레위기 25:15의 주석

במספר שנים אחר היובל תקנה ACCORDING TO THE NUMBER OF YEARS AFTER THE JUBILEE THOU SHALT BUY [OF THY COMPANION] — This (the following) is the literal sense fitting in the clauses of the verse as required by the context: Scripture intends here to warn against wronging prohibited in the preceding verse: When you sell or buy landed property take into account how many years there are until the Jubilee, and according to the years and the crops of the field which it can be expected to yield shall the vendor sell and the purchaser buy, for in the end he (the purchaser) will have to return it to him (to the vendor) in the Jubilee-year. Consequently if there are only a few years until the Jubilee and this man sells it at a high price it follows that the purchaser has been overreached. If, on the other hand, there are still many years until the Jubilee so that he eats from it many crops the seller is overreached if you give him only a low price. It must therefore be purchased according to the period remaining until the Jubilee. That is what Scripture means when it states: “According to the number of the years of the fruits he shall sell unto ,"thee," i. e. according to the number of years of crops that it (the field) will remain in the hand of the purchaser you shall sell it to him. Our Rabbis, however, derived from here the law that one who sells his field has no right to repurchase it before the elapse of at least two years, — that it must remain in the possession of the purchaser two full years reckoning from date to date, and even though there may be three crops in these two years, as, for instance, if he sold it when it had its corn standing. And in this interpretation the word שני does not lose its literal meaning, viz., that of years, (the words שני תבואות are not taken in this interpretation to mean “two crops” as you might at first think) — the phrase means מספר שנים של תבואות the number of years of crops (i. e. שני is the construct of שנים) and not of years when the corn is smitten by blast, and you know that the minimum number implied in the plural שנים is two (this is how the Rabbis derived the law that the vendor must leave the field at least two years in possession of the purchaser) (Arakhin 29b).

במספר שנים תקנה, you are to pay a price corresponding to the number of years that you will own the land. Our sages state that when it comes to matters which are subject to verification by weight, by measure, or number, even if the overcharge amounted to less than 1/6th, the usual leeway when buying things in “bundles,” etc, is refundable. (Baba Metzia 56)

במספר שנים אחר היובל, "according to the number of years after the Jubilee year, etc," We must establish first of all why the Torah speaks of the years "after the Jubilee," rather than "the number of years until the Jubilee year," seeing that the years the purchase is in effect are part of those years? Secondly, why did the Torah change its wording in the middle of a verse? The Torah describes the transaction as a purchase,מקנתו, when speaking of the number of years which determines the purchase price, i.e. making the purchaser the principal figure. When the Torah speaks of the number of harvests, however, it switches and describes the transaction as a sale, i.e. הוא מוכר לך, "he sells to you?"

במספר שנים אחר היובל תקנה מאת עמיתך, “you will buy from your fellow on the basis of how many years have elapsed since the last Jubilee year.” According to Rashi the plain meaning of the verse is to warn the seller not to overcharge the buyer. Nachmanides agrees that this is the plain meaning of the text, but adds that if this were so halachically, it would contradict the principle that the term אונאה, an illegal overcharge, does not apply when the object in question is real estate. We are therefore bound to look for a different interpretation of the meaning of our verse(s) here.(compare Ketuvot 99) We therefore need to view each of the verses in this paragraph as unrelated to the verse prior to it or subsequent to it. Verse fourteen speaks of chattels changing hands, something where the laws of אונאה, overcharges, do apply. Afterwards the Torah warns not to become guilty of unfair dealing in the sale of real estate. In verse 17 the Torah repeats the general principle of dealing fairly with one’s fellowman rather than applying the principle of “buyer beware!” which is so prevalent in our society. Verse 17 even includes אונאת דברים, causing damage by the spoken word, though nothing substantive had been denied the purchaser or seller, as the case may be. The Talmudבבא מציעא folio 58 even considers the latter kind of unfair practice as more serious than the former, either because it is not subject to being retracted or because it insults the victim’s body rather than cause harm only to his financial assets. Alternately, it is quite possible that if one deliberately cheats one’s customer by misrepresenting the object one tries to sell, one is guilty of violating a negative commandment regardless of whether the object involved is a chattel or real estate, seeing that the Torah here quotes both examples separately as forbidden. The words אל תונו איש את אחיו, followed by the example of the number of years that have elapsed since the Jubilee year, clearly refer to transactions involving real estate. The difference in the law of אונאה when practiced with chattels as opposed to when involving real estate, would only be that in the case of chattels when the overcharge is less than 1/6th of the fair price the transaction is not voided and the vendor does not have to return the excess he has charged. Should the overcharge have exceeded that amount, the transaction is automatically reversed when the buyer becomes aware of having been deceived. When the Talmud stated that the law of אונאה does not apply to transactions involving real estate, the meaning was that even if the overcharge was more than one 6th, the sale is not cancelled, but the vendor must make the appropriate refund. When viewed in this light, Rashi’s explanation does not raise any problems. In any event, it is forbidden to overcharge deliberately, hoping that the purchaser in his desire to acquire said land will forgive the vendor for overcharging him. Our sages arrived at this interpretation because the Torah employed the plural mode in verse 14 when writing וכי תמכרו ממכר לעמיתך...אל תונו, “when you make a sale to your fellow….do not cheat one another” (literally :”cause each other grief.”) The use of the plural here suggests that both real estate transactions and chattels are the subject of this ordinance. Although the Torah spoke first specifically of chattels, i.e. או קנה מיד, “or when he purchased something from the “hand, etc.,” it reverts to the all embracing אל תונו without limiting such transactions to chattels, mobile objects. Seeing that the chattels did warrant special mention, the reason must be that the regulations as to under what conditions such “cheating” results in a reversal of the transaction is bound to be somewhat different from the conditions invalidating a real estate transaction in which one or the other party was not honest. It is also possible that the thrust of the whole verse is to warn people to be aware at all times of how many years have elapsed since the last Jubilee year, that knowing the date of the month is not sufficient. Once this is common knowledge, there will not be miscalculations as to the value of the piece of property that is being sold until the advent of the next Jubilee year. This also will preclude the buyer from believing that what he is about to buy will remain in his possession for an unlimited number of years. At any rate, the principle of אונאה, legal consequences that result from misrepre-sentations of objects being sold, applies also to real estate transactions, though the details are different from when someone sells produce in the market at an inflated price. If it applies there, it is obvious that it also applies when chattels or produce is being bought or sold. Ibn Ezra writes that the reason why the Torah formulated this paragraph by beginning with the words וכי תמכרו in the plural, is that it describes transactions that take place publicly, in front of eyewitnesses. This is why the Torah also employs the plural mode when writing לא תונו, do not take unfair advantage, addressing the seller, is that usually the seller is more likely to take unfair advantage of the buyer rather than vice versa. After all, it is he who initiates the transaction.

How many years there are until the jubileeJubilee. (Divrei Dovid) You might ask: According to Rashi’s explanation that the verse “according to the number of years” is explaining the cheating involved in selling land, would we not know this ourselves? Since he is obligated to return it in the jubileeJubilee, the sale [price] obviously depends on the time left until the jubileeJubilee. Perhaps the difference that arises from this [Rashi’s explanation] is when a first buyer sold to a second buyer. You might have thought that he [the first buyer] can say to him, “I am selling it to you forever! Even though you have to return it to the [original] seller, I have nothing to do with that! The obligation is upon you to fulfill the mitzvah.” This would be similar to someone who sells an animal to a slaughterer, where the obligation to give the gifts to a kohein rests upon the slaughterer and not upon the seller. Here too regarding the jubileeJubilee [one might have thought it is the same and that] one is permitted to “cheat” him [the second buyer]. So it comes to teach us that even in this case do not cheat, and you are included in the obligation [to ensure that the field returns to its original owner].

אחר היובל תקנה, there is no point in purchasing a field during the actual Jubilee year, as a situation might arise in which the returning owners cannot retain possession of it for any meaningful amount of time at all, depriving them of the feeling that they had benefited from the Yovel institution.

And according to the years [remaining] and the crops. Explanation: This verse, “according to the number of years,” is explained afterwards in the next verse, “Based on the abundance of years, etc.” Even though the first verse is speaking of the years that passed since the [last] jubileeJubilee, while the next verse is speaking of the years until the [next] jubileeJubilee, this is because the one results from the other, since the buyer and seller only look at the years remaining until the jubileeJubilee and calculate according to them. Therefore, Rashi explains both verses according to the years remaining. Re’m

We have the following Mishnah in Massechet Arachin folio 29: "When someone sells a field in the Jubilee year he is not allowed to redeem it until at least 2 years have elapsed seeing that the Torah stipulates that the sale has to be in effect for "a number of harvests," i.e. not less than two harvests. If one of those two years happens to be a year of drought so that no harvest is brought in, or it was the shemittah year (when the harvest is public property), such a year does not form part of the two years we have just mentioned. Rabbi Eliezer says that if the seller sold the field immediately before New Year's day while it had not yet been harvested the buyer may enjoy 3 harvests before the seller can redeem the field." Thus far the Mishnah. When the Talmud elaborates on this, it is pointed out that the Mishnah did not say that redemption of the field in less than two years would be legally ineffective, but said only that the "seller is not allowed to redeem it." This means that there is both a negative and a positive commandment, the positive commandment being that one must allow the purchaser to enjoy the field for at least two harvests. The wording of the Torah applies the positive commandment also to the purchaser, not merely to the seller having to allow the purchaser to enjoy possession for a minimum of two harvests ; this is based on the word תקנה "you shall purchase." We also find a Baraitha in that connection which states as follows: "if the purchaser enjoyed only one harvest prior to the Jubilee year one allows him to enjoy the harvest of an additional year after the Jubilee year." As a result of the foregoing we have four separate הלכות, rulings, on the subject which are based on our verse. 1) It is a commandment applicable to both seller and buyer that the sale be valid for no less than two years as stated in the Torah. 2) If there were three harvests within the space of two years they all belong to the purchaser. 3) If there was a year of drought so that there was no harvest, the purchaser is entitled to another year. 4) If the Jubilee year occurs during one of the two years the purchaser contracted for, this year is considered as null and void and the purchaser continues in possession for another year. Maimonides rules in accordance with what we have just stated in chapter 11 of his treatise Shemittah Veyovel.

שני תבואות, years during which a harvest is produced, not years of drought, etc. The conditions are parallel to a farmer who enters into a tenancy agreement working the field for the owner and giving him a portion of the harvest.

In less than two years. Because they find it problematical to explain [verse 14 in a way] that the first verse (verse 14) is connected with the second verse (verse 15). [See Re’m]

Keeping the above in mind the wording of the Torah can be fully appreciated. The words במספר שנים אחר היובל mean "the number of years that have to be completed in the event the Jubilee year does not require the present owner of the field to relinquish it." The Torah then changed its wording from buyer to seller in order to make the law apply to the purchaser as well. Both seller and buyer are responsible for the sale not to remain effective for less than the time legislated by the Torah. The Torah mentions both the number of years and the number of harvests (pl) in order to allow for the eventuality of a drought or the Jubilee year which would result in the number of harvests being less than the number of years contracted for.

We need to understand the reason why G'd does not permit the buyer to return the field he purchased to the seller before two (harvest) years have passed. Since when is it forbidden for a person to waive financial claims in favour of someone else? The answer to this peculiar piece of legislation must be sought in the Torah's looking askance at anyone who sells land which is his heritage in the Holy Land. Torat Kohanim on verse 25: "if your brother becomes poor and sells part of his ancestral heritage, etc." explains that a person is not permitted to sell his field and to use the proceeds to invest in livestock or chattels. They base this on the fact that the Torah described permission to sell as due only to poverty, i.e. כי ימוך. The Torah hopes to dissuade a potential seller of his ancestral property from selling if he is aware that he will not be able to redeem it for at least two years.

Another reason may be connected to a ruling by Maimonides in chapter 11 of Hilchot Shemittah Veyovel that if someone sold his field for a period of 60 years such a field does not revert to the seller in the Jubilee year. The only purchases which are reversed in the Jubilee year are lands sold without a specific time frame, or a piece of property sold "forever." The author of Kesseph Mishneh does not quote the origin for Maimonides' ruling. Perhaps Maimonides derived it from a nuance in our text here. When the Torah writes במספר שנים אחר היובל the meaning may be that if the seller mentions a specific number of years that the sale is to be in force, be it 40 years or 60 years, ימכר לך, "he may go ahead and sell it to you." -The additional words ימכר לך mean that the sale is effective for the number of years contracted. In such a situation the Jubilee year does not override the agreement reached between buyer and seller. The words במספר שני תבואות explain why such a sale can remain effective beyond the Jubilee year, i.e. seeing that the seller sold a number of harvests he did not contravene Torah law not to sell soil. The Torah's principal concern is that a Jew must not sell the land which is his heritage in the land of Israel.