Kids Daf Quest

Daf Yomi for kids · Talmud Bavli · Masechet Arakhin

Arakhin 33 for kids: Houses and Jubilee

ערכין ל״ג

🏠 This daf asks when the Jubilee Year returns a house to its owner. It also explores special rules for houses in unwalled courtyards and for Levite cities.

Daf Yomi day:

📖 Open Arakhin 33a in Daf QuestOpen Arakhin 33b 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 33

Words to know

Rashi and Tosafot on Arakhin 33 in simple English

Rashi on Arakhin 33a, in English Tab translation (36)
  1. This works well for the Rabbis — They disagree with Rabbi Yehuda and say that the fiftieth year is not counted among the Sabbatical Years. So, as you said, they needed to count the Jubilee Years.
  2. But according to Rabbi Yehuda, who says the fiftieth year — It is the Jubilee Year and also counts toward the next Sabbatical cycle. Why count Jubilee Years? Counting a Sabbatical Year every seven years would be enough, since no year interrupts the count and no mistake could arise.
  3. Certainly — The earlier teaching that they counted Sabbatical Years and Jubilee Years in Ezra’s time does not follow Rabbi Yehuda.
  4. And did they not count Jubilee Years? — That is, in Sennacherib’s time.
  5. But isn’t it written? — This was said in Zedekiah’s time.
  6. At the end of seven years you shall let go, and so on — We asked: “At the end of seven years” implies after seven years, including the seventh year. But the verse also says, “And he has served you six years.”
  7. Six for one who was sold — As it is written in Exodus 21:2: “He shall serve six years.”
  8. And seven for one whose ear was pierced — He does not go free until the Jubilee. If the Jubilee falls in the eighth year after his ear was pierced, he goes free then. So the Jubilee was observed in Zedekiah’s time, at the destruction of the Temple, many generations after Sennacherib’s exile of the tribes.
  9. It is written as a rebuke — Jeremiah was reproving them: Had you freed the slaves in the years when you were required to do so?
  10. As it is written — In Zedekiah’s time, “The seller shall not return to what he sold.” Jeremiah was telling them that they would eventually be exiled, the Jubilee would cease, and fields would not return to their owners.
  11. Could the Jubilee have ceased? — Could it have ceased when the tribes of Reuben and Gad were exiled, while the prophet speaks of its ceasing as a future event?
  12. What was Josiah doing in Bethel? — The verse describes Josiah clearing idolatry from the land of Israel. Bethel belonged to the kings of Israel, so what was Josiah, king of Judah, doing there?
  13. Harvest — This means a ruler: the Hebrew letters nun and resh can be interchanged, as in the two forms of Nebuchadnezzar’s name.
  14. Mishna: Houses of the courtyards — These are houses in towns without walls.
  15. The favorable provision — As explained: they may be redeemed immediately, without waiting two years while the buyer holds them. In this, they are like houses in walled cities.
  16. And with a deduction from the price — As with fields, the buyer deducts an amount for the years he held the property, as Leviticus 25:27 says: “He shall calculate the years since its sale.”
  17. Gemara: It shall be reckoned with the fields of the land — This is written about houses in unwalled courtyards.
  18. And with a deduction from the price — If the owner comes to redeem them before the Jubilee.
  19. What is this saying? — Why would one think they do not leave the buyer’s possession at the Jubilee? They were compared to ancestral fields, so why is “and it shall go out in the Jubilee” needed?
  20. And the Jubilee falls in the second year — That is, the second year after this person bought it from the Temple treasury.
  21. It belongs to the buyer — As taught earlier: if someone else redeems a consecrated field and the Jubilee arrives without its original owner redeeming it, it belongs to that buyer permanently.
  22. It goes to the priests — If someone consecrates an ancestral field and another person redeems it, it goes to the priests at the Jubilee. The second year is specified because, if the Jubilee fell in the first year, “and it shall go out in the Jubilee” would not be needed: even if the house were treated like one in a walled city, it would not yet belong permanently to the buyer and would go out at the Jubilee under the favorable rule that applies to fields.
  23. Even if no one redeemed it — It should still leave the Temple treasury’s possession at the Jubilee. The phrase “and it shall go out in the Jubilee” is written explicitly and is not needed for an ordinary sale, since these houses were already compared to fields.
  24. A Levite has a stronger right concerning what he sells — He may redeem a field in his city’s surrounding land immediately, and he may redeem a house in a walled city at any time. Both leave the buyer’s possession at the Jubilee, as explained later.
  25. His right is weaker concerning what he consecrates — It does not leave the Temple treasury’s possession without redemption, as explained later.
  26. The sold property shall go out — If the verse had said that a Levite’s sold property goes out in the Jubilee Year without specifying a house, I would have thought that even documents and movable goods sold by a Levite return to him then.
  27. And this disagrees with Rabbi Oshaya — Rav Huna said above that if someone consecrated a house in an unwalled village and another person redeemed it from the Temple, it leaves that person’s possession and returns to its original owner in the Jubilee Year. Rabbi Oshaya disagrees.
  28. Included in “he shall give the money, and it shall be his” — Anything a person buys from the Temple remains his permanently.
  29. When Scripture specified — It expressly excluded a consecrated ancestral field redeemed by someone else: the field leaves that person’s possession and is divided among the priests.
  30. But these — Houses in unwalled villages remain under the rule that the purchase is his; they do not leave the buyer’s possession.
  31. “And it shall go out in the Jubilee Year” — Why does Rabbi Oshaya need this verse?
  32. It requires completion — The buyer must receive the second of the two years the property is entitled to remain in his possession. As taught above: If he held it for one year before the Jubilee Year, he receives another year afterward.
  33. The text reads, “A baraita supports Rav Huna” — Rav Huna said above that if someone consecrated a house in an unwalled village and another person redeemed it from the Temple, it returns to its original owner in the Jubilee Year.
  34. And it refutes Rabbi Oshaya — He said that such houses remain in the buyer’s possession.
  35. And he may redeem it at any time — Even if someone else redeemed it, the original owner may redeem it from that person. It is unlike an ancestral field, of which Scripture says, “It shall not be redeemed again.”
  36. If another person redeemed it from the Temple and the Jubilee Year arrived before the one who consecrated it redeemed it from him — The house returns to the one who consecrated it without payment.
Tosafot on Arakhin 33a, in English Tab translation (1)
  1. Rather, this teaches that Jeremiah brought them back and Josiah ruled over them — But after Jeremiah brought them back, they remained in the land only thirty-six years before the destruction, as explained earlier in chapter two (Arakhin 12b). The Jubilee Year had not yet arrived, so how could Scripture say, “They listened and let them go”? One can answer that they had slaves from before their exile. The main force of the earlier challenge, however, comes from the words “All the officials and all the people who had entered the covenant listened” (Jeremiah 34:10). This implies that they entered a covenant to free their slaves when the Jubilee Year arrived.
Rashi on Arakhin 33b, in English Tab translation (38)
  1. Two courtyards — A city with only two courtyards.
  2. Do I not know that they have no wall? — “Houses of the courtyards” suggests a settlement of neighboring courtyards, not houses within a city.
  3. Like places without a wall — Because the settlement is too small to count as a city.
  4. And how many? — How small must it be for its wall not to count as a city wall? Two courtyards, and so on.
  5. Say one house and one courtyard, one house and one courtyard — But if each courtyard has two houses, the settlement would count as a walled city, not as houses of unwalled courtyards.
  6. If so, let it say “courtyards” — It need not say “houses,” since we already know that a courtyard contains a house.
  7. An Israelite who inherited — If he inherited a house in a walled city from his mother’s father, a Levite, it does not become the buyer’s permanent property after one year if he sells it. Rather, he may always redeem it, like a Levite, as it says: “The Levites shall have a perpetual right of redemption” (Leviticus 25:32).
  8. Unless he is — The seller must be a Levite. This excludes an Israelite who inherited from his mother’s father, a Levite: he cannot redeem like a Levite.
  9. And the cities of the Levites — The house must be in a city given to the Levites in Joshua’s time. This excludes a Levite who inherited from his mother’s father, an Israelite: he cannot redeem like a Levite. The first part of the mishna now appears to contradict the last part; the Gemara resolves this.
  10. These matters are stated only — Perpetual redemption applies only in the cities of the Levites; the seller need not be a Levite. The Rabbis agree that an Israelite who inherited from his mother’s father, a Levite, redeems like a Levite if the house is in a Levite city. They also agree that a Levite who inherited from his mother’s father, an Israelite, does not redeem like a Levite, because the Torah makes the rule depend on the city.
  11. He does not redeem in accordance with this procedure — The Gemara asks: If he does not redeem like an Israelite, does he redeem like a Levite? But the end of the mishna says the seller must be a Levite.
  12. Granted, the cities of the Levites — The house must be in a Levite city, excluding a Levite who inherited from an Israelite, for the verse says “the cities of the Levites.”
  13. But how do we know the seller must be a Levite? — What excludes an Israelite who inherited from his mother’s father, a Levite?
  14. And if a man redeems from the Levites — This suggests that permission to redeem was given to some Levites, but not to all.
  15. And it was taught — A teaching interprets the verse this way. This is the reading in Sifra: “Why does it say ‘from the Levites’?” Had the verse said only, “The Levites shall have a perpetual right of redemption,” one might think that a Levite who sold to an Israelite may always redeem, since an Israelite’s right is weaker: his sale becomes permanent after one year.
  16. But this one’s right is stronger — The Levite has a perpetual right of redemption. One might therefore think that if he sold to another Levite, he could redeem only within a year, after which the sale would become permanent.
  17. Therefore it says “from the Levites” — This excludes a Levite born from a forbidden union with a woman who is a mamzeret or a Gibeonite woman. All the more so, it excludes an Israelite who inherited from his mother’s father, a Levite, since he is fully an Israelite.
  18. The open land and the fields — The open land extended one thousand cubits around a Levite city, as it says, “From the wall of the city outward, one thousand cubits all around” (Numbers 35:4). Beyond it the Levites had another thousand cubits for fields and vineyards, as indicated by the measurements in the next verse. The open land was left empty: it had no houses and was not planted, but added beauty to the city.
  19. Fields may not be made into open land — That would reduce cultivation and harm the settlement of the Land of Israel.
  20. Nor open land into fields — That would spoil the city’s beauty.
  21. Open land may not be made into a city — Houses may not be built there, because a city is not beautiful without open land. All the more so, a city may not be turned into open land, for one may not destroy an inhabited area.
  22. They may sell at any time — I heard that this includes the Jubilee Year itself. But this is difficult: Rav and Shmuel disagree earlier about an Israelite who sells his field during the Jubilee Year, and the same question should arise here. One could argue that if a Levite’s earlier sale ends at Jubilee, surely a sale made during Jubilee cannot take effect. It seems to me that, because the preceding chapter says, “They may consecrate at any time and redeem at any time,” the mishna uses the same wording here.
  23. They may redeem at any time — Their houses in walled cities do not become the buyers’ permanent property.
  24. Could this one also? — Might a Levite who sells his ancestral field—the thousand cubits beyond the open land—also be barred from redeeming it during the first two years?
  25. Because it is stated — If someone else redeems a consecrated ancestral field from the Temple treasury, the field passes to the priests in the Jubilee Year, as the verse says: “The field shall be…”
  26. Could it be that even a Levite — who consecrated a field and did not redeem it loses it at the Jubilee? Scripture says, “The Levites shall have a perpetual right of redemption.”
  27. These cities — the cities given to the Levites.
  28. They may not make them small towns — because they are cities of refuge and need enough residents to provide refuge for those who have killed someone.
  29. Nor large cities — because people come there from everywhere to trade, and the avenger of blood might come, lie in wait for the killer, and kill him.
  30. Rather, medium-sized towns — without a wall.
  31. Here, it was walled and then settled — as you said, that could not have happened in the Levite cities. But they could have been settled and then walled: after the cities were given to the Levites in Joshua’s days, the Levites built walls around them.
  32. And in such a case — where it was settled and then walled, does it count as a walled city, so that a verse is needed to exclude it?
  33. A dwelling house in a walled city — a house built and inhabited in a city that was already walled. This implies that the wall came before settlement.
  34. Could it be even if the Israelites walled it — after conquering the land, but before settling the city?
  35. And elsewhere it says “wall” — “All these were fortified cities with high walls” (Deuteronomy 3:5).
  36. Afterward — after the Israelites conquered them.
  37. Rav Salla explained it — the city was indeed walled before it was settled. As for your objection that “these towns may not be made” that way:
  38. For example, cities that fell to them — by lot in Joshua’s days.

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 33.