Commentary page

Kiddushin 20b

This page gathers the commentary on one source unit: the classic commentaries as they are printed, the sources the text cites, the sages named in it and direct links back to the text.

Read the full text in the reader

Babylonian Talmud · folio map

Kiddushin 20b

Kiddushin 20b. The full printed text of this folio side — 22 numbered segments, about 546 words — with the classic commentaries printed on the page.

Original text

Segment 1

– זֶה הַנִּמְכָּר לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה עַצְמָהּ.

this is referring to one sold for idol worship itself, i.e., he is forced to sell himself as a slave to work in a temple of idol worship. The baraita teaches that it is only due to a person’s sins that he reaches a point where he has to sell himself as a slave. Therefore, one should be stringent with him with regard to his redemption and not allow him to be redeemed easily.

Segment 2

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: הָתָם, הָא אַהְדְּרֵיהּ קְרָא, דְּתָנֵי דְּבֵי רַבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל: הוֹאִיל וְהָלַךְ זֶה וְנַעֲשָׂה כּוֹמֶר לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, אֵימָא: לִידְחֵי אֶבֶן אַחַר הַנּוֹפֵל – תַּלְמוּד לוֹמַר: ״אַחֲרֵי נִמְכַּר גְּאֻלָּה תִּהְיֶה לּוֹ אֶחָד מֵאֶחָיו יִגְאָלֶנּוּ״.

Abaye said to that Sage: There, the verse brings him back, i.e., one must strive to redeem a Jew who has been sold as a slave. As the school of Rabbi Yishmael taught: Since this person who sold himself as a slave has gone and become a priest for idol worship, one might say: Let us throw a stone after the fallen, that is, since he has reached this nadir one should abandon him. Therefore, the verse states: “After he is sold he shall be redeemed; one of his brothers may redeem him” (Leviticus 25:48).

Segment 3

וְאֵימָא: ״גְּאוּלָּה תִּהְיֶה לוֹ״ – כִּי הֵיכִי דְּלָא לִיטַּמַּע בֵּין הַנׇּכְרִים, הָא לְעִנְיַן פִּדְיוֹן נַחְמִיר עֲלֵיהּ, מִדְּרַבִּי יוֹסֵי בְּרַבִּי חֲנִינָא!

The Gemara further asks: But one can say as follows: “He shall be redeemed,” so that he will not be assimilated among the gentiles. But with regard to the matter of his redemption and freedom, let us act strictly with him, as derived from that which Rabbi Yosei, son of Rabbi Ḥanina, said, that one is sold as a slave due to his sins.

Segment 4

אָמַר רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק: תְּרֵי קְרָאֵי כְּתִיבִי. כְּתִיב: ״אִם עוֹד רַבּוֹת בַּשָּׁנִים״ וּכְתִיב: ״וְאִם מְעַט נִשְׁאַר בַּשָּׁנִים״. וְכִי יֵשׁ שָׁנִים מְרוּבּוֹת וְיֵשׁ שָׁנִים מוּעָטוֹת? אֶלָּא, נִתְרַבָּה כַּסְפּוֹ – ״מִכֶּסֶף מִקְנָתוֹ״, נִתְמַעֵט כַּסְפּוֹ – ״כְּפִי שָׁנָיו״.

Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak said: Two verses are written with regard to the redemption of a slave sold to a gentile. It is written: “If there be yet many of the years, according to them he shall give back the price of his redemption out of the money that he was bought for” (Leviticus 25:51), and it is written: “And if there remain but few of the years until the Jubilee Year, and he shall reckon with him, according to his years” (Leviticus 25:52). But how can there be both many years and few years when, in any case, he will not serve for more than six years? Rather, this means that as the money of his value increased with the passage of time, he is redeemed “out of the money that he was bought for,” i.e., the price for which he was originally sold, which is the lower sum. And if his monetary value decreased over time, one determines his value “according to his years,” i.e., according to his current value.

Segment 5

וְאֵימָא הָכִי קָאָמַר: הֵיכָא דַּעֲבַד תְּרֵי וּפֻשׁ לֵיהּ אַרְבַּע – נִיתֵּיב לֵיהּ אַרְבַּע ״מִכֶּסֶף מִקְנָתוֹ״, עֲבַד אַרְבַּע וּפֻשׁו לֵיהּ תַּרְתֵּי – נִיתֵּיב תַּרְתֵּי ״כְּפִי שָׁנָיו״?

The Gemara asks: But one can say that this is what the Torah is saying: In a case where he served for two years and an additional four years remain for his service, as indicated by the phrase “if there be yet many of the years,” let him give his redemption money for the four years he owes him “out of the money that he was bought for.” If he served four years and two years remain for his service, as is stated “and if there remain but few of the years,” let him give his redemption money the value of the two years, “according to his years.”

Segment 6

אִם כֵּן, נִכְתּוֹב קְרָא: ״אִם עוֹד רַבּוֹת שָׁנִים״, ״אִם מְעַט נִשְׁאַר שָׁנִים״, מַאי ״בַּשָּׁנִים״ – נִתְרַבָּה כַּסְפּוֹ בַּשָּׁנִים, ״מִכֶּסֶף מִקְנָתוֹ״ – נִתְמַעֵט כַּסְפּוֹ בַּשָּׁנִים ״כְּפִי שָׁנָיו״. אָמַר רַב יוֹסֵף: דַּרְשִׁינְהוּ רַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק לְהָנֵי קְרָאֵי כְּסִינַי.

The Gemara rejects this suggestion: If so, let the verse write: If there be yet many years, and: If there remain but few years. What is the meaning of the phrase “of the years”? This teaches that if his monetary value increased over the years of his servitude, he is redeemed “out of the money that he was bought for,” which is the lower sum. And if his monetary value decreased over the years of his servitude, one determines his value “according to his years.” Upon hearing this statement, Rav Yosef said: Rav Naḥman bar Yitzḥak homiletically interpreted these verses like Sinai. His exposition reflects the truth of Torah as it was given at Mount Sinai, as every matter is fully resolved.

Segment 7

(סִימַן: עֶבֶד, בַּיִת, חֲצָאִין, בַּיִת עֶבֶד, קְרוֹבִים). בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַב הוּנָא בַּר חִינָּנָא מֵרַב שֵׁשֶׁת: עֶבֶד עִבְרִי הַנִּמְכָּר לְנׇכְרִי, נִגְאָל לַחֲצָאִין, אוֹ אֵינוֹ נִגְאָל לַחֲצָאִין?

The Gemara records a mnemonic device for the upcoming discussions: Slave, house, partial, house, slave, and relatives. Rav Huna bar Ḥinnana raised a dilemma before Rav Sheshet: With regard to a Hebrew slave who is sold to a gentile, can he be partially redeemed, or can he not be partially redeemed? Does this slave have the option of paying part of his value and thereby reducing his remaining period of service?

Segment 8

״גְּאֻלָּתוֹ״ ״גְּאֻלָּתוֹ״ מִשְּׂדֵה אֲחוּזָּה גָּמַר: מָה שְׂדֵה אֲחוּזָּה אֵינוֹ נִגְאָל לַחֲצָאִין – אַף הַאי נָמֵי אֵינוֹ נִגְאָל לַחֲצָאִין, אוֹ דִילְמָא לְקוּלָּא אָמְרִינַן, לְחוּמְרָא לָא אָמְרִינַן?

The Gemara analyzes the sides of the dilemma: With regard to a Hebrew slave sold to a gentile, the verse states: “According to his years he shall give back the price of his redemption [ ge’ullato ]” (Leviticus 25:52), and the meaning of the term “ ge’ullato ” can be derived from the same term stated with regard to the redemption of an ancestral field: “And he becomes rich and finds sufficient means to redeem it [ ge’ullato ]” (Leviticus 25:26). Accordingly, just as an ancestral field cannot be partially redeemed, but is either fully redeemed or not at all, so too, this slave cannot be partially redeemed. Or perhaps we say that he cannot be partially redeemed only if that leads to a leniency, but we do not say that he cannot be redeemed if it leads to a stringency.

Segment 9

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: לָאו אָמְרַתְּ הָתָם: ״נִמְכַּר״ – כּוּלּוֹ וְלֹא חֶצְיוֹ, הָכִי נָמֵי, ״נִגְאָל״ – כּוּלּוֹ וְלֹא חֶצְיוֹ.

Rav Sheshet said to him: Didn’t you say there, with regard to a thief who is sold to repay what he stole, that the verse: “And he is sold” (Exodus 22:2), teaches that all of him is sold but not part of him? If he is worth one thousand, and he owes five hundred for theft, he cannot be sold. So too, in the case of one who was sold to a gentile, the phrase “he is redeemed” (Leviticus 25:49) means all of him and not part of him.

Segment 10

אָמַר אַבָּיֵי: אִם תִּימְצֵי לוֹמַר נִגְאָל לַחֲצָאִין, מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ לְקוּלָּא וּלְחוּמְרָא. לְקוּלָּא: זַבְנֵיהּ בִּמְאָה, יְהַב לֵיהּ חַמְשִׁין, פַּלְגָא דְּדָמֵי, וְאַשְׁבַּח וְקָם עַל מָאתַן, אִי אָמְרַתְּ נִגְאָל לַחֲצָאִין – יָהֵיב לֵיהּ מְאָה וְנָפֵיק, וְאִי אָמְרַתְּ אֵין נִגְאָל לַחֲצָאִין – יָהֵיב לֵיהּ מְאָה וְחַמְשִׁין וְנָפֵיק.

Abaye said: If you say that he is partially redeemed, you find elements of leniency and stringency. This ruling can lead to a leniency in the following case: A master purchased a Hebrew slave for one hundred and the redeemer gives him fifty, which is half of his value, and afterward the slave increased in value and stood at two hundred. If you say that he can be partially redeemed he is already half-redeemed. Consequently, the redeemer gives him one hundred, half of his current value, and the slave goes out, i.e., is redeemed. And if you say that he cannot be partially redeemed, the redeemer gives the owner an additional one hundred and fifty and the slave goes out, as the initial fifty serves merely as the first payment, and he is now worth two hundred.

Segment 11

וְהָאָמְרַתְּ נִתְרַבָּה כַּסְפּוֹ – ״מִכֶּסֶף מִקְנָתוֹ״! כְּגוֹן דְּאוֹקִיר וְזָל וְאוֹקִיר.

The Gemara asks: But you said that if the money of his value increased, one always pays “out of the money that he was bought for” (Leviticus 25:51), i.e., one calculates the value of the slave in accordance with his value at the time when he was acquired, even if that is less than his present value. Why, then, should one have to pay the full two hundred? The Gemara answers: This is referring to a case where he initially, before being sold, increased in value, was then sold for two hundred, and afterward decreased in value to one hundred, and subsequently he again increased in value so that he was worth the same amount as he was originally. In this case, his value of two hundred remains determinative.

Segment 12

מַשְׁכַּחַתְּ לַהּ לְחוּמְרָא: זַבְנֵיהּ בְּמָאתַן, יְהַיב מְאָה, פַּלְגֵי דִּדְמֵי, וְאִיכְּסִף וְקָם עַל מְאָה, אִי אָמְרַתְּ נִגְאָל לַחֲצָאִין – יָהֵיב לֵיהּ חַמְשִׁין וְנָפֵיק, וְאִי אָמְרַתְּ אֵין נִגְאָל לַחֲצָאִין – הָנָךְ מְאָה פִּקָּדוֹן נִינְהוּ גַּבֵּיהּ, יָהֵיב לְהוּ נִיהֲלֵיהּ וְנָפֵיק.

Abaye proceeds to describe how you find a case that leads to a stringency. A master purchased a Hebrew slave for two hundred and the redeemer gave one hundred, which is half of his value, and the slave decreased in value and stood at a value of one hundred. If you say that he can be partially redeemed, the redeemer gives fifty and the slave goes out, i.e., is redeemed. And if you say that he cannot be partially redeemed, these one hundred are a deposit with him. Therefore, the redeemer gives it to him at the time of the redemption and the slave goes out. There is no reason to pay him more money, as he is now worth one hundred.

Segment 13

בְּעָא מִינֵּיהּ רַב הוּנָא בַּר חִינָּנָא מֵרַב שֵׁשֶׁת: הַמּוֹכֵר בַּיִת בְּבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה, נִגְאָל לַחֲצָאִין, אוֹ אֵינוֹ נִגְאָל לַחֲצָאִין? ״גְּאֻלָּתוֹ״ ״גְּאֻלָּתוֹ״ מִשְּׂדֵה אֲחוּזָּה גָּמַר: מָה שְׂדֵה אֲחוּזָּה אֵינָהּ נִגְאֶלֶת לַחֲצָאִין – אַף הַאי נָמֵי אֵינוֹ נִגְאָל לַחֲצָאִין,

Rav Huna bar Ḥinnana raised a dilemma before Rav Sheshet with regard to a similar topic: In the case of one who sells a house from among the houses of walled cities, which can be redeemed only during the first year after the sale, can it be partially redeemed, or can it not be partially redeemed? The Gemara explains the sides of the dilemma: Does he derive the verbal analogy of “ ge’ullato ” (Leviticus 25:29) and “ ge’ullato ” (Leviticus 25:26) from the case of an ancestral field and say that just as ancestral land cannot be partially redeemed, so too, this house cannot be partially redeemed?

Segment 14

אוֹ דִילְמָא: הֵיכָא דְּגַלִּי – גַּלִּי, הֵיכָא דְּלָא גַּלִּי – לָא גַּלִּי?

Or perhaps one should say: In a case where the verse explicitly revealed that it cannot be redeemed partially, as it does in the context of an ancestral field, it revealed it. With regard to one who redeems an ancestral field, it is written: “And he becomes rich and finds sufficient means to redeem it” (Leviticus 25:26), indicating that he has enough money to redeem the whole field, not part of it. By contrast, in a case where the Torah did not reveal that it cannot be redeemed, it did not reveal it, and therefore a house from a walled city can be partially redeemed, as the verse does not state this condition in that context.

Segment 15

אֲמַר לֵיהּ: מִמִּדְרָשׁוֹ שֶׁל רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן נִשְׁמַע, שֶׁלֹּוֶה וְגוֹאֵל וְגוֹאֵל לַחֲצָאִין, דְּתַנְיָא: ״אִם גָּאֹל יִגְאַל״ – מְלַמֵּד שֶׁלֹּוֶה וְגוֹאֵל וְגוֹאֵל לַחֲצָאִין.

Rav Sheshet said to him: From Rabbi Shimon’s interpretation one learns that with regard to houses in walled cities, one can borrow money and redeem them, and similarly that one can partially redeem them. As it is taught in a baraita with regard to a verse that describes one who consecrates his field: “And if he will redeem [ ga’ol yigal ] the field” (Leviticus 27:19). The repetition of the verb teaches that one can borrow money and redeem houses in walled cities and that one can also partially redeem them.

Segment 16

אָמַר רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן: מָה טַעַם, לְפִי שֶׁמָּצִינוּ בְּמוֹכֵר שְׂדֵה אֲחוּזָּה שֶׁיִּפָּה כֹּחוֹ, שֶׁאִם הִגִּיעַ יוֹבֵל וְלֹא נִגְאֲלָה – חוֹזֶרֶת לִבְעָלֶיהָ בַּיּוֹבֵל, הוֹרַע כֹּחוֹ – שֶׁאֵינוֹ לֹוֶה וְגוֹאֵל וְגוֹאֵל לַחֲצָאִין.

Rabbi Shimon said: What is the reason for this halakha ? This is because we find with regard to one who sells his ancestral field that his power is enhanced, as, if the Jubilee Year arrives and it is not redeemed, the ancestral field returns to its owners in the Jubilee Year without them having to pay for it. Therefore, the power of the seller is diminished in that he cannot borrow money and redeem the field but must have the money to do so on his own, and he cannot partially redeem it.

Segment 17

מַקְדִּישׁ, שֶׁהוֹרַע כֹּחוֹ, שֶׁאִם הִגִּיעַ יוֹבֵל וְלֹא נִגְאֲלָה – יוֹצְאָה לְכֹהֲנִים בַּיּוֹבֵל, יִפָּה כֹּחוֹ – שֶׁלֹּוֶה וְגוֹאֵל וְגוֹאֵל לַחֲצָאִין.

By contrast, if one consecrates his field his power is diminished, as, if the Jubilee Year arrives and he did not redeem it in the meantime, and the Temple treasurer sold it to someone else, the ancestral field goes out and becomes the property of the priests in the Jubilee Year and does not return to its original owners. Consequently, in order to offset this stringency his power is enhanced in that he may borrow money and redeem the field, and partially redeem it.

Segment 18

הַאי מוֹכֵר בַּיִת בְּבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה נָמֵי, הוֹאִיל וְהוֹרַע כֹּחוֹ, שֶׁאִם מָלְאָה לוֹ שָׁנָה תְּמִימָה וְלֹא נִגְאֲלָה נֶחְלָט – יִפָּה כֹּחוֹ, שֶׁלֹּוֶה וְגוֹאֵל וְגוֹאֵל לַחֲצָאִין.

According to this explanation, with regard to this one who sells a house from among the houses of walled cities, since his power is also diminished, as, if a full year passes and the house has not been redeemed it remains the permanent property of the buyer, in order to offset this stringency, his power should be enhanced in that he may borrow money and redeem the house, and partially redeem it.

Segment 19

אֵיתִיבֵיהּ: ״אִם גָּאֹל יִגְאַל״ – מְלַמֵּד שֶׁלֹּוֶה וְגוֹאֵל וְגוֹאֵל לַחֲצָאִין.

Rava bar Ḥinnana raised an objection to this opinion from a baraita . The verse states with regard to one who consecrates his field: “And if he will redeem [ ga’ol yigal ] the field” (Leviticus 27:19). This teaches that he may borrow money and redeem it, and partially redeem it.

Segment 20

שֶׁיָּכוֹל, וַהֲלֹא דִּין הוּא: וּמָה מוֹכֵר שְׂדֵה אֲחוּזָּה שֶׁיִּפָּה כֹּחוֹ, שֶׁאִם הִגִּיעַ יוֹבֵל וְלֹא נִגְאֲלָה חוֹזֶרֶת לִבְעָלֶיהָ בַּיּוֹבֵל – הוֹרַע כֹּחוֹ, שֶׁאֵין לֹוֶה וְגוֹאֵל וְגוֹאֵל לַחֲצָאִין, מַקְדִּישׁ, שֶׁהוֹרַע כֹּחוֹ, שֶׁאִם הִגִּיעַ יוֹבֵל וְלֹא נִגְאֲלָה יוֹצְאָה לְכֹהֲנִים בַּיּוֹבֵל – אֵינוֹ דִּין שֶׁהוֹרַע כֹּחוֹ שֶׁאֵין לֹוֶה וְגוֹאֵל וְגוֹאֵל לַחֲצָאִין?

The baraita continues: As one might have thought: Could this not be derived through an a fortiori inference: Just as with regard to one who sells an ancestral field that his power is enhanced, as if the Jubilee Year arrives and it is not redeemed, it returns to its owners in the Jubilee Year, and yet his power is diminished in that he cannot borrow money and redeem the field and he cannot partially redeem it; with regard to one who consecrates a field, where his power is diminished, for if the Jubilee Year arrives and it was not redeemed it goes out to the priests in the Jubilee Year, is it not logical that his power is diminished in that he cannot borrow money and redeem the field and he cannot partially redeem it?

Segment 21

מָה לְמוֹכֵר שְׂדֵה אֲחוּזָּה, שֶׁכֵּן הוֹרַע כֹּחוֹ לִיגָּאֵל מִיָּד, תֹּאמַר בְּמַקְדִּישׁ שֶׁיִּפָּה כֹּחוֹ לִיגָּאֵל מִיָּד.

The baraita raises a difficulty against this a fortiori inference: What is unique about one who sells his ancestral field is that his power is diminished with regard to redeeming it immediately, as he cannot redeem his field right away but must wait at least two years. Shall you say that the same halakhot apply with regard to one who consecrates his field, as his power is enhanced with regard to redeeming it immediately? One who has consecrated his field can redeem it as soon as he has the money to do so. If so, the a fortiori inference is not valid.

Segment 22

מוֹכֵר בַּיִת בְּבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה יוֹכִיחַ, שֶׁיִּפָּה כֹּחוֹ לִיגָּאֵל מִיָּד וְאֵין לֹוֶה וְגוֹאֵל וְגוֹאֵל לַחֲצָאִין! לָא קַשְׁיָא:

The baraita responds: The case of one who sells a house from among the houses of walled cities can prove otherwise, as his power is enhanced with regard to redeeming it immediately, and yet he cannot borrow money and redeem the house and he cannot partially redeem it. In any case, with regard to the issue at hand, the baraita indicates the opposite of the previous conclusion: One who sells a house in a walled city cannot partially redeem it. Rav Sheshet answers: This is not difficult.

Kiddushin 20b

Kiddushin 20b

Rashi

Tosafot

Rashba

Ritva

Meiri

Maharsha (Chidushei Halachot)

Penei Yehoshua

Gilyon HaShas

What this page contains

Continue the sequence

Parallel sources

Lessons and study tools

Sages named on this page

Encyclopedia entries citing this page

Original text