Parshas Behar
1. On the verse1 "שבת שבתון יהי' לארץ שבת לה'" ("It shall be a Sabbath of complete rest for the land, a Sabbath to the L‑rd"), the Toras Kohanim expounds: "שבת לה' – כשם שנאמר בשבת בראשית שבת לה' כך נאמר בשביעית שבת לה'" ("'A Shabbos to the L‑rd' — just as it is said2 regarding Shabbos Bereishis, 'a Shabbos to the L‑rd,' so it is said regarding the Seventh Year, 'a Shabbos to the L‑rd'"). Rashi's commentary also cites this exposition, but with a change of wording: "שבת לה' – לשם ה' כשם שנאמר בשבת בראשית" ("'A Shabbos to the L‑rd' — for the sake of the L‑rd, just as it is said regarding Shabbos Bereishis").
Now, at first glance it would seem that the content of the two expositions is one and the same.3 But according to this, the reason for the differences between them needs clarification:
a) In his commentary, Rashi explains the content of the exposition "a Shabbos to the L‑rd" — "for the sake of the L‑rd"4 — and afterwards brings a proof: "just as it is said regarding Shabbos Bereishis." The Toras Kohanim, by contrast, notes the gezeirah shavah — that in both it says "a Shabbos to the L‑rd" — but leaves it unqualified, without explaining the content of the matter learned from it, namely "for the sake of the L‑rd."
b) Conversely, Rashi is brief and writes simply "just as it is said regarding Shabbos Bereishis," whereas the Toras Kohanim elaborates: "(just as it is said regarding Shabbos Bereishis) 'a Shabbos to the L‑rd,' so it is said regarding the Seventh Year, 'a Shabbos to the L‑rd.'"
c) In the Toras Kohanim the exposition is on the second time that "a Shabbos to the L‑rd" is said in the passage, whereas Rashi gives his explanation on the first time that "a Shabbos to the L‑rd" is said.
2. The explanation: As has been mentioned several times, Rashi's purpose in his commentary on the Torah is not to derive halachos but to explain the plain meaning of the verses — in his own words in his commentary on Parshas Bereishis:5 "אני לא באתי אלא לפשוטו של מקרא" ("I have come only to explain the plain meaning of Scripture"). The Toras Kohanim, on the other hand — part of the halachic and midrashic portion of the Torah — is devoted to expounding the verses and deriving the halachos contained in them.
This fundamental distinction explains the differences between the Toras Kohanim and Rashi's commentary in our case. The crux of the difference between the Toras Kohanim and Rashi is this: the Toras Kohanim expounds this for a matter of halacha, whereas Rashi's intent is to explain the plain meaning of the verse "a Shabbos to the L‑rd" — and from this follow the particular differences between the Toras Kohanim and Rashi's commentary, as will be explained below.
3. Some commentators6 explain Rashi's intent in "for the sake of the L‑rd" as follows: The verse teaches us that resting from field labor in the Shemittah year is not for the sake of man's rest, nor for the benefit the field derives from it — as is the way of farmers, who let a field lie fallow for one year so that it will have strength in the following years7 — but "for the sake of the L‑rd," for the sake of fulfilling the commandment of the Holy One, blessed be He. And for this he brings a proof from Shabbos Bereishis, where too the resting must be "for the sake of the L‑rd."8
However, it is difficult to explain Rashi this way:
a) If the explanation "for the sake of the L‑rd" is not the plain meaning of the words "a Shabbos to the L‑rd" (and therefore requires a proof), Rashi should have explained it (earlier) on the verse "a Shabbos to the L‑rd" that is said regarding Shabbos Bereishis! Especially since Rashi himself writes here, "just as it is said regarding Shabbos Bereishis" — and there he explained nothing at all?
b) If you say that this explanation is the plain meaning of "a Shabbos to the L‑rd" (which is why Rashi explained nothing regarding Shabbos Bereishis), but that in our case he is compelled to explain it because here there is room to mistakenly understand it in another way — it is not understood: why does he need a proof for this ("just as it is said regarding Shabbos Bereishis")?9 We find something similar in Rashi's commentary on the verse10 "ויקחו לי תרומה" ("Let them take for Me an offering") — "לי – לשמי" ("'for Me' — for My Name"), and he brings no proof for his explanation! And also on the verse11 "קדש לה'" ("holy to the L‑rd") — "שמירת קדושתה לשמי ובמצותי" ("guarding its [Shabbos's] holiness for My Name and by My command").
c) Why does Rashi copy from the verse the word "Shabbos" — according to the above, he is only explaining the words "to the L‑rd" — "for the sake of the L‑rd"?
The explanation of this:
Rashi copies from the verse the word "Shabbos" as well, because the difficulty in the verse lies in it: the word "Shabbos" seems superfluous, since the verse begins "ושבתה הארץ" ("the land shall rest"), so it should have said "the land shall rest to the L‑rd"?
Therefore Rashi explains, "for the sake of the L‑rd, just as it is said regarding Shabbos Bereishis." His intent is (not to explain that the word "to the L‑rd" means "for the sake of the L‑rd" — for this is understood plainly and needs no explanation — but rather) that from the superfluous word "Shabbos" we learn that the resting "for the sake of the L‑rd" of Shemittah must be in a specific manner: "just as it is said regarding Shabbos Bereishis" — in the same manner as the resting of "Shabbos Bereishis" (as will be explained below in Section 6).
4. Rashi gives this explanation the first time these words are said in the passage — since this difficulty arises immediately when it says "the land shall rest, a Shabbos to the L‑rd." The second time, Rashi explains nothing, because he relies on what he explained before; and in the plain meaning of Scripture, it is the way of the verses in many places to repeat a matter several times when something new is added to it ("את ספיח גו'" — "what grows of itself…").12
The Toras Kohanim, however, which does not set out to explain the plain meaning of the verses, as mentioned above, but to derive from the verse a matter of halacha, therefore expounds specifically the second time it says "a Shabbos to the L‑rd." For the first time it says "a Shabbos to the L‑rd," it does not come for exposition but to teach that the resting should be "for the sake of the L‑rd" (as Rashi explains); whereas the superfluous words "a Shabbos to the L‑rd," when said the second time,13 come for exposition: "just as it is said, etc."
5. Now, since the Toras Kohanim does not specify which matter and halacha is learned from the comparison to Shabbos, but expounds in an unqualified manner, "just as it is said regarding Shabbos… so it is said…," one can explain that the novelty of the Toras Kohanim is (not (only) a specific halacha learned from Shabbos, but rather) that the general matter of Shabbos teaches about Sheviis — and not the reverse.
That is: regarding both — Shabbos Bereishis and Sheviis — the same expression, "a Shabbos to the L‑rd," is used, which indicates an aspect and law common to both; but it is not specified which is learned from which. The Toras Kohanim explains: "Just as it is said regarding Shabbos… so it is said regarding Sheviis…" — that is, Shabbos teaches about Sheviis, and not the reverse.
This will be understood according to the explanation of the Raavad,14 that the exposition of the Toras Kohanim concerns the addition (tosefes) to Sheviis. In his words: "Some explain it leniently, as we say in Moed Katan:15 'Just as Shabbos Bereishis is forbidden, while before it and after it is permitted, so too Sheviis — it is forbidden, while before it and after it is permitted.'" That is: just as there is no law (from the Torah) of an addition to Shabbos Bereishis,16 so there is no law of an addition to Sheviis (and it is permitted to sow, etc., at the end of the sixth year17).
According to this, one can explain the exposition in the Toras Kohanim — for simple reasoning (without the derivation from Shabbos Bereishis) would require that Sheviis be bound by an addition:
The verse says "ושבתה הארץ שבת לה'" ("the land shall rest, a Shabbos to the L‑rd") and "a Sabbath of complete rest it shall be for the land." That is, the essence of Shemittah is not only man's resting from field labor, but also the resting of the land18 — meaning that the "land" itself must be in a state of rest, and not merely that man should refrain from working it.
Accordingly, it stands to reason that it should be forbidden to sow at the end of the sixth year, for then the field ("necessarily") grows the seed and causes it to sprout, until it stands as standing grain in Sheviis; and even if man does not reap what grew from his sowing — through his act the land was not at all in a state of rest.19
And according to the derivation "just as…," one might mistakenly think that the "Shabbos to the L‑rd" said regarding Sheviis teaches us20 about Shabbos Bereishis — that it too requires an addition. Therefore the Toras Kohanim is precise and expounds: "Just as it is said regarding Shabbos… so it is said…." That is, the expression "a Shabbos to the L‑rd" (repeated here) emphasizes and teaches us that the resting of the seventh year is modeled on the "Shabbos to the L‑rd" of "Shabbos Bereishis," and that the manners and laws of its resting are to be learned from Shabbos Bereishis — and not the reverse.
6. However, all this is the exposition of the verse by way of halacha. But by way of the plain meaning — the approach of Rashi in his commentary on the Torah — the intent of the verse "a Shabbos to the L‑rd" is to teach that the resting must be "for the sake of the L‑rd," in the manner of "Shabbos Bereishis" (as mentioned above in Section 3).
This will be understood by first explaining the precise wording "Shabbos Bereishis," and not "Shabbos of days" (similar to the expression21 used regarding Shemittah — "Shabbos of years").
On the verse22 "ממחרת השבת יניפנו הכהן" ("On the morrow of the Shabbos the Kohen shall wave it"), Rashi explains: "On the morrow of the first Yom Tov of Pesach; for if you say [it means] Shabbos Bereishis, you would not know which one." That is, the term "Shabbos" applies also to Yom Tov, and "Shabbos Bereishis" excludes Yom Tov.
The explanation: In the command concerning man's resting on Shabbos (on account of which it is called "Shabbos"), two reasons are stated:23 a) A remembrance of the work of Creation — since "ששת ימים עשה ה' את השמים גו' וינח ביום השביעי" ("In six days the L‑rd made the heavens… and He rested on the seventh day"), therefore man was commanded, "Six days you shall work… and the seventh day is a Shabbos…" (as explained in the Ten Commandments in Parshas Yisro24). b) A remembrance of the Exodus from Egypt, as it says (in the Ten Commandments in Parshas Va'eschanan25): "וזכרת כי עבד היית בארץ מצרים גו' על כן צוך ה' אלקיך לעשות את יום השבת" ("And you shall remember that you were a slave in the land of Egypt… therefore the L‑rd your G‑d commanded you to keep the Shabbos day").
This is the precision of the term "Shabbos Bereishis": a resting in remembrance of the work of "Bereishis" — the creation of the world. And in this the resting of Yom Tov differs:26 it contains a remembrance of the Exodus27 (and in this it is equal to the resting of Shabbos), but it contains no remembrance of the work of Creation.28
And this is Rashi's intent in his explanation, "for the sake of the L‑rd, just as it is said regarding Shabbos Bereishis": the intent "for the sake of the L‑rd" in the resting of the seventh year is the same intent as that of Shabbos Bereishis — a remembrance of the work of Creation, the creation of the world in six days, "and on the seventh day He rested…."29
7. According to the above (in explaining the term "Shabbos Bereishis"), one can explain a puzzling Rashi in Parshas Mishpatim.30 On the verse "וביום השביעי תשבת" ("And on the seventh day you shall rest"), Rashi explains (from the Mechilta): "Even in the seventh year, Shabbos Bereishis is not to be uprooted from its place — lest you say, since the whole year is called 'Shabbos,' one need not observe Shabbos Bereishis in it." At first glance this is puzzling: what would lead one to think that "Shabbos Bereishis would be uprooted" because "the whole year is called Shabbos"?
The explanation: It was explained above that the reason for resting on Shabbos contains two matters: a) a remembrance of the work of Creation (on account of which it is called "Shabbos Bereishis"); b) a remembrance of the Exodus from Egypt. And Rashi explains31 the connection of the Exodus to Shabbos: "On this condition He redeemed you, that you be His servant and keep His commandments." That is, the reason for the command to keep Shabbos — as stated in the first Ten Commandments32 — is "a remembrance of the work of Creation," while "a remembrance of the Exodus" is a reason for fulfilling the mitzvah that was commanded on account of the remembrance of the work of Creation. Therefore one might think that in the seventh year Shabbos Bereishis would be uprooted: since "the whole year is called Shabbos," the whole year, the weekdays included, is a remembrance of the work of Creation33 — so what need is there for the remembrance of the seventh day, and what does it add?
The verse therefore teaches that "Shabbos Bereishis" applies in Sheviis as well. The reason: Although "the whole year is called Shabbos," in practice the resting is only from field labors (and consequently, the actual remembrance through resting applies only at the time of these labors, and only to a person who works his land); whereas the resting (and consequently "the remembrance of the work of Creation") of the day of Shabbos extends through the entire twenty-four-hour period, for every single person is forbidden to do any labor; moreover, on Shabbos there are also positive commandments.
8. From the "wine of the Torah" (the inner dimension) in Rashi's commentary: The rest and holiness of Shabbos encompass and permeate a person's entire being, all his details and affairs, including his material affairs and needs — as in the command and mitzvah "וקראת לשבת עונג" ("And you shall call the Shabbos a delight"),34 which includes the delight of eating and drinking, etc.
— Although on weekdays worldly matters and permitted things should be engaged in only as necessary, and if one engages in them for the sake of pleasure it is a matter of excess and is forbidden, etc.35 — on Shabbos the holiness of Shabbos extends also into a person's material affairs, and he must take pleasure in them, and this itself is a matter of mitzvah and holiness.
And this is alluded to in Rashi's commentary, "a Shabbos to the L‑rd — for the sake of the L‑rd, just as it is said regarding Shabbos Bereishis…" [OCR unclear — part of the text is missing here, including the places of note markers 36 and 37]36 37 … the land, in the manner of the service of "בכל דרכיך דעהו" ("In all your ways, know Him").38
9. Accordingly, it is understood that just as Shabbos has an advantage over Sheviis, so Sheviis has an advantage over Shabbos:39
On the day of Shabbos, man and the entire world are elevated — as the Sambatyon river proves40 — as are all the worlds.41 On Shabbos all labors are forbidden, and even all one's material needs become a matter of delight — a delight that is a mitzvah, as mentioned above.
Sheviis goes further still, for its essence is "the land shall rest, a Shabbos to the L‑rd" — to draw the "Shabbos to the L‑rd" into one's earthly matters,42 as they are on the level of "land"43 (earthiness) — for only [using the produce] for waste, for commerce, etc., was forbidden.
Moreover: this is so not only with (matters of) human food, but also with animal food.44 To the point that it becomes "לכם לאכלה גו' ולבהמתך ולחיה גו'" ("for you for food… and for your cattle and for the beast…"), so that when it is finished for the beast [in the field], it is finished for man…45 — man and animal are equal, because of the great revelation of G‑dliness even below.46
And this is among the lessons of the mitzvah of Sheviis in the spiritual service of every Jew (even outside Eretz Yisrael and in the time of exile): A person's holiness and his attachment to the Holy One, blessed be He, must be not only during the times of Torah and prayer, when he is holy and separated from worldly matters, but also when he is occupied with mundane activities, in his earthly affairs —
Just as the six years receive from the seventh year, as one pours first into a large vessel and from it into small vessels47 — one must draw the "Shabbos to the L‑rd" (G‑dly holiness) into everything — "In all your ways, know Him."
(From the sichos of Shabbos Parshas Behar-Bechukosai, 5726)
Notes
1) Our Parsha, 25:4.
2) Yisro 20:10.
3) See Ramban here; Malbim; and elsewhere.
4) Verse 2.
5) 3:8, and elsewhere.
6) Chizkuni; Be'er Mayim Chaim (on Rashi); and elsewhere.
7) See Bava Basra 29a.
8) Note Rashi on Ki Sisa 31:15.
9) Simply understood, Rashi's concluding words, "just as it is said regarding Shabbos Bereishis," are the explanation of the verse "a Shabbos to the L‑rd" (see the commentators on Rashi, and Divrei David: "And what he concluded, 'just as…' — this comes from the superfluous word 'Shabbos'…" (and according to this the third question in the main text is resolved)). But it is still not understood: if the verse's intent is only to say that the resting of Sheviis must be "for the sake of the L‑rd," what is added by the example of Shabbos Bereishis?
10) Terumah 25:2.
11) Ki Sisa 31:15.
12) And all the more so in light of the fact that an entire passage is repeated for the sake of something new in it (Rashi on Bo 13:5, and elsewhere).
13) For in study by way of halacha, the doubling of a matter is for the sake of exposition, etc.
14) In his second explanation. In his first explanation he writes: "Some explain it stringently regarding the prohibition of Sheviis, since it is compared to Shabbos Bereishis." (And see Midrash HaGadol here: "Just as it is said… so it is said…: just as on Shabbos one must add from the weekday onto the holy, so with Sheviis.") But the unattributed view of the Gemara* in Moed Katan (4a) and of the Yerushalmi, Sheviis (1:1), follows the second explanation — that what is learned from Shabbos for Sheviis is that there is no obligation of an addition.
*) Based on what is explained below in the main text — that according to external reasoning Sheviis requires an addition — one can say that even according to the conclusion of the Gemara in Moed Katan there, that Rabban Gamliel and his court permitted it because "when the halacha was received, [it applied only] while the Beis HaMikdash stood," nevertheless, were it not for the gezeirah shavah of "Shabbos — Shabbos," there would be an obligation of an addition to Sheviis even when the Beis HaMikdash does not stand (although this is not implied in Tosafos there, s.v. Ela amar Rav Ashi). And see the Raavad on the Toras Kohanim there: "And for this reason they voted… and permitted them."
15) Ibid.
16) This requires some clarification in light of what the Toras Kohanim cites in Parshas Emor (14:5 ff.), the exposition on the verse (ibid. 23:32) "ועניתם גו' תשבתו שבתכם" ("You shall afflict… you shall rest your Shabbos"), that "every resting… you add…." One can answer according to the answer of Tosafos (Moed Katan ibid., s.v. Mah lehalan) that such a small amount is not counted…, see there. And see below, the gloss to note 20.
17) According to the view of Rabban Gamliel and his court, who voted on these two periods and abolished them (Moed Katan 3b; Yerushalmi, Sheviis ibid.).
18) See Avodah Zarah 15b; Tosafos Rid there; Minchas Chinuch, Mitzvah 112; the commentary of Rabbi Y. F. Perla (on Rav Saadia Gaon's Sefer HaMitzvos), Positive Commandment 61. And see the book L'Or HaHalacha by Rabbi S. Y. Zevin, p. 94.
19) See similarly in Perla's commentary there, that if the seed took root in Sheviis (even though it was sown before Sheviis), one transgresses the positive commandment of the land's resting; and for this reason one may not plant… on the eve of Sheviis…, see there. (But see Minchas Chinuch (end of Mitzvah 326), which discusses something similar.)
20) Seemingly, one could learn this by a kal vachomer from Sheviis, without needing the derivation "Shabbos — Shabbos" (and see Mechilta deRashbi, Mishpatim 23:12; Tosafos, Rosh Hashanah 9a, s.v. VeRabbi Yishmael, and s.v. VeRabbi Akiva; Rashba and Ritva there).
— But one can say that from the standpoint of reasoning there is no room for an addition to Shabbos, since its holiness is "fixed and established" (Beitzah 17a) through the Holy One, blessed be He, having rested — and the Holy One, blessed be He, rested only during the twenty-four hours of Shabbos, as our Sages say (Bereishis Rabbah 10:9, cited in Rashi on Bereishis 2:2): "Flesh and blood, who does not know his times and moments… adds from the weekday onto the holy; but the Holy One, blessed be He, who knows… entered it by a hair's breadth."*
*) Moreover: according to this saying of our Sages, the whole matter of the addition to Shabbos stems from the doubt — "who does not know his times…." And see Likutei Sichos vol. 5, p. 31, note 22, that one can say that the Midrash too holds of the exposition "you shall rest your Shabbos" (see above, note 16), but explains the reason one must add from the weekday onto the holy — because flesh and blood does not know…; see there. And this doubt does not apply to the addition to Sheviis — see the aforementioned note.
21) Yerushalmi, Sheviis ibid.
22) Emor 23:11.
23) See Moreh Nevuchim (Part II, ch. 31 — cited in Ramban, Va'eschanan 5:15); Mateh Moshe §437. And see Sha'ar HaKollel (by Rabbi A. D. Lavut — ch. 17, par. 29), that this is the difference between the evening and morning prayers of Shabbos regarding saying "a remembrance of the work of Creation."
24) 20:9–11.
25) 5:15.
26) In contrast, "Shabbos of days" would include Yom Tov as well, since Yom Tov too is connected with "days," as it says (Emor 23:7, 24, 39): "On the first day… you shall do no servile work"; "On the first of the month you shall have a rest…"; "On the first day a rest…." And elsewhere.
27) For all the festivals are connected with the Exodus from Egypt (see Shemos 3:12; Rashi on Yisro 20:2, and elsewhere; Emor 23:43).
28) In the language of the Gemara: Shabbos is "fixed and established" — from Creation (Beitzah ibid.), whereas Yom Tov — "Israel sanctify the times" (Berachos 49a).
29) See similarly the Re'em here; the Ra'av here; and elsewhere.
30) 23:12.
31) Va'eschanan 5:15.
32) This explanation can also reconcile [OCR unclear] in note 23.
33) See similarly Torah Temimah there.
34) [OCR unclear — the text of this note is missing from the source.]
35) [OCR unclear — the text of this note is missing from the source.]
36) [OCR unclear — the text of this note is missing from the source.]
37) [OCR unclear — the beginning of this note is missing] … in the verse concerning Yovel:* "holy… like hekdesh… to chullin."
*) See Torah Temimah, Behar, §161.
38) Mishlei 3:6. Rambam, Hilchos De'os, end of ch. 3. Tur and Shulchan Aruch, Orach Chaim §231. Shulchan Aruch of the Alter Rebbe §156, par. 12.
39) See similarly Likutei Sichos vol. 1, p. 275.
40) Sanhedrin 65b. Bereishis Rabbah 11:5.
41) See the Tzemach Tzedek's Sefer HaMitzvos, the mitzvah of the sanctity of the seventh year.
42) See Toldos Yaakov Yosef, beginning of Parshas Behar; Kesser Shem Tov (Kehot, 5733), Additions, p. 20.
43) For this reason it applies only in Eretz Yisrael — which has holiness of its own as well. And one can say that this is the reason (in the inner dimension of matters) for the opinions (cited in L'Or HaHalacha by Rabbi S. Y. Zevin, p. 105 ff.) that Shemittah nowadays is only rabbinic — for in order to draw (the revelation of) holiness into the land as well, there must be assistance from the revelation of G‑dliness that shone in the Beis HaMikdash in the land.
44) Sheviis, beginning of ch. 7. Rambam, Hilchos Shemittah VeYovel 7:13.
45) See Rambam ibid., beginning of ch. 7.
46) See Sefer HaMitzvos ibid.
47) See Panim Yafos here; Ohr HaTorah, Behar, p. 607.
Key Lesson
Shabbos elevates a person entirely, but Sheviis teaches something further: to draw "a Shabbos to the L‑rd" into one's most earthly affairs, as they are. A Jew's holiness and attachment to G‑d must not be limited to the times of Torah study and prayer, but must extend into his everyday mundane activities — "In all your ways, know Him."