1)

TOSFOS DH EIN L'HEKDESH ELA MEKOMO V'SHA'ATO

úåñ' ã"ä àéï ìä÷ãù àìà î÷åîå åùòúå

(Summary: Tosfos reconciles this with the Reisha of the Mishnah.)

åà"ú, àí ëï ìîä öøéê ìäîúéï ùåí ää÷ãù ùùéí éåí? åäøé áëì äðé ãäëà àéï îîúéðéï àò"â ãäåé øååçà ãä÷ãù?

(a)

Question: If so, why is it necessary to leave any Hekdesh for sixty days, seeing as all of the current cases one does not wait, even if there would be a benefit for Hekdesh?

åàéï ìåîø ãäëà îééøé áùä÷ãéù ëì ðëñéå, åîùåí äëé ìà ùééê äëøæä...

(b)

Refuted Answer: Nor can one answer that it speaks here where he was Makdish all his property, and that is why announcing is not applicable (See Avodah Berurah) ...

æä àéðå, ãäà úðéà áúåñôúà ãôø÷éï ãàôéìå ìà ä÷ãéù àìà îøâìéú ìáãä, ëê äãéï ãàéï îîúéðéï.

1.

Refutation: This is not correct, because we learned in the Tosefta in this Perek (4:3) that even if he only declared Hekdesh a single pearl, the Din is not to wait?

åé"ì, ãäëà îééøé áîèìèìéï...

(c)

Answer: It is speaking here about Metaltelin ...

åàéúà (áäðåùà) [áô' àìîðä ðéæåðú] (ëúåáåú ãó ÷:) ãàéï îëøéæéï òì àìå ...

1.

Source: About which the Gemara says in Almanah Nizonis (Kesuvos, Daf 100b) that one does not announce ...

ùîà éâðáå...

2.

Reason: In case people will steal them.

àáì øéùà ãîúðé' ãîöøéê äëøæä ùùéí éåí îééøé á÷ø÷òåú.

(d)

Answer (cont.): Whereas the Reisha of the Mishnah which requires announcing for sixty days is speaking about Karka'os.

HADRAN ALACH 'SHUM HA'YESOMIM'
PEREK EIN MAKDISHIN
2)

TOSFOS DH RAV U'SH'MUEL D'AMRI TARVAIHU EIN MAKDISHIN LI'GA'EL

úåñ' ã"ä øá åùîåàì ãàîøé úøåééäå àéï î÷ãéùéï ìéâàì

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies Rav and Shmuel's statement and elaborates.)

ìôãåú ôçåú îùúé ùðéí áùðé ñìòéí åá' ôåðãéåï (éôéí)...

(a)

Clarification: To redeem in less than two years for two Sela'im and two Pundiyonim (See Avodah Berurah).

äøé àí âàìå äåà àå àçø áàçã îùðé äéåáì - áòùøä àå áòùøéí àå áùìùéí àå áàçã îëì ùðé äéåáì, äåà ðâàì ìôé äùðéí äðåúøåú òã éåáì, ñìò åôåðãéåï ìëì ùðä åùðä.

1.

Clarification: If he or somebody else were to redeem the field in one of the years of the Yovel - after ten, twenty, thirty or any of the other years, it would be redeemed according to the remaining years up to the Yovel, a Sela and Pundiyon per year ...

(continued on Amud Beis).

24b----------------------------------------24b

3)

TOSFOS DH RAV U'SHEMUEL D'AMRI TARVAIHU EIN MAKDISHIN LI'GA'EL

úåñ' ã"ä øá åùîåàì ãàîøé úøåééäå àéï î÷ãéùéï ìéâàì

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies Rav and Shmuel's statement and elaborates.)

ãî"è ñìòéí ìî"è ùðéí ôù ìê ñìò -ãäåà î"ç ôåðãéåï...

(a)

Clarification (cont.): Because forty-nine Sela'im for forty-nine years makes an excess of one Sela - which is forty-eight Pundiyon ...

åæäå ôåðãéåï ùîáéà ì÷ìáåï -ëãàéúà ááëåøåú (ãó ð.)...

1.

Clarification (cont.): And this is the Pundiyon that one brings as a premium - as the Gemara states in Bechoros (Daf 50a).

àáì àí äåà âåàì áôçåú îùúé ùðéí ìôðé äéåáì, àéðå îâøò ëìåí, àìà âåàì ëåø æøò áçîùéí ñìòéí ùìéîéí ...

2.

Clarification (concl.): But if he redeems it less than two years before the Yovel, he does not deduct anything, but redeems a Kur of barley-seeds for fifty complete Sela'im ...

ëãëúéá (åé÷øà ëæ) "åçùá ìå àú äëñó òì ôé ùðéí äðåúøåú òã ùðú äéåáì åðâøò îòøëê" ...

(b)

Source: As the Torah writes in Vayikra (27) "And he shall reckon the money according to the years that remain until the Yovel and deduct from the 'value' ...

åîéòåè "ùðéí" ùúéí, àáì îùúé ùðéí àéï ìå âéøåò ...

1.

Source (cont.): And the minimum of "years" is two - but less than two, there is no reduction ...

ìôéëê áà äúðà ìàùîåòéðï ùéäà àãí çñ òì ðëñéå, åàì é÷ãéù ôçåú îùúé ùðéí ìôðé äéåáì, ùìà éöèøê ìâàåì áìà âéøåò, àìà ðåúï çîùéí ñìòéí ùìéîéí.

(c)

Conclusion: That is why the Tana comes to teach us that a person should have pity on his money, and refrain from being Makdish his field less than two years before the Yovel, so as not to have to redeem it without a reduction, but for fifty complete Sela'im (See Shitah Mekubetzes 17)..

åà"ú, ðéúðé ðîé 'àéï î÷ãéùéï ùðä øàùåðä ùì éåáì, ëãé ùéäà çñ òì ðëñéå -ãàæ ðîé âåàì áìà âéøåò?

(d)

Question: Why does the Tana not also state that one re3frain from being Makdish in the first year after the Yovel, to have pity on his money - since he will then have to redeem it without a reduction?

åéù ìåîø, ãæä ìà äåöøê ìåîø ...

(e)

Answer #1: It is unnecessary to mention that ...

ãéåãò äî÷ãéù ùàí âåàì éâàì áìà âéøåò å÷áéì òéìåéä, ùäøé äéà òåìä çîùéí ñìòéí ìî"è ùðéí çùáåï ñìò åôåðãéåï ìùðä ...

(f)

Reason: Because the Makdish already knows that if he redeems it, he will have to redeem it without the reduction, and he accepts the increase, since it amounts to fifty Sela'im for the forty-nine years according to the Cheshbon of a Sela and a Pundiyon p.a..

àáì ëàï )äùîéòðå( ìôé ùàéï òã äéåáì ë"à ùðä ìôéëê (ìà äæäéø) äùîéòðå äúðà ùéäà çñ òì ðëñéå åàì é÷ãéù ôçåú îùúé ùðéí )ãàæ äåà( ìôðé äéåáì ,ùàí éâàì ,àéï ìå âéøåò.

(g)

Answer #1 (cont.): Whereas in our case, since only one year remains until the Yovel, the Tana is coming to teach us that one should have pity on one's money and not be Makdish his field less than two years before the Yovel, because if he does, he will not receive a reduction.

åòåã éù ìåîø ãìôéëê ìà úðà ðîé 'àéï î÷ãéùéï ùðä øàùåðä ùì éåáì'- ìôé ùéëåì ìäîúéï òã â' ùðéí ìôðé äéåáì- åàæ ìà éäà öøéê ìéúï ëé àí ùìù ñìòéí åùìù ôåðãéåðéï...

(h)

Answer #2: Furthermore one can answer that the Tana does not also mention not to be Makdish in the first year of Yovel - seeing as one wait until three years before the Yovel - at which point he will only need to pay three Sela'im and three Pundiyonim ...

ìôéëê ìà äæäéø äúðà àìà áôçåú îùúé ùðéí, ãàæ äåà öøéê ìéúï çîùéí ñìòéí ùìéîéí...

1.

Answer #2 (cont.): That is why he only mentions less than two years before the Yovel, since then he will have to pay fifty complete Sela'aim ...

åàí äîúéï òã äéåáì ìà éçæåø òåã ìéãå.

2.

Answer #2 (concl.): Whereas if he waits till the Yovel, the field will not be returned to him at all.

åà"ú, îàé ÷î"ì, äà îúðéúà ã'î÷ãéùéï áéï ìôðé äéåáì áéï ìàçø äéåáì' ?

(i)

Question: What is (the Beraisa - See Avodah Berurah DH 've'Zeh L'shon ... ') coming to teach us, seeing as the the Beraisa (cited on Amud Alef) has already stated that one can be Makdish both before the Yovel and after it?

åé"ì ãäëé ôé'- ãàò"â ãäùðä îúçéì îøàù äùðä, î"î éåáì àéðå îúçéì òã éåí ëôåøéí...

(j)

Answer: That what the Tana means (when he says 'Bein Lifnei ha'Yovel') is that even though the year begins on Rosh ha'Shanah, nevertheless Yovel begins on Yom Kipur (and if he is Makdish the field between Rosh ha'Shanah and Yom Kipur in the year of the Yovel, the Hekdesh is effective - Tzon Kodshim).

'áéï ìàçø éåáì' -æä àçø øàù äùðä ùì ñåó ùðú äéåáì ...

(k)

Answer (cont.): 'Bein le'Achar ha'Yovel' - This refers to after Rosh ha'Shanah at the end of the Yovel (when the Hekdesh also takes effect - [Ibid.) ...

åìà ðàîø ùùðú éåáì ðîùëú òã éåí äëôåøéí.

1.

Answer (concl.): And we do not say that the Yovel year extends till Yom Kipur.

4)

TOSFOS DH SOF SOF L'BA'ALIM MI KA HADRA

úåñ' ã"ä ñåó ñåó ìáòìéí îé ÷à äãøà

(Summary: Tosfos explains why the Gemara cannot answer that Rav does not hold of Shmuel's Kal va'Chomer.)

åà"ú, ìîä ìéä ìúøåöé äëé? ìéîà ãìéú ìéä ÷"å ãùîåàì?

(a)

Question: Why is it necessary to answer like this? Why not simply say that Rav does not hold of Shmuel's Kal va'Chomer?

åé"ì, îùåí ãì÷îï (ãó ëè:) âáé ôìåâúà ãøá åùîåàì ã'îåëø ùãäå áùðú äéåáì òöîä' ÷àîø 'îàé èòîà ãùîåàì? ÷"å -åîä îëåøä ëáø ... ... '

(b)

Answer: Because further on (on Daf 29b) in connection with the Machlokes Rav and Shmuel by 'Someone who sells a filed in the Yovel year itself', the Gemara presents Shmuel's reason as a Kal va'Chomer - 'If a field that is already sold ... ' ...

åôøéê äúí 'åìøá ìà àîø ÷"å ëä"â" åäúðéà 'éëåì éîëåø áúå ëùäéà ðòøä? àîøú ÷ì åçåîø ... ... '

1.

Answer (cont.): Then, in answer to the question "Does Rav not learn a similar Kal va'Chomer? And quoting a Beraisa to explain why a father cannot sell his daughter when she is a Na'arah, it cites a Kal va'Chomer 'If a Na'arah she goes out ... ' ...

åîùðé, äúí ìà äãøà îéæãáðà, äëà äãøà îéæãáðà' ...

2.

Answer (cont.): It answers 'There he cannot sell her later; whereas here he can sell the field later'.

àìîà àéú ìäå àé ìàå ôéøëà, äåé öøéê øá ðîé ìîéìó ÷"å, ëãéìôéðï ìéä áîåëø áúå ðòøä.

3.

Answer (cont.): So we see that, if not for the Pircha, Rav would also learn the Kal va'Chomer, as he does in the case of the father who sells a his daughter when she is a Na'arah.

ìôéëê äåöøê äëà ìøá ìñúåø ä÷"å ...

4.

Answer (concl.): That is why Rav needs here to disprove the Kal va'Chomer ...

åä"ô ñåó ñåó ìáòìéí îé ÷à äãø? åëéåï ãìà äãø úå ìáòìéí, úå ìà î÷ãéùéï ëãéï ùãä àçåæä.

(c)

Conclusion: And what the Gemara means is that when all's said and done does it go back? And since it doesn't go back, one cannot be Makdish it like the Din of a Sadeh Achuzah.

5)

TOSFOS DH MAI TA'AMA D'RAV AMAR K'RA V'IM NU'SHENAS HA'YOVEL ETC.

úåñ' ã"ä îàé èòîà ãøá àîø ÷øà åàí îùðú äéåáì ëå'

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies Rav's reason and the Machlokes between Rav and Shmuel.)

åà"ú, àîàé äåöøê ìôøù èòîà ãøá, ëéåï ãñúø ÷"å ãùîåàì, ãäà ùîåàì òé÷ø èòîéä îëç ÷"å äåà?

(a)

Question: Now that Rav has refuted Sh'muel's Kal va'Chomer, why does the Gemara find it necessary to explain Rav's reason - seeing as Shmuel's basic reason is based on the Kal va'Chomer?

åé"ì, ãò"ë äåöøê ìøá ìåîø ã÷øà ã"àí îùðú äéåáì" øåöä ìåîø ãùðú äéåáì áëìì, ëøáé ãàîø áøéù ô' äùâ éã (ìòéì ãó éç: åùí) "øàùåï" ,åøàùåï áëìì ...

(b)

Answer #1: Rav must explain the Pasuk "Im mi'Shenas ha'Yovel" to mean that the Yovel year is included - like Rebbi who says at the beginning of Perek Heseg Yad (above, Daf 18b & 19a) that "Rishon" incorporates the first day ...

ãàé àîøú "îùðú äéåáì" ùðä ùàçø äéåáì ëîå ùîåàì...

1.

Reason: Because if he were to learn that "mi'Shenas ha'Yovel" would refer exclusively to the year after the Yovel, like Shmuel ...

à"ë áùðú äéåáì òöîä îàçø ùìà ãáø áä äëúåá, äéä ìðå ìåîø ùàí ä÷ãéù áä, ùéâàåì áùåéä åìà ëñãø ùàø äùðéí ùâåàìéï ìôé çùáåï áéú æøò çåîø ùòåøéí áçîùéí ù÷ì ëñó. ëê ôé' áúåñô' .

2.

Reason: Then the Din ought to be that, in the Yovel year itself, seeing as the Pasuk does not refer to it, the field will be redeemed for its regular value - and not like the other years, when it is redeemed at the rate of a Chomer (Kur) of barley seeds for fifty silver Shekel (i.e. Sela [So Tosfos explained - Gilyon. See Avodah Berurah]).

àáì ÷öú ÷ùä ì÷îï òì æä?

(c)

Question: This is a little difficult however from the Gemara shortly (See following Dibur).

åî"å äøî"ø ôéøù ãëéåï ùìà ãáø äëúåá áùðú òöîä ùì éåáì, äéä ìðå ìåîø àéðä ÷ãåùä ëîå ùàåîø ùîåàì ...

(d)

Answer #2: Mori ve'Rebi R. Mordechai therefore explains that seeing as the Pasuk does not refer to the Yovel year itself, we should have said that it is not Kadosh at all, like Shmuel ...

åìôéëê äåöøê ìôøù ãøá ëøáé ñáéøà ìéä ã"îùðú äéåáì" åùðú äéåáì áëìì ÷àîø.

(e)

Answer #2: That is why it is necessary to explain that Rav holds like Rebbi that "mi'Shenas ha'Yovel" includes the Yovel year itself.

åàí úàîø, ëéåï ãøá ñáéøà ìéä ã÷øà ã"îùðú äéåáì" åùðú äéåáì áëìì ÷àîø, àí ëï ìîä äåöøê ìñúåø ä÷ì åçåîø -ãäà ÷øà áäãéà ëúéá ãùðú äéåáì òöîä áëìì?

(f)

Question: Since Rav holds that "mi'Shenas ha'Yovel" includes the Yovel year itself, why do we then need to refute the Kal va'Chomer - seeing as the Pasuk specifically includes the Yovel year itself?

åé"ì, ãàí ä÷"å èåá, àôé' øáé ìà äéä àåîø ã"îùðú äéåáì" åùðú äéåáì áëìì ÷àîø...

(g)

Answer: If the Kal va'Chomer was sound, even Rebbi would not maintain "mi'Shenas ha'Yovel" includes the Yovel year

àìà äééúé àåîø àôé' ìøáé îëç ä÷"å ã"îùðú äéåáì" ùðú ùàçø äéåáì ÷àîø ëîå ùîåàì...

1.

Answer (cont.): Only we would say that based on the Kal va'Chomer, even he would concede that it refers to the year after, like Shmuel ...

åîù"ä ðéçà ðîé ,ãîöéðå ìîéîø ãàôé' ùîåàì ìøáé ðîé ÷àîø ãàéðä ÷ãåùä, ãëç ä÷"å îåöéà -ãìà àîø äëà "îùðú äéåáì" åùðú äéåáì òöîå ...

2.

Answer (concl.): And it also fits nicely, becase we can now say that Shmuel too, says that it is not Kadosh even according to Rebbi - since the power of the Kal va'Chomer causes us to reject the argument that "mi'Shenas ha'Yovel incorporates the Yovel itself ...

ãìà îöé ìîéîø ãøá ëøáé åùîåàì ëøáðï ...

(h)

Reason: Because we cannot say that Rav holds like Rebbi and Shmuel, like the Rabbanan.

åîù"ä äåöøê øá éåñó ìôøù èòîà ãùîåàì îëç ä÷"å, ãà"à ã÷àé ôìåâúà ãøá åùîåàì ëôìåâúà ãúðàé, æä ìà éúëï ...

(i)

Conclusion: And that explains why Rav Yosef finds it necessary to explain Shmuel's reason to the Kal va'Chomer, since it would not be correct to hinge the Machlokes of Rav and Shmuel on a Machlokes Tana'im ...

àìà åãàé àìéáà ãøáé ôìéâé ëãôé' èòîééäå ,àáì ìøáðï àôé' øá îåãä ãî÷ãéù áùðú äéåáì òöîä àéðä ÷ãåùä.

1.

Conclusion (cont.): It is therefore clear that they are arguing according to Rebbi, as Tosfos just explained, whereas according to the Rabbanan even Rav will agree that if someone is Makdish in the Yovel year itself it is not Kadosh.

åäëé àéúà ì÷îï áùîòúéï.

(j)

Support: And so the Gemara will say later in the Sugya.

6)

TOSFOS DH AMAR L'CHA RAV HA MANI RABBANAN HI

úåñ' ã"ä àîø ìê øá äà îðé øáðï äéà

(Summary: Tosfos clarifies Rav's statement and refers to the Machlokes which he cited in the previous Dibur.)

åàðà ãàîøé ëøáé.

(a)

Clarification: Whereas I hold like Rebbi.

ìôéøåù äúå' ãîôøùéí ìòéì ã'ëéåï ãìà ãáø äëúåá áùðú äéåáì òöîå, äéä ìðå ìåîø ãàí ä÷ãéù áä, äøé äéà ÷ãåùä ìéâàì áùåéä... '

(b)

Introduction to Question: According to Tosfos, who explained earlier (in the previous Dibur), who explained that 'Since the Pasuk does not mention the Yovel year itself, we should have said that if one is Makdish a field on itm it is Kadosh to be redeemed according to its intrinsic value ...

à"ë, àîàé ÷àîøé øáðï áùðú äéåáì òöîä ìà î÷ãéù, åàí ä÷ãéù àéðä ÷ãåùä ?äéä ìðå ìåîø ãàí ä÷ãéù áä, äøé äéà ÷ãåùä ìéâàì áùåéä?

1.

Question: Why do the Rabbanan say that in the Yovel year itself one cannot be Makdish, and that if one is, it is not Kadosh? They ought to have said that if he is, it is Kadosh to be redeemed according to its intrinsic value?

àáì ìôé' îåøé äøî"ø, ðéçà.

(c)

Resolution: But according to Tosfos' Rebbe, R. Mordechai, there is no problem (See Avodah Berurah.)

7)

TOSFOS DH I K'REBBI PUNDIYON MAI IVIDTEIH

úåñ' ã"ä àé ëøáé ôåðãéåï îàé òáéãúéä

(Summary: Tosfos explains why the Gemara does not query Rav from the Mishnah later.)

åà"ú, ìîä ìå ìîéôøê îùåí ãñáéøà ìéä ëøáé? äåä ìéä ìîéôøê áäãéà ìøá îäà ãúðï (ì÷îï ãó ëä.) 'ä÷ãéùä ùúé ùðéí àå ùìù ùðéí ìôðé äéåáì, ðåúï ñìò åôåðãéåï ìùðä' ...

(a)

Question: Why does the Gemara establish the Kashya according to Rebbi? It ought to have queried him from the Mishnah later (on Daf 25a) 'If he was Makdish it two or three years before the Yovel a Sela and a Pundiyos for each year ...

ëéåï ãùðú äéåáì òöîä ÷ãåùä ëñãø ùàø ùðé äéåáì, ôåðãéåï îàé òáéãúéä?

1.

Question (cont.): Since the Yovel year itself is Kadosh like the other years, why must he pay the Pundiyon?

åéù ìåîø, ãîæä äåä îöé ìùðåéé 'ääéà ëøáðï' ëãîùðé ìòéì...

(b)

Answer: The Gemara Gemara could have answered that the Mishnah goes according to the Rabbanan, as it answered earlier ...

àáì îøáé ôøéê ùôéø ,ãøáé àåîø ëîå ùîôøù äù"ñ.

1.

Answer: Whereas to ask from Rebbi is justifiable, since Rebbi specifically says (that he pays a Sela and a Pundiyon p.a.) as the Gemara will cite him.

OTHER D.A.F. RESOURCES
ON THIS DAF