Return To TorahWeb.org Homepage
Parshat Behar begins (25:2) "daber el Benei Yisrael veamarta aleihem ki tavou el haaretz asher ani notein lachem veshavtah haaretz Shabbat laHashem"- proclaiming that the shemitah year is to be observed upon the Jewish nation's arrival in Eretz Yisrael. This is a puzzling formulation considering that the shemitah cycle was, in fact, not initiated until after seven years of conquering and apportioning the land. The first shemitah was actually observed only after fourteen years. Apparently, the principle of shemitah observance and its anticipation in practice underpins the fundamental link between Klal Yisrael and Eretz Yisrael from the very outset!
Moreover, the Torah twice depicts shemitah as "Shabbat laHashem" (25:2,4). Rashi invokes the comparison to Shabbat bereishit to establish a demand for lishmah, purity and exclusivity of motivation. The Ramban, however, questions why other moadim, though they are certainly dedicated to Hashem, are not also articulated accordingly.
The Ramban himself invokes mystical sources that allude to Shabbat and shemitah each as a testament to central and eternal truths - the Divine act of creation (Shabbat), and the ultimate eschatological promise of olam ha-ba (shemitah) [see, also, Moshav Zekenim al ha-Torah]. The Ramban reinforces the link between these two crucial halachic institutions - Shabbat and Shabbat haaretz - by noting that the demand of shemitah observance like that of Shabbat is unusually stringent, and the punishment for its violation is extremely severe as it constitutes the disavowal of fundamental principles.
The Moshav Zekenim proposes to explicate Rashi's perspective regarding lishmah - purity of motive. He posits that the expression "Shabbat laHashem" emphatically precludes the popular notion -misconception (see also Rambam Moreh Nevuchim, end of book 3, and the critique of Kli Yakar) that one should abstain from agricultural activity during the shemitah year in order to enhance the yield of Eretz Yisrael produce overall. However, some commentators question whether this consideration would properly warrant Rashi's demand for exclusive and absolute lishmah. They note that Rashi, himself, elsewhere (Pesachim 8a-"haomer sela zu lezedakah bishvil sheyihyeh beni...harei zeh tzadik gamur", see Rinat Yitzchak, Vayikra 25:2) seems to sanction the fusion of sincere and pragmatic or ulterior motivations.
Perhaps we should properly conclude that the Torah's unusual formulation determines that this requirement of absolute lishmah precisely distinguishes both Shabbat and shemitah from other mitzvot! Indeed, some mefarshim (Rinat Yitzchak op cit) project this added dimension of lishmah as the basis for the statement (in the maariv shemoneh esreh of Shabbat): "vekidashto mikol hazemanim". [In light of Tosafot Shavuot 13a s.v. lo karau mikra kodesh, one might posit that this distinctiveness is included in the phrase "techilah le-mikraei kodesh".]
Shared or dual motivations are specifically rejected in these contexts for the same reason that the two Shabbatot are linked in the Torah, probably as sanctioning frameworks, with the creative melachah norm that they bound. Both Shabbat bereishit and Shabbat haaretz assert Hashem's absolute temporal and geographic sovereignty. For this reason, they constitute not only regular mizvot, but tenets of Yahadut as reflected in their elevated halachic status.
The creative enterprise, melachah, is only religiously viable and certainly only spiritually meaningful when takes place in a context that unequivocally projects absolute Divine sovereignty. Only explicit acknowledgement of that awareness and an unambiguous assertion of this theme justifies, sanctions, and, then, even sanctifies and elevates human effort. The Torah accentuates this by reiterating the message of "sheishet yamim taavod veasita kol melachtecha" and formulating its shemitah parallel - "shesh shanim tizra sadechah vesheh shanim tizmor karmecha veasafta et tevuatah" (25:3). While the Ramban asserts that the reference to the rest of the cycle only constitutes background for the demands of the shemitah year, the Talmud Yerushalmi (Kilayim 8:1, and see Moshav Zekenim, Behar) rules that this pasuk constitutes an added issur aseh for the violation of shemitah. One who does not properly acknowledge Hashem's sovereignty over the land, as reflected by his abuse of shemitah laws, implicitly surrenders his license to produce and create on the land at all times.
The principle of Divine sovereignty is perceived by many mefarshim (Sefer haChinuch, Keli Yakar, Ohr haChayim, etc.) to be the primary motif of Shabbat haaretz. By virtue of its very character, the assertion of absolute Divine sovereignty in both Shabbats demands not only a proper focus, but an absolute, unequivocal and exclusive motivation, as Rashi declares.
It is unsurprising that the principle of Shabbat haaretz and all that it implies, is projected as a sine qua non to Am Yisrael's entrance into Eretz Yisrael, even if the implementation would properly await the apportionment of individual ownership and a cycle of creative melachah, each of which would reinforce and concretize the vital importance of an uncompromising and absolute assertion of Divine sovereignty, the foundation of Jewish life in general and of a life of kedushat Eretz Yisrael in particular.