Please ensure Javascript is enabled for purposes of website accessibility Skip to content

Today's Daf Yomi

February 5, 2018 | 讻壮 讘砖讘讟 转砖注状讞

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Joanna Rom and Steven Goldberg in loving memory of Steve's mother Shirley "Nana" Goldberg (Sura Tema bat Chaim v'Hanka)

Avodah Zarah 21

Can one sell or rent property to non-Jews in Israel, close to Israel (Syria) or outside of Israel entirely? What are the issues involved? What is at the root of this prohibition? How is it that people sell property anyway? What explanations did later authorities provide to explain this? Is it applicable to all non-Jews or only to the 7 nations or only to idol worshippers? An additional issue is raised with renting a field or bathhouse to a non-Jew who will use it on Shabbat. In what situations is it permitted and in what situations is it forbidden? What is the difference between a non-Jew and a聽Samaritan.

诪砖讻讬专讬谉 诇讛诐 讘转讬诐 讗讘诇 诇讗 砖讚讜转 讜讘讞讜爪讛 诇讗专抓 诪讜讻专讬谉 诇讛诐 讘转讬诐 讜诪砖讻讬专讬谉 砖讚讜转 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讘讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 诪砖讻讬专讬谉 诇讛诐 讘转讬诐 讗讘诇 诇讗 砖讚讜转 讜讘住讜专讬讗 诪讜讻专讬谉 讘转讬诐 讜诪砖讻讬专讬谉 砖讚讜转 讜讘讞讜爪讛 诇讗专抓 诪讜讻专讬谉 讗诇讜 讜讗诇讜

one may rent houses to gentiles, but one may not rent fields. And outside of Eretz Yisrael one may sell houses and rent fields to gentiles; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei says: In Eretz Yisrael one may rent houses to gentiles but one may not rent fields. And in Syria one may sell houses to them and rent fields, and outside of Eretz Yisrael one may sell both these, houses, and those, fields.

讗祝 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讗诪专讜 诇讛砖讻讬专 诇讗 诇讘讬转 讚讬专讛 讗诪专讜 诪驻谞讬 砖讛讜讗 诪讻谞讬住 诇转讜讻讜 注讘讜讚讛 讝专讛 砖谞讗诪专 诇讗 转讘讬讗 转讜注讘讛 讗诇 讘讬转讱 讜讘讻诇 诪拽讜诐 诇讗 讬砖讻讬专 诇讜 讗转 讛诪专讞抓 诪驻谞讬 砖讛讜讗 谞拽专讗 注诇 砖诪讜

Even in a place with regard to which the Sages said that it is permitted for a Jew to rent a house to a gentile, they did not say that one may rent it for use as a residence, because the gentile will bring objects of idol worship into it, as it is stated: 鈥淵ou shall not bring an abomination into your house鈥 (Deuteronomy 7:26), and this is still considered the house of a Jew. And for the same reason, in every place, one may not rent a bathhouse to a gentile, since it is called by the name of the owner, and onlookers will think that the Jew is operating it on Shabbat.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讜诪专 砖讚讜转 讗讬诇讬诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讗讬转 讘讛 转专转讬 讞讚讗 讞谞讬讬转 拽专拽注 讜讞讚讗 讚拽讗 诪驻拽注 诇讛 诪诪注砖专

GEMARA: What is the meaning of the mishna鈥檚 statement: Needless to say one may not allow gentiles to rent fields? Why is the halakha with regard to fields more obvious than the halakha of houses? If we say that it is because allowing a gentile to rent a field entails two problems, one of which is aiding gentiles in encamping in the land, and the other one is that doing so releases the land from the mitzva of separating tithe, this cannot be correct.

讗讬 讛讻讬 讘转讬诐 谞诪讬 讗讬讻讗 转专转讬 讞讚讗 讞谞讬讬转 拽专拽注 讜讞讚讗 讚拽讗 诪驻拽注 诇讛 诪诪讝讜讝讛 讗诪专 专讘 诪砖专砖讬讗 诪讝讜讝讛 讞讜讘转 讛讚专 讛讜讗

The Gemara explains why that cannot be the reason: If that is so, the same can be said about the prohibition against renting houses, as it also involves two problems: One is aiding gentiles in encamping in the land, and the other one is that it releases the house from the mitzva of mezuza. Rav Mesharshiyya says in response: Affixing a mezuza is the obligation of the resident, rather than an obligation that applies to the house. Therefore, if no Jew lives in a house, it is not subject to the mitzva of mezuza. This means that by renting a house to a gentile one is not removing the right to perform the mitzva from the house.

讘住讜专讬讗 诪砖讻讬专讬谉 讘转讬诐 讻讜壮 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 诪讻讬专讛 讚诇讗 诪砖讜诐 诪讻讬专讛 讚讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 讗讬 讛讻讬 诪砖讻讬专讜转 谞诪讬 谞讙讝讜专 讛讬讗 讙讜驻讛 讙讝专讛 讜讗谞谉 谞讬拽讜诐 讜谞讬讙讝讜专 讙讝专讛 诇讙讝专讛

The mishna teaches: In Syria one may rent houses but not fields to gentiles. The Gemara asks: What is different about selling houses that it is not permitted to sell houses in Syria? The Gemara answers that it is prohibited due to a concern that this will ultimately result in the selling of houses in Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara challenges: If that is so, let us also issue a decree prohibiting renting houses to gentiles in Syria, lest it lead to renting to gentiles in Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara explains: The prohibition against renting houses to gentiles in Eretz Yisrael is itself a rabbinic decree lest one come to sell the houses, and shall we arise and issue one decree to prevent the violation of another decree?

讜讛讗 砖讻讬专讜转 砖讚讛 讚讘住讜专讬讗 讚讙讝专讛 诇讙讝专讛 讛讬讗 讜拽讗 讙讝专讬谞谉 讛转诐 诇讗讜 讙讝专讛 讛讜讗 拽住讘专 讻讬讘讜砖 讬讞讬讚 砖诪讬讛 讻讬讘讜砖

The Gemara challenges: But the prohibition against renting a field that is in Syria is also a decree whose purpose is to prevent the violation of another decree, as the prohibition against allowing a gentile to rent one鈥檚 field in Eretz Yisrael is a rabbinic decree, and yet we still issue the decree. The Gemara explains: According to Rabbi Meir, there, with regard to selling houses and fields in Syria to gentiles, the prohibition is not merely a decree intended to prevent the violation of the decree with regard to Eretz Yisrael. Rather, Rabbi Meir holds that the conquest of an individual is called a conquest. Once Syria was conquered by King David, who is considered an individual in this regard, the sanctity of Eretz Yisrael applied to it.

砖讚讛 讚讗讬转 讘讬讛 转专转讬 讙讝专讜 讘讬讛 专讘谞谉 讘转讬诐 讚诇讬转 讘讛讜 转专转讬 诇讗 讙讝专讜 讘讛讜 专讘谞谉

Therefore, concerning a field, which has two problems, as one releases the land from the mitzva of separating tithes and aids gentiles in acquiring land in Eretz Yisrael, the Sages issued a decree as a preventative measure, prohibiting the renting of fields just as in Eretz Yisrael. But concerning houses, which do not have two problems, the Sages did not issue such a decree.

讘讞讜爪讛 诇讗专抓 讜讻讜壮 砖讚讛 讚讗讬转 讘讬讛 转专转讬 讙讝专讜 讘讛讜 专讘谞谉 讘转讬诐 讚诇讬转 讘讛讜 转专转讬 诇讗 讙讝专讜 讘讛讜 专讘谞谉

The mishna teaches that according to Rabbi Meir, outside of Eretz Yisrael one may sell houses and rent fields, but one may not sell fields to gentiles. The Gemara explains: Concerning a field, which has two problems when it is in Eretz Yisrael, the Sages issued a decree preventing its sale even outside of Eretz Yisrael. Concerning houses, which do not have two problems, the Sages did not issue a decree prohibiting their sale.

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讘讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 诪砖讻讬专讬谉 诇讛诐 讘转讬诐 讜讻讜壮 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 砖讚讜转 讚讗讬转 讘讛讜 转专转讬 讙讝专讜 讘讛讜 专讘谞谉 讘转讬诐 讚诇讬转 讘讛讜 转专转讬 诇讗 讙讝专讜 讘讛讜 专讘谞谉

The mishna further teaches that Rabbi Yosei says: In Eretz Yisrael one may rent houses but not fields to gentiles. The Gemara explains: What is the reason that one may rent houses but not fields? Concerning fields, which have two problems, the Sages issued a decree as a preventive measure prohibiting the renting of fields in Eretz Yisrael. But concerning houses, which do not have two problems, the Sages did not issue a decree prohibiting renting houses to gentiles.

讜讘住讜专讬讗 诪讜讻专讬谉 讜讻讜壮 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 拽住讘专 讻讬讘讜砖 讬讞讬讚 诇讗 砖诪讬讛 讻讬讘讜砖 讜砖讚讛 讚讗讬转 讘讛 转专转讬 讙讝专讜 讘讛 专讘谞谉 讘转讬诐 讚诇讬转 讘讛讜 转专转讬 诇讗 讙讝专讜 讘讛讜 专讘谞谉

The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yosei rules: And in Syria one may sell houses and rent fields to gentiles, but one may not sell fields. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that one may sell houses but not fields? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yosei holds that the conquest of an individual is not called a conquest, and therefore there is no prohibition by Torah law against selling houses in Syria. And concerning a field, which has two problems, the Sages issued a decree as a preventive measure prohibiting the sale of fields in Syria. Concerning houses, which do not have two problems, the Sages did not issue a decree prohibiting their sale.

讜讘讞讜爪讛 诇讗专抓 诪讜讻专讬谉 讜讻讜壮 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讻讬讜谉 讚诪专讞拽 诇讗 讙讝专讬谞谉

The mishna continues: And outside of Eretz Yisrael one may sell houses and fields. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Gemara answers: Since this land is at a distance from Eretz Yisrael, the Sages do not issue a decree, unlike Syria, which is near Eretz Yisrael.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 讜讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 讬注砖谞讛 砖讻讜谞讛 讜讻诪讛 砖讻讜谞讛 转谞讗 讗讬谉 砖讻讜谞讛 驻讞讜转讛 诪砖诇砖讛 讘谞讬 讗讚诐

In conclusion, Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, that it is permitted to sell houses outside of Eretz Yisrael to gentiles. Rav Yosef says: And this is the halakha provided that one does not make it into a gentile settlement. And how many people constitute a settlement? The Sage taught: There is no settlement that consists of fewer than three people.

讜诇讞讜砖 讚诇诪讗 讗讝讬诇 讛讗讬 讬砖专讗诇 讜诪讝讘讬谉 诇讞讚 讙讜讬 讜讗讝讬诇 讛讬讗讱 讜诪讝讘讬谉 诇讛 诇转专讬 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讗诇驻谞讬 诪驻拽讚讬谞谉 讗诇驻谞讬 讚诇驻谞讬 诇讗 诪驻拽讚讬谞谉

The Gemara challenges: But let us be concerned that perhaps this Jew will go and sell to one gentile, and the other owners of the adjacent houses will go and sell to two other gentiles, resulting in a gentile settlement. Abaye said: We are commanded about placing a stumbling block before the blind (see Leviticus 19:14), but we are not commanded about placing a stumbling block before someone who may place it before the blind. In other words, this prohibition applies only when one causes another to sin by his direct action, not in a situation such as this, where the prohibition is two stages removed from the Jew鈥檚 action.

讗祝 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讗诪专讜 诇讛砖讻讬专 诪讻诇诇 讚讗讬讻讗 讚讜讻转讗 讚诇讗 诪讜讙专讬

搂 The mishna teaches that even in a place with regard to which the Sages said that it is permitted for a Jew to rent a house to a gentile, they did not say that one may rent it for use as a residence. The Gemara points out: By inference, this means that there is a place where one may not rent any house to a gentile.

讜住转诪讗 讻专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讚讗讬 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘讻诇 讚讜讻转讗 诪讜讙专讬

And this unattributed opinion in the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir. As, if you say that this ruling is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, that cannot be, since he holds that in every place one may rent a house to a gentile, including Eretz Yisrael.

讜讘讻诇 诪拽讜诐 诇讗 讬砖讻讜专 讜讻讜壮 转谞讬讗 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 诇讗 讬砖讻讜专 讗讚诐 诪专讞爪讜 诇讙讜讬 诪驻谞讬 砖谞拽专讗 注诇 砖诪讜 讜讙讜讬 讝讛 注讜砖讛 讘讜 诪诇讗讻讛 讘砖讘转讜转 讜讘讬诪讬诐 讟讜讘讬诐

搂 The mishna teaches: And in every place, one may not rent a bathhouse to a gentile, as it is called by the name of the owner. The Gemara notes that it is taught in a baraita that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: A person may not rent his bathhouse to a gentile, because it is called by the name of the owner, and this gentile uses it for performing prohibited labor on Shabbatot and on Festivals.

讗讘诇 诇讻讜转讬 诪讗讬 砖专讬 讻讜转讬 讗讬诪专 注讘讬讚 讘讬讛 诪诇讗讻讛 讘讞讜诇讜 砖诇 诪讜注讚 讘讞讜诇讜 砖诇 诪讜注讚 讗谞谉 谞诪讬 注讘讚讬谞谉

The Gemara asks: It is prohibited to rent one鈥檚 bathhouse to a gentile, but with regard to a Samaritan, what is the halakha? It can be inferred from the lack of mention of a Samaritan that it is permitted. The Gemara asks: Why not say that a Samaritan will perform work in the bathhouse during the intermediate days of a Festival? The Gemara answers: During the intermediate days of a Festival we too perform work and heat bathhouses.

讗讘诇 砖讚讛讜 诇讙讜讬 诪讗讬 砖专讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗专讬住讗 讗专讬住讜转讬讛 拽注讘讬讚 诪专讞抓 谞诪讬 讗诪专讬 讗专讬住讗 讗专讬住讜转讬讛 拽注讘讬讚 讗专讬住讗 讚诪专讞抓 诇讗 注讘讚讬 讗谞砖讬

The Gemara further infers: It is prohibited to rent one鈥檚 bathhouse to a gentile; but with regard to renting one鈥檚 field to a gentile, what is the halakha? Evidently, it is permitted. What is the reason for this? People know that a gentile sharecropper works for his tenancy, not for the Jewish owner. The Gemara asks: But if so, in the case of a bathhouse as well, why not say that the gentile sharecropper works for his tenancy, and therefore a Jew should be permitted to rent them to gentiles. The Gemara answers: People do not usually make this type of arrangement whereby a second party works as a sharecropper of a bathhouse. Consequently, it will be assumed that the gentile is a hired worker who is working for the Jew.

转谞讬讗 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讗讜诪专 诇讗 讬砖讻讬专 讗讚诐 砖讚讛讜 诇讻讜转讬 诪驻谞讬 砖谞拽专讗转 注诇 砖诪讜 讜讻讜转讬 讝讛 注讜砖讛 讘讜 诪诇讗讻讛 讘讞讜诇讜 砖诇 诪讜注讚 讗讘诇 讙讜讬 诪讗讬 砖专讬 讚讗诪专讬 讗专讬住讗 讗专讬住讜转讬讛 注讘讬讚 讗讬 讛讻讬 讻讜转讬 谞诪讬 讗诪专讬 讗专讬住讗 讗专讬住讜转讬讛 注讘讬讚

The Gemara cites a similar discussion. It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: A person may not rent his field to a Samaritan, since it is called by the name of the owner and this Samaritan will perform work in it during the intermediate days of a Festival. The Gemara infers: It is prohibited to rent one鈥檚 field to a Samaritan, but with regard to a gentile, what is the halakha? Evidently, it is permitted, as we say that the gentile sharecropper works for his tenancy and not for the Jewish owner. The Gemara asks: If that is so, in the case of a Samaritan as well, why not say that the sharecropper works for his tenancy?

  • This month's learning is sponsored by Joanna Rom and Steven Goldberg in loving memory of Steve's mother Shirley "Nana" Goldberg (Sura Tema bat Chaim v'Hanka)

Want to explore more about the Daf?

See insights from our partners, contributors and community of women learners

Sorry, there aren't any posts in this category yet. We're adding more soon!

Avodah Zarah 21

The William Davidson Talmud | Powered by Sefaria

Avodah Zarah 21

诪砖讻讬专讬谉 诇讛诐 讘转讬诐 讗讘诇 诇讗 砖讚讜转 讜讘讞讜爪讛 诇讗专抓 诪讜讻专讬谉 诇讛诐 讘转讬诐 讜诪砖讻讬专讬谉 砖讚讜转 讚讘专讬 专讘讬 诪讗讬专 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讘讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 诪砖讻讬专讬谉 诇讛诐 讘转讬诐 讗讘诇 诇讗 砖讚讜转 讜讘住讜专讬讗 诪讜讻专讬谉 讘转讬诐 讜诪砖讻讬专讬谉 砖讚讜转 讜讘讞讜爪讛 诇讗专抓 诪讜讻专讬谉 讗诇讜 讜讗诇讜

one may rent houses to gentiles, but one may not rent fields. And outside of Eretz Yisrael one may sell houses and rent fields to gentiles; this is the statement of Rabbi Meir. Rabbi Yosei says: In Eretz Yisrael one may rent houses to gentiles but one may not rent fields. And in Syria one may sell houses to them and rent fields, and outside of Eretz Yisrael one may sell both these, houses, and those, fields.

讗祝 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讗诪专讜 诇讛砖讻讬专 诇讗 诇讘讬转 讚讬专讛 讗诪专讜 诪驻谞讬 砖讛讜讗 诪讻谞讬住 诇转讜讻讜 注讘讜讚讛 讝专讛 砖谞讗诪专 诇讗 转讘讬讗 转讜注讘讛 讗诇 讘讬转讱 讜讘讻诇 诪拽讜诐 诇讗 讬砖讻讬专 诇讜 讗转 讛诪专讞抓 诪驻谞讬 砖讛讜讗 谞拽专讗 注诇 砖诪讜

Even in a place with regard to which the Sages said that it is permitted for a Jew to rent a house to a gentile, they did not say that one may rent it for use as a residence, because the gentile will bring objects of idol worship into it, as it is stated: 鈥淵ou shall not bring an abomination into your house鈥 (Deuteronomy 7:26), and this is still considered the house of a Jew. And for the same reason, in every place, one may not rent a bathhouse to a gentile, since it is called by the name of the owner, and onlookers will think that the Jew is operating it on Shabbat.

讙诪壮 诪讗讬 讗讬谉 爪专讬讱 诇讜诪专 砖讚讜转 讗讬诇讬诪讗 诪砖讜诐 讚讗讬转 讘讛 转专转讬 讞讚讗 讞谞讬讬转 拽专拽注 讜讞讚讗 讚拽讗 诪驻拽注 诇讛 诪诪注砖专

GEMARA: What is the meaning of the mishna鈥檚 statement: Needless to say one may not allow gentiles to rent fields? Why is the halakha with regard to fields more obvious than the halakha of houses? If we say that it is because allowing a gentile to rent a field entails two problems, one of which is aiding gentiles in encamping in the land, and the other one is that doing so releases the land from the mitzva of separating tithe, this cannot be correct.

讗讬 讛讻讬 讘转讬诐 谞诪讬 讗讬讻讗 转专转讬 讞讚讗 讞谞讬讬转 拽专拽注 讜讞讚讗 讚拽讗 诪驻拽注 诇讛 诪诪讝讜讝讛 讗诪专 专讘 诪砖专砖讬讗 诪讝讜讝讛 讞讜讘转 讛讚专 讛讜讗

The Gemara explains why that cannot be the reason: If that is so, the same can be said about the prohibition against renting houses, as it also involves two problems: One is aiding gentiles in encamping in the land, and the other one is that it releases the house from the mitzva of mezuza. Rav Mesharshiyya says in response: Affixing a mezuza is the obligation of the resident, rather than an obligation that applies to the house. Therefore, if no Jew lives in a house, it is not subject to the mitzva of mezuza. This means that by renting a house to a gentile one is not removing the right to perform the mitzva from the house.

讘住讜专讬讗 诪砖讻讬专讬谉 讘转讬诐 讻讜壮 诪讗讬 砖谞讗 诪讻讬专讛 讚诇讗 诪砖讜诐 诪讻讬专讛 讚讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 讗讬 讛讻讬 诪砖讻讬专讜转 谞诪讬 谞讙讝讜专 讛讬讗 讙讜驻讛 讙讝专讛 讜讗谞谉 谞讬拽讜诐 讜谞讬讙讝讜专 讙讝专讛 诇讙讝专讛

The mishna teaches: In Syria one may rent houses but not fields to gentiles. The Gemara asks: What is different about selling houses that it is not permitted to sell houses in Syria? The Gemara answers that it is prohibited due to a concern that this will ultimately result in the selling of houses in Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara challenges: If that is so, let us also issue a decree prohibiting renting houses to gentiles in Syria, lest it lead to renting to gentiles in Eretz Yisrael. The Gemara explains: The prohibition against renting houses to gentiles in Eretz Yisrael is itself a rabbinic decree lest one come to sell the houses, and shall we arise and issue one decree to prevent the violation of another decree?

讜讛讗 砖讻讬专讜转 砖讚讛 讚讘住讜专讬讗 讚讙讝专讛 诇讙讝专讛 讛讬讗 讜拽讗 讙讝专讬谞谉 讛转诐 诇讗讜 讙讝专讛 讛讜讗 拽住讘专 讻讬讘讜砖 讬讞讬讚 砖诪讬讛 讻讬讘讜砖

The Gemara challenges: But the prohibition against renting a field that is in Syria is also a decree whose purpose is to prevent the violation of another decree, as the prohibition against allowing a gentile to rent one鈥檚 field in Eretz Yisrael is a rabbinic decree, and yet we still issue the decree. The Gemara explains: According to Rabbi Meir, there, with regard to selling houses and fields in Syria to gentiles, the prohibition is not merely a decree intended to prevent the violation of the decree with regard to Eretz Yisrael. Rather, Rabbi Meir holds that the conquest of an individual is called a conquest. Once Syria was conquered by King David, who is considered an individual in this regard, the sanctity of Eretz Yisrael applied to it.

砖讚讛 讚讗讬转 讘讬讛 转专转讬 讙讝专讜 讘讬讛 专讘谞谉 讘转讬诐 讚诇讬转 讘讛讜 转专转讬 诇讗 讙讝专讜 讘讛讜 专讘谞谉

Therefore, concerning a field, which has two problems, as one releases the land from the mitzva of separating tithes and aids gentiles in acquiring land in Eretz Yisrael, the Sages issued a decree as a preventative measure, prohibiting the renting of fields just as in Eretz Yisrael. But concerning houses, which do not have two problems, the Sages did not issue such a decree.

讘讞讜爪讛 诇讗专抓 讜讻讜壮 砖讚讛 讚讗讬转 讘讬讛 转专转讬 讙讝专讜 讘讛讜 专讘谞谉 讘转讬诐 讚诇讬转 讘讛讜 转专转讬 诇讗 讙讝专讜 讘讛讜 专讘谞谉

The mishna teaches that according to Rabbi Meir, outside of Eretz Yisrael one may sell houses and rent fields, but one may not sell fields to gentiles. The Gemara explains: Concerning a field, which has two problems when it is in Eretz Yisrael, the Sages issued a decree preventing its sale even outside of Eretz Yisrael. Concerning houses, which do not have two problems, the Sages did not issue a decree prohibiting their sale.

专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗讜诪专 讘讗专抓 讬砖专讗诇 诪砖讻讬专讬谉 诇讛诐 讘转讬诐 讜讻讜壮 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 砖讚讜转 讚讗讬转 讘讛讜 转专转讬 讙讝专讜 讘讛讜 专讘谞谉 讘转讬诐 讚诇讬转 讘讛讜 转专转讬 诇讗 讙讝专讜 讘讛讜 专讘谞谉

The mishna further teaches that Rabbi Yosei says: In Eretz Yisrael one may rent houses but not fields to gentiles. The Gemara explains: What is the reason that one may rent houses but not fields? Concerning fields, which have two problems, the Sages issued a decree as a preventive measure prohibiting the renting of fields in Eretz Yisrael. But concerning houses, which do not have two problems, the Sages did not issue a decree prohibiting renting houses to gentiles.

讜讘住讜专讬讗 诪讜讻专讬谉 讜讻讜壮 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 拽住讘专 讻讬讘讜砖 讬讞讬讚 诇讗 砖诪讬讛 讻讬讘讜砖 讜砖讚讛 讚讗讬转 讘讛 转专转讬 讙讝专讜 讘讛 专讘谞谉 讘转讬诐 讚诇讬转 讘讛讜 转专转讬 诇讗 讙讝专讜 讘讛讜 专讘谞谉

The mishna teaches that Rabbi Yosei rules: And in Syria one may sell houses and rent fields to gentiles, but one may not sell fields. The Gemara asks: What is the reason that one may sell houses but not fields? The Gemara answers: Rabbi Yosei holds that the conquest of an individual is not called a conquest, and therefore there is no prohibition by Torah law against selling houses in Syria. And concerning a field, which has two problems, the Sages issued a decree as a preventive measure prohibiting the sale of fields in Syria. Concerning houses, which do not have two problems, the Sages did not issue a decree prohibiting their sale.

讜讘讞讜爪讛 诇讗专抓 诪讜讻专讬谉 讜讻讜壮 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讻讬讜谉 讚诪专讞拽 诇讗 讙讝专讬谞谉

The mishna continues: And outside of Eretz Yisrael one may sell houses and fields. The Gemara asks: What is the reason for this? The Gemara answers: Since this land is at a distance from Eretz Yisrael, the Sages do not issue a decree, unlike Syria, which is near Eretz Yisrael.

讗诪专 专讘 讬讛讜讚讛 讗诪专 砖诪讜讗诇 讛诇讻讛 讻专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讗诪专 专讘 讬讜住祝 讜讘诇讘讚 砖诇讗 讬注砖谞讛 砖讻讜谞讛 讜讻诪讛 砖讻讜谞讛 转谞讗 讗讬谉 砖讻讜谞讛 驻讞讜转讛 诪砖诇砖讛 讘谞讬 讗讚诐

In conclusion, Rav Yehuda says that Shmuel says: The halakha is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, that it is permitted to sell houses outside of Eretz Yisrael to gentiles. Rav Yosef says: And this is the halakha provided that one does not make it into a gentile settlement. And how many people constitute a settlement? The Sage taught: There is no settlement that consists of fewer than three people.

讜诇讞讜砖 讚诇诪讗 讗讝讬诇 讛讗讬 讬砖专讗诇 讜诪讝讘讬谉 诇讞讚 讙讜讬 讜讗讝讬诇 讛讬讗讱 讜诪讝讘讬谉 诇讛 诇转专讬 讗诪专 讗讘讬讬 讗诇驻谞讬 诪驻拽讚讬谞谉 讗诇驻谞讬 讚诇驻谞讬 诇讗 诪驻拽讚讬谞谉

The Gemara challenges: But let us be concerned that perhaps this Jew will go and sell to one gentile, and the other owners of the adjacent houses will go and sell to two other gentiles, resulting in a gentile settlement. Abaye said: We are commanded about placing a stumbling block before the blind (see Leviticus 19:14), but we are not commanded about placing a stumbling block before someone who may place it before the blind. In other words, this prohibition applies only when one causes another to sin by his direct action, not in a situation such as this, where the prohibition is two stages removed from the Jew鈥檚 action.

讗祝 讘诪拽讜诐 砖讗诪专讜 诇讛砖讻讬专 诪讻诇诇 讚讗讬讻讗 讚讜讻转讗 讚诇讗 诪讜讙专讬

搂 The mishna teaches that even in a place with regard to which the Sages said that it is permitted for a Jew to rent a house to a gentile, they did not say that one may rent it for use as a residence. The Gemara points out: By inference, this means that there is a place where one may not rent any house to a gentile.

讜住转诪讗 讻专讘讬 诪讗讬专 讚讗讬 专讘讬 讬讜住讬 讘讻诇 讚讜讻转讗 诪讜讙专讬

And this unattributed opinion in the mishna is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Meir. As, if you say that this ruling is in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yosei, that cannot be, since he holds that in every place one may rent a house to a gentile, including Eretz Yisrael.

讜讘讻诇 诪拽讜诐 诇讗 讬砖讻讜专 讜讻讜壮 转谞讬讗 专讘谉 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讙诪诇讬讗诇 讗讜诪专 诇讗 讬砖讻讜专 讗讚诐 诪专讞爪讜 诇讙讜讬 诪驻谞讬 砖谞拽专讗 注诇 砖诪讜 讜讙讜讬 讝讛 注讜砖讛 讘讜 诪诇讗讻讛 讘砖讘转讜转 讜讘讬诪讬诐 讟讜讘讬诐

搂 The mishna teaches: And in every place, one may not rent a bathhouse to a gentile, as it is called by the name of the owner. The Gemara notes that it is taught in a baraita that Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel says: A person may not rent his bathhouse to a gentile, because it is called by the name of the owner, and this gentile uses it for performing prohibited labor on Shabbatot and on Festivals.

讗讘诇 诇讻讜转讬 诪讗讬 砖专讬 讻讜转讬 讗讬诪专 注讘讬讚 讘讬讛 诪诇讗讻讛 讘讞讜诇讜 砖诇 诪讜注讚 讘讞讜诇讜 砖诇 诪讜注讚 讗谞谉 谞诪讬 注讘讚讬谞谉

The Gemara asks: It is prohibited to rent one鈥檚 bathhouse to a gentile, but with regard to a Samaritan, what is the halakha? It can be inferred from the lack of mention of a Samaritan that it is permitted. The Gemara asks: Why not say that a Samaritan will perform work in the bathhouse during the intermediate days of a Festival? The Gemara answers: During the intermediate days of a Festival we too perform work and heat bathhouses.

讗讘诇 砖讚讛讜 诇讙讜讬 诪讗讬 砖专讬 诪讗讬 讟注诪讗 讗专讬住讗 讗专讬住讜转讬讛 拽注讘讬讚 诪专讞抓 谞诪讬 讗诪专讬 讗专讬住讗 讗专讬住讜转讬讛 拽注讘讬讚 讗专讬住讗 讚诪专讞抓 诇讗 注讘讚讬 讗谞砖讬

The Gemara further infers: It is prohibited to rent one鈥檚 bathhouse to a gentile; but with regard to renting one鈥檚 field to a gentile, what is the halakha? Evidently, it is permitted. What is the reason for this? People know that a gentile sharecropper works for his tenancy, not for the Jewish owner. The Gemara asks: But if so, in the case of a bathhouse as well, why not say that the gentile sharecropper works for his tenancy, and therefore a Jew should be permitted to rent them to gentiles. The Gemara answers: People do not usually make this type of arrangement whereby a second party works as a sharecropper of a bathhouse. Consequently, it will be assumed that the gentile is a hired worker who is working for the Jew.

转谞讬讗 专讘讬 砖诪注讜谉 讘谉 讗诇注讝专 讗讜诪专 诇讗 讬砖讻讬专 讗讚诐 砖讚讛讜 诇讻讜转讬 诪驻谞讬 砖谞拽专讗转 注诇 砖诪讜 讜讻讜转讬 讝讛 注讜砖讛 讘讜 诪诇讗讻讛 讘讞讜诇讜 砖诇 诪讜注讚 讗讘诇 讙讜讬 诪讗讬 砖专讬 讚讗诪专讬 讗专讬住讗 讗专讬住讜转讬讛 注讘讬讚 讗讬 讛讻讬 讻讜转讬 谞诪讬 讗诪专讬 讗专讬住讗 讗专讬住讜转讬讛 注讘讬讚

The Gemara cites a similar discussion. It is taught in a baraita that Rabbi Shimon ben Elazar says: A person may not rent his field to a Samaritan, since it is called by the name of the owner and this Samaritan will perform work in it during the intermediate days of a Festival. The Gemara infers: It is prohibited to rent one鈥檚 field to a Samaritan, but with regard to a gentile, what is the halakha? Evidently, it is permitted, as we say that the gentile sharecropper works for his tenancy and not for the Jewish owner. The Gemara asks: If that is so, in the case of a Samaritan as well, why not say that the sharecropper works for his tenancy?

Scroll To Top