## Arakhin Daf 31a

###### Arakhin 31a:1
[Arakhin 31a:1](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Arakhin/r/31a:1)

תָּנֵי חֲדָא: לֹוֶה וְגוֹאֵל וְגוֹאֵל לַחֲצָאִין, וְתַנְיָא אִידַּךְ: אֵינוֹ לֹוֶה וְגוֹאֵל וְאֵינוֹ גּוֹאֵל לַחֲצָאִין. לָא קַשְׁיָא, הָא רַבָּנַן וְהָא רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara raises a contradiction between two *baraitot* with regard to redeeming a field from the Temple treasury: **It is taught** in **one** *baraita*: One **may borrow** money **and redeem** a field, **and** one **may partially redeem** it. **And** it **is taught** in **another** *baraita*: One **may not borrow** money **and redeem** a field, **nor may** one **partially redeem** it. The Gemara explains: It is **not difficult. This** *baraita*, which teaches that one may not borrow money and redeem his field, is in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis; and that** *baraita*, which states that one may borrow money and redeem his field, is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Shimon,** who is lenient with regard to redeeming a field from the Temple treasury.


###### Arakhin 31a:2
[Arakhin 31a:2](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Arakhin/r/31a:2)

**מַתְנִי׳** הַמּוֹכֵר בֵּית בְּבָתֵּי עָרֵי חוֹמָה — הֲרֵי זֶה גּוֹאֵל מִיָּד, וְגוֹאֵל כׇּל שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ, הֲרֵי זֶה כְּמִין רִבִּית, וְאֵינוֹ רִבִּית.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**MISHNA:** **One who sells a house** from **among the houses of walled cities may redeem** the house **immediately,** even without the consent of the buyer, **and he may redeem** the house during **the entire twelve months** following the sale, but not after that. When he redeems the house within the twelve-month period, he returns the sale price to the buyer, and **this is** ostensibly **like a form of interest,** as the buyer has effectively resided in the house for free in exchange for the fact that the buyer’s money was in the possession of the seller. **It is not** considered **interest,** because the buyer owned the house during the period in which he resided in it.


###### Arakhin 31a:3
[Arakhin 31a:3](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Arakhin/r/31a:3)

מֵת הַמּוֹכֵר — יִגְאַל בְּנוֹ, מֵת הַלּוֹקֵחַ — יִגְאַל מִיַּד בְּנוֹ. אֵין מוֹנִין שָׁנָה אֶלָּא מִשָּׁעָה שֶׁמָּכַר, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״עַד מְלֹאת לוֹ שָׁנָה״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
If **the seller died, his son may redeem** the house from the buyer. If **the buyer died,** the seller **may redeem** it **from the possession of** the buyer’s **son.** If the buyer sold the house to another, **one calculates** the **year only from the time that** the owner **sold** the house to the first buyer, **as it is stated:** “And if it is not redeemed **until the passage of** a full **year for him,** then the house that is in the walled city shall stand in possession of the one who bought it in perpetuity” (Leviticus 25:30). The term “for him” indicates that the year is calculated from when the initial owner sold the house.


###### Arakhin 31a:4
[Arakhin 31a:4](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Arakhin/r/31a:4)

כְּשֶׁהוּא אוֹמֵר ״תְּמִימָה״, לְהָבִיא אֶת חֹדֶשׁ הָעִיבּוּר. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: לִיתֵּן לוֹ שָׁנָה וְעִיבּוּרָהּ. הִגִּיעַ יוֹם שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ וְלֹא נִגְאֲלָה — הָיְתָה חֲלוּטָה לוֹ. אֶחָד הַלּוֹקֵחַ וְאֶחָד הַנִּיתָּן לוֹ בְּמַתָּנָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״לַצְּמִיתוּת״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**When it says: “A full** year,” this serves **to include the intercalated month** in the year calculated from the sale, if it was a leap year. **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says:** The word “full” serves **to give** the seller **a year and its addition,** i.e., the year during which the house may be redeemed is not the 354-day lunar year, but the 365-day solar year. If the final **day of the twelve-month** period **arrived and** the house **was not redeemed,** the house has **become** the property **of** the buyer **in perpetuity.** This is the *halakha* with regard to both **one who buys** a house in a walled city **and one to whom it is given as a gift, as it is stated:** “Then the house that is in the walled city shall stand in possession of the one who bought it **in perpetuity”** (Leviticus 25:30).


###### Arakhin 31a:5
[Arakhin 31a:5](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Arakhin/r/31a:5)

**גְּמָ׳** מַתְנִיתִין דְּלָא כְּרַבִּי, דְּתַנְיָא: רַבִּי אוֹמֵר: ״יָמִים״ — אֵין יָמִים פָּחוֹת מִשְּׁנַיִם.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**GEMARA:** The mishna teaches that one who sells a house in a walled city may redeem it immediately. The Gemara comments: **The mishna is not in accordance with** the opinion of **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, **as it is taught** in a *baraita* that **Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **says:** The Torah states: “And if a man sells a dwelling house in a walled city, then he may redeem it until the completion of the year after it is sold; for **days** he shall have the right of redemption” (Leviticus 25:29). The word **“days”** means **no fewer than two** days, i.e., the house cannot be redeemed during the first two days after the sale.


###### Arakhin 31a:6
[Arakhin 31a:6](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Arakhin/r/31a:6)

וְרַבָּנַן, הַאי ״יָמִים״ מַאי עָבְדִי לֵיהּ? מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ מִיּוֹם לְיוֹם. וְרַבִּי, מִיּוֹם לְיוֹם מְנָא לֵיהּ? נָפְקָא לֵיהּ מֵ״עַד תּוֹם שְׁנַת מִמְכָּרוֹ״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And the Rabbis, what do they do with this** word **“days”?** The Gemara answers: The Rabbis **require it** to teach the *halakha* that the year does not conclude with the arrival of Rosh HaShana, at the end of the calendar year; rather, it is calculated **from day to day,** that is, until the arrival of the date of the sale in the subsequent year. The Gemara asks: **And Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, **from where does he** derive that the year is calculated **from day to day?** The Gemara responds: **He derives it from** the phrase: **“Until the completion of the year after it is sold”** (Leviticus 25:29).


###### Arakhin 31a:7
[Arakhin 31a:7](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Arakhin/r/31a:7)

וְרַבָּנַן? הַהוּא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ שְׁנַת מִמְכָּרוֹ שֶׁלּוֹ, וְלֹא (שְׁנַת) [שָׁנָה] שֶׁל מִנְיַן עוֹלָם. וְיָמִים מִיבְּעֵי לְהוּ לְמֵעֵת לְעֵת, דְּאִי מֵ״עַד תּוֹם שְׁנַת מִמְכָּרוֹ״ הֲוָה אָמֵינָא: מִיּוֹם לְיוֹם — אִין, מֵעֵת לְעֵת — לָא, כְּתַב רַחֲמָנָא ״יָמִים״.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And the Rabbis,** what do they do with this phrase? The Gemara responds: Actually, **they require that** phrase to teach that the calculated year is **a year from his sale and not the year of the counting of the world,** i.e., not the calendar year. **And** the Rabbis **require** the word **“days”** to teach that the year is calculated not only from day to day, but also **from hour to hour,** i.e., the year is completed only when the hour of the sale arrives in the subsequent year. **As if** one sought to derive this **from** the phrase **“until the completion of the year after it is sold,” I would say** that with regard to calculating the year **from day to day, yes,** it is calculated in this manner, but with regard to calculating the year **from hour to hour, no,** it is not calculated in this manner. Rather, once the beginning of the day arrives the seller can no longer redeem the house. **The Merciful One** therefore **wrote** the word **“days”** to teach that the year is calculated from hour to hour.


###### Arakhin 31a:8
[Arakhin 31a:8](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Arakhin/r/31a:8)

וְרַבִּי, מֵעֵת לְעֵת מְנָא לֵיהּ? נָפְקָא לֵיהּ מִ״תְּמִימָה״. וְרַבָּנַן? הַהוּא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְעִיבּוּרַהּ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **And Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi, **from where does he** derive that the year is calculated **from hour to hour?** The Gemara answers that **he derives it from** the term **“a full** year” (Leviticus 25:30). The Gemara asks: **And the Rabbis,** what do they derive from the term “a full year”? The Gemara responds: The Rabbis **require that** term **to** teach that **the intercalated month** of a leap year is included in the year of sale.


###### Arakhin 31a:9
[Arakhin 31a:9](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Arakhin/r/31a:9)

וְרַבִּי נָמֵי, הָא מִיבְּעֵי לֵיהּ לְעִיבּוּרַהּ! הָכִי נָמֵי, מִיּוֹם לְיוֹם וּמֵעֵת לְעֵת מֵ״עַד תּוֹם שְׁנַת מִמְכָּרוֹ״ נָפְקָא.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara objects: **But Rabbi** Yehuda HaNasi **also requires that** term **to** teach that **the intercalated month** of a leap year is included in the year of sale. The Gemara explains: **Indeed,** i.e., Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi derives the inclusion of the intercalated month from the term “a full year.” Rather, according to Rabbi Yehuda HaNasi, the fact that the year is calculated **from day to day and from hour to hour** constitutes one *halakha*, which is **derived from** the phrase **“until the completion of the year after it is sold.”**


###### Arakhin 31a:10
[Arakhin 31a:10](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Arakhin/r/31a:10)

הֲרֵי זוֹ כְּמִין רִבִּית וְכוּ׳. וְהָתַנְיָא: הֲרֵי זוֹ רִבִּית גְּמוּרָה, אֶלָּא שֶׁהַתּוֹרָה הִתִּירַתּוּ!

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
§ The mishna teaches: When one redeems a house among those of a walled city, **this is** ostensibly **like a form of interest,** as the seller returns the original sale price to the buyer and he does not subtract from it in exchange for the period during which the buyer resided in the house. This is not considered interest because the buyer owned the house during that period. The Gemara asks: **But isn’t it taught** in a *baraita*: **This is fully** considered **interest, but** in this case **the Torah permitted it?**


###### Arakhin 31a:11
[Arakhin 31a:11](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Arakhin/r/31a:11)

אָמַר רַבִּי יוֹחָנָן: לָא קַשְׁיָא, הָא רַבִּי יְהוּדָה וְהָא רַבָּנַן. דְּתַנְיָא: הֲרֵי שֶׁהָיָה נוֹשֶׁה בַּחֲבֵירוֹ מָנֶה, וְעָשָׂה לוֹ שָׂדֵהוּ מֶכֶר, בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַמּוֹכֵר אוֹכֵל פֵּירוֹת — מוּתָּר, לוֹקֵחַ אוֹכֵל פֵּירוֹת — אָסוּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yoḥanan said:** It is **not difficult. This** mishna is in accordance with the opinion of **Rabbi Yehuda, and that** *baraita* is in accordance with the opinion of **the Rabbis. As it is taught** in a *baraita*: Consider the case of one **who had a debt of one hundred** dinars **against another, and** the borrower **made** a conditional **sale of his field to** the lender, stipulating that if he does not repay the loan on time then the sale shall take effect retroactively from the present moment. **As long as the seller,** i.e., the borrower, **consumes the produce** of that field until the time the loan comes due, this arrangement **is permitted.** But if the **buyer,** i.e., the lender, **consumes the produce** during this time, the arrangement **is prohibited,** as it constitutes interest. The reason is that if the loan is repaid on time, the sale is nullified, which means that the produce consumed by the lender will have been consumed as payment for allowing the loan to remain in the borrower’s possession.


###### Arakhin 31a:12
[Arakhin 31a:12](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Arakhin/r/31a:12)

רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר: אַף בִּזְמַן שֶׁהַלּוֹקֵחַ אוֹכֵל פֵּירוֹת — מוּתָּר. אָמַר רַבִּי יְהוּדָה: מַעֲשֶׂה בְּבַיְתוֹס בֶּן זוֹנִין שֶׁעָשָׂה שָׂדֵהוּ מֶכֶר עַל פִּי רַבִּי אֶלְעָזָר בֶּן עֲזַרְיָה, וְלוֹקֵחַ אוֹכֵל פֵּירוֹת הָיָה. אָמְרוּ לוֹ: מִשָּׁם רְאָיָיה? מוֹכֵר אוֹכֵל פֵּירוֹת הָיָה, וְלֹא לוֹקֵחַ.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
**Rabbi Yehuda says: Even when the buyer consumes the produce,** such an arrangement is permitted. **Rabbi Yehuda said** in support of his opinion: There was **an incident involving Baitos ben Zunin, who made** a conditional **sale of his field** by a similar arrangement **under the direction of Rabbi Elazar ben Azarya, and** in this case the **buyer was consuming the produce.** The Rabbis **said to him:** Do you seek to bring **proof from there?** Actually, it was the **seller** who **was consuming the produce, and not** the **buyer.**


###### Arakhin 31a:13
[Arakhin 31a:13](https://torahapp.org/share/book/Arakhin/r/31a:13)

מַאי בֵּינַיְיהוּ? צַד אֶחָד בְּרִבִּית אִיכָּא בֵּינַיְיהוּ, תַּנָּא קַמָּא סָבַר: צַד אֶחָד בְּרִבִּית אָסוּר, וְרַבִּי יְהוּדָה סָבַר: צַד אֶחָד בְּרִבִּית מוּתָּר.

**William Davidson Edition - English:**
The Gemara asks: **What is** the basis for the dispute **between** Rabbi Yehuda and the Rabbis? The Gemara responds: The dispute **between them** concerns the permissibility of an agreement involving **an uncertain interest,** i.e., an agreement that will involve interest only under certain circumstances. This is the case here, since if the loan is repaid the produce consumed by the lender constitutes interest, but if the loan is not repaid then the field is acquired retroactively by the lender and no interest is involved. The Gemara elaborates: **The first *tanna*,** i.e., the Rabbis, **holds** that **uncertain interest is prohibited, and Rabbi Yehuda holds** that **uncertain interest is permitted.**