1)

(a)The Mishnah now discusses the redemption of a field when the Yovel does not apply. The Yovel ceased to apply - when the tribes of Reuven and Gad went into exile (See Tosfos Yom Tov) ...

(b)... because Yovel only applies - when all twelve tribes are intact in the land ...

(c)... based on the Pasuk in B'har - "u'Kerasem D'ror ba'Aretz le'Chol Yoshvehah".

2)

(a)The Mishnah rules that when someone is Makdish his field at a time when the Yovel does not apply - Hekdesh first ask how much he is willing to pay for the field before putting it up for sale ...

(b)... since he (exclusively) has to add a fifth, and it is therefore to Hekdesh's advantage for him to redeem it.

(c)The Tana speaks specifically 'when the Yovel does not apply' - because when it does, the price is fixed (a Beis Kur for fifty Shekel, as we learned earlier).

(d)When the Torah refers to 'a fifth', it always means - what we call a quarter ...

(e)... because it is a fifth of the full amount plus plus the fifth (See Tosfos Yom Tov DH 'she'ha'Ba'alim ... ').

3)

(a)Besides the reason the Tana just gave, the first choice of redeeming also goes to the owner, based on ...

1. ... the Pasuk (in connection with selling a Hekdesh field) "Im Lo Yiga'el" - which implies that the owner redeeming it takes precedence over Hekdesh selling it to someone else.

2. ... logic - because due to the principle that 'A person prefers one of his own over nine of somebody else's, the owner is generally willing to pay more for the field.

(b)The Mishnah now tells the story of a person who was Makdish his field because of its 'bad quality', by which the Tana means - that the cost of the upkeep exceeds what it is worth.

(c)According to the Tana Kama, the man was willing to pay an Isar - (eight P'rutos, to redeem the field).

4)

(a)Rebbi Yossi maintains that he paid an egg to redeem it. The basis of their Machlokes is - whether one can redeem Hekdesh for less than four P'rutos or not.

(b)The Tana Kama holds that one cannot - because the fifth then amounts to less than a P'rutah.

(c)The Machlokes cannot be whether one can redeem Hekdesh with Metaltelin - because the principle 'Shaveh Kesef ke'Kesef' is an accepted fact (See Tosfos Yom Tov).

(d)The Gizbar of Hekdesh accepted the owner's offer.

(e)The Halachah is - like the Tana Kama.

5)

(a)The Mishnah's final statement is that - 'It transpires that the owner of the field lost an Isar' on the deal (See Tosfos Yom Tov).

6)

(a)The Mishnah now discusses a case where five people offered different amounts for the field (ranging from ten Sela'im to fifty). In the event that the person who offered ...

1. ... fifty retracts - Hekdesh takes a security worth ten Shekalim (the difference between his offer and the one that is closest to him [See Tosfos Yom Tov]).

2. ... forty then retracts, then the one who offered thirty and then twenty, retract after him - Hekdesh takes a security worth ten Sela'im from each one.

(b)If the one who offered ten Sela'im then retracts - Hekdesh sells the field to another purchaser and takes from the last one whatever is short of ten Shekalim.

(c)The reason for these rulings is that - one way or another, Hekdesh always receives the offer of the highest bidder.

7)

(a)As we explained, the Mishnah is speaking where they retracted one after the other. If some of those who initially offered to redeem the field or all of them, retracted simultaneously - then each bidder that retracts must pay an equal amount to ensure that Hekdesh does not lose.

(b)For example, in a case where one person offered ten Sela'im, the second one twenty and the third one, twenty-four, assuming ...

1. ... the second and the third ones retracted simultaneously - Hekdesh sell it to the first bidder, and they take a Mashkon worth seven Shekel from each of the two who retracted (See Tosfos Yom Tov).

2. ... all three retracted simultaneously and the field is subsequently sold for three Sela'im - then Hekdesh takes a Mashkon worth seven Shekalim from each one.

8)

(a)If both the owner and others offer to redeem the field for twenty Sela'im - then it goes to the owner ...

(b)... because he pays an extra fifth (as we learned at the beginning of the Perek).

9)

(a)The Mishnah rules, in a case where, after the owner offered twenty Sela'im to redeem his field, somebody else offers ...

1. ... anything between twenty-one and twenty-five Sela'im (This ruling and the following one will be explained shortly) that - the owner must redeem it adding a fifth to his offer (See Tosfos Yom Tov).

2. ... twenty-six that - the owner is then given the option to pay thirty-one Sela'im plus a Dinar. Otherwise, it goes to the second bidder.

(b)The reason for the former rulings is - because selling it to the second bidder, who does not add a fifth, would entail a loss for Hekdesh.

10)

(a)The problem with the case where the second bidder offers twenty-five is - why we force the owner to redeem it, seeing as his offer plus a fifth is equal to that of the second bidder.

(b)We therefore amend the owner's offer - to twenty-five Sela'im plus a P'rutah, in which case we force him to redeem it (See Tosfos Yom Tov).

(c)By the same token, we amend the final case - where he offered twenty-six Sela'im plus a Dinar ...

(d)... and the Mishnah obligates him to pay thirty-one Sela'im plus a Dinar - since there are four Dinrim in a Sela.

(e)And we explain the final statement of the Mishnah 've'Im La'av, Omrim "Higi'ascha" ' - where the owner offered to pay twenty Sela'aim (as opposed to the second bidder's twenty-five.

11)

(a)We force the owner to add a fifth on to the offer of the second man - there where the assessment of three people concur with the offer of the second bidder.

(b)All the above cases are speaking - about a Sadeh Achuzah at a time when the Yovel does not apply (as we already explained).

12)

(a)The three categories of a person's property that are subject to 'Charamim' are - his sheep and cattle, his slaves and maid-servants and his moveable objects (Metaltelin).

(b)Rebbi Elazar learns from the three 'Memin' in the words (in the Pasuk in Bechukosai, in connection with Charamim "mi'Kol asher lo, me'Adam, u'mi'Sedei Achuzaso" that - one is not permitted to declare a Cherem all that one owns of any single item in the three above categories.

(c)Bedi'eved, if one did - his declaration is valid.

13)

(a)According to Rebbi Elazar ben Azaryah - his declaration is not valid even Bedi'eved (See Tosfos Yom Tov).

(b)The Halachah in this regard is - like Rebbi Elazar (Ibid.).

14)

(a)If someone declares Cherem ...

1. ... his Eved Ivri or Shifchaso ha'Ivriyah ...

2. ... his son or his daughter - his declaration is invalid ...

(b)... because one cannot declare Cherem something that does not belong to him.

(c)Granted, a man is permitted to sell his daughter - but that is only as long as she is a Ketanah, not once she becomes a Na'arah.

15)

(a)According to Rebbi Yehudah, neither Kohanim nor Levi'im can declare a Cherem. Rebbi Shimon holds - that Kohanim cannot, but Levi'im can.

(b)The ruling regarding Kohanim is based on the Pasuk "Kol Cherem be'Yisrael l'cha Yih'yeh" which is speaking - to the Kohanim.

(c)Consequently - there would be no point in a Kohen being Machrim his property, seeing as it would go back to him anyway (See Tiferes Yisrael).

16)

(a)When Rebbi says 'Nir'in Divrei Rebbi Yehudah be'Karka'os', he means that - Rebbi Shimon agrees with Rebbi Yehudah by Karka'os ...

(b)... since the Torah writes in B'har "Ki Achuzas Olam hi lahem" - with reference to the Karka'os that belong to the Levi'im.

(c)Rebbi Yehudah learns from the Pasuk "mi'Kol asher lo, me'Adam u'Veheimah u'mi'Sedei Achuzah" that - Metalt'lin of Charamim are compared to Karka'os (in this regard).

(d)Rebbi Shimon disagrees with him - because he does not learn the Hekesh.

(e)We rule like Rebbi Shimon - because Rebbi, who discusses his opinion, clearly holds like him (See Tosfos Yom Tov).

17)

(a)One can redeem Chermei Bedek ha'Bayis - up until the Yovel.

(b)The Tana rules that Chermei Kohanim - are not subject to redemption, but are given to the Kohanim.

(c)This ruling is based on the Pasuk in Bechukosai - "Lo Yimacher ve'Lo Yiga'el".

(d)Nevertheless, Chermei Bedek ha'Bayis are subject to redemption - because it is only their value (and not the fields themselves) that go to Bedek ha'Bayis.

18)

(a)Based on the Pasuk "Kol Cheirem Kodesh Kodashim hu la'Hashem", Rebbi Yehudah says that S'tam Charamim" - go to Bedek ha'Bayis.

(b)Based on the Pasuk there "ki'Sedei ha'Cheirem la'Kohen Tih'yeh Achuzaso (See Tosfos Yom Tov) the Chachamim say that - S'tam Charamim go to the Kohanim.

(c)They learn from the Pasuk "Kol Cheirem Kodesh Kodashim hu la'Hashem" that - Charamim take effect even on Kodshei Kodshim and Kodshim Kalim (See Tosfos Yom Tov).

(d)The Halachah is - like the Chachamim (See Tosfos Yom Tov).

19)

(a)Nowadays, someone who is Machrim ...

1. ... Metalt'lin or ...

2. ... Karka'os in Chutz la'Aretz (which are considered Metalt'lin in this regard) - must give it to the Kohanim.

(b)If, on the other hand, he declares Cherem le'Bedek ha'Bayis - he must redeem them for a small amount ...

(c)... at least - four of five Zuzim (Dinrim [See Tos. Yom Tov).

(d)A P'rutah will not suffice - because then it will not become publicized.

20)

(a)The Mishnah rules that one can be Machrim one's ...

1. ... Kodshim, both Kodshim Kalim and ...

2. ... Kodshei Kodshim.

(b)The Tana draws a distinction a Neder ...

1. ... where the owner declares 'Harei alai' and a Nedavah - where he declares 'Harei Zeh'.

2. ... Halachically - the owner is liable to replace the former, in the event that it is stolen or lost, but not in the case of the latter.

(c)A Neder is therefore subject to Charamim - because ownership of a Korban is measured by one's liability to replace it should it becomes stolen or lost.

(d)Consequently, he gives its redemption money (See Tosfos Yom Tov DH 'Im Neder']) - to the Kohanim (as we ruled earlier).

21)

(a)A Nedavah is not considered the owner's - since he is not liable to replace it.

(b)One therefore assesses how much it is worth to him - by assessing how much a person would pay for this animal to bring as an Olah which he is not Chayav to bring.

(c)With regard to assessing the animal, the Tana uses the term 'she'Eino Rashai', meaning that - he is not Chayav to bring it.

(d)Seeing as a Nedavah is not really subject to the Din of Cherem, he gives the redemption money - to Bedek ha'Bayis.

22)

(a)A B'chor Beheimah - is subject to Charamim, irrespective of whether it is ...

1. ... a Tamim or ...

2. ... a Ba'al-Mum.

(b)One assesses the value of a B'chor to the owner - by assessing how much a person would be willing to give him to give the B'chor to the son of his daughter or his sister who is a Kohen.

(c)The Tana does not say 'how much a Kohen would give the owner to give him the B'chor - because that would fall under the heading of 'a Kohen helping in the granary in order to receive Matnos Kehunah', which is forbidden).

23)

(a)To resolve the apparent discrepancy between the Pasuk in Re'ei "Kol ha'Bechor asher Yivaled Takdish", and the Pasuk in Bechukosai "Ach B'chor asher Yevukar la'Hashem bi'Veheimah Lo Yakdish Ish oso", Rebbi Yishmael explains that - one cannot declare it Hekdesh Mizbe'ach, only Hekdesh Iluy ...

(b)... which means what a person would be willing to pay for this animal to bring as a Korban which he is not Chayav to bring (See Tosfos Yom Tov), which ...

(c)... the Chachamim learned earlier from "Kol Cherem Kodesh Kodshim".

(d)They therefore learn from the Pasuk ...

1. ... in Re'ei 'Takdish' that - it is a Mitzvah to declare a B'chor Kadosh (even though it is Kadosh anyway).

2. ... in Bechukosai 'Al Takdish' that - someone who declares Kedushas Olah (for example) on a B'chor (or any other Hekdesh animal) has transgressed a La'av.

(e)Rebbi Yishmael does not concur with these two rulings. The Halachah is - like the Chachamim.