Arakhin 62

Chapter 62

א רבא אמר דכולי עלמא צד אחד ברבית אסור והכא ברבית על מנת להחזיר איכא בינייהו מר סבר אסור ומר סבר מותר:
1 Raba said: All agree that one-sided usury is forbidden, here they are disputing [the principle of] usury [received] on condition that it shall be returned,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The case is one in which the purchaser undertakes that if the seller redeems the field within three years, he would return to him the value of the usufruct. The Rabbis hold even this is forbidden, for when he enjoys the usufruct it is actually interest on money lent, whilst R. Judah said: Since by this arrangement the infringement of usury is precluded. V. B.M. Sonc. ed., p. 376. n. 9.');"><sup>1</sup></span> one holding it to be forbidden, the other to be permitted. IF THE SELLER DIED, HIS SON MAY REDEEM IT. But that is self-evident? - You might have said: The Divine Law said, And if a man sell a dwelling house,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV, 29.');"><sup>2</sup></span>
ב מת המוכר יגאל בנו: פשיטא מהו דתימא (ויקרא כה, כט) ואיש כי ימכר בית מושב אמר רחמנא והאי לאו מכר קמשמע לן (ויקרא כה, כט) והיתה גאולתו מכל מקום:
2 and this one [the son] did not sell it, therefore we ar informed, then he may redeem it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV, 29.');"><sup>2</sup></span> which means any way. IF THE PURCHASER DIED, IT MAY BE REDEEMED FROM [THE HAND OF] HIS SON. But that is self-evident? - You might have said: The Divine Law said, To him that bought it,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 30.');"><sup>3</sup></span> but this one did not buy it, therefore we are informed, 'then he may redeem it', which means anyway.
ג מת הלוקח יגאל מיד בנו וכו': פשיטא מהו דתימא {ויקרא כה } לקונה אותו אמר רחמנא והא לא קנה קמ"ל והיתה גאולתו מכל מקום:
3 ONE CAN RECKON THE YEAR ONLY FROM THE TIME THAT HE SOLD IT, etc. Our Rabbis taught: [It Is written:] 'year';<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 29.');"><sup>4</sup></span> I would not know whether this year is to be counted to the first or the second [purchaser], but as it says, 'with the space of a full year',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'until a full year has been completed for him'.');"><sup>5</sup></span> it must mean to the first. Whose abiding [possession] does it become? - R'Eleazar said: It becomes the abiding possession of the first one. R'Johanan said: It becomes the abiding possession of the second.
ד אין מונין לו שנה אלא משעה שמכר כו': תנו רבנן שנה איני יודע אם שנה לראשון אם שנה לשני כשהוא אומר עד מלאת לו שנה תמימה הוי שנה לראשון
4 This is quite right according to R'Eleazar, since we reckon also according to him, but what is the reason for R'Johanan's view? - R'Abba B'Memel said: What did the first sell to the second? All the rights that may accrue to him therefrom. R'Abba B'Memel said: If one sold two houses in a walled city, one on the fifteenth day of the first Adar, and the other on the first day of the second Adar, then as soon as the first day of Adar in the next year has arrived, the year is complete for the sale of the first day of the second Adar, but for the sale of the fifteent Adar the year does not become complete before the fifteenth Adar in the next year. Rabina demurred: But could he not say unto him: I lighted a fire before you!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., I have kindled fire and used the house before you! Why should it become your abiding possession before the one I used became mine?');"><sup>6</sup></span>
ה למי חלוט רבי אלעזר אומר לראשון חלוט רבי יוחנן אמר לשני חלוט בשלמא לר' אלעזר דלדידיה קא מנינן אלא לרבי יוחנן מאי טעמא אמר רבי אבא בר ממל מה מכר לו ראשון לשני כל זכות שתבא לידו
5 - [That would not be effective] because he could reply: You have chosen the intercalated month!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Having chosen that month, you indicated that you are satisfied to abide by the regulations of the intercalated year. hence your year is completed later.');"><sup>7</sup></span> Furthermore said R'Abba B'Memel: If two lambs were born to one,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' These lambs, being firstlings, must be offered up before they are one year old.');"><sup>8</sup></span> one on the fifteenth of the first Adar and the other on the first of the second Adar, then the one born on the first of the second Adar has its year completed as soon as the first day of Adar of the next year has arrived, whereas to the one born on the fifteenth day of the first Adar the year is not complete before the fifteenth day of Adar in the next year. Rabina demurred: But [the first] could say to the [second] other: I have eaten grass before you! [That would not be effective] because it could reply: You have come down [to life] in the intercalated month, I have not arrived in the intercalated month! For what purpose was that second [case] taught? Is it not identical with the first? - You might have said: There [the reason for the change] is that it is written: 'a full [year]', but here connection with which 'full' is not written, it does not apply; therefore we are informed that there is an inference from the analogous 'year', 'year'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV. 30. (with reference to a dwelling house) and Deut. XV, 20 (with reference to firstlings) .');"><sup>9</sup></span> SINCE IT SAYS A 'FULL' [YEAR], etc. RABBI SAYS, HE IS ALLOWED A YEAR AND ITS INTERCALARY [DAYS]. Our Rabbis taught: [It is written], 'a full year': Rabbi Says.
ו אמר רבי אבא בר ממל מכר שני בתי ערי חומה אחד בחמשה עשר באדר הראשון ואחד באחד באדר השני זה שמכר לו באדר השני כיון שהגיע יום אחד באדר של שנה הבאה עלתה לו שנה זה שמכר לו בחמשה עשר של אדר הראשון לא עלתה לו שנה עד חמשה עשר באדר של שנה הבאה
6 He counts three hundred and sixty-five days according to the number of days in the solar year; but the Sages say: He counts twelve months from day to day, and if the year is intercalated it is intercalated to his advantage! IF THE [LAST] DAY OF THE TWELVE MONTHS HAS ARRIVED AND IT WAS NOT REDEEMED, etc. Our Rabbis taught: 'La-zemithuth',<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' E.V. 'In perpetuity'. Lev. XXV, 30.');"><sup>10</sup></span> i.e., permanently.
ז מתקיף לה רבינא ולימא ליה אנא קדים שחין נורא מקמא דידך משום דאמר ליה את נחית לעיבורא:
7 Another explanation: La-zemithuth'. that includes the gift. What is the reason? - [Since instead of] zamith [it says] zemithuth.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The shorter form would have been sufficient. The redundancy of the longer form includes something, hence possession by gift, to which the same rule applies as does to possession by purchase.');"><sup>11</sup></span> - The scholars said before R'Papa: According to whom is this?
ח וא"ר אבא בר ממל נולדו לו שני טלאים אחד בחמשה עשר של אדר הראשון ואחד באחד באדר השני זה שנולד באדר השני כיון שהגיע יום אחד באדר (השני) של שנה הבאה עלתה לו שנה זה שנולד לו בחמשה עשר באדר הראשון לא עלתה לו שנה עד חמשה עשר באדר של שנה הבאה
8 [Evidently] not in accord with R'Meir; for if according to R'Meir, surely he said: 'A gift is not treated like a sale'!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Bek. 52b.');"><sup>12</sup></span> - R'Papa answered: You may even say that it is in accord with R'Meir, but here it is different.
ט מתקיף לה רבינא ולימא ליה אנא קדים אכיל ירוקא מקמא דידך משום דאמר ליה את נחיתת לעיבורא אנא לא נחיתנא לעיבורא
9 because the Divine Law, in saying 'la-zemithuth' has included [the field by gift]. The scholars said to R'Papa, or as some say. R'Huna the son of R'Joshua said to R'Papa: But in connection with the Jubilee touching which it is said: Ye shall return<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV, 10.');"><sup>13</sup></span> includes the gift.
י הא תו למה לי היינו הך מהו דתימא התם דכתיב תמימה הכא דלא כתיב תמימה לא קמ"ל דשנה שנה מהדדי גמרי:
10 yet R'Meir does not include [a gift]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the law of the Jubilee.');"><sup>14</sup></span> - Hence indeed it is not in accord with R'Meir. Our Rabbis taught: If one consecrated a house among the houses In a walled city, he may redeem it at once, and redeem it any time in the future. If someone else redeemed it from the Sanctuary.
יא כשהוא אומר תמימה כו' רבי אומר ליתן שנת עיבורה: ת"ר (ויקרא כה, ל) שנה תמימה רבי אומר מונה שלש מאות וששים וחמשה ימים כמנין ימות החמה וחכמים אומרים מונה שנים עשר חודש מיום ליום ואם נתעברה נתעברה לו:
11 and the [last] day of the twelve months<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After redeeming it from the Sanctuary.');"><sup>15</sup></span> has arrived and the [original owner] did not redeem it [from him who redeemed it] then it is his in perpetuity. Whence do we know this? - Said Samuel: Because Scripture said: To him that bought it, i.e., even out of the possession of the Sanctuary. But let it become the permanent possession of the Sanctuary? - Scripture said: Throughout his generations;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV, 30.');"><sup>16</sup></span> that excludes the Sanctuary which has no generations.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., offspring.');"><sup>17</sup></span> Why [is it written]: It shall not go out in the Jubilee?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. This is apparently superfluous in view of the preceding 'in perpetuity'.');"><sup>18</sup></span>
יב הגיע יום שנים עשר חודש ולא נגאל כו': ת"ר לצמיתות לחלוטין דבר אחר לצמיתות לרבות את המתנה מאי טעמא צמית צמיתות
12 - Said R'Safra: That was necessary only for the case of one who sold a house among the houses in a walled city, and the Jubilee arrived within the [first] year. One might have assumed: It shall go out on the Jubilee, therefore we were taught: 'It shall no go out in the Jubilee'. <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>BEFORETIME HE [THE BUYER] USED TO HIDE HIMSELF ON THE LAST DAY OF THE TWELVE MONTHS, SO THAT [THE HOUSE] MIGHT BECOME HIS PERMANENT [POSSESSION]. BUT HILLEL ORDAINED THAT HE [THAT SOLD IT] COULD DEPOSIT HIS MONEY IN A CHAMBER<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' What chamber? Not, as most commentators have it, in the Sanctuary. No house in Jerusalem could fall to the purchaser, and for an inhabitant of the province the procedure of bringing that money to Jerusalem on the particular day might be very burdensome. R. Gershom suggests it was a chamber constructed ad hoc, in any court of justice, in the city wherein the case arose.');"><sup>19</sup></span> AND BREAK DOWN THE DOOR AND ENTER, AND THAT THE OTHER, WHENEVER HE WANTED, MIGHT COME AND TAKE HIS MONEY. <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Raba said: [One may deduce] from the ordinance of Hillel that [if a husband said to his wife]: Here is thy bill of divorce on condition that you give me two hundred zuz, and she gave it to him, then she is divorced if she did so with his consent; but if against his will, she is not divorced.
יג אמרוה רבנן קמיה דרב פפא כמאן דלא כר"מ דאי כר"מ האמר מתנה אינה כמכר א"ר פפא אפילו תימא ר"מ שאני הכא דרבי רחמנא לצמיתות
13 
יד אמרו רבנן לרב פפא ואמר לה רב הונא בריה דרב יהושע לרב פפא והא גבי יובל דכתיב תשובו לרבות את המתנה ור"מ לא קא מרבי אלא הא ודאי דלא כר"מ:
14 
טו ת"ר המקדיש בית בבתי ערי חומה הרי זה גואל וגואל לעולם גאלו אחר מיד הקדש הגיע יום שנים עשר חודש ולא נגאל היה חלוט לו
15 
טז מנא ה"מ אמר שמואל דאמר קרא {ויקרא כה } לקונה אותו ואפילו מיד הקדש ולחלטיה הקדש אמר קרא לדורותיו יצא הקדש שאין לו דורות
16 
יז לא יצא ביובל למה לי אמר רב ספרא לא נצרכא אלא למוכר בית בבתי ערי חומה ופגע בו יובל בתוך שנתו סד"א ליפוק ביובל קמ"ל לא יצא ביובל:
17 
יח <big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> בראשונה היה נטמן יום שנים עשר חודש כדי שיהא חלוט לו התקין הלל שיהא חולש מעותיו ללשכה ויהא שובר את הדלת ונכנס אימתי שירצה הלז יבא ויטול את מעותיו:
18 
יט <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> אמר רבא מתקנתו של הלל הרי זה גיטיך על מנת שתתני לי מאתים זוז ונתנה לו מדעתו מגורשת בעל כרחו אינה מגורשת
19