Rambam - 1 Chapter a Day

Sefer HaMitzvot (positive commandment 135) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 112) includes this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.

There is a difference of opinion among the commentaries if the mitzvah is incumbent on the gavra (the person himself) or on the land (the cheftza, the object). The commentaries note that the Rambam's wording in this halachah indicates that the mitzvah is on the person, he should rest. Nevertheless, the wording he uses when enumerating the mitzvot - that "the land should rest" - puts the emphasis on the land.

The citation of this verse reflects a general principle in the Mishneh Torah: that the Rambam will occasionally favor the understanding of a verse proposed by the Jerusalem Talmud even though the Babylonian Talmud interprets it otherwise. To explain: the Babylonian Talmud (Mo'ed Kattan 4a) inteprets this verse as a prohibition to work the land on the Sabbath. It is the Jerusalem Talmud (Sh'vi'it 1:3) which understands it as referring to the Sabbatical year.

From Chapter 4, Halachah 1, it appears that here the Rambam is speaking of harvesting for the sake of improving the land, not for gathering its crops. The intent appears to be that harvesting produce will enable the land to produce better produce in the future.

This mitzvah is incumbent both on men and women.

Sefer HaMitzvot (negative commandment 220) and Sefer HaChinuch (mitzvah 326) include this commandment among the 613 mitzvot of the Torah.

As indicated by Halachah 20 and notes, the intent here is trimming the top of the tree and not the end of its branches.

The term betzirah whose root is used in Leviticus 25:5 is usually employed specifically with regard to harvesting grapes. Nevertheless, in a wider sense, it refers to harvesting any fruit.

Because like sowing, trimming contributes to the growth of the tree (Radbaz).

In Leviticus 25:5: "The aftergrowth of your harvest you shall not reap and the grapes you had designated you shall not gather."

And performing work with trees.

Plowing is explicitly mentioned in the positive commandment for observing the Sabbatical year, but not in the prohibition.

Although Mo'ed Kattan 3a uses techniques of Biblical exegesis to show that other labors are forbidden, the Rambam considers these teachings merely as asmachteot, citing a verse as support for a concept forbidden by Rabbinic Law.

To improve the land, not because he needs the stones. See Chapter 2, Halachah 10.

Implants the head of a branch of a vine or tree in the ground so that roots will grow to improve its nurture.

In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 2:2), the Rambam writes that this is beneficial for certain trees.

As will be explained (see Halachah 7), we are permitted to perform labor to maintain a tree's wellbeing. These activities, however, are intended to foster its growth.

Both of these activities speed their ripening (ibid.:5).

Bind their branches so that they grow upward rather than spread out (ibid.:6).

For this prepares the land on which they grow to be used to plant crops.

And not on land that could be used for crops in which instance, the plowing would benefit him.

For this resembles sowing them.

Because we do not usually sow in dung.

For this does not involve working with the land.

A fragrant herb, also used for medicinal purposes.

I.e., prevent them from being damaged. The Radbaz questions why the aloe plant is singled out; seemingly the same principle applies with regard to all plants. He explains that since the aloe grows on the roofs, it is in need of shade. Our Sages permitted a person to construct a shelter to protect the aloe from the sun. This is not considered as forbidden labor.

For that would promote their growth, not merely maintain them.

Chulin 78a states that this is intended to attract notice to the tree and cause people to pray that its fruit do not fall prematurely. This is permitted because it does not involve caring for the tree.

This weakens the tree's strength and thus prevents it from causing its fruit to fall prematurely (ibid.). Since it weakens the tree, it is permitted.

The Kessef Mishneh quotes Rashi (Mo'ed Kattan 3a) who explains that the words oder and kishkush - used by hthe Rambam in this halachah - are synonymous. The difference is only with regard to the type of plants.

For otherwise all the trees in the field will die, as stated in Halachah 10.

Hilchot Shabbat 16:3 defines an area in which a se'ah of grain is sown as 50 cubits by 50 cubits. This leniency is permitted to make sure that the trees do not die.

Since it is unnecessary to do that to provide the individual trees with water.

For that is the most effective way of watering the trees, since they are close to each other.

I.e., ten in an area larger than 50 cubits by 50 cubits. Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 2:10).

Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Mo'ed Kattan 1:1).

Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kelayim 5:4).

So the trees will not die.

In Halachot 2-3.

Our translation is based on the authoritative manuscripts and early printings of the Mishneh Torah. The standard publish text follows a slightly different version.

This leniency was granted even though sowing is forbidden by Scriptural Law. It must, however, be emphasized that (as stated in Chapter 10, Halachah 9), from the later years of the First Temple period, the observance of the Sabbatical year only had the status of Rabbinic commandment. The Radbaz maintains that such leniency would be granted even if the Scriptural ordinance was in effect.

For since he is being threatened, it makes no difference whether the person threatening him is a king or an ordinary person. Since there is danger involved, leniency is granted (Radbaz, Kessef Mishneh).

The Kessef Mishneh emphasizes that this leniency is granted only when the person does not receive payment for his activity. He is forbidden to take payment, even if he is being compelled for then a person could perform such labors and excuse himself, claiming that he was compelled to do so.

There are many who sow their fields and reap their crops. See Chapter 8 which lists many safeguards instituted for that reason.

Terumot 2:3 contrasts sowing on the Sabbath with sowing during the Sabbatical year, explaining that the Jews are not suspect to violate the Sabbath. Hence, the results of the inadvertent violation of the Sabbath laws are not forbidden.

This is the translation of the word nirah, based on the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 4:3, Pe'ah 2:1). The term differs from plowing in that it is a far less thorough activity. See Rashi's gloss to Jeremiah 4:3 which explains that it refers primarily to the removal of weeds, thorns, and the like.

In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 4:2), the Rambam explains that this applies even if the field is fertilized by making it a corral for animals, so that their manure will fertilize it and improve its quality.

For the penalty is imposed on him personally, not on the land. Note the contrast to Chapter 3, Halachah 11.

As stated in Halachot 4 and 16.

In these eras, there was no refrigeration and vegetables would be preserved by placing them in the ground.

As long as the leaves are revealed, one is not planting in the ordinary manner (Radbaz). Burying the plants in this manner is permitted, because he does not desire that the plants grow in the earth; they are merely buried there [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Kilayim 1:9)].

Because he appears to be planting them.

If they are not packed so densely, burying them resembles planting [ibid. (Sh'vi'it 5:2)].

Our translation is based on Rav Kappach's notes to the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (ibid. 2:10). There the Rambam explains the term yichsech, but does not explain the term mereis. The Radbaz and the Kessef Mishneh interpret the latter term as meaning that it is permitted to sprinkle water on the rice plants. The contrast to the following clause supports Rav Kappach's interpretation.

Those that stick out and attract attention [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Pe'ah 6:11; Sh'vi'it 4:1)].

I.e., when clearing the land, one takes smaller stones and pieces as well as larger ones, so that the land will not have any foreign matter upon it.

For we do not suspect that he will be intending to clear his colleague's field.

It would appear that a person would be permitted to gather both larger and small pieces from his colleague's field. The Radbaz, however, grants this leniency only with regard to larger pieces.

Our translation is based on the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 4:1). There he emphasizes that the person clearing the field is expecting something in return.

Not only the large ones permitted in the previous halachah. Even though the person's field will be cleared in this manner, since this is not his intent, and the labor of clearing a field involves merely a Rabbinic prohibition, stringency was not enforced.

That he is seeking to provide his animal with food and not clear his field.

The Radbaz states that this leniency is granted only when the owner takes both the large and small pieces. If he takes only small pieces, it is forbidden because he is obviously intending to clear his field.

See Chapter 5, Halachot 17-18, which restricts cutting down trees for kindling once they have begun to grow fruit.

Even though it involves work with the land, since he desires the wood, it is permitted.

The place where three trees can grow is significant and can be used for planting. Thus by removing the stumps, it is as if he is clearing a field for himself [the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 5:4)].

The intent is not that one has uninhibited license to cut down a colleague's tree even in the Sabbatical year. Instead, if the tree has been cut down, one may uproot the stump.

This law also applies to other species. See Sh'vi'it 4:5 and the gloss of the Ra'avad.

This is forbidden by Scriptural Law.

In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 4:7), the Rambam explains that there is no need for a deviation in the way he trims the branches, because he is not intending to trim the tree. To explain his statements: Although trimming is one of the activities forbidden by Scriptural Law, this refers to trimming the top of the tree, not the ends of its branches (Tifferet Yisrael to the above mishnah).

Our translation is taken from the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 5:5)].

For cutting these branches is not that beneficial to the tree (Bava Batra 80b).

Here, also, our translation is taken from the Rambam's Commentary to the Mishnah (Sh'vi'it 5:5)], which quotes I Samuel 15:33 as support.

I.e., that the split will be healed. This is forbidden, because this would be improving the tree.

This is permitted, because this is maintaining the tree.