The Coming Week's Daf Yomi by Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz
This essay is based upon the insights and chidushim (original ideas) of Talmudic scholar Rabbi Adin Steinsaltz, as published in the Hebrew version of the Steinsaltz Edition of the Talmud.
Arakhin 28a-b - Introducing the idea of herem
The mishnayot on today's daf (=page) discuss someone who declares his property to be herem - dedicated or devoted to God (see Vayikra 27:28-29).
The term herem is found in a number of Semitic languages, meaning a thing that is sanctified to God. In the Torah we find it relating to a number of different situations, meaning something that must be utterly destroyed, something that is forbidden to all, or killing. Another meaning of the word is a very serious oath, one whose abrogation would mean death. In Rabbinic literature there are two additional ways in which the word is used - as a serious type of excommunication or a severe prohibition established by the community or by the Rabbinic court.
In our Mishnah, the word herem is used to mean that the person has sanctified his property by means of that expression. In contrast with ordinary sanctity, which can be redeemed, a herem is totally forbidden and removed from the possession of the original owner. Thus we find that someone who declares his ancestral plot of land to be sanctified in an ordinary way is encouraged to redeem it before the Jubilee year. If, however, the method of sanctification was by means of herem, the land immediately is transferred to the kohanim and he no longer has any rights to it.
For this very reason, the Mishnah explains that a person can only declare his own ancestral field herem. If he has purchased a field from another that is supposed to be returned to the original owner in the Jubilee year, then the purchaser cannot declare it to be herem since it does not truly belong to him and a person does not have the ability to declare something that does not belong to him to be herem.
*******************************************
Arakhin 29a-b - Selling an ancestral field
As a segue from the discussion of someone who sanctified his field in the Land of Israel, the final perek (=chapter) of Masekhet Arakhin discusses the general sale of real estate in Israel. Although this topic is not actually an issue of sanctity, nevertheless there are similarities between these issues.
The Torah explains that someone who sells an ancestral field is permitted - and, in fact, commanded - to redeem the field from the purchaser. Whether or not he does so, the field will automatically be returned to the original owner at the end of the 50-year Jubilee cycle. For this reason, all land purchases in Israel were viewed as short-term sales, and in the event that the original owner chooses to redeem the land from the purchaser, he does it by subtracting the years that field was in the hands of the purchaser and paying the remainder of the purchase price of the field.
The Mishnah teaches that the seller must leave the field in the hands of the purchaser for at least two years before he can redeem it. The Sefer HaHinukh suggests that the Torah wanted to discourage the original owner from selling his ancestral field easily. If he thought that he could redeem it at any time, he would not be discouraged from selling it. The Hinukh further suggests that this rule applies only to a sale of the field. In the event that he gave it away as a gift, he could redeem it at any time.
In his Mishneh Torah (Hilkhot Shemittah VeYovel 11:18), the Rambam rules that once the two years are up, the original owner can force the purchaser to sell the field, even if he does not want to do so. This would be true if his relatives came to redeem it on his behalf, as well.
****************************************
Arakhin 30a-b - Slavery according to the Sages
Although the common perception today is that slavery is inhumane, the situation of an eved ivri is more similar to a long-term contract, in that the slave must be treated with great respect. The Gemara understands from the passage ki tov lo imakh - that some slaves choose to remain beyond their assigned years because they find their situation to be a good one (see Devarim 15:16) - that the master is obligated to ensure that the slave join him in eating and drinking. According to the baraita on our daf (=page), the master cannot eat fine bread and feed his eved ivri poor bread; he cannot drink aged wine and have his eved ivri drink poorer quality wine; he cannot sleep on cushions and have his eved ivri sleeping on straw. The baraita concludes with the expression kol ha-koneh eved, koneh adon le-atzmo - anyone who purchases a slave has bought a master for himself.
The Me'iri writes that these obligations on the master should be seen as recommendations - as good deeds. They are not monetary obligations that the master owes to his eved ivri, so the eved ivri could not, for example, take his master to court and sue him demanding a higher standard of living. Furthermore, the Me'iri argues that even today, when we no longer have the concept of slavery, this attitude should inform contemporary relationships with workers, who should be housed, clothed and fed in a manner similar to that of the master. This is certainly true according to the opinion of Tosafot, which bring a prooftext to this rule from the passage ke-sahir ketoshav ya'avod imakh (Vayikra 25:40) - that an eved ivri should be treated like a hired servant. The Talmud Yerushalmi writes that Rabbi Yohanan treated all who worked for him this way - even his non-Jewish slaves.
***********************************************
Arakhin 31a-b - Selling houses in walled cities
One of the unique laws relating to walled cities is that a house that is sold can be "redeemed" - that is, repurchased - within a 12-month period. After that time it becomes the permanent possession of the purchaser and, in contrast with other real estate in Israel - will not be returned to the original owner at the beginning of the Jubilee year (see Vayikra 25:29-31).
The Mishnah on today's daf (=page) rules that such a house can be redeemed at any time during those 12 months, and that although doing so appears to be payment of interest - which is forbidden by the Torah - nevertheless it is not considered to be interest and is permitted.
The reason it appears to be payment of interest is because the seller will be returning the same amount of money to the purchaser as he originally paid (we assume that the value of real estate does not fluctuate, or that the halakhah requires that the redemption be done at the same value as the original payment price), and, in addition, the purchaser derived the benefit of living in the house for a period of time. Since the seller can always redeem the house, it appears that the purchaser "lent" money to the seller that was returned at a later time together with an additional benefit.
The Gemara quotes a baraita that states this law in a different manner. According to the baraita, redeeming a house in a walled city in this manner is an actual case of forbidden interest, but the Torah permits it in this unique case. In response, Rabbi Yohanan says that there is, in fact, a disagreement between Rabbi Yehudah and the Sages, and the Mishnah and baraita represent these two opinions. The Talmud Yerushalmiexplains Rabbi Yehudah believes that this is a real case of interest, and the Sages argue that since this is done as a sale and not as a loan, it only has the appearance of forbidden interest, but is not truly a case of interest.
***********************************************
Arakhin 32a-b - The sanctity of walled cities
The Mishnah on today's daf (=page) lists a number of cities that had the unique status of arei homah - walled cities - with the special laws that applied to them (see, for example, yesterday's daf). These are defined as cities that were surrounded by walls from the days of Joshua, and they include Zippori, Gush Halav, Yodfat, Hadid, Ono and Yerushalayim.
The Gemara quotes a baraita where Rabbi Yishma'el b'Rabbi Yossi explains that these cities were enumerated because they were recognized by the returning exiles at the beginning of the second Temple period and resanctified (for details on the sanctification ceremony, see Shevu'ot 16a). This is explained by the Gemara as necessary, since kedusha rishonah kidshah le-sha'atah ve-lo kidshah le-atid la-vo - the original sanctity of the land during the first Temple period was only established for that time, but not for the future. For this reason, only those cities that were resanctified by Ezra and the community that returned to Israel were granted the status of arei homah. The sanctity of these cities impacts on the laws of selling houses within them (which is the topic of discussion in our Gemara), but also grants them a higher status of holiness so that, for example, a metzorah - someone suffering from biblical leprosy - would not be permitted to remain in the city (see Mishnah Kelim 1:7).
The Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilkhot Shemittah Ve-Yovel 12:15-16) rules that this sanctity was removed with the destruction of the second Temple, and these cities will need to undergo a process of resanctification again when the third Temple is built. This stands in contrast with the sanctity of the city of Jerusalem, where the Rambam rules that even if the holiness of the Land is removed, kedushat Yerushalayim - which stems from the presence of God - can never be removed.
******************************************
Arakhin 33a-b - When is the Jubilee year in force?
When is the yovel - the Jubilee year - in effect?
According to a baraita quoted by the Gemara on yesterday's daf (=page), with the beginning of exile during the first Temple period, the yovel no longer applied. This is based on the passage in Vayikra (25:10) that requires that during the Jubilee year the courts must "proclaim liberty throughout the land unto all the inhabitants thereof." Only if "all the inhabitants" are residing in the land of Israel does this law apply.
The Gemara on today's daf questions whether the yovel was not in force at the end of the first Temple period, for we find that the prophet Yirmiyahu calls on the people to free their slaves (see Yirmiyahu 34:14), which is understood by the Gemara to include even an eved nirtzah - a Jewish slave who asked to remain with his owner (see Shmot 21:6) - who is set free at the beginning of the Jubilee year.
Rabbi Yohanan responds that Yirmiyahu succeeded in bringing back at least some of the exiled people from the northern tribes, and that there was a period when the Judean king, Amon, ruled on all of Israel. It was at that time that the yovel was reestablished.
From the straightforward flow of the Gemara it appears that Rabbi Yohanan's response is presented in order to explain why the Jubilee year was kept during second Temple times. Based on this approach, Rabbenu Tam argues that Ezra the Scribe must have been successful in bringing with him at least some remnants from each one of the tribes and arranged for them to settle in their ancestral lands. According to this view, even during the second Temple the yovel was in affect on a biblical level. The Ramban disagrees, suggesting that Rabbi Yohanan's statement comes only to explain the reality during first Temple times. During the second Temple period, Jubilees were counted on a Rabbinic level in order to keep track of the Sabbatical year cycle.
*****************************************
Arakhin 34a - Levitical cities
As we learned above (dapim, or pages, 31 and 32) there are a number of unique laws associated with walled cities, among them the rule that a house that was sold in such a city must be redeemed by the seller within 12 months or else it will remain the property of the purchaser and will not be returned to the original owner in the Jubilee year. While this is true in most cases, there is an exception to the rule. If someone from the tribe of Levi sells a house in a walled city, the 12 month limitation does not apply to him, and he has the right to redeem the house from the purchaser at any time (see Vayikra 25:32-34).
Upon entering the Land of Israel, each of the tribes received an area of the land as their inheritance, which was divided between the families of the tribe. The exception to this rule was the Tribe of Levi, whose 48 cities were spread out throughout the land belonging to the other tribes. As noted, these cities, together with the fields around the cities had their own, unique, set of laws.
The Gemara on yesterday's daf quotes a baraita that appears to deny the possibility that Levitical cities could possibly have had walls surrounding them. The baraita teaches that "the cities of the Levites may not be either little villages nor large
walled cities, but cities of average size." In response, Rav Yosef the son of Rav Sala Hasida suggests that the walled cities must have been those captured from the Canaanites upon entering the land of Israel. On today's daf Rav Ashi explains that although the walls of such cities would have had to have been destroyed, in order to fulfill the requirement of the baraita that Levitical cities must be of average size, nevertheless the laws of walled cities did not apply to them and the Levite could redeem his house forever.
In addition to his monumental translation and commentary on the Talmud, Rabbi Steinsaltz has authored dozens of books and hundreds of articles on a variety of topics, both Jewish and secular. For more information about Rabbi Steinsaltz's groundbreaking work in Jewish education, visit www.steinsaltz.org or contact the Aleph Society at 212-840-1166.