Commentary for Kiddushin 40:21
מה למוכר שדה אחוזה שכן הורע כחו ליגאל מיד תאמר במקדיש שיפה כחו ליגאל מיד
He raised an objection: 'And if he will indeed redeem it': this teaches that he may borrow and redeem, and redeem half. For I might have thought, does it [the reverse] not follow a minori: if he who sells 'a field of possession', whose privilege is great in that if jubilee comes and it has not been redeemed it reverts to its original owner, yet his power is impaired in that he cannot borrow and redeem, and redeem half; then he who sanctifies, whose rights are impaired in that if jubilee comes and it has not been redeemed it goes out to the priests at jubilee, it surely follows that his rights are [also] impaired so that he cannot borrow and redeem, and redeem half.
Daf Shevui to Kiddushin
The baraita now continues and argues that deriving the law about one who consecrates his field from one who sells his field is not possible, because the latter cannot redeem his field immediately, whereas the former can. To prove therefore that it would have been logical to claim that one who consecrates his field cannot redeem half, the baraita turns to the one who sells a house in a walled city. He too can redeem immediately, and yet he can still redeem half. This final line is where the difficulty on R. Sheshet lies—it proves that one who sells a house in a walled city cannot redeem half.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy