נחלה ללויים לעתיד לבוא? – Summary, Analysis, and Footnotes

I. The Basic Debate: Will Leviim Receive a נחלה in the Messianic Era?

The Torah repeatedly prohibits and describes the absence of נחלה (apportioned land) for שבט לוי in Eretz Yisrael.
Footnote 1:
- במדבר יח:כ (for כהנים: “בארצם לא תנחל…”), רש”י (even spoils), רמב”ן (even cities are only for service, not נחלה), במדבר יח:כד (for לוים), דברים י:ט; דברים יח:א-ב; במדבר לה:א-ח (ערי לוים).
End of Footnote 1.

This prohibition is not only descriptive but also a Biblical commandment, as codified by the Rambam.
Footnote 2:
- Rambam Sefer HaMitzvot Lo Taaseh 169, 170; citing Devarim 18.
- Rambam explains why both land and spoils are counted as separate prohibitions, but both are subsumed under the general rule for all Leviim (see also Sifrei, and Yevamot 5a regarding unique laws for kohanim).
End of Footnote 2.

Messianic Times – The Core Debate

  • Gemara (Bava Basra 122a): The Land will be divided into 13 portions לעתיד לבוא (in Messianic times).
  • Rashbam: Cites Yechezkel that Leviim will get a נחלה then.
  • Ran (Chiddushei HaRan): Argues Leviim will never get a נחלה.
  • Semag: Prominent among Rishonim agreeing with Rashbam.

Three Major Questions Raised:

  1. Eternal Mitzvot? Rambam (Sefer HaMitzvot) only counts eternal prohibitions—so how can the prohibition against Leviim receiving land be included, if it will be nullified in the future? This is especially pressing for the סמ”ג.
  2. Prophetic Authority? Minchat Chinuch: A prophet cannot uproot Torah law—how can Yechezkel say Leviim will receive נחלה?
  3. Replacement for Terumot/Maasrot? Mishneh Lamelech (Parshat Derachim, citing Raavad): If the isur of נחלה is tied to Leviim receiving terumot/maasrot, letting them get land would imply removal of those gifts. But Gemara (Sanhedrin 90) says Leviim will get terumot/maasrot even לעתיד לבוא!

For the Ran, these are moot—Leviim never get a נחלה.

II. Two Models to Reconcile the Sources

1. Gift Model (Rav Jolty/Mishnat Yaavetz; Ohr HaChaim; Netziv)

  • Leviim never get a formal נחלה, but may be gifted land by the rest of Israel or by God.
  • This fits the isur’s eternality: The prohibition is not violated if the land is a gift, not an apportionment.
  • Footnote 3: Netziv (Haamek Davar Vayikra 25:33) – God forced the tribes to give these lands as a gift.
  • This view solves all three questions above by distinguishing between “formal נחלה” and gifted property.
  • Challenge: Rashbam says Leviim receive נחלה “כשאר שבטי ישראל”, which sounds like a formal apportionment, not just a gift.

2. Dual-Aspect Model (Rav Turetsky)

  • נחלה in Israel includes both a monetary (קנין ממון) and a spiritual/issur (קנין איסור) component.
  • The prohibition is on the spiritual/issur side. In Messianic times, a new sanctity may allow only the monetary aspect to be renewed, not the issur.
  • This means Leviim’s future landholding could be a purely monetary נחלה, with no change in the sanctity structure.

III. Rambam, Raavad, and the Function of Gifts

  • Rambam (Shemitta v’Yovel 13:11): Prohibition applies only to land given to Avraham, Yitzchak, and Yaakov’s descendants. In other conquered lands, Leviim get portions like all Jews.
  • Raavad: Disagrees, since Leviim were given terumot/maasrot in place of נחלה, so wherever they get נחלה, they shouldn’t get these gifts.
  • Netziv: Sees the isur as evolving—originally tied to חלף עבודתם (their Temple service), but later became a fundamental status, especially for kohanim as “chelek Hashem.”
  • Rav Werblowsky: Suggests that לעתיד לבוא, only Leviim will get a portion, not kohanim, since their prohibitions are rooted in different principles.

IV. Reason for the Prohibition

  • Rambam: Leviim have no נחלה because they are set aside for service of God; their sustenance is through terumot/maasrot.
  • Netziv/Rabbi Yoni Levin: The prohibition is to prevent Leviim from having a formal role (like landowners or warriors); their cities (and war exemption) allow them to serve and teach the people without distraction.

V. Sifrei and the Nature of the Leviim’s Portion

  • Sifrei (Korach 119): Leviim and kohanim each have a covenant for their respective gifts; for Leviim, the gifts are “in place of נחלה,” and are only for those who serve.
  • Malbim and Netziv: See a debate in Sifrei whether the gifts are independent or a replacement for נחלה.

VI. Are the Levite Cities (ערי מקלט) a נחלה?

  • Initial View: Cities are mere gifts, not formal נחלה.
  • Sources Indicating Otherwise:
    • Vidui Maaser: Only those with נחלה perform it; Leviim do, implying their cities are a form of נחלה.
    • Yerushalmi, Makkot 13: Taxes in cities of refuge are paid to Leviim, implying ownership.
    • Rishonim on Berachot 20b: Rashi implies Leviim may be obligated in bentching because they have a נחלה.
  • Resolution (Rabbi Yoni Levin): The prohibition is only to prevent Leviim from being distracted from service/teaching. Their cities are dispersed among Israel to aid that role, so their owning them is not a violation, but a fulfillment of their mission.

VII. Sources Cited

  1. Torah: במדבר יח:כ, כד; דברים י:ט; דברים יח:א-ב; במדבר לה:א-ח
  2. Rashi, Ramban: on Bamidbar 18
  3. Rambam: Sefer HaMitzvot, Shemitta v’Yovel 13:11
  4. Sifrei Korach 119
  5. Gemara: Bava Basra 122a, Yevamot 5a, Sanhedrin 90a, Makkot 13
  6. Chiddushei HaRan Bava Basra 122
  7. Semag, Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh, Netziv Haamek Davar, Malbim
  8. Mishnat Yaavetz, Mishneh Lamelech (Parshat Derachim)
  9. Rabbi Yoni Levin, Sefer Kol Tzvi, Hov. 12
  10. Rishonim on Berachos 20b (Rashi, Tosafot, Shiltey Giborim)
  11. Yerushalmi Makkot 13
  12. Rav Jolty, Rav Werblowsky, Rav Turetsky’s shiurim