasha concentrates only on one
new  law  concerning  the  Shemitta  year  -  a   law  not
mentioned  previously in the Torah. But this new  law  is
ultimately  one  of  the laws of the Shemitta  year,  and
therefore  its heading in the parasha hints to  the  fact
that  when  the  Shemitta year is not actually  observed,
then  this  law  of  canceling  debts  is  likewise    not
observed, since this detail is bound up with the entirety
of  the  Shemitta laws, even though it is  an  obligation
that pertains to the individual.

       This  perception  forces  us  to   return  to   our
consideration of the connection between shemittat kesafim
and  shemittat  karkaot  in the  seventh  year,  since   a
qualitative connection is indeed hinted at here.

III.  WHY  DOES SHEMITTA OF LOANS OCCUR AT  THE  TIME 
OF SHEMITTA OF THE LAND?

     The  clarification  of  this  connection   draws  our
attention  to  the fact that the Torah is  addressing  an
agricultural  nation. If a loan is taken by  someone  who
works  the  land,  how  and when  must  it  be   returned?
Obviously,  when  he reaps his harvest  and  gathers  his
crops.   In  other  words,  only  at  the  end    of   the
agricultural year or, at any rate, only during its second
half  will the farmer be able to repay the loan. But what
happens to the Israelite farmer who refrains from working
the  land during the seventh year? He reaches the end  of
this  year without having reaped any harvest - how, then,
will he repay his debt?!

      Shemittat kesafim at the CONCLUSION of the  seventh
year  is therefore an inevitable consequence of the  laws
of  letting  the  land lie fallow throughout  the  entire
seventh  year. The problem of repaying debts is a problem
that  actually  relates  to the eighth  year,  since  the
borrowing farmer has no harvest from which he is able  to
return the loan. At the beginning of the seventh year  no
such  problem exists, since the harvest of the sixth year
is  still available to the farmer and he can use that for
repaying  a debt. (During the course of the seventh  year
itself, it seems, the poor and the wealthy were nourished
alike  from  the produce that grew in everyone's  fields,
for these were declared "hefker," ownerless, as the verse
teaches, "that the poor of your nation may eat...")

      Thus  we  can  understand the  date   for  shemittat
kesafim  -  it occurs at the transition from the  seventh
year to the eighth. We can also understand the dependence
of  shemittat kesafim on the Shemitta of the land,   even
though the latter is an obligation on the individual that
is not in itself dependent on the land. When the Shemitta
of  the  land is not observed, there is no need for  this
protection for a borrowing farmer, for during the seventh
year  he  will be sowing and reaping as usual,  and  will
therefore be able to repay his debts.

     Does  this  qualitative  connection  (in   which  the
Shemitta  of  the land in the seventh year  represents  a
REASON   for   shemittat  kesafim  that  comes    at   its
conclusion) have any substantiation in the text? Rabbeinu
Yosef   Bekhor   Shor,  a  medieval  Ashkenazi    biblical
commentator, finds explicit expression for the connection
between  the  two  shemittot further on in  the  parasha,
where  the  reason  for shemittat  kesafim  is  given   as
follows:  "He shall not demand it of his neighbor  or  of
his  brother, FOR HE HAS DECLARED A SHEMITTA  UNTO 
GOD."

Who  is the subject of the latter phrase? R. Yosef Bekhor
Shor  explains  that  the subject is  the  same  as   that
mentioned  in the previous verse - the debtor's  neighbor
and brother:

   "For  he - HIS BROTHER - has declared a Shemitta -  of
   his FIELDS - for the sake of heaven, and THEREFORE  HE
   HAS NO MEANS TO REPAY THE DEBT!"

In  other  words, the creditor shall not demand repayment
because  THE  DEBTOR has declared shemitta.  Bekhor  Shor
interprets the continuation of the text accordingly:

   "'You  may demand it of a gentile' - for a gentile  is
   sowing  and  reaping and gathering (as usual)  AND  IS
   ABLE TO REPAY. But your brother did not plough or  sow
   or reap, and so how can he repay?"
  
IV. CANCELLATION OF DEBT OR POSTPONEMENT OF
REPAYMENT?

     This connection between Shemitta of the land in  the
seventh  year which represents the reason, and  shemittat
kesafim  at  the  end of that year which  represents  the
result,  gives rise to the following difficulty:  why  is
there a need for complete cancellation of the debt at the
end  of  the  seventh year? The reason for  the  debtor's
inability  to  repay  his debt - the  fact  that  he   has
refrained  from  all  agricultural  activity  during  the
seventh  year  - is a temporary one, and it  is  entirely
possible  that  when  he comes to reap  his  harvest  and
gather  his  crops during the second half of  the  eighth
year,  he  will recover financially and will in  fact  be
able  to  repay his debt. From the point of view  of  the
reason for shemittat kesafim, it would be sufficient  for
the  Torah  to mandate a postponement of repayment  until
such time as the debtor is able to earn again.

      Let  us  explore the answer to this via two   verses
which are subject to differing interpretation:

   "And   this  is  the  manner  of  the   release:  every
   creditor  who  has lent to his neighbor shall  release
   it  (shamot  kol  ba'al masheh yado asher  yasheh   be-
   re'ehu);  he  shall not demand it of  his  neighbor...
   But  that  which is between you and your  brother  you
   shall release." (15:2-3)

     These are difficult verses from the point of view of
composition   analysis.  According   to   the    "te'amim"
(punctuation/cantillation)  and   vowelling,   the    word
"masheh" is linked to "yado," meaning that every creditor
should  release  "masheh-yado,"  i.e.  his  loan.   It  is
therefore  possible to understand (although this  is  not
the  only  possible interpretation) that the creditor  is
commanded to relinquish the loan or to forgive it.

      But  Rashi  does not understand verse  2   thus.  He
connects the word "masheh" not the following word but  to
the previous lone, rendering the meaning, "Every creditor
should  release his hand." (This interpretation  does  in
fact  contradict  the  punctuation  of  the  verse.)   The
significance  of  Rashi's  interpretation  is  that    the
command  "release" refers to the HAND  of  the  creditor,
i.e. he should not lift his hand and demand repayment  of
the  debt. This does not imply cancellation of the  debt,
but  rather the act of collecting the loan is prohibited.
It  should be remembered, however, that nothing has  been
said  concerning the time period during which the act  of
collecting is being forbidden.

      Let us summarize Rashi's approach. According to his
understanding  of the beraita mentioned above,  shemittat
kesafim  is  connected to the Shemitta  of  land  in  the
seventh  year,  and  this  connection  testifies   to    a
different  understanding of shemittat kesafim.  It  means
not  a complete cancellation of debt, which is a category
of  the  laws of Yovel, but rather an easing  up  on  the
farmer who observed the laws of the "Shabbat of the land"
and is therefore unable to return his debt at the end  of
the  seventh  year  or at the beginning  of  the  eighth.
According to this perception there is no need for  a  law
comprehensively  canceling debts.  Indeed,  from  Rashi's
explanation  it  appears possible that shemittat  kesafim
refers  not to a cancellation of the debt, but rather  to
the  prohibition of collecting it, which applies  to  the
creditor.  This prohibition applies from the moment  when
the  seventh year ends - "at the end of seven  years"   -
and  it  continues  throughout the  eighth.  Until  which
point?

V. THE SEFER YEREIM'S NOVEL UNDERSTANDING

     R.  Eliezer  of  Metz, a student  of   Rabbeinu  Tam,
writes  as follows in the old edition of his work on  the
mitzvot, "Sefer Ha-Yere'im:"

   "It  appears  to  me that Shemitta  does  not   mean  a
   forgiving  (of loans). Rather, the Holy  One  commands
   that  one 'let lie' - i.e., to leave it alone, not  to
   demand  it, UNTIL HE RETURNS IT OF HIS OWN ACCORD,  as
   it  is  written, 'let it lie' and 'he shall not demand
   it.'  For  whenever the Torah uses the word 'Shemitta'
   it   means   to  'leave  alone,'  not   to   relinquish
   altogether.  As  it is written [regarding  the  land],
   'And  the  seventh  year  it shall  be  left   and  lie
   fallow' - meaning, you shall leave it alone.
   Thus  a  loan always has the condition that the debtor
   not  keep  him  (the  creditor)  waiting   forever  for
   repayment from his storehouse. If he does so, then  he
   is  termed  an  'evil debtor,' as in the  verse,   'The
   evil debtor does not pay back' (Tehillim 37:21)."

     According to the above view, the postponement of the
repayment  of the loan begins, obviously, at the  end  of
the  seventh  year,  as  set down  in  the  halakha,   and
continues  UNTIL THE DEBTOR REPAYS THE DEBT  OF  HIS 
OWN ACCORD.  When  does this occur? From the legal  point  of
view,  the debtor must repay his loan the moment  he  has
available assets (money, produce). But after the  end  of
the  seventh year, the creditor cannot force him in  this
regard,  since the loan has passed the "critical  moment"
from  which  time the creditor is forbidden  to  collect.
However, from a moral point of view, if the debtor  fails
to  return the loan when it is possible for him to do so,
he is a sinner and is termed an "evil debtor."

      The  difficulty in this interpretation lies in   the
creditor's  inability to force the debtor to  return  the
loan.  But  attention should be paid to the fact  that  a
debtor who has the means to repay and fails to do  so  is
generally  unable  hide this fact.  Therefore  the  moral
requirement that he not show ingratitude and  be  counted
in the category of "evil debtors" creates social pressure
which in turn leto a reasonable chance of having the loan
repaid.

     Although this innovative teaching does not appear in
the  later edition of Sefer Ha-Yere'im (he seems to  have
changed  his mind), we may still adopt it and defend  it.
There  are  several points which recommend the  Yere'im's
original interpretation, among which are:

  i.This  teaching  fits  in with Rashi's  interpretation
     both  of  the Talmud (his explanation of the beraita
     of   Rabbi   on   Gittin  36a,   as   well   as   his
     interpretation of the words of Rabba -  Gittin  37b)
     and of the verse in our parasha, "Every creditor who
     has lent to his neighbor shall release it."

  ii.      This  explanation  also  sits   well  with  the
     literal  meaning  of the mishnayot  at  the   end  of
     massekhet Shevi'it, dealing with repayment of  loans
     which  have continued beyond the seventh  year,   and
     the  explanations  of  the  Amoraim  in   the  Talmud
     Yerushalmi and Bavli on these mishnayot. If the  end
     of the seventh year indeed cancels debts altogether,
     it  is hard to understand these mishnayot. (See also
     the  mishna commentary Mishna Rishona, who for  this
     reason  arrived at the Yere'im's novel  conclusion.)
     It  would  seem  that  just as different   views  are
     prevalent  among  the Rishonim with  regard   to  the
     mitzva  of  shemittat  kesafim,  likewise   different
     perceptions may be detected in the Talmudic sources.

  iii.    This  innovation also suits the literal meaning
     of  the text, as the Yere'im himself asserts. It was
     based  on  the literal meaning of the text that   the
     Yere'im  arrived at his teaching, and  the   teaching
     remains valid at this level (i.e. peshuto shel Mikra
     but  not practical halakha) even if its author later
     went back on it.

(Translated by Kaeren Fish)

*********************************************************

YESHIVAT HAR ETZION
ISRAEL KOSCHITZKY VIRTUAL BEIT MIDRASH
ALON SHEVUT, GUSH ETZION 90433

Copyright (c) 1999 Yeshivat Har Etzion
All Rights Reserved