Soncino English Talmud
Arakhin
Daf 33b
MISHNAH. THE FOLLOWING ARE CONSIDERED HOUSES IN [OPEN] COURTYARDS: [A CITY IN WHICH ARE] TWO COURTYARDS, EACH HAVING TWO HOUSES, EVEN THOUGH THEY HAVE BEEN ENCOMPASSED BY A WALL SINCE THE DAYS OF JOSHUA B. NUN, ARE THEY ACCOUNTED HOUSES IN [OPEN] COURTYARDS. GEMARA. Our Rabbis taught: By mere implication of the text: ‘Houses of the courtyards’,1 would I not know that they are not encompassed by walls, why then is it stated: ‘Which have no wall around them’? [To teach us] that even if they were encompassed by a wall, they would still be considered as not being so encompassed.2 And how many [houses and courtyards must there be]? — ‘Houses’ [denotes] two; ‘courtyards’, also two: i.e., two courtyards having two houses each. But perhaps one house in one courtyard? Then the Divine Law should have written, [only] ‘courtyards’. And if you were to say: If the Divine Law had written only courtyards’, it would have been understood as a courtyard without a house, but such a one is called an enclosure [and not a courtyard]. MISHNAH. IF AN ISRAELITE INHERITED [A HOUSE IN A WALLED CITY OF THE LEVITES] FROM HIS MOTHER'S FATHER WHO WAS A LEVITE, HE CANNOT REDEEM IT ACCORDING TO THE ORDER HERE PRESCRIBED.3 ALSO IF A LEVITE INHERITED [A HOUSE IN A WALLED CITY OF ISRAELITES] FROM HIS MOTHER'S FATHER WHO WAS AN ISRAELITE, HE CANNOT REDEEM IT ACCORDING TO THE ORDER HERE PRESCRIBED, AS IT IS WRITTEN: FOR THE HOUSES OF THE CITIES OF THE LEVltes.4 [THIS ORDER THUS DOES NOT APPLY] UNLESS HE IS A LEVITE AND IN THE CITIES OF THE LEVITES. THESE ARE THE WORDS OF RABBI. THE SAGES SAY: THESE THINGS APPLY ONLY TO THE CITIES OF THE LEVITES.5 GEMARA. Then like whom [does he redeem]?6 Like a Levite? But then it teaches UNLESS HE IS A LEVITE AND IN THE CITIES OF THE LEVITES? — Say: HE CANNOT REDEEM IT except AC CORDING TO THE [FOREGOING] ORDER HERE PRESCRIBED, UNLESS HE IS A LEVITE AND IN THE CITIES OF THE LEVITES. THESE ARE THE WORDS OF RABBI. It is quite right as to [UNLESS HE IS IN] THE CITIES OF THE LEVITES, as it is written: For the houses of the Levites. But whence do we know that [these foregoing rules do not apply UNLESS HE IS] A LEVITE? — Because it was written: And if a man redeem of the Levites.7 It was [likewise] taught: ‘And if a man redeem [re-purchases] of the Levites’. One might assume that a Levite could re-purchase from an Israelite, because the privileges of the former are strengthened, whereas the rights of the latter are weakened,8 but a Levite could not re-purchase from a Levite because the privileges of both are strengthened, therefore it is said: ‘[And if a man] redeem of the Levites’. ‘Of the Levites, i.e., but not all the Levites, excluding a Levite who is a bastard or a nathin.9 The Sages, however, say: ‘These things apply only to the cities of the Levites’. But we do not say that he must be a Levite.10 MISHNAH. ONE MAY NOT TURN A FIELD INTO A CITY'S OUTSKIRTS,11 NOR A CITY'S OUTSKIRTS INTO A FIELD.12 NOR A CITY'S OUTSKIRTS INTO A CITY,13 NOR A CITY INTO A CITY'S OUTSKIRTS.14 R. ELEAZAR SAID: THIS APPLIES ONLY TO THE CITIES OF THE LEVITES, BUT IN THE CITIES OF THE ISRAELITES ONE MAY TURN A FIELD INTO A CITY'S OUTSKIRTS, BUT NOT15 A CITY'S OUTSKIRTS INTO A FIELD. [ONE MAY TURN] A CITY'S OUTSKIRTS INTO A CITY, BUT NOT A CITY INTO A CITY'S OUTSKIRTS, THAT THEY DESTROY NOT THE CITIES OF ISRAEL. THE PRIESTS AND LEVITES MAY SELL [A HOUSE] AT ANY TIME AND REDEEM IT AT ANY TIME, AS IT IS SAID: THE LEVITES SHALL HAVE A PERPETUAL RIGHT OF REDEMPTION.16 GEMARA. R. ELEAZAR SAID: THIS APPLIES ONLY TO THE CITIES OF THE LEVITES. BUT IN THE CITIES OF THE ISRAELITES ONE MAY TURN etc. But, at any rate, all are of the opinion that in [the cities of] the Levites one may not effect any change. Whence do we know that? — R. Eleazar said: Because Scripture said, But the fields of the open land about their cities may not be sold.17 What does ‘may not be sold’ mean? Shall I say that it may not be sold at all? But since it is written, ‘The Levites shall have a perpetual right of redemption’ it is evident that they must be selling; rather must ‘may not be sold’ mean that they may not be changed [as above]. THE PRIESTS AND LEVITES MAY SELL AT ANY TIME AND REDEEM AT ANY TIME. Our Rabbis taught: ‘The Levites shall have a perpetual right of redemption’; what does that teach us? Because it is said: According unto the number of years of the crops he shall sell unto thee,18 one might have assumed that shall apply also here, therefore it is said: ‘The Levites shall have a perpetual right of redemption’. And because it is said: But the field, when it goeth out in the Jubilee, shall be holy unto the Lord,19 one might have assumed the same applies here: therefore it is said: ‘The Levites shall have a perpetual right of redemption’. And because it is said: ‘Then the house that is in the walled city shall be made sure in perpetuity to him’,20 one might have assumed that shall apply also here: therefore it is said: ‘The Levites shall have a perpetual right of redemption’. Granted that one could assume that with regard to the first, but how do Levites come to have houses in walled cities? Was it not taught: These cities [of the Levites] may not be either little villages nor large walled cities, but cities of average size?21 — R. Kahana said: This is no contradiction: one refers to a city first inhabited and then encompassed.22 But would it in that case be considered a walled city? Was it not taught: ‘And if a man sell a dwelling house in a walled city’,23 i.e., one that was first walled, and then inhabited. One might have assumed [that law applies] even if the Israelites had walled it [after the conquest of the Land]: therefore it says here: ‘wall’ and elsewhere it says, too, ‘wall’:24 just as there it refers to one built by idolaters, so here also. One might have assumed [it would be considered a walled city] if the idolaters had walled it at a later date: therefore it says here, ‘wall’, and there too it says ‘wall’: just as there the idolaters had done so before [the conquest]. so here too [the wall must have been there before the conquest]! — R. Joseph, son of R. Sala the Pious interpreted it before R. Papa: We suppose that they [the cities] had fallen to them [the Levites] together with their outskirts.25 belonging to the Levites. V. however Gemara. Levites) that he who redeems must himself be a Levite, excluding thus an Israelite who inherited from a Levite, which is the view of Rabbi in our Mishnah. Nethinim that with regard to intermarriage they be excluded from the congregation of Israel. shall be for their cattle, and for their substance and for off their beasts. (Ibid. 4:) From the wall of the city and outward a thousand cubits round about. beautiful appearance requires an open space round about it. outskirts. wall.
Sefaria
Leviticus 25:31 · Leviticus 25:33 · Leviticus 25:33 · Leviticus 25:32 · Yevamot 78a · Bava Batra 24b · Bava Batra 24b · Leviticus 25:32 · Leviticus 25:34 · Leviticus 25:32 · Leviticus 25:32 · Leviticus 25:15 · Leviticus 27:21 · Leviticus 25:30 · Makkot 10a · Megillah 3b · Leviticus 25:29 · Deuteronomy 3:5
Mesoret HaShas