0

Can anyone help me with the final words of the quoted passage (below) from this commentary? Beginning with the asterisks, to the end. Thanks!

אבל הנשים של אותו דור צדקניות היו והיו אוהבים הצדקה, הן מצות חלה המיוחדת לנשים ותלויה בארץ, הן שאר תרומות ומעשרות ע"כ היו אוהבים את הארץ לילך למקום החיוב **כי סתם אשה אינה רשאית ושלטאה בנכסי בעלה ע"כ היה להם חפץ לילך למקום שהחוב מוטל על בעליהן ליתן

1 Answer 1

1

Because a typical woman does not have control over her husband's property, therefore they desired to go to a place where their husbands would be obligated to give [terumah and ma'aser].

His point is that the woman really wanted their husbands to give terumah and ma'aser. Outside Eretz Yisrael, only certain crops are obligated in teruma etc. even rabbinically, and the women had no way to get their husbands to plant those crops. Therefore, they wanted them to go to Eretz Yisrael where all crops are obligated in teruma etc., at least rabbinically.

6
  • 1
    A suggestion that you change the word “property” to “assets or money”. The emphasis is not about land, but the rights to movable property which in marriage is under control of the husband, even that earned by the wife. Once the Jewish people take possession of the land, they are obligated in the mitzvah of Challah, Terumah and Ma’aser on the produce and herds. Or by minhag, on the cash they earn. May 12 at 4:05
  • Thanks so much both
    – Zarka
    May 12 at 5:02
  • @YaacovDeane 1. I didn't think property implies land more than not land. 2. This has nothing to do with husband's control of wife's property; women did not generally receive portion in Israel, so not relevant. It's about women telling men what to plant in the men's fields.
    – N.T.
    May 12 at 7:53
  • @Zarka Glad to help.
    – N.T.
    May 12 at 7:55
  • @N.T. You are wrong about your assumptions and don’t understand what the Kli Yakar is discussing. The first line quoted by OP is discussing the subject of tzedakah. The righteous women desired the obligation aspect of the mitzvot. In regard their separating produce, they do not have the right to separate from their husband’s assets. But their husband has the obligation of the mitzvah. That is the emphasis of the 4th line quoted. May 12 at 15:56

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .