1)

(a)We query why our Mishnah needs to teach us that one does not deduct from the first two years, a year where the purchaser plowed the field but did not sow it - having already taught us that one does not deduct the year that he leaves the field fallow.

(b)And we answer that - it comes to add that when the owner takes back his field, he is not obligated to pay the purchaser for the trouble of plowing it (see Rabeinu Gershom).

(c)Rebbi Eliezer in a Beraisa, interprets the Pasuk "be'Mispar Sh'nei Tevu'os Yimkor lach" to mean that - sometimes, the purchaser receives more than two years produce from the field ...

(d)... and that in a case where the owner hands him a field with the fully-grown produce ready to cut, he is not permitted to stipulate that the purchaser hands him back a field in the same condition.

2)

(a)Our Mishnah learns from the Pasuk in B'har (in connection with Reuven who sold Shimon a field ...

1. ... for one Manah, and Shimon sold it to Levi for two) "Veheishiv es ha'Odef la'Ish asher Machar lo" that - he reckons with Shimon at the price that he sold it to him, returning him the balance between the Manah that he received from him, and the years that still remain until the Yovel.

2. ... for two Manah, and Shimon sold it to Levi for one) " ... la'Ish asher Machar lo" (from the word "la'Ish") that - he reckons with Levi, the man who is currently in the field, returning to him the balance between the Manah that the latter paid Shimon for the field and the years still remaining until the Yovel.

(b)The Tana forbids ...

1. ... selling a distant field in order to redeem one that is close-by, or a bad field in order to redeem a good one.

2. ... a seller who has enough money to redeem part of the field that he sold - to redeem half the field.

(c)Our Mishnah confines all the above restrictions to a field that one sold, but regarding one that the owner declared Hekdesh - they do not apply.

3)

(a)The Reisha of our Mishnah concurs with the opinion of Rebbi in a Beraisa. Rebbi Dusta'i ben Yehudah there learns ...

1. ... that if a field which the owner sold for a Manah subsequently rises to two hundred Zuz - then, when the owner redeems it, he reckons it according to its original value of a Manah.

2. ... that if a field which the owner sold for two hundred Zuz then drops to a Manah - when the owner redeems it, he reckons it at the current price (a Manah).

(b)He derives both rulings from the same Pasuk. He explains "Ve'heishiv es ha'Odef" ...

1. ... in the first ruling to mean that - the owner has to return the remainder from what he received after deducting what the purchaser ate.

2. ... in the second ruling to mean - whatever the field is now worth in excess of what the purchaser ate.

4)

(a)We establish the difference between the two opinions in a case where Shimon sold the two-hundred Zuz field to Levi for a Manah, and the field went up in price to two hundred Zuz, where ...

1. ... Rebbi holds that - we still reckon the field at a Manah, as it was worth when Shimon sold it to Levi.

2. ... Rebbi Dusta'i ben Yehudah holds that - according to whichever of the above interpretation of Odef we apply, we will reckon the field at two hundred Manah.

(b)The problem with our Mishnah ('Machar le'Rishon be'Manah ... ') is - from where the Tana knows to Darshen both possibilities le'Kula (rather than le'Chumra [as is common in Shas]).

(c)And we answer with a Gezeirah-Shavah "Ge'ulah" ("u'Matza K'dei Ge'ulaso") "Ge'ulah" ("Ge'ulah Tih'yeh Lo" [also in B'har]) - in connection with Eved Ivri.

5)

(a)We learn from the Pasuk ...

1. ... "mi'Kesef mi'Kenaso" that - if the value of an Eved Ivri rises after having been sold, we go after the original price and not after the current one.

2. ... "K'fi Shanav" that if on the other hand, his value drops after being sold - we go after his current price.

(b)Bearing in mind that the latter D'rashah is written in connection with an Eved who has been sold to a Nochri (who has the upper-hand to begin with), we learn from the Gezeirah-Shavah "Sachir" (" ... ki Mishnah Schar Sachir Avadcha") "Sachir" ("ki'Yemei Sachir Yih'yeh Imo", in Parshas Re'ei) that - the same applies to an Eved Ivri who has been sold to a Yisrael.

6)

(a)When Abaye claimed that he was acclaimed in his place no less than ben Azai in his (place in his time [see also Rabeinu Gershom]), a certain Talmid-Chacham challenged him to explain (in connection with the previous D'rashah) - how the previous Beraisa knows to Darshen both Pesukim le'Kula.

(b)Abaye answered with the Pasuk in Re'ei " ... ki Tov lo Imach" (see Tosfos DH 'de'Sanya'), from which we learn that - a master is not permitted to provide the Eved Ivri with food, drink and a bed that is inferior to his own, from which the Chachamim extrapolate that someone who acquires an Eved Ivri actually acquires a master.

(c)We counter this however, from Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina who, based on Semuchin (the juxtaposition of two or more Pesukim), learns that if a person has to sell himself, it is - because he did business with Sh'mitah produce (prompting us to be strict with him).

(d)The D'rashah begins with the Pasuk "bi'Shenas ha'Yovel ha'Zos Tashuvu Ish el Achuzaso ... ve'Chi Simkeru Mimkar la'Amisecha O Kano mi'Yad Amisecha - from which he learns that if a person does business with Sh'mitah produce, he will be forced to sell his Metaltelin (which are sold from hand to hand).

7)

(a)Based on the sequence of the Pasukim, Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina learns that eventually, he will have to sell first, his fields and then, his house. By fields, he uses the expression 'Lo Hirgish' - because, at that stage, he was still expected to realize what he had done, and to do Teshuvah on it, and by a house, 'Lo Ba'as le'Yado ad ... ' - because, Teshuvah is beyond his scope.

(b)This in turn, is based on a statement of Rav Huna. Who said that if someone commits the same sin twice 'Hutrah lo' (it becomes permitted to him)...

(c)... bu which means that - the sinner believes that it is permitted.

8)

(a)The sequence continues with having to borrow money on interest. Rebbi Yossi b'Rebbi Chanina inserts selling his daughter before that (even though it is not mentioned in that Parshah) - because it is obvious that a person would sooner sell his daughter (for a few years, during which time the redemption price of his daughter diminishes) than borrow on interest, where the debt constantly increases.

(b)Finally, the sinner will be forced to sell himself - first to a fellow Jew, then to a Ger Tzedek, then to a Ger Toshav and finally, to a Nochri, before being sold to Eiker ...

(c)... Avodah-Zarah itself (so-called because it will eventually be uprooted), in whose service he will end up working (if he does not do Teshuvah).

9)

(a)In any event, the question remains, in view of these Pesukim, how do we know to Darshen the previous Pesukim le'Kula and not le'Chumra, as the Talmid-Chacham asked Abaye, who (based on Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael) replied that - the Torah nevertheless indicates that it has pity on him after all (as we will now see).

(b)Tana de'bei Rebbi Yishmael initially thought that we ought to be strict with the Eved Ivri (to push the stone on to the one who falls) - by penalizing him for selling himself to Avodas Kochavim.

(c)We refute the counter-proof from the Pasuk "Ge'ulah Tih'yeh lo, Echad me'Echav Yig'alenu" - which only proves the obligation to redeem him, but not the obligation to be lenient with his payments, which is what we are discussing.

(d)Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak however, solves the problem. Bearing in mind that all years are the same length, he Darshens the Pasuk ...

1. ... "Im Od Rabos ba'Shanim ... mi'Kesef Miknaso" to mean that - if the price of the Eved Ivri rises, then he is redeemed according to the sale price.

2. ... "Im Me'at Nish'ar ba'Shanim ... k'fi Shanav" to mean that - if his price drops, then he pays according to the remaining years (the current price).

10)

(a)Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak rejects the seemingly obvious interpretation of the Pasuk that - if there are four years of service left, then he pays more for his redemption, whereas if there are only two years, then he pays less ...

(b)... because we already know that from "Im Od Rabos Shanim" and "Im Me'at Nish'ar Shanom". From the extra 'Beis' in "ba'Shanim" he therefore learns the above D'rashos.

(c)Rav Yosef, impressed with Rav Nachman bar Yitzchak's interpretation. exclaimed that - he Darshened these Pesukim like Sinai.

11)

(a)Based on the ruling in our Mishnah, the Beraisa learn from the Pasuk in B'har ...

1. ... "Ve'hisigah Yado" that - one cannot borrow in order to redeem a Sadeh Achuzah that one sold.

2. ... "u'Matza" that - one cannot redeem a sold field by selling property that one already owns (distant property in order to redeem property that is nearby, or poor-quality fields in order to redeem high-quality ones)

3. ... "K'dei Ge'ulaso" that - one can only redeem a complete field, and not half at a time.

(b)Rebbi Eliezer ben Ya'akov in a Beraisa learns from the word "u'Matza" (in the Pasuk in Re'ei [in connection with someone who kills be'Shogeg] "u'Matza es Re'eihu ba'Ya'ar") that - one is only Chayav if the axe strikes someone who is already in the line of fire, but not if the victim appears on the scene after the stroke was dealt.

(c)The seeming discrepancy between the two Beraisos is that - whereas the first Tana interprets "u'Matza" in the present (precluding the past), the second Tana interprets it in the past (precluding the present).

(d)Rava reconciles the two Beraisos by establishing each one according to its context. He explains "Matza" ...

1. ... of Eved Ivri with reference to the present - because it is juxtaposed to "O Hisigah Yado" (which means money that he obtained now but did not have before).

2. ... of a Rotze'ach be'Shogeg with reference to the past - because he compares it to a forest, together with which it is mentioned, and which was certainly there before).

12)

(a)Still based on the rulings of our Mishnah, the Beraisa learns from the Pasuk in Bechukosai "ve'Im Ga'ol Yig'al es ha'Sadeh" that - one is permitted a. to borrow in order to redeem a field from Hekdesh, and b. to redeem half a field from Hekdesh at a time.

(b)Rebbi Shimon there explains that the Mishnah here is more lenient with regard to Hekdesh than it is with regard to a sale - because when it comes to the Yovel, assuming that the owner does not redeem his field, in the latter case, he will get it back anyway, whereas in the former case, it will go out to the Kohanim, and he will lose it.

(c)Bearing in mind the D'rashah of Rebbi Shimon we will establish the Beraisa which rules (by Makdish Sadeh Achuzah) 'Eino Loveh ve'Go'el, ve'Eino Go'el la'Chatza'in' - like the Rabbanan, whilst the Beraisa which rules 'Loveh ve'Go'el, ve'Go'el la'Chatza'in' - goes like Rebbi Shimon (as does our Mishnah).