INTRODUCTION TO PARASHAT HASHAVUA

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

In memory of Yakov Yehuda ben Pinchas Wallach
and Miriam Wallach bat Tzvi Donner

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

PARASHOT BEHAR BECHUKOTAI

REDEEMING HOUSES AND SELVES

By Rabbi Yaakov Beasley

A. Introduction – The Case Summary

The parashiot of Behar and Bechukotai conclude Sefer Vayikra and are usually read together.  Parashat Behar discusses the Shemitta year, the agricultural Shabbat during which working the land is prohibited; the laws of the fiftieth Jubilee year, the Yovel, during which we proclaim "liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants" (25:10); and the laws regarding the redemption and release of indentured servants.  Parashat Bechukotai seals the covenant of Sinai by guaranteeing liberty, security, and prosperity throughout Eretz Yisrael if the laws of the Torah are observed and threatening slavery, poverty, and exile for their violation. 

In last year's lecture, we discussed the parallels between the two parashiot.[1]  This year, we will discuss the specific rules of how to redeem property, found in the context of the laws of Yovel, and the role played by the go'el, the redeemer, in this act.  We will also discus the unique laws regarding the sale of a house, as opposed to the sale of property.

Verses 25:23-28 discuss the redemption of property and can be divided into two parts: the command (v. 23-24) and the instructions (v. 25-28). Formally, the instruction begins with a casuistic (a conditional clause): "Ki yamuch achikha u-makhar me-achuzzato" – "If your brother becomes poor and sells some of his property." From the story of Navot's vineyard (Melakhim I 21), we see that the Jewish People traditionally clung to their ancestral property, even risked their lives in the face of heavy royal pressure.  Indeed, Rashi states (v. 25) that a person would only sell his inheritance under dire circumstances. In 25:35, the verse begins with a similar phrase: "Ki yamuch achikha u-matah yado."[2] The phrase "mata yado" literally means "his hand shakes" (the root m.u.t. means "to waver, shake"), a metaphor referring to economic weakness. Thus, in modern terms, the root m.u.kh. means to become "shaky" financially and unable to support oneself.  As a measure of his desperation, the poor man prefers to suffer the loss of land and mortgage his inheritance rather than the cruel consequences of an unpaid debt.

What does the poor man actually sell? Verses 14-15 imply that the landholder sold only the land's produce or yield, not the property itself. In effect, he only rented out the land (at most for forty-nine years), but he did not surrender its title. Having received the rent in advance as a single lump sum payment, just as if there had been a sale, the landowner now faces the difficulty of retrieving his mortgaged land.

How is this accomplished? Verses 25-28 provide the answer: a go'el (presumably one of the relatives listed later in v. 48-49, a brother, uncle, cousin, or any blood relative) may "redeem" (ga'al) the property (v. 25).  If the original owner lacks a go'el but somehow gathers the necessary means, he may redeem the land himself (v. 26) by repaying the buyer part of the rent originally advanced him (v. 27). Based on the number of years left until the yovel year, the amount would be the sum first borrowed less the sum that the mortgage holder had earned from the land during his tenancy. In the worst case scenario, the property remains with the buyer until the yovel (v. 28), at which point the original landholder regain full possession of it.

B. Redeeming the House

The Torah establishes two separate laws, one for the sale of fields and one for the sale of houses. When a field is sold, it is returned automatically to the original owner in the fiftieth year.  The sale of a house, however, becomes permanent if it is not redeemed within twelve months, unless it is in an open field.  The Rivash and the Chizkuni give an economic explanation for the distinction between the two cases.  If a wall surrounds a city, then the land upon which a house stands is not intended for planting.  The Torah only requires that land that a man uses to produce his living, such as a crop field or a vineyard, be returned to the original owner.  Since Hashem does not want the person's source of sustenance to be cut off, He decreed that the land, even when sold, must eventually return to its original owner.  This is also the case regarding houses in open fields; since the surrounding land may be used later for growing crops, the house on such land cannot be sold permanently.  However, one whose residence is within the city walls is rarely provided with his livelihood from his house (any building can serve as a storefront).[3]   Therefore, absent the direct connection between the person's residence and his livelihood, there is no need to require its redemption during the yovel. 

The Chizkuni offers another interpretation for the different rules based on the differing mindsets of the buyers.  Houses in the countryside were often used for short-term rentals; therefore, the assumption is that even if a person buys a house in the country, it is understood that the house will be returned to the original owner during the yovel year.  However, houses in urban areas were often sold in perpetuity.  Psychologically, states the Chizkuni, a person would not invest in another's house, or settle comfortably within it, if he knew that he would be required to relinquish his rights to it at the yovel.  To protect the buyer, once the seller did not exercise his right to redeem the house, it remained in the buyer's property forever.

In contrast, the Ramban explains the difference between the two cases based on the psychological makeup of the seller.  Unlike the case of the person forced to sell family fields, one forced to forsake his home suffers tremendously; the Torah therefore grants him one year to redeem it.  However, after a year, the seller resigns himself to his loss.  He has clearly found other accommodations in the meantime, and since his livelihood is not dependent on the house, as in the case of fields, the opportunity for redemption disappears. 

The Meshekh Chakhmah provides a different and creative rationale for distinguishing between the two cases.  Cities in ancient societies served another purpose - a wall of defense against marauding and invading armies. In order for the city to withstand the onslaught of enemy invaders, however, it must contain a stable population, who know its streets, alleyways, and hidden paths.  If every yovel a considerable portion of the population is replaced, the city's defenses would be weakened.  

            C. The Meaning of Redemption

To fully appreciate the role played by the go'el, we must analyze the different responsibilities that the Torah places upon him in addition to those explained above. Three roles stand out in particular.  In Bamidbar 35:16-21, we learn that the go'el ha-dam may avenge the death of a relative by tracking down and putting the killer to death before he could escape to a city of refuge. As head of his clan, the go'el receives any monetary restitution due to a deceased relative for a wrong committed against him (Bamidbar 5:8). Finally, the go'el assists his relatives in obtaining justice in a lawsuit (see Iyov 19:25; Tehillim 119:154; Mishlei 23:11; Yerimiyahu 50:34; and Eicha 3:58).  Essentially, the go'el serves one main goal – to recover the tribe's losses, whether of people or property.[4]

D. The Lessons of Redeeming the Land

Based on what we have learned so far, we may understand the twofold theological basis for the legislation of land redemption (v. 23-24): "The land shall not be sold permanently for the land is mine, for you are resident aliens and settlers with me." To support the prohibition against the permanent transfer of ownership of land in Israel, Hashem contrasts the status of a landowner and that of a resident alien. Hashem is the landowner; He alone holds title to the property, and the Jewish People merely work it on his behalf. Israel is only a resident alien (ger) and settler (toshav). The Jewish People live not on their own land, but on land that belongs to someone else, and since she holds no title, she has no right to sell that land. Permanent sale infringes on Hashem's rights.

There is a second basis for the command as well (v. 24): "Throughout the land of your possession, you shall permit (titnu) redemption (ge'ulah) for the land." The prohibition in v.23 outlaws the permanent sale of property, and this positive command allows for its return when temporarily separated from its owner. The command logically follows after the prohibition; having established Hashem's authority as landowner, the Torah now outlines His policy concerning the land. Without this policy, the Jewish People would not have likely permitted redemption of property. Indeed, quite the opposite scenario is probable. Unavoidable bankruptcy would compel the poor to mortgage some of their land just to survive, while the rich in turn would increase their land holdings and reap a handsome profit, which would be turned into other land purchases.  Ultimately, a few wealthy land barons would rise above the vast majority of landless poor.[5]  It is the accumulation of economic power that these laws seek to prevent. Whether this is accomplished through the mechanism of the go'el, through self-redemption, or through the yovel year, Hashem intends redemption of land to maintain a social and economic equilibrium in Israel.

E. Redeeming People

Our chapter also discuses the laws of redemption of people (v. 47-55), which are similar to the laws concerning the redemption of land.  Here, too, repayment of a debt probably stands behind the crisis (u-makh ahikha, "and your brother becomes poor," v. 47). To obtain funds, the threatened individual has sold himself (nimkar) into servitude to a foreign financier, working off a monetary advance by laboring in his employ.  The fact that he sells himself rather than land may imply that he has already mortgaged his property; his only remaining asset is his labor. If so, this represents an even more extreme example of insolvency than before.  Like the case above, the Torah aids him in regaining his economic independence by listing the same three avenues as we saw in vv. 25-28. First, his relatives may redeem him from servitude. Second, he comes into money, he may redeem himself. Finally, and as in the case of mortgaged land, if the above two means fail, the next yovel affects his release.

Verse 53 specifies the special treatment due an enslaved Jew and prohibits harsh treatment.  The boss is to handle him not like an ordinary slave, but like a "day laborer," an employee hired for a fixed period of time (see Devarim 24:14-15). By placing the Jew under His protection, Hashem limits the master's control and declares that despite his misfortune, the Jew is still a full citizen and not a lowly slave. More importantly, in verse 55, Hashem states, "The children of Israel are Mine; they are My servants whom I brought out of the land of Egypt…" An enslaved Jew goes free because Hashem already owns him as a servant.

The Torah engages in a form of wordplay between the two forms of the verb y.tz.a here.  Verse 54 says that the redeemed Jew is to "go out" (ve-yatza) - that is, go free. According to verse 55, Hashem "brought out" Israel (hotzeiti) – that is, He set them free from Egypt. Implicitly, the wordplay links the institution of ge'ulah, redemption, with Yetziat Mitzrayim. The redemption of our parasha is the natural outgrowth of what Hashem did in Egypt.  The institution of ge'ulah recreates and perpetuates the first liberation from Egyptian slavery within later, settled Israel. Whenever an act of ge'ulah occurs, it is like a miniature exodus. 

In turn, the role of go'el assumes an entirely different hue.  In essence, the human relative, the go'el, carries out the redemption policy of the "Great Redeemer," Hashem himself.[6] One might even argue that the kinsman personally represents Hashem in such transactions. When circumstances conspire so that human redemption fails to free the enslaved, the laws of yovel intervene; Hashem Himself steps in to perform redemption, just as he did in Egypt.