Ownership of the Land of Israel
YOSSI ARON
“And the land shall not be sold for permanent possession for the land is Mine, for only strangers and sojourners you are with me. And in the whole land of your possession you shall grant ‘geulat ha’aretz’ — a redemption back for the land.” (Vayikra 25: 23-4)
AS recently promulgated land reform legislation results in changes to the Israel Lands Authority (ILA) and privatisation of ownership of some land in Israel, there is room to ponder the relationship between current structures for the possession and use of land in Israel compared to those of earlier times.
Perhaps one might start by referring to a custom that has developed in recent times here in Australia. Politicians and other speakers at important occasions often commence their presentations by giving respect to the traditional owners of the land on which a particular function venue is located.
It would indeed be a good idea if, whenever we refer to Israel in general and Jerusalem in particular, we too paid our respects to the original owners of that land -— our ancestors -— and also asked others, even if not of our faith, to do likewise.
Any political spin-off aside, such an approach would constantly remind us that our land indeed belongs to our nation from antiquity, and that from the perspective of the Bible, which is so important to western civilisation, its ownership cannot be determined by the whim of any ­individual.
For with the exception of houses in walled cities, the Torah has a fascinating approach to the ownership and sale of land in Israel. Basically, all land was the property of the nation as divided into the tribes. Individual ownership was neither absolute nor unfettered.
Should one for any reason be constrained to sell a property, one effectively only sold the number of seasonal crops to be grown pending the yovel -— the jubilee year (Vayikra 25:16). There was no such concept as permanent sale -— permanent transfer of a property from its traditional owners.
Land ownership following sale was a form of leasehold for up to 49 years; beyond that allotted time span, only an original owner (and his heirs) had the right to enjoy its fruits.
And significant strictures on agricultural work and the use of produce during sh’mitah and yovel reminded even rightful traditional owners that even while properties were in their possession, there were constraints on utilising them and their produce as solely their own.
So much for the legislation that governed our ownership of the land at the outset of our national existence.
But beyond biblical days, our nation has also long had a predilection for national rather than individual ownership. The advent of Zionism saw emphasis on what was again termed “geulat ha’aretz” — redemption of the land. The shekel and the Blue Box became the means of repurchase of lands that were ancestrally ours.
And once acquired on behalf of Jewry, those lands were not to be again disbursed to individuals -— even to Jews. They were to remain a national heritage and 49-year leaseholds -— patterned on the biblical precedent -— were to be the norm.
Already in his famed book Altneuland, Theodor Herzl envisaged acquisition of land by a Jewish company; that land would remain under common national ownership and be given out for cultivation and other uses only through leasing. The early Zionist Congresses resulted in establishment of a geulah (redemption) company to purchase land to achieve Zionist ends.
And once established, the Jewish National Fund (JNF) too only leased land to potential settlers, whether for the purposes of a kibbutz, moshav or even an urban settlement. In his history of the early development of the JNF, Zvi Shilony specifies that the call by originator of the JNF, Professor Zvi Hirsch Shapira, for such a basis of national ownership of land, was rooted “in a sentimental veneration for biblical concepts combined with an adherence to traditional notions of communal solidarity”.
More recently, even in the context of movement towards longer leases for a longer period, the leasing concept remained supreme and the original yovel, based 49-year leasing span, was simply doubled in length to 98 years.
Apparently, the new privatisation initiative relates to some 80,000 hectares, roughly four per cent of land currently controlled by the ILA.
Most affected properties are smaller urban lots -— so albeit that our cities are not walled, even this development in some ways reflects the biblical precedent for a difference between ownership structures of city houses and rural land.
May the streamlining of regulations and procedures expected to arise from this latest legislative development only facilitate the sacred aim of our nation -— yishuv ha’aretz -— the settlement and population of the land.
Yossi Aron is The AJN‘s religious affairs editor.
comments