## Tur HaArokh, Leviticus

###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:1:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:1:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:1:1)

**בהר סיני.**פירש"י מה ענין שמטה אצל הר סיני והלא כל המצות נאמרו בסיני אלא מה שמיטה נאמרו כללותיה ופרטותיה ודקדוקיה בסיני וכו'. והקשה הרמב"ן עליו כי הרבה מצות יש שלא נשנו בערבות מואב כמו שמטת קרקע ונדע מהן שנאמרו כלליהן ופרטיהן בסיני או באהל מועד ועוד מניין שהוקשו שאר הדברות שנשנו בערבות מואב לשמיטה שלא נשנית ואדרבה יותר נראה לומר כיון שנשנו בערבות מואב שלא נאמר בסיני אלא כלליהן ולכך נשנו לבאר פרטיהן. ופי' הוא כי השמטה נאמרה בסיני דכתיב בפרשת ואלה המשפטים והשביעית תשמטנה ונטשתה ונאמרה בדרך כלל ובכאן חזר ואמר כי בהר נאמרו כל פרטיה שהרי כולן נזכרו בפרשה הזאת ובסוף הענין כתב אלה המצות אשר צוה ה' את משה בהר סיני להקיש כל המצות לשמטה הנזכרת וכולם נאמרו בכלל ופרט והכל מסיני וענין ערבות מואב מה שנצטוה שם משה לא היה אלא לבאר התורה לישראל. ואיני מבין מה צריך פירוש זה שהרי בזו הפרשה נאמרה דרך כלל ופרט שמתחלה כלל ושבתה הארץ שבת לה' ואח"כ מפרט כל דיניה. וענין זו הפרשה בכאן כתב ר' אברהם אין מוקדם ומאוחר בתורה כי זאת הברית הכתובה בפרשת ואלה המשפטים וכשקבלו עליהם נעשה ונשמע אז נכרתה הברית ואמר להם כל הפרשה הזאת להזכירה בכאן. והרמב"ן כתב ולפי דעתי כי נכתבה כאן בסדר נכון וכו' עד שבת לה':

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
בהר סיני, “at Mount Sinai.” *Rashi* explains that the reason for the Torah adding the words “at Mount Sinai,” is to inform us that just as the details of the laws of the *Sh’mittah* year were revealed to Moses at Mount Sinai, so the details of all the other laws were also revealed to Moses at Mount Sinai. Nachmanides queries this although *Rashi* only copied the words of *Torat Kohanim.*
 He explains the meaning of *Rashi* as based on the fact that some laws were repeated in the Book of Deuteronomy, whereas others were not. In connection with *Sh’mittah,* for instance, the need for the land to remain fallow during that year was not repeated in Deuteronomy, although the need to relinquish overdue debts to the impecunious debtor was. We might have concluded that anything that was repeated in Deuteronomy was something that was revealed to Moses later than at Mount Sinai. *Rashi* therefore sets the record straight by informing us that all the details of all the 613 commandments had been revealed to Moses on Mount Sinai down to the last detail. Whereas already in Exodus chapter 23,10-12 the subject of the *Sh’mittah* year had been discussed in general terms, now it is being discussed in greater detail. The Torah reveals that the details had already been given to Moses at Mount Sinai, even though the Torah had seen fit to write these details only now. This, *Rashi* says, is typical of all the laws of the Torah. If Moses saw fit, shortly before his death, to repeat some of these laws, this does not mean that he had not known about them all long before, ever since his first stay on Mount Sinai. [Numerous commentators understand Nachmanides as explaining that contrary to some laws which were revealed to Moses whenever G’d called him to a meeting in the Tabernacle, the laws of *sh’mittah* were revealed to him in all their details already long before there was a Tabernacle, in Exodus 23, immediately following the revelation and the giving of the Ten Commandments. The same applies to all the 613 commandments, according *to Rashi,* [whereas any laws revealed in the Tabernacle may not have been the kind which conform to Maimonides’ 14 criteria for inclusion in the 613 commandments. Ed.] Whatever Moses mentioned shortly before his death in Deuteronomy, were not new laws, as no prophet is entitled to formulate new laws, but were explanations of laws that had been revealed at Mount Sinai, and since the time had not come for them to be practiced, Moses thought it appropriate to publicly discuss them again.
 According to our author, Nachmanides considers that the laws of *sh’mittah* appeared here in their appropriate place, i.e. up until the words שבת לה' in verse 2 which concludes the headline of the legislation. The conclusive proof that all the laws were revealed in detail at Mount Sinai is from Leviticus 26,56, where the matter is spelled out most clearly.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:2:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:2:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:2:1)

**שבת לה'.**פי' הרמב"ן בכל המועדים נאמר בהם שבת ושבתון ולא נאמר באחד מהם שבת לה' כמו בשבת שהוא עדות לה' שברא עולמו בו' ימים ונח בשביעי וכן השמיטה עשת (רמז?) לששת אלפים ימי העולם ואלף השביעי הוא כולו שבת ומנוחה לחי העולמים וכל הכופר בשמטה ככופר במעשה בראשית ובעולם הבא כדרך שאמרו בשבת. ולכך החמיר בשמטה יותר מבשאר חייבי לאוין וחייב עליהן הגלות כמו שהחמיר בעריות שנאמר אז תרצה הארץ:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
שבת לה', “as a kind of Sabbath in honour of *Hashem.”* Nachmanides observes that in connection with all the festivals the Torah mentions such expressions as שבת or שבתון, describing various degrees of abstention from work, whereas nowhere else do we encounter the expression שבת לה', “a Sabbath for *Hashem,*” as we find it concerning the weekly Sabbath which is testimony that *Hashem* has created the universe in six days. (Compare Exodus 20,10 as well as the second version of the Ten Commandments in Deuteronomy.) It is fairly clear then that the *sh’mittah* legislation too is meant to pay homage to the fact that G’d created the universe in six stages. Our sages consider the duration of that universe as meant to endure for 6000 years, paralleling the “days” it took to create. The seventh millennium, by contrast, would be of a different order altogether, work in the manner in which we know it not being performed during that millennium. As a result of such considerations, anyone who denies the validity of the *sh’mittah* in thought or deed is equivalent to someone who denies that G’d created the universe in six days and that there is a world to come beyond the world in which we find ourselves on this planet. This is the reason why the Torah has been so strict with warnings about the dire consequences to the nation if this legislation were to be disregarded, and why there are so many apparently stringent regulations connected to the observance of the *sh’mittah* legislation. Non-observance of this positive commandment [usually carrying a relatively minor penalty Ed.] is followed by the exile of the nation, a punishment equal to the violation of non-observance of the negative commandments of incestuous or immoral sexual relationships! (Compare Leviticus 27,34)


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:3:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:3:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:3:1)

**שש שנים תזרע שדך.**פי' הרמב"ן לא נאמר לצווי אלא דרך הפסוק לומר כמו ששת ימים תעשה מעשיך וביום השביעי תשבו'. ועל דרך רבותינו הוא לאו הבא מכלל עשה שש שנים תזרע ולא בשביעית והזורע בשביעית עובר בלא תעשה:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
שש שנים תזרע שדך, “you are to sow your field for six consecutive years.” According to Nachmanides the wording is not to be viewed as an absolute commandment, but is similar to the one in the fourth of the Ten commandments ששת ימים תעשה מלאכתך “you shall perform your work on six days, etc.,” meaning that any work which you have to do, you shall do during the six days of the week allocated to the performance of such tasks, whereas on the seventh day you are to rest. (Compare Exodus 20,9)
 According to our sages the law to abstain from work in the field during the seventh year is in the nature of a negative commandment derived from the restrictive statement that you may only “sow your field for six consecutive years.” [Something known in *halachah* as לאו הבא מכלל עשה, a negative commandment that is a derivative of a positive commandment. In practice, this means that although the Torah phrased the abstention from such work in the seventh year as a positive instruction, he who fails to observe it transgresses a negative commandment. Ed.]


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:5:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:5:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:5:1)

**את ספיח קצירך וגו'.**אפי' לא זרעתה והיא צמחה מאליה וכו' בש"ר. והרמב"ן כתב והנכון בעיני שענבי נזירך כמו ספיח קצירך ולא תבצור כמו לא תקצור כי כן דרך כל הפרשה לכפול הענין בשדה ובכרם דכתיב תזרע שדך ותזמור כרמך שדך לא תזרע וכרמך לא תזמור וזהו פי' הפסוק כי הצומח בשדה מאליו בלי זריעה וחרישה נקרא ספיח קצירך שהוא נספח אל קציר שנה שעברה מגזרת ונספחו על בית יעקב. והגפן שלא נעבד שלא חפר ולא זמר אותו נקרא נזיר כי הזירו והפרישו ממנו כאלו אינו שלו מגזרת וינזרו מקדשי בני ישראל. ויתכן שהוא נקרא נזיר כלומר שהוא כרם הנזיר מפני שהנזיר אסור ביין וענבים ואינו עודר כרמו כי כן השער הארוך על שם הנזיר גזי נזרך והשליכי. וזה פי' ענבי נזירך שצומח מבלי עבודת הכרם שאסר הכתוב לקצור הצומח בשדה מאליו ולבצור הענבים הגדלים מבלי עבודה לו לבדו ולצורך עצמו אלא תהיה שבת שבתון לארץ מן הזריעה והזמירה ותהיה עוד שבת הארץ שכל אשר תצא מן הספיח והנזיר יהיה לכולכם יחד לך ולעניים ולחיה ולבהמה:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
את ספיח קצירך לא תלקט, “You are not to gather in the aftergrowth of your harvest, etc.” This verse precludes you from harvesting even produce that grew on your field during that year without your having seeded that field. [The word “harvest” in this context means produce to be stored for future consumption. Ed.] Nachmanides adds that the expression ענבי נזירך in the line immediately following refers to similar spontaneously grown grapes in your vineyard that the owner of the vineyard had not in any way encouraged to grow during that year. The expression לא תבצור in connection with such grapes also means that although the owner may eat such grapes, he must not “harvest” them in the sense that he must not make wine out of them for consumption at a later time. It is the nature of this and similar paragraphs to repeat legislation applicable to the field when speaking about similar activities applicable to the orchard. What grows in the field without the field having been ploughed or seeded is called ספיח, whereas what grows in the vineyard without the latter having been primed in preparation cutting such grapes for storage, etc. is called זמירה, i.e. לא תזמור. The vineyard is called by the Torah here נזיר, akin to the person who vows to abstain from the consumption of wine or grapes, as by contrast to the grain of the field the vines are durable and do not have to be reseeded or replanted year after year. The owner of such field or vineyard or orchard does not enjoy any special privileges *vis a vis* a person visiting that field and may not partake of such spontaneously grown grapes or grain except for immediate consumption. The Torah requires him to give up any claim of ownership of the land on which these fruit grow. The land enjoys freedom from its owners during that year, i.e. it enjoys a שבת שבתון. Man and beast enjoy what there is to enjoy alike.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:6:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:6:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:6:1)

**והיתה שבת הארץ לכם לאכלה.**פי' בעבור שאמר שבת שבתון יהיה לארץ אמר שתהיה השביתה הנזכרת לכם לאכלה ותחיו בה כולכם אתה ועבדיך והבהמה והחיה:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
והיתה שבת הארץ לכם לאכלה, “the Sabbath produce shall be for you to eat, etc.” Seeing that the objective is for the earth to enjoy rest, it is in order for you or your servants or the beasts to consume on an *ad hoc* basis what grows on it during that year


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:10:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:10:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:10:1)

**יובל היא.**פירש"י שנה זו נבדלת משאר השנים בנקיבת שמה לבדה ומה שמה יובל שמה על שם תקיעת שופר. וכתב הרמב"ן וכן דעת המפרשים מלשון במשוך היובל. שופרות היובלים. ואינו נכון בעיני שהרי כתיב תהיה לכם ואינו לשון שיאמר על השנה תקיעה היא תהיה לכם ועוד כי פי' שופרות היובלים הם קרני אילים וכן תרגום יונתן שופריא דקרן דכריא וכן איתא בגמרא מאי משמע דהאי יובלא לישנא דדיכרא הוא וכו'. ושופר ביום הכיפורים אינו צריך להיות דוקא בשל איל אלא כל השופרות כשרים בו א"כ למה תקרא השנה שנת האיל. ור' אברהם פי' יובל לשון שילוח. ולפי דעתי נקרא יובל על שם הדרור כי לא הזכיר שם יובל בפסוק הראשון אלא אמר והעברת שופר תרועה אבל לאחר וקראתם דרור בארץ לכל יושביה שיהיו כולם בני חורין לדור בכל מקום שירצו אמר יובל היא שבה יובל כל איש אל אחוזתו ואל משפחתו יובילוהו רגליו מרחוק לגור ונשתמשו בזה הלשון בעניינים. יובל שי. ועל יובל ישלח שרשיו. פלגים יבלי מים המעמקים ששם יובלו המים. ונתנה הארץ יבולה. ואין יבול בגפנים ענין הבאה כמו שנקראת תבואה וכן בארמית והולך מהרה ואוביל בפריע. ופי' הפסוק: **יובל היא תהיה לכם.**הבאה היא ותהיה כן לכולכם כי תבואו ותשובו איש אל משפחתו. וחזר ואמר: **יובל היא שנת החמשי'.**שתהי' לכם שנת החמשים ליובל לא לדבר אחר לא תזרעו ולא תקצרו אבל תהיה קדש ותשובו איש אל משפחתו להיות לכולכם יובל כשמה:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
יובל היא, “it shall be a Jubilee;” *Rashi* explains the term as “something apart,” so that even the year itself is called by a name different from ordinary years. As to the significance of the different name, it is called thus on account of the blowing of the *shofar* which introduces that year. The term occurs elsewhere for the *shofar* when the Torah writes: במשוך היובל “when a long blast is blown with the *shofar*,” (compare Exodus 19,13) This view is shared by other commentators.
 Nonetheless, Nachmanides does not agree, citing that the Torah writes the words תהיה לכם, “it will be for you,” and it would not be appropriate to refer to the “*shofar*” as a year, i.e. שנת החמשים שנה, “the fiftieth year.” A year (verse 12) can hardly be described as a תקיעה, the blast on the *shofar.* Furthermore the meaning of the expression שופרות היובלים is a reference to the horns of rams and this is the way *Targum Yonatahan* renders that expression. It is a fact that the horn used to blow out of on the *Yom* Kippur of the Jubilee year does not need to be a ram’s horn. The Talmud is quite specific on this. (*Rosh Hashanah* 26) Why should that year then bear a name that is equivalent to שנת האיל, “the year of the ram?”
 Ibn Ezra explains the word יובל as related to שילוח, as in יבל, [compare the modern Hebrew הובלה, describing transportation of goods, especially moving furniture. Ed.] It would describe the release and dispatch to his home of servants whose period of service was brought to an abrupt halt with the onset of this year. Nachmanides adds that the mystical connotation of the word suggests a return to one’s origin, to original freedom in the widest sense, דרור, being related to דור generation, as Solomon describes the return of man to his roots, i.e. after death as דור הולך ודור בא, (Kohelet 1,4) seeing that at the beginning of the paragraph the Torah speaks only about והעברת שופר תרועה , “you shall sound a broken blast on the *shofar,”* etc.” Families are to be reunited during that year, something that involves travel, mobility, i.e. יובל. It is noteworthy that the expression יובל for this year appears only after the Torah stated that during that year דרור, freedom is to be proclaimed for all, and those who had been enslaved will return to their original homes and families. Nachmanides quotes additional verses from Scripture showing that יובל does not always mean physical motion, transportation of goods or people, so that a “return” to one’s roots, one’s family, need not be understood only in physical terms, bodily return, but as something more profound.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:12:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:12:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:12:1)

**מן השדה תאכלו את תבואתה.**פירש"י על ידי השדה תאכלו מה שיש בבית שאם כלה לחיה מן השדה אתה צריך לבער מן הבית. וכתב הרמב"ן ואם כן לא יהיה מן השדה מחובר לראש הפסוק אלא פירוש ומן השדה תאכלו כי דבר אחר הוא. ור' אברהם פי' מן השדה תאכלו שתוציא השדה מעצמה תאכלו אתם כולכם כמו שכתוב בשנת השמטה. ולדעתי פי' הפסוק לא תקצרו ולא תבצרו בשנה הזאת כי יובל היא וקדש תהיה לכם מן השדה תביאו התבואה ותאכלו שתצאו השדה ללקוט ולאכול עם העניים והאביונים והחיה והבהמה ולא יהיה לכם עת קציר ובציר ותאספו לכם אל הבית והאוצרות כתבואת שאר השנים:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
מן השדה תאכלו את תבואתה, “you may eat whatever crop the field yields.” *Rashi* explains the wording to mean that as long as some food is found in the fields, food suitable for the beasts, any food of that year’s spontaneous crop taken indoors by man, may be eaten. When that period has come to an end, the householder has to burn whatever food of that field from that year has not been consumed. Nachmanides comments that if we accept *Rashi’s* interpretation the words מן השדה, “from the field” in our verse, are not connected to the beginning of the verse. The meaning of the words מן השדה would therefore be that only something grown at the initiative of the field itself, as distinct from the result of the farmer’s efforts are you allowed to eat. Ibn Ezra explains the verse simply as meaning that you may eat only what the field produces spontaneously without a farmer’s input. [He puts no time limit on the consumption of such produce. Ed.] It is like the rules of the *sh’mittah* year.(compare verses 6 and 7) Personally, (*Tur* speaking), the meaning of the verse is that you must not work the field during that year, neither plant nor harvest seeing that it is Jubilee year, and the year is to be holy for you; however you may bring in from the field whatever it has produced unaided by man. You are to share such produce in equal measure with the poor who may also help themselves to it. The usual seasons are not to be treated as such, i.e. there is no specific time frame during which the above applies, as opposed to normal years.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:15:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:15:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:15:1)

**במספר שנים אחר היובל תקנה מאת עמיתך.**פירש"י פשוטו של מקרא על האונאה בא להזהירו וכו'. וכתב הרמב"ן ובאמת שהוא הנכון בפשט המקרא אבל לפי זה היה דין אונאה בקרקעות ורבותינו אמרו שאין אונאה לקרקעות אבל על כרחינו אנו צריכים להטות המקראות הללו מפשטן. ולפרש שכל מקרא עומד בפני עצמו שמתחל' מזהיר באונאה במטלטלין הנקנין מיד ליד ואחר כך מזהיר בקרקעות לפי רוב השנים וגו' ואינו אלא אזהרה ביובל שיזהרו כך וחוזר ואומר אל תונו ומזהיר באונאת דברים. אי נמי ודאי המאנה חבירו לדעת עובר בלאו בין בקרקעות בין במטלטלים שהפסוק מדבר בקרקעות אל תונו איש את אחיו לפי רוב השנים וגו' כמו שפירש"י אלא שזה החילוק שבין קרקעות למטלטלין שבמטלטלין בשתות קנה ומחזיר אונאה וביתר משתות בטל מקח ומזה מיעטו קרקעות דאפי' ביתר משתות הוי מחילה כמו שהוא מחילה במטלטלין בפחות משתות אע"פ שהוא אסור להונות כן לדעת. ודרשו רבותינו כן מדכתיב וכי תמכרו ממכר לשון רבים משמע דאיירי בין בקרקעות בין במטלטלין וחזר ואמר או קנה מיד עמיתך לשון יחיד המוכר המטלטלין מיד ליד ואמר אל תונו לכולם וכיון שייחד והפריש המטלטלין בפני עצמו ריבה בהו דין אונאה והוא בחזרת המעות ביתר משתות. אי נמי נוכל לפרש שהכתוב מזהיר שידעו מספר השנים עד היובל ולפיהם ימכרו ויקנו ולא יונו בהם איש את אחיו להטעותו במספר או להטעותו במכירה שיחשוב שהוא לחלוטין אלא שידעו שניהם ויודיעו זה לזה המספר כי המכירה הוא לפי מספר השנים שגם בקרקעות יש אונאה בטועים במדה ובמנין אפילו בפחות משתות וכ"ש במטלטלין. ור' אברהם כתב טעם וכי תמכרו לשון רבים על פי עדים וטעם ולא תונו איש את עמיתו יהיה אזהרה למוכר כי הוא הראשון לקונה:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
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.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:18:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:18:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:18:1)

**ועשיתם את חקותי.**פי' הרמב"ן זה חוזר על השמטה והיובל שהם מכלל החוקים:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ועשיתם את חקותי, “you shall carry out My decrees, etc.” According to Nachmanides these words refer back to the *sh’mittah* and Jubilee legislation, seeing that these two sets of laws belong to the category of חקים, whereas cheating belongs to the category of משפטים.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:18:2
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:18:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:18:2)

**ואת משפטי תעשו.**זה חוזר על חזרת הממכרים והעבדים ביובל והאונאה. ואמר:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ואת משפטי תשמרו, “and you are to observe My social laws;” Here the Torah refers back to the sale of land, freeing of slaves, etc, which are part of the legislation discussed in the context of *sh’mittah* and Jubilee year legislation.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:18:3
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:18:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:18:3)

**וישבתם על הארץ לבטח.**שבעון שמטה ויובל ישראל גולים. וחזר ואמר:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
וישבתם על הארץ לבטח, “as a result of such observance you will dwell in the land securely.” Israel went into exile as a result of its failure to heed these warnings. The Torah repeats once more:


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:19:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:19:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:19:1)

**ונתנה הארץ פריה וגו' וישבתם לבטח עליה.**שלא תצטרכו לצאת ממנה בשביעית מפני חסר לחם:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ונתנה הארץ פריה...וישבתם לבטח עליה, “and the earth will yield its fruit and you will dwell on it in safety.” This is a promise that you will not have to leave the land of Israel on account of a scarcity of food during the *sh’mittah* year, or as a result of the observance of these regulations.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:20:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:20:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:20:1)

**וכי תאמרו מה נאכל בשנה.**פי' הרמב"ן מקר' מסורס ופי' וכי תאמרו בשנה השביעית מה נאכל פי' בשמינית כי הדאגה על השמינית היא דכיון דתחלת שנת שמטה ויובל מתשרי א"כ יאכלו בשביעית מפירות ששית כמנהג כל השנים לאכול עד אחר הקציר שהוא אחר השבועות וגם אחרי כן עד כלות מלאכת התבואה לזרות ולהבר. על כן פי':

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
וכי תאמרו מה נאכל בשנה השביעית?, “and if you were to ask: ‘what are we going to it during the seventh year?” According to Nachmanides this is a verse that has been truncated, and the correct wording should have been וכי תאמרו בשנה השביעית מה נאכל, “if you were to ask during the seventh year: ‘what are we going to eat?’” The question refers to where the people’s food supply during the eight’s year will come from. The people were not concerned about their food supply during the seventh year as they had the harvest of the sixth year to depend on which would last them until the harvest time of that year. It was accepted that the basic food supply consisted of the previous year’s harvest. Their concern was centred on the year after the *sh’mittah,* or the Jubilee year. The Torah therefore lays such concerns to rest by writing:


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:21:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:21:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:21:1)

**ועשת את התבואה לשלש שנים.**בעבור שנת היובל שתעשה בששית לכל שנת השמטה והיובל והשנה שאחרי היובל כי כולם יאכלו ישן. ואמר:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ועשת את התבואה לשלוש השנים, “the land will produce (during the sixth year) enough harvest to last for the three years.” This promise was necessary to cover the *sh’mittah* year of the 49th year which was followed by the Jubilee year during which no work in the fields was performed either.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:22:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:22:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:22:1)

**וזרעתם את השנה השמיני'.**לומר שתזרעו בשנת השמינית כמנהג הארץ ולא תמהרו לחרוש ולזרוע ולא בקציר כי עד בוא תבואת' בבית בעת אוסף השנים בחג הסוכות תאכלו ישן. ורש"י לא פי' כן:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
וזרעתם את השנה השמינית, ”you will seed in the eighth year, etc.” Here the Torah reverts to the natural state of affairs, planting a crop that will develop without miraculous input by G’d, as did the one in the sixth year. You will not have to extend yourselves especially, as what the land had provided in the sixth year is sufficient until the crop planted in the eighth year had matured in the normal way. *Rashi* does not explain our verse in this manner.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:23:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:23:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:23:1)

**והארץ לא תמכר לצמיתות.**פירש"י ליתן לאו על חזרת שדות לבעלים ביובל שלא יהיה הלוקח כובשה. וכתב הרמב"ן א"כ למה מזהיר במכירה היה ראוי לומר לא תקנה לצמיתות כמו לא ימכרו ממכרת עבד שהוא אזהרה ללוקח. ויתכן שיהיה אזהרה למוכר שלא ימכור אותה לחלוטין לומר לו הריני מוכרה לך לעולמים ואע"פ שהיובל מפקיעה הזהיר הכתוב למוכר או לשניהם שלא יעשו ממכרם לצמיתות ואם יעשו כן יעברו בלאו אע"פ שאינו מועיל וכן כתב הרמב"ם ז"ל. והטעם שאם יעשו מתחלה ממכרם עד היובל יקל בעיניהם להחזירה אבל אם יקנה לחלוטין יקשה בעיניו להחזירה. והנכון בעיני שאין לזה לאו ללקות עליו אלא הוא נתינת טעם לומר הנהיגו ביניכם היובל ולא יקשה בעיניכם כי לי הארץ ואיני רוצה שתמכר לצמיתות כשאר המוכרים:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
והארץ לא תמכר לצמיתות, “and the land (family inheritance) must never be sold in perpetuity.“ *Rashi* understands the verse as a negative commandment, in addition to the positive commandment for the purchaser to restore the land to the party from whom he had bought it. (Verse13). Failure to restore it is not only violation of a positive commandment, but transgression of a negative commandment also.
 Nachmanides feels that if this were so the Torah should have made the purchaser the culprit, i.e. forbidding him to write a contract by the terms of which he acquired the land in perpetuity, and should not have worded the instruction as a restriction imposed on the seller. This would be parallel to selling a servant in perpetuity, ignoring the law that servants go free in the *sh’mittah year.*
 It is possible that the verse may be understood as a warning to the seller not to try and bypass the legislation of the Torah, and to secure a better price for himself by promising the buyer that he may retain the land in question in perpetuity, his foregoing the right given him by the Torah to reclaim his ancestral property in the Jubilee year. This warning may be addressed by the Torah to both the seller and the buyer to advise them that by making individual arrangements bypassing Torah law, they both make themselves guilty of a serious violation of the Torah. This is the interpretation of our verse by Maimonides. This would be considered violation of a negative commandment, although such a contract would be invalid to start with, no one being able to legally override laws of the Torah.
 The reason for the legislation as it is written is that if, at the time of the sale, the number of years during which the sale will be effective is part of the document, it is much easier, psychologically, that when the next Jubilee occurs, either during the lifetime of the purchaser or his heir, to effect the transfer of that property back to its original owner. I believe that the kind of negative commandment that we are dealing with here is not the type that carries the penalty of 39 lashes, as do most other negative commandments. Rather, it is in the nature of an explanation by the Torah of its motivation, designed to facilitate the smooth observance of the unusual law, which basically is a reminder that all land in the land of Israel ultimately is the Lord’s and we only administer it on His behalf.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:24:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:24:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:24:1)

**ובכל ארץ אחוזתכם גאולה תתנו לארץ.**פירש"י לפי פשוטו סמוך על פרשה של אחריו שהמוכר רשאי לגאלה לאחר ב' שנים או הוא או קרובו ואין יכול לעכב עליו. וכתב הרמב"ן ואינו נכון בעיני שיכלול בפרשת היובל ובכל ארץ אחוזתכם וגו' ויאמר בפרשה שני' כי ימוך אחיך עמך. והנכון בעיני ובכל ארץ אחוזתכם הארץ אשר אני נותן (לכם) לאחוזה תתנו הגאולה הזאת של היובל. ואמר גאולה כמו גאל י"י את יעקב שהוציא עבדו מיד המחזיקים בו. שלא נתנה להם בחלק אחוזתם. והוצרך לומר כן בעבור שאמר כי לי כל הארץ והנה כל הארץ לו הוא לפיכך חזר ופי' שלא ינהוג אלא בארץ אחוזתינו ולא בחוצה לארץ. ואמר ובכל לרבות מעבר לירדן ובכל ארץ אחוזה לא המקום אשר שם המקדש בלבד:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ובכל ארץ אחוזתכם גאולה תתנו לארץ, “In the entire land of your ancestral heritage you shall make provision for the redemption of such lands (when appropriate).” *Rashi,* in addressing the plain meaning of our verse, assuming that the verses immediately following deal with people that need this redemption of their ancestral land, explains that whereas the seller enjoys the right to redeem his land after two years, either himself or through the good offices of a relative, sees the principal meaning of our verse in denying the purchaser the right to interfere with such a process of redemption.
 Nachmanides writes that he does not agree with *Rashi* on this, as he sees no reason why the Torah should have written this verse as part of the Jubilee legislation. *Rashi,* in effect, interprets our verse which deals with a legislation in effect only when the Israelites are predominantly all living on their ancestral land, as discussing legislation applicable also under far less favourable situations, at any time when part of the people live on their land. [An impoverished Jew is to be helped to regain economic independence regardless of the political environment in which the Jewish people find themselves. Ed.]
 According to Nachmanides, the reason why the Torah in our verse speaks of בכל ארץ אחוזתכם, “throughout your ancestral lands,” is to drive home the point that what we consider “our” land, is really still G’d’s land, something that the Jubilee legislation comes to remind us of. The very term גאולה for the transaction restoring land to its original owner or his heir, is parallel to such expressions as גאל ה' את יעקב, “the Lord redeemed Yaakov,” i.e. when G’d took the Israelites out of Egypt, He in effect redeemed their ancestor who had entered exile when he brought his family down to Egypt where they would become enslaved. The land had originally been given (promised) by G’d to Yaakov, so that all his descendants are entitled to a share of it. The difference between the land of Israel and the Diaspora, is that the laws about redeeming land holdings does not and never did apply anywhere except in the land of Israel after the distribution of it by Joshua. The reason the Torah adds the word ובכל, is to make sure we understand that the rules of the Jubilee and the reversal of land sales in that year also applies to the lands conquered by the Israelites under Moses on the East bank of the Jordan river. Seeing that G’d had repeated כי לי כל הארץ, “for the entire globe belongs to Me,” some confusion might have arisen as to within which parameters the Jubilee laws would apply.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:29:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:29:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:29:1)

**ואיש כי ימכור בית מושב עיר חומה.**כתב הרמב"ן בעבור שממכר ביתו של אדם קשה בעיניו מאד ויבוש על מכירתו רצתה התורה שיגאלנו בתוך השנה ראשונה ובעבור כי האדם לשדה נעבד וממנו יצא לחם למחיתו רצתה שיצא השדה ביובל אבל הבית לאחר היאוש ששינה דירתו ועומד שנה בבית אחר לא תזיק לו כי לא תתמעט מחיתו אם יחלט ובתי החצרים עשויים לשמירת השדות ולהיותם מושב לעובדי האדמה על כן דינם כשדה הארץ:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ואיש כי ימכור בית מושב עיר חומה, “If a man shall sell a house of residence in a walled city,” Nachmanides writes that seeing that if someone is forced to sell his residence for reasons of economic distress, and this is something which the seller feels as very degrading, the Torah permitted him to exercise the right to redeem such a house even during the very first year after he has sold it. Seeing that his house is not the source of his livelihood, the rules pertaining to the reversion of a field to its original owner in the Jubilee year do not apply to the sale of a residence. Loss of one’s house is something one comes to terms with much sooner than loss of one’s primary source of livelihood, i.e. one’s ancestral field. Houses in open areas, as distinct from residential houses in walled cities, serve the owner in supervising his field and as temporary residence for his harvest workers, and therefore the legislation governing the sale of such a house is much more similar to that governing the sale of one’s ancestral field. (verse 31)


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:33:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:33:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:33:1)

**ואשר יגאל מן הלוים.**כתב הרמב"ן נראה מפשוטו של מקרא בעבור שאמר גאולת עולם תהיה ללויים לגאול מיד ולעולם לא פירש אם יגאלו הקרובים אם לאו ואם ינהג בהם היובל כדין ישראל לכך חזר ואמר ואשר יגאל מן הלויים לומר שיהיה הגואל שיגאל או הוא בעצמו או הלוי הקרוב אליו:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ואשר יגאל מן הלווים, “and if someone buys a property from a Levite, etc.” Nachmanides writes that from the plain meaning of the text it appears that seeing that the Torah had already stated that the Levites have an unlimited period of time during which they can redeem property they had been forced to sell, (compare verse 32) the right to redeem his property commences immediately, i.e. as soon as he has the necessary means, and nothing is said about his relatives having the right to do this on his behalf. Neither does the Torah indicate if the laws of the Jubilee apply to the Levites, i.e. a return of their property in that year without their having to compensate the buyer of it. This is why the Torah phrases this legislation as אשר יגאל מן הלווים, “if one of his fellow Levites redeems it,” to show that since in the case of the Levites who do not own ancestral land, a Levite has fallen on hard times, it is clear that his house has to be viewed as just as basic to his needs as the field is to the ordinary Israelite. Another Levite, who is his relative, may redeem it on behalf of the one who sold it.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:33:2
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:33:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:33:2)

**ויצא ממכר וגו'.**לומר שעל דעת כן יגאל שיחשוב את שני ממכרו והשיב העודף כלומר לומר שהיובל נוהג בהם ותהי גאולת הלוים כמו בישראל. ורבותינו אמרו שהכתוב מדבר בלוי שקנה מלוי ולפי דבריהם נראה בפי' הפסוק שדרך היה בישראל שמי שהיה מוכר שדהו שהקרוב הקודם בירושתו היה קונה אותו וזהו נקרא גאולה כמו שנאמר בירמיה כי כך משפט הגאולה. ונראה בעיני שהיו דנים בו קדימה כמו שתיקנו קדימה בדינא דבר מצרא ואם רצה לקנותה אחר היה קונה מן הגואל בקנין סודר כמו שמצינו בבועז ועל זה אמר הפסוק כאשר יגאל הלוי נחלת הלוי קרובו כלומר שקנה אותה ויצא ממכר וגו'. שיהא נוהג היובל בגאולה כמו במכירה. אחרת ולא היה צריך להזכיר הדין במכירה כי פשיטא כי הם בכלל ישראל אלא שייפה כחם בגאולת עולם. והמין הזה של גאולה גם בישראל הוא נוהג אלא הזכירו הכתוב בלוים שלא תאמר הערים נתנו לכל השבט כולו ולכן יצאו מיד ישראל אבל לא מלוי וכ"ש שלא יצאו מיד הגואל שחייבנוהו לקנותו ולכך הוצרך לומר שאף הגאולה תהיה בלוים וכ"ש בישראל:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ויצא ממכר בית וגו', “and the house shall go out in the Jubilee year, etc.;” the sale of that house will be reversed, meaning that the sale price was calculated originally on the number of years remaining till the Jubilee so that the price of the redemption will take into account the number of years the purchaser has not been able to live in that house. In other words, the redemption procedures applied to the Levites closely parallels that of the Israelites.
 Our sages interpret this verse as dealing with a situation where a Levite had purchased the house under discussion from a fellow Levite and the Torah would tell us that redemption involving both buyer and seller who are Levites follow the same pattern as that involving ordinary Israelites. According to their words it was assumed that whenever the need for such redemptions arose in ancient Israel, the closest family member of the impoverished person was the first one in line to act as the redeemer. This is where the meaning of the term “redemption” fulfills its truest meaning. We find this documented in Jeremiah I believe that the pattern which determined the respective rank of the redeemer was similar to the manner in which the sages determined the rights of prospective purchasers when someone’s neighbour claimed first right of refusal when his neighbour put up a property for sale which adjoined his own. The subject is called דינא דמצרא in the Talmud. If a third party not in line wished to secure the property in question, he would have had to buy it from the original redeemer. The case of Boaz not being able to marry Ruth until the more closely related redeemer had declined, illustrates this kind of procedure. (Compare Ruth 4,1-9) This is what our verse meant when speaking of someone who “redeems from a Levite, etc.” The Levite in question had redeemed the field of his fellow Levite by paying out the purchaser who had bought that house. Now, someone wishes to buy that house from that “redeemer.” [Possibly, the proceeds of such a sale must be given by the “redeemer” to the original Levite, who might have moved to another town in the meantime. Ed.]
 At any rate, the Torah did not find it necessary to spell out the mechanics of how the Jubilee law works to restore the original property to the one who had owned it ancestrally, and does not then have to compensate the present holder of it in order to ensure that it is legally given back to him. The Levites have a claim on using this legislation in perpetuity. While it is true that basically this legislation applies also to the Israelites, the reason that the Levite was used by the Torah as the classical example of such a situation is in order that we should not think that such property would be distributed amongst all the Levites collectively, instead of the individual original Levite who had felt himself forced to sell it. Consequently such property is redeemed from ownership by an ordinary Israelite, but not from the ownership of a fellow Levite. It will certainly not be removed through automatic redemption from the possession of the redeemer who had been commanded by the Torah to redeem it, i.e. to “rescue” it from the original purchaser.
 This is why the Torah had to make the point that such redemption must occur through another Levite. Only such a Levite has the right to perform such redemption for an unlimited period of time after the original sale even if the original purchaser had been a Levite, and even more so if an ordinary Israelite had purchased that property from the Levite.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:35:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:35:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:35:1)

**וחי עמך.**זהו מצות עשה להחיותו עמך וממנה נצטוינו על פיקוח נפש. וחזר ואמר:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
וחי עמך, “so that he may live alongside you.” This is a positive commandment addressed to you the Israelite with means, to enable fellow Israelites to have secure means of subsistence. The commandment to physically save fellow Israelites’ lives (when they appear to be in danger) flows directly from this verse. The Torah repeats and says:


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:36:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:36:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:36:1)

**וחי אחיך עמך.**לחזק ולהזהיר על הענין. ואנקלוס עשה גר ותושב וחי עמך הכל מן המצוה שתירגם דור ותותב ויחי בהדך. אבל על דעת רבותינו והחזקת בו ובגר ובתושב וחי כל אחד מהם עמך:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
וחי אחיך עמך, “and let your brother live with you.” The line is repeated primarily in order to show the reader how important that consideration is in the eyes of the Torah. Onkelos demonstrates in his translation that he includes the resident stranger as included in the admonition of the Torah to fear the Lord and “let your brother live with you.” Our sages apply the obligation of והחזקת בו, “you shall strengthen him (economically),” to fellow Jews, whereas they understand the commandment “and let him live with you,” as also including the resident stranger. [Anyone checking Onkelos will note that there is another version of the text in Onkelos in which the word דיר, “resident stranger,” does not appear. Ed.]


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:37:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:37:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:37:1)

**נשך ותרבית.**כתב הרמב"ן לפי הפשט נראה כי נשך הוא שמלוה לו מנה ליתן לו ברביתו דבר ידוע בכל שנה ונקרא כן בעבור שאחריתו כנחש שמבצבץ ועולה. ותרבית הוא שמלוה לו מנה עד זמן פלוני ואז יפרענו ויתן לו לרבית דבר ידוע ואפי' אם יתאחר יותר לא יוסיף לו ברבית שאין זה נשך (וז"ש את כספך וכו' בנשך. כצ"ל) ובמרבית (וכו') אכלך כי המנהג להלוות הכסף בנשך ובכל שנה יתן כך והאוכל דרך להלוות עד הקציר ואז יפרענו מגורנו בתוספת קצוב:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
נשך ותרבית, “outright interest, or food against repayment by a greater amount, etc.” Nachmanides writes that according to the plain meaning of he text it appears that נשך refers to a loan to be repaid with a fixed amount of interest which runs and is payable concurrently. It is called נשך, “bite,” as the borrower feels as if he is being bitten every time he makes an interest payment. The word תרבית refers to a loan of money for a fixed period at the end of which both principal and interest is due. Seeing that the “interest” does not accumulate even when the principal is repaid after the agreed upon time, the Torah does not describe such a transaction as נשך. מרבית, on the other hand, refers to loans of food or other chattels, not loans of money. Here too the Torah forbids the lender to charge any extra when the harvest time rolls around and the borrower repays him from the new harvest.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:47:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:47:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:47:1)

**משפחת גר.**פירש"י זה הגוי כשהוא אומר לעקר זה הנמכר לע"ז עצמה. וכתב הרמב"ן וא"כ פי' הפסוק או לעקר ומשפח' גר וקורא ע"ז עקר לפי שחייבין לשרש אחריה ולעוקר'. ואנקלוס תרגם לארמאי והוא הנכון ופי' עקר לשון שורש פי' שנאחז ונשרש בישראל. ואמר משפחת גר שהגר ותושב שהשיגה ידו עמנו הוא גרם למה שמך עמו שימכר לעקר משפחתו וצוה הכתוב שתהיה לו גאולה והיא מצות עשה לכל ישראל שיגאול אותו ואחר כך צוה בקרובים שהם קודמים. וטעם המצוה ברור כדי שלא ילמד ממעשיהם כי בשאר הנמכרים הגאולה בקרובים רשות. ולכך אמר כאן כי לי בני ישראל עבדים עבדי הם לומר אע"פ שאין הגר תושב והעקר חייבין במצות היובל לא יקנו את עבדי להם לעבדים:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
משפחת גר, “the family of a total stranger.” According to *Rashi* the Torah refers to a real idolator (non Jew), the word עקר meaning the idolatrous cult itself. The reason why the Torah uses the term עקר, “something to be uprooted, eradicated,” is that the Torah had charged us with eradicating all kinds of symbols and cults in our land. (Nachmanides)
 Onkelos translates the word עקר as an Aramaic word, a correct interpretation, the word literally meaning “root.” The Torah in using this term here criticizes a community in which such cults had been tolerated and had taken root. The reason why the word משפחת, “family of,” had been added is to remind is that tolerating such aliens and allowing them to prosper in our land is the reason why some of our own people have fallen on hard times and are now facing the ultimate degradation of being sold into slavery to families of strangers in their own land. The Torah is adamant that such Jews must be redeemed, and that the cost of their redemption must be paid for by Jewish family members, who had allowed their own flesh and blood to be so demeaned. Although this duty falls upon the immediate family of the person so sold first, the entire Jewish community is called upon being the “redeemer” when the family of the party concerned is either unable or unwilling to perform its duty. In order to make this point crystal clear, the duty of the Jewish community at large is mentioned before the next of kin of the victim of such a sale. The principal reason of the legislation is to prevent a situation from arising in which the victim will prefer the religion of his new masters who may by then have shown him more compassion than his own people. When a Jew has been sold into service to a fellow Jew, the redemption by members of his family prior to the *sh’mittah* year is something of a voluntary nature, as there is no fear that he will become estranged to his people and to his religion. In the situation discussed here it is an absolute duty. Jews are to be servants (in a contractual relationship) only of their Creator, not servants of servants.


###### Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:54:1
[Tur HaArokh, Leviticus 25:54:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Tur%20HaArokh/s/Leviticus/r/25:54:1)

**ואם לא יגאל באלה.**כתב ר' אברהם בשנים הנזכרות. וי"מ על יד אלה הנזכרים:

**Sefaria Community Translation:**
ואם לא יגאל באלה, and if he has not been redeemed by these means,” according to Ibn Ezra the reference is to the elapse of the years which have been mentioned here. According to other opinions, the reference is to the people mentioned whose duty it would have been to redeem him.