Kids Daf Quest

Daf Yomi for kids · Talmud Bavli · Masechet Arakhin

Arakhin 29 for kids: Where Does It Go?

ערכין כ״ט

🌾 Where does dedicated property go if the owner does not say? This daf also asks how a firstborn animal can be consecrated and what happens to a field sold during the Jubilee Year.

Daf Yomi day:

📖 Open Arakhin 29a in Daf QuestOpen Arakhin 29b in Daf Quest

In the app: the Gemara with Rashi and Tosafot, the printed page, games made from this daf, play coins and treasure chests.

Stories from Arakhin 29

Words to know

Rashi and Tosafot on Arakhin 29 in simple English

Rashi on Arakhin 29a, in English Tab translation (27)
  1. They are like consecrated property — misusing them is subject to the law of misuse of sacred property.
  2. They are like non-sacred property — like the priest’s other possessions.
  3. Granted, the Rabbis — the Rabbis in the mishna explain both their own reasoning and Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira’s verse, as the mishna says: “If so, why does the verse say, ‘Every dedicated item’?”
  4. Who consecrated his dedicated field — an Israelite dedicated a field, and it was allotted to a priest. The priest might argue: If I do not redeem it from the Temple treasurer and someone else does, it will be divided among the priests at the Jubilee, as with a consecrated ancestral field. But I already possess it, so it should remain mine. After all, if I receive a share when another person consecrates an ancestral field, all the more so should I receive my own field.
  5. Therefore the verse states, “As a dedicated field” — this verse concerns someone who consecrates an ancestral field.
  6. What have we learned from a dedicated field — about an ancestral field? Just as an Israelite’s ancestral field, if consecrated and then redeemed by a priest, leaves that priest’s possession at the Jubilee and is divided among all the priests of the watch, as explained in the previous chapter—“his possession” means his own field, and this is not his own—so too with the priest’s dedicated field.
  7. He agrees with Rabbi Yishmael — who derives this law in the mishna from “you shall consecrate” and “you shall not consecrate.”
  8. The halakha follows Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira — unspecified dedications go to Temple maintenance.
  9. The baraita teaches the reverse — the Rabbis say they go to Temple maintenance, and Rabbi Yehuda ben Beteira says they go to the priests.
  10. Rav had learned it this way — his teacher taught him that the mishna’s wording was mistaken.
  11. And he threw them — the four zuz coins into the river, because they were consecrated for Temple maintenance. If they had belonged to the priests, they could not have been redeemed and would have had to be given to a priest.
  12. In the present day — when there is no Temple and no financial loss, only a prohibition attaching to the property, one may do so even from the outset.
  13. The Hebrew servant does not apply — a person cannot be sold as a Hebrew servant in the present day.
  14. Nor does an ancestral field — the law allowing its redemption at a reduced price does not apply. A buyer may return it for whatever price he wants, but cannot be forced to do so. Likewise, when the Temple stood but the Jubilee was not observed, as after the tribes of Reuben and Gad were exiled, a consecrated ancestral field could be redeemed only at its full value.
  15. Walled-city houses do not apply — a buyer cannot be compelled to return the house when the seller seeks to redeem it, even within the first year.
  16. A resident alien does not apply — an Israelite is not obligated to sustain him. A resident alien has undertaken not to worship idols but may eat meat from an animal that died without ritual slaughter.
  17. It is written — of a Hebrew servant, “because he fares well with you,” and of a resident alien, “he shall live with you.” The passage beginning “You shall not return a slave to his master” concerns a resident alien, as explained in tractate Gittin, and continues, “He shall live with you, among you.” In any event, both views face the difficulty that the teaching says dedicated fields apply only when the Jubilee is observed.
  18. Landed property — the law of dedicated fields does not apply, as the verse says, “When it goes out at the Jubilee ... as a dedicated field.”
  19. The mishna: One verse says, “You shall consecrate” — concerning a firstborn animal: “Every firstborn ... you shall consecrate.”
  20. And another verse says, “You shall not consecrate” — “But a firstborn that is born first to the Lord among the animals, no one shall consecrate it.”
  21. A dedication of value — to assess its monetary value and give the priest the benefit of choosing its recipient.
  22. But you may not consecrate it as an altar offering — so that it acquires the designation of a different offering.
  23. The Gemara: And the Rabbis — who derive this teaching from “Every dedicated item is most sacred,” as explained above.
  24. They need “You shall not consecrate” for a prohibition — one who designates it as a different offering violates a prohibition.
  25. For it is a mitzva to consecrate it — by declaring it a firstborn offering, even though it is already sacred on its own.
  26. And Rabbi Yishmael — he would respond: “If he did not consecrate it, would it not be sacred?” This is a rhetorical question.
  27. There is no need to consecrate it — Rabbi Yishmael does not accept this interpretation of the verse.
Tosafot on Arakhin 29a, in English Tab translation (2)
  1. Take four zuz, transfer the sanctity onto them, and throw them into the river; then it will be permitted to you — But Avodah Zarah 13a says that nowadays one may not consecrate property, dedicate it, or pledge its value. If one does, an animal must be rendered unfit for use, while produce and utensils must be left to rot. This case also concerns the present day, so why not leave the property to rot? That rule applies specifically to movable property, which can be left to rot without risk of misuse. Here the property is land, and waiting would risk misuse. The nearby discussion likewise says that the incident in Pumbedita involved land.
  2. Consecration of its value — This means assigning it a monetary value in order to give the priest the benefit of choosing its recipient.
Rashi on Arakhin 29b, in English Tab translation (23)
  1. Mishna: One who sells — “During the Jubilee period” means when the Jubilee laws are in force.
  2. Less than two years — After two years, the seller may redeem the field even against the buyer’s wishes. He pays for the years remaining until Jubilee. For example, if he sold it ten years before Jubilee for ten litras, each year’s produce cost one litra, since an ordinary sale lasts only until Jubilee. If he redeems it after five years, the buyer deducts five litras, one for each year he had the field.
  3. It does not count — It does not count toward the two years, because Scripture requires two years fit to produce crops. But if the year was fit and the buyer merely plowed without sowing, or left the field entirely fallow, that is his own loss, and the year counts.
  4. Three crops — The crop standing in the field when he buys it, and two more crops during his two years of possession.
  5. Gemara: It does not say “cannot redeem” — That wording would mean only that a court cannot compel the buyer to return the field for payment before two years.
  6. Even rattling coins is forbidden — The seller may not show the buyer money to entice him to return the field.
  7. You shall buy for years — “According to the number of years after the Jubilee you shall buy” means the buyer must own it for two years. Returning it earlier violates a positive commandment.
  8. Sold and released — The field is sold but returns to its owner in the Jubilee Year, and the buyer loses his money.
  9. Not sold at all — The sale is void, and the money is returned.
  10. Already sold — Sold before the Jubilee Year.
  11. A Hebrew maidservant leaves upon showing signs of young womanhood — As taught from “She shall go free without payment”: This refers to her years of young womanhood.
  12. There — A daughter sold while still a minor becomes free upon showing signs of young womanhood and can never be sold again. As taught from “when he has dealt treacherously with her,” once her father has sold her into servitude, he cannot sell her again. Her release is therefore final, supporting the inference that she cannot be sold as a young woman. But a field returned in the Jubilee Year can be sold again afterward. It may therefore also be sold during Jubilee, even though it immediately returns to its owner without payment.
  13. After the Jubilee — This implies immediately after the Jubilee Year.
  14. You shall buy for years — If you buy a field, it remains yours for two years, even if the seller wants to redeem it sooner.
  15. According to the many years — If many years remain until Jubilee, sell the field for more, since the buyer may keep it until then unless it is redeemed. If few years remain, sell it for less so as not to overcharge the buyer. These verses show that a field may be sold either soon after the previous Jubilee or many years later.
  16. For the number of crop years — The field does not remain with the buyer at all, since it returns that same year. But the sale takes effect, so the buyer loses his money.
  17. If it is sold — Why not let the buyer keep it for two years after Jubilee, then return it without payment because a Jubilee Year passed during his ownership? Was it not taught that a buyer can complete his second year after Jubilee?
  18. He entered to consume its produce — The buyer had already begun using the field before Jubilee, so we give effect to the verse requiring two crop years. A buyer who purchases during Jubilee never begins using it.
  19. One was this — Shmuel’s ruling that the field is not sold at all.
  20. He goes free — One who sells his slave to a gentile is penalized: He must redeem the slave and free him, because he deprived him of the opportunity to fulfill commandments. A slave sold to a Jew outside the Land of Israel also goes free.
  21. In one case, the sale is reversed — From one of these two rulings of Master Shmuel, I learned that the sale is void and the money is returned: either the sale of a field during Jubilee or the sale of a slave to a Jew outside the Land of Israel.
  22. In the other case, the sale is not reversed — The buyer loses his money, but I do not know which ruling concerns a void sale. One might object: Surely Shmuel means the field sale is void and the money returned; otherwise, how does he differ from Rav? They differ if the buyer cut down trees on the field. For Rav, the field returns, but the trees have been cut under a valid sale. For Shmuel, no sale occurred, so the buyer must pay for the trees, even if his payment for the field is treated as a gift and not returned. They also differ if movable property was sold with the field, and the buyer took possession of the land but did not physically take the movable property. Movable property can be acquired with land through payment, a deed, or taking possession, without being physically taken. For Rav, the field returns but the buyer acquires the movable property. For Shmuel, the sale of the field is void, so taking possession of it does not transfer the movable property.
  23. Evidently, the sale is not reversed — In the slave case, the buyer loses his money. Since that sale is not reversed, Shmuel must mean that in the field case the sale is void and the money is returned.
Tosafot on Arakhin 29b, in English Tab translation (4)
  1. One who sells — A year of blight, mildew, or the Sabbatical Year does not count toward the buyer’s two years. Bava Metzia explains that the blight or mildew must have affected the whole region. If it affected only the buyer’s local area, the year would count. The comparison to the Sabbatical Year, when sowing is forbidden everywhere, supports this reading.
  2. If he plowed it or left it fallow, the year counts — The Gemara asks why the Mishna mentions plowing when it already says that even leaving the field fallow counts. It could have answered that the Mishna teaches: not only plowing, but even leaving it fallow counts.
  3. There she cannot be sold again — Rashi explains that once a daughter sold as a child becomes a young woman and goes free, her father cannot sell her again. Kiddushin derives from “when he betrays her” that a father cannot sell his daughter into servitude after selling her once. Her release is therefore permanent, making the a fortiori argument possible. Rabbi Yitzhak objects that the rule against a second sale is disputed. He explains that even those who permit a second sale agree that she cannot be sold after showing signs of young womanhood. One might ask why the same a fortiori argument would not prevent a field sold during the Jubilee Year from ever being sold again. The difference is that a daughter does not lose those signs, whereas the Jubilee Year passes and the field can then be sold as before. Alternatively, Rashi’s explanation can stand: although the rule is disputed, the law follows Rabbi Shimon, who forbids a second sale.
  4. I do not know which of them holds that the sale is void — One might ask: Surely Shmuel says that a field sold during the Jubilee Year is not sold, and the money is returned. If the money is forfeited, what difference is there between Shmuel and Rav? Rashi gives two differences. If the buyer cut down trees, Rav holds that the sale took effect: the field reverts to its owner, but the trees remain cut down. Shmuel holds that no sale took effect, so the trees must be returned, even though the buyer does not recover his money, which is treated as a gift. Alternatively, suppose movable goods were sold with the field, and the buyer took possession of the land but did not take the goods. Movable goods can be acquired along with land by payment, deed, or taking possession of the land, without taking the goods themselves. For Rav, the field reverts but the goods are acquired; for Shmuel, the sale is void and the goods are not acquired. Others question Rashi’s view that the goods are acquired even though the field immediately reverts. In Bava Metzia, Rabban Gamliel assigned tithe to Rabbi Yehoshua and rented him its location; the account says they paid each other rent. Why did he not instead give him the location on condition that it be returned, convey it by a symbolic exchange of a cloth, or lend it and convey it by such an exchange? The answer is that an interest that must revert to its owner—whether a conditional gift, a loan, or a rental—cannot be acquired by symbolic exchange. It resembles a discretionary benefit, which is not considered property for that purpose. They therefore had to exchange payment.

Sources

Kid summary and story cards written by Tab from the William Davidson Edition English (Sefaria, CC BY-NC 4.0).

Tab translation (machine-assisted) of Rashi and Tosafot, from the Vilna Edition Hebrew (public domain) on Sefaria. May contain mistakes.

In the app, the Gemara text comes from Sefaria (William Davidson Edition, CC BY-NC 4.0; Hebrew/Aramaic Vilna Edition). Rashi and Tosafot Hebrew: Vilna Edition (public domain) via Sefaria.

Also spelled: Arachin, Erchin 29.