Arakhin 35

ואח"כ מתה בתו פקח ונתחרש וחזר ונתפקח פתוח ונסתמא ואח"כ נתפתח שפוי ונשתטה וחזר ונשתפה כשר

and after that his daughter [the father-in-law's i.e. his wife] died; or if he could hear, became deaf, and no regained his hearing; or if he could see, lost his sight, and now recovered it; or was of sound mind, lost his mind, and now recovered it, then he is eligible [as witness].

זה הכלל

This is the general rule: Whosoever was capable at the beginning and, again, at the end, is eligible?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Whereas above the condition was made that he must be of one quality or condition from the beginning to the end.');">¹</span>

כל שתחילתו וסופו בכשרות כשר

- It is different there because Scripture says: If he do no utter it, then he shall bear his iniquity.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. V, 1.');">²</span>

שאני התם דאמר קרא

the Divine Law has made the matter dependent on seeing and hearing, and that is found here.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Torah here insists that it is sufficient if he be fit at the time of seeing and telling, rendering his condition at any other time irrelevant.');">³</span>

(ויקרא ה, א) או ראה אם לא יגיד בראייה והגדה תלא רחמנא מילתא והא איכא

But then what is the need of: 'He being a witness'? - Because of what has been taught: If he saw a company of men standing, among whom are his witnesses, and he says: I adjure you that if you know a testimony on my behalf you come and testify for me, one might have assumed that they then are obliged [to do so], therefore the text states: 'He being a witness', whilst he has not singled out his witnesses.

ואלא והוא למה לי

One might assume that [the same applies] even if he said: Whosoever [of you knows a fact to testify to.

לכדתניא

etc.], therefore the text states: 'He being a witness', and he has singled them out.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He must single out those whom he adjures to give testimony on his behalf, because the Biblical 'He being a witness' indicates that a definite person must be involved. When the adjurer says: If someone among you knows etc., he speaks in general terms, hence does not affect those few who know among the majority who do not. But if he said: Whosoever of you knows, then he is addressing himself individually to each who does, hence he does oblige those who can give testimony on his behalf, to do so.');">⁴</span>

ראה סיאה של בני אדם עומדין ועידיו ביניהן ואמר

BUT IT IS NOT SO WITH OFFERINGS: IF HIS FATHER DIED AND LEFT HIM TEN THOUSAND etc. But then he is a rich man?

משביעני עליכם אם יודעים אתם לי עדות שתבואו ותעידוני יכול יהו חייבין

R'Abbuha said: Say, He was leaving him ten thousand.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He has not left him the money yet. He is still living, although in a dying condition. Yet, as long as he is alive, the Sanctuary has no claim whatsoever on the son, because the general experience that people in a dying condition die, does not, for the purpose of the law, assume that the person is dead, that the inheritance is available, but we say that the son now has no money yet.');">⁵</span>

ת"ל

But that is self-evident? - It means that his father lies in a dying condition.

(ויקרא ה, א) והוא עד והרי לא ייחד עידיו

You might have said: Most of the people in a dying condition really die, therefore we are informed [that the Sanctuary has nevertheless no claim].

יכול אפילו אמר כל מי

IF HIS BOAT IS ON THE SEA RETURNING TO HIM WITH TEN THOUSAND.

ת"ל

But then he is a rich man?

והוא עד והרי ייחד עידיו:

R'Hisda said: It refers to a case when he had rented out or hired it out to others.

אבל בקרבנות אינו כן וכו':

But there is the rent? - Rent is not payable before the end [of the contracted period].

אביו מת והניח לו ריבוא עשיר הוא

But derive [his richness] from his boat alone?

אמר ר' אבהו אימא

This is in accord with the view of R'Eliezer, for it was taught: If he was a farmer, they must leave him his yoke of oxen, and if he was an ass-driver, they must leave him his ass.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Just as the farmer's yoke of oxen are his 'tools' wherewith he earns his living; just as the ass-driver's ass for that reason may not be taken in pledge, so is this man's boat, a tool wherewith he earns his living and must not be taken either.');">⁶</span>

מניח לו ריבוא

<big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>'AS FOR THE YEARS THIS SHALL BE [VALUED] ACCORDING TO [THE AGE OF] HIM WHO IS VOWED'?

פשיטא

IF A CHILD EVALUATES AN OLD MAN.

כשהיה אביו גוסס מהו דתימא

HE MUST PAY THE VALUATION OF AN OLD MAN.

רוב גוססין למיתה קמ"ל

AND IF AN OLD MAN EVALUATES A CHILD.

ספינתו בים ובאה לו בריבואות עשיר הוא

HE MUST PAY THE VALUATION OF A CHILD.

אמר רב חסדא

AS FOR VALUATION: THIS SHALL BE ACCORDING TO HIM WHO IS THE SUBJECT OF THE VALUATION.

כשהיתה מוחכרת ומושכרת ביד אחרים

HOW IS THAT?

והאיכא שכירות

IF A MAN EVALUATED A WOMAN, HE MUST PAY THE VALUATION OF A WOMAN.

שכירות אינה משתלמת אלא לבסוף

AND IF A WOMAN EVALUATED A MAN, SHE MUST PAY THE VALUATION OF A MAN.'

ותיפוק ליה משום ספינה

AND THE VALUATION DEPENDS UPON THE TIME OF THE VALUATION'.

הא מני

HOW IS THAT?

ר"א היא

IF HE EVALUATED ONE WHO WAS LESS THAN FIVE YEARS OF AGE, AND HE BECAME [MEANTIME] OLDER THAN FIVE YEARS OF AGE; OR [HE EVALUATED ONE] WHO WAS LESS THAN TWENTY YEARS OF AGE AND HE BECAME TWENTY YEARS OLD.

דתנן רבי אליעזר אומר

HE MUST PAY [ONLY] IN ACCORD WITH THE AGE AT THE TIME OF THE VALUATION.

אם היה איכר נותן לו צמדו וחמר נותן לו חמורו:

<big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Our Rabbis taught: You have compared vows [of market value] to valuations, both with regard to [the valuation of] pearls for the poor,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' If a poor man owned a pearl which in his place of residence, for lack of demand, is worth but thirty sela's, whereas in a large town where there are many buyers, it would be worth fifty-one must assume that it is worth only what the poor man can get for it now, in his place of residence. The poor man who vowed his own valuation would hence not have to pay fifty sela's (if he were between twenty and fifty years of age) , although the pearl might fetch that price elsewhere. Now the same rule applies to the case of one who said: 'I take it upon myself to pay to the Sanctuary the value of this pearl'. Here, too since we compared valuation to vow of market-value, the vower would have to pay the lower price. The comparison, based on analogy of expression, is found supra 2a.');">⁷</span>

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> השנים בנידר כיצד

and to the rule that the value of a limb be judged in accord with its importance.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 4b,');">⁸</span>

ילד שהעריך זקן נותן ערך זקן וזקן שהעריך את הילד נותן ערך ילד

One might have assumed that we shall compare valuations with vows of market value also with regard to the rule that there, too, he shall have to pay its value according to the time of the payment,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When the worth of the person who is the subject of the vow is valued.');">⁹</span>

הערכין בנערך כיצד

therefore it is said: According to thy valuation it shall stand,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXVII, 17.');">¹⁰</span>

איש שהעריך האשה נותן ערך אשה ואשה שהעריכה איש נותנת ערך איש

i.e., [in the case of valuation] he shall pay only as much as it was worth at the time of the valuation.

והערך בזמן הערך כיצד

<big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>THE THIRTIETH DAY IS ACCOUNTED UNDER THIS AGE.

העריכו פחות מבן חמש ונעשה יתר על בן חמש פחות מבן עשרים ונעשה יתר על בן עשרים נותן בזמן הערך:

THE FIFTH YEAR OR TWENTIETH YEAR IS ACCOUNTED UNDER THIS AGE.

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> ת"ר

FOR IT IS WRITTEN: AND IF IT BE FROM SIXTY YEARS OLD AND UPWARD.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXVII, 7.');">¹¹</span>

אתה הקשית דמים לערכין מרגלית לקלים ולידון בכבודו יכול נקיש ערכין לדמים שיתן כשעת נתינה

WE LEARN THUS WITH REGARD TO ALL OTHERS FROM WHAT IS SAID ABOUT SIXTY YEARS: JUST AS THE SIXTIETH YEAR IS ACCOUNTED UNDER THIS AGE.

ת"ל

SO ALSO THE FIFTH AND TWENTIETH YEARS ARE ACCOUNTED UNDER THIS AGE.

(ויקרא כז, יב) כערכך (כן) יקום אינו נותן אלא בזמן הערך:

WHAT! BECAUSE [THE TORAH] HAS RECKONED THE SIXTIETH YEAR TO BE UNDER THIS AGE, THEREBY BEING MORE STRINGENT, SHALL THE FIFTH OR THE TWENTIETH YEAR BE CONSIDERED UNDER THIS AGE.

<big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> יום שלשים כלמטה הימנה שנת חמש ושנת עשרים כלמטה מהם

WHEREBY IT WOULD BE MORE LENIENT?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The valuation from twenty to sixty is fifty shekels. From sixty up it is fifteen. From five to twenty, twenty shekels. Now the Torah in considering one of sixty years to be under age, imposes upon the vower the highest payment - a stringency. Would one stretch the analogy so far as to do just the opposite: to lower the payment by considering one of twenty to be nineteen, which would mean reducing the sum due from fifty shekels to twenty?');">¹²</span>

שנאמר

TO TEACH US THAT, IT IS SAID: 'YEARS', 'YEARS' TO SET FORTH THIS ANALOGY: JUST AS WITH THE SIXTIETH YEAR THE WORD 'YEARS' MEANS THAT IT BE RECKONED UNDER AGE, SO THE WORD YEARS' WITH THE FIFTH AND WITH THE TWENTIETH YEAR MEANS THAT IT IS TO BE RECKONED UNDER AGE, NO MATTER WHETHER IT BEARS LENIENTLY OR STRINGENTLY.

(ויקרא כז, ז) ואם מבן ששים שנה ומעלה הרי אנו למדים בכולן משנת ששים מה שנת ששים כלמטה הימנה אף שנת חמש ושנת עשרים כלמטה הימנה

R'ELEAZAR SAYS: [THIS RULE HOLDS GOOD] UNTIL THEY ARE A MONTH AND A DAY BEYOND THE YEARS CONCERNED.

הן

<big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Now this is superfluous,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Mufneh'; lit., 'free, empty, disengaged'. It means that the identical expression, the gezerah shawah (v. Glos.) occurring in two different texts, has not been engaged for any deduction or interpretation, thus is 'free' and legitimately a source of comparison for the case in question. The repetition of the word 'years'. which has no meaning in the context, and which suggests no other teaching. thereby justifies the inferences made here from the analogous expression.');">¹³</span>

אם עשה שנת ששים כלמטה ממנה להחמיר נעשה שנת חמש ושנת עשרים כלמטה ממנו להקל

for were that not the case, it could be refuted as we did.

ת"ל

For [the fa is that] the words 'years', 'years' are written superfluously.

שנה שנה לגזירה שוה מה שנה האמורה בשנת ששים כלמטה אף שנה האמורה משנת חמש ושנת עשרים כלמטה ממנו בין להקל ובין להחמיר

Shall we say that our Mishnah is not in accord with Rabbi; for if it were in accord with Rabbi, surely he said: 'Until' is meant to be inclusive.

ר"א אומר

For it was taught: [It is written:] From the first day until the seventh day.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ex. XII, 15.');">¹⁴</span>

עד שיהו יתירות על השנים חדש ויום אחד:

One might have assumed [this to mean]: 'From the first day on' but the first not included, and 'until the seventh day' but the seventh day not included,

<big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> מופנה דאי לא מופנה איכא למיפרך כדפרכינן שנה שנה יתירי כתיבי

לימא מתני' דלא כרבי דאי רבי האמר

עד ועד בכלל

דתניא

(שמות יב, טו) מיום הראשון ועד יום השביעי יכול ראשון ולא ראשון בכלל שביעי ולא שביעי בכלל