Arakhin 29b

מַתְנִי׳ הַמּוֹכֵר אֶת שָׂדֵהוּ בִּשְׁעַת הַיּוֹבֵל — אֵינוֹ מוּתָּר לִגְאוֹל פָּחוֹת מִשְׁתֵּי שָׁנִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״בְּמִסְפַּר שְׁנֵי תְבוּאֹת יִמְכׇּר לָךְ״.

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.

הָיְתָה שְׁנַת שִׁדָּפוֹן וְיֵרָקוֹן, אוֹ שְׁנַת שְׁבִיעִית — אֵינָו עוֹלָה מִן הַמִּנְיָן. נָרָהּ אוֹ הוֹבִירָהּ — עוֹלָה לוֹ מִן הַמִּנְיָן. רַבִּי אֱלִיעֶזֶר אוֹמֵר: מְכָרָהּ לוֹ לִפְנֵי רֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה וְהִיא מְלֵיאָה פֵּירוֹת — הֲרֵי זֶה אוֹכֵל מִמֶּנָּה שָׁלֹשׁ תְּבוּאוֹת בִּשְׁתֵּי שָׁנִים.

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.

גְּמָ׳ הַמּוֹכֵר שָׂדֵהוּ בִּשְׁעַת הַיּוֹבֵל וְכוּ׳. ״אֵינוֹ גּוֹאֵל״ לָא קָתָנֵי, אֶלָּא ״אֵינוֹ מוּתָּר לִגְאוֹל״, אַלְמָא קָסָבַר: אִיסּוּרָא נָמֵי אִיכָּא, דַּאֲפִילּוּ קַרְקוֹשֵׁי זוּזֵי נָמֵי אָסוּר.

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.

וְלָא מִיבַּעְיָא מוֹכֵר, דְּקָאֵי בַּעֲשֵׂה, דִּכְתִיב: ״בְּמִסְפַּר שְׁנֵי תְבוּאֹת יִמְכׇּר לָךְ״, אֶלָּא אֲפִילּוּ לוֹקֵחַ נָמֵי קָאֵי בַּעֲשֵׂה, דְּבָעֵינַן ״שָׁנִים תִּקְנֶה״, וְלֵיכָּא.

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.

אִיתְּמַר: הַמּוֹכֵר שָׂדֵהוּ בִּשְׁנַת הַיּוֹבֵל עַצְמָהּ, רַב אָמַר: מְכוּרָה וְיוֹצְאָה, וּשְׁמוּאֵל אָמַר: אֵינָהּ מְכוּרָה כׇּל עִיקָּר. מַאי טַעְמָא דִּשְׁמוּאֵל? קַל וָחוֹמֶר, וּמָה מְכוּרָה כְּבָר יוֹצְאָה, שֶׁאֵינָהּ מְכוּרָה אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁלֹּא תִּימָּכֵר?

§ 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?

וּלְרַב, לָא אָמְרִינַן קַל וָחוֹמֶר כִּי הַאי גַוְונָא? וְהָתַנְיָא: יָכוֹל יִמְכּוֹר אָדָם אֶת בִּתּוֹ כְּשֶׁהִיא נַעֲרָה? אָמַרְתָּ קַל וָחוֹמֶר: וּמָה מְכוּרָה כְּבָר — יוֹצְאָה עַכְשָׁיו, שֶׁאֵינָהּ מְכוּרָה — אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁלֹּא תִּימָּכֵר?

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?

הָתָם לָא הָדְרָא מִיזְדַּבְּנָא, הָכָא הָדְרָא מִיזְדַּבְּנָא.

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.

מֵיתִיבִי: ״אַחַר הַיּוֹבֵל שָׁנִים תִּקְנֶה״ — מְלַמֵּד שֶׁמּוֹכְרִין סָמוּךְ לַיּוֹבֵל, מוּפְלָג מִן הַיּוֹבֵל מִנַּיִן? תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״לְפִי רֹב הַשָּׁנִים... וּלְפִי מְעוֹט הַשָּׁנִים״.

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.

וּבִשְׁנַת הַיּוֹבֵל עַצְמָהּ לֹא יִמְכּוֹר, וְאִם מָכַר — אֵינָהּ מְכוּרָה! אָמַר לְךָ רַב: אֵינָהּ מְכוּרָה לְמִסְפַּר שְׁנֵי תְבוּאוֹת, אֲבָל מְכוּרָה הִיא וְיוֹצְאָה.

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.

וְאִי אִיזְדַּבּוֹנֵי מִיזְדַּבְּנָה, תֵּיקוּם בִּרְשׁוּתֵיהּ עַד בָּתַר יוֹבֵל, וּבָתַר יוֹבֵל נֵיכְלַיהּ שְׁנֵי תְבוּאוֹת וְנַיהְדְּרַהּ! מִי לָא תַּנְיָא: אֲכָלָהּ שָׁנָה אַחַת לִפְנֵי הַיּוֹבֵל — מַשְׁלִימִין לוֹ שָׁנָה אַחֶרֶת אַחַר הַיּוֹבֵל? הָתָם נָחֵית לַאֲכִילָה, הָכָא לָא נָחֵית לַאֲכִילָה.

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.

אָמַר רַב עָנָן: שְׁמַעִית מִינֵּיהּ דְּמָר שְׁמוּאֵל תַּרְתֵּי, חֲדָא הָךְ, וְאִידַּךְ הַמּוֹכֵר עַבְדּוֹ לְגוֹיִם אוֹ בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ יָצָא לְחֵירוּת.

§ 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.

חֲדָא הָדְרִי זְבִינֵי, וַחֲדָא לָא הָדְרִי זְבִינֵי, וְלָא יָדַעְנָא הֵי (מיניה) [מִינַּיְהוּ].

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.

אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: נִיחְזֵי אֲנַן, מִדְּתַנְיָא בְּבָרַיְיתָא: הַמּוֹכֵר עַבְדּוֹ בְּחוּצָה לָאָרֶץ יָצָא לְחֵירוּת, וְצָרִיךְ גֵּט שִׁיחְרוּר מֵרַבּוֹ שֵׁנִי. שְׁמַע מִינַּהּ, מִדְּקָרֵי לֵיהּ לִשְׁנֵי ״רַבּוֹ״, אַלְמָא לָא הָדְרִי זְבִינֵי, וְכִי קָאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל הָכָא: אֵינָהּ מְכוּרָה וּמָעוֹת חוֹזְרִין.

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.