The Inner Workings of a Genizah Midrash on the Symbolic Value of Orlah

Some believe the cycle was every 3 and half years, i.e., twice every shemitta cycle, finishing in time for Hakhel. See Joseph Heinemann, “On the Triennial Lectionary Cycle,” JJS 19 (1968): 41-48; Shlomo Naeh, “The Orders of Torah Reading in the Land of Israel: A New Examination,” Tarbiz 67.2 (2003): 167–87; “On the Seven-Year Cycle Torah Reading in the Land of Israel,” Tarbiz 74.1 (2005): 43–75; and see the bibliography in H. Strack and G. Stemberger, Introduction to the Talmud and Midrash (Minneapolis, 1992), 241–2.

Much scholarship has been devoted to the structure of the petihta as well as its possible relationship to the sermon presented in the synagogue each week either preceding or following the Torah reading. See for example Heinemann, “Profile of a Midrash,” JAAR 39 (1971) 141-50; Burton Visotzky, Golden Bells and Pomegranates: Studies in Midrash Leviticus Rabbah  (Mohr Siebeck: Tübingen, 2003), 23–30; Paul Mandel, “The Petichta,” in Higayon Le-Yonah: hebetim hadashim be-heker sifrut ha-midrash, ha-agadah, veha-piyut: kovetz mekharim li-khevodo shel Profesor Yonah Frenkel be-melot lo 75 shanim, ed. Jacob Elbaum, Joshua Levinson, and Galit Hasan-Rokem (Jerusalem, 2006), 49–82. 

The Tanhuma-Yelamdenu corpus possesses several distinguishing characteristics in terms of its form. This includes an opening proem(s) containing a halakhic unit, a following aggadic unit which is deeply connected and then an exposition of the opening verse of the Torah reading . The name “Tanhuma” derives from the fact that many homilies are attributed to the amora R. Tanhuma b. Abba, more than any other named sage in the collection. “Yelamdenu” is the term used to open several of the homilies. See Marc Bregman, Sifrut Tanḥuma-Yelamdenu: teʼur nusḥeha ṿe-ʻiyunim be-darkhe hithaṿutam (Piscataway, NJ: Hotsaʼat Gorgiʼas, 2003).

Tova Sacher is currently writing a Ph.D. dissertation on this Tanhuma recension, of which 4 different fragments have been found. The text discussed here is based on the Genizah fragment MS Or 1081 2.51, first published by Wertheimer in, קמח-קעג בתי מדרשות חלק א ירושלים תשמט עמ’, under the title, Midrash Yelamdanu. It has also been transcribed by the Friedberg Midrash team, Maagarim site, and Yonatan Wormser (unpublished). We have taken all these readings into account.

[5] כמעשה ארץ מצרים is the most common name of the sidra, since the homilies in Leviticus Rabbah and Midrash Tanhuma use this phrase from v. 18:3 as their lectionary hook. The author of this collection may have called the sidra “Daber” (דבר), since he seems to have used v. 18:2 as his hook (דבר אל בני ישראל). The scope of this sidra is unclear; see Moshe Lavee’s discussion in the addendum.

This is the likely scope of the sidra, but since the next sidra attested to in the manuscript (Lev. 21:1) is on a separate fragment, it is possible that pages are missing and there was asidra in between, and that ונטעתם did not include all of ch. 20. 

Although the prohibition against illicit relations should also be part of this sidra—assuming it spanned 19:23-20:27—the homily for ונטעתם makes no such mention.

The same paraphrase of the verse, recalling the deeds of the land of Egypt and Cannan without the descriptions is also found in Sifra, Achrei Mot 8:1 and Lev Rab 23:9.

The Genizah fragment employs unique graphic symbols for both God’s names. X for the word אלהים and :: for the Tetragammaton the significance of which is being investigated in Tova Sacher’s forthcoming doctoral dissertation. For the sake of clarity we will use the word אל’ for X and ה’ for ::.

This is an indication of the late dating of this midrash; from a period when Jews were no longer residing in Palestine.

In the next homily the phrase used in the homily is נכנסין לארץ, “you will enter the land” – clearing relating the exegesis to the desert experience. The wording here is less decisive.

 Deuteronomy Rabba (Vilna) Ekev 3.11, (Liberman) Ekev Sec 11.

For a critical analysis of this law, see Itamar Kislev’s TABS essay, “The Law of the Fourth Year Fruit: Restraining the Ancient Vintage Celebration.”

The fragment has a second proem as well, also unique, but we will only discuss the first proem in this piece. See Tova Sacher’s forthcoming dissertation for an extensive discussion of the whole text.

Joseph Heinemann, “The Proem in the Aggadic Midrashim,” Scripta Hierosolymitana22 (1971) 100-122 [102] explains the function of opening a proem with a verse from elsewhere (mainly from Ketuvim) as demonstrating the preacher’s skill (preacher because Heinemann believed that proems were originally oral sermons preached in the synagogue; this question continues to be debated among scholars) in connecting a seemingly unrelated verse with a theme of the Torah reading in question.

See Midrash Tanhuma (Buber Noah:2 p.29), which incorporates trees, fruit, and Torah in a way reminiscent of the present homily.

[ב]וא וראה היאך אל’ שוקד לזכות את ישראל לעולם שכשם שו מזהיר על המילה כך הוא מזהיר על האילן. 

Come and see how much God strives to merit Israel forever. For just as he has warned them about circumcision so he has warned them about the tree.

ר’ יוסי או’ כשם שיש ערלה באילן כך[יש] ערלה לבשר ולארץ.

Rabbi Yossi says: “Just as there is orlah (foreskin) of the tree so there is of the flesh and the land.”

Other elements connect between the two as well:

• Both require self-sacrifice, entailing bodily harm (circumcision) or monetary loss (orlah).
• Both create “fruits.”
• Both, as the homily explains, ensure life and continuity (hinted at in the text by the declaration that these commandments merit Israel “forever”; see m. Avot 6:11).
• Both forms of orlah share the need for a definite time-frame; three years for orlah, eight days for circumcision.

The midrash then elaborates on the distinctiveness of circumcision:

יש לבשר שמנת ימים שנ’ וביום השמיני וגו’

The flesh has eight days as scripture states: and on the eighth day etc.

תדע לך כמה היא חבובה לפני האלהים’ שי דוחא את השבת

Know how precious [circumcision] is before God that it pushes [aside] the Sabbath.

While at first blush this point seems out of place, it represents a further connection to orlah. Both this and the subsequent section emphasize the importance and distinctiveness of milah and orlah respectively.

The next line focuses specifically on Abraham, who is particularly relevant to this proem since he is intimately connected to circumcision, being the first to be commanded to do so. Moreover, he evokes the theme of chosenness.

בזכות אברהם שנתיחד תחילה לשמו של האל’.

In the merit of Abraham who was first to devote himself for the Name of God.

The point seems to be that just as Abraham devoted himself solely to God, the orlah fruits are set aside solely for God (since they are forbidden for all human use). It could also allude to the midrashic tradition, found in the Tanhuma corpus, which states that Abraham discovered God when he was three years old (Tanhuma Lech Lecha 3, Behar 1). 

For the first three years, the fruit is absolutely forbidden for all use, on the fourth year it is considered holy and can be eaten in Jerusalem. From the fifth year it is permitted for all uses.

 The derasha ends by circling back to orlah and the patriarchs:

הוי בשביל האבות ניתנו מצות ערלה לאילן.

That [teaches us that it] is for the patriarchs the commandment of orlah for the tree was given.

Harry Fox explains that the circular structure (literary envelope) serves to “emphasize the unity of the enclosed portion, to indicate that elaborations or parallels of statement have not departed from the original focus.” Harry Fox, “The Circular Proem: Composition, Terminology, and Antecedents,” Proceedings of the American Academy of Jewish Research 49 (1982): 1-31. Another feature of the homiletic proem is to demonstrate how the remote verse, though ostensibly unrelated to the lection in question, is in fact connected. This served a number of purposes: to create dramatic tension, present multiple perspectives of a given theme, and to demonstrate the artistry of the homilist. See Norman Cohen, “Lev Rab, Parasha 3: An Example of a Classical Rabbinic Homily,” JQR 72 (1981) 18-31; Heinemann, “Profile of a Midrash,” JAAR 39 (1971) 141-50. 

ד’א’ ונטעתם כיבד האל’ אילני ארץ ישראל כשם שכיבד את התורה כיצד?

Another thing: “And you shall plant” God honored the trees of the land of Israel as He honored the Torah. How?

ניתנה התורה בחודש השלישי

The Torah was given in the third month,

ונתנה לדור הרביעי שכן הוא או’ “ודור רביעי ישובו הנה” בשביל כך תהא קודש הילולים לרביעית

And it was given to the fourth generation as it says (Gen 15:16), “And they shall come back here in the fourth generation” for that there will be “holy for giving praise” in the fourth (year(.

ובשביל שנכתבה בה’ ספרים ניתנה בחמישית למאכל שאכלו פיריה שלתורה שנ’ טוב פריי מחרוץ ומפז וגו’ לכך נאמר ובשנה החמישית תאכלו א’פ’

And for that it was written in five books it was given in the fifth (year) for consumption that they shall eat the fruits of the Torah as it says (Prov 8:19): “My fruit is better than gold even fine gold.” Therefore, scripture says (Lev 19:25), “And in the fifth year you shall eat the fruits”

One might take the comparison further; just as the fruits of the fourth year are the first that are permitted for human consumption (on the condition they are eaten in holiness, in Jerusalem), thus marking the transition between the Divine realm (when the fruits are forbidden) to the human one, the transmission of the Torah at Sinai, is a new connection between God and humans.

In the biblical narrative, the land is not inherited by the generation who receives the Torah, since they perish in the wilderness as a result of the sin of the scouts, but only by their children. 

The lectionary verse is quoted differently, here. It skips the word ונטעתם (“you shall plant”), and jumps straight to וערלתם ערלתו (“you shall treat as forbidden.”)

Here is a chart of the sidrot that make up our parashiyot of Acharei Mot and Kedoshim according to Leviticus Rabbah:

סדרת “אחרי מות”

Petihta Verse 16:1 Sidra = ch. 16 (Lev Rab 20) 

וַיְדַבֵּ֤ר יְ-הֹוָה֙ אֶל־מֹשֶׁ֔ה אַחֲרֵ֣י מ֔וֹת שְׁנֵ֖י בְּנֵ֣י אַהֲרֹ֑ן בְּקָרְבָתָ֥ם לִפְנֵי־יְ-הֹוָ֖ה וַיָּמֻֽתוּ:

YHWH spoke to Moses after the death of the two sons of Aaron who died when they drew too close to the presence of YHWH.

סדרת “שור או כשב או עז”

Petihta verse 17:3 Sidra = ch. 17 (Lev. Rab. 22)

אִ֥ישׁ אִישׁ֙ מִבֵּ֣ית יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל אֲשֶׁ֨ר יִשְׁחַ֜ט שׁ֥וֹר אוֹ־כֶ֛שֶׂב אוֹ־עֵ֖ז בַּֽמַּחֲנֶ֑ה א֚וֹ אֲשֶׁ֣ר יִשְׁחַ֔ט מִח֖וּץ לַֽמַּחֲנֶֽה:

If anyone of the house of Israel slaughters an ox or sheep or goat in the camp, or does so outside the camp,

סדרת “כמעשה ארץ מצרים”

Petihta verse 18:3 Sidra = ch. 18 (Lev. Rab. 23)

כְּמַעֲשֵׂ֧ה אֶֽרֶץ־מִצְרַ֛יִם אֲשֶׁ֥ר יְשַׁבְתֶּם־בָּ֖הּ לֹ֣א תַעֲשׂ֑וּ…

You shall not copy the practices of the land of Egypt where you dwelt…

סדרת “קדשים תהיו”

Petihta verse 19:2 Sidra = 19:1-19:22 (Lev. Rab. 24)

…קְדֹשִׁ֣ים תִּהְי֑וּ כִּ֣י קָד֔וֹשׁ אֲנִ֖י יְ-הֹוָ֥ה אֱלֹהֵיכֶֽם:

…You shall be holy, for I, YHWH, your God, am holy.

סדרת “ונטעתם”

Petihta verse 19:23 Sidra = 19:23–20:27 (Lev. Rab. 25)

וְכִי־תָבֹ֣אוּ אֶל־הָאָ֗רֶץ וּנְטַעְתֶּם֙ כָּל־עֵ֣ץ מַאֲכָ֔ל וַעֲרַלְתֶּ֥ם עָרְלָת֖וֹ אֶת־פִּרְי֑וֹ שָׁלֹ֣שׁ שָׁנִ֗ים יִהְיֶ֥ה לָכֶ֛ם עֲרֵלִ֖ים לֹ֥א יֵאָכֵֽל:

When you enter the land and plant any tree for food, you shall regard its fruit as forbidden. Three years it shall be forbidden for you, not to be eaten.

This same tradition appears in Leviticus Rabbah, Kedoshim 24:5 in the name of Rabbi Hiyya.

We should recall that Lev. Rab. includes homilies not only for the sidrot but also for lections aimed at festivals and special occasions. Thus, the inclusion of a homily for Kedoshim in Lev. Rab. does not necessarily indicate the use of Kedoshim as the beginning of a weekly lection.