Arakhin — Daf 21a

הקדישו הדר בו מעלה שכר להקדש הקדישו הדר בו היכי מצי מקדיש לה (ויקרא כז, ב) איש כי יקדיש ביתו קדש אמר רחמנא מה ביתו ברשותו אף כל ברשותו הכי קאמר הקדישו משכיר הדר בו מעלה שכר להקדש

הקדישו משכיר היכי דייר ביה במעילה קאי ותו מעלה שכר להקדש כיון דמעל ביה נפיק לי' שכר לחולין

דאמר לכשיבא שכרו יקדש והא אין אדם מקדיש דבר שלא בא לעולם

אמר רב יהודה אמר רב הא מני ר"מ היא דאמר אדם מקדיש דבר שלא בא לעולם איכא דאמרי א"ל רב פפא לאביי ואמרי לה רב מרי בר חמא לרב חסדא כמאן כר"מ דאמר אדם מקדיש דבר שלא בא לעולם אמר ליה ואלא כמאן:

מתני׳ חייבי ערכין ממשכנין אותן חייבי חטאות ואשמות אין ממשכנין אותן חייבי עולות ושלמים ממשכנין אותן

אע"פ שאין מתכפר לו עד שיתרצה שנאמר {ויקרא א } לרצונו כופין אותו עד שיאמר רוצה אני וכן אתה אומר בגיטי נשים כופין אותו עד שיאמר רוצה אני:

גמ׳ אמר רב פפא פעמים שחייבי חטאות ממשכנין אותן חייבי עולות אין ממשכנין אותן

חייבי חטאות ממשכנין אותן בחטאת נזיר דכיון דאמר מר אם גילח על אחד משלשתן יצא ואם נזרק עליו אחד מן הדמים הותר הנזיר לשתות יין וליטמא למתים פשע בה ולא מייתי

חייבי עולות אין ממשכנין אותן בעולת יולדת

מאי ניהו דאקדמיה קרא והאמר רבא למקראה הקדימה הכתוב

אלא בעולת מצורע דתניא רבי ישמעאל בנו של רבי יהודה בן ברוקה אומר כשם שחטאתו ואשמו עיכבתו כך עולתו עיכבתו:

ואף על פי שאין מתכפר לו עד שיתרצה: ת"ר (ויקרא א, ג) יקריב אותו מלמד שכופין אותו יכול בעל כרחו ת"ל לרצונו הא כיצד כופין אותו עד שיאמר רוצה אני

אמר שמואל עולה צריכה דעת שנאמר לרצונו מאי קמ"ל תנינא אף על פי שאין מתכפר לו עד שיתרצה שנאמר לרצונו

לא צריכא דפריש ליה חבריה מהו דתימא כי בעינן דעת מדידיה אבל מדחבריה לא קמ"ל זימנין דלא ניחא ליה דליכפר במידי דלא דידיה

מיתיבי חטאתו ואשמו של פלוני עלי

if he consecrated it, then he who dwells therein must pay rent to the Sanctuary. [It says,] ‘If he consecrated it, then he who dwells therein must pay the rent to the Sanctuary’. But how could he have consecrated it; does not the Divine Law say. And when a man shall sanctify his house,1 i.e..just as his house is in his possession, so [can he sanctify only] such things as are in his possession? — This is what it means: If he who leases it consecrates it, then he who dwells therein must pay rent to the Sanctuary. You say, ‘If he who leases it consecrated it’, but how could he dwell therein? Surely he is committing sacrilege? Furthermore [it says]: ‘He must pay rent to the Sanctuary’? Once sacrilege has been committed its rent becomes profane? — It speaks of the case where he said: ‘As soon as the rent comes in, it shall be sanctified’. But no man can sanctify anything that is non-existent? — That is in accord with R. Meir who said: A man may sanctify a thing that is non-existent. Some say R. Papa said to Abaye (others, that it was Rama b. Hama said to R. Hisda). According to whom [will this teaching be]? According to R. Meir. who said. A man may sanctify a thing that is non-existent? — He replied: According to whom else [will it be]? MISHNAH. A PLEDGE IS TO BE TAKEN FROM THOSE WHO OWE [MONEY DUE FROM] VALUATIONS, BUT NOT FROM THOSE WHO OWE SIN-OFFERINGS OR GUILT-OFFERINGS.2 A PLEDGE MUST BE TAKEN FROM THOSE WHO OWE BURNT-OFFERINGS OR PEACE-OFFERINGS AND ALTHOUGH NO ATONEMENT IS OBTAINED FOR HIM UNTIL HE AGREES, AS IT IS SAID: LIRZONO, HE IS TO BE COERCED UNTIL HE SAYS: I AGREE.3 THUS ALSO IS IT THE CASE WITH A DOCUMENT OF DIVORCE: THEY COERCE HIM UNTIL HE SAYS: I AGREE. GEMARA. R. Papa said: It may happen that a pledge is taken from those who owe sin-offerings, and that none is taken from those who owe burnt-offerings. A pledge is taken of those who owe a sin-offering, that is in the case of a Nazirite. For since a Master said: If he shaved his hair after having offered one of the three sacrifices due,4 he has fulfilled his duty, and if the blood of one of them has been sprinkled, he is permitted to drink wine and to defile himself with a dead person; therefore he might be negligent about it5 and not bring it, [therefore one compels him to do so]. No pledge is taken from those who owe burnt-offerings: this refers to the burnt-offerings due from a woman who has given birth. Why is that? [presumably] because Scripture cites it first?6 But did not Raba say: It is only in the reading [in the text] that Scripture has placed it first but not in respect of the offering itself? — Rather, it refers to the burnt-offering due from a leper, for it was taught: R. Johanan b. Beroka said: Just as his sin-offering and his guilt-offering are indispensable for [his becoming clean again]. so is his burnt-offering indispensable. AND ALTHOUGH NO ATONEMENT IS OBTAINED FOR HIM UNTIL HE AGREES. Our Rabbis taught: He shall offer it,7 that teaches that one forces him to do so. One might have thought, against his will? Therefore the text states: Lirzono. 8 How is that? He is coerced until he says. ‘I will’. Samuel said: A burnt-offering requires his agreement, for it is said: ‘Lirzono’. What is he teaching Us, we have learnt already: ALTHOUGH HE CANNOT OBTAIN ATONEMENT UNTIL HE AGREES, AS IT IS SAID: LIRZONO? — It is necessary [for Samuel to mention it] for the case where his fellow put one aside for him. You might have said: We need his agreement only in the case of an offering from his own [possession] but not from his fellow's, therefore we are informed that [it may happen] at times it may not please him to obtain atonement through something not of his own. An objection was raised: [If he said,] ‘I vow the sin-offering or guilt-offering due from So-and-so’ where but the redemption of a pledge is involved, he might be negligently delaying it. The exceptions to each rule the Gemara mentions and explains. (ibid. 18) shave his hair, at the end of his Naziriteship. implying that the burnt-offering is indispensable to her cleansing. Actually, however, the sin-offering is offered up first.