The gemara says that reb Yehuda learns from the passuk of v'Shav El Mishpachto that he only returns to his family but he doesn't return to the position he had before. However reb Meir says that he even returns to the position which he had, and he learns it from the fact the passuk continues and says El Achuzas Avosav. My question is that why can't reb yehuda also learn from Achuzas Avosav that he returns to the position which he had?
Benzi, London
Vayikra 25:41 states v'El Eretz Avosav Yashuv and Bamidbar 35:28 states El Eretz Achuzaso. The simple reading is that he returns to the land of his fathers, but there is no explicit mention of a previous position. The Ritva writes that it is possible that Rabbi Yehuda only said that a muderer or a slave cannot return to an important position because of the severity of spilling blood or being an eved to others, but he will agree that if someone transgressed other aveiros and then did a full Teshuva, that he can now occupy an important position.
Chodesh Tov
Dovid Bloom
Follow-up reply:
1) I think I found, bs'd, some support for the above from the Mordecai in the 3rd chapter of Bava Basra #533. He discusses the question of somebody who was accustomed to do a certain Mitzvah; for instance "Gelilah"; and then had some "ones" or became poor and was no longer able to pay for the Mitzvah, and consequently the Mitzvah was given to a different member of the community. When the first member becomes capable once again of doing the Mitzvah, does he has the first option if he wants to return to the Mitzvah, since previously he always did the Gelilah of the sefer Torah?
2) One of the sources that Mordecai cites to prove that he may return to the Mitzvah, is from our Gemara. He writes that even according to Rabbi Yosi (it seems that the girsa of the Mordecai in our Gemara was R. Yosi, not R. Yehuda) he can return to the Mitzvah of Gelilah. This is because Vayikra 25:41 states that he returns to his family, which implies that he only returns to his family, but not to his "Serarah"; "position" (see Machatzis HaShekel on Magen Avraham at very end of Shulchan Aruch Orach Chaim #153). Mordecai writes that R. Yehudah only learns the verse this way because a transgression was commited; murder; or selling oneself as a slave; or stealing and being sold as a slave.
3) The Aruch LaNer on our Gemara calls this a Miyut. According to R. Yehudah "he will return to his family" means only to his family snd not to any postion of power that he formerly possessed.
KOL TUV
Dovid Bloom
So according to the simple meaning of the verse how would u explain it, I understand the first part of the passuk when it says v'Shav El Mishpachto because this means he can return to his family, but when it says v'El Achuzas Avosav so u told me that this means that he will return to the land of his fathers but what is this regarding does it mean that he returns to the land of his fathers that he could now inherit the land or does it mean something else?
Rabbi Yehuda learns that v'El Achuzas Avosav Yoshuv means that he can return to the land of his fathers but he cannot return to a position of powers occupied by his fathers.
Good Shabbos
Dovid Bloom
But what is the difference between v'Shav El Mishpachto and v'El Achuzas Avosav they both seem to mean that you return to your family? What I'm not understanding is that we already know from v'Shav El Mishpachto that he returns to his family so what is v'El Achuzas Avosav telling us extra, i understand that it's telling us that he could return to the land but that's just another way of saying that he could return to his family so y did it have to say v'El Achuzas Avosav we already know it from v'Shav El Mishpachto?
It seems to me that ושב אל משפחתו means that he returns to be a full member of his family. His family cannot say that we do not want to be associated with you because you were a murderer. It would also have a נפקא מינא למעשה that he would inherit any cash bequeathed by his father. However we do not yet know that he would also inherit family land. This is what the words ואל אחוזת אבותיו add for us; that he is once again a full member of the family even to receive land from the family estate. However the fact that the Torah tells us that he returns to the family land indicates that it is only this that he receives, but he loses any family position of political power.
KOL TUV
Dovid Bloom
When u say that he can receive land does that mean that untill now he wasn't able to inherit it but now he is?
Because if u look In the chumash in Vayikra 25:41 so the sifsei chachomim says that it can't be referring to yerusha. So if it can't be referring to yerusha how else can you explain what v'El Achuzas Avosav means?
Thanks alot sorry about this.
Benzi
Benzi, Yasher Koach for showing me the Sifsei Chachomim!
However, the Ponim Yofos (by the Haflo'oh) on that posuk writes that this is a machlokes in Perek Elu Hen Hagolin.
What he means to say is that Rashi is explaining according to Rabbi Meir, not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
So the Sifsei Chachomim is not going according to Rabbi Yehuda.
Therefore according to R. Yehuda we can say that up to now he was not able to hold onto family land and now he is, but he still may not return to positions of authority.
Gut Voch
Dovid Bloom
When u say that he cant hold onto family land what do u mean? Do u mean he can't yarshun it when he is an eved but as soon as he goes out free that Yerushah which he was meant to get he now gets it even if someone else has taken it as Yerushah?
Of course, this whole discussion is going according to what would have been if the Torah had not said that he returns to his family land. Now that the Torah says åàì àçåæú àáúéå éùåá I assume that means he gets back what someone else has taken as a yerushah, but if the Torah would not have said that he would have received no family land even though he returned to his family.
KOL TUV
Dovid Bloom