Hubbry Logo
ShmitaShmitaMain
Open search
Shmita
Community hub
Shmita
logo
8 pages, 0 posts
0 subscribers
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Be the first to start a discussion here.
Shmita
Shmita
from Wikipedia

Shmita
Halakhic texts relating to this article
Torah:Exodus 23:10–11, Leviticus 25:2–7 Leviticus 25:20–22 and Deuteronomy 15:1–3.
Mishnah:Shevi'it (tractate)
Jerusalem Talmud:Shevi'it (tractate)
Shmita placard in an agricultural field (in the year 5782)

The sabbath year (shmita; Hebrew: שמיטה, literally "release"), also called the sabbatical year or shǝvi'it (שביעית‎, literally "seventh"), or "Sabbath of The Land", is the seventh year of the seven-year agricultural cycle mandated by the Torah in the Land of Israel and is observed in Judaism.[1]

During shmita, the land is left to lie fallow and all agricultural activity, including plowing, planting, pruning and harvesting, is forbidden by halakha (Jewish law). Other cultivation techniques (such as watering, fertilizing, weeding, spraying, trimming and mowing) may be performed as a preventive measure only, not to improve the growth of trees or other plants. Additionally, any fruits or herbs which grow of their own accord and where no watch is kept over them are deemed hefker (ownerless) and may be picked by anyone.[2] A variety of laws also apply to the sale, consumption and disposal of shmita produce. All debts, except those of foreigners, were to be remitted.[3]

Chapter 25 of the Book of Leviticus promises bountiful harvests to those who observe the shmita, and describes its observance as a test of religious faith.

The most recent shmita year was 2021–2022 or Anno mundi 5782 in the Hebrew calendar. The next shmita cycle will be in 2028–2029, year 5789 in the Hebrew calendar.

Ancient Israel

[edit]

Ancient Near East fallow years

[edit]

It is still discussed among scholars of the Ancient Near East whether or not there is clear evidence for a seven-year cycle in Ugaritic texts.[4] It is also debated how the biblical seventh fallow year would fit in with, for example Assyrian practice of a four-year cycle and crop rotation, and whether the one year in seven was an extra fallow year. Yehuda Feliks [he] suggests [5] that the land may have been farmed only 3 years in seven.[6] Elie Borowski (1987) takes the fallow year as one year in seven.[7]

Biblical references

[edit]

A sabbath year (shmita) is mentioned several times in the Hebrew Bible by name or by its pattern of six years of activity and one of rest:

  • Book of Exodus: "You may plant your land for six years and gather its crops. But during the seventh year, you must leave it alone and withdraw from it. The needy among you will then be able to eat just as you do, and whatever is left over can be eaten by wild animals. This also applies to your vineyard and your olive grove." (Exodus 23:10–11[8])
  • Book of Leviticus: "God spoke to Moses at Mount Sinai, telling him to speak to the Israelites and say to them: When you come to the land that I am giving you, the land must be given a rest period, a sabbath to God. For six years you may plant your fields, prune your vineyards, and harvest your crops, but the seventh year is a sabbath of sabbaths for the land. It is God's sabbath during which you may not plant your fields, nor prune your vineyards. Do not harvest crops that grow on their own and do not gather the grapes on your unpruned vines, since it is a year of rest for the land. [What grows while] the land is resting may be eaten by you, by your male and female slaves, and by the employees and resident hands who live with you. All the crops shall be eaten by the domestic and wild animals that are in your land." (Leviticus 25:1–7)[9]
    "And if ye shall say: 'What shall we eat the seventh year? behold, we may not sow, nor gather in our increase'; then I will command My blessing upon you in the sixth year, and it shall bring forth produce for the three years. And ye shall sow the eighth year, and eat of the produce, the old store; until the ninth year, until her produce come in, ye shall eat the old store." (Leviticus 25:20–22)[9]
    " I will scatter you among the nations, and keep the sword drawn against you. Your land will remain desolate, and your cities in ruins. Then, as long as the land is desolate and you are in your enemies' land, the land will enjoy its sabbaths. The land will rest and enjoy its sabbatical years. Thus, as long as it is desolate, [the land] will enjoy the sabbatical rest that you would not give it when you lived there." (Leviticus 26:33–35)[9]
  • Book of Deuteronomy: "At the end of every seven years, you shall celebrate the remission year. The idea of the remission year is that every creditor shall remit any debt owed by his neighbor and brother when God's remission year comes around. You may collect from the alien, but if you have any claim against your brother for a debt, you must relinquish it...." (Deuteronomy 15:1–6)[10]
    "Moses then gave them the following commandment: 'At the end of each seven years, at a fixed time on the festival of Sukkoth, after the year of release, when all Israel comes to present themselves before God your Lord, in the place that He will choose, you must read this Torah before all Israel, so that they will be able to hear it. 'You must gather together the people, the men, women, children and proselytes from your settlements, and let them hear it. They will thus learn to be in awe of God your Lord, carefully keeping all the words of this Torah. Their children, who do not know, will listen and learn to be in awe of God your Lord, as long as you live in the land which you are crossing the Jordan to occupy'." (Deuteronomy 31:10–13)[11]
  • Book of Jeremiah: Thus saith the LORD, the God of Israel: I made a covenant with your fathers in the day that I brought them forth out of the land of Egypt, out of the house of bondage, saying: "At the end of seven years ye shall let go every man his brother that is a Hebrew, that hath been sold unto thee, and hath served thee six years, thou shalt let him go free from thee"; but your fathers hearkened not unto Me, neither inclined their ear." (Jeremiah 34:13–14)[12]
  • Book of Nehemiah: "and if the peoples of the land bring ware or any victuals on the sabbath day to sell, that we would not buy of them on the sabbath, or on a holy day; and that we would forego the seventh year, and the exaction of every debt." (Nehemiah 10:31)[13]
  • Books of Chronicles: "... And them that had escaped from the sword carried he away to Babylon; and they were servants to him and his sons until the reign of the kingdom of Persia; to fulfil the word of the Lord by the mouth of Jeremiah, until the land had been paid her sabbaths; for as long as she lay desolate she kept sabbath, to fulfil threescore and ten years. (2 Chronicles 36:20–21)[14]
  • Books of Kings: (Isaiah speaking) "... And this is the sign for you: This year you shall eat what grows of itself, and the next year what springs from that, and in the third year, sow and reap and plant vineyards and eat their fruit. And the survivors of the House of Judah that have escaped shall regenerate its stock below and produce boughs above." (2 Kings 19:29).

The 2 Kings passage (and its parallel in Isaiah 37:30) refers to a sabbath (shmita) year followed by a jubilee (yovel) year. The text says that in the first year the people were to eat "what grows of itself", which is expressed by one word in the Hebrew, saphiah (ספיח). In Leviticus 25:5, the reaping of the saphiah is forbidden for a Sabbath year, explained by rabbinic commentary to mean the prohibition of reaping in the ordinary way (with, for example, a sickle), but permitted to be plucked in a limited way by one's own hands for one's immediate needs during the Sabbath year.[15]

There is an alternative explanation used to rectify what appears to be a discrepancy in the two biblical sources, taken from Adam Clarke's 1837 Bible commentary.[16] The Assyrian siege had lasted until after planting time in the fall of 701 BCE, and although the Assyrians left immediately after the prophecy was given (2 Kings 19:35), they had consumed the harvest of that year before they left, leaving only the saphiah to be gleaned from the fields. In the next year, the people were to eat "what springs from that", Hebrew sahish (סחיש). Since this word occurs only here and in the parallel passage in Isaiah 37:30, where it is spelled שחיס, there is some uncertainty about its exact meaning. If it is the same as the shabbat ha-arets (שבת הארץ) that was permitted to be eaten in a Sabbath year in Leviticus 25:6, then there is a ready explanation why there was no harvest: the second year, i.e. the year starting in the fall of 700 BCE, was a Sabbath year, after which normal sowing and reaping resumed in the third year, as stated in the text.

Another interpretation obviates all of the speculation about the Sabbath year entirely, translating the verse as: "And this shall be the sign for you, this year you shall eat what grows by itself, and the next year, what grows from the tree stumps, and in the third year, sow and reap, and plant vineyards and eat their fruit."[17] According to the Judaica Press commentary, it was Sennacherib's invasion that prevented the people of Judah from sowing in the first year and Isaiah was promising that enough plants would grow to feed the population for the rest of the first year and the second year. Therefore, Isaiah was truly providing a sign to Hezekiah that God would save the city of Jerusalem, as explicitly stated, and not an injunction concerning the Sabbath (shmita) or jubilee (yovel) years, which are not mentioned at all in the passage.

Historical shmita years

[edit]

Various attempts have been made to reconstruct when Sabbatical years actually fell using clues in the biblical text and events clearly dated in fixed historically understood calendars. This is important because the system of shmita and Jubilee years provides a useful check in deciding between competing reconstructions of the histories of the First Temple period and earlier and the history of the Second Temple period and later. There are explicit mentions of a Sabbatical year found in Josephus, 1 Maccabees, and in various legal contracts from the time of Simon bar Kokhba. In contrast, no direct statements that a certain year was a Sabbatical year have survived from First Temple times and earlier.

The Jewish method of calculating the recurring Sabbatical year (shmita) has been greatly misunderstood by modern chroniclers of history, owing to their unfamiliarity with Jewish practice, which has led to many speculations and inconsistencies in computations. According to Maimonides (Mishne Torah, Hil. Shmita ve-Yovel 10:7), during the Second Temple period, the seven-year cycle which repeated itself every seven years was actually dependent upon the fixation of the Jubilee, or the fiftieth year, which temporarily broke off the counting of the seven-year cycle. Moreover, the laws governing the Jubilee (e.g. release of Hebrew bondmen, and the return of leased property to its original owners, etc.) were never applied all throughout the Second Temple period, but the Jubilee was being used during the period of the Second Temple in order to fix and sanctify thereby the Sabbatical year.[18] A Sabbatical year could not be fixed without the year of the Jubilee, since the Jubilee serves to break-off the 7 x 7-year cycle, before resuming its count once again in the 51st year. While the 49th year is also a Sabbatical year, the fiftieth year is not the 1st year in a new seven-year cycle, but rather is the Jubilee. Its number is not incorporated into the seven-year cycle. Rather, the new seven-year cycle begins afresh in the 51st year, and in this manner is the cycle repeated.[19] After the Temple's destruction, the people began a new practice to number each seventh year as a Sabbatical year, without the necessity of adding a fiftieth year.[20]

Rabbinical interpretations

[edit]

The rabbis of the Talmud and later times interpreted the shmita laws in various ways to ease the burden they created for farmers and the agricultural industry. The heter mechira (leniency of sale), developed for the shmita year of 1888–1889, permitted Jewish farmers to sell their land to non-Jews so that they could continue to work the land as usual during shmita. This temporary solution to the impoverishment of the Jewish settlement in those days was later adopted by the Chief Rabbinate of Israel as a permanent edict, generating ongoing controversy between Zionist and Haredi leaders to this day.[21] There is a major debate among halakhic authorities as to what is the nature of the obligation of the Sabbatical year nowadays. Some say it is still biblically binding, as it has always been. Others hold that it is rabbinically binding, since the shmita only biblically applies when the Jubilee year is in effect, but the Sages of the Talmud legislated the observance of the shmita anyway as a reminder of the biblical statute. And yet others hold that the shmita has become purely voluntary. An analysis by respected posek and former Sephardic Chief Rabbi Ovadiah Yosef in his responsa Yabi'a Omer (Vol. 10), accorded with the middle option, that the biblical obligation holds only when a majority of the Jewish people is living in the biblical Land of Israel and hence the shmita nowadays is a rabbinic obligation in nature. This approach potentially admits for some leniencies which would not be possible if the Shemitah were biblical in origin, including the aforementioned sale of the land of Israel. Haredi authorities, on the other hand, generally follow the view of the Chazon Ish, that the shmita continues to be a biblical obligation.

Rabbi Joshua Falk, author of Sefer Me'irat Einayim on Choshen Mishpat, holds that shmita nowadays is only a rabbinic obligation, and, subsequently, the biblical promise of bounty for those who observe the shmita (Leviticus 25:20–22[22]) only applies when the biblical obligation is in effect, and hence that the biblical promise of bounty is not in effect today. However, the Chazon Ish, who holds that the biblical obligation of shmita observance remains in effect today, holds that the biblical promise of bounty follows it and Divine bounty is promised to Jews living in the Land of Israel today, just as it was promised in ancient times. However, he holds that Jews should generally not demand miracles from Heaven and hence that one should not rely on this promise for one's sustenance, but should instead make appropriate arrangements and rely on permissible leniencies.[23]

Observance in the Land of Israel

[edit]
Field left uncultivated in observance of the shmita year near Rosh HaAyin (2007)

According to the laws of shmita, land owned by Jews in the Land of Israel is left unfarmed. The law does not apply to land in the Diaspora. Any naturally growing produce was not to be formally harvested, but could have been eaten by its owners,[24] as well as left to be taken by poor people, passing strangers, and beasts of the field. While naturally growing produce such as grapes growing on existing vines can be harvested, it cannot be sold or used for commercial purposes; it must be given away or consumed. Personal debts are considered forgiven at sunset on 29 Elul. Since this aspect of shmita is not dependent on the land, it applies to Jews both in Israel and elsewhere.[25]

As produce grown on land in Israel owned by Jewish farmers cannot be sold or consumed, fruits and vegetables sold in a shmita year may be derived from five sources:[citation needed]

  • Produce grown during the sixth year, to which the laws of the seventh year do not apply.
  • Produce grown on land owned by non-Jewish (typically, Arab) farmers in Israel.
  • Produce grown on land outside the halakhic boundaries of Israel (chutz la'aretz).
  • Produce (mainly fruits) distributed through the storehouse of the rabbinical court.
  • Produce grown in greenhouses.

There is a requirement that shevi'it produce be consumed for personal use and cannot be sold or put in trash. For this reason, there are various special rules regarding the religious use of products that are normally made from agricultural produce. Some authorities hold that Hanukkah candles cannot be made from shevi'it oils because the light of Hanukkah candles is not supposed to be used for personal use, while Shabbat candles can be because their light can be used for personal use. For similar reasons, some authorities hold that if the Havdalah is performed using wine made from shevi'it grapes, the cup should be drunk completely and the candle should not be dipped into the wine to extinguish the flame as is normally done.[citation needed]

The otzar beit din system is structured in such a way that biur remains the responsibility of members of individual households and hence warehoused produce does not have to be moved to a public place or reclaimed at the biur time. Households only have to perform biur on produce they receive before the biur time, not on produce they receive after it.[23]

Because the Orthodox rules of Kashrut have strictures requiring certain products, such as wine, to be produced by Jews, the leniency of selling one's land to non-Jews is unavailable for these products, since these strictures would render the wine non-Kosher. Accordingly, wine made from grapes grown in the land of Israel during the shmita year is subject to the full strictures of shmita. New vines cannot be planted. Although grapes from existing vines can be harvested, they and their products cannot be sold.

While obligatory to the Orthodox as a matter of religious observance, observance of the rules of shmita is voluntary so far as the civil government is concerned in the contemporary State of Israel. Civil courts do not enforce the rules. A debt would be transferred to a religious court for a document of prosbul only if both parties voluntarily agreed to do so. Many non-religious Israeli Jews do not observe these rules, although some non-religious farmers participate in the symbolic sale of land to non-Jews to permit their produce to be considered kosher and sellable to Orthodox Jews who permit the leniency. Despite this, during shmita, crop yields in Israel fall short of requirements so importation is employed from abroad.[26]

Talmudic references

[edit]

Shevi'it

[edit]

In halakha (Jewish law), produce of the Seventh Year that is subject to the laws of shmita is called sheviit. Shevi'it produce has sanctity requiring special rules for its use:

  • It can only be consumed or used (in its ordinary use) for personal enjoyment
  • It cannot be bought, sold, or thrown out.
  • It must be used in its "best" manner so as to ensure fullest enjoyment (For example, fruits that are normally eaten whole cannot be juiced).
  • It can only be stored so long as naturally-growing plants of the given species can be eaten by animals in the fields. Once a particular species is no longer available in the field, one must rid one's house of it through a process known as biur.[23]

By biblical law, Jews who own land are required to make their land available during the shmita to anyone who wishes to come in and harvest. If the land is fenced etc., gates must be left open to enable entrance. These rules apply to all outdoor agriculture, including private gardens and even outdoor potted plants. Plants inside a building are exempt. However, the rabbis of the Mishna and Jerusalem Talmud imposed rabbinic ordinances on harvesters to ensure an orderly and equitable process and to prevent a few individuals from taking everything. Harvesters on others' land are permitted to take only enough to feed themselves and their families.[23]

Aftergrowths

[edit]

According to the Mosaic law, grains, fruits, legumes and vegetables are permitted to be eaten in the Seventh Year, yet must they be harvested in an irregular fashion, and only as much as a person might need for their sustenance, without the necessity of hoarding the fruits in granaries and storehouses.[29] It is not permitted to make merchandise of Seventh Year produce.[29][30] These restrictions are implied by the biblical verse, "You are not to reap the aftergrowth of your harvest, nor gather the grapes of your untended vines" (Leviticus 25:5), and by the supportive verse, "In the Seventh Year you must let it (i.e. the ground) rest and lie fallow, so that the poor among your people may eat from the field and the wild animals may consume what they leave. Do the same with your vineyard and olive grove" (Exodus 23:11). Grain cannot be harvested by using a sickle, nor can a person reap an entire field, or make use of beasts to separate the grain from the husks by treading.[29][30][31] Grapes that are on the vine can be taken, sufficient for ones immediate needs, but they cannot be pressed in a winepress, but only in a small tub.[32]

When certain farmers began to secretly sow their fields during the Seventh Year and to harvest what they had planted, and to cover-up their action by saying that such produce was a mere aftergrowth from last year's planting, the Sages of Israel were compelled to enact restrictions on Seventh Year produce and to forbid all aftergrowths (Hebrew: ספיחין) of grain, legumes and those vegetables which are usually planted by mankind, in order to put an end to their deception.[33][31] Other rabbinic authorities prohibit only the aftergrowths of vegetables, but permit the aftergrowths of legumes and grain.[34] They permitted, however, to pick the fruits of trees that grow of themselves during the Seventh Year, for one's immediate needs, and to gather such vegetables and herbs that are not normally planted by humans, such as wild rue (Ruta chalepensis), either wild asparagus (Asparagus aphyllus) or amaranth (Amaranthus blitum var. silvestre), purslane (Portulaca oleracea), wild coriander (Coriandrum sativum), parsley growing alongside rivers (Apium graveolens), garden rocket growing in marshlands (Eruca sativa), sweet marjoram (Majorana syriaca), white-leaved savory (Micromeria fruticosa), and the like of such things.[33][35][36] Had any of these been kept watch over in the courtyard of a house, their aftergrowths would be forbidden to eat in the Seventh Year.[36] Rabbi Nathan ben Abraham permits the gathering of aftergrowths of mustard greens (Sinapis alba) during the Seventh Year.[37]

An ancient practice in the Land of Israel was to permit the gathering of spring onions which grew of themselves during the Seventh Year, after the first rains had fallen upon them and sprouted.[38]

The laws governing Aftergrowths apply only to crops grown in the Land of Israel.[31]

Heter mechira

[edit]
Proclamation of Chief Rabbi, Rav Avraham Yitzchak HaKohen Kook, Regarding The Importance of Shemitah Observance, and collecting for a communal fund to support those who observe shmita without compromise.

In the late 19th century, in the early days of Zionism, Rabbi Yitzchak Elchanan Spektor came up with a halakhic means of allowing agriculture to continue during the shmita year. After ruling in favor of Minhag Yerushalayim, that the biblical prohibition consists of not cultivating the land owned by Jews ("your land", Exodus 23:10), Rabbi Spektor devised a mechanism by which the land could be sold to a non-Jew for the duration of that year under a trust agreement. Under this plan, the land would belong to the non-Jew temporarily, and revert to Jewish ownership when the year was over. When the land was sold under such an arrangement, Jews could continue to farm it. Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, the first Chief Rabbi of British Mandate Palestine, allowed this principle, not as an ideal, but rather as a limited permit for individuals and times which are considered by Halacha of great need ("b'shas hadchak"), which became known as the heter mechira (lit. "sale permit"). Rabbi Kook explained in a lengthy responsum that the ideal is not to rely on the leniency of heter mechira, but rather to observe shmita according to all opinions. He noted that he himself did not rely on the leniency, it was intended only in a limited time of great need, for those unable to observe the shmita without the leniency.

The heter mechira was accepted by Modern Orthodox Judaism and is one of the classic examples of the Modern Orthodox approach toward adapting classical Jewish law to the modern world. However, this approach has not been universally accepted in the Orthodox community and has met with opposition, particularly from Haredi poskim (authorities of Jewish law).

In contemporary religious circles these rabbinic leniencies have received wide but not universal acceptance. In Israel, the Chief Rabbinate obtains permission from all farmers who wish to have their land sold. The land is then legally sold to a non-Jew for a large sum of money. The payment is made by a cheque post-dated to after the end of the Sabbatical year. When the cheque is returned or not honoured at the end of the year the land reverts to its original owners. Thus, the fields can be farmed with certain restrictions.

Although the Orthodox Union's Kashrut Division accepts Minhag Yerushalayim and hence regards the produce of land owned by non-Jews as ordinary produce, it does not currently rely on the heter mechira because of doubts about whether the trust arrangement involved effects a valid transfer of ownership.[23]

Some Haredi farmers do not avail themselves of this leniency and seek other pursuits during the shmita year.[21]

Storehouse of the rabbinical court

[edit]

The ancient idea of an otzar beit din (storehouse of the rabbinical court) is mentioned in the Tosefta (Sheviit 8, 1). Under an otzar beit din, a community rabbinical court supervises harvesting by hiring workers to harvest, store, and distribute food to the community. Members of the community pay the beth din, but this payment represents only a contribution for services, and not a purchase or sale of the food. This Talmudic device was revived in modern times as an alternative to the heter mechira.[23]

Because under this approach land cannot be sown but existing plants can be tended and harvested, the approach is applied to orchards, vineyards, and other perennial crops. A beit din, or rabbinical court supervising the process, hires farmers as its agents to tend and harvest the crops, and appoints the usual distributors and shopkeepers as its agents to distribute them. Individual consumers appoint the court and its designees as their agents and pay monies to court-appointed designees as agents of the court. Thus, under this approach, a legal arrangement is created whereby the crops themselves are never bought or sold, but rather people are merely paid for their labor and expenses in providing certain services. In modern Israel, the badatz is notable for adapting and supervising such arrangements.

The Orthodox Union notes that "to some, the modern-day otzar might seem to be nothing more than a legal sleight of hand. All the regular players are still in place, and distribution rolls along as usual. However, in reality, it is identical only in appearance as prices are controlled, and may correspond only to expenses, with no profit allowed. In addition, the otzar beit din does not own the produce. Since it is simply a mechanism for open distribution, any individual is still entitled to collect produce from a field or orchard on his own. Furthermore, all agents of the beit din are appointed only if they commit to distributing the produce in accordance with the restrictions that result from its sanctity."[23]

Biur

[edit]

Under the rules of the shmita, produce with Sabbatical sanctity (shevi'it) can only be stored as long as plants of the same species (e.g. plants sprouting by themselves) are available to animals in the fields. Once a species is no longer available in the land, halakha requires that it be removed, made ownerless, and made available to anyone who wishes to take it through a procedure called biur.

The Orthodox Union describes the contemporary application of the rules of biur as follows:

On the appointed day, one must remove all the relevant produce, and all products containing such produce, from his home and take it to a public area such as a sidewalk. Once there, the individual declares the produce in front of three people who do not live with him. He then waits to give the witnesses a chance to claim the produce. Once they have taken what they want, he is permitted to reclaim whatever remains. It is permissible to choose three people whom one knows will not claim the produce for themselves, even though they are legally entitled to.[23]

Thus, while the obligation of making one's produce available to the public and permitted to all takers can be performed in such a way as to minimize the risk that this availability will actually be utilized, this risk cannot be eliminated. The community at large, including members of the poor, must be afforded some opportunity to take the produce.

Biur only applies to produce that has shevi'it sanctity. For this reason, it does not apply to produce grown under the heter mechira for those who accept it. (Under the reasoning of the heter mechira the shmita does not apply to land owned by non-Jews, so its produce does not have shevi'it sanctity.)[23]

Wine prepared during the Seventh Year (with grapes grown in the same year) may be kept until Passover of the 1st-year cycle. Following the Passover, the wine can no longer be kept over.

Kabbalah and Chassidut

[edit]

When you eat and are satiated, you should bless God your Lord on the land The primary place where a Jew can eat in holiness is the Holy Land, which was given to us so we can sanctify its produce through the mitzvot such as tithes, the Sabbatical year, and so on. By eating in holiness, one can experience the Noam HaElyon, "Divine Pleasantness", which is mainly found in the Holy Land. When we bless God for our food, we draw the sanctity of the Land into our eating[39]

All good and blessing are the life of Jewish people. "Israel could be in death" without this "spiritual-life", i.e. Holy air of Eretz Israel; Rashi teaches that all Jewish people can say that God has done the Creation and has stated ha'Aretz as gift to Israel: if Nations want to take this Land we must teach that in past time all World was "Reign of Kushit" in fact "now all Eretz Israel is in the hand of Jewish people."

According to the Chassidut, eating is not only a way to stay alive but even a necessity so that the soul can continue to be strongly inspired by the study of the Torah and the prayer that the Jew performs every day: this means that something material, the food – food can in fact be from the "mineral, vegetable or animal kingdoms" – becomes "sublimated" to enter the sacred area of devotional service to God.

Love God your Lord, hear His voice, and devote yourselves to Him. For He is your life and the length of your days, enabling you to dwell upon the Land that God your Lord promised your fathers, Abraham, Isaac and Jacob, that He would give them[40] If someone separates himself from the Torah, it is as if he separates from life itself (Zohar I, 92a). A person's life force comes principally from the Torah (Likutey Moharan II, 78: 2). Thus, the more one devotes himself to the Torah by studying and observing it, the more is his life enhanced[41]

The main alliance between God and the Jewish people consists in continuous Blessings, transcribed also in the Torah; from Moses to Aaron up to the Levites and to the Jewish people as a whole, in the Torah the pact of revelation is established to bind them forever in the Land which can only be that place where it is possible to realize the Kingdom of God.

Just as rain, dew and strong winds provide life to the world, so does the Torah

— Rashi

The event of the gift of the Torah at Mount Sinai involved the whole world, in fact even the angels and other nations were witnesses or spectators of this miraculous event. With Avodah this event is perfectly consolidated until the messianic vision of the reconstruction of Third Temple of Jerusalem.

Ruach ("wind") also means "spirit"— in particular, the "spirit of Divine inspiration". Moses' words, which exemplify the power of the spirit of the tzaddik, bring Divine inspiration to all Jews

Shmita is therefore abundance of Nature until it becomes holy.

In modern Israel

[edit]

The first shmita year in the modern State of Israel was 1951–1952 (5712 in the Hebrew calendar). Subsequent shmita years have been 1958–1959 (5719), 1965–1966 (5726), 1972–1973 (5733), 1979–1980 (5740), 1986–1987 (5747), 1993–1994 (5754), 2000–2001 (5761), 2007–2008 (5768), and 2014–2015 (5775).[43] The last shmita year began on Rosh Hashanah in September 2021, corresponding to the Hebrew calendar year 5782. The 50th year of the land, which is also a Shabbat of the land, is called "Yovel" in Hebrew, which is the origin of the Latin term "Jubilee", also meaning 50th. According to the Torah, observance of Jubilee only applies when the Jewish people live in the land of Israel according to their tribes. Thus, with the exile of the tribes of Reuben, Gad, and Menashe (about 600 BCE) Jubilee has not been applicable.[44] In 2000, Sefardic Chief Rabbi Eliyahu Bakshi-Doron withdrew religious certification of the validity of permits for the sale of land to non-Jews during the shmita year following protests against his endorsement of the leniency by members of the Haredi community.

Hydroponics

[edit]

Authorities who prohibit farming in Israel generally permit hydroponics farming in greenhouses structured so that the plants are not connected to the soil. As a result, hydroponics use has been increasing in Haredi farming communities.[45]

Shmita 2007–2008

[edit]

During the 2007–2008 shmita, the Chief Rabbinate of Israel attempted to avoid taking a potentially divisive position on the dispute between Haredi and Modern Orthodox views about the correctness of the heter mechira leniency by ruling that local rabbis could make their own decisions about whether or not to accept this device as valid. The Israel Supreme Court, however, ordered the Chief Rabbinate to rescind its ruling and to devise a single national ruling. The Israel Supreme Court opined that divergent local rulings would be harmful to farmers and trade and could implicate competition. The issue of secular courts ordering the rabbinate to rule in particular ways on religious matters aroused a debate within the Knesset.[46][47][48] Israeli wineries often address this issue by making separate batches of shmita wine, labeled as such, and giving away bottles of shmita wine as a free bonus to purchasers of non-shmita wine.

In the First Temple period

[edit]
Sabbatical years in the pre-exilic period, according to Thiele's approach
(First Temple and earlier) Sabbatical years start in Tishri
Year Event
1406 BCE Entry into land; beginning of counting for Jubilee and Sabbatical years, as calculated from observance of 17th Jubilee in 574/73 BCE and (independently) from 1 Kings 6:1.[49]
868/867 BCE Public reading of the Law in 3rd year of Jehoshaphat.[50] Also a Jubilee year, the 11th.
700/699 BCE Sabbatical year after the departure of the Assyrian army in late 701 or early 700 BCE.[51]
623/622 BCE Public reading of the Law.[52] Also a Jubilee year, the 16th.[53]
588/587 BCE Release of slaves at beginning of the Sabbatical year 588/587 (Tishri 588).[54]
Summer 587 BCE Fall of Jerusalem to the Babylonians in the latter part of the Sabbatical year 588/587.[55]
Tishri 10, 574 BCE Ezekiel's vision of a restored temple at beginning of 17th Jubilee year, which was also a Sabbatical year.[56]

The Sabbatical year 868/867 BCE

[edit]

Another public reading of the Law, suggesting a Sabbatical year, took place in the third year of Jehoshaphat (2 Chronicles 17:7–9). According to the widely accepted biblical chronology of Edwin Thiele, Jehoshaphat began a coregency with his father Asa in 872/871 BCE, and his sole reign began in 870/869.[57] The passage about the reading of the law in Jehoshaphat's third year does not specify whether this is measured from the beginning of the coregency or the beginning of the sole reign, but since the two synchronisms to Jehoshaphat's reign for the kings of Israel (1 Kings 22:51, 2 Kings 3:1) are measured from the start of the sole reign, it would be reasonable to determine Jehoshaphat's third year in the same way. In Thiele's system, this would be 867/866. However, Thiele's years for the first few kings of Judah has come under criticism as being one year too late, because of problems that appear in the reign of Ahaziah and Athaliah that Thiele never solved. Therefore, in 2003, an article by Rodger Young showed that the texts that Thiele could not reconcile were in harmony when it was assumed that Solomon died before Tishri 1 in the (Nisan-based) year in which the kingdom divided, rather than in the half-year after Tishri 1 as assumed, without explanation, by Thiele.[58] In 2009 Leslie McFall, who is recognized in Finegan's Handbook of Biblical Chronology as the foremost living interpreter of Thiele's work,[59] agreed with Young's correction that moved dates for Jehoshaphat and the preceding kings of Judah up one year,[60] as have some other recent works by evangelicals and creationists studying this the field.[61][62][63] With this resolution to Thiele's problem, the year in which Jehoshaphat had the Law read to the people was 868/867. This is 294 years, or 42 Sabbatical cycles, before Ezekiel's Jubilee. The 42 Sabbatical cycles would make six Jubilee cycles, so it was also a Jubilee year. It is of some passing interest that in 1869, long before the breakthroughs of Valerius Coucke and Thiele that solved the basic problems of how the biblical authors were measuring the years, Ferdinand Hitzig stated that the occasion for Jehoshaphat's proclamation was because it was a Jubilee year.[64]

The Sabbatical year 700/699 BCE

[edit]

If 574/573 marked a Jubilee, and if the Sabbatical cycles were in phase with the Jubilees, then 700/699 BCE, the year often mentioned as a possible Sabbatical year because of the land lying fallow during that year (Isaiah 37:30, 2 Kings 19:29), was also a Sabbatical, 126 years or 18 Sabbatical cycles before Ezekiel's Jubilee. Assuming a 49-year cycle, the nearest Jubilee would have been in 721 BC, inconsistent with attempts to place a Jubilee after the Sabbatical year at this time. If a 50-year Jubilee cycle is assumed, the nearest Jubilee would be 724/723, and then assuming that a Sabbatical cycle began in the year following a Jubilee, neither 701/700 nor 700/699 would be a Sabbatical year.

Could the passages in Isaiah 37 and 2 Kings 19 be referring to two voluntary fallow years? This might be possible if the Jubilee year was a 50th year separate from the seventh Sabbatical/shmita year. Young presents a linguistic argument against this interpretation, as follows:

Others have imagined that Isa 37:30 and its parallel in 2 Kgs 19:29 refer to a Sabbatical year followed by a Jubilee year, since the prophecy speaks of two years in succession in which there would be no harvest. But the first year could not be a Sabbatical year, because in it the people were allowed to eat "what grows of itself", for which the Hebrew word is ספיח . In Lev 25:5 the reaping of the ספיח is forbidden during a Sabbatical year. Whatever the exact meaning is for this word, its use in Isaiah's prophecy and its prohibition in Lev 25:5 means that the first year of the Isaiah and Second Kings passages could not have been a Sabbatical year. This rules out the possibility that the passage is dealing with a Sabbatical year followed by a year of Jubilee. The proper understanding of the passage is that the harvest of the first year had been destroyed by the Assyrians, and the defeat of the Assyrian army came too late in the year to allow sowing that year. The destruction of the Assyrian host came the night after the giving of the prophecy (2 Kgs 19:35), so the reason that sowing and reaping were forbidden for the next year must have been because that year, the second year of the prophecy, was going to be a Sabbatical year.[65]

The Sabbatical year 623/622 BCE

[edit]

It has already been mentioned that the Babylonian Talmud (Megillah 14b) and the Seder Olam (ch. 24) mentioned a Jubilee in Josiah's 18th year, 623/622 BCE. With the proper assumption of a 49-year cycle for the Jubilee, the Jubilee would be identical to the seventh Sabbatical year, so that the Jubilee and Sabbatical cycles would never be out of synchronization. 623/622 BCE would therefore also have been a Sabbatical year. In Sabbatical years, the Mosaic code specified that the Law was to be read to all the people (Deuteronomy 31:10–11). Although this commandment, like so many others, was probably neglected throughout most of Israel's history, it was observed in Josiah's 18th year (2 Kings 23:1,2).

The Sabbatical year 588/587 BCE

[edit]

Various scholars have conjectured that Zedekiah's release of slaves, described in Jeremiah 34:8–10, would likely have been done at the start of a Sabbatical year.[66][67][68] Although the original Mosaic legislation stated that an indentured servant's term of service was to end six years after the service started (Deuteronomy 15:12), later practice was to associate the Sabbatical year, called a year of release (shemitah) in Deuteronomy 15:9, with the release of slaves. Based on a chronological study of Ezekiel 30:20–21, Nahum Sarna dated Zedekiah's emancipation proclamation to the year beginning in Tishri of 588 BCE.[69] Although Zedekiah's release of slaves could have occurred at any time, the occurrence of a Sabbatical year at just this time provides some insight into the background that probably influenced Zedekiah's thinking, even though the release was later rescinded.

The year 588/587 BCE was also the year that Jerusalem fell to the Babylonians, consistent with the Babylonian records for the reign of Amel-Marduk and the Scriptural data regarding Jehoiachin and Zedekiah. This is in keeping with the statement in Seder Olam chapter 30, properly translated as discussed above, that put the burning of the First Temple, as well as the Second, in the "latter part" of a Sabbatical year. The statement of the Seder Olam in this regard is repeated in the Tosefta (Taanit 3:9), the Jerusalem Talmud (Ta'anit 4:5), and three times in the Babylonian Talmud (Arakin 11b, Arakin 12a, Ta'anit 29a). An example of the caution that must be exercised when consulting English translations is shown by the Soncino translation in Arakin 11b, that the Temple was destroyed "at the end of the seventh [Sabbatical] year",[70] compared to Jacob Neusner's translation of the corresponding passage in the Jerusalem Talmud, that it was "the year after the Sabbatical year".[71]

The Sabbatical year 574/573 BCE

[edit]

A convenient starting place for the study of Sabbatical years in the time of the First Temple is the Jubilee that the Babylonian Talmud (tractate Arakin 12a), and also the Seder Olam (chapter 11), say was the 17th and which began at the time that Ezekiel saw the vision the occupies the last nine chapters of his book. Although many of the chronological statements of the two Talmuds, as well as in the Seder Olam that preceded them, have been shown to be unhistorical, this particular statement has considerable evidence to support its historicity. One of these evidences is the consistency of this reference with the other Jubilee mentioned in the Talmud and the Seder Olam (ch. 24), which is placed in the 18th year of Josiah (Megillah 14b). Ezekiel's vision occurred in the 25th year of the captivity of Jehoiachin (Ezekiel 40:1). Babylonian records state that Amel-Marduk (the biblical Evil-Merodach) began to reign in October 562 BCE,[72] and 2 Kings 25:27 says that it was in the twelfth month of this accession year (Adar, 561 BCE) and in Jehoiachin's 37th year of captivity that Jehoiachin was released from prison. By Judean reckoning, Jehoiachin's 37th year would then be 562/561 BCE. His 25th year, the year in which Ezekiel saw his vision, is therefore determined as 574/573 BCE, i.e. the year that began in Tishri of 574. Josiah's 18th year, at which time the Talmud says there was another Jubilee, began in 623 BCE, as can be determined from Babylonian records dating the Battle of Carchemish, which occurred shortly after Josiah was slain in his 31st year (2 Kings 22:3, 23:29). This is 49 years before Ezekiel's Jubilee, providing evidence that the Jubilee cycle was 49 years, not 50 years as is accepted by many interpreters, but which has been challenged by recent work such as the study of Jean-François Lefebvre.[73] Zuckermann also held that the Jubilee cycle was 49 years,[74] as did Robert North in his notable study of the Jubilees.[75] A fuller discussion of the reasons that the Jubilee cycle was 49 years can be found in the Jubilee article, where it is pointed out that the known chronological methods of the Talmuds and the Seder Olam were incapable of correctly calculating the time between Josiah's 18th year and the 25th year of the captivity of Jehoiachin, indicating that these remembrances of Jubilees were historical, not contrived.

That Ezekiel saw his vision at the beginning of a Jubilee year is also shown by his statement that it was "in the twenty-fifth year of our captivity, on Rosh Hashanah, on the tenth day of the month…;" (Ezekiel 40:1). It was only in a Jubilee year that Rosh Hashanah (New Year's Day) came on the tenth of Tishri (Leviticus 25:9), the Day of Atonement. The Seder Olam, in relating that Ezekiel's vision was at the beginning of a Jubilee, does not cite the part of Ezekiel 40:1 that says it was Rosh Hashanah and the tenth of the month, indicating that the fact that a Jubilee was commencing was based on historical remembrance, not on just the textual argument regarding Rosh Hashanah being on the tenth of the month. Ezekiel also says it was 14 years after the city fell; 14 years before 574/573 BCE was 588/587 BCE, in agreement with "the 25th year of our captivity".

Sabbatical years in the Second Temple period

[edit]
Sabbatical years of Second Temple period
(randomly mentioned by Josephus)[76]
Year Event
150 Seleucid era = 162 BCE–161 BCE Sabbatical year. Second year of Antiochus Eupator's reign. Judas Maccabeus lays siege to the garrison in the citadel at Jerusalem, with the Jewish runagates.[77]
178 Seleucid era = 134 BCE–133 BCE Sabbatical year. Ptolemy slays the brethren of John Hyrcanus.[78]
271 Seleucid era = 41 BCE–40 BCE Sabbatical year. Jerusalem captured by Herod and Sosius.[79]

Sabbatical years have been used to fix the exact time of historical events, as shown in traditional Jewish chronology, but which are rarely understood by modern chroniclers of ancient history.[80]

The first modern treatise devoted to the Sabbatical (and Jubilee) cycles was that of Benedict Zuckermann.[81] Zuckermann insisted that for Sabbatical years after the Babylonian exile "it is necessary to assume the commencement of a new starting-point, since the laws of Sabbatical years and Jubilees fell into disuse during the Babylonian captivity, when a foreign nation held possession of the land of Canaan ... We therefore cannot agree with chronologists who assume an unbroken continuity of septennial Sabbaths and Jubilees."[82] The Seder Olam (ch. 30) is explicit that this was the case, i.e. that the returned exiles had a renewed start of tithes, Sabbatical years, and Jubilee years. The first instance of a Sabbatical year treated by Zuckermann was Herod the Great's siege of Jerusalem, as described by Josephus.[83] Zuckermann assigned this to 38/37 BCE, i.e. he considered that a Sabbatical year started in Tishri of 38 BCE. Next, he considered John Hyrcanus's siege of Ptolemy in the fortress of Dagon, which is described both in Josephus (Antiquities. 13.8.1/235; The Jewish War 1.2.4/59-60) and 1 Maccabees (16:14–16), and during which a Sabbatical year started; from the chronological information provided in these texts, Zuckermann concluded that 136/135 BCE was a Sabbatical year. The next event to be treated was Antiochus Eupator's siege of the fortress Beth-zur (Ant. 12.9.5/378, 1 Maccabees 6:53), dated by Zuckermann to 163/162 BCE. However, he also remarked on the difficulties presented to this figure by the text in 1 Maccabees, which would seem to date the siege one year later, and so he decided to leave it out of consideration.[84] The final text considered by Zuckermann was a passage in the Seder Olam that relates the destruction of the Second Temple to a Sabbatical year, an event that is known from secular history to have happened in the summer of 70 CE. Zuckermann interpreted the Seder Olam text as stating that this happened in a year after a Sabbatical year, thus placing a Sabbatical in 68/69 CE.

All these dates as calculated by Zuckermann are separated by an integral multiple of seven years, except for the date associated with the siege of Beth-zur. Furthermore, his chronology is consistent with that accepted by the geonim (medieval Jewish scholars) and the calendar of Sabbatical years used in present-day Israel.[citation needed] All of this would seem to be strong evidence in favor of Zuckermann's scheme. Nevertheless, some problems have been recognized, beyond just the question of the siege of Beth-zur, which was one year too late for Zuckermann's calendar. A consistent problem has been the ambiguity alleged in some of the passages, notably of Josephus, where it has been questioned, for example, when Josephus started the regnal years of Herod the Great. In a study the chronology of all Herod's reign, Andrew Steinmann presents arguments in favor of dating Herod's capture of Jerusalem in 10 Tishre of 37 BCE, i.e. just after the Sabbatical year of 38/37, based on references to the activities of Mark Antony and Sosius, Herod's helpers, in Cassius Dio (49.23.1–2) and also on other considerations.[85] This date is in agreement with Ben Zion Wacholder's chronology. Therefore, many modern scholars have adopted a Sabbatical year calendar for the Second Temple period that is one year later, although there are many prominent scholars who still maintain a cycle consistent with Zuckermann's conclusion of a 38/37 BCE Sabbatical year.

Among those who have advocated an adjustment to Zuckermann's chronology, the most extensive studies in its favor have been those of Ben Zion Wacholder.[86] Wacholder had access to legal documents from the time of the Bar Kokhba revolt that were not available to Zuckermann. The arguments of Wacholder and others to support the calendar one year later than that of Zuckermann are rather technical and will not be presented here, except for two items to which Zuckermann, Wacholder, and other scholars have given great weight: 1) the date of Herod's capture of Jerusalem from Antigonus, and 2) the testimony of the Seder Olam relating the destruction of the Second Temple to a Sabbatical year. Wacholder gives the dates of post-exilic Sabbatical years in the following table:[87]

Sabbatical Years in the post-exilic period
Year Event
331/330 BCE Remission of taxes under Alexander the Great for Sabbatical years.
163/162 BCE Second battle of Beth-Zur; summer 162 BCE.[88]
135/134 BCE Murder of Simon the Hasmonean.[89]
37/36 BCE Herod conquers Jerusalem on 10 Tishri (Day of Atonement) just after end of Sabbatical year 37/36 BCE.[90]
41/42 CE Recital of Deuteronomy 7:15 by Agrippa I in a post-Sabbatical year, making the Sabbatical year 41/42.[91]
55/56 CE A note of indebtedness from Wadi Murabba'at in 2nd year of Nero, 55/56 CE, indicating 55/56 as a Sabbatical year.
69/70 CE Destruction of Jerusalem in the latter part (motsae, "going-out") of the Sabbatical year 69/70.[92]
132/133 CE Rental contracts of Simon bar Kosiba indicating 132/133 as a Sabbatical year.
433/434 and
440/441 CE
Three fourth- and fifth-century tombstones near Sodom indicating 433/434 and 440/441 CE were Sabbatical years.

Subsequent to Wacholder's study, Yoram Tsafrir and Gideon Foerster published the results of archaeological excavations at Beth Shean in the Levant that verified a record from the Cairo Geniza that gave 749 CE as the year for the "Earthquake of the Sabbatical Year".[93] According to the Geniza record, the earthquake occurred on 23 Shevat, 679 years after the destruction of the Second Temple; this is January 18, 749 CE in the Julian calendar.

The Sabbatical-year earthquake of 749 CE
Jan. 749 CE "Sabbatical year earthquake": 23 Shevat=18 Jan., 749 CE.

Seder Olam and the Sabbaticals associated with the destructions of the Temples

[edit]

The principal author of the Seder Olam, Rabbi Jose, was a pupil of the famous Rabbi Akiva. Jose was a young man when the Romans destroyed Jerusalem and burned the Temple. On such an important issue as the year in which the Temple was destroyed, it would be logical that Jose's ideas were taken from his mentor and his mentor's contemporaries.

Chapter 30 of the Seder Olam gives the year that both Temples were destroyed as be-motsae shevi'it (במוצאי שבעית). Heinrich Guggenheimer's recent translation[94] renders this phrase as "at the end of a Sabbatical year", thus unambiguously supporting the Wacholder calendar that starts a Sabbatical year in the fall of 69 CE. The problem, however, is that many translations of the Seder Olam render the phrase as "in the year after a Sabbatical year" or its equivalent. This was the sense adopted by Zuckermann when citing the Seder Olam as supportive of his calendar of Sabbatical years. The same Hebrew phrase is used in the Babylonian Talmud when citing this passage from the Seder Olam, and some modern translations of the Talmud into English translate the phrase in the sense given by Guggenheimer, while others translate it in the sense of "the year after". The Seder Olam uses the same phrase regarding a Sabbatical year for the destruction of both Temples, so that its testimony in this regard is important for dating the shemitot in both pre-exilic and post-exilic times. Therefore, it would seem necessary to closely examine the phrase in the original Hebrew when making chronological decisions. Unfortunately, this was not done, either by Zuckermann,[95] Wacholder,[96] or Finegan,[97] when citing the Seder Olam's testimony as decisive for their particular calendars of Sabbatical years. Most interpreters have simply relied on an existing translation, and that translation may have been unduly influenced by an attempt to make the translation consistent with the chronology of the geonim that placed the end of the Second Temple in a post-Sabbatical year.

At least one study has addressed this problem, arguing from both a linguistic standpoint and from a study of related texts in the Seder Olam that the phrase ve-motsae sheviit should be translated as something close to "and in the latter part of a Sabbatical year", consistent with Guggenheimer's translation and Wacholder's calendar.[98] This recent study argues that a comparative study of the word motsae (literally, "goings-out") does not support any sense of "after" ("after a Sabbatical year"). Further, the reference of the Seder Olam to a Sabbatical year associated with Jehoiachin is in keeping with a Sabbatical year when the First Temple was burned a few years later, but the Seder Olam would be in conflict with itself if the phrase in chapter 30 was interpreted as saying that the burning was in a post-Sabbatical year.

Jubilee and Sabbatical years as a long-term calendar for Israel

[edit]

The Jubilee and Sabbatical year provided a long-term means for dating events, a fact that must have become obvious soon after the legislation was put into effect. It is of some interest, then, that the Babylonian Talmud (tractate Sanhedrin 40a,b) records that in the time of the judges, legal events such as contracts or criminal cases were dated according to the Jubilee cycle, the Sabbatical cycle within the Jubilee cycle, and the year within the Sabbatical cycle. The Samaritan community apparently used this method of dating as late as the 14th century CE, when an editor of one of the writings of the Samaritans wrote that he finished his work in the sixty-first Jubilee cycle since the entry into Canaan, in the fourth year of the fifth Sabbatical of that cycle.[99] These cases of usage of the Jubilee/Sabbatical cycles make no provision for the possibility of the Sabbatical cycles being out of phase with the Jubilee cycles, which is additional evidence that the Jubilee was contemporaneous with the seventh Sabbatical year.[citation needed]

See also

[edit]

References

[edit]
[edit]
Revisions and contributorsEdit on WikipediaRead on Wikipedia
from Grokipedia
Shmita (Hebrew: שמיטה, literally "release") refers to the sabbatical year in Jewish , the seventh year of a seven-year agricultural cycle mandated by the , during which farmland in must lie fallow, with prohibitions on , plowing, , and for commercial purposes, while any naturally growing becomes ownerless and available for free collection by all, including the poor and animals. This biblical institution, outlined primarily in Leviticus 25, also requires the remission of debts owed between Jewish creditors and debtors at the end of the year, fostering economic reset and by preventing perpetual indebtedness. Enacted as a divine command to emulate the weekly rest for the and affirm God's ultimate ownership of the land, Shmita underscores principles of , trust in divine provision, and cyclical renewal over endless exploitation. Historically observed during the periods of the First and Second Jewish Temples, Shmita fell into abeyance after the destruction of the Second Temple in 70 CE due to and the loss of sovereignty over the , rendering full agricultural compliance impractical amid foreign rule and . With the return of to in the late 19th and 20th centuries and the establishment of agricultural settlements, observance revived, though partial and contested, as farmers grappled with economic viability in a modern state economy. Key innovations include the heter mechira, a developed by Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook in the early 20th century allowing symbolic sale of land to non-Jews to permit continued farming, which has enabled broader participation but sparked ongoing debate among Orthodox authorities over fidelity to the Torah's intent versus practical necessity. In contemporary , Shmita cycles—most recently concluded in 2021-2022—impose significant economic pressures, including reliance on imports, elevated produce prices, and restrictions on kosher certification for non-observant output, prompting government subsidies, rabbinic leniencies, and public controversies that highlight tensions between religious commandment and national . Proponents of strict observance argue it cultivates , environmental , and in providence, while critics of circumventions like heter mechira view them as dilutions that undermine the mitzvah's transformative potential, fueling perennial clashes within . Beyond agriculture, Shmita inspires broader interpretations in Jewish thought, influencing discussions on debt forgiveness, , and ecological , though empirical on benefits remains anecdotal rather than rigorously quantified.

Biblical and Ancient Origins

Scriptural Commandments and References

The primary scriptural commandment for Shmita, the sabbatical year, appears in Leviticus 25:1–7, where the instructs on : "Speak to the children of and say to them: When you come to the land that I am giving you, the land shall rest a to the Lord. For six years you shall sow your field, and for six years you shall prune your and gather in its fruits... But in the seventh year there shall be a Sabbath of solemn rest for the land, a Sabbath to the Lord. You shall not sow your field or prune your vineyard." This mandates that agricultural land in Israel lie during the seventh year, prohibiting sowing, pruning, , or gathering, while permitting natural growth to be eaten by the owner, servants, poor, and wild animals as a form of communal access. A parallel provision in Exodus 23:10–11 reinforces this agrarian rest: "Six years you shall sow your land and gather in its yield, but on the seventh year you shall let it rest and lie fallow. Let the poor among your people eat of it, as well as the wild beasts of the field." The economic dimension of Shmita, involving debt remission (shemitat kesafim), is detailed in Deuteronomy 15:1–6: "At the end of every seven years you shall grant a release. And this is the manner of the release: every creditor shall release what he has lent to his neighbor. He shall not exact it of his neighbor, his brother, because the Lord's release has been proclaimed." This requires creditors to forgive loans to fellow Israelites at the close of the seventh year, preventing perpetual indebtedness while exempting foreigners and emphasizing intra-communal equity, with the rationale tied to Israel's anticipated prosperity in the land. Leviticus 25 integrates these elements further by linking the sabbatical cycle to the Jubilee (yovel) in verses 8–13, where after seven Shmita cycles, a fiftieth year proclaims liberty, returning sold lands and freeing indentured servants, though Shmita itself focuses on annual land rest and biennial debt cycles. These passages constitute the core mitzvot (commandments) of Shmita, totaling around 22 according to rabbinic enumeration, including nine positive and thirteen negative injunctions against agricultural labor and enforcement. Prophetic and reference Shmita observance indirectly, such as 2 Chronicles 36:21 attributing the Babylonian to neglected land sabbaths: "to fulfill the word of the Lord by the mouth of , until the land had enjoyed its s. All the days that it lay desolate it kept Sabbath, to fulfill seventy years." No explicit Shmita commands appear outside the Pentateuch, underscoring its foundational role in covenantal agriculture and .

Parallels in Ancient Near Eastern Practices

In ancient Mesopotamian societies, periodic royal edicts known as andurārum in Akkadian or mīšarum in Babylonian implemented cancellations, liberation of debt-bondsmen, and restoration of lands seized for , practices that bear resemblance to the socio-economic release aspects of Shmita described in Deuteronomy 15:1–11. These edicts, attested from the third millennium BCE onward—such as in the Sumerian of around 2400 BCE and later under Babylonian kings like (r. 1792–1750 BCE) and Ammiṣaduqa (r. 1646–1626 BCE)—aimed to restore economic balance by annulling consumer debts, freeing dependents sold into servitude, and returning cultivable land to original holders, preventing perpetual indebtedness and land concentration. Unlike Shmita, which mandates automatic septennial remission independent of royal initiative, Mesopotamian amnesties were proclaimed sporadically, often at a king's accession or during significant festivals like the , reflecting royal equity rather than a fixed divine . The biblical debt release in Shmita, prohibiting and loan recalls every seventh year to avert (Deuteronomy 15:4–5), echoes these Mesopotamian mechanisms for averting social upheaval from , a common peril in agrarian economies where crop failures or taxes led to pledges and servitude. However, Shmita integrates this with prohibitions on cultivation (Leviticus 25:4–5), a feature absent in surviving ANE texts; Mesopotamian records emphasize and labor but lack of mandated septennial agricultural sabbaths, suggesting the land-rest component may derive from distinct Israelite theological emphases on soil rejuvenation and divine ownership (Leviticus 25:23). Egyptian practices, such as pharaonic decrees under rulers like Ramses III (r. 1186–1155 BCE) redistributing temple lands or forgiving arrears, show analogous resets but focused on state-temple relations rather than private debts or cyclical . Hittite laws from (c. 1650–1200 BCE) include provisions for limits and servitude terms but no periodic amnesties paralleling Shmita's scope, underscoring that while economic renewal motifs permeated the region—likely influencing biblical formulations—the Israelite system's rigid seven-year cycle and linkage to agricultural cessation represent a synthesized , potentially adapting broader ANE precedents to covenantal . Archaeological and textual evidence, including tablets from and Mari, confirms these Mesopotamian edicts' role in stabilizing palace economies, yet their irregularity contrasts with Shmita's statutory predictability, highlighting causal differences in : royal versus Torah-mandated periodicity.

Theological and Causal Rationale

The commandment for Shmita originates in Leviticus 25:1–7, where the Lord speaks to on , mandating that upon entering the , the earth must observe a sabbath rest every seventh year by ceasing , , and systematic ing, with spontaneous growth available for consumption by all inhabitants, including . This provision underscores a divine assurance of abundance, as the sixth year's harvest is promised to suffice for three years, fostering reliance on providential supply rather than human effort alone. Theologically, Shmita extends the Sabbath principle—God's cessation of creative work on the seventh day—to the agrarian cycle, affirming the land's subordination to divine rhythm and ownership, as articulated in Leviticus 25:23: "The land must not be sold permanently, because it is Mine, and you are but foreigners and sojourners with Me." (Ramban) interprets the command's Sinaitic framing as a testimony to the entirety of Torah's , reminding of their covenantal status and the mitzvot's comprehensive scope, thereby countering any notion of the land as mere property for exploitation. This rationale emphasizes humility and , liberating practitioners from materialistic self-reliance and promoting unity through shared access to produce, which transcends economic barriers. Commentators like Ibn Ezra highlight its role in enabling and reflection, while stresses honoring the land's inherent holiness. Causally, traditional sources acknowledge agronomic benefits, with (Rambam) noting that fallowing prevents soil exhaustion and enhances long-term fertility, a principle empirically validated by practices where periodic rest restores nutrient levels and microbial activity, though the seven-year interval prioritizes ritual over optimized . This dual purpose—divine sovereignty paired with observable natural renewal—reinforces Shmita's role in balancing human dominion with ecological limits, as the land's "rest" compensates for prior disruptions and yields compensatory growth in preceding cycles.

Historical Observance in Antiquity

Evidence from First Temple Period

In the Book of Jeremiah, dated to the late 7th to early 6th century BCE, an episode during the Babylonian siege of Jerusalem under King Zedekiah (r. 597–586 BCE) provides the clearest textual indication of attempted Shmita observance. Jeremiah 34:8–22 recounts Zedekiah and the Judean elites entering a covenant to manumit Hebrew slaves after their term of service, explicitly invoking the Torah's stipulation in Deuteronomy 15:12 that every seventh year Hebrew bondsmen be released, a provision linked to the sabbatical cycle's debt remission and social release. This occurred around 588/587 BCE, aligning with a sabbatical year in scholarly reconstructions, as the covenant referenced the "year of release" (shemitah) mandated from the Exodus era. However, the narrative reveals non-compliance: the manumitted slaves were promptly re-enslaved after the immediate Babylonian threat lifted, prompting Jeremiah's prophetic condemnation as a violation of divine covenant, foretelling judgment on the perpetrators. This suggests familiarity with Shmita norms among Judah's , but inconsistent application, possibly opportunistic amid rather than routine practice. The text attributes the act to adherence, implying prescriptive knowledge predated the event, yet underscores causal realism in prophetic : neglect of periodic release exacerbated social inequities, contributing to national downfall. Retrospective biblical attribution in 2 Chronicles 36:21 links the 70-year Babylonian exile (ca. 586–516 BCE) to unfulfilled land sabbaths, stating the desolated earth "made up" for sabbatical rests omitted over 490 years (70 cycles of seven), framing chronic neglect as a theological cause of the First Temple's destruction in 586 BCE. This interpretation, echoed in Jeremiah's broader oracles, posits empirical causality between agricultural and debt-release lapses and via , though it relies on post-exilic composition for interpretive framing. No corroborating extra-biblical inscriptions or chronicles from Assyrian or Babylonian records mention Shmita specifically, and archaeological surveys of II Judah (ca. 1000–586 BCE) yield no direct proxies like systematic fallow-induced signatures or gaps, despite extensive settlement and agricultural remains. Scholarly consensus holds textual prophetic sources as primary , reflecting elite awareness but sparse proof of widespread, verifiable across the kingdom.

Prophetic Critiques and Consequences of Neglect

The articulates the foundational consequences of neglecting the sabbatical year, stating that disobedience to God's commandments, including the land's rest, would result in such that "the land shall enjoy her sabbaths, as long as it lieth desolate, and ye be in your enemies' ; even then shall the land rest, and enjoy her sabbaths" (Leviticus 26:34). This covenantal warning posits a causal mechanism wherein the land compensates for withheld rests through enforced desolation, a principle echoed in prophetic literature as for systemic disregard. Jeremiah directly critiqued the Judahite elite's failure to observe the sabbatical release of Hebrew indentured servants, a core Shmita provision mandated every seventh year ( 34:14; cf. Deuteronomy 15:12). During the siege of circa 588 BCE, King and officials proclaimed liberty in apparent compliance but soon reneged, re-enslaving the freed individuals, prompting God's rebuke through the : "Ye have not hearkened unto me... therefore thus saith the Lord; Behold, I will give you liberty... to the sword, to the pestilence, and to the " ( 34:17). This incident exemplifies prophetic condemnation of Shmita neglect as a breach of social covenant, linking it causally to immediate national calamity rather than mere ritual failure. The ultimate historical consequence manifested in the Babylonian exile following Jerusalem's fall in 586 BCE, interpreted as fulfilling 70 years of neglected sabbatical cycles to allow the land its due rests (2 Chronicles 36:21). This duration aligns with approximately 490 years of —from Saul's accession around 1050 BCE to the exile—during which 70 Shmita years were withheld, as the land "enjoyed [its] sabbaths... to fulfil threescore and ten years" in desolation, per 's broader prophecies of judgment (Jeremiah 25:11-12; 29:10). Rabbinic , drawing on these texts, calculates the arrears precisely from periods of unchecked cultivation, underscoring the exile's role in redressing agrarian .

Second Temple Period and Post-Exilic Calculations

During the (516 BCE–70 CE), literary sources indicate that Shmita observance occurred, though likely not universally or comprehensively. In 6:49–53, dated to approximately 163 BCE, the faced shortages during a by Seleucid forces under , explicitly attributed to the sabbatical year's prohibition on sowing and harvesting, suggesting active adherence in at that time. references multiple sabbatical years in his and Jewish War, including one during the of by in 63 BCE and another amid Roman conflicts, aligning with contemporary Roman administrative records that accounted for the agricultural cycle's impact on provisioning. Archaeological corroboration includes undated coins from Judean mints bearing inscriptions referencing Shmita exemptions or distributions, interpreted as evidence of periodic observance to mitigate economic strain under foreign rule. Documents from the (132–135 CE), shortly after the Temple's destruction, further confirm the cycle's continuity, with letters instructing adherence to restrictions on . These attestations imply routine planning around Shmita, though full compliance may have varied due to Hellenistic and Roman influences, with prophetic critiques in earlier texts like 10:31 reflecting renewed commitments post-exile but not unbroken practice. Post-exilic calculations of Shmita cycles relied on anchoring to historical events for synchronization after disruptions like the Babylonian exile (586–516 BCE). Rabbinic tradition, as in , retroactively traces the cycle to 14 years after the Israelite entry into (circa 1272 BCE per traditional ), establishing the first Shmita in the subsequent seventh year to allow land familiarization. Upon return under , observance resumed per 10:31, with cycles inferred from pre-exilic prophetic records and Babylonian astronomical data for alignment, though no direct evidence specifies Shmita resumption. Following the Second Temple's destruction in 70 CE, the (e.g., Moed Katan 3b) designates the subsequent year (71 CE) as the first of a new seven-year cycle, providing a verifiable starting point amid uncertainties. The practical formula, articulated in the and codified by , instructs: add one year to the elapsed years since the destruction, then divide by seven; a remainder of zero indicates a Shmita year. This method, extending through 17 cycles to ' era (12th century), prioritizes empirical historical fixation over speculative pre-exilic continuity, ensuring calculable observance despite exile-induced gaps.

Rabbinic and Talmudic Elaborations

Core Interpretations in Mishnah and Talmud

The tractate Shevi'it in the , the earliest major compendium of rabbinic oral law redacted circa 200 CE, interprets the Torah's agricultural Shmita commandments (Leviticus 25:1–7; Exodus 23:10–11) as requiring the to lie fallow, prohibiting Jewish owners from performing labors that cultivate or harvest in a proprietary manner during the seventh year. The year commences on preceding the sabbatical cycle, with the specifying rabbinic extensions like a 30-day pre-Shmita work ban on perennials to safeguard the biblical rest ( Shevi'it 1:1–3). Core prohibitions encompass sowing, pruning vines, reaping standing crops, making sheaves, and threshing, with the House of deeming seven such acts biblically forbidden versus the House of Hillel's five, the latter prevailing in practice to avoid undue stringency. Mishnaic rulings emphasize the sanctity of Shmita produce (kedushat shevi'it), which grows spontaneously and becomes effectively ownerless (hefker), available for free consumption by humans and animals but barred from commercial sale, market storage, or wasteful discard to fulfill the Torah's egalitarian intent ( Shevi'it 4:1–3; 7:1–4). Aftergrowths (sifichim) from the prior year are rabbinically prohibited during Shmita to deter field neglect, with their sanctity lifting only after a formal declaration or the next cycle's onset, ensuring the land's full repose. The Jerusalem Talmud's , compiled circa 400 CE in the , amplifies these via case-based debates, clarifying that minimal gathering akin to leniencies is permissible if not for profit, while equating Shmita violations to desecrating the with similar penalties under certain views (Yerushalmi Shevi'it 1:1). It addresses edge cases, such as gentile-owned lands exempt from prohibitions and the interplay with tithes, where Shmita yields require separation before consumption despite their communal status. Rabbinic reasoning prioritizes causal prevention of evasion, like banning that aids growth, to uphold the Torah's rest as a divine trust rather than mere agrarian policy. Shmita's debt remission (Deuteronomy 15:1–6), termed shemitat kesafim, receives Mishnaic treatment primarily in tractate Gittin (4:3), where Hillel institutes the prosbul—a transferable debt document to courts—as a pragmatic safeguard against lending cessation, interpreting the release as interpersonal (hav'at shetarot) rather than strictly ontological to avert economic collapse while preserving periodic equity. Talmudic analysis in Gittin (36a–37a, Babylonian) and related sugyot debates its biblical versus rabbinic status, affirming it for loans but not oral debts, balancing literal observance with societal viability.

Regulations on Shevi'it Produce and Aftergrowths

Produce grown during the shevi'it (Sabbatical) year, known as shevi'it produce, acquires biblical sanctity (kedushat shevi'it), which imposes specific restrictions on ownership, use, and disposal. This produce must be declared hefker (ownerless) by its original owner, allowing any person in the Land of Israel to access and consume it directly from the field or tree for personal needs without payment or formal acquisition. Commerce with shevi'it produce is biblically prohibited, including buying, selling, or using it as security for loans, as it undermines the ownerless status intended to foster communal reliance on divine provision. Consumption of shevi'it produce is restricted to its ordinary purpose in a manner befitting its type—raw for typically raw items and cooked for those usually cooked—while prohibiting , beyond Israel's borders, or diversion to non-food uses if the is normally eaten. The sanctity extends to processed forms, such as or derived from it, requiring similar respectful handling. At the conclusion of the shevi'it year or specific bi'ur (removal) dates tied to , , and , uneaten portions must undergo bi'ur: the owner declares them hefker anew, distributes or discards excess to prevent , and private storage becomes forbidden thereafter to enforce timely communal consumption. Aftergrowths (sefichim), referring to vegetation sprouting unsolicited during the shevi'it year from seeds or roots left in the soil, face additional rabbinic prohibitions to prevent covert tillage or sowing disguised as natural growth. All sefichim of vegetables, grains, and herbs are forbidden for consumption during shevi'it, except for specific perennial aftergrowths like those of (per Rabbi Shimon) or trees, whose fruits retain only kedushat shevi'it without the sefichim ban, as tree growth derives from woody perennials not reliant on annual sowing. In the eighth year following shevi'it, aftergrowths emerging from shevi'it-era roots or seeds inherit the prior year's sanctity if they constitute continuation of the original growth, permitting work on trees but requiring observance of kedushat shevi'it rules until bi'ur or natural depletion. Vegetables identifiable as eighth-year growth—once they reach one-third maturity before shevi'it's end or appear distinctly new—escape the sefichim prohibition and may be purchased and consumed without sanctity constraints. These delineations, elaborated in Tractate Shevi'it chapters 1–9, balance agricultural rest with prevention of abuse, ensuring the shevi'it year's produce supports immediate sustenance rather than market exploitation.

Debt Release and Social-Economic Dimensions

The debt release provision of Shmita, termed shemitat kesafim, requires creditors to forgive outstanding loans made to fellow Israelites at the conclusion of every seventh year, as commanded in Deuteronomy 15:1-3: "At the end of every seven years you shall grant a release... Every creditor shall release what he has lent to his neighbor; he shall not exact it of his neighbor, his brother." This applies exclusively to interpersonal debts among Jews, excluding obligations to non-Jews, and emphasizes a relational bond of brotherhood that overrides financial claims during the release. Rabbinic literature, particularly the Mishnah (Sheviit 10:1-9), interprets the mechanism of release as primarily automatic under biblical law once the Shmita year concludes, rendering uncollected debts unenforceable without need for explicit creditor renunciation, though some authorities require verbal affirmation to reinforce the moral imperative. The Talmud (e.g., Gittin 36a) further clarifies that this forgiveness targets principal loans (kesafim) but not interest or documented obligations transferred to courts, while prohibiting post-Shmita harassment of debtors. To counteract the observed decline in lending—attributed to creditors' reluctance to extend credit nearing a Shmita cycle—Hillel the Elder devised the prosbul (Mishnah Gittin 4:3), a notarized declaration assigning personal debts to a rabbinical court for collection, thereby circumventing release since communal bodies hold no such exemptions. Socially, shemitat kesafim functions as a safeguard against entrenched , interrupting hereditary economic disadvantage by liberating debtors from cycles of servitude and dependency, as evidenced in its linkage to of Hebrew indentured servants in the same chapter (Deuteronomy 15:12-18). This promotes communal equity and trust, aligning with Deuteronomy 15:7-11's directive to lend generously without resentment, viewing loans as acts of charity rather than profit-driven transactions. Economically, the periodic remission acknowledges market-driven wealth concentration, providing a reset to avert oligarchic control through debt leverage and encouraging agricultural self-sufficiency over credit-fueled expansion. Historical non-observance, critiqued by prophets like (34:8-17) for enabling exploitation, underscores its role in stabilizing society against the corrosive effects of unremitted obligations.

Medieval to Early Modern Developments

Kabbalistic and Chassidic Insights

In Kabbalistic tradition, Shmita embodies the mystical principle of cosmic rest and rectification, mirroring the sevenfold structure of divine emanations known as the sefirot. The seventh year corresponds to the sefirah of Malchut, the realm of kingship where divine influx integrates into the material world, allowing latent holy sparks (nitzotzot) trapped in physicality to ascend through abstention from cultivation. This process facilitates tikkun (repair), aligning earthly cycles with upper worlds, as the land's release from human dominion reveals God's sovereignty over creation. The Zohar alludes to such dependencies on divine will, likening agricultural yields to providential "luck" even in normative years (Zohar, Naso 134a). A deeper esoteric layer appears in the doctrine of cosmic shemittot, vast 49,000-year cycles comprising seven 7,000-year epochs—each a "day" of the cosmic week—followed by a 50,000-year of renewal. These parallel the biblical Shmita, with each epoch governed by a sefirah (e.g., for expansion, for contraction), during which Torah's manifestation and halakhic emphases shift; our era falls within the sixth, preparatory for ultimate rest in the seventh millennium. This framework, elaborated in Sefer haTemunah and echoed in Rabbeinu Bechaye's commentary on Leviticus 25, posits pre-existent worlds shattered and reformed, underscoring Shmita's role in sustaining creation's equilibrium against . Chassidic interpretations, building on , emphasize Shmita's transformative power for the individual soul, fostering bitachon (unwavering trust) in over self-reliance. By declaring fields hefker (ownerless) and desisting from labor, the observer emulates angelic purity—devoid of bodily appetites or doubt—achieving total submission to God's will, akin to the collective assent at Sinai ("We will do and we will hear"). This seventh-year pinnacle infuses the preceding six with sustained faith, countering materialism's grip and revealing all sustenance as direct from the Creator, thus elevating mundane existence to perpetual spiritual clinging (devekut).

Disputes Over Shmita Calendar and Observance Cycles

The primary medieval dispute over the Shmita calendar centered on the precise alignment of the seven-year cycles with historical events, particularly the duration of the Second Temple and the year of its destruction in 70 CE. This originated from ambiguities in the ( 9b), which states that the Temple stood for 420 years but does not explicitly clarify whether this count includes the destruction year or aligns precisely with Shemita observance. Scholars diverged in their interpretations, leading to a one-year offset in determining subsequent Shemita years within the fixed . Rashi (1040–1105), in his commentary on the Talmud, maintained that the Second Temple's destruction occurred at the conclusion of a Shemita year (motzaei Shemita), positioning the year 3829 AM (68–69 CE) as the end of the sabbatical cycle rather than its midst. This view implies that Shemita years fall one year earlier than alternative calculations, based on Rashi's adherence to Rabbi Yehuda's reckoning in related Talmudic discussions, which adjusts the cycle's starting point relative to the entry into the Land of Israel in 2503 AM. In contrast, the Tosafot (12th–13th century commentaries expanding on Rashi) and Maimonides (Rambam, 1138–1204) held that the destruction transpired during an active Shemita year itself—year 3829 AM per Rambam or 3830 AM per Tosafot—aligning the 420-year span such that the sabbatical fell as the seventh year in the cycle at that time. This position, rooted in a stricter counting of the Temple's years excluding partial periods, results in Shemita years occurring one year later than Rashi's framework. The ramifications extended to practical observance, as the unbroken Shemita cycle—unaffected by the non-observance of (Yovel) years post-Temple—must be anchored to a verifiable historical baseline for calendar fixation. , in his (Hilchot Shemita ve-Yovel 10:7–8), explicitly dated a Shemita year in his era to 4936 AM (1176 CE), consistent with his cycle calculation divisible by seven from the destruction. While Rashi's view influenced some Ashkenazic traditions, the Tosafot-Rambam alignment prevailed in halachic codification, determining modern Shemita years such as 5782–5783 AM (2021–2022 CE) as sabbaticals, with cycles computed from years congruent to 0 modulo 7 relative to the accepted base. This resolution underscores the reliance on majority scholarly consensus over isolated interpretations, ensuring uniform agricultural cessation in despite the theoretical discrepancy. No major early modern disputes altered this framework, though it informed later debates on leniencies like heter mechira.

Modern Observance in Israel

Revival in Pre-State and Early State Periods

The renewal of Jewish agricultural settlement in Ottoman during the late 19th century prompted renewed consideration of Shmita observance, dormant since antiquity due to and conditions. Early efforts included strict adherence by Orthodox communities in settlements like Mikveh Yisrael during the 1870s and 1880s, where warnings against violation were issued to maintain halachic compliance. In 1888–1889, Rabbi Yitzchak Elchanan Spector authorized the heter mechira, a symbolic sale of land to non-Jews, enabling continued cultivation amid economic pressures faced by pioneer farmers. Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, upon arriving in Palestine in 1904, supported this mechanism as a provisional leniency while promoting Shmita's spiritual renewal for the land and people. For the 1909–1910 cycle, Kook endorsed heter mechira alongside Otzar Beit Din for produce distribution, countering opposition from figures like Rabbi Yaakov Dovid Wilovsky (Ridvaz). Kook's 1910 treatise Shabbat Ha'Aretz articulated Shmita as a divine process integral to national redemption, influencing religious Zionist approaches to balance settlement imperatives with observance. Support funds, such as Keren HaShemita, emerged in the to financially assist strict observers, fostering partial adherence in religious kibbutzim and moshavim despite widespread reliance on heter mechira. Following statehood in 1948, the 1951–1952 Shmita year saw renew heter mechira to support agricultural output and immigrant integration amid postwar recovery. In contrast, Avraham Yeshaya Karelitz (Chazon Ish), who had settled in in 1933, rejected the heter, advocating stringent land rest and Otzar Beit Din revival, which gained traction among charedi communities and intensified debates on authentic compliance. These efforts signified a broader revival, transitioning from sporadic pre-state initiatives to institutionalized contention in the nascent state, with varying degrees of practical observance.

Heter Mechira: Mechanisms and Defenses

Heter mechira involves the temporary sale of Jewish-owned agricultural land in Israel to a non-Jew for the duration of the shmita year, thereby rendering the land non-Jewish-owned and permitting cultivation and other agricultural activities that would otherwise be prohibited under shmita laws. This mechanism draws from Talmudic precedents in tractate Gittin, where land acquisition by a non-Jew in Israel does not fully exempt the produce from shmita sanctity but allows operational work if ownership transfers validly. The sale is structured as a formal transaction, often facilitated by rabbinic authorities acting as agents, with the non-Jewish buyer granting Jews rights to work the land as laborers or through leases, and including repurchase clauses post-shmita to ensure reversibility. In practice, since the late 19th century, this has been implemented through centralized sales overseen by bodies like the Israeli Chief Rabbinate, covering vast acreages—such as approximately 20% of Israel's farmland in recent cycles—to sustain agricultural output. The validity of the sale requires gemirat da'at (serious intent) from both parties, distinguishing it from mere symbolic gestures; rabbinic enforcers ensure documentation, witnesses, and nominal payments to uphold halachic integrity, countering claims of it being a legal fiction. Proponents argue that shmita prohibitions are tied to Jewish ownership under Leviticus 25:23, so a genuine transfer exempts the land from biblical work bans, though produce may retain partial shmita status requiring specific handling like otzar beit din distribution. This approach parallels other halachic heterim, such as selling chametz before Passover to avoid destruction, where temporary transfer to a non-Jew permits otherwise forbidden possession and use. Defenses of heter mechira emphasize its halachic foundation amid the absence of the Jubilee (yovel) cycle, rendering shmita rabbinic rather than fully biblical, which permits leniencies for communal necessity (tzorech rabim). Rabbi Abraham Isaac Kook, in his 1909-1910 work Shabbat HaAretz, provided comprehensive justification, arguing that settling the land—a core —outweighs strict non-observance that could lead to economic ruin and abandonment of , as evidenced by early settlements facing without it. Leading poskim, including Rabbi , affirmed its reliability, citing precedents from the Hazon Ish and others who initially opposed but later accommodated it for Israel's viability. Critics' concerns over are addressed by noting that heter mechira preserves land rest in intent where possible and prevents greater violations, such as total non-observance, while empirical data from cycles like 5782 (2021-2022) show sustained productivity without widespread desecration.

Criticisms of Heter Mechira and Calls for Strict Observance

Critics of heter mechira contend that the mechanism violates biblical and rabbinic prohibitions against selling land in the to non-Jews, as articulated in Leviticus 25:23, which states that the land shall not be sold permanently because it belongs to , and supported by Talmudic interpretations in tractates like 21a restricting such transactions to prevent permanent transfer of Jewish patrimony. This objection holds that even temporary sales undermine the sanctity of , equating the practice to forbidden sales only in superficial form but lacking substantive validity for immovable property. A second major critique posits that heter mechira constitutes a rather than a bona fide transaction, rendering any grown during the shmita year subject to the prohibitions on sefichim (aftergrowths), which are biblically banned under Leviticus 25:5 and elaborated in Shevi'it 3:1-5 as unfit for consumption or benefit. Opponents argue this circumvents the Torah's intent for land rest, potentially desecrating the and , as the nominal non-Jewish ownership does not alter the reality of Jewish cultivation and control. Such views have led rabbinic bodies like the to issue kol koreh (public decrees) against relying on heter mechira, deeming its chazuta (suspect and forbidden). Proponents of strict shmita observance, including Haredi rabbis and segments of the religious Zionist community, advocate full cessation of agricultural labor to fulfill the mitzvah's spiritual and national dimensions, viewing heter mechira as prioritizing economic over divine command and risking communal spiritual decline. Rabbi Abraham Isaac HaCohen Kook, while initially endorsing heter mechira in 1887 to sustain early settlements, later emphasized in writings that ideal observance demands trust in over leniencies, influencing disciples to push for stricter practices amid growing agricultural viability. In the 2007-2008 shmita cycle (5768), opposition intensified with rabbis like those affiliated with Otzar HaPoskim urging alternatives to sale, citing historical precedents where strict adherence yielded miraculous sustenance, as referenced in Ta'anit 23a. During the 2014-2015 shmita year (5775), thousands of farmers received communal support for strict observance, including financial aid from organizations like Keren Hashvi'it, which raised millions to compensate for lost income, demonstrating feasibility through collective tzedakah and highlighting the mitzvah's role in affirming Jewish sovereignty over the land as God's domain. Similarly, in the 2021-2022 cycle (5782), rabbinic calls from figures such as Rabbi Shmuel Eliyahu emphasized shmita as a pathway to agricultural blessing and national unity, rejecting heter mechira to avoid diluting Torah ideals in state institutions. These efforts underscore a persistent tension between halachic fidelity and modern economics, with strict adherents arguing that true observance fosters reliance on bitachon (trust in God), potentially averting crises as prophesied in Leviticus 26:34-35 for non-compliance.

Alternative Compliance Methods: Otzar Beit Din and Hydroponics

Otzar Beit Din, or the "Treasury of the Court," serves as a rabbinical mechanism to facilitate access to Shmita produce while adhering to biblical prohibitions against commercial sale and extensive harvesting of seventh-year fruits. Under this system, a rabbinical assumes representative ownership of the crops on behalf of the consuming public, hiring laborers to perform minimal harvesting directly in the fields as needed by consumers, rather than the landowner conducting commercial operations. The then stores, processes (such as pressing grapes into wine), and distributes the produce, charging participants only for actual expenses like labor and storage, without profit, thereby treating the fruits as communal property exempt from standard Shmita commerce bans. This approach traces to Talmudic precedents but gained modern application in during Shmita cycles, such as 2000–2001 (5761), where certified programs ensured produce retained Shmita sanctity, including exemptions from certain tithes. In practice, farmers participating in Otzar Beit Din receive fixed payments from the for pre-Shmita planting and basic maintenance, following strict guidelines to avoid prohibited fieldwork during the year, with the overseeing distribution through designated outlets. Proponents argue it balances agricultural continuity with halachic fidelity, serving consumers directly and preventing waste of ownerless Shmita fruits, though critics note potential abuses where growers exploit the system for undue profits under lax supervision. Kashrut authorities like STAR-K and cRc certify such programs, verifying compliance to maintain the produce's elevated status under Jewish law. Hydroponic cultivation offers another compliance avenue by circumventing Shmita land-rest mandates, as plants grown in soilless systems—using nutrient-rich water solutions in greenhouses or controlled environments—are deemed disconnected from the biblical "land" of Israel, exempting them from sabbatical prohibitions on soil-based . Halachic consensus, as articulated by authorities including Rabbi , views such methods as permissible since they involve no tillage, planting, or harvesting of the earth itself, akin to exemptions for raised beds or non-soil media not touching Eretz Yisrael's . This has enabled expanded use in during Shmita years like 2014–2015 (5775), where hydroponic vegetable production sustained supply without violating core laws, though rabbinic oversight ensures no indirect land involvement. While hydroponics avoids Shmita restrictions on produce sanctity and commerce, the fruits lack the holy status of land-grown Shmita items, requiring separate tithing and limiting their ritual use, such as for the four species during Sukkot. Adoption has grown with Israel's advanced agrotechnology, but stricter observers debate its full equivalence to traditional farming, emphasizing that exemptions rely on precise non-soil contact to uphold causal distinctions in Torah agriculture laws.

Economic Impacts and Agricultural Challenges

Strict observance of Shmita requires Israeli farmers to forgo planting, , and harvesting for commercial purposes, resulting in substantial revenue losses as agricultural lands lie for the year. This cessation of production affects thousands of farmers, with approximately 3,000 to 3,500 adhering to full biblical restrictions in earlier cycles like 5768 (2007–2008), leaving around 100,000 acres unproductive. Organizations such as Keren Hashvi'is provide financial subsidies to offset these impacts, disbursing $66 million during the 5782 Shmita year (2021–2022) to support farmers abstaining from crop production. The economic strain is particularly acute for those dependent on annual farming income, lacking the steady paychecks of other sectors, and prompting diversification into non-agricultural activities or reliance on aid programs from Israel's Ministry of . Market dynamics shift during Shmita, with non-observant producers, including farmers, gaining substantial as demand for unrestricted produce rises, potentially squeezing observant Jewish farmers in subsequent years. Agriculturally, the mandated rest challenges and , as only limited is permitted, risking degradation or invasive growth that complicates post-Shmita replanting. Strict adherents must also navigate restrictions on aftergrowths (safiach), which cannot be cultivated or sold commercially, further limiting yields and requiring careful monitoring to avoid violations. While heter mechira allows many to circumvent these prohibitions through symbolic land sales, critics argue it undermines the mitzvah's intent, exacerbating debates over long-term for devout observers facing repeated cycles of idleness. Overall, these factors contribute to Israel's broader agricultural resilience through imports and alternatives, though individual farms endure heightened financial vulnerability every seventh year.

Case Studies of Recent Shmita Years

The Shmita year of 5768 ( 2007 to 2008) featured intense controversies over heter mechirah, with the Chief Rabbinate's ruling deeming certain non-kosher due to perceived flaws in the land sale process, prompting some Orthodox consumers to avoid Israeli fruits and . Most farmers utilized the heter to continue operations, leading to symbolic sales of agricultural land valued at billions of shekels to non-Jews, while a minority strictly observed by leaving fields , which contributed to elevated prices from supply constraints. In 5775 (September 2014 to September 2015), compliance varied widely among Israel's approximately 6,700 Jewish farmers, with around 450 abandoning cultivation entirely for strict observance and only about 50 defying halakhic restrictions outright by farming without heter mechirah. An Ministry study indicated roughly 150 farmers fully refrained from farming, reflecting limited adoption of pure practices amid economic pressures. Many turned to heter mechirah or alternative imports, including from Palestinian territories, while U.S. Orthodox communities boycotted produce deemed reliant on the mechanism, exacerbating market tensions. During 5782 (September 2021 to September 2022), an estimated 51% of farmers observed Shmita, marking a rise in traditional adherence compared to prior cycles, with 75% of those using heter mechirah among compliant operations and the remainder employing strict rest or otzar beit din distribution. Proposals to ease Gaza import restrictions for fresh produce failed due to concerns, leading to heavier reliance on sixth-year stockpiles and foreign suppliers, though overall economic effects remained contained given agriculture's minor role in Israel's GDP. Community initiatives, such as price tags signaling strict observance, gained traction to support fallow-keeping farmers financially.

References

Add your contribution
Related Hubs
User Avatar
No comments yet.