Do not abandon the Levi

---

SMG

[There is a negative Mitzva] prohibiting the abandonment of the Levi’im [during the holidays]. Instead, they are provided with their sustenance needs, and we also provide them with that which will render their holiday joyous for each of the holidays, as it says in the verse[i] השמר לך פן תעזב (את) הלוי.

It is a Mitzva to cause one’s children and household members joy on the holiday, (including) by offering the peace offerings for the holiday, and the peace offerings for joy (which are eaten together with the family members). This does not only apply to one’s children and family members, as it says in the verse[ii] והלוי והגר והיתום והאלמנה as we explained [in positive Mitzva 229]. This Mitzva applies in particular to the Levi’im more than the other categories, because [as stated in the verse[iii]] אין לו חלק ונחלה עמך, nor do they receive gifts from the meat [being slaughtered for the holidays, as do the Kohanim]. And anyone who abandons Levi’im by refusing to cause him joy, or he delays paying his tithing obligations until after the holidays, is violating this negative Mitzva, as it says in the verse השמר לך פן תעזב את הלוי כל ימיך על אדמתך.

[However, this negative Mitzva technically only applies] so long as the Jewish people are living in their land.

And [this phrase used by the Torah is the proscription of a negative Mitzva], as Rabbi Ila’I stated[iv] anytime the Torah uses the terms השמר, פן, אל – those phrases are the statements of a negative Mitzva.

---

[i] Devarim 12:19

[ii] Devarim 16:14

[iii] Devarim 14:27

[iv] Gem. Makos 13b

---

AMUDAY SHLOMO

[The Amuday Shlomo – negative Mitzvos manuscript ends with Negative Mitzva 264. Presumably his manuscript was never completed, or his notes on the remaining negative Mitzvos were lost.]

---

RASHI

Rashi provides the following commentary on this verse:

• השמר לך – this provides a negative Mitzva for this.
• על אדמתך – however, in the diaspora one is not admonished about him [the Levi] any more than the other poor among the Jewish people.

On the verse אין לו חלק ונחלה, Rashi provides the following commentary:

• כי אין לו חלק ונחלה עמך – which excludes the obligations of לקט [positive Mitzva 157] שכחה [positive Mitzva 158] פאה [positive Mitzva 156] and ownerless materials, as he [the Levi] does have a portion in them just as you do, and [therefore] one is not obligated to tithe from them. [see positive Mitzva 135]
• והלוי לא תעזבנו – from giving him the first tithe.

---

Discussion by SMS

In Rambam’s first chapter of the laws of tithing[i], he notes that during the establishment of the second Jewish commonwealth, most of the Levi’im refused to emigrate from Babylon.[ii] Ezra therefore decreed that the tithing obligations that should go to the Levi’im instead should go to the Kohanim.

Although technically this was permissible because Kohanim are also from the tribe of Levi, which is why when there is no Levi present during the reading of the Torah, a Kohen can take the place of the Levi. However, this seems to be a technicality that specifically violates this Mitzva – meaning the ability of the Kohen to step in to replace the Levi is only when there is no Levi. But when there is a Levi, they don’t forfeit their rights to receive the gifts allotted to them, and, if one deliberately did so, wouldn’t that violate this negative Mitzva? Especially since, as the SMG notes, the reason for this Mitzva is given as “nor do they receive gifts from the meat” – which the Kohanim do.

The מנחת חינוך preceded me and asked this question already. His answer is that during the time of Ezra, during the establishment of the second commonwealth, the obligation to give Ma’aser was only Rabbinic. Therefore, Ezra was able to change the Rabbinic Mitzva.

Others answer that Rambam adds the caveat בזמנו – in his [Ezra’s] time. It was only a temporary penalty instituted.

---

[i] הלכות מעשר 1:4

[ii] Ezra 8:15

---