Shabbos Parashas Reeh - 5777

Shabbos Parashas Reeh - 5777

Rabbi Hal Miller

When Hashem your G-d wil lcut down the nations, to which you come to take possession

from them, before you, and you will take possession from them and settle in their land

[Devarim 12:29]

We have come through a number of weeks of verses discussing inheriting the land. Now

we have a verse telling us to settle in it. Is this actually a commandment? Is it different

than inheriting? Does it apply today? Does it apply to all of us?

Sifri tell us, "living in Eretz Yisrael is equivalent to all the mitzvos in the Torah." But we hear

this phrase applied to a number of other mitzvos as well. How is it more important here? Nearly

all commentators agree that dwelling in the land is a mitzvah. Most will agree that it applies at

all times and in all generations, to all Jews. All will agree that there are a great number of other

mitzvos that depend on an individual Jew living in the land, and even more that depend on the

majority of all Jews living in the land. According to the Ran and the Ramban, it applies today.

Tosafos and others say, not so quick. Since we are not today capable of being meticulous in

our observance of the mitzvos of the land, there is not today a commandment to live in it.

Despite this being a minority position, there are those around the world, including in Israel, who

take this approach today.

Rambam does not list this as one of the 613 mitzvos, however most supercommentaries on the

Rambam explain that this is because he held this command to be the foundation for all the other

mitzvos, and did not need to be enumerated separately, thus it is in fact even more important.

Rivash and Tashbetz hold that this is in fact two mitzvos. The first is to move to Eretz Yisrael, and

the second is to dwell in that land. Many Jews did not have the capability for one reason or another

to actually make the move, but if they put forth their best effort, they would still gain credit for one of

these mitzvos. From this we can surmise that possession and dwelling are separate things, which

our verse seems to indicate.

Does our commandment apply to the tribe of Levi? They were not granted an inheritance or

possession in the land, so are they required to settle in it? Given the Rivash and Tashbetz, the

answer would seem to be that possession would not be required in order to fulfill the second mitzvah

of dwelling in the land. We could also look to the cities of refuge, cities given to the Levites, but this

does not seem to fit the same "possession" as applies to the other tribes. Rambam applies our

mitzvah to slaves, who do not have a possession in the land. Further, when we recall the role that

Levi plays in the nation of Israel, teachers of Torah, implementers of the commands of the Temple,

it would seem a foregone conclusion that these could only be performed in the land, so long as the

rest of the nation is there, thus even Levites fall under our verse's command.