Commentary for Kiddushin 58:2
ר' יהודה סבר מלוה דכתיב בתורה ככתובה בשטר דמיא בהני חמש פריק לבריה ואזיל כהן וטריף ליה לחמש משועבדים לדידיה
They differ when there are five sela's [worth of property] sold<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [Before the birth of his son, v. Tosaf.]');"><sup>1</sup></span> and five sela's free. R'Judah holds: A debt decreed in Scripture is as one indited in a bond:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence the five sela's he owes for his own redemption is like a written liability, contracted before he sold the land, and therefore his creditor, i.e., the priest to whom the redemption money is due, can distrain upon this property.');"><sup>2</sup></span>
Daf Shevui to Kiddushin
R. Yirmiyah limits the dispute in the baraita. If the father really has only five selas, then he redeems himself and not his son. There is only a dispute if the father has five selas that are free and five selas that have a lien over them, meaning he used them to secure a loan or he sold them. According to R. Judah, the “lien” of the Kohen on the five selas owed for the redemption of the father is like a debt written in a document, and therefore it can be collected even from property encumbered with a lien. So the priests would seize five selas worth of land and with this the father would be redeemed. The father can then use the free five selas to redeem himself. But the other rabbis hold that the debt of the five selas cannot be taken from encumbered property. Therefore, he really only has five selas with which he is to redeem himself.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy