Arakhin 57

Chapter 57

א <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> תנו רבנן חרמי כהנים אין להן פדיון ונותנין לכהן חרמים כל זמן שהן בבית בעלים הרי הן כהקדש לכל דבריהן שנאמר (ויקרא כז, כח) כל חרם בישראל קדש קדשים הוא לה' נתנן לכהן הרי הן לכל דבריהן כחולין שנאמר (במדבר יח, יד) כל חרם בישראל לך יהיה:
1 <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Our Rabbis taught: Things devoted to the priests cannot be redeemed, but must be given to the priests. Things devoted, as long as they are in the house of their owners, are in every respect as objects consecrated, as it is said: 'Every devoted thing [in Israel] is most holy unto the Lord'. Once given to the priests, they are in every respect profane, as it is said: 'Every devoted thing in Israel shall be thine.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Num. XVIII, 14.');"><sup>1</sup></span> R'JUDAH B. BATHYRA SAID: THINGS DEVOTED GENERALLY FALL TO [THE FUND FOR] TEMPLE REPAIRS. It is all right as to the Rabbis, for they have explained their own reason as well as [the verse] adduced by R'Judah B'Bathyra.
ב ר' יהודה בן בתירא אומר סתם חרמים לבדק הבית כו': בשלמא רבנן כדקא מפרשי טעמייהו וטעמא דרבי יהודה בן בתירא אלא רבי יהודה בן בתירא האי כשדה החרם מאי עביד ליה
2 But what does R'Judah B'Bathyra do with 'as a field devoted'? - He needs it for what has been taught: 'As a field devoted, the possession thereof shall be the priest's'. What does that teach us? Whence do we know that if a priest consecrates his field which he derived from 'devotion',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., a field which an Israelite devoted.');"><sup>2</sup></span> he may not say: Since it falls to the priests [at Jubilee] and is now in my possession, it shall remain mine; and i is arguable a minori: If I acquire title to what belongs to others, how much more [can I do so] with what belongs to me! Therefore it is written: 'As a field devoted, the possession thereof shall be the priest's'.
ג מיבעיא ליה לכדתניא (ויקרא כז, כא) כשדה החרם לכהן תהיה אחוזתו מה תלמוד לומר מנין לכהן שהקדיש שדה חרמו שלא יאמר הואיל ויוצאה לכהנים והרי היא תחת ידי תהא שלי
3 What now, is it that we learn from 'a field devoted'? This comes to throw light and it itself illumined: His field which he derived from 'devotion' is compared with an Israelite's field of possession: just as an Israelite's field of possession goes out of his hand and is distributed among the priests [at Jubilee], thus also his field which he derived from 'devotion' goes out of his hands and is distributed among his brethren the priests. And the other?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Rabbis.');"><sup>3</sup></span> [They derive this from the fact that instead of] 'devoting thing' [is is written] the devoted thing.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' 'Devoted' would have conveyed the required meaning; 'the' devoted is redundant, and the Sages make the said inference therefrom.');"><sup>4</sup></span>
ד ודין הוא בשל אחרים אני זוכה בשל עצמי לא כל שכן ת"ל כשדה החרם לכהן תהיה אחוזתו
4 And the other? - [The argument from] 'devoted', 'the devoted' does not convey [any inference] to him. Whence does R'Judah B'Bathyra know that it applies to the most holy and to less holy things?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Since he applies the verse 'Every' devoted thins' to another purpose.');"><sup>5</sup></span> - He holds as does R'Ishmael.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. next MISHNAH:');"><sup>6</sup></span>
ה וכי מה למדנו משדה חרם מעתה הרי זה בא ללמד ונמצא למד מקיש שדה חרמו לשדה אחוזה של ישראל
5 Rab said: The halachah is like R'Judah B'Bathyra. But will Rab leave aside the Rabbis and act in accord with R'Judah B'Bathyra? - A Baraitha teaches the reverse.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., reverses the views of R. Judah b. Bathyra and the Sages recorded in our MISHNAH:');"><sup>7</sup></span> But will he leave aside a Mishnah and act in accord with a Baraitha? - Rab teaches also our Mishnah in the reverse manner.
ו מה שדה אחוזה של ישראל יוצאה מתחת ידו ומתחלקת לכהנים אף שדה חרמו יוצאה מתחת ידו ומתחלקת לאחיו הכהנים
6 
ז ואידך מחרם החרם ואידך חרם החרם לא משמע ליה
7 Why do you find it right to teach to reverse our Mishnah in view of the Baraitha? Why not reverse the Baraitha in view of our Mishnah? - Rab had a tradition [on this matter]. If that be the case,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That he taught it in reverse manner.');"><sup>8</sup></span>
ח ורבי יהודה בן בתירא דחל על קדשי קדשים ועל קדשים קלים מנא ליה סבר ליה כרבי ישמעאל:
8 why does he say: [the halachah is like] R'Judah B'Bathyra? He should rather say, 'Like the Rabbis'? - This is what he means: Given your teaching in the reverse manner, the halachah is like R'Judah B'Bathyra.
ט אמר רב הלכה כרבי יהודה בן בתירא ורב שביק רבנן ועביד כרבי יהודה בן בתירא ברייתא איפכא תניא שביק מתני' ועביד כברייתא רב מתני' נמי איפכא תני
9 There was a man who devoted his possessions in Pumbeditha. He came before Rab Judah, who said to him: Take four zuz, redeem them thereby, throw them into the river, and then they will be allowed to you. This shows that he holds that things devoted generally go to [the fund for] Temple repairs. In accord with whom will that be? In accord with Samuel, who said: If one re deemed an object worth a mina with an object worth a perutah, it is redeemed. But R'Samuel said that only for the case where he had already done so, but did he at all say one may do so at the outset? - That [reservation] applied only to the time when the Sanctuary was still standing, because of the loss of consecrated property, but now one may do so even at the outset.
י מאי חזית דאפכת מתניתין מקמי ברייתא נפיך ברייתא מקמי מתני' רב גמריה גמיר אי הכי כרבי יהודה בן בתירא כרבנן מיבעי ליה הכי קאמר למאי דאפכיתו ותניתו הלכה כרבי יהודה בן בתירא
10 If so, a perutah ought to do as well?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Why did he have to take four zuz?');"><sup>9</sup></span> - It is necessary in order to make the matter public.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That it had been redeemed.');"><sup>10</sup></span> 'Ulla said: 'If I had been there,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' When this cited case happened.');"><sup>11</sup></span> I would have given all to the priests'. This shows that 'Ulla holds that things devoted generally fall to the priests. An objection was raised: The law of the Hebrew slave applies only as long as the Jubilee applies, as it is said: He shall serve with thee unto the year of Jubilee.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV, 40.');"><sup>12</sup></span> Neither does the law concerning a devoted field apply except at the time when the law of the Jubilee applies, as it is said: And in the Jubilee it shall go out, and he shall return unto his possessions.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 28.');"><sup>13</sup></span>
יא ההוא גברא דאחרמינהו לנכסיה בפומבדיתא אתא לקמיה דרב יהודה אמר ליה שקול ארבעה זוזי ואחיל עלייהו ושדינהו בנהרא ולישתרו לך אלמא קסבר סתם חרמים לבדק הבית
11 The law touching houses in walled cities applies only as long as the law of the Jubilee applies, as it is said: It shall not go out in the Jubilee.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 30.');"><sup>14</sup></span> R'Simeon B'Yohai said: The law concerning a devoted field applies only at the time in which the law of the Jubilee applies, as it is said: But the field, when it goeth out in the Jubilee, shall be holy unto the Lord, as a field devoted.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. XXVII, 21.');"><sup>15</sup></span> R'Simeon B'Eleazar said: The law concerning the resident alien<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., a stranger who renounced idolatry, thereby acquiring a kind of limited citizenship in Palestine.');"><sup>16</sup></span> applies only at the time when the law of the Jubilee applies.
יב כמאן כשמואל דאמר הקדש שוה מנה שחיללו על שוה פרוטה מחולל אימר דאמר שמואל שחיללו לכתחלה מי אמר
12 Said Bibi, what is the reason? Because it is inferred from the analogous 'well', 'well'. Here it is written: Because he fareth well with thee,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XV, 16.');"><sup>17</sup></span> and there it is written: Where it liketh him well, thou shalt not wrong him.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. XXIII, 17.');"><sup>18</sup></span>
יג הני מילי בזמן שבית המקדש קיים דאיכא פסידא אבל בזמן הזה אפי' לכתחלה אי הכי אפי' פרוטה נמי פרסומי מלתא
13 - This is no difficulty: the one refers to immovable property,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV, 28 refers to immovable property.');"><sup>19</sup></span> the other to movable property. But the case of Pumbeditha referred also to immovable property? - Immovable property outside the Land is like movable property in the land of Israel.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Here, then, is evidence that the law concerning devoted property applies only as long as the law of the Jubilee is in force.');"><sup>20</sup></span>
יד אמר עולא אי הואי התם הוה יהיבנא כולהו לכהנים אלמא קסבר עולא סתם חרמים לכהנים
14 <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>R'ISHMAEL SAID: ONE VERSE SAYS, [ALL THE FIRSTLING MALES] THOU SHALT SANCTIFY,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XV, 19.');"><sup>21</sup></span> AND ANOTHER VERSE SAYS: [THE FIRSTLINGS AMONGST BEASTS] NO MAN SHALL SANCTIFY.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXVII, 26.');"><sup>22</sup></span> IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO SAY: THOU SHALT SANCTIFY', SINCE IT WAS SAID ALREADY: NO MAN SHALL SANCTIFY'. AND IT IS NOT POSSIBLE TO SAY: ONE SHALL NOT SANCTIFY', SINCE IT IS ALSO WRITTEN: THOU SHALT SANCTIFY'?
טו מיתיבי אין עבד עברי נוהג אלא בזמן שהיובל נוהג שנאמר (ויקרא כה, מ) עד שנת היובל יעבוד עמך
15 HOW THEN? YOU MAY SANCTIFY IT BY CONSECRATING ITS VALUE [TO THE OWNER], BUT YOU MAY NOT SANCTIFY IT BY CONSECRATING ITSELF TO THE ALTAR.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The Sanctuary may receive the value which the satisfaction of having offered up such a sacrifice has for the owner (v. previous Mishnah) , but the firstling may never be deprived of its primary character as a firstling, so as to be offered up in any other capacity, as any other animal consecrated to the altar.');"><sup>23</sup></span> <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>And the Rabbis?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Who do not use these verses for the inferences which R. Ishmael derives from them, to what purpose are they using them?');"><sup>24</sup></span>
טז ואין שדה החרם נוהגת אלא בזמן שהיובל נוהג שנאמר (ויקרא כה, כח) ויצא ביובל ושב לאחוזתו אין בתי ערי חומה נוהגין אלא בזמן שהיובל נוהג שנאמר (ויקרא כה, ל) לא יצא ביובל
16 'No man shall sanctify' is required to [render such consecration for the altar transgression of a] prohibition; 'thou shalt sanctify' is necessary in accord with what was taught: Whence do we know that if one had a firstling born to him among his flock, that he is commanded [formally] to sanctify it? Because it is said: 'The firstling thou shalt sanctify'. And R'Ishmael? - If he did not sanctify it, would not be sacred? It is sacred from his dam's womb! Since, therefore, it is holy even if it be not [specially] sanctified, there is no need to sanctify it.
יז ר"ש בן יוחי אומר אין שדה חרמין נוהגין אלא בזמן שהיובל נוהג שנאמר (ויקרא כז, כא) והיה השדה בצאתו ביובל קודש לה' כשדה החרם ר"ש בן אלעזר אומר אין גר תושב נוהג אלא בזמן שהיובל נוהג
17 [
יח אמר רב ביבי מ"ט אתיא טוב טוב כתיב הכא (דברים טו, טז) כי טוב לו עמך וכתיב התם (דברים כג, יז) בטוב לו לא תוננו
18 
יט לא קשיא הא במקרקעי הא במטלטלי והא מעשה דפומבדיתא במקרקעי נמי הוה מקרקעי דחוצה לארץ כמטלטלי דארץ ישראל דמי:
19 
כ <big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> רבי ישמעאל אומר כתוב אחד אומר תקדיש וכתוב אחד אומר לא יקדיש א"א לומר תקדיש שהרי כבר נאמר לא יקדיש א"א לומר לא יקדיש שהרי כבר נאמר תקדיש
20 
כא הא כיצד מקדישו אתה הקדש עלוי ואי אתה מקדישו הקדש מזבח:
21 
כב <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> ורבנן {ויקרא כז } אל תקדיש מיבעי ליה ללאו תקדיש מיבעי ליה לכדתניא מנין לנולד בכור בעדרו שמצוה להקדישו שנאמר (דברים טו, יט) הזכר תקדיש
22 
כג ורבי ישמעאל אי לא מקדיש ליה לא קדוש קדושתו מרחם הוה וכיון דכי לא מקדיש ליה קדוש לא צריך לאקדושיה:
23 
כד <br><br><big><strong>הדרן עלך המקדיש שדהו</strong></big><br><br>
24 
Previous ChapterNext Chapter