12-5771 Mitzvah N-107

Torat Emet
12-5771 Mitzvah N-107
01/17/11

Negative Mitzvah 107– This is a negative commandment: do not sow two kinds of seeds in a field.

Hafetz Hayim – As Scripture says: “you shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed” (Lev. 19:19). In lands other than Israel, a Jew is permitted initially, from the start, to sow two kinds of seeds together. As for mixed kinds of trees, which means grafting an etrog tree onto an apple tree, or anything similar, it is forbidden in the other lands as well. So too, it is forbidden to graft a tree onto a vegetable or a vegetable onto a tree, even in other lands. However, with both mixed kinds of seeds and mixtures of trees, even though a violation of the law is committed thereby, their produce is nevertheless permitted to be eaten, even by the one who did the forbidden act. As for mixtures of a vineyard (which means planting grain in a vineyard), it is forbidden to sow them, eat their produce or derive any benefit from them – in other lands, by the law of the Sages; and in the Land of Israel, by the law of the Torah.

Here we have to think like a farmer. There are so many acres of land that are ready to produce food. Clearly we want to use as much of the land as possible. By planting a mixture of different crops, we can not only feed our family but also have a hedge against the failure of any one crop. The problem is that the Torah forbids us from certain kinds of planting. We can plant one area with wheat, one area with barley and one with oat. But we can't mix these grains together in one field. The problem here is not grafting, we are not talking about hybrid grains. This is just not a proper way for Jews to plant grains. The law applies only in the Land of Israel.

Grafting trees is the issue in the second part, since it does not matter if you plant different trees close to one another. Here the problem is creating hybrid fruits or vegetables. While Jews should not be doing these kinds of plantings, there is, significantly, no punishment for those who do the grafting nor is there a prohibition against using the hybrid fruits. The prohibition applies both in Israel and in other lands.

In a vineyard, one might think to use the space between the vines to grow grain. After all the vines are above so the grain could grow below. This is also forbidden. And if it is done, then the fruit of both grain and vine are forbidden to be eaten, sold or used in any way that the grower could derive a benefit.

So the question is, “Why?” Why are we forbidden to mix seeds? This is one of three laws in this one verse (Leviticus 19:19) which includes the prohibition of mating cattle with different animals and wearing cloth of two different materials (linen and wool). These laws are part of the priestly legislation that are very concerned with keeping things pure and preventing “impurity”. This law of “mixture” falls under a category of laws, in Judaism, called “Hukkim” or “laws that have no apparent logical explanation”. We are commanded to obey these laws, not because we understand them, but because God gave them to us. Etz Hayim, the Bible commentary published by the Rabbinical Assembly, USCJ and JPS, notes that, in Conservative Judaism, we accept hukkim when they do not affect us morally. When they do affect our moral sense, we reserve the right to challenge and change the law; challenging the Torah to be morally consistent in its laws (p. 697 comment on verse 19). These laws about “mixture” don't seem to have any moral issues associated with them so they stand as written.

There are number of commentators who try to find meaning in these “unexplainable” laws and their answers are interesting, midrashic in nature, explaining after the fact why such a division of species is a good idea. The Torah seems to be teaching that we have limits in how we can change nature. The Sages may limit these mixtures by location and species but the fundamental meaning behind them is unknown. Modern anthropologists have tried to make sense of these laws in Judaism and in other cultures with mixed results (eg: Mary Douglas, Purity and Danger). The reasons behind these laws still remains unclear and when we take up farming, we are bound by these purity laws.

11-5771 Mitzvah N-106

Torat Emet
11-5771 Mitzvah N-106
12/29/2010

Negative Mitzvah 106– This is a negative commandment: do not eat the kind of food eaten by a wayward and rebellious son

Hafetz Hayim – As Scripture says: “You shall not eat over blood.” (Lev. 19:26). Which is understood to mean “you are not permitted to eat the kind of meal that leads to bloodshed.” that is, the food eaten by a wayward and rebellious son. This verse of Scripture is also an injunction not to eat any flesh of an animal before its life expires. And it is also an injunction not to take any food before we pray. This is in force everywhere, in every time, for both men and women.

The wayward and rebellious son is a son who will not listen to his parents and who is totally out of control. The Torah declares that the parents should bring their son before the court and declare that their son is out of control. If the court agrees, then the son is liable for the death penalty. The Sages of the Talmud are so appalled by this law that they go to great lengths to limit it. After all, what kind of parent would come before a court to testify against their son in a capital offense? A minor is not responsible for his actions and an adult would not be responsible to his parents. So the Sages limited this law to the few months between 12 and 13 years of age when a child may be between childhood and adulthood. Later Sages declared that this law was never actually used; that it was written as a warning to children to listen to their parents.

For our purposes, the definition of a wayward and rebellious son was that he would eat meat at an inappropriate time and his parents could not stop him. ( It could also involve drinking, but that is not the direction of this Mitzvah). In ancient times, meat was only eaten on special occasions and to eat meat at other times was a waste of meat since a whole animal would have to be killed and one person could not eat it all. There was no way to preserve the rest of the meat so it was a great waste and a real act of rebellion to eat meat when others were not eating (which they might do on a holiday or other celebratory meal). This Mitzvah, therefore, tells us not to eat like a wayward or rebellious son and eat meat indiscriminately allowing the leftovers to be wasted.

Because this is a rather limited use of this Mitzvah, and because it is only a hypothetical case (according to the Talmud it never happened in history), there are other meanings associated with this verse. Since the Torah tells us that “blood is the life” of an animal, we can also use this verse to prohibit not only the blood of a properly slaughtered animal, but also to prohibit the blood of an animal that has not yet died. This too is a rather limited situation; the animal is, after all dying and will be dead in a little while. Instead of listing this law here, we may be able to include this lesson in the law that prohibits eating a limb from a living animal. As the first two reasons seem to be very limited in their application, this may be the reason why there is a third lesson to be learned from this verse, the lesson that we should not eat before we have prayed.

I am not sure how the Sages make the connection from the rebellious son to the requirement to pray before we eat. I can see that they might learn it from the fact that there are blessings recited when slaughtering an animal and that might cover the time between the slaughter and eating. I can imagine that this could also refer back to the wayward and rebellious son who, they speculate, eats before he prays (if he didn’t, he would not be rebellious). I am just not sure how they made this connection. It is the rule, however, not to eat breakfast until after reciting the prayers of Shacharit.