Leviticus 25

Sugya Map

• Issue: Why does the Torah explicitly state "בהר סיני" (on Mount Sinai) concerning the laws of Shemittah (Sabbatical year), given that all mitzvot were given at Sinai?
• Nafka Mina(s): Understanding the nature and completeness of Divine revelation at Sinai, particularly the relationship between klalim (general rules) and pratim (specific details), and the authority of Torah Sheb'al Peh.
• Primary Sources: Vayikra 25:1, Shemot 23:10-11, Vayikra 27:34, Torat Kohanim (Sifra Behar 1:1).

Text Snapshot

"וַיְדַבֵּר יְהוָה אֶל־מֹשֶׁה בְּהַר סִינַי לֵאמֹר" (Vayikra 25:1) The phrase "בהר סיני" is notably placed here, as the location of revelation is usually stated at the beginning of a major collection of laws (e.g., Vayikra 1:1, "מֵאֹהֶל מוֹעֵד") or as a concluding summary (e.g., Vayikra 27:34). Its specific insertion for Shemittah begs explanation. The use of "לֵאמֹר" indicates that the following text is the direct content of the Divine utterance.

Readings

• Rashi (Vayikra 25:1 s.v. בהר סיני): Citing Torat Kohanim (Sifra Behar 1:1), Rashi explains that Shemittah serves as an archetype: just as its klalim (general principles), pratim (specific details), and dikdukei dikdukim (minute particulars) were all given at Sinai, so too were all mitzvot. He connects this to Shemittah not being repeated in Arvot Moav (Devarim), suggesting its comprehensive Sinai origin distinguishes it.
• Ramban (Vayikra 25:1 s.v. בהר סיני): Challenges Rashi's Arvot Moav distinction, noting many mitzvot were not repeated there. Ramban argues that Shemittah's klal was given earlier (Shemot 23:10-11). The phrase "בהר סיני" here emphasizes that the pratim and dikdukim of Shemittah (detailed in Vayikra 25) were also given at Sinai, and this applies to all mitzvot (Vayikra 27:34), not just those unrepeated in Devarim. He also provides a unique drasha linking it to the second covenant after the Egel.

Friction

Kushya

Ramban queries Rashi's reasoning: If Shemittah is an archetype, why base it on the happenstance of its non-repetition in Devarim? What about other mitzvot also not repeated there?

Terutz

The Tur HaAroch (Vayikra 25:1:1) clarifies Rashi's nuance. One might assume that mitzvot first stated generally at Sinai had their details revealed later (e.g., in the Ohel Moed or Arvot Moav). Shemittah, however, was given all its details at Sinai, even though the Torah chose to record them later. Its non-repetition in Devarim highlights that even a mitzvah not reiterated was given in full detail at Sinai, cementing it as the perfect mashal for the completeness of the Sinai revelation for all mitzvot.

Intertext

• Shemot 23:10-11: "וְהַשְּׁבִעִת תִּשְׁמְטֶנָּה וּנְטַשְׁתָּהּ" – This earlier, general command for Shemittah is the klal upon which the detailed laws in Vayikra 25 build, as highlighted by Ramban.
• Vayikra 27:34: "אֵלֶּה הַמִּצְוֺת אֲשֶׁר צִוָּה יְהוָה אֶת־מֹשֶׁה אֶל־בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּהַר סִינָי" – This concluding verse of Sefer Vayikra affirms that all its mitzvot, including their details, originated at Sinai.

Psak/Practice

This sugya is foundational for the hashkafa of Torah Sheb'al Peh. It teaches that the vast body of Oral Law, comprising the pratim and dikdukei dikdukim of the written text, is not a later human innovation but an integral part of the original Divine revelation at Sinai. This principle validates the authority of Chazal's interpretations and elaborations.

Takeaway

The explicit "בהר סיני" for Shemittah serves as a powerful meta-statement: the entirety of Torah, both Written and Oral, was revealed at Sinai, ensuring the divine origin of even the most intricate halachic details.