Talmud - Arachin 27a ערכין כ״ז א׳

But here, with regard to their opinion that even if the son consecrated the field before his father’s death it is considered an ancestral field, this is because they found another allusion in the verse and interpreted it as follows: If the verse meant to indicate only the halakha that Rabbi Meir derives from it, let the Merciful One write: And if he will consecrate unto the Lord a field that he has bought, which is not his ancestral field, or: Which is not an ancestral field. What is the meaning of the extra word “of” in the phrase: “Which is not of his ancestral field” (Leviticus 27:22)? It teaches that only a field that is not due to become his ancestral field is treated like a purchased field, thereby excluding this field, which is due to become his ancestral field.

§ The mishna teaches: The priests and the Levites may always consecrate their ancestral fields and may always redeem their ancestral fields, both before the Jubilee Year and after the Jubilee Year. The Gemara asks: Granted, the mishna’s statement that they may always redeem their ancestral fields was necessary, in order to exclude them from the halakha that applies to the ancestral field of an Israelite, which may be redeemed only until the Jubilee Year, and if not redeemed by then, it is given to the priests. In contrast, the mishna teaches us that priests and Levites may always redeem their fields. But with regard to the statement that they may always consecrate their fields, why does the mishna specifically mention priests and Levites? Even an Israelite may always consecrate his field, both before and after the Jubilee Year.

The Gemara continues: And if you would say that the mishna means that priests and Levites may consecrate their fields during the Jubilee Year itself, whereas an Israelite may not, this works out well according to the opinion of Shmuel, who says (24a) that if an Israelite consecrated his field during the Jubilee Year itself it is not consecrated. Accordingly, the mishna teaches us that priests and Levites may always consecrate their fields, even in the Jubilee Year itself. But according to the opinion of Rav, why does the mishna specifically mention priests and Levites? Even an Israelite may consecrate his field during the Jubilee.

The Gemara responds: And according to your reasoning, one may similarly ask: Why do I need the statement that priests and Levites may consecrate their fields both before the Jubilee Year and after the Jubilee Year? Doesn’t the mishna already state that they may always consecrate their fields? Rather, since the tanna taught in the first mishna in this chapter (24a) that Israelites may not consecrate their fields less than two years before the Jubilee and they may not redeem them less than one year after the Jubilee, the tanna also taught in the latter mishna that priests and Levites may consecrate their fields both after the Jubilee and before the Jubilee, despite the fact that there is no novelty in this statement.

And similarly, since the tanna taught in the first mishna that Israelites may neither consecrate their fields less than two years before the Jubilee nor redeem them less than one year after the Jubilee, the tanna also taught in the latter mishna that priests and Levites may always consecrate and redeem their fields, despite the fact that there is no novelty with regard to consecrating in this statement either, as Israelites may also consecrate their fields both after the Jubilee and before the Jubilee.

MISHNA: In the case of one who consecrates his ancestral field during a period when the Jubilee Year is not observed, and therefore the field is not redeemed according to a fixed rate of fifty shekels per beit kor but according to its value, when the treasurer announces the sale of the field he says to the owner: You open the bidding first; how much do you offer for its redemption? This method is advantageous for the Temple treasury, as the owner gives an additional payment of one-fifth of the value of the field, and every other person does not give an additional one-fifth payment.

There was an incident involving one who consecrated his field due to its inferior quality. The treasurers said to him: You open the bidding first. He said: It is hereby mine for an issar, a small sum. Rabbi Yosei says: That person did not say he would purchase it for an issar; rather, he said he would purchase it for an egg, as consecrated items may be redeemed with money or with the equivalent value of money. The treasurer said to him: The field has come into your possession based on your bid. As a result, he loses an issar and his field remains before him in his possession.

GEMARA: The mishna teaches that with regard to one who consecrates his ancestral field during a period when the Jubilee Year is not observed, the treasurer says to him: You open the bidding first. The Gemara asks: Why does the treasurer merely say this to him? But isn’t it taught in a baraita that the treasurer forces him to open the bidding? The Gemara responds: What is the meaning of the phrase: The treasurer says to him? It means that the treasurer forces him to open the bidding. And if you wish, say instead that initially the treasurer says to him that he should open the bidding; if he complies, he complies; and if not, the treasurer forces him to comply.

The mishna teaches that the one who consecrated the field opens the bidding, as the owner gives an additional one-fifth payment whereas others do not give an additional one-fifth payment. The Gemara asks: Why does the mishna state that the reason he opens the bidding is specifically because the owner gives an additional one-fifth? Let the tanna derive it from the reason that since the field is dear to the owner he would increase his bid and redeem it for a higher price. And furthermore, doesn’t the mitzva of redemption begin with the owner of the field by Torah law?

The Gemara answers: The tanna states one reason and there are another two reasons: One reason is that since it is dear to him he would increase his bid and redeem it for a higher price; another reason is that the mitzva of redemption begins with the owner; and another reason is that the owner gives an additional one-fifth payment and every other person does not give an additional one-fifth payment.

§ The mishna teaches: There was an incident involving one who consecrated his field, which was causing him a loss due to its low quality. The treasurers said to him: You open the bidding first. He said: It is hereby mine for an issar. Rabbi Yosei says: That person did not say he would purchase it for an issar; rather, he said he would purchase it for an egg, as consecrated items may be redeemed with money or with the equivalent value of money. The Gemara suggests: Let us say they disagree about this, that Rabbi Yosei holds that the equivalent value of money is the same as money, and the Rabbis hold that the equivalent value of money is not the same as money.

The Gemara asks: But don’t we maintain as an accepted principle that the equivalent value of money is the same as money? The Gemara answers: Everyone agrees that the equivalent value of money is the same as money, and here they disagree with regard to whether one may redeem with an item one-fifth of whose value is not worth one peruta. The first tanna holds that one may redeem with an issar, which is worth eight perutot, as one-fifth of its value is greater than the value of one peruta, and Rabbi Yosei holds that one may even redeem with an item such as an egg, despite the fact that one-fifth of its value is not worth one peruta.

The mishna relates that after the owner made his bid the treasurer said to him: The field has come into your possession based on your bid. As a result, he loses an issar and his field remains before him in his possession. The Gemara notes: This statement, whose source is unspecified, is in accordance with the opinion of the Rabbis, who hold that in the incident in the mishna, the man redeemed the field with an issar.

MISHNA: If one said: The field is hereby mine for ten sela, and one other person said: It is mine for twenty, and one said for thirty, and one said for forty, and one said for fifty; and then the one who bid fifty reneged on his offer, the treasurer repossesses from his property up to ten sela and the field is redeemed by the one who bid forty. This ensures that the Temple treasury does not lose. If the one who bid forty sela subsequently reneged on his offer, the treasurer repossesses from his property up to ten sela and the field is redeemed by the one who bid thirty.

If the one who bid thirty subsequently reneged on his offer, the treasurer repossesses from his property up to ten sela and the field is redeemed by the one who bid twenty. If the one who bid twenty reneged on his offer, the treasurer repossesses from his property up to ten sela and it is redeemed by the one who bid ten. If the one who bid ten reneged on his offer, the treasurer sells the field at its value and collects the remainder from the property of the one who bid ten, to complete the sum of ten sela.

If the owner says he will pay twenty sela and any other person says he will pay twenty sela, the offer of the owner takes precedence, due to the fact that he adds one-fifth. If the owner says he will pay twenty sela and one other person said: The field is hereby mine for a payment of twenty-one sela,

Traduction : The William Davidson digital edition of the Koren Noé Talmud, with commentary by Rabbi Adin Even-Israel Steinsaltz.

Arachin 27a examines how a field bought before inheriting it counts as ancestral property, then discusses priests and Levites uniquely redeeming or consecrating their fields anytime, even during the Jubilee Year.