ורבנן סברי מלוה דכתיב באורייתא לאו ככתובה בשטר דמיא והילכך מצוה דגופיה עדיף
hence, with these five sela's [that are free] he redeems his son, while the priest goes and seizes the five sela's [worth] that is sold on account of himself [the father]. But the Rabbis maintain, A debt decreed in Scripture is not as one indited in a bond; therefore a precept touching his own person is more important.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For a creditor can distrain upon mortgaged property that is sold only if he holds a note against the debt.');"><sup>3</sup></span> Our Rabbis taught: If one has his son to redeem and the duty of making the festival pilgrimage,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On Passover, Pentecost, and Tabernacles every male was to visit the Temple at Jerusalem: Deut. XVI, 16.');"><sup>4</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
