Arakhin 29bערכין כ״ט ב
The William Davidson Talmudתלמוד מהדורת ויליאם דוידסון
Save "Arakhin 29b"
Toggle Reader Menu Display Settings
29bכ״ט ב

מתני׳ המוכר את שדהו בשעת היובל אינו מותר לגאול פחות משתי שנים שנאמר (ויקרא כה, טו) במספר שני תבואות ימכר לך

MISHNA: One who sells his field during a period when the Jubilee Year is in effect is not permitted to redeem it less than two years after the sale, as it is stated: “According to the number of years of the crops he shall sell to you” (Leviticus 25:15). The plural form “years” indicates a minimum of two years.

היתה שנת שדפון וירקון או שנת שביעית אינו עולה מן המנין נרה או הובירה עולה לו מן המנין רבי אליעזר אומר מכרה לו לפני ראש השנה והיא מליאה פירות הרי זה אוכל ממנה שלש תבואות בשתי שנים:

If one of those years was a year of blight or mildew, or if it was the Sabbatical Year, when the buyer is unable to derive benefit from the field, that year does not count as part of the tally, and the owner must wait an additional year before redeeming the field. If the buyer plowed the field but did not sow it, or if he left it fallow, that year counts as part of his tally, as it was fit to produce a crop. Rabbi Eliezer says: If the owner of the field sold it to the buyer before Rosh HaShana and the field was full of produce, and the owner redeems the field after two years, that buyer consumes from the field’s produce three crops in two years. Although he received the field with its crop, he is not required to return it in the same state.

גמ׳ המוכר שדהו בשעת היובל וכו' אינו גואל לא קתני אלא אינו מותר לגאול אלמא קסבר איסורא נמי איכא דאפילו קרקושי זוזי נמי אסור

GEMARA: The mishna states that one who sells his field during a period when the Jubilee Year is in effect is not permitted to redeem it less than two years after the sale. The Gemara notes: The mishna does not teach that one cannot redeem his field before two years have elapsed; rather, the mishna teaches that one is not permitted to redeem it. Evidently, the tanna of the mishna holds that there is also a prohibition involved in the matter, such that it is prohibited even to rattle dinars before the buyer in order to persuade him to sell back the field.

ולא מיבעיא מוכר דקאי בעשה דכתיב (ויקרא כה, טו) במספר שני תבואות ימכר לך אלא אפילו לוקח נמי קאי בעשה דבעינן {ויקרא כה } שנים תקנה וליכא

The Gemara continues: And it is not necessary to state this with regard to the seller, as he stands in violation of a positive mitzva, as it is written: “According to the number of years of the crops he shall sell to you” (Leviticus 25:15), and the plural form “years” indicates a minimum of two years. Rather, even the buyer stands in violation of a positive mitzva, as we require the fulfillment of another mitzva from the same verse: “According to the number of years after the Jubilee Year you shall buy from your neighbor,” and if the buyer returns the field before the two years elapse, the mitzva is not fulfilled.

איתמר המוכר שדהו בשנת היובל עצמה רב אמר מכורה ויוצאה ושמואל אמר אינה מכורה כל עיקר מאי טעמא דשמואל קל וחומר ומה מכורה כבר יוצאה שאינה מכורה אינו דין שלא תימכר

§ It was stated: With regard to one who sells his field during the Jubilee Year itself, Rav says: The field is sold in principle, but it leaves the buyer’s possession immediately, and his money is not refunded. And Shmuel says: It is not sold at all. The Gemara elaborates: What is the reasoning of Shmuel? Shmuel derives his opinion via an a fortiori inference. And what, if a field that was already sold before the Jubilee Year leaves the possession of the buyer in the Jubilee Year, is it not logical that a field that was not yet sold is not sold at all during the Jubilee Year?

ולרב לא אמרינן קל וחומר כי ה"ג והתניא יכול ימכור אדם את בתו כשהיא נערה אמרת קל וחומר ומה מכורה כבר יוצאה עכשיו שאינה מכורה אינו דין שלא תימכר

The Gemara asks: And according to Rav, do we not say that one may derive an a fortiori inference in this way? But isn’t it taught in a baraita: One might have thought that a person may sell his daughter as a maidservant when she is a young woman. You can say the following a fortiori inference to reject such a possibility: And what, if a daughter who was already sold, now leaves her master upon becoming a young woman, is it not logical that a daughter who was not sold is not capable of being sold once she becomes a young woman? Evidently, one may derive this type of an a fortiori inference. Why, then, does Rav disagree with Shmuel?

התם לא הדרא מיזדבנא הכא הדרא מיזדבנא

The Gemara answers that the cases are not comparable. There, with regard to a maidservant, once she becomes a young woman she is not ever sold again. Here, the field that is returned to the seller in the Jubilee Year may later be sold again. Rav therefore maintains that one may not derive the aforementioned a fortiori inference.

מיתיבי אחר היובל שנים תקנה מלמד שמוכרין סמוך ליובל מופלג מן היובל מנין ת"ל (ויקרא כה, טז) לפי רוב השנים ולפי מעוט השנים

The Gemara raises an objection to Rav’s opinion from a baraita: The verse states: “According to the number of years after the Jubilee you shall buy from your neighbor” (Leviticus 25:15). The term: After the Jubilee, teaches that a field may be sold in the year adjacent to the Jubilee Year. From where is it derived that a field may be sold in a year that is separated from the Jubilee Year? The verse states: “According to the multitude of the years you shall increase the price thereof, and according to the fewness of the years you shall diminish the price of it” (Leviticus 25:16). The verse teaches that one may sell a field even after several years have elapsed since the last Jubilee Year.

ובשנת היובל עצמה לא ימכור ואם מכר אינה מכורה אמר לך רב אינה מכורה למספר שני תבואות אבל מכורה היא ויוצאה

The baraita continues: And in the Jubilee Year itself one may not sell his field, and if one sold it, it is not sold. This baraita clearly seems to contradict the opinion of Rav. The Gemara responds: Rav could say to you: The baraita means that the field is not sold for the number of years of the crops, i.e., it does not remain in the buyer’s possession for a minimum of two years, rather it is sold in principle, and then immediately leaves the buyer’s possession.

ואי איזדבוני מיזבנה תיקום ברשותיה עד בתר יובל ובתר יובל ניכליה שני תבואות וניהדרה מי לא תניא אכלה שנה אחת לפני היובל משלימין לו שנה אחרת אחר היובל התם נחית לאכילה הכא לא נחית לאכילה

The Gemara objects: But if the field is indeed sold, let it stand in the buyer’s possession until after the Jubilee Year, and after the Jubilee Year let him consume the field’s produce for two years of crops, and only then return the field. Isn’t it taught in a baraita: If the buyer consumed the field’s produce for one year before the Jubilee Year, he completes another year after the Jubilee Year? The Gemara explains: The cases are not comparable. There, the buyer already entered the field in order to consume the produce, and therefore he completes the minimum of two years. Here, the buyer did not enter the field to consume the produce at all, as ownership of the field immediately reverts to the seller.

אמר רב ענן שמעית מיניה דמר שמואל תרתי חדא הך ואידך המוכר עבדו לעובד כוכבים או בחוצה לארץ יצא לחירות

§ Rav Anan says: I learned two halakhot from Master Shmuel. One was this halakha, that if one sells his field during the Jubilee Year the sale is ineffective. And the other halakha concerned one who sells his Canaanite slave to gentiles, or to a Jew who resides outside of Eretz Yisrael, that the slave is emancipated. A Canaanite slave is partially obligated in the fulfillment of mitzvot. By selling him to a gentile, one prevents him from fulfilling the mitzvot, and by selling him to one who dwells outside of Eretz Yisrael, one prevents him from fulfilling the mitzva of dwelling in Eretz Yisrael. The Sages therefore decreed that the Jewish master must write the slave a bill of manumission after the sale, so that if he runs away from his gentile master, he would not reenter servitude under the Jewish master.

חדא הדרי זביני וחדא לא הדרי זביני ולא ידענא הי מיניה

Rav Anan continues: With regard to one of these halakhot, Shmuel said that the sale is retracted and the money is refunded, and with regard to one of them, he said that the sale is not retracted and the buyer loses his money. But I do not know in which of the cases the sale is retracted and in which case it is not.

אמר רב יוסף ניחזי אנן מדתניא בברייתא המוכר עבדו בחו"ל יצא לחירות וצריך גט שיחרור מרבו שני ש"מ מדקרי ליה לשני רבו אלמא לא הדרי זביני וכי קאמר שמואל הכא אינה מכורה ומעות חוזרין

Rav Yosef said: Let us see if it is possible to resolve Rav Anan’s dilemma. It may be resolved from that which is taught in a baraita: In the case of one who sells his slave to a Jew outside of Eretz Yisrael, the slave is emancipated but nevertheless requires a bill of manumission from his second master. Conclude from the baraita as follows: Since the baraita calls the second owner the slave’s master, and requires him to emancipate the slave, evidently the sale is not retracted, and the buyer loses his money. And therefore, when Shmuel says here that the field is not sold during the Jubilee Year, he means that the sale does not take effect and the money is returned to the buyer.