Gemara Clarity

Nedarim 44a

נדרים מ״ד ע״א

Learn Nedarim 44a step by step: Aramaic beside English, every question, answer and proof colour-coded.

Open Nedarim 44a in Gemara Clarity

Topic

Declaring a field הפקר for a limited time, and whether the ברייתא follows רבנן or רבי יוסי

Overview

The גמרא quotes the end (סיפא) of a ברייתא about someone who makes his field הפקר for a set time, such as a day, a year or a seven-year cycle. That end lets him retract until someone takes the field, which sounds like רבי יוסי, who ties הפקר to someone taking the item. But the first part (רישא) of the same ברייתא seemed to follow רבנן. עולא answers that both parts follow רבנן, and that a time-limited הפקר is an unusual case where even רבנן let the owner retract. ריש לקיש answers the opposite way: both parts follow רבי יוסי, and the רישא's three-day rule is a safeguard made by חכמים so the laws of הפקר are not forgotten. רבה explains that חכמים did not make it final from the first day because of swindlers who declare הפקר and then take it back. The גמרא then asks what the item's status is by Torah law, and the discussion continues on the next amud.

Opening lines

אָמַר ״תְּהֵא שָׂדֶה זוֹ מוּפְקֶרֶת לְיוֹם אֶחָד״,

If one said: 'This field will be ownerless for one day,'

״לְשַׁבָּת אַחַת״, ״לְחֹדֶשׁ אֶחָד״,

'for one week,' 'for one month,'

״לְשָׁנָה אַחַת״, ״לְשָׁבוּעַ אֶחָת״ —

'for one year,' 'for one seven-year cycle,'

עַד שֶׁלֹּא זָכָה בָּהּ,

as long as no one took possession of it,

The steps (9)

  1. StatementA field made ownerless for a limited time
  2. ChallengeThe two halves of the ברייתא seem to follow different opinions
  3. Resolutionעולא: the last part also follows רבנן
  4. ChallengeBut רבנן don't allow taking back הפקר
  5. ResolutionTime-limited הפקר is unusual and different
  6. Resolutionריש לקיש: the first part also follows רבי יוסי
  7. ChallengeThen why not make it final from the first day?
  8. Resolutionרבה: because of swindlers
  9. QuestionWhat is the item's status by Torah law?