I'm not clear what you are suggesting here? That those tribes never settled in the lands that were allotted to them? That would definitely not be true, we have many verses saying they did (not sure exactly when but eventually). Or just that they didn't expel all the Canaanites right away? That's true, but they didn't expel all the Canaanites from Yehudah either. But eventually the Canaanites went extinct.
We have verses saying that Shimon and Dan settled, but did that happen in *their* land (remember: Shimon was entirely landlocked within Yehuda: was that what was supposed to happen?)
> "but they didn't expel all the Canaanites from Yehudah either."
That reminds me, where was Reuven and Gad supposed to be before they decided on עבר הירדן? It seems perhaps that there was some unspecified degree of freedom that wasn't fully captured by the גורל.
I'll have to look into Shimon and Dan specifically, I was thinking of Naftali and others. But let's say you're right, eventually the Canaanites went extinct and all their land was taken by somebody. Who?
To me, the bigger question is about the Plishtim. From many pesukim it seems that was part of the promised land. But they were never expelled during the Bayis Rishon...
The Radak בראשית כו:כג says that even though the land of the Plishtim is part of Eretz Yisrael, it won't be in our hands until the time of mashiach. Maybe he can help clarify. (With gratitude to Rav Chaim Soloveitchik of Ramat Beit Shemesh who told me about this radak).
The area of the פלישתים was part of א"י but the פלישתים themselves were not from the ז עממין [see רמב"ן דברים פ"ב כג' ד"ה והנראה בעיני] so there was no requirement to kill them, just to be כובש their land. [כיבוש מעלה מסים]. Perhaps they were under the control of ארץ ישראל. [even though they had kings]
See זבחים קיח עמוד ב where the גמ establishes that there were 7 years of division "מדשבע כבשו שבע נמי חלקו" [see חזו"א] I heard from ר שלמה פישר [IIRC I saw it afterwards in בית ישי] that from this גמ it seems that the שבע שכבשו ושבע שחלקו are not statements of historical fact but דינים. Of course they were still being כובש after 7 years, but there was a הלכה that in order to posses א"י they needed to spend 7 years conquering and then 7 years dividing it. The גמ is using a סברא to establish how many years did they have to spend doing חלוקה until א"י would become קדוש.
Interesting. Although we calculate shmita and yovel from the end of the first 14 years...so it would be problematic to say that we don't really mean *those* 14 years.
It does mean those 14 years. Just that שבע שכבשו doesn't mean that the כיבוש was completed at the end of those 7 years, just that they had fulfilled the requirement to engage in conquering א"י for 7 years. חז"ל were fully aware that it took many more years to finish conquering א"י.
You probably may recall at the time of the sinking of the Titanic, which had begun its return on Esru Chag, and one of the passengers, namely Natan Straus, delayed his departure from Israel where he had been encountering poverty stricken people and to whom his compassion and Tzdakkah would not free him until he missed the time to return on that ship, thus saving his life?
Regarding “in the context of terumos and shemita - my question is "why not?" When did we ever transition to the d'oraissa?”,
In Avot, where the discussion is about the tithes in the different years following the Shmittah year, Avot quotes Rabonim as having warned that war comes to The Land because or as a result of the tithe not having been given to the poor…—does this prove, or is their warning a proof that they had previously “transitioned to the d’oraissa”?
That is certainly a proof. One of many. In fact, I wasn't clear enough in the article: there's no question that the transition happened, I'm just not sure what triggered it and what Chazal meant when they said the transition depended on the events of those 14 years.
Perhaps I can humbly suggest that the significance of the end of the 14 years was not about conquering all the land. It was about all 12 tribes having an inheritance and being able to settle therein, whether or not that was what was "originally" intended for them. The tribes of Reuven and Gad apparently were supposed to settle west of the Jordan until they requested to settle on the east bank. Once the 14 years were completed, enough land was conquered so as to allow the Jewish people to live in the Land of Israel as a nation. The fact that some of the land was not yet conquered is clearly irrelevant, as some of it was never conquered, and the Radak בראשית כו:כג says there are parts of Eretz Yisrael which won't be in our hands until the times of mashiach. At the end of the 14 year period, each of the tribes had enough of a hold over their portion so as to settle in a reasonable manner. The situation was likely similar to what we have today in the Binyamin, Yehuda and Shomron areas, where Jewish towns thrive next to enemy enclaves. It doesn't prevent us from settling our inheritance, though it does cause serious problems as it did back then.
I guess that's possible. Although the fact that there were clearly seven shevatim who had definitely not settled or even identified their lands after the end of the 14 years does make that a bit difficult.
That's possible. But the Ritva (to Kesuvos) and others seem to say that rubo k'kulo was used to be mechayav challah during the first 14 years. But that implies it wouldn't have been enough to trigger the 14 transition.
And, it seems they didn't even get to rubo - there were still seven tribes who weren't settled.
I'm not clear what you are suggesting here? That those tribes never settled in the lands that were allotted to them? That would definitely not be true, we have many verses saying they did (not sure exactly when but eventually). Or just that they didn't expel all the Canaanites right away? That's true, but they didn't expel all the Canaanites from Yehudah either. But eventually the Canaanites went extinct.
> "we have many verses saying they did"
We have verses saying that Shimon and Dan settled, but did that happen in *their* land (remember: Shimon was entirely landlocked within Yehuda: was that what was supposed to happen?)
> "but they didn't expel all the Canaanites from Yehudah either."
Indeed. Which makes the question even stronger.
The Ramban on בראשית מט:ה seems to say Shimon was supposed to be within Yehuda.
That reminds me, where was Reuven and Gad supposed to be before they decided on עבר הירדן? It seems perhaps that there was some unspecified degree of freedom that wasn't fully captured by the גורל.
I'll have to look into Shimon and Dan specifically, I was thinking of Naftali and others. But let's say you're right, eventually the Canaanites went extinct and all their land was taken by somebody. Who?
To me, the bigger question is about the Plishtim. From many pesukim it seems that was part of the promised land. But they were never expelled during the Bayis Rishon...
The Radak בראשית כו:כג says that even though the land of the Plishtim is part of Eretz Yisrael, it won't be in our hands until the time of mashiach. Maybe he can help clarify. (With gratitude to Rav Chaim Soloveitchik of Ramat Beit Shemesh who told me about this radak).
The area of the פלישתים was part of א"י but the פלישתים themselves were not from the ז עממין [see רמב"ן דברים פ"ב כג' ד"ה והנראה בעיני] so there was no requirement to kill them, just to be כובש their land. [כיבוש מעלה מסים]. Perhaps they were under the control of ארץ ישראל. [even though they had kings]
See זבחים קיח עמוד ב where the גמ establishes that there were 7 years of division "מדשבע כבשו שבע נמי חלקו" [see חזו"א] I heard from ר שלמה פישר [IIRC I saw it afterwards in בית ישי] that from this גמ it seems that the שבע שכבשו ושבע שחלקו are not statements of historical fact but דינים. Of course they were still being כובש after 7 years, but there was a הלכה that in order to posses א"י they needed to spend 7 years conquering and then 7 years dividing it. The גמ is using a סברא to establish how many years did they have to spend doing חלוקה until א"י would become קדוש.
Interesting. Although we calculate shmita and yovel from the end of the first 14 years...so it would be problematic to say that we don't really mean *those* 14 years.
It does mean those 14 years. Just that שבע שכבשו doesn't mean that the כיבוש was completed at the end of those 7 years, just that they had fulfilled the requirement to engage in conquering א"י for 7 years. חז"ל were fully aware that it took many more years to finish conquering א"י.
Same with שבע שחילקו.
I don't understand. Is the ritva saying challah isn't מדאורייתא (even in Israel) today because we never conquered the land
He's definitely not saying that. But - in the context of terumos and shemita - my question is "why not?" When did we ever transition to the d'oraissa?
You probably may recall at the time of the sinking of the Titanic, which had begun its return on Esru Chag, and one of the passengers, namely Natan Straus, delayed his departure from Israel where he had been encountering poverty stricken people and to whom his compassion and Tzdakkah would not free him until he missed the time to return on that ship, thus saving his life?
Regarding “in the context of terumos and shemita - my question is "why not?" When did we ever transition to the d'oraissa?”,
In Avot, where the discussion is about the tithes in the different years following the Shmittah year, Avot quotes Rabonim as having warned that war comes to The Land because or as a result of the tithe not having been given to the poor…—does this prove, or is their warning a proof that they had previously “transitioned to the d’oraissa”?
That is certainly a proof. One of many. In fact, I wasn't clear enough in the article: there's no question that the transition happened, I'm just not sure what triggered it and what Chazal meant when they said the transition depended on the events of those 14 years.
I'd actually never heard that. Nice.
Perhaps I can humbly suggest that the significance of the end of the 14 years was not about conquering all the land. It was about all 12 tribes having an inheritance and being able to settle therein, whether or not that was what was "originally" intended for them. The tribes of Reuven and Gad apparently were supposed to settle west of the Jordan until they requested to settle on the east bank. Once the 14 years were completed, enough land was conquered so as to allow the Jewish people to live in the Land of Israel as a nation. The fact that some of the land was not yet conquered is clearly irrelevant, as some of it was never conquered, and the Radak בראשית כו:כג says there are parts of Eretz Yisrael which won't be in our hands until the times of mashiach. At the end of the 14 year period, each of the tribes had enough of a hold over their portion so as to settle in a reasonable manner. The situation was likely similar to what we have today in the Binyamin, Yehuda and Shomron areas, where Jewish towns thrive next to enemy enclaves. It doesn't prevent us from settling our inheritance, though it does cause serious problems as it did back then.
I guess that's possible. Although the fact that there were clearly seven shevatim who had definitely not settled or even identified their lands after the end of the 14 years does make that a bit difficult.
That's possible. But the Ritva (to Kesuvos) and others seem to say that rubo k'kulo was used to be mechayav challah during the first 14 years. But that implies it wouldn't have been enough to trigger the 14 transition.
And, it seems they didn't even get to rubo - there were still seven tribes who weren't settled.