Worth Waiting For

Headshot of Gail Labovitz
Headshot of Gail Labovitz
Rabbi Gail Labovitz, PhD

Professor, Rabbinic Studies

Ziegler School of Rabbinic Studies

Rabbi Gail Labovitz, PhD, is Associate Professor of Rabbinic Literature and former Chair of the Department of Rabbinics for the Ziegler School of Rabbinic Studies. She also enjoys serving as the Ziegler School’s faculty advisor for “InterSem,” a dialogue program for students training for religious leadership at Jewish and Christian seminaries around the Los Angeles area. Dr. Labovitz formerly taught at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America (JTS) and the Academy for Jewish Religion in New York. Prior to joining the faculty at AJU, Dr. Labovitz worked as the Senior Research Analyst in Judaism for the Feminist Sexual Ethics Project at Brandeis University, and as the Coordinator for the Jewish Women’s Research Group, a project of the Women’s Studies Program at JTS. Rabbi Labovitz is also preparing a teshuva (rabbinic responsum) for consideration by the Committee on Jewish Law and Standards of the Rabbinical Assembly on whether a person who is unable to fast for medical reasons may nonetheless serve as a leader of communal prayer on Yom Kippur.

posted on April 30, 2011
Torah Reading
Haftarah Reading

Several years ago, at the end of Sukkot, I cut open one of our etrogim and extracted a number of seeds. These I planted in pots and in several places around our yard. Thanks to the help of our friend, Ruth, who has the greenest thumb of anyone I know - and no intervention of my own, my thumb being not at all green - several of the potted seeds sprouted and began to grow. This spring, again under Ruth's guidance, the gardeners replanted the two tallest trees, one in our backyard and one out front of our house. So far, both seem to be happy in their new locations. God willing, some day we will have our own homegrown etrogim with which to celebrate the holiday of Sukkot.

But that's a ways off, I think. Right now, neither tree is very tall; both come up to about my hips or my waist, and I am not a tall person. Neither has given any sign of being ready to produce fruit any time soon. My son is already getting impatient, however (he is a teenager, after all). The other day, he proved in one fell swoop that all those years and dollars of day school tuition have not been wasted by asking me: "We aren't going to have to do that thing where you don't use the fruit for the first three years, are we?"

What he is referring to is an obscure commandment found in this week's parashah, Lev. 19:23-25:

Image removed. 

23 And when you come into the Land, and you plant all kinds of trees for food, you shall consider its fruit uncircumcised, three years it will be uncircumcised to you, it shall not be eaten. 24 And in the fourth year all its fruit shall be holy, for giving praise to the Lord. 25 And in the fifth year you may eat its fruit, that it may increase its produce for you, I am the Lord your God.

So first, let me try to answer my son's question. I'm not an expert in this area of law (how many of us are?), but after some brief research, I believe the factors to be taken into consideration are these: (a) This would appear to be a commandment that falls into the category "commandments that are dependent on the Land" (Mishnah Kiddushin 1:9), that is, agricultural laws that are observed only in the Land of Israel. After all, verse 23 says explicitly "when you come into the Land." But according to rabbinic law (actually, the rabbis consider this to be a special law given to Moses on Sinai; see Bavli Kiddushin 39a), this commandment applies everywhere - or rather, the three year ban on eating the fruit still applies; the requirement to dedicate the fruit to God in the fourth year cannot be observed outside of the Land or in the absence of the Temple. Thus, despite living in California and not Israel, we are indeed bound by this law; (b) Replanting a tree may begin its three year count again, depending on how the replanting was done (most particularly, was it replanted with some of its original soil or not); (c) Tu b'Shvat is known as the "new year for trees" - and this is one of the situations in which that has actual legal consequences. Presuming the age of our etrog trees is counted from the time they were replanted in the soil around our house, we will not actually have to wait an entire year to consider the trees one year old. As of Tu b'Shvat, the first year of waiting is complete and the second year begins. Moreover, three years is three years, even if our trees are not ready to produce fruit for some time longer than that. Therefore, no later than Sukkot of 5775, our etrogim, presuming either tree has yet grown any, will be "good to go."

This is a strange commandment in a number of ways, and raises a number of questions. To list just a few:

  • Why can't a tree's fruit be used right away?

  • What does it mean to call fruit "uncircumcised"?

  • The running theme of this parashah is that we should "Be holy." In what way does observing this commandment help us holy?

These questions, of course, are - or can be seen as - interconnected. There are several answers that have been given by rabbis and scholars over the course of Jewish history, but I'd like to look at two comments, one from the classical midrash and one from the medieval commentator, Ramban, that share a similar focus. First, an observation attributed to Rabbi Akiva and recorded in Vayikra Rabbah, 25:6:

Image removed. 

Rabbi Akiva says: There are four types of orlah (lack of circumcision). Lack of circumcision is mentioned regarding the ear: "Behold, their ear is uncircumcised [and they cannot listen...]" (Jer. 6:10). Lack of circumcision is mentioned regarding the mouth: "I am of uncircumcised lips" (Ex. 6:30). Lack of circumcision is mentioned regarding the heart: "And all of the House of Israel are uncircumcised of heart" (Jer. 9:25). And it is written, "[the Lord appeared to Avram and said to him...] Walk before me and be whole(hearted) (Gen. 17:1)...One must say this is circumcision of the body.

That this statement is part of the commentary to these verses demonstrates that there is a connection between these other forms of "uncircumcision" and the "uncircumcision" of the fruit from a newly planted tree. The midrash does not, however, explain how that connection might work or what it might mean. About a millennium later, Ramban draws out the comparison a little further:

Image removed. 

"you shall consider its fruit uncircumcised" - You shall consider it closed off: it will closed off and hidden from benefit. This is Rashi's language, and he explained well. And if this is so, "uncircumcised of heart" (Ezek. 44:9) would be "closed of heart," as it is said, "and I will tear their closed up heart" (Hosea 13:8). And so too "their ear is uncircumcised [and they cannot listen...]" (Jer. 6:10) - that it is closed and sealed off, the sound does not enter it. And "of uncircumcised lips" (Ex. 6:12) - of sealed lips...And speech is called "opening": "Open your mouth for the mute" (Prov. 31:8), "Job opened his mouth" (Job 3:1), "the opening of my lips shall be right things" (Prov. 8:6), "guard the doors of your mouth from her who lies in your bosom" (Micah 7:5).

Scripture mentions the closed-off-ness of the fruit that comes within three years so as to forbid one from getting any benefit (from it)...Because the coming of the fruit at the beginning is called "opening," as it is said "the grape blossom has opened" (Song of Songs 7:13). Therefore it said "three years it will be uncircumcised to you," as if the fruits were closed up on the trees, (and) they did not give out flowers and the blossoms had not opened.

Ramban's comment helps on the level of linguistics and language, a basic understanding of why this word, arel, can fit in this context. What is more, he suggests to us a web of connections between biblical verses that link a lack of circumcision with the state of being closed off, and identify the lack of circumcision as the opposite of openness. But I'm still not sure what it is about fruit that links its state of "uncircumcision" to the other examples both Rabbi Akiva and Ramban cite, or how they help explain how and why fruit can be "uncircumcised."

So as I pondered this, I wondered if I weren't coming at this the wrong way around. What if it is not other types of non-circumcision that can teach us how and why new fruit can be "uncircumcised," but new fruit that can teach us something about the closing or opening of our ears, hearts, mouths, and bodies? As Ramban hints, even when fruit first appears to be opening, it may not yet be truly open. He goes on to suggest that the early fruit of the tree still isn't really ready for consumption; it's sparse and hasn't yet achieved its full odor and taste. For this reason, it still "lacks circumcision."

That circumcision happens in two ways: time/additional development, and dedication to God. And perhaps so too with the process of opening our ears, our hearts, our mouths, our bodies. Going from closed to open is a process, not an instantaneous transition that takes place in a moment. Opening begins, but we are not yet truly open. Our openness needs to develop, to come of age. We need to work at it, cultivate it, and be patient. And then we need to treat our open hearts, ears, mouths, and bodies as holy, and dedicate them to God. Then, and only then, will we be able to fully and properly enjoy the fruits of our labors.

Shabbat shalom.