Hubbry Logo
BeharBeharMain
Open search
Behar
Community hub
Behar
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Behar
Behar
Behar
View on Wikipedia
from Wikipedia
A shofar

Behar, BeHar, Be-har, or B'har (בְּהַר‎—Hebrew for "on the mount," the fifth word, and the first distinctive word, in the parashah) is the 32nd weekly Torah portion (פָּרָשָׁה‎, parashah) in the annual Jewish cycle of Torah reading and the ninth in the Book of Leviticus. The parashah tells the laws of the Sabbatical year (שמיטה‎, Shmita) and limits on debt servitude. The parashah constitutes Leviticus 25:1–26:2. It is the shortest of the weekly Torah portions in the Book of Leviticus (although not the shortest in the Torah). It is made up of 2,817 Hebrew letters, 737 Hebrew words, 57 verses, and 99 lines in a Torah Scroll (סֵפֶר תּוֹרָה‎, Sefer Torah). [1]

Jews generally read it in May. The lunisolar Hebrew calendar contains up to 55 weeks, the exact number varying between 50 in common years and 54 or 55 in leap years. In leap years (for example, 2024 and 2027), parashah Behar is read separately. In common years (for example, 2025 and 2026), parashah Behar is combined with the next parashah, Bechukotai, to help achieve the needed number of weekly readings.[2]

In years when the first day of Passover falls on a Sabbath (as it does in 2022), Jews in Israel and Reform Jews read the parashah following Passover one week before Conservative and Orthodox Jews in the Diaspora. In such years, Jews in Israel and Reform Jews celebrate Passover for seven days and thus read the next parashah (in 2018, Shemini) on the Sabbath one week after the first day of Passover, while Conservative and Orthodox Jews in the Diaspora celebrate Passover for eight days and read the next parashah (in 2018, Shemini) one week later. In some such years (for example, 2018), the two calendars realign when Conservative and Orthodox Jews in the Diaspora read Behar together with Bechukotai while Jews in Israel and Reform Jews read them separately.[3]

Readings

[edit]

In traditional Sabbath Torah reading, the parashah is divided into seven readings, or עליות‎, aliyot.[4]

First reading—Leviticus 25:1–13

[edit]

In the first reading, on Mount Sinai, God told Moses to tell the Israelites the law of the Sabbatical year for the land.[5] The people could work the fields for six years, but in the seventh year, the land was to have a Sabbath of complete rest during which the people were not to sow their fields, prune their vineyards, or reap the aftergrowth.[6] They could, however, eat whatever the land produced on its own.[7] The people were further to hallow the 50th year, the Jubilee year, and to proclaim release for all with a blast on the horn.[8] Each Israelite was to return to his family and his ancestral land holding.[9]

Second reading—Leviticus 25:14–18

[edit]

In the second reading, in selling or buying property, the people were to charge only for the remaining number of crop years until the jubilee, when the land would be returned to its ancestral holder.[10]

Land near the Dead Sea

Third reading—Leviticus 25:19–24

[edit]

In the third reading, God promised to bless the people in the sixth year, so that the land would yield a crop sufficient for three years.[11] God prohibited selling the land beyond reclaim, for God owned the land, and the people were but strangers living with God.[12]

Land in Judea

Fourth reading—Leviticus 25:25–28

[edit]

In the fourth reading, if one fell into straits and had to sell land, his nearest relative was to redeem what was sold.[13] If one had no one to redeem, but prospered and acquired enough wealth, he could refund the pro rata share of the sales price for the remaining years until the jubilee, and return to his holding.[14]

Fifth reading—Leviticus 25:29–38

[edit]

In the fifth reading, if one sold a house in a walled city, one could redeem it for a year, and thereafter the house would pass to the purchaser beyond reclaim and not be released in the jubilee.[15] But houses in villages without encircling walls were treated as open country subject to redemption and release through the jubilee.[16] Levites were to have a permanent right of redemption for houses and property in the cities of the Levites.[17] The unenclosed land about their cities could not be sold.[18] If a kinsman fell into straits and came under one's authority by virtue of his debts, one was to let him live by one's side as a kinsman and not exact from him interest.[19] Israelites were not to lend money to countrymen at interest.[20]

Sixth reading—Leviticus 25:39–46

[edit]

In the sixth reading, if the kinsman continued in straits and had to give himself over to a creditor for debt, the creditor was not to subject him to the treatment of a slave, but to treat him as a hired or bound laborer until the jubilee year, at which time he was to be freed to go back to his family and ancestral holding.[21] Israelites were not to rule over such debtor Israelites ruthlessly.[22] Israelites could, however, buy and own as inheritable property slaves from other nations.[23]

Seventh reading—Leviticus 25:47–26:2

[edit]

In the seventh reading, if an Israelite fell into straits and came under a resident alien's authority by virtue of his debts, the Israelite debtor was to have the right of redemption.[24] A relative was to redeem him or, if he prospered, he could redeem himself by paying the pro rata share of the sales price for the remaining years until the jubilee.[25] God again told the people they shall not make idols and shall keep God's Sabbaths. [26]

Readings according to the triennial cycle

[edit]

Jews who read the Torah according to the triennial cycle of Torah reading read the parashah according to a different schedule.[27]

In inner-biblical interpretation

[edit]

The parashah has parallels or is discussed in these Biblical sources:[28]

Jews Praying in the Synagogue on Yom Kippur (1878 painting by Maurycy Gottlieb)

Leviticus chapter 25

[edit]

Yom Kippur

[edit]

Leviticus 25:8–10 refers to the Festival of Yom Kippur. In the Hebrew Bible, Yom Kippur is called:

  • the Day of Atonement (יוֹם הַכִּפֻּרִים‎, Yom HaKippurim)[29] or a Day of Atonement (יוֹם כִּפֻּרִים‎, Yom Kippurim);[30]
  • a Sabbath of solemn rest (שַׁבַּת שַׁבָּתוֹן‎, Shabbat Shabbaton);[31] and
  • a holy convocation (מִקְרָא-קֹדֶשׁ‎, mikrah kodesh).[32]

Much as Yom Kippur, on the 10th of the month of Tishrei, precedes the Festival of Sukkot, on the 15th of the month of Tishrei, Exodus 12:3–6 speaks of a period starting on the 10th of the month of Nisan preparatory to the Festival of Passover, on the 15th of the month of Nisan.

Day of Atonement (painting circa 1900 by Isidor Kaufmann)

Leviticus 16:29–34 and 23:26–32 and Numbers 29:7–11 present similar injunctions to observe Yom Kippur. Leviticus 16:29 and 23:27 and Numbers 29:7 set the Holy Day on the tenth day of the seventh month (Tishrei). Leviticus 16:29 and 23:27 and Numbers 29:7 instruct that "you shall afflict your souls." Leviticus 23:32 makes clear that a full day is intended: "you shall afflict your souls; in the ninth day of the month at evening, from evening to evening." And Leviticus 23:29 threatens that whoever "shall not be afflicted in that same day, he shall be cut off from his people." Leviticus 16:29 and 23:28 and Numbers 29:7 command that you "shall do no manner of work." Similarly, Leviticus 16:31 and 23:32 call it a "Sabbath of solemn rest." And in Leviticus 23:30, God threatens that whoever "does any manner of work in that same day, that soul will I destroy from among his people." Leviticus 16:30, 16:32–34, and 23:27–28, and Numbers 29:11 describe the purpose of the day to make atonement for the people. Similarly, Leviticus 16:30 speaks of the purpose "to cleanse you from all your sins," and Leviticus 16:33 speaks of making atonement for the most holy place, the tent of meeting, the altar; and the priests. Leviticus 16:29 instructs that the commandment applies both to "the home-born" and to "the stranger who sojourns among you." Leviticus 16:3–25 and 23:27 and Numbers 29:8–11 command offerings to God. And Leviticus 16:31 and 23:31 institute the observance as "a statute forever."

Leviticus 16:3–28 sets out detailed procedures for the priest's atonement ritual during the time of the Temple.

Leviticus 25:8–10 instructs that after seven Sabbatical years, on the Jubilee year, on the day of atonement, the Israelites were to proclaim liberty throughout the land with the blast of the horn and return all people to their possessions and to their families.

In Isaiah 57:14–58:14, the Haftarah for Yom Kippur morning, God describes "the fast that I have chosen [on] the day for a man to afflict his soul." Isaiah 58:3–5 makes clear that "to afflict the soul" was understood as fasting. But Isaiah 58:6–10 goes on to impress that "to afflict the soul," God also seeks acts of social justice: "to loose the fetters of wickedness, to undo the bands of the yoke," "to let the oppressed go free," "to give your bread to the hungry, and . . . bring the poor that are cast out to your house," and "when you see the naked, that you cover him."

The Duty To Redeem

[edit]

Tamara Cohn Eskenazi wrote that Biblical laws required Israelites to act as redeemers for relatives in four situations: (1) redemption of land in Leviticus 25:25–34, (2) redemption of persons from slavery, especially in Leviticus 25:47–50, (3) redemption of objects dedicated to the sanctuary in Leviticus 27:9–28, and (4) avenging the blood of a murdered relative in Numbers 35.[33]

Naboth

[edit]

In 1 Kings 21:2, Naboth the Jezreelite refused to sell his vineyard to King Ahab because the land is an inheritance subject to the rule in Leviticus 25:23.[34]

Leviticus chapter 26

[edit]

Leviticus 26:1 directs the Israelites not to rear up a pillar (מַצֵּבָה‎, matzeivah). Exodus 23:24 directed the Israelites to break in pieces the Canaanites' pillars (מַצֵּבֹתֵיהֶם‎, matzeivoteihem). And Deuteronomy 16:22 prohibits setting up a pillar (מַצֵּבָה‎, matzeivah), "which the Lord your God hates." But before these commandments were issued, in Genesis 28:18, Jacob took the stone on which he had slept, set it up as a pillar (מַצֵּבָה‎, matzeivah), and poured oil on the top of it.

A Damascus Document Scroll found at Qumran

In early nonrabbinic interpretation

[edit]

The parashah has parallels or is discussed in these early nonrabbinic sources:[35]

Leviticus chapter 25

[edit]

The Damascus Document of the Qumran sectarians prohibited non-cash transactions with Jews who were not members of the sect. Professor Lawrence Schiffman of New York University read this regulation as an attempt to avoid violating prohibitions on charging interest to one's fellow Jew in Exodus 22:25; Leviticus 25:36–37; and Deuteronomy 23:19–20. Apparently, the Qumran sect viewed prevailing methods of conducting business through credit to violate those laws.[36]

In classical rabbinic interpretation

[edit]

The parashah is discussed in these rabbinic sources from the era of the Mishnah and the Talmud:[37]

Leviticus chapter 25

[edit]

Leviticus 25:1–34—a Sabbatical year for the land

[edit]

Tractate Sheviit in the Mishnah, Tosefta, and Jerusalem Talmud interpreted the laws of the Sabbatical year in Exodus 23:10–11, Leviticus 25:1–34, and Deuteronomy 15:1–18 and 31:10–13.[38]

The Mishnah asked until when a field with trees could be plowed in the sixth year. The House of Shammai said as long as such work would benefit fruit that would ripen in the sixth year. But the House of Hillel said until Shavuot. The Mishnah observed that in reality, the views of two schools approximate each other.[39] The Mishnah taught that one could plow a grain-field in the sixth year until the moisture had dried up in the soil (that it, after Passover, when rains in the Land of Israel cease) or as long as people still plowed in order to plant cucumbers and gourds (which need a great deal of moisture). Rabbi Simeon objected that if that were the rule, then we would place the law in the hands of each person to decide. But the Mishnah concluded that the prescribed period in the case of a grain-field was until Passover, and in the case of a field with trees, until Shavuot.[40] But Rabban Gamaliel and his court ordained that working the land was permitted until the New Year that began the seventh year.[41] Rabbi Joḥanan said that Rabban Gamaliel and his court reached their conclusion on Biblical authority, noting the common use of the term "Sabbath" (שַׁבַּת‎, Shabbat) in both the description of the weekly Sabbath in Exodus 31:15 and the Sabbath-year in Leviticus 25:4. Thus, just as in the case of the Sabbath Day, work is forbidden on the day itself, but allowed on the day before and the day after, so likewise in the Sabbath Year, tillage is forbidden during the year itself, but allowed in the year before and the year after.[42]

The Mishnah taught that we encourage the work of non-Jews in the Sabbatical year, but not that of Jews. And we inquire after the non-Jews’ wellbeing for the sake of peace.[43]

Rabbi Isaac taught that the words of Psalm 103:20, "mighty in strength that fulfill His word," speak of those who observe the Sabbatical year. Rabbi Isaac said that we often find that a person fulfills a precept for a day, a week, or a month, but it is remarkable to find one who does so for an entire year. Rabbi Isaac asked whether one could find a mightier person than one who sees one's field untilled, see one's vineyard untilled, and yet pays one's taxes and does not complain. And Rabbi Isaac noted that Psalm 103:20 uses the words "that fulfill His word (דְבָר‎, devar)," and Deuteronomy 15:2 says regarding observance of the Sabbatical year, "And this is the manner (דְּבַר‎, devar) of the release," and argued that "dabar" means the observance of the Sabbatical year in both places.[44]

The Mishnah taught that the fines for rape, seduction, the husband who falsely accused his bride of not having been a virgin (as in Deuteronomy 22:19), and any judicial court matter are not canceled by the Sabbatical year.[45]

Hillel (detail from the Knesset Menorah in Jerusalem)

The Mishnah told that when Hillel the Elder observed that the nation withheld from lending to each other and were transgressing Deuteronomy 15:9, "Beware lest there be in your mind a base thought," he instituted the prozbul, a court exemption from the Sabbatical year cancellation of a loan. The Mishnah taught that any loan made with a prozbul is not canceled by the Sabbatical year.[46] The Mishnah recounted that a prozbul would provide: "I turn over to you, so-and-so, judges of such and such a place, that any debt that I may have outstanding, I shall collect it whenever I desire." And the judges or witnesses would sign below.[47]

The Mishnah employed the prohibition of Leviticus 25:4 to imagine how one could with one action violate up to nine separate commandments. One could (1) plow with an ox and a donkey yoked together (in violation of Deuteronomy 22:10) (2 and 3) that are two animals dedicated to the sanctuary, (4) plowing mixed seeds sown in a vineyard (in violation of Deuteronomy 22:9), (5) during a Sabbatical year (in violation of Leviticus 25:4), (6) on a Festival-day (in violation of, for example, Leviticus 23:7), (7) when the plower is a priest (in violation of Leviticus 21:1) and (8) a Nazirite (in violation of Numbers 6:6) plowing in a contaminated place. Chananya ben Chachinai said that the plower also may have been wearing a garment of wool and linen (in violation of Leviticus 19:19 and Deuteronomy 22:11). They said to him that this would not be in the same category as the other violations. He replied that neither is the Nazirite in the same category as the other violations.[48]

The Gemara implied that the sin of Moses in striking the rock at Meribah compared favorably to the sin of David. The Gemara reported that Moses and David were two good leaders of Israel. Moses begged God that his sin be recorded, as it is in Numbers 20:12, 20:23–24, and 27:13–14, and Deuteronomy 32:51. David, however, begged that his sin be blotted out, as Psalm 32:1 says, "Happy is he whose transgression is forgiven, whose sin is pardoned." The Gemara compared the cases of Moses and David to the cases of two women whom the court sentenced to be lashed. One had committed an indecent act, while the other had eaten unripe figs of the seventh year in violation of Leviticus 25:6. The woman who had eaten unripe figs begged the court to make known for what offense she was being flogged, lest people say that she was being punished for the same sin as the other woman. The court thus made known her sin, and the Torah repeatedly records the sin of Moses.[49]

The latter parts of tractate Arakhin in the Mishnah, Tosefta, and Babylonian Talmud interpreted the laws of the jubilee year in Leviticus 25:8–34.[50]

The Mishnah taught that the jubilee year had the same ritual as Rosh Hashanah for blowing the shofar and for blessings. But Rabbi Judah said that on Rosh Hashanah, the blast was made with a ram's horn shofar, while on jubilee the blast was made with an antelope's (or some say a goat's) horn shofar.[51]

The Mishnah taught that exile resulted from (among other things) transgressing the commandment (in Leviticus 25:3–5 and Exodus 23:10–11) to observe a Sabbatical year for the land.[52] And pestilence resulted from (among other things) violation of the laws governing the produce of the Sabbatical year.[53]

A midrash interpreted the words "it shall be a jubilee unto you" in Leviticus 25:10 to teach that God gave the year of release and the jubilee to the Israelites alone, and not to other nations. And similarly, the midrash interpreted the words "To give you the land of Canaan" in Leviticus 25:38 to teach that God gave the Land of Israel to the Israelites alone.[54]

A baraita taught that they ceased counting Jubilee Years from the time that the tribe of Reuben and the tribe of Gad and half the tribe of Manasseh were exiled, as Leviticus 25:10 states: "And you shall proclaim liberty throughout the land to all its inhabitants; it shall be a Jubilee for you," indicating that the laws of the Jubilee Year apply only when all its inhabitants are in the Land of Israel, and not when some Israelites have been exiled.[55] And a baraita noted that Rabbi Judah HaNasi said that Deuteronomy 15:2 states in the context of the cancellation of debts: "And this is the manner of the abrogation: He shall abrogate." The baraita taught that the verse speaks of two types of abrogation: One is the release of land, and one is the abrogation of monetary debts. Since the two are equated, one can deduce that at a time when they release land, when the Jubilee Year is practiced, they abrogate monetary debts; but at a time when they do not release land, such as the present time, when the Jubilee Year is no longer practiced, they also do not abrogate monetary debts. But the Sages instituted that despite this, the Sabbatical Year still abrogates debt in the present, in remembrance of the Torah-mandated Sabbatical Year. Hillel saw that the people of the nation refrained from lending to each other, so he instituted the prosbol.[56]

Chapter 4 of Tractate Bava Metzia in the Mishnah, Jerusalem Talmud, and Babylonian Talmud, and chapter 3 of the tractate in the Tosefta interpreted the law of fraud in Leviticus 25:14.[57] The Mishnah defined as fraud overcharging by one-sixth of the purchase price. And the Mishnah taught that a person defrauded had until that person had time to show the purchase to a merchant or a kinsman to retract the sale.[58] The Mishnah taught that the law of fraud applied to both the buyer and the seller, both the ordinary person and the merchant. Rabbi Judah said that the law of fraud did not apply to the merchant. The Mishnah taught that the one who was defrauded had the upper hand: The person defrauded could demand from the other the money paid or the amount by which that person was defrauded.[59] The Mishnah taught that one who stole something worth even a perutah (the minimum amount of significant value) from a fellow and swore falsely about it had to go after the victim even as far as Media to return it.[60] The Mishnah taught that just as the laws of fraud applied to buying and selling, so too did they apply to the spoken word.[61] The Mishnah taught that one could not ask how much an object costs if one did not wish to buy it.[62]

At a feast, Rabbi served his disciples tender and tough cuts of beef tongue. When his disciples chose the tender over the tough, Rabbi instructed them so to let their tongues be tender to one another. Rabbi taught that this was the meaning of Leviticus 25:14 when Moses admonished: "And if you sell anything ... you shall not wrong one another."[63] Similarly, a midrash concluded that these words of Leviticus 25:14 taught that anyone who wrongs a neighbor with words will be punished according to Scripture.[64]

In a baraita, the Rabbis interpreted the words "you shall not wrong one another" in Leviticus 25:17 to prohibit verbal wrongs, as Leviticus 25:14 had already addressed monetary wrongs. The baraita cited as examples of verbal wrongs: (1) reminding penitents of their former deeds, (2) reminding converts' children of their ancestors' deeds, (3) questioning the propriety of converts' coming to study Torah, (4) speaking to those visited by suffering as Job's companions spoke to him in Job 4:6–7, and (5) directing donkey drivers seeking grain to a person whom one knows has never sold grain. The Gemara said that Scripture uses the words "and you shall fear your God" (as in Leviticus 25:17) concerning cases where intent matters, cases that are known only to the heart. Rabbi Joḥanan said on the authority of Rabbi Simeon ben Yoḥai that verbal wrongs are more heinous than monetary wrongs, because of verbal wrongs it is written (in Leviticus 25:17), "and you shall fear your God," but not of monetary wrongs (in Leviticus 25:14). Rabbi Eleazar said that verbal wrongs affect the victim's person, while monetary wrongs affect only the victim's money. Rabbi Samuel bar Naḥmani said that while restoration is possible in cases of monetary wrongs, it is not in cases of verbal wrongs. And a Tanna taught before Rav Naḥman bar Isaac that one who publicly makes a neighbor blanch from shame is as one who sheds blood. Whereupon Rav Naḥman remarked how he had seen the blood rush from a person's face upon such shaming.[65]

Reading the words of Leviticus 25:17, "And you shall not mistreat each man his colleague (עֲמִיתוֹ‎, amito)," Rav Ḥinnana, son of Rav Idi, taught that the word עֲמִיתוֹ‎, amito, is interpreted as a contraction of עִם אִתּוֹ‎, im ito, meaning: "One who is with him. " Thus one must not mistreat one who is with one in observance of Torah and commandments.[66]

The Gemara taught that the Torah three times prohibits verbally mistreating a convert—in Exodus 22:20, "And you shall neither mistreat a convert"; in Leviticus 19:33, "And when a convert lives in your land, you shall not mistreat him"; and in Leviticus 25:17, "And you shall not mistreat, each man his colleague." And the Torah similarly three times prohibits oppressing the convert—in Exodus 22:20, "And you shall neither mistreat a convert, nor oppress him"; in Exodus 23:9, "And you shall not oppress a convert"; and in Exodus 22:24, "And you shall not be to him like a creditor." Reading Exodus 22:20, "And you shall not mistreat a convert nor oppress him, because you were strangers in the land of Egypt," a baraita reported that Rabbi Nathan taught that one should not mention in another a defect that one has oneself. Thus, since the Jewish people were themselves strangers, they should not demean a convert because he is a stranger in their midst. And this explains the adage that one who has a person hanged in the family does not say to another member of the household: Hang a fish for me, as the mention of hanging is demeaning for that family.[66]

Expanding on Leviticus 25:23, in which God says that "the land is Mine," Rabbi Elazar of Bartotha said that you and all that is yours is Gods; and thus 1 Chronicles 29:14 says with regards to David: "for everything comes from You, and from Your own hand have we given you."[67]

Rabbi Phinehas in the name of Rabbi Reuben interpreted the words "If your brother grows poor ... then shall his kinsman ... redeem" in Leviticus 25:25 to exhort Israel to acts of charity. Rabbi Phinehas taught that God will reward with life anyone who gives a coin to a poor person, for the donor could be giving not just a coin, but life. Rabbi Phinehas explained that if a loaf costs ten coins, and a poor person has but nine, then the gift of a single coin allows the poor person to buy the loaf, eat, and become refreshed. Thus, Rabbi Phinehas taught, when illness strikes the donor, and the donor's soul presses to leave the donor's body, God will return the gift of life.[68] Similarly, Rav Naḥman taught that Leviticus 25:25 exhorts Israel to acts of charity, because fortune revolves like a wheel in the world, sometimes leaving one poor and sometimes well off.[69] And similarly, Rabbi Tanḥum son of Rabbi Ḥiyya taught that Leviticus 25:25 exhorts Israel to acts of charity, because God made the poor as well as the rich, so that they might benefit each other; the rich one benefiting the poor one with charity, and the poor one benefiting the rich one by affording the rich one the opportunity to do good. Bearing this in mind, when Rabbi Tanhum's mother went to buy him a pound of meat, she would buy him two pounds, one for him and one for the poor.[70]

The Gemara employed Leviticus 25:29 to deduce that the term יָמִים‎, yamim, (literally "days") sometimes means "a year," and Rab Hisda thus interpreted the word יָמִים‎, yamim, in Genesis 24:55 to mean "a year." Genesis 24:55 says, "And her brother and her mother said: ‘Let the maiden abide with us יָמִים‎, yamim, at the least ten." The Gemara reasoned that if יָמִים‎, yamim, in Genesis 24:55 means "days" and thus to imply "two days" (as the plural implies more than one), then Genesis 24:55 would report Rebekah's brother and mother suggesting that she stay first two days, and then when Eliezer said that that was too long, nonsensically suggesting ten days. The Gemara thus deduced that יָמִים‎, yamim, must mean "a year" in Genesis 24:55, as Leviticus 25:29 implies when it says, "if a man sells a house in a walled city, then he may redeem it within a whole year after it is sold; for a full year (יָמִים‎, yamim) shall he have the right of redemption." Thus Genesis 24:55 might mean, "Let the maiden abide with us a year, or at the least ten months." The Gemara then suggested that יָמִים‎, yamim, might mean "a month," as Numbers 11:20 suggests when it uses the phrase "a month of days (יָמִים‎, yamim)." The Gemara concluded, however, that יָמִים‎, yamim, means "a month" only when the term "month" is specifically mentioned, but otherwise means either "days" (at least two) or "a year."[71]

Leviticus 25:35–55—limits on debt servitude

[edit]

The Sifra read the words of Leviticus 25:35, "You shall support him," to teach that one should not let one's brother who grows poor to fall down. The Sifra compared financial strains to a load on a donkey. While the donkey is still standing in place, a single person can take hold of it and lead it. But if the donkey falls to the ground, five people cannot pick it up again.[72]

In the words, "Take no interest or increase, but fear your God," in Leviticus 25:36, "interest" (נֶשֶׁךְ‎, neshech) literally means "bite." A midrash played on this meaning, teaching not to take interest from the poor person, not to bite the poor person as the serpent—cunning to do evil—bit Adam. The midrash taught that one who exacts interest from an Israelite thus has no fear of God.[73]

Rav Naḥman bar Isaac (explaining the position of Rabbi Eleazar) interpreted the words "that your brother may live with you" in Leviticus 25:36 to teach that one who has exacted interest should return it to the borrower, so that the borrower could survive economically.[74]

A baraita considered the case where two people were traveling on a journey, and one had a container of water; if both drank, they would both die, but if only one drank, then that one might reach civilization and survive. Ben Patura taught that it is better that both should drink and die, rather than that only one should drink and see the other die. But Rabbi Akiva interpreted the words "that your brother may live with you" in Leviticus 25:36 to teach that concern for one's own life takes precedence over concern for another's.[75]

Part of chapter 1 of Tractate Kiddushin in the Mishnah, Tosefta, Jerusalem Talmud, and Babylonian Talmud interpreted the laws of the Hebrew servant in Exodus 21:2–11 and 21:26–27; Leviticus 25:39–55; and Deuteronomy 15:12–18.[76]

Abaye said that because the law (in Leviticus 25:39–43 and elsewhere) required the master to treat a Hebrew slave well—and as an equal in food, drink, and sleeping accommodations—it was said that buying a Hebrew slave was like buying a master.[77] The Rabbis taught in a baraita that the words of Deuteronomy 15:16 regarding the Hebrew servant, "he fares well with you," indicate that the Hebrew servant had to be "with"—that is, equal to—the master in food and drink. Thus, the master could not eat white bread and have the servant eat black bread. The master could not drink old wine and have the servant drink new wine. The master could not sleep on a feather bed and have the servant sleep on straw. Hence, they said that buying a Hebrew servant was like buying a master. Similarly, Rabbi Simeon deduced from the words of Leviticus 25:41, "Then he shall go out from you, he and his children with him," that the master was liable to provide for the servant's children until the servant went out. And Rabbi Simeon deduced from the words of Exodus 21:3, "If he is married, then his wife shall go out with him," that the master was responsible to provide for the servant's wife, as well.[78]

The Sifra read Leviticus 25:42, "For they are My servants," to imply that God's deed of servitude came first, and therefore, Israelites may serve others only as God permits. And the Sifra read Leviticus 25:42, "whom I took out of the land of Egypt" to imply that God took the Israelites out on the condition that they not be sold as slaves are sold.[79]

Rabbi Joḥanan read Leviticus 25:42, "They shall not be sold as bondsmen," to prohibit abduction. The Gemara asked where Scripture formally prohibited abduction (as Deuteronomy 22:7 and Exodus 21:16 state only the punishment). Rabbi Josiah said that Exodus 20:13, "You shalt not steal," did so. Rabbi Joḥanan said that Leviticus 25:42, “They shall not be sold as bondsmen,” did so. The Gemara harmonized the two teachings by interpreting Rabbi Josiah to state the prohibition for stealing (including abduction) and Rabbi Joḥanan to state the prohibition for selling the kidnapped person.[80]

Joḥanan ben Zakai (detail from the Knesset Menorah in Jerusalem)

Rabbi Levi interpreted Leviticus 25:55 to teach that God claimed Israel as God's own possession when God said, "To Me the children of Israel are servants."[81]

Reading Exodus 21:6, regarding the Hebrew servant who chose not to go free and whose master brought him to the doorpost and bore his ear through with an awl, Rabban Joḥanan ben Zakkai explained that God singled out the ear from all the parts of the body because the servant had heard God's Voice on Mount Sinai proclaiming in Leviticus 25:55, "For to me the children of Israel are servants, they are my servants," and not servants of servants, and yet the servant acquired a master for himself when he might have been free. And Rabbi Simeon bar Rabbi explained that God singled out the doorpost from all other parts of the house because the doorpost was witness in Egypt when God passed over the lintel and the doorposts (as reported in Exodus 12) and proclaimed (in the words of Leviticus 25:55), "For to me the children of Israel are servants, they are my servants," and not servants of servants, and so God brought them forth from bondage to freedom, yet this servant acquired a master for himself.[82]

In medieval Jewish interpretation

[edit]

The parashah is discussed in these medieval Jewish sources:[83]

Leviticus chapter 25

[edit]

Baḥya ibn Paquda taught that those who are alone, without family or relatives, should let their companionship be with God during their time of loneliness, and trust in God during their period of being a stranger. Baḥya counseled that they should contemplate that the soul is also a stranger in this world, and that all people are like strangers here, as Leviticus 25:23 says, "because you are strangers and temporary residents with Me." Baḥya encouraged them to reflect in their hearts that all those who have relatives here, in a short time, will be left solitary strangers.[84]

Moses Maimonides

Maimonides taught that the laws of the Sabbatical year and the Jubilee imply sympathy with others and promote the well-being of humanity, as about these precepts Exodus 23:11 states, "That the poor of your people may eat," and the land will also increase its produce and improve when it remains fallow for some time. Others of these laws prescribe kindness to servants and the poor, by renouncing claims to debts in the year of release and relieving servants of their bondage in the Sabbatical year. Some of these precepts secure for people a permanent source of economic well-being by providing that the land should remain the permanent property of its owners and could not be sold, as Leviticus 25:23 says, "And the land shall not be sold forever." In this way, people's property remained intact for them and their heirs, and they could consume only the land's produce.[85]

In modern interpretation

[edit]

The parashah is discussed in these modern sources:

Leviticus chapter 25

[edit]

In 1877, August Klostermann observed the singularity of Leviticus 17–26 as a collection of laws and designated it the "Holiness Code."[86]

Jay Sklar identified the following chiastic structure in Leviticus 25–27:[87]

A—laws about redemption (Leviticus 25)
B—blessings for covenant obedience and curses for covenant disobedience (Leviticus 26)
A'—laws about redemption (Leviticus 27)

William Dever noted that Leviticus 25:29–34 recognizes three land-use distinctions: (1) walled cities (עִיר חוֹמָה‎, ir chomot); (2) unwalled villages (חֲצֵרִים‎, chazeirim, specially said to be unwalled); and (3) land surrounding such a city (שְׂדֵה מִגְרַשׁ‎, sedeih migrash) and the countryside (שְׂדֵה הָאָרֶץ‎, sedeih ha-aretz, "fields of the land").[88]

Commandments

[edit]

According to Sefer ha-Chinuch, there are 7 positive and 17 negative commandments in the parashah:[89]

  • Not to work the land during the seventh year[90]
  • Not to work with trees to produce fruit during that year[90]
  • Not to reap crops that grow wild that year in the normal manner[91]
  • Not to gather grapes which grow wild that year in the normal way[91]
  • The Sanhedrin must count seven groups of seven years.[92]
  • To blow the shofar on the tenth of Tishrei to free the slaves[93]
  • The Sanhedrin must sanctify the 50th year.[9]
  • Not to work the soil during the 50th year[94]
  • Not to reap in the normal manner that which grows wild in the fiftieth year[94]
  • Not to pick grapes which grew wild in the normal manner in the fiftieth year[94]
  • To buy and sell according to Torah law[95]
  • Not to overcharge or underpay for an article[95]
  • Not to insult or harm anybody with words[96]
  • Not to sell the land in Israel indefinitely[97]
  • To carry out the laws of sold family properties[98]
  • To carry out the laws of houses in walled cities[99]
  • Not to sell the fields but they shall remain the Levites' before and after the Jubilee year[18]
Jeremiah Lamenting the Destruction of Jerusalem (painting by Rembrandt)
  • Not to lend with interest[20]
  • Not to have a Hebrew servant do menial slave labor[100]
  • Not to sell a Hebrew servant as a slave is sold[101]
  • Not to work a Hebrew servant oppressively[22]
  • Canaanite slaves must be kept forever[102]
  • Not to allow a non-Jew to work a Hebrew servant oppressively[103]
  • Not to bow down on smooth stone[104]

Haftarah

[edit]

The haftarah for the parashah is Jeremiah 32:6–27.

When parashah Behar is combined with parashah Behukotai, the haftarah is the haftarah for Behukotai, Jeremiah 16:19–17:14.

Notes

[edit]

Further reading

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia

Behar

View on Grokipedia
from Grokipedia
Behar (Hebrew: בְּהַר‎, Bəhar, "On the Mount"), the 32nd () in the annual cycle of public readings observed in , spans Leviticus 25:1–26:2 and originates from divine instruction given to at . The portion establishes foundational agricultural and economic regulations for the , including the year (shemittah), during which cultivation ceases every seventh year to allow the land rest and its natural produce to sustain the populace without ownership claims, and the year (yovel), occurring after seven cycles, which mandates the return of ancestral lands to original tribal allotments, the emancipation of Hebrew indentured servants, and the remission of certain debts. These statutes underscore the principle that the land belongs ultimately to , with human tenure as a conditional , prohibiting perpetual and emphasizing redemption to preserve familial and tribal holdings. The parashah's directives extend to interpersonal and social welfare, such as fair pricing for based on proximity to , prohibitions on among , and provisions for supporting impoverished kin through rights and interest-free loans, all framed as safeguards against exploitation and perpetual poverty. In Jewish legal tradition (halakhah), these laws have influenced discussions on property rights, economic equity, and , with classical commentators like interpreting the Sinai setting to link them integrally to the core covenantal revelation, while in his codifies their observance as binding mitzvot primarily applicable in biblical . Observance waned post-exile but saw revivals, notably in modern via legal mechanisms like the heter mechirah to permit farming during shemittah amid debates over strict adherence versus practical necessity. Behar's themes of periodic societal reset have sparked interpretive controversies, including rabbinic disputes over extraterritorial applicability and the tension between divine mandates for land rest—which empirical analyses link to cycles—and , as evidenced in Second Temple-era texts like the alluding to sectarian enforcement. Despite institutional biases in some academic treatments favoring allegorical over literal readings, the portion's causal emphasis on preventing wealth concentration through mandated redistribution aligns with first-principles observations of inequality's destabilizing effects in agrarian societies.

Overview

Position in the Annual Torah Reading Cycle

Parashat Behar constitutes the thirty-second weekly Torah portion (parashah) in the of 54 parshiyot, which systematically divides the of for weekly public reading on . This cycle commences with Parashat Bereshit on the Shabbat immediately following and advances sequentially, ensuring the complete is recited over the course of approximately one Hebrew year, culminating in Parashat V'Zot HaBerakhah on . Behar encompasses Leviticus 25:1–26:2, succeeding Parashat (the thirty-first portion) and preceding Parashat Bechukotai (the thirty-third). The precise timing of Behar's reading varies annually due to the lunisolar Hebrew calendar's intercalation, typically falling in on the , such as May 21 in 5782 (2022 CE) or May 25 in 5784 (2024 CE). In non-leap years, which feature 50 or 51 Shabbatot between observances, certain portions including Behar are combined with adjacent ones to fit the cycle; thus, Behar-Bechukotai forms a double reading as the thirty-second and thirty-third portions in Diaspora Ashkenazi practice. Leap years, with an extra month ( II), accommodate 52–54 Shabbatot, allowing more portions to be read singly, though customs differ: Israeli and Sephardic communities often maintain separate readings for Behar and Bechukotai regardless, prioritizing the full 54 divisions over calendar constraints.

Core Themes and Scope

Parashat Behar, spanning Leviticus 25:1–26:2, delineates laws governing agricultural rest, property transactions, and in ancient Israelite society, framed as divine instructions given to on . The portion emphasizes the land's ultimate ownership by , with positioned as temporary stewards obligated to permit periodic cessation of cultivation. Every seventh year, known as Shemitah, fields must lie , prohibiting , pruning, or harvesting in the usual manner, while natural growth is deemed permissible for all, including the poor and animals, to foster communal reliance on divine sustenance rather than human labor. This mandate extends the weekly principle to the earth itself, underscoring a of rest that applies to creation broadly. Central to the scope is the , or year, proclaimed on the Day of following seven Shemitah cycles (49 years), with the 50th year serving as a comprehensive societal reset. During , all ancestral lands revert to original tribal or familial owners, Hebrew indentured servants are emancipated, and no sowing or harvesting occurs, reinforcing prevention of perpetual land concentration or among kin. These provisions address redemption mechanisms for sold fields or houses, valuing properties based on remaining years until , and distinguish between permanent alien purchases and redeemable Israelite holdings, reflecting a causal framework where economic cycles avert entrenched inequality without negating individual agency in transactions. Prohibitions against in loans to fellow , alongside commands to sustain the impoverished through interest-free aid and field gleanings, integrate welfare into covenantal obedience, positing that such practices ensure survival and dignity amid hardship. Thematically, Behar promotes causal realism in socioeconomic policy by linking land productivity to divine sovereignty, cautioning that exploitation leads to , as evidenced by assurances of bountiful prior harvests to cover the periods. It scopes beyond ritual to civil law, regulating servitude by mandating humane treatment of Hebrew bondsmen—treating them as hired workers rather than chattel—and culminating in an exhortation to observe commandments faithfully, tying observance to the Sinai revelation for holistic fidelity. Traditional views these as blueprints for a agrarian , where periodic liberation curtails oligarchic tendencies, though historical varied due to challenges in post-exilic contexts.

Textual Structure

Division into Traditional Aliyot

In traditional Jewish , Parashat Behar (Leviticus 25:1–26:2) is divided into seven for the , with each consisting of a contiguous set of verses assigned to an individual who recites the blessings before and after the reading. These divisions follow established Ashkenazic and Sephardic customs, ensuring that no ends mid-sentence or violates Talmudic guidelines from Megillah 22a–23a on minimum verse lengths and boundaries. The aliyot emphasize the parashah's progression from agricultural sabbaticals to economic and social regulations, culminating in foundational commandments:
AliyahVerse RangeKey Content
1Lev. 25:1–13Introduction to shemitah (sabbatical year) and yovel (), including land rest and proclamation on .
2Lev. 25:14–18Ethical commerce rules, pricing land sales relative to Jubilee years, and prohibitions on .
3Lev. 25:19–24Divine provision during sabbatical years and the inalienable status of land as .
4Lev. 25:25–28Redemption rights for ancestral fields, with calculations based on remaining Jubilee years.
5Lev. 25:29–38Rules for redeeming houses in cities (walled vs. unwalled), Levitical perpetual redemption rights, and bans on among .
6Lev. 25:39–46Treatment of indentured Hebrew servants as hired workers, not slaves, with distinctions from non-Hebrew servitude.
7Lev. 25:47–26:2Redemption from foreign servitude, Jubilee , and concluding exhortations against , to keep , and to revere the .
When Behar is read separately (as in non-leap years or certain customs), these aliyot total 57 verses, with the seventh aliyah serving as maftir for haftarah selection. Variations exist in Yemenite or Italian rites, but the above reflects the predominant minhagim.

Alignment with Triennial Cycle

In communities following the triennial cycle, such as many Conservative and Masorti synagogues, Parashat Behar (Leviticus 25:1–26:2) is subdivided into three shorter sedarim, one read each year, to complete the entire over three years rather than one. This approach, formalized in modern rabbinic responsa like Richard Eisenberg's system approved by the Rabbinical Assembly, adheres to halakhic guidelines for portion breaks (e.g., avoiding divisions mid-paragraph or in certain legal contexts) while prioritizing thematic units. The divisions for Behar typically align with natural textual shifts: Year 1 focuses on foundational laws of land rest and cycles (Leviticus 25:1–24, covering shemitah observance, counting, and principles of land inalienability); Year 2 addresses redemption mechanisms and economic protections (Leviticus 25:25–38, including property buyback and aid to the impoverished); and Year 3 concludes with servitude regulations and sanctity exhortations (Leviticus 25:39–26:2, on Hebrew limits and prohibitions against ). Variations exist due to local customs or adjustments for combined readings with adjacent parshiot like Bechukotai, especially in where festival schedules differ. For instance, some schedules shorten Year 1 to Leviticus 25:1–28 to accommodate haftarah alignments or distributions, ensuring each seder supports seven traditional on mornings. Historical precedents from ancient Palestinian practice, referenced in Talmudic sources like Megillah 29b, influenced these modern systems, though the annual Babylonian cycle predominates globally. This triennial alignment emphasizes extended study of Behar's agrarian and equity laws, allowing congregations to explore interconnections with prior portions like over multiple cycles.

Shemitah: Sabbatical Rest for the Land

The Shemitah, or sabbatical year, mandates a complete cessation of agricultural cultivation in the every seventh year, allowing the land to observe a rest unto the . This provision is detailed in Leviticus 25:1–7, where instructs on : "When you come into the land which I give you, then the land shall keep a unto the ." For six consecutive years, fields may be sown and vineyards pruned, but in the seventh year, all such activities halt to provide respite for the soil. Specific prohibitions include sowing seeds in the field, pruning vines, reaping the aftergrowth (olel or sefichim), and harvesting grapes from untended vines (netzer) as one would in a regular . Instead of commercial exploitation, any spontaneous that emerges—such as grains or fruits growing without intervention—becomes communal sustenance. This yield is designated for consumption by the landowner, their servants, maids, hired laborers, resident strangers, and , ensuring equitable access without ownership claims or market transactions. The biblical text emphasizes: "And the sabbath of the land shall be food for you; for you, and for your servant, and for your maid, and for your hired servant, and for your stranger that sojourns with you; and for your cattle, and for the beasts that are in your land, shall all its increase be food." This agrarian sabbath underscores a theological principle of divine over the earth, paralleling the weekly rest for humans and animals while fostering dependence on God's provision rather than human labor. The law's revelation at Sinai links it directly to core covenantal commandments, distinguishing it from agricultural statutes conveyed elsewhere. Observance applies exclusively to within Israel's biblical borders, excluding non-agricultural areas or land outside these territories.

Yovel: Jubilee Proclamation and Release

The Yovel, or year, is established after seven cycles of seven years each, totaling forty-nine years, with the fiftieth year serving as the . This year requires the proclamation of dror—translated as or release—across the entire land for all its inhabitants, hallowing the period and mandating that each person return to their ancestral property and family. The proclamation occurs specifically on Yom Kippur, the tenth day of the seventh month, signaled by the sounding of the shofar, a ram's horn , to announce the onset of these restorations. This ritual blast underscores the year's sacred reset, emphasizing communal sanctity over individual holdings. Central to the release is the of Hebrew indentured servants, who, having entered service due to or , are freed automatically in the , regardless of service length, and reintegrated into their clans without perpetual bondage. Unlike harsher servitude for non-Hebrews, this provision treats fellow as hired workers, culminating in Jubilee liberation to preserve familial and tribal integrity. The land itself participates in the release through mandatory rest, barring sowing, pruning, or harvesting of vineyards and fields, allowing self-grown produce for free access by owners, servants, and passersby alike. This agrarian reinforces the proclamation's theme of periodic renewal, tying economic relief to divine ownership of the soil.

Redemption of Inherited Property

The provisions for redemption of inherited in Parashat Behar emphasize the perpetual tenure of under divine ownership, prohibiting permanent alienation to preserve familial and tribal inheritances in the . According to Leviticus 25:23, the land cannot be sold in perpetuity because it belongs to God, with Israelites serving as temporary and stewards. If financial hardship compels an owner to sell ancestral fields or inherited , a near kinsman-redeemer, or go'el, bears primary responsibility to repurchase it by compensating the buyer for the remaining years until the , ensuring restoration to the original lineage. The redemption price is calculated proportionally: if repurchased soon after sale, it approximates the original amount minus elapsed time's value; alternatively, from the forward, it deducts years served from the full assessed worth based on seed yield, such as fifty shekels of silver per chomer of for a field. The original seller may also redeem independently upon regaining resources, but failure by all parties to act results in automatic reversion to the seller's family at without payment, underscoring the temporary nature of any transfer. This mechanism, rooted in Leviticus 25:25–28, prioritizes kinship solidarity and economic recovery over unrestricted , with the go'el embodying familial akin to protections for persons and property elsewhere in law. Houses in unwalled towns follow field redemption rules, returning in if unredeemed, while those in walled cities allow only a one-year redemption window post-sale, after which transfer becomes irrevocable to facilitate urban stability and trade. Levitical holdings receive heightened protections: suburban pasturelands cannot be sold at all, as they sustain sacred service, and city houses remain perpetually redeemable by Levites regardless of time elapsed, reverting in if not repurchased, reflecting their dependent status without territorial inheritance. These distinctions in Leviticus 25:29–34 balance agrarian preservation with practical concessions for non-agricultural assets, ensuring no permanent dispossession from God-allotted portions.

Limits on Hebrew Indentured Service

If an Israelite fell into poverty and sold himself into service, Leviticus 25:39 mandates that he be treated not as a slave (eved) but as a hired laborer (sachir) or temporary resident (toshaveh), prohibiting harsh dominion over him. This provision emphasized familial and communal bonds, requiring the servant to work until the year, after which he and his children regained freedom without debt, returning to ancestral land and kin (Leviticus 25:40-41). Unlike foreign slaves, who could be held as perpetual property and bequeathed to heirs (Leviticus 25:44-46), Hebrew service was inherently temporary, limited by the 50-year cycle to prevent entrenchment of inequality. Redemption offered further limits on service duration: the bondsman could self-redeem upon accumulating funds, or a relative (go'el) could intervene by paying a proportional sum based on remaining years to , calculated daily at 50 shekels of silver annually for full-term service (Leviticus 25:47-52). If unredeemed, automatic release occurred in without repayment, underscoring the law's aim to restore economic autonomy rather than enforce perpetual subjugation. Masters were barred from treating Hebrew bondsmen ruthlessly, as all remained servants of , a status invoked to justify humane conditions and cyclical liberation (Leviticus 25:42-43, 53-55). These restrictions contrasted with broader ancient Near Eastern practices, where debt servitude often lacked fixed release mechanisms or familial protections, positioning the Torah's framework as a restraint on exploitation within Israelite society. While permitting as a poverty alleviation tool, the laws prioritized prevention of through temporal bounds, redemption rights, and resets, fostering social stability over chattel ownership.

Usury Bans and Aid to the Impoverished

Leviticus 25:35–38 mandates that if a fellow Israelite becomes impoverished and unable to support himself, he must be sustained as one would a resident alien or temporary among the , ensuring he lives alongside them without falling into destitution. This provision requires providing without extracting (neshekh) on monetary loans or profit (tarbit) on victuals or other consumables advanced for sustenance, prohibiting any form of increase that exploits the borrower's need. The rationale is tied to divine of the land of and Israel's redemption from Egyptian bondage, framing such aid as an reflective of God's gracious provision rather than a charitable option. The ban specifically targets intra-communal lending to prevent the poor from being further impoverished through compounding debt, distinguishing it from permissible interest on loans to foreigners as outlined in Deuteronomy 23:20. Rabbinic sources, such as the on Behar, interpret this alongside prohibitions on ona'ah (overreaching in transactions), emphasizing that even indirect benefits to the lender—such as collateral yielding profit—violate the spirit of non-exploitative aid. In practice, this fosters a system where loans serve restoration rather than entrapment, aligning with the broader Behar framework of and releases to avert perpetual servitude. These laws underscore a causal mechanism for social stability: unchecked exacerbates poverty cycles, whereas interest-free support enables self-sufficiency, as evidenced by the text's insistence on treating the needy as kin to preserve communal and avoid Egyptian-style oppression. Medieval commentators like further codify enforcement through communal oversight, prohibiting even verbal agreements implying interest to uphold the ban's integrity.

Historical Observance

Evidence from Biblical Times

The sole explicit biblical reference to the historical consequences of Shemitah observance appears in 2 Chronicles 36:21, which attributes the seventy-year duration of the (ca. 586–516 BCE) to the land's need to "enjoy its " after periods of neglect, fulfilling the prophecy in 25:11–12. This passage implies that the Sabbatical cycles, mandated every seventh year for land rest (Leviticus 25:1–7), were irregularly followed during the monarchic period, with the serving as enforced restitution for approximately 490 years of cumulative omission (70 cycles × 7 years). Calculations anchoring this neglect to specific eras vary among interpreters, with some linking the start to the united monarchy under (ca. 1050 BCE) or the kingdom's division (ca. 930 BCE), though the text does not specify the timeframe of delinquency. A partial instance of Shemitah-related practice is recorded in 34:8–17, where King (r. ca. 597–586 BCE) proclaimed a release of Hebrew debt-slaves in , aligning with the law's debt remission and servitude limits (Deuteronomy 15:1–12; Leviticus 25:8–55), but the populace violated the covenant by re-enslaving them, prompting divine rebuke. This event demonstrates awareness and attempted enforcement of Shemitah provisions amid the siege of , yet underscores inconsistent adherence rather than routine observance. No other prophetic or historical narratives in the document successful, widespread Shemitah implementation during the pre-exilic era, suggesting it was aspirational or selectively applied rather than systematically enforced. For the Yovel (Jubilee), proclaimed every fiftieth year after seven Shemitah cycles with land restoration and (Leviticus 25:8–55), the provides no direct accounts of historical observance. Allusions in prophetic texts, such as 61:1–2 ("to proclaim to the captives, and the opening of the to those who are bound... to proclaim the year of the Lord's favor") or 46:17 (referencing a "year of " for returned fields), evoke themes but pertain to ideal future restoration rather than past practice. Scholarly consensus holds that no biblical evidence confirms Yovel's implementation in ancient , likely due to its economic disruptiveness and dependence on precise calendrical alignment with Shemitah. The absence of references in monarchic histories or prophetic critiques further indicates it remained theoretical, without verifiable enactment during Biblical times.

Post-Exilic and Rabbinic Implementation

In the post-exilic period, following the return from circa 538 BCE, the reconstituted Jewish community in affirmed commitment to Shemitah observance, as documented in 10:31, where signatories pledged to remit debts and allow land rest every seventh year, reflecting an intent to implement Leviticus 25 provisions under Persian suzerainty. This aligns with broader Second Temple-era evidence of sabbatical cycle tracking, including Hasmonean records in 6:49–53, which describe a sabbatical year interrupting agricultural labor during the Seleucid siege of Jerusalem around 163 BCE, indicating practical adherence despite wartime pressures. Documentary finds from the Judean Desert, such as Bar Kokhba-era letters referencing the "seventh year" (circa 132 CE), further demonstrate continuity in calendrical observance into the early rabbinic transition, with planning for periods evident in economic adjustments. Rabbinic literature codified Shemitah implementation in the Mishnah's tractate Sheviit (compiled circa 200 CE), which delineates rules for produce sanctity, debt remission via the prosbul mechanism instituted by to facilitate lending amid economic realities, and prohibitions on cultivation, emphasizing empirical soil rest while permitting spontaneous growth for communal use. These provisions extended post-Temple destruction (70 CE), with Talmudic elaboration in 36a attributing Hillel's innovation to observed hardships from strict debt cancellation, prioritizing causal sustainability of credit systems over literal non-lending. Enforcement relied on communal courts, with violations penalized through produce invalidation for tithes or resale, as rabbinic authorities like stressed verifiable sabbatical onset from prior year's grain remnants. In contrast, Yovel implementation was suspended post-exile, as articulated in rabbinic sources deeming prerequisites unmet: full tribal land allotments and proclamation, absent under foreign dominion and fragmentation. The Arakhin (circa 200 CE) theorizes Yovel manumission and reversion but notes non-observance, echoed in Talmudic discussions (e.g., Megillah 14b) linking cessation to exile's territorial losses, rendering shofar liberty blasts inapplicable without restored sovereignty. This pragmatic deferral, grounded in conditions like those in Leviticus 25:10 requiring "all the land," avoided infeasible disruptions, with medieval commentators like later affirming theoretical validity pending messianic return but no historical post-exilic activation. Empirical absence of cycles in records corroborates this, distinguishing Shemitah's adaptability from Yovel's structural dependencies.

Modern Adherence in Israel

In modern , observance of the sabbatical year (Shemitah) centers on agricultural prohibitions, with many farmers employing the heter mechira—a rabbinic permission involving the formal sale of land to non-Jews for the year—to permit continued cultivation and avoid biblical violations. This mechanism, endorsed by Israel's Chief Rabbinate since the state's founding, allows produce to be sold as non-sacred, though it faces criticism from stricter authorities who view it as a leniency undermining the Torah's intent for land rest. During the 5782 (September 2021–September 2022) Shemitah cycle, roughly 75% of participating farmers relied on heter mechira, while 20% used alternatives like otzar beit din (communal trust distribution of produce) or full abstention from planting. Adherence varies by community and crop type, with estimates indicating 40–50% of Jewish farmers incorporating some form of observance, often supplemented by subsidies or for losses. Strict non-heter observers, who let fields lie , represent a minority but have grown from 25% in prior cycles to higher commitments in recent years, driven by religious Zionist initiatives. Economically, Shemitah prompts a surge in produce imports—reaching levels unseen since 2000 in 2022—to offset domestic shortfalls, while exports remain stable; however, strict adherents face revenue drops of up to 100% for certain crops, mitigated by community funds or crop destruction to prevent chazzer (post-year produce restrictions). The Jubilee year (Yovel), by contrast, receives no practical observance in Israel, as rabbinic consensus deems it inapplicable without the full settlement of all twelve tribes in their biblical allotments and a restored for proclamation. This suspension, dating to the Second Temple period's end, persists amid debates over 's territorial completeness post-1967, though symbolic discussions occasionally invoke Yovel themes for or land policies without legal implementation. Debt remission and release, integral to Yovel, remain unapplied, with modern handling such matters through secular and labor codes rather than biblical cycles.

Exegetical Interpretations

Inner-Biblical Cross-References

The sabbatical year provisions in Leviticus 25:1–7, mandating rest for the every seventh year with its produce available to the poor and wild animals, find parallels in Exodus 23:10–11, which similarly prescribes six years of and reaping followed by a seventh year for the afflicted and needy to glean. Deuteronomy 15:1–11 extends this cycle to the remission of debts among every seventh year, emphasizing generosity to avoid perpetual , though it omits explicit land rest while reinforcing economic release. These Deuteronomic laws align temporally with Leviticus but prioritize restraint over agrarian sabbath, reflecting covenantal adaptations for settled life in . Jubilee legislation in Leviticus 25:8–55, proclaimed with a ram's horn on the Day of Atonement for land reversion and servile manumission, receives prophetic allusion in Isaiah 61:1–2, where the anointed herald proclaims "liberty (deror)" to captives and "the year of the Lord's favor," echoing the Jubilee's deror release and redemptive cycle. Ezekiel 46:17 invokes the "year of liberty" for terminating a prince's gift of land to a servant, directly mirroring Leviticus' temporal bounds on alienated property to preserve inheritance. Leviticus 26:34–35, immediately following Behar, anticipates non-observance by foretelling desolated land fulfilling neglected sabbaths during exile, a motif realized in 2 Chronicles 36:21, which attributes seventy years of Babylonian captivity to compensating for omitted sabbatical rests. Servitude limits in Leviticus 25:39–55, treating impoverished Hebrews as hired workers redeemable via kin or self-purchase until , parallel Deuteronomy 15:12–18's sixth-year with provisions for sustenance upon release, but Leviticus innovates by subordinating this to the fiftieth-year universal , preventing indefinite . Exodus 21:2–6 offers a baseline six-year term for Hebrew male bondservants with ear-piercing option for permanence, underscoring Leviticus' extension of familial protections amid economic cycles. These cross-references collectively frame Behar's laws as culminative, integrating earlier motifs into comprehensive socio-economic restoration.

Classical Rabbinic Elaborations

In the (Torat Kohanim), the tannaitic on Leviticus, the year is elaborated as sharing the year's prohibitions on , , and asserting dominion over field produce, with the land's rest underscoring its ultimate belonging to rather than human owners; for instance, owners may eat spontaneous growth but must not commercialize or store it excessively. The text further interprets Leviticus 25:11–12 to mandate that the 's sanctity prohibits all forms of agricultural labor akin to the , ensuring a full year of release following the prior 's conclusion. The in tractate Shevi'it details Sabbatical-year rules on remission (Shevi'it 10:1), which rabbinic sources extend interpretively to 's broader liberation, though the latter uniquely mandates return of ancestral lands and Hebrew indentured servants without option for permanent sale or bondage. Tractate Arakhin addresses valuations for redeeming consecrated persons or fields, calibrated against cycles to prevent undervaluation near release years, reflecting the system's aim to preserve family holdings (Arakhin 1:1–5). The Babylonian Talmud in Rosh Hashanah 25b–26a specifies that the shofar proclamation of liberty (Leviticus 25:9–10) occurs on Yom Kippur at the Jubilee's onset, freeing Hebrew slaves immediately, though they delay departure until after the holiday to avoid travel on the holy day; this blast, using a ram's horn, symbolizes restoration over mere remission. In Arakhin 32b and Sanhedrin 110b, the Talmud debates the Jubilee's counting—whether the fiftieth year overlaps the next Sabbatical cycle (per Rabbi Yehuda) or stands distinct (majority view)—resolving toward the latter to align with seven full Sabbaticals plus an additional release year. Rabbinic tradition unanimously holds that Jubilee observance ceased after the Assyrian exile of the tribes of , Gad, and half of Manasseh circa 732 BCE, as the law requires all tribes' presence for equitable land redistribution; subsequent dispersions, including the Babylonian exile in 586 BCE, rendered the mechanism inoperative rabbinically, though laws persist deoraita in . The (Shevi'it 10:3) reinforces that without , certain debt remissions apply only midde-rabbanan, prioritizing causal prerequisites like territorial integrity over isolated observance.

Medieval Scholastic Analyses

Maimonides (1138–1204), in his Mishneh Torah (completed circa 1180), systematically codified the laws of shemitah (sabbatical year) and yovel (jubilee) in the tractate Hilchot Shevi'it ve-Yovel, spanning fourteen chapters that outline prohibitions on agricultural labor every seventh year, land reversion to original owners in the fiftieth year, and regulations for Hebrew indentured servants and debt remission. He emphasized the rational basis for these institutions, arguing that shemitah fosters trust in divine providence by suspending normal economic productivity, while yovel prevents perpetual inequality through mandatory restoration, applicable only when the majority of Israel resides in the land and the Sanhedrin proclaims it. Maimonides ruled that sales of land must account for the proximity to yovel, with prices adjusted proportionally to remaining years of use, deeming non-compliance as theft; he also clarified that urban properties revert after a year unless redeemed, distinguishing them from rural fields tied to tribal inheritance. Nachmanides (1194–1270), in his Torah commentary, offered exegetical depth to Leviticus 25, interpreting the yovel trumpet blast (shofar) as deriving from the root meaning "to lead" or "transport," symbolizing the return of persons and to their primordial states of freedom and inheritance, akin to rams led home by horns. He defended the perpetuity of these laws against rationalist critiques by linking shemitah to cosmic rest cycles, including the , and argued that land sales are perpetual leases from , with yovel enforcing reversion to prevent human ownership from overriding divine allocation to tribes. On usury bans and aid to the poor (Leviticus 25:35–37), Nachmanides stressed ethical , prohibiting exploitative pricing that ignores yovel timelines, viewing such practices as violations of covenantal brotherhood rather than mere economic opportunism. Other medieval commentators, such as Rashba (1235–1310), built on these by reconciling yovel's suspension post-Temple with ongoing shemitah observance, analyzing redemption formulas for fields (Leviticus 25:25–28) as commutative justice balancing buyer and seller interests through actuarial valuation of harvests. These analyses prioritized textual fidelity and halakhic applicability, often countering philosophical dismissals of the laws' feasibility by underscoring their role in sustaining national cohesion and moral order.

Economic and Causal Analysis

Foundations in Property and Divine Stewardship

The principle of divine ownership of land, as enunciated in Leviticus 25:23—"The land shall not be sold in perpetuity, for the land is Mine; for you are [but] and resident settlers with Me"—establishes the foundational theological constraint on Israelite property rights. This declaration positions God as the absolute proprietor of , with human inhabitants granted conditional tenure for productive use, akin to tenancy rather than dominion. Such a framework derives from the covenantal allocation of tribal inheritances in Numbers 26 and 13–19, where land parcels were apportioned as perpetual family holdings under divine oversight, prohibiting their permanent alienation to avert erosion of this sacred distribution. This model extends to all , mandating redemption for kin (Leviticus 25:25–28) and reversion to original owners in the year (Leviticus 25:10–13, 28), thereby treating sales as redeemable leases prorated by remaining years to Jubilee. (Ramban), in his commentary on Leviticus 25:14, interprets related prohibitions against overcharging in land deals as requiring valuation based on Jubilee proximity, reinforcing that no transaction can override divine reversion, as the buyer acquires only —the right to fruits and income—until restoration. Economically, this curtails speculative hoarding, as permanent sales would incentivize absentee and underutilization, whereas enforces active cultivation tied to familial responsibility, aligning human incentives with long-term of the agrarian base. Causally, absolute rights, absent such resets, foster compounding inequalities through and , as initial disparities amplify via market exchanges; divine interrupts this by periodic nullification of encumbrances, preserving the land's role in sustaining covenantal rather than enabling oligarchic consolidation. Empirical parallels in ancient Near Eastern codes, like Hammurabi's edicts on , show similar royal interventions to avert peasant dispossession, but Behar uniquely grounds limits in theistic — as delegated trust, not commodified asset—prioritizing collective viability over individual perpetuity. This approach, while constraining , theoretically bolsters resilience against famines or downturns by ensuring broad access to productive assets, though implementation demanded rigorous enforcement to counter evasion via proxies or foreign holdings.

Cycles for Preventing Permanent Dispossession

The sabbatical year, or , mandated every seventh year in Leviticus 25:1–7, requires the land to lie fallow, prohibiting cultivation and harvesting beyond spontaneous growth, which is designated for the poor and ; concurrently, verses 8–12 extend debt remission principles from Exodus 23:10–11 and Deuteronomy 15:1–6 to avert foreclosure-driven land sales during economic distress. This cycle interrupts compounding indebtedness, as creditors release loans without collateral seizure, thereby curbing the initial stages of dispossession where forces asset . Culminating in the , or Yovel, the fiftieth year after seven cycles (Leviticus 25:8–55), proclaims liberty (deror) with automatic reversion of sold properties to ancestral kin and of Hebrew bondsmen, rendering all land transfers provisional leases valued by years to the next Yovel (verses 13–17, 23–28). Redemption formulas, prorating based on remaining cycles (e.g., a field's worth diminishing predictably), incentivize familial repurchase while prohibiting perpetual alienation, as the land's ultimate tenure resides with God and its allotted families per the conquest divisions in Numbers 26 and 13–19. Causally, these mechanisms reset wealth disparities by nullifying accumulative gains from or misfortune, forestalling oligarchic consolidation where a few clans monopolize arable holdings and exacerbate hereditary . Such periodicity—Shmita for proximate relief, Yovel for comprehensive restoration—embeds economic safeguards against irreversibility, predicated on the covenantal view that Israelite land grants are inalienable stewardships rather than commodified assets, though rabbinic sources note suspended Yovel observance post-exile due to incomplete tribal settlement.

Empirical Feasibility and Potential Drawbacks

The year (Shemitah) mandated in Leviticus 25 has historical evidence of implementation in ancient during the Second Temple period, where adherence was reportedly rigid, as noted by and supported by chronological alignments in biblical texts with sabbatical cycles. However, full empirical records of widespread observance remain limited, with no direct archaeological yield data confirming sustained agricultural rest across the population; biblical narratives imply reliance on prior-year provisions and divine increase in yields, but these lack quantifiable verification beyond textual claims. In modern , Shemitah observance is partial and facilitated by rabbinic leniencies like heter mechira, a temporary sale of land to a non-Jew to circumvent prohibitions, allowing continued cultivation for and domestic needs. Full non-commercial rest is rare among commercial farms due to scale; only a minority, such as certain religious kibbutzim, approximate it, often receiving government grants for fallow fields, with around 400 farmers compensated in recent cycles per monitoring. Agricultural output data shows no aggregate collapse during Shemitah years (e.g., 2021–2022 cycle), with national production rising moderately to NIS 19.3 billion in 2022 amid workarounds, though localized impacts include price volatility and import reliance. A study on labor substitution in observant communities indicates substantial short-term economic contraction, with affected areas experiencing reduced activity equivalent to a 10–15% output dip from idling land, partially offset by soil recovery benefits in long-term fertility. The year (Yovel), proclaimed every 50th year with reversion and debt release, lacks clear historical implementation evidence beyond theoretical cycles in biblical ; no verified instances of mass property redistribution appear in extrabiblical records, suggesting feasibility hinged on tribal allotments rather than fluid markets, rendering it improbable in urbanized or commercial economies. Modern analogs are absent, as Israel's policies prioritize state leases over resets, with economists noting implementation would disrupt tenure security and . Potential drawbacks include acute risks to from ~14% annual land idling under strict Shemitah, potentially exacerbating shortages in high-population contexts without buffers like Egypt's imports during 2021–2022, where Gaza's restricted access highlighted vulnerabilities. remission discourages extension, as lenders anticipate losses every seven years, historically curbing non-agricultural enterprise post-exile when shifted from farming. provisions could stifle market efficiency by nullifying voluntary sales after 49 years, deterring improvements on revertible assets and favoring over merit-based allocation, though proponents argue it prevents oligarchic consolidation. Rabbinic sources acknowledge economic hardship, leading to post-Temple relaxations, while contemporary analyses emphasize financial support needs for stricter observance to avoid farmer exodus. Overall, reveals short-term output losses outweighed by unproven long-term gains in sustainability, with full adherence feasible only in low-density, subsistence systems.

Ethical Dimensions and Critiques

Humane Constraints on Servitude

The provisions in Leviticus 25:39–43 mandate that a Hebrew individual who enters servitude due to or inability to pay debts be treated not as a chattel slave but as a temporary hired laborer (sākhīr) or resident sojourner (tôshābh), ensuring their status remains distinct from permanent bondage. This framework limits the duration of service to the cycle, culminating in automatic every fiftieth year, regardless of payment, to prevent indefinite subjugation. A core humane constraint prohibits masters from imposing "rigor" (āwōdhāh rûaḥ) on Hebrew servants, explicitly barring harsh, oppressive labor or physical that characterized ancient Near Eastern slave systems. Servants retain to Sabbath rest and festival participation, integrating them into the covenant community's rhythm rather than isolating them as property. Upon release in the , the servant departs with their family intact and provisions for reintegration, such as grain, wine, and oil, to facilitate economic recovery. Redemption mechanisms further constrain servitude's severity: relatives or the servant themselves may repurchase at a prorated value based on remaining years to , with fixed valuation scales to avoid exploitative pricing. Even if sold to a resident alien, the Hebrew retains redemption priority, and the alien cannot impose permanent subjugation, underscoring the servant's underlying status as Yahweh's bondservant freed from . These rules applied to both voluntary self-sale for and court-ordered for restitution, positioning servitude as rehabilitative rather than punitive ownership. Such constraints reflect a causal emphasis on preserving familial and tribal , as perpetual dispossession risked broader social destabilization in an agrarian economy reliant on land inheritance. Empirical parallels in ancient show harsher norms without release cycles or redemption, highlighting the biblical system's relative restraint, though enforcement depended on communal adherence to Jubilee observance, which historical records indicate was sporadic.

Distinctions Between Hebrew and Non-Hebrew Labor

In Leviticus 25:39–43, the mandates that a Hebrew individual who sells themselves into service due to impoverishment must be treated as a hired (sakhir) or resident temporary worker (toshav), rather than as a chattel slave, with their servitude terminating in the year to restore familial and proprietary rights. This provision frames Hebrew labor as oriented toward debt relief and economic recovery, prohibiting harsh rule and emphasizing kinship protections to avert permanent within the Israelite covenant community. Redemption could occur earlier through familial repurchase or personal means, underscoring a system designed for transient obligation rather than ownership. Conversely, Leviticus 25:44–46 permits the acquisition of non-Hebrew slaves from surrounding nations or resident foreigners, designating them as inheritable property (achuzzah) that could be bequeathed across generations without release, enabling perpetual labor extraction. These individuals, lacking covenantal ties to the land's and cycles, were subject to ownership models akin to those in contemporaneous Near Eastern societies, though bounded by broader biblical prohibitions on murder, excessive injury, or neglect. The text explicitly contrasts this with Hebrew treatment, stating that non-Hebrews "shall be your possession" for laborious tasks, reflecting a hierarchical ethic prioritizing national cohesion and divine over egalitarian labor norms. This binary framework—temporary indenture for versus heritable bondage for non-Hebrews—aims to insulate Israelite patrimony from erosion, as and kin form the core of under God's ownership (Leviticus 25:23), while allowing economic utility from outsiders without extending the same redemptive liberties. Empirical parallels in ancient economies, where endogenous groups often restricted permanent enslavement to preserve internal structures, suggest causal efficacy in maintaining tribal viability amid agrarian vulnerabilities like debt cycles and conquest risks. Modern analyses, however, critique the ethnic differentiation as inherently inequitable, though such views project post-Enlightenment onto a pre-modern, covenantal order where distinctions reinforced collective survival rather than individual rights.

Debates on Equity Versus Inheritance Preservation

Interpretations of the laws in Leviticus 25 diverge on whether their core function promotes broad —through mechanisms like debt remission and land resets to curb inequality—or prioritizes the preservation of familial and tribal as originally apportioned by divine allocation. The biblical text mandates that "every man shall return unto his possession" (Leviticus 25:10), with ancestral lands reverting to their original holders every fiftieth year, underscoring a restoration to predefined lineages rather than a reallocation based on current economic need. This mechanism treats land sales as temporary rights, priced according to remaining years until (Leviticus 25:15–16), thereby preventing permanent alienation while affirming God's ultimate ownership: "the land shall not be sold for ever: for the land is mine" (Leviticus 25:23). Classical rabbinic sources, such as those reflected in Maimonides' codification, reinforce inheritance preservation by classifying land transactions in Israel as redeemable leases, not absolute transfers, to maintain tribal estates as perpetual holdings under divine stewardship. Nachmanides (Ramban) similarly interprets the laws as safeguarding the integrity of familial portions, linking them to the initial conquest divisions (Numbers 26:52–56), where allotments were proportional to census counts but irrevocable across generations. Economic analyses highlight the causal role in averting oligarchic land concentration within an agrarian, kinship-based society, where dispossession could erode clan viability; yet, the reset favors original proprietors, potentially allowing wealthier families to reacquire holdings post-Jubilee, rather than enforcing egalitarian outcomes. Critics of equity-centric readings, including biblical scholars like Michael Harbin, contend that claims of as mandatory wealth redistribution misalign with exceptions permitting permanent sales of urban houses after (Leviticus 25:29–30) and perpetual servitude of non-Hebrews (Leviticus 25:44–46), which preserve distinctions in rights aligned with covenantal identity over universal leveling. These provisions indicate a framework prioritizing Hebrew ancestral continuity—tied to theological promises of prosperity for obedience (Leviticus 25:18–22)—over socioeconomic parity, as land returns to specific families regardless of their post-sale status. Historical plausibility studies affirm the laws' fit within ancient Near Eastern economies, where analogous edicts reset usufructs without upending lineage-based titles, though of widespread observance remains sparse, suggesting an aspirational ideal. Modern equity advocates, often drawing from , may amplify redistributive elements to critique , yet such views overlook the text's explicit tethering to , risking anachronistic projection absent direct textual warrant for outcome equality.

Cultural and Liturgical Role

Associated Haftarah Reading

The Haftarah for Parashat Behar, drawn from the , consists of verses 32:6–27. This selection recounts the Jeremiah's purchase of a field in from his cousin Hanamel during the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem in the 6th century BCE, an act commanded by God as a symbolic assurance of Israel's future restoration and return to the land. In the narrative, Jeremiah, imprisoned by King Zedekiah, receives divine instruction to redeem the ancestral property, fulfilling the Torah's ge'ulah (redemption) laws outlined in Leviticus 25, which emphasize preventing permanent alienation of family holdings through obligatory repurchase by relatives. He executes the transaction publicly, sealing the deed in earthen vessels for preservation, and declares it before witnesses, proclaiming: "For thus saith the Lord of hosts, the God of Israel: Houses and fields and vineyards shall be possessed again in this land." This deed serves as a prophetic sign amid impending exile, countering despair by affirming God's covenantal promise of redemption after punishment for covenant violations. Thematically, the Haftarah parallels Behar's focus on sabbatical and cycles, which mandate reversion to original owners every 50 years to uphold divine and avert perpetual dispossession. Jeremiah's act embodies these principles under duress, illustrating faith in ge'ulah even when national appears lost, as concludes: "Behold, I am the , the of all flesh; is there anything too hard for Me?" This reading, standardized in Ashkenazi and Sephardi traditions, reinforces the parashah's economic and theological imperatives for redemption as a mechanism of national resilience.

Broader Influence on Jewish and Western Traditions

The laws of Parashat Behar, particularly the year and provisions in Leviticus 25, have exerted significant influence on Jewish legal and philosophical traditions by underscoring the conditional nature of human ownership over , positioning it as divine held in stewardship. , in his 12th-century (Hilchot Sheviit ve-Yovel), codified these regulations, detailing their agricultural cessation every seventh year and the fiftieth-year reversion of ancestral holdings to prevent perpetual dispossession, thereby embedding principles of economic reset and familial inheritance preservation into halakhic practice. Rabbinic literature, including the (e.g., tractate Shevi'it), extended these into debates on post-exilic applicability, with authorities like interpreting the 's suspension absent the and full tribal settlement, yet affirming its enduring ethical imperative for equity amid scarcity. In Kabbalistic thought, the Zohar's 13th-century reframed Behar's cycles as metaphysical restorations, linking land release to (repair of the world) and eschatological redemption, influencing later Hasidic emphases on spiritual liberation from material bondage. , in his 13th-century commentary, connected the Jubilee's horn-blast proclamation to broader themes of national renewal, informing medieval Jewish views on property as a covenantal trust rather than absolute dominion. Extending to Western traditions, Leviticus 25 inspired 17th-century European intellectuals such as , Carlo Sigonio, and , who invoked the Jubilee as a biblical for redistribution and limits on perpetual private tenure, challenging feudal systems and informing early modern theories of property rights. In Christian , Evangelical abolitionists in the drew on Jubilee's manumission clauses (Leviticus 25:39–46) to argue against hereditary , emphasizing redemption motifs echoed in liberty themes, though interpretations varied on distinguishing from chattel bondage. These ideas contributed to secular discourses on periodic and anti-entailment reforms, as seen in influences on agrarian laws, yet empirical implementation in ancient remains debated due to sparse archaeological corroboration beyond textual mandates.

References

  1. https://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/2033/jewish/Behar-in-a-Nutshell.htm
  2. https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/bhar-a-summary-of-the-parashah/
  3. https://www.sefaria.org/topics/parashat-behar?tab=sources
  4. https://www.myjewishlearning.com/torah-portions/parashat-behar/
  5. https://www.chabad.org/parshah/torahreading_cdo/aid/2492757/p/1/jewish/Behar-Torah-Reading.htm
  6. https://www.hebcal.com/sedrot/behar-bechukotai
  7. https://hallel.info/parashat-behar/
  8. https://www.hebcal.com/sedrot/behar
  9. https://www.jewfaq.org/torah_readings
  10. https://www.chabad.org/parshah/otherparshas_cdo/aid/9175/jewish/Complete-Parshah-List.htm
  11. https://www.hebcal.com/sedrot/behar-20220521
  12. https://www.hebcal.com/sedrot/
  13. https://www.alephbeta.org/weekly-torah-portion/parshat-behar
  14. https://www.chabad.org/parshah/default_cdo/aid/15584/jewish/Behar.htm
  15. https://ffoz.org/torahportions/parashah/behar
  16. https://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/512392/jewish/Aliyah-Summary.htm
  17. https://www.hebcal.com/sedrot/behar-20380515
  18. https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1730105/jewish/The-Stopping-Points-in-the-Public-Torah-Reading.htm
  19. https://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/sites/default/files/public/halakhah/teshuvot/19861990/eisenberg_triennial.pdf
  20. https://www.hebcal.com/home/50/triennial-torah-reading-cycle
  21. https://www.rabbinicalassembly.org/sites/default/files/2023-09/eisenberg_triennial_updated-1.pdf
  22. https://www.betemunah.org/tishri83.html
  23. https://www.chabad.org/library/bible_cdo/aid/9926/jewish/Chapter-25.htm
  24. https://mechon-mamre.org/p/pt/pt0325.htm
  25. https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/562077/jewish/What-Is-Shemitah.htm
  26. https://www.theologyofwork.org/old-testament/leviticus-and-work/the-sabbath-year-and-the-year-of-jubilee-leviticus-25/
  27. https://www.tyndalebulletin.org/article/29326-the-manumission-of-slaves-in-jubilee-and-sabbath-years.pdf
  28. https://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/day-of-atonement
  29. https://www.sefaria.org/topics/jubilee
  30. https://enduringword.com/bible-commentary/leviticus-25/
  31. https://www.thefellowship.site/archives/leviticuspart4/redemption-laws
  32. https://rsc.byu.edu/sperry-symposium-classics-old-testament/lord-will-redeem-his-people
  33. https://kb.osu.edu/server/api/core/bitstreams/3e882df7-ee6e-5303-a90e-40184fe13e5c/content
  34. http://www.torahweb.org/torah/2016/parsha/rhab_behar.html
  35. https://facultyshare.liberty.edu/files/40222024/Article%25208_%2520Ruth%2520at%2520a%2520Glance.pdf
  36. https://superiorword.org/leviticus-25-23-38-the-year-of-jubilee-part-ii/
  37. https://thebiblicalmind.org/article/examining-ancient-israelite-slave-law-leviticus/
  38. https://www.thetorah.com/article/the-hebrew-slave-exodus-leviticus-and-deuteronomy
  39. https://www.mdpi.com/2077-1444/12/8/570
  40. https://www.preceptaustin.org/leviticus_25_commentary
  41. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1029&context=studiaantiqua
  42. https://www.cambridge.org/core/journals/journal-of-law-and-religion/article/biblical-social-welfare-legislation-protected-classes-and-provisions-for-persons-in-need/DDC046895A24CF66E92F1EC8C95B9189
  43. https://www.journals.uchicago.edu/doi/pdfplus/10.1086/372105
  44. https://www.studylight.org/commentary/leviticus/25-35.html
  45. https://tifwe.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/08/2016-Issler-OT-Usury-JETS_59.4.pdf
  46. https://www.etzion.org.il/en/tanakh/torah/sefer-vayikra/parashat-behar/behar-prohibitions-ona%25E2%2580%2599ah-neshekh-and-ribit
  47. https://cbfa-cbar.org/index.php/jbib/article/download/308/310/
  48. https://www.etzion.org.il/en/philosophy/issues-jewish-thought/issues-mussar-and-faith/prohibition-against-lending-interest
  49. https://biblehub.com/2_chronicles/36-21.htm
  50. https://www.studylight.org/commentary/2-chronicles/36-21.html
  51. https://biblearchaeology.org/research/chronological-categories/exodus-era/2662-evidence-for-inerrancy-from-a-second-unexpected-source-the-jubilee-and-sabbatical-cycles
  52. https://associationforjewishstudies.org/podcasts/shmita-transcript
  53. https://www.thegospelcoalition.org/themelios/article/the-jubilee-and-the-millennium-holy-years-in-the-bible-and-their-relevance-today/
  54. https://judaism.stackexchange.com/questions/82682/evidence-that-yovel-was-ever-observed
  55. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Nehemiah%2010%3A31&version=JPS
  56. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=1%20Maccabees%206&version=NRSVCE
  57. https://www.jstor.org/stable/23507663
  58. https://schechter.edu/how-should-shemitah-the-sabbatical-year-be-observed-in-the-state-of-israel/
  59. https://biblearchaeology.org/research/exodus-from-egypt/2662-evidence-for-inerrancy-from-a-second-unexpected-source-the-jubilee-and-sabbatical-cycles
  60. https://en.yhb.org.il/revivim963/
  61. https://www.npr.org/transcripts/15143103
  62. https://www.tarb.co.il/the-last-fruits-of-the-shemita-year/
  63. https://religionnews.com/2022/04/22/bringing-the-torahs-sabbath-of-the-land-to-jewish-american-farmers/
  64. https://israel21c.org/the-farmers-who-are-giving-their-land-a-years-rest/
  65. https://gisha.org/en/low-hanging-fruit/
  66. https://www.zim.com/es/zim-blog/the-land-is-on-sabbatical-we-are-not
  67. https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/5810108/jewish/Jubilee-Yovel.htm
  68. https://truah.org/issue/yovel-fifty-years-of-occupation/
  69. https://www.scielo.org.za/scielo.php?script=sci_arttext&pid=S1010-99192023000200009
  70. https://stars.library.ucf.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1116&context=jaca
  71. https://brill.com/display/book/9789047410560/B9789047410560_008.pdf
  72. https://www.godwhospeaks.uk/the-development-of-the-jubilee-theme-in-scripture/
  73. https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/8943-jubilee
  74. https://www.jewishencyclopedia.com/articles/13560-shemittah
  75. https://www.sefaria.org/Mishnah_Sheviit.10.1
  76. https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/1007178/jewish/Shemita-Chapter-13.htm
  77. https://www.sefaria.org/Ramban_on_Leviticus.25.2
  78. https://www.sefaria.org/Ramban_on_Leviticus.25.14
  79. https://outorah.org/p/355/
  80. https://www.thetorah.com/parashah/behar-bechukotai
  81. https://www.studylight.org/commentary/leviticus/25-23.html
  82. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Numbers%2026&version=ESV
  83. https://biblehub.com/commentaries/leviticus/25-25.htm
  84. https://www.sefaria.org/Ramban_on_Leviticus.25.14?lang=bi
  85. https://michael-hudson.com/2017/01/the-land-belongs-to-god/
  86. https://library.biblicalarchaeology.org/article/proclaim-liberty-throughout-the-land/
  87. https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/sabbatical-year-shemitah-and-jubilee-year-yovel/
  88. https://www.thetorah.com/article/balancing-social-responsibility-with-market-economics
  89. https://biblehub.com/q/Leviticus_25_27_God_s_care_for_vulnerable.htm
  90. https://tifwe.org/resource/five-myths-about-jubilee/
  91. https://hazon.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/08/Sabbatical.Jubilee.EJ_.pdf
  92. https://library.biblicalarchaeology.org/sidebar/the-significance-of-the-sabbatical-year/
  93. https://www.jta.org/2014/09/09/israel/understanding-shmita-israels-agricultural-shabbat-1
  94. https://www.oecd.org/en/publications/agricultural-policy-monitoring-and-evaluation-2023_b14de474-en/full-report/israel_5c28fbe4.html
  95. https://en.toraland.org.il/media/hxqljjed/agriculture-report-2024.pdf
  96. https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/linhto/files/substitution_effect_shmita_v4.pdf
  97. https://www.npr.org/2021/12/26/1066377153/israel-gaza-farm-bible-rest
  98. https://www.etzion.org.il/en/halakha/studies-halakha/philosophy-halakha/sabbatical-year-and-jubilee
  99. https://civileats.com/2019/03/28/could-the-ancient-jewish-practice-of-shmita-be-a-new-tool-for-sustainable-ag/
  100. https://www.thetorah.com/article/the-hebrew-slave-reading-the-law-collections-as-complementary
  101. https://jbqnew.jewishbible.org/assets/Uploads/422/jbq_422_3_bakonbondage.pdf
  102. https://jta.org/2018/05/08/ny/rabbis-have-final-say-on-biblical-ethics
  103. https://www.etzion.org.il/en/tanakh/torah/sefer-shemot/parashat-mishpatim/mishpatim-laws-eved-ivri
  104. https://www.thetorah.com/article/the-treatment-of-non-israelite-slaves-from-moses-to-moses
  105. https://surface.syr.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1115&context=rel
  106. https://www.jtsa.edu/torah/grappling-with-slavery-in-parashat-behar/
  107. https://biblehub.com/leviticus/25-39.htm
  108. https://scholarsarchive.byu.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1146&context=studiaantiqua
  109. https://biblehub.com/leviticus/25-46.htm
  110. https://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Leviticus+25&version=KJV
  111. https://tifwe.org/does-jubilee-require-the-redistribution-of-wealth-or-land/
  112. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/255609085_A_Biblical_and_Economic_Analysis_of_Jubilee_Property_Provisions
  113. https://www.chabad.org/library/article_cdo/aid/5111462/jewish/Whose-Land-Is-It.htm
  114. https://torah.org/torah-portion/abarbanel-5765-behar/
  115. https://www.cooperative-individualism.org/kaplan-jonathan_credibility-of-liberty-the-plausibility-of-the-jubilee-2019.pdf
  116. https://www.chabad.org/parshah/article_cdo/aid/4182557/jewish/Haftarah.htm
  117. https://www.myjewishlearning.com/article/haftarah-for-bhar/
  118. https://www.sefaria.org/sheets/407053
  119. https://torah.org/torah-portion/haftorah-summary-behar/
  120. https://hebrew4christians.com/Scripture/Parashah/Summaries/Behar/Haftarah/haftarah.html
  121. https://www.nehemiaswall.com/prophet-pearls-behar
  122. https://www.jtsa.edu/torah/behar-haftarah/
  123. https://jewishjournal.com/mobile_20111212/129004/
  124. https://beitchaverimutah.org/torah-behar-leviticus-251-262-haftarah-jeremiah-326-27/
  125. https://opensiddur.org/readings-and-sourcetexts/mekorot/tanakh/neviim/aharonim/yirmiyah/haftarah-reading-for-parashat-behar-chantable-english-translation-with-trop-by-len-fellman/
  126. https://haftorahaudio.com/bhar/
  127. https://www.aju.edu/ziegler-school-rabbinic-studies/our-torah/back-issues/invisible-our-midst
  128. https://hebrewcollege.edu/blog/to-be-a-guest-in-the-world-parshat-behar-behukotai-leviticus-251-2734/
  129. https://www.jstor.org/stable/45212923
  130. https://truah.org/resources/justice-for-the-land-and-its-inhabitants/
  131. https://www.sefaria.org/topics/parashat-behar
  132. https://rabbisacks.org/covenant-conversation/behar/family-feeling/
Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.