Arakhin 65

Chapter 65

א הניחא לרבנן דאמרי שנת חמשים אינה מן המנין אלא לרבי יהודה דאמר שנת חמשים עולה לכאן ולכאן למה לי בשמיטין סגיא הא ודאי דלא כרבי יהודה
1 That will be right in the view of the Rabbis who hold that the fiftieth year is not included,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the cycle of seven years.');"><sup>1</sup></span> but according to R'Judah who holds that the fiftieth year counts both ways,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Both as the year of release and the beginning of the next seven year cycle.');"><sup>2</sup></span> why was that necessary [to count the Jubilees]? It would have been enough if the years of release alone had been counted! Hence [we must say], this is not in accord with the view of R'Judah. But did they not count years of release and the Jubilees?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After the exile of the tribes of Reuben, Gad, etc.');"><sup>3</sup></span>
ב ולא מנו שמיטין ויובלות והכתיב (ירמיהו לד, יד) מקץ שבע שנים תשלחו איש את אחיו העברי אשר ימכר לך
2 Is it not written: At the end of seven years ye shall let go every man his brother that is a Hebrew, that hath been sold unto thee,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Jer. XXXIV, 14.');"><sup>4</sup></span> and when we asked: Why 'at the end of seven years'? is it not written: He shall serve thee six years?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Deut. XV, 12.');"><sup>5</sup></span>
ג והוינן בהו מקץ שבע שנים והכתיב (דברים טו, יב) ועבדך שש שנים ואמר רב נחמן בר יצחק שש לנמכר ושבע לנרצע
3 and to this R'Nahman B'Isaac replied: Six for one who had been sold and seven for one who had his ear pierced?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' According to Ex. XXI, 6 the ear of the slave who refuses to go free and who must then serve him up to the year of the Jubilee, is pierced. If such a pierced servant has completed seven years and the eighth was a Jubilee year. he went out free. This passage of Jeremiah refers to the time of Zedekiah, long after Sennacherib had exiled a large part of the people, and yet the law of the year of Jubilee was valid!');"><sup>6</sup></span> - This is written in connection with the threat of punishment, for the prophet said: 'Did you set them free [when you should have done so]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The verse is thus to be rendered: By the end of the seven years you should have had set free etc.');"><sup>7</sup></span> But it is said: They hearkened and let them go'?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Jer. XXXIV, 10.');"><sup>8</sup></span> - Rather, said R'Johanan: Jeremiah brought them back, and Josiah son of Amon ruled over them.
ד ההוא בתוכחה כתיב וקאמר נביא השלחתם והכתיב (ירמיהו לד, י) וישמעו וישלחו
4 Whence do we know that they returned? - Because it is written: For the seller shall not return to that which is sold.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ezek. VII, 13.');"><sup>9</sup></span> Now is it possible that the Jubilee was abolished already and the prophet would prophesy concerning it that it will be abolished? This therefore teaches that Jeremiah had brought them back. Whence do we know that Josiah ruled over them? - Because it is written: Then he said: What monument is that which I see?
ה אלא אמר ר' יוחנן ירמיה החזירן ויאשיה בן אמון מלך עליהן ומנא לן דהדור דכתיב (יחזקאל ז, יג) כי המוכר אל הממכר לא ישוב אפשר יובל בטל ונביא מתנבא עליו שיבטל אלא מלמד שהחזירן ירמיה
5 And the men of the city told him: It is the sepulchre of the man of God, who came from Judah, and proclaimed these things that thou hast done against the altar of Beth-El.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' II Kings XXIII, 17.');"><sup>10</sup></span> Now what had Josiah to do at Beth-El?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Josiah was King of Judah, Beth-el was in Israel.');"><sup>11</sup></span> Hence [we must say]. When Jeremiah had brought them back, Josiah ruled over them. R'Nahman B'Isaac derived it from here: Also, O Judah, there is a harvest [katsir] appointed for thee!<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Hosea VI, 11. Reading for kazir (harvest) kazin (prince, ruler) . The letters r and n interchange frequently in the Hebrew Bible. The meaning of the passage thus is given as: 'From Judah (whose king Josiah was first) was a king appointed for thee (O Israel) '.');"><sup>12</sup></span> <big><b>MISHNAH: </b></big>HOUSES IN COURTYARDS<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. Lev. XXV, 31. E.V., 'houses of the villages'.');"><sup>13</sup></span>
ו ומנלן דיאשיה מלך עליהן דכתיב (מלכים ב כג, יז) ויאמר מה הציון הלז אשר אני רואה ויאמרו אליו אנשי העיר הקבר איש האלהים אשר בא מיהודה ויקרא את הדברים על המזבח בית אל
6 HAVE THE PRIVILEGES BOTH OF HOUSES IN A WALLED CITY. AND THE PRIVILEGES GIVEN TO FIELDS: THEY CAN BE REDEEMED AT ONCE, AND AT ANY TIME WITHIN THE TWELVE MONTHS LIKE HOUSES [IN A WALLED CITY], AND THEY GO OUT [TO THE OWNERS] IN THE YEAR OF JUBILEE OR [AT AN EARLIER TIME] BY [PAYMENT OF A] LESSENED PRICE<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 24a.');"><sup>14</sup></span> LIKE FIELDS.
ז וכי מה טיבו של יאשיהו בבית אל אלא כשהחזירן ירמיהו יאשיהו מלך עליהם רב נחמן בר יצחק אמר מהכא (הושע ו, יא) גם יהודה שת קציר לך בשובי שבות עמי:
7 <big><b>GEMARA: </b></big>Our Rabbis taught: [It is written:] [But the houses in courtyards which have no wall about them] shall be reckoned with the fields of the country:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV. 31.');"><sup>15</sup></span> Scripture compares them with a field of possession: just as a field of possession goes out in the Jubilee and by payment of a lessened price, so do houses in courtyards go out in the year of Jubilee and by payment of a lessened price. [One might have assumed that similarly:] Just as a field of possession may not be redeemed before two years, thus may houses in courtyards not be redeemed before two years, therefore it is said: they may be redeemed,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV. 31.');"><sup>15</sup></span>
ח <big><strong>מתני׳</strong></big> בתי החצרים נותנין להם כח יפה שבבתי ערי חומה וכח יפה שבשדות ונגאלין מיד וכל שנים עשר חדש כבתים ויוצאין ביובל ובגרעון כסף כשדות:
8 i.e., at once.
ט <big><strong>גמ׳</strong></big> תנו רבנן (ויקרא כה, לא) על שדה הארץ יחשב הקישו הכתוב לשדה אחוזה מה שדה אחוזה יוצא ביובל ובגרעון כסף אף בתי החצרים יוצאין ביובל ובגרעון כסף
9 Since you have given them the privileges of fields, as well as those of houses in walled cities, one might assume that they do not go out in the year of Jubilee, therefore it is said: And they shall go out in the Jubilee.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV. 31.');"><sup>15</sup></span> What does he mean to say?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Obviously they will go out in the Jubilee because they were compared to fields of possession. Why then the superfluous, And they shall go out in the Jubilee?');"><sup>16</sup></span> - Said R'Huna: This was necessary [to be stated] only for the case of one who consecrates a house among the houses in a courtyard, and someone else redeemed it from the Sanctuary, and the year of Jubilee came in its second year.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' After it had been redeemed from the Sanctuary.');"><sup>17</sup></span>
י אי מה שדה אחוזה אינה נגאלת בפחות משתי שנים אף בתי החצרים אינם נגאלים פחות משתי שנים תלמוד לאמר (ויקרא כה, לא) גאולה תהיה לו מיד הואיל ונתת להם כח יפה שבשדות וכח שדה שבבתים יכול לא יצאו ביובל תלמוד לאמר (ויקרא כה, לא) וביובל יצא
10 With what, now, will you compare it? If you compare it to a house in a walled city. it becomes the perpetual [possession] of the purchaser;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 31b.');"><sup>18</sup></span> if you compare it to a field of possession, it goes out to the priests. For this case it was necessary to say: 'And the shall go out in the Jubilee'.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' And it returns to the owner.');"><sup>19</sup></span>
יא מאי קאמר אמר רב הונא לא נצרכא אלא למקדיש בית בבתי החצרים וגאלו אחר מיד הקדש ופגע בו יובל בשנה שניה
11 To this R'Ze'ira demurred: Why speak about someone else redeeming it? Even if no-one redeemed it the same [law would apply]?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' The superfluous 'And they shall go out in the Jubilee' coming to teach that the law applies to the case of consecration no less than to that of sale, making the house in a courtyard returnable on the Jubilee to the original owner.');"><sup>20</sup></span> - Said Abaye: [This is not so] lest people say: Consecrated property goes out without redemption.
יב למאי מדמית ליה אי לבתי ערי חומה מדמית ליה איחליט ליה ללוקח אי לשדה אחוזה מדמית לכהנים נפקא להכי אצטריך וביובל יצא
12 Whence do we know that? - [It is derived] from a Levite: If a Levite whose privilege is strengthened where he sold property<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' A Levite can redeem at any time a house in a walled city sold by him.');"><sup>21</sup></span> has his rights weakened where he consecrated an object,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. infra.');"><sup>22</sup></span>
יג מתקיף לה רב זעירא מאי איריא גאלו אחר אפילו לא גאלו נמי אמר ליה אביי שלא יאמרו הקדש יוצא בלא פדיון
13 how much more shall an Israelite whose rights are weakened where he sold property, have his rights weakened with regard to an object which he consecrated himself! And whence do we know it there?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' That the rights of the Levite are weakened in the case of consecration.');"><sup>23</sup></span> - Because it was taught: And if a man purchase of the Levites, then shall go out [in the Jubilee] that which was sold.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXV, 33. So literally.');"><sup>24</sup></span> From this I might infer that [the law applies] even to his slaves, his movable property, and his documents, therefore it is said: Of a house [in the] city of his possession. What then does 'that which was sold' mean? What he sold goes out without payment, but no consecrated object goes out without payment but [requires] redemption.
יד מנלן מבן לוי מה בן לוי שיפה כחו בממכרו הורע כחו בהקדשו ישראל שהורע כחו בממכרו אין דין שהורע כחו בהקדשו
14 Now this<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' R. Huna's statement above that if a stranger redeems a house in a courtyard from the Sanctuary, it returns to the original owner at Jubilee.');"><sup>25</sup></span> conflicts with R'Oshaia, for R'Oshaia said: All was included in the general statement: Then shall he add [the fifth part of] the money.
טו והתם מנלן דתניא (ויקרא כה, לג) ויצא ממכר שומע אני אפילו עבדיו מטלטליו ושטריו תלמוד לאמר בית ועיר אחוזתו
15 and it shall be assured to him,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. XXVII, 19 teaching that he who redeems aught from the Sanctuary retains the ownership of the redeemed object in permanence.');"><sup>26</sup></span> and when Scripture specified with regard to the field of possession: But the field when it goeth out in the Jubilee shall be holy unto the Lord,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Ibid. 21.');"><sup>27</sup></span> [as a field devoted], [it teaches] only a field if redeemed goes out [from the one who redeemed it] to the priests, but all other [objects redeemed from the Sanctuary] remain where they are.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' In the permanent possession of him who redeemed them.');"><sup>28</sup></span> For what purpose [then]<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' On the view of R. Oshaia.');"><sup>29</sup></span>
טז מה תלמוד לאמר ממכר ממכריו יוצא בחנם ואין הקדש יוצא בחנם אלא בפדיון
16 is it said: 'And they shall go out in the Jubilee'? - R'Papa said: This is necessary but for the case of one who sells a house among the houses in courtyards, and the Jubilee came in the second year. With what now will you compare it?
יז ופליגא דר' אושעיא דאמר ר' אושעיא הכל היו בכלל (ויקרא כז, יט) ונתן הכסף וקם לו
17 If you compare it to a house in a walled city, it becomes the perpetual [possession] of the purchaser; if you compare it to a field of possession, it needs the completion [of two years in the purchaser's possession],<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' V. supra 29b.');"><sup>30</sup></span> for this case it was necessary to state: 'And they shall go out in the Jubilee'.
יח כשפרט הכתוב בשדה אחוזה (ויקרא כז, כא) והיה השדה בצאתו ביובל קדש לה' שדה הוא דפרק ליה ונפקא לכהנים אבל הנך כדקיימי קיימי
18 It was taught in accord with R'Huna and in refutation of R'Oshaia: If one consecrates a house among the houses in courtyards, then he may redeem it at once, and redeem it for ever.
יט וביובל יצא למה לי אמר רב פפא לא נצרכא אלא למוכר בית בבתי החצרים ופגע בו יובל בשנה שניה
19 If someone else redeemed it from the Sanctuary, and the Jubilee arrived and it had not been redeemed [by the original owner] it reverts in the year of Jubilee to the owner.
כ למאי מדמית ליה אי לבתי ערי חומה מדמית ליה איחלט ליה ללוקח אי לשדה אחוזה מדמית ליה השלמה בעי להכי אצטריך וביובל יצא
20 
כא תניא כוותיה דרב הונא ותיובתא דרבי אושעיא המקדיש בית בבתי החצרים הרי זה גואל מיד וגואלו לעולם גאלו אחר מיד הקדש הגיע יובל ולא נגאל חוזר לבעלים ביובל
21 
Previous ChapterNext Chapter