Comentario sobre Arakhin 4:2
אֲבָל בַּקָּרְבָּנוֹת אֵינוֹ כֵן. הֲרֵי שֶׁאָמַר, קָרְבָּנוֹ שֶׁל מְצֹרָע זֶה עָלָי. אִם הָיָה מְצֹרָע עָנִי, מֵבִיא קָרְבַּן עָנִי. עָשִׁיר, מֵבִיא קָרְבַּן עָשִׁיר. רַבִּי אוֹמֵר, אוֹמֵר אֲנִי אַף בָּעֲרָכִין כֵּן. וְכִי מִפְּנֵי מָה עָנִי שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ אֶת הֶעָשִׁיר נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָנִי, שֶׁאֵין הֶעָשִׁיר חַיָּב כְּלוּם. אֲבָל הֶעָשִׁיר שֶׁאָמַר עֶרְכִּי עָלָי, וְשָׁמַע הֶעָנִי וְאָמַר, מַה שֶּׁאָמַר זֶה עָלָי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָשִׁיר. הָיָה עָנִי וְהֶעֱשִׁיר אוֹ עָשִׁיר וְהֶעֱנִי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָשִׁיר. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אֲפִלּוּ עָנִי וְהֶעֱשִׁיר וְחָזַר וְהֶעֱנִי, נוֹתֵן עֵרֶךְ עָשִׁיר:
Pero no es así con los sacrificios. Si un hombre dijo: "Tomo sobre mí el sacrificio de este leproso", y el leproso era pobre, traía el sacrificio de un hombre pobre; pero si el leproso era rico, debía traer el sacrificio de un hombre rico. El rabino dice: Yo digo que lo mismo se aplica con respecto a una valoración. ¿Por qué un hombre pobre que evaluó a un hombre rico está obligado a pagar solo la valoración de un hombre pobre? Porque el hombre rico no había incurrido en ninguna responsabilidad. Pero si el hombre rico dijo: "Me evalúo a mí mismo". y el pobre hombre, al oír eso, dijo: "Lo que dijo este hombre, lo tomo sobre mí", entonces debe pagar la valoración de un hombre rico.
Bartenura on Mishnah Arakhin
אומר אני אף בערכין כן – if it happens by chance, even with Valuations is similar to sacrifices, then it is like sacrifices, But it was stated [in this Mishnah] that Valuations are not like Sacrifices, because they are not similar one with the other, and for what reason does a poor person who dedicated the value of a rich person, gives the value of a poor person because of the law regarding the payment of certain vows according to one’s [own] means, because the rich person is not liable for anything, and not the monetary value of the Metzorah/leper. But this [individual] who spoke regarding the rich person, did not intend other than according to the measurement of the years of the rich individual which are less or more than his own years. Therefore, he is judged according to his own means/wealth, but the rich person who said: “My value is upon me,” that he is liable for a complete/full value, similar to the [wealthy] leper and the poor person heard it and said, “What that person that this upon me,” he gives the value of a rich person. This is the reading.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Arakhin
Introduction
Our mishnah draws a distinction between one who makes a vow of evaluation and one who undertakes to bring someone else’s sacrifices. Whereas in the case of the former, the priest estimates the ability of the vower to pay his vow, in the case of sacrifices the priest estimates the financial ability of the person who was originally obligated to bring the sacrifice, and not the one who took on his obligation.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Arakhin
היה עני והעשיר או עשיר והעני משלם ערך עשיר – if he was poor and became rich prior to giving [the valuation money], he pays the value of a rich person, for the All-Merciful one said (Leviticus 27:8): “according to what the vower can afford,” for it is in regard to one’s wealth/means. Rich and the poor [alike] also according to one’s means of the person who vows, is written (see the verse mentioned above), for he had the means at the time that he made the vow.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Arakhin
But it is not so with sacrifices. The law with regard to one who vows to bring someone else’s sacrifice is different from the law regarding someone who vows to give someone else’s worth. The mishnah will now explain.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
Bartenura on Mishnah Arakhin
רבי יהודה אומר אפילו עני והעשיר וחזר והעני נותן ערך עשיר – as it is written (Leviticus 27:8): “But if one cannot afford the equivalent,” until it will be that he must have remained in his impoverished condition from the beginning to the end of the proceedings (see Talmud Arakhin 17b). But the Halakha is not according to Rabbi Yehuda.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Arakhin
If he said: “I take upon myself the sacrifices of this metzora,” and the metzora was poor, he brings the sacrifices of a poor metzora. But if the metzora was rich, he must bring the sacrifices of a rich man. The sacrifices that a metzora, one afflicted with skin disease, brings at the end of his affliction depend upon his financial means. If he is rich he brings the full array of sacrifices (see Leviticus 13) but if he is poor, he can bring fewer sacrifices. In this case, one person vowed to bring the sacrifices of another person who was becoming pure from being a metzora. The vower must bring whatever the metzora was obligated to bring. If the metzora was poor, the vower brings a poor person’s sacrifice, even if the vower himself was rich. Conversely, if the metzora was rich and the vower poor, he must bring the sacrifices of a rich person. In both cases, the obligation goes according to the metzora and not the one making the vow.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Arakhin
Rabbi says: I say the same applies with regard to an evaluation. Why is a poor man who evaluated a rich man obliged to pay only the evaluation of a poor man? Because the rich man is not obligated at all. But if the rich man said: “My value is upon me” and the poor man, hearing that, said: “What this man has said, I take upon myself,” then he must pay the evaluation of a rich man. Rabbi says that he can find a situation involving evaluations where we go according to the one being evaluated. First of all, he notes that if a poor man vows the value of a rich man we of course have to go according to the poor man’s means, because the rich man didn’t do anything at all. It would make no sense to do otherwise. But if a rich man vowed his own value, and the poor man said that he wanted to vow what the rich man had already vowed, he must pay the same amount that the rich main vowed. Thus Rabbi has found a case where we go according to the one being evaluated, and not the vower.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
English Explanation of Mishnah Arakhin
If he was poor and then became rich, or rich and then became poor, he must pay the evaluation of a rich man. Rabbi Judah says: even if he was poor and became rich and then again became poor he must pay the evaluation of a rich man. If the person who made the vow was rich at the moment he vowed and then he became poor before he paid his debt, we estimate his financial ability as if he were rich, because his liability cannot go down over time. If he made the vow when he was poor and then became rich before he paid his vow, he again pays according to the means of a rich man. This is because at the time he pays his debt he is already of means, and why should he be allowed to pay any less. Rabbi Judah goes even further. Even if he was poor, then became rich and then became poor again (perhaps he jumped onto the dot-com bubble?) he pays according to the means of a rich person. Again we see that once the obligation is set, it can never be reduced, even though it can be increased.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy