Arakhin 64

אמר אביי הכי קאמר

Abaye said: This is what he means, [All the cities] up to Gamala in Galilee.

עד גמלא בגליל עד גדוד בעבר הירדן וחדיד ואונו וירושלים ביהודה

up to Gadud in Transjordania, and Hadid, Ono and Jerusalem in Judaea.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' All the cities up to Gamala etc. were encompassed with walls in the days of Joshua, and have no less than three courtyards of two houses each.');">¹</span>

רבא אמר

Raba said: Gamala in Galilee [is mentioned so as] to exclude [any city called] Gamala in other countries; Gadud in Transjordania to exclude Gadud in any other countries; but with regard to the others, since there are none of the same name [like them], no [statement as to their location] was necessary.

גמלא בגליל לאפוקי גמלא דשאר ארצות גדוד בעבר הירדן לאפוקי גדוד דשאר ארצות

But is [any house in] Jerusalem liable to become irredeemable?

אינך דלא איכא דכותייהו לא איצטריך ליה

Was it not taught: Ten special regulations were applied to Jerusalem: first, that a house sold there should not be liable to become irredeemable [etc.].

וירושלים מי מיחלט בה

R'Johanan said: [The Mishnah means] like Jerusalem, that was encompassed by a wall in the days of Joshua B'Nun, [yet] not like Jerusalem,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' He compares them to Jerusalem which was a walled city in the days of Joshua, but they are not as Jerusalem, for in that city no house sold could become irredeemable, Jerusalem belonging to all Israel.');">²</span>

והתניא

for in Jerusalem no house sold there was liable to become irredeemable, but here<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., in the other places mentioned.');">³</span>

עשרה דברים נאמרו בירושלים אין הבית חלוט בה

a house sold is liable to become irredeemable.

אמר רבי יוחנן

R'Ashi said: Did not R'Joseph say.

כירושלים דמוקפת חומה מימות יהושע בן נון ולא כירושלים דאילו ירושלים אין הבית חלוט בה ואילו הכא הבית חלוט בהן

There were two [different cities called] Kadesh?

רב אשי אמר לאו אמר רב יוסף

Thus also were there two [cities called] Jerusalem.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Perhaps the distinction is made between the Greater Jerusalem and Jerusalem proper, as between New York City and Greater New York, the latter including very many and widely scattered communities. In Jerusalem proper no house could fall to the purchaser in perpetuity because of the seller's failure to redeem it within the year. But this restriction would have no validity in the expanded Greater Jerusalem, evidence as to which has of late been presented.');">⁴</span>

תרי קדש הוו

It was taught: R'Ishmael B'Jose said: Why did the Sages enumerate those [in the Mishnah]?

ה"נ תרי ירושלים הוו

Because when the exiles [from Babylon] went up [to Palestine] they found these [cities] and sanctified them, but former [cities] lost [their holiness] as the sanctity of the land was lost.

תניא ישמעאל בר' יוסי

He holds, therefore, that as to the first consecration, he<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Joshua; the consecration of the Holy Land by him lost its validity with the destruction of the Holy City and the exile of its population.');">⁵</span>

למה מנו חכמים את אלו

consecrated it only for the time being, but not for the future.

שכשעלו בני הגולה מצאו אלו וקידשום אבל ראשונות בטלו משבטלה קדושת הארץ

I will raise a question of contradiction against this: R'Ishmael B'Jose said: Were there only these [mentioned in the Mishnah], surely it has been said: Three score cities, all the region of Argob.

קסבר

all these were fortified cities?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. III, 4, 5.');">⁶</span>

קדושה ראשונה קידשה לשעתה ולא קידשה לעתיד לבא

Why then did the Sages enumerate but these?

ורמינהי א"ר ישמעאל בר' יוסי

Because when the exiles came up they found these and consecrated them anew.

וכי אלו בלבד היו

And not only these [are walled cities], but any one concerning which you have a tradition from your fathers that it was encompassed by a wall since the days of Joshua B'Nun, then all these laws apply to it, because as to the first consecration, he consecrated it not only for the time being, but for the future?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Shebu., Sonc. ed., p. 80 notes.');">⁷</span>

והלא כבר נאמר

- If you like, say: There were two Tannaim in conflict about the view of R'Ishmael.

(דברים ג, ד) ששים עיר כל חבל ארגוב כל אלה ערים בצורות

Or, if you like, say: One of them was R'Eleazar B'Jose, for it was taught: R'Eleazar B'Jose said, 'Asher lo homah', even though it is not encompassed by one to-day, as long as it was walled before.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. p. 192, n. 9.');">⁸</span>

אלא למה מנו חכמים את אלו

What is the reason of the one who holds: 'As to the first consecration, he consecrated it only for the time being, but not for the future'? - Because it is written: And all the congregation of them that were come back out of the captivity made booths, and dwelt in the booths; for since the days of Joshua the son of Nun had not the children of Israel done so.

שכשעלו בני הגולה מצאו אלו וקידשום

And there was very great gladness.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Neh. VIII, 17.');">⁹</span>

קידשום

Is it possible that when David came, they made no booths, [when Solomon came, they did not make booths] until Ezra came?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Inserted with Sh.Mek. The mentioning of David alone is insufficient, surely with Solomon, the Temple-builder, Sukkoth was celebrated, too.');">¹⁰</span>

הא אמרינן דלא צריך לקדושינהו

Rather, he compares their arrival in the days of Ezra to their arrival in the days of Joshua: just as at their arrival in t days of Joshua they counted the years of release and the Jubilees, and consecrated cities encompassed by walls, thus also at their arrival in the days of Ezra they counted the years of release and the Jubilees.

אלא מנאום

and consecrated walled cities.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The words For since the days of Joshua . . had not . . done so, do not refer to the booths but to the renewed formal rites of sanctification.');">¹¹</span>

ולא אלו בלבד אלא כל שתעלה לך מסורת בידך מאבותיך שמוקפת חומה מימות יהושע בן נון כל מצות הללו נוהגות בה מפני שקדושה ראשונה קידשה לשעתה וקידשה לעתיד לבא

And it says also: And the Lord thy God will bring thee into the land which thy fathers possessed, and thou shalt possess it;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XXX, 5.');">¹²</span>

איבעית אימא

thus comparing your possession thereof with that of your fathers: just as your forefathers' possession thereof brought about a renewal of all these things, so shall your possession thereof bring about a renewal of all these things.

תרי תנאי ואליבא דר' ישמעאל

And the other?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' How does he who holds that he consecrated for all the future explain the passage from Nehemiah? 'Booths' here as symbolic meaning: they enjoyed the protection 'as of booths', because Ezra through his prayer had achieved the destruction of idolatrous tendencies among the people, and this achievement protected them. In this sense they 'had booths', when they returned.');">¹³</span>

ואיבעית אימא

- He [Ezra] had prayed for mercy because of the passion for idolatry and he removed it, and his merit then shielded them even as the booth.

חד מינייהו ר' אלעזר בר יוסי אמרה

That is why Scripture reproved Joshua, for in all other passages it is spelt: Jehoshua, but here, Joshua.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' For his failure to implore the Lord to remove the passion for idolatry from the heart of the people. Just as with Abram the enlargement of his name into 'Abraham' was an expression of divine approval, so did this diminution of Jehoshua into Joshua express divine disapproval. The reason for Joshua's failure to implore the Lord to remove the passion for idolatry was his assumption that he possessed the land in its pristine holiness, so that it would in itself help Israel to overcome its idolatrous tendencies.');">¹⁴</span>

דתניא ר"א בר יוסי אומר

It was quite right that Moses did not pray for mercy, because the virtue [power] of the Holy Land was absent [to support his plea], but why did Joshua, who had the power of the Holy Land [to assist him], fail to pray for mercy?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hence the implied censure of Joshua.');">¹⁵</span>

אשר לוא חומה אע"פ שאין לו עכשיו והיה לו קודם לכן

But it is written: 'which thy fathers possessed and thou shalt possess it'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Which would show that renewed sanctification was required.');">¹⁶</span>

מאי טעמא דמ"ד

- This is what is meant: Since they fathers possessed it, you also possess it.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Without the need of a renewed sanctification.');">¹⁷</span>

קדושה ראשונה קידשה לשעתה ולא קידשה לעתיד לבא

But did they count the years of release and Jubilees [after the return from Babylon]?

דכתיב

If even after the trib of Reuben, the tribe of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh went into exile, the Jubilees were abolished, should Ezra in connection with whom it is said: The whole congregation together was forty and two thousand three hundred and three score,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ezra II, 64.');">¹⁸</span>

(נחמיה ח יז) ויעשו בני הגולה השבים מן השבי סוכות וישבו בסוכות כי לא עשו מימי יהושע בן נון כן בני ישראל וגו' ותהי שמחה גדולה מאד אפשר בא דוד ולא עשו סוכות עד שבא עזרא

have counted them?

אלא מקיש ביאתם בימי עזרא לביאתם בימי יהושע מה ביאתם בימי יהושע מנו שמיטין ויובלות וקדשו ערי חומה אף ביאתן בימי עזרא מנו שמיטין ויובלות וקדשו ערי חומה

For it was taught: When the tribe of Reuben, the tribe of Gad and the half-tribe of Manasseh went into exile, the Jubilees were abolished as it is said: And ye shall proclaim liberty throughout the land unto all the inhabitants thereof,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV, 10.');">¹⁹</span>

ואומר

i.e., [only] at the time when all the inhabitants thereof dwell upon it, but not at the time when some of them are exiled.

(דברים ל, ה) והביאך ה' אלהיך אל הארץ אשר ירשו אבותיך וירשתה מקיש ירושתך לירושת אבותיך מה ירושת אבותיך בחידוש כל דברים הללו אף ירושתך בחידוש כל דברים הללו

One might have assumed that if they were there, but intermingled, the tribe of Benjamin with that of Judah and the tribe of Judah with that of Benjamin, that even the [laws of the] Jubilee should apply, therefore it is said: 'unto all t inhabitants thereof', which means, only at the time when its inhabitants are there as [where] they ought to be, but not when they are intermingled! - Said R'Nahman B'Isaac: They counted the Jubilees to keep the years of release holy.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Though the Jubilees had been abolished, years of release were still observed, consequently they had to count the Jubilees in order to be able to observe the years of release in their proper time. For the year of Jubilee was not included in the seven years cycle. They therefore had to know when the year of Jubilee arrives to be able to fix the next year of release, which was to be the eighth year following the year of Jubilee.');">²⁰</span>

ואידך

[

דבעי רחמי על יצר דעבודה זרה ובטליה ואגין זכותא עלייהו כי סוכה

והיינו דקא קפיד קרא עילויה דיהושע דבכל דוכתא כתיב יהושע והכא כתיב (נחמיה ח, יז) ישוע בשלמא משה לא בעא רחמי דלא הוה זכותא דארץ ישראל אלא יהושע דהוה ליה זכותא דארץ ישראל אמאי לא ליבעי רחמי

והא כתיב

אשר ירשו אבותיך וירשתה

הכי קאמר

כיון דירשו אבותיך ירשת את

ומי מנו שמיטין ויובלות

השתא משגלו שבט ראובן ושבט גד וחצי שבט מנשה בטלו יובלות עזרא דכתיב ביה

(עזרא ב, סד) כל הקהל כאחד ארבע רבוא אלפים ושש מאות וששים הוה מני

דתניא

משגלו שבט ראובן ושבט גד וחצי שבט המנשה בטלו יובלות שנאמר

(ויקרא כה, י) וקראתם דרור בארץ לכל יושביה בזמן שכל יושביה עליה ולא בזמן שגלו מקצתן

יכול היו עליה והן מעורבין שבט בנימין ביהודה ושבט יהודה בבנימין יהא יובל נוהג

תלמוד לומר

לכל יושביה בזמן שיושביה כתיקונן ולא בזמן שהן מעורבין

א"ר נחמן בר יצחק

מנו יובלות לקדש שמיטין