Sukkah, Daf Lammed Tet, Part 4

 

Introduction

Today’s section comments on the mishnah, which said that on the sabbatical year one shouldn’t purchase the etrog he should get it as a gift along with the lulav.

As an aside, we can sense from this sugya that there were many people who didn’t observe the sabbatical year laws. This halakhah is an interesting case of how the rabbis had to navigate living in a world where Jews did not keep the halakhot the way the rabbis would have liked them to. The rabbis had to find a way to do business with Jews who weren’t perfect in their observance of mitzvoth. It is, in my opinion, an interesting test case.

 

גמרא. לא רצה ליתן לו במתנה מהו? – אמר רב הונא: מבליע ליה דמי אתרוג בלולב. –

 

GEMARA. What happens if he doesn’t want to give it to him as a gift?

R. Huna said: He should include the price of the etrog in that of the lulav.

 

If the seller doesn’t want to give the etrog directly as a gift, he can include the price of the etrog in the price of the lulav. In this way, he can get the same amount of money that he wanted but the money doesn’t take on the sanctity of the etrog (see the explanation of yesterday’s mishnah).

 

וליתיב ליה בהדיא! – לפי שאין מוסרין דמי פירות שביעית לעם הארץ. דתניא: אין מוסרין דמי פירות שביעית לעם הארץ יותר ממזון שלש סעודות. ואם מסר – יאמר: הרי מעות הללו יהו מחוללין על פירות שיש לי בתוך ביתי, ובא ואוכלן בקדושת שביעית.

 

But why should he not pay him directly?

Because one must not give money for Sabbatical Year produce to an am haaretz.

As it has been taught: One must not give money to an am haaretz for Sabbatical Year produce, more than he needs for three meals. And if he handed [him] over [more] he should say, "This money shall be redeemed for [the ordinary] fruit which I have in my house" and [the purchaser] eats the produce [as though it has] the sanctity of the Sabbatical Year.

 

The Talmud now explains why one shouldn’t pay directly for the etrog. There is a general principle that one shouldn’t give money to an am haaretz for sabbatical year produce. An am haaretz, sometimes translated as an ignoramus, was in mishnaic times a person not scrupulous about tithing, as well as the observance of other agricultural laws and the laws of purity. One shouldn’t give something to an am haaretz if he will not treat it with the proper sanctity. As I explained in yesterday’s section, on the Sabbatical year, once produce has stopped growing in the field, one can no longer eat the same type of produce that one has stored in the house. If one sells this produce, the money can be used only as long as the produce that the money purchased still grows in the field. Since the am haaretz will not observe this law, he will circulate money that should no longer be used. Therefore, one should only buy produce from him for an amount of money greater than needed to buy three meals. Assumedly, if the am haaretz gets a small amount of money he will use it up before it becomes prohibited.

If one still wants to buy a larger amount of produce from the am haaretz, he should declare that regular produce he has at home will take on the sanctity of the money he is giving to the am haaretz. In this way the am haaretz can use the money as long as he wants, and the purchaser will just have to treat that produce that he has in his house as if it was sabbatical year produce itself.

 

במה דברים אמורים – בלוקח מן המופקר. אבל בלוקח מן המשומר, אפילו בכחצי איסר – אסור.

 

This however, applies only where one buys from what is ownerless, but if one buys from protected produce it is forbidden [to buy] even for as little as half an issar.

 

During the sabbatical year one is obligated to treat all of his fields as if they were ownerless. In other words, I can sell the produce in my field with certain restrictions. But I can’t lock up and guard my field. One who does so is suspected of being a sabbatical year transgressor. So the person who buys three meals worth of food from the am haaretz can do so only if he sees that the am haaretz is treating his field as if it were ownerless. But if the am haaretz has guarded his field, then we know that he is transgressing the sabbatical year laws. Under such circumstances, one cannot buy any produce from him whatsoever.