The commandment that one who appraises a man give the value delineated in the Torah: To rule on appraisals of people; that is, one who says, “My appraisal is upon me” or “The appraisal of x is upon me,” must give to the priest according to the amount that he said, and not less — as appears explicitly in Scripture about a male and female and according to the tally of [their] years — as it is stated (Leviticus 27:2), “If a man proclaims an oath of the appraisal of souls to the Lord.” And the matter of appraisals is included in vows of consecration and we are therefore obligated to keep them on account of “he shall not profane his words” (Numbers 30:3), “you shall not delay” (Deuteronomy 23:22) and “he shall do like everything that comes out of his mouth” (Numbers 30:3).
It is from the roots of the commandment [that it is] since a person only belongs to the higher [realm] through speech, and this is the entire esteemed part in him. And it is what is called the “living soul” (Genesis 2:7) of a man — as Onkelos translates [this phrase as] “and there was a speaking spirit in man” — since the rest of the parts of the body die. And if a man loses this good part, the body remains dead and like an undesirable vessel. Therefore he is obligated to [at least] fulfill his speech in whatever he uses it for matters of the Heavens, such as consecrations and with all matters of charity. And regarding all other matters of the world — even though there is no particular positive or negative commandment specified for them — the Sages commanded and warned with several warnings that a person should never change his words. And they also ordained to curse one who changes his words so long as an act is done with the matter. And that is the matter of [the curse of] “He who repaid” that is mentioned about them in many places, about which they said (Bava Metzia 44a), “Words and money [do not] acquire, but they said, etc.” as it appears in the chapter [entitled] HaZahav. And I have already written at much length about the roots of oaths and vows in the Order of Vayishma Yitro in the commandment of “You shall not bear” (Sefer HaChinukh 30).
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Arakhin 18b) that we received from the tradition that these years that are stated for appraisals are measured day to day — meaning from the day of birth — and also that all the shekel-coins stated there are the holy shekels. And we have known from the received tradition that the weight of a holy shekel is three hundred and twenty barley grains of pure silver. And the Sages have already added upon it and made its weight like the weight of the coin called the sela at the time of the Second [Temple], which is three hundred and eighty-four medium barley grains (so is it in Mishneh Torah, Laws of Sheqel Dues 1:2-3). And they, may their memory be blessed, said that this sela is (four) dinar, and the dinar is six maah — and the maah is what was called gerah in the days of Moshe, as Onkelos translates gerah as maah — and its weight is sixteen barley grains.
And that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Arakhin 2a) that there is no distinction in appraisals whether he is handsome or ugly or sick or blind or stump-legged. Rather all are appraised according to [their] years, as the Torah commanded about them. And that which they said (Arakhin 2a) that the value is not like appraisal, such that one who says, “The value of x is upon me,” gives according to what he is worth and we do not pay attention to the years at all — as the Torah only commanded to give the valuation according to years specifically for appraisal, as we explained. And [payment of] undifferentiated appraisals and values are for the upkeep of the [Temple] and we always give all of it into the cell that was prepared in the Temple for the consecrated items of the upkeep of the [Temple]. (So is it found in Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 1:10.) And [also] the law of one [the sex of which is in doubt], a gentile or a slave who appraised or were appraised; the law of one who is dying that he has no appraisal or value; the law of one who is going out to be killed; the law of one who appraises one limb; the law of one who says, “My weight is upon me”; the law of one who says, “My height is upon me,” or “My full height is upon me”; [the law of] one who says, “Gold and silver are upon me,” but he did not specify from which [type of] coin (Menachot 104b); and the law of how it is that we arrange things for one who made an appraisal and his hand could not reach to pay what he appraised — and this is what the Sages said about this matter (Arakhin 23b): We take collateral from those obligated in appraisals and values, and we do not return the collateral during the day or the night; and we sell everything that is found to them of land and movable items — even clothing and household utensils, and there is no need to say, slaves and beasts. But we do not sell for them the clothing of their wives or their children — and not even clothes that he [just] dyed for their sake nor new shoes from when he bought them for their sake before he made the appraisal. And so [too,] one who consecrates all of his possessions, does not consecrate these.
And the matter of the arrangement is that we provide for the one that has appraisals or values [that he owes], thirty days of food and twelve months of clothing — clothes that are suitable for him — and his shoes and his tefillin, but not other books. And [we provide him with] a suitable bed and bedding. But we do not provide food and clothing for his wife and children, even though he is obligated in their food and clothing. And when we give him alone clothing for twelve months, it is only that which is suitable for him, but if he wore silk items and golden clothing we take it off of him, and we provide him with suitable clothing for a man like him for weekdays, but not for Shabbat and holidays (Bava Metzia 113b). And if he was a craftsman, we provide him with tools of his trade — two craft tools from each and every type. How is this? If he was a carpenter, we provide him with two planes and two saws. And if he had many tools of one type and few of another type, we do not sell the many in order to buy him of the few. Rather we provide him with two of the many and all that he has of the few. But if he was a donkey driver or a shipowner, we do not provide him with the beast or the ship, even though their [sustenance] is only from them. And so [too,] if he is a Torah scholar and he has nothing with which to earn his livelihood besides his study, the commentators said that we do not leave him his books, as this is also not included in tools of a trade — and from here I have a proof that it is upon the student to bring the book to the teacher. But there are some of the commentators who said that we leave him the tractate that he is studying at that time — and they said well, on account of the honor of the Torah.
And that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Arakhin 23a) that we ask about appraisals and values [in order to annul them] in the [same] way that we ask about other vows and consecrations. And they also said (Arakhin 24a) that if there were animals or slaves or jewels among the possessions of the appraiser and the traders say, “If he buys clothing of thirty dinar for this slave, he will increase his value by more than sixty”; or “If you wait on this animal for a month, its value will increased by double”; or “If they bring this jewel to place x, it will be worth much money” — we do not listen to them at all. Rather we sell everything in their place and in their time, as it is stated (Leviticus 27:23), “and he shall give the appraisal on that day, a sacred donation to the Lord.” And the understanding came about this that this verse teaches about all consecrated things that we do not sustain them, we do not wait with them for the market day and we do not take them from one place to [another]. And this is the principle — that they only have their place and time alone. And what are these words speaking about? About movable items. But we proclaim [the intention to sell] lands sixty consecutive days — morning and evening — and afterwards, we sell them.
And since the matter of arranging [this debt] has come to our hand, we shall write here that which they, may their memory be blessed, said about a [general] debtor in the chapter [entitled] HaMekabel Sadeh Mechavero in Bava Metzia 113b: That there we say, “A teacher taught in front of Rav Nachman bar Yitschak, ‘In the [same] way that we arrange things with appraisals, so do we arrange things with a debtor.’” And they brought many challenges and solutions and the end of the matter is that which the Gemara brings, “A story of Eliyahu, who Rabbah bar Avoua found standing in a graveyard of gentiles. He said to him, ‘What is [the law] about their arranging things for a debtor?’” And Rashi, may his memory be blessed, and others had a textual variant [instead], “From where [do we know] about their arranging things for a debtor?” [This is] meaning to say, it was obvious to Rabbah bar Avoua that we arrange [things for a debtor], but he was asking Eliyahu, from which verse we learn it. “And Eliyahu answered him, ‘That this is how we learn it, “destitution, destitution,” from appraisals.’” [This is] meaning to say that it is written about a loan (Leviticus 25:35), “And if your brother becomes destitute and his hand falters with you, you shall strengthen him” — which is a loan, as it is written at its end (Leviticus 25:35), “Do not take from him interest or increase, etc.”; and it is written about appraisals (Leviticus 27:8), “And if he is destitute from [paying] the appraisal” — and the received tradition (Arakhin 24a) comes [that its understanding is], revive him from his appraisal.
And [so] we learn, “destitution, destitution,” to arrange things with a debtor in the way that we arrange things with appraisals, and we should not hesitate about the words of Eliyahu. And so did all the Geonim and Rabbenu Alfasi rule. And even though Rabbi Yaakov in the name of Rabbi Pedat, and Rabbi Yirmiyah in the name of Ilfa, said that we do not arrange things for a debtor, in the way of it being obvious in the Gemara — [nonetheless] we do not hesitate about the words of Eliyahu. And even though we found that Rabbenu Tam wrote like the opinion that we do not arrange things, and his proofs are in his book, “after the many do we incline.” And Rambam, may his memory be blessed, also ruled like the other Geonim that we arrange things (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Creditor and Debtor 1:7). And nonetheless, he wrote that the agent of the court only leaves the debtor items that are essential to him, such as a bed and bedding and that which he wears. And it appears that what forced the Teacher to say this is when he saw in this chapter [entitled] Mekabel regarding an agent of the court: That they said in the Mishnah (Bava Metzia 113a), “If he had two items, he takes one and returns one — the pillow at night, and the plow during the day.” And they did not list tools of the trades. But from what it appears, this is certainly not a great compulsion [to rule as he did]. As since it is established to us that we arrange things with him in the way that we arrange things with appraisals, they are the same in every matter. And even though the Mishnah did not enumerate them, this is no matter; as it is not like a peddler that enumerates [all of his wares] and repeats [them] in every place. [Rather] it mentioned pillow and plow, and the law is the same for everything that is fitting to leave him. And the principle of the matter, according to that which seems — and that which is agreed by all the savants of the world whose fame about Torah has been disseminated — is that we arrange things with a debtor exactly in the way that we arrange things with appraisals. And they have what to rely upon from the words of the Gemara and from that of Eliyahu — may he be remembered for the good — as we we have written.
And if you ask, “And how do we arrange his clothing; and behold, we say in the Gemara (Bava Kamma 11b), ‘His clothing, and even the cloak that is on his shoulder’” — it is possible to say that it is an expression of exaggeration. And also [one could say it is referring to] a very precious cloak — such as [one] of silk and gold — from those that we said are not included in the arrangement [of what he keeps]. And the rest of the many laws of appraisals are elucidated in the tractate that is built upon this, and that is Tractate Arakhin. (See Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 4.)
And the commandment of appraisals is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females — meaning that it is practiced such that if they appraised, their appraisal is effective and [the amount] is consecrated. And nonetheless, the Sages said that at this time we should not appraise from the outset. And [it is] as we say in Tractate Avodah Zarah 13a [in the] first chapter, “We do not consecrate, and we do not appraise and we do not dedicate at this time. But if one did consecrate, or appraise or dedicate, a beast should be destroyed; produce, garments, or vessels should rot; money or metal vessels, he should take to the Dead Sea. And what is destroying? He locks the door before it, and it dies on its own.” And the understanding of this consecration is consecration for the [Temple] upkeep — as with regards to appraisals, it was taught with it, that their undifferentiated [pledge] is also for the [Temple] upkeep. And even though Shmuel said in Arakhin 29a, “Consecrated items worth a maneh (a hundred large coins) that they desanctified upon that which is worth a perutah (the smallest coin), is desanctified (it is effective).” And this is also about consecrated items of the [Temple] upkeep, as with consecration for the poor, it is certainly not something that can be desanctified, but rather we pay it in full; and that which Shmuel said, “desanctified,” in the past is not [meant] to be precise, as he holds that we can desanctify it on the worth of the smallest coin at the outset, as is clearly proven in the Gemara — it is not a difficulty at all: That which we say about it here, “A beast should be destroyed, etc.” — such is the law; but Shmuel said the solution [to the problem created by the law]. And it appears that this is how Rabbenu Alfasi, may his memory be blessed, solves [it] in his Laws in the first chapter of Avodah Zarah, as he brings both of [these statements] together there.
And one who transgresses this and appraises at the time of the [Temple] and does not fulfill [it] to give the amount specified in the Torah; or that at this time he did not do in the thing that which they, may their memory be blessed, said to destroy everything according to the law — or that which Shmuel said as its solution — has violated this positive commandment. And his punishment is very great, as he has “misappropriated a misappropriation of the Lord.” And if three festivals have passed him by after he appraised, there is another punishment in the matter, since he is [also] transgressing, “do not delay.” And there are those that explained that he transgresses immediately also on account of “do not delay”: That in everything that he obligated himself and it is fit to pay, like charity and that which is similar to it, “do not delay” [applies] immediately. [This is] to exclude a sacrifice, as he did not obligate himself, such that he does not transgress until three festivals — and like the words of Rabbi Shimon (Rosh Hashanah 4b), “Until three festivals, and the holiday of [Pesach] is first.” And there are those that said that even regarding charity — and all the more so, other vows — we do not transgress on account of “do not delay,” until three festivals. And [it is] like we find in the Gemara (Rosh Hashanah 5b) concerning gleanings, forgotten sheaves and the corner, “And we do not differentiate between if he obligated himself or he did not obligate himself.” And that which they said in the Gemara, in Rosh Hashanah 6a, “And for charity, he is liable for it” — meaning, immediately — [means] he is liable for it with a positive commandment. (See Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 4.)
מִצְוַת מַעֲרִיךְ אָדָם שֶׁיִּתֵּן דָּמִים הַקְּצוּבִים בַּתּוֹרָה – לָדוּן בְּעֶרְכֵי אָדָם, כְּלוֹמַר, מִי שֶׁאָמַר עֶרְכִּי עָלַי אוֹ עֵרֶךְ פְּלוֹנִי עָלַי, שֶׁיִּתֵּן לַכֹּהֵן כְּפִי הָעֵרֶךְ שֶׁאָמַר וְלֹא פָּחוֹת, כְּמוֹ שֶׁבָּא בַּכָּתוּב מְפֹרָשׂ בְּזָכָר וּנְקֵבָה וּלְפִי חֶשְׁבּוֹן הַשָּׁנִים, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא כז ב) אִישׁ כִּי יַפְלִא נֶדֶר בְּעֶרְכְּךָ נְפָשֹׁת לַיְיָ. וְעִנְיַן הָעֲרָכִין הוּא מִכְּלַל נִדְרֵי הֶקְדֵּשׁ, וּלְפִיכָךְ חַיָּבִים עֲלֵיהֶם מִשּׁוּם לֹא יַחֵל דְּבָרוֹ (במדבר ל ג), וּמִשּׁוּם לֹא תְאַחֵר לְשַׁלְּמוֹ (דברים כג כב), וּמִשּׁוּם כְּכָל הַיֹּצֵא מִפִּיו יַעֲשֶׂה (במדבר ל ג).
The commandment that one who appraises a man give the value delineated in the Torah: To rule on appraisals of people; that is, one who says, “My appraisal is upon me” or “The appraisal of x is upon me,” must give to the priest according to the amount that he said, and not less — as appears explicitly in Scripture about a male and female and according to the tally of [their] years — as it is stated (Leviticus 27:2), “If a man proclaims an oath of the appraisal of souls to the Lord.” And the matter of appraisals is included in vows of consecration and we are therefore obligated to keep them on account of “he shall not profane his words” (Numbers 30:3), “you shall not delay” (Deuteronomy 23:22) and “he shall do like everything that comes out of his mouth” (Numbers 30:3).
וּמִשָּׁרְשֵׁי הַמִּצְוָה. לְפִי שֶׁהָאָדָם לֹא יִשְׁתַּתֵּף בָּעֶלְיוֹנִים זוּלָתִי בְּדִבּוּר, וְהוּא כָּל הַחֵלֶק הַנִּכְבָּד שֶׁבּוֹ, וְזֶה יִקָּרֵא בָּאָדָם נֶפֶשׁ חַיָּה, כְּדִמְתַרְגֵּם אוּנְקְלוֹס וַהֲוָת בָּאָדָם לְרוּחַ מְמַלְּלָא, כִּי שְׁאָר חֶלְקֵי הַגּוּף מֵתִים הֵם, וְאִם יַפְסִיד הָאָדָם זֶה הַחֵלֶק הַטּוֹב יִשָּׁאֵר הַגּוּף מֵת וְכִכְלִי אֵין חֵפֶץ בּוֹ, עַל כֵּן נִתְחַיֵּב לְקַיֵּם דִּבּוּרוֹ בְּמָה שֶׁהוּא מִשְׁתַּמֵּשׁ בּוֹ בְּדִבְרֵי שָׁמַיִם מִכָּל מָקוֹם, כְּגוֹן בַּהֶקְדֵּשׁוֹת וּבְכָל דִּבְרֵי הַצְּדָקוֹת. וּבְיֶתֶר כָּל עִנְיְנֵי הָעוֹלָם, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלֹּא נִתְיַחֲדוּ בָּהֶן עֲשֵׂה וְלָאו צִוּוּ חֲכָמִים וְהִזְהִירוּ כַּמָּה אַזְהָרוֹת שֶׁלֹּא יְשַׁנֶּה אָדָם בְּדִבּוּרוֹ, גַּם תִּקְּנוּ לְקַלֵּל הַמְשַׁנֶּה בְּדִבּוּרוֹ כָּל זְמַן שֶׁנַּעֲשָׂה בָּעִנְיָן מַעֲשֶׂה, וְזֶהוּ עִנְיַן מִי שֶׁפָּרַע הַנִּזְכָּר לָהֶם בְּהַרְבֵּה מְקוֹמוֹת שֶׁאָמְרוּ בּוֹ, דְּבָרִים וּמָעוֹת קָאֵי בַּאֲבָל אָמְרוּ וכו' (ב"מ מד, א), כְּמוֹ שֶׁבָּא בַּגְּמָרָא בְּפֶרֶק הַזָּהָב, וּכְבָר הֶאֱרַכְתִּי הַרְבֵּה בְּשָׁרְשֵׁי שְׁבוּעוֹת וּנְדָרִים בְּסֵדֶר "וַיִּשְׁמַע יִתְרוֹ" בְּמִצְוַת "לֹא תִשָּׂא" (מצוה ל).
It is from the roots of the commandment [that it is] since a person only belongs to the higher [realm] through speech, and this is the entire esteemed part in him. And it is what is called the “living soul” (Genesis 2:7) of a man — as Onkelos translates [this phrase as] “and there was a speaking spirit in man” — since the rest of the parts of the body die. And if a man loses this good part, the body remains dead and like an undesirable vessel. Therefore he is obligated to [at least] fulfill his speech in whatever he uses it for matters of the Heavens, such as consecrations and with all matters of charity. And regarding all other matters of the world — even though there is no particular positive or negative commandment specified for them — the Sages commanded and warned with several warnings that a person should never change his words. And they also ordained to curse one who changes his words so long as an act is done with the matter. And that is the matter of [the curse of] “He who repaid” that is mentioned about them in many places, about which they said (Bava Metzia 44a), “Words and money [do not] acquire, but they said, etc.” as it appears in the chapter [entitled] HaZahav. And I have already written at much length about the roots of oaths and vows in the Order of Vayishma Yitro in the commandment of “You shall not bear” (Sefer HaChinukh 30).
מִדִּינֵי הַמִּצְוָה. מָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (ערכין יח, ב), שֶׁשָּׁנִים אֵלּוּ הָאֵמוּרִין בָּעֲרָכִין, כָּךְ קִבַּלְנוּ שֶׁהֵם שָׁנִים הַנִּמְנִים מִיּוֹם לְיוֹם. כְּלוֹמַר, מִיּוֹם הַלֵּדָה, וְכָל הַשְּׁקָלִים הָאֲמוּרִים שָׁם גַּם כֵּן הֵם שִׁקְלֵי הֶקְדֵּשׁ, וְשֶׁקֶל הַקֹּדֶשׁ יָדַעְנוּ בַּקַּבָּלָה שֶׁהוּא מִשְׁקַל שְׁלשׁ מֵאוֹת וְעֶשְׂרִים גַּרְעִינֵי שְׂעוֹרָה מִכֶּסֶף טָהוֹר. וּכְבָר הוֹסִיפוּ חֲכָמִים עָלָיו וְעָשׂוּ מִשְׁקָלוֹ כְּמִשְׁקַל הַמַּטְבֵּעַ הַנִּקְרָא סֶלַע בִּזְמַן בַּיִת שֵׁנִי, שֶׁהוּא מִשְׁקַל שְׁלֹשׁ מֵאוֹת וְאַרְבַּע וּשְׁמֹנִים שְׂעוֹרָה בֵּינוֹנִית (כ"ה ברמב"ם שקלים א ב ג). וְסֶלַע זֶה, אָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה, שֶׁהוּא (אַרְבָּעָה) דִּינָרִין, וְהַדִּינָר שֵׁשׁ מָעִין, וּמָעָה הִיא הַנִּקְרֵאת בִּימֵי מֹשֶׁה גֵּרָה, כְּדִמְתַרְגֵּם אוּנְקְלוֹס גֵּרָה מָעָה, וּמִשְׁקָלָהּ שֵׁשׁ עֶשְׂרֵה שְׂעוֹרוֹת.
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Arakhin 18b) that we received from the tradition that these years that are stated for appraisals are measured day to day — meaning from the day of birth — and also that all the shekel-coins stated there are the holy shekels. And we have known from the received tradition that the weight of a holy shekel is three hundred and twenty barley grains of pure silver. And the Sages have already added upon it and made its weight like the weight of the coin called the sela at the time of the Second [Temple], which is three hundred and eighty-four medium barley grains (so is it in Mishneh Torah, Laws of Sheqel Dues 1:2-3). And they, may their memory be blessed, said that this sela is (four) dinar, and the dinar is six maah — and the maah is what was called gerah in the days of Moshe, as Onkelos translates gerah as maah — and its weight is sixteen barley grains.
וּמָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ גַּם כֵּן (שם ב, א), שֶׁאֵין חִלּוּק בָּעֲרָכִין בֵּין יָפֶה, אוֹ כָּעוּר, אוֹ חוֹלֶה, אוֹ סוּמָא, אוֹ גִּדֵּם אֶלָּא הַכֹּל נֶעֱרָכִין לְפִי הַשָּׁנִים, כְּמוֹ שֶׁצִּוְּתָה הַתּוֹרָה בָּהֶן, וּמָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ (שם) שֶׁהַדָּמִים אֵינָם כָּעֲרָכִין, שֶׁהָאוֹמֵר, דְּמֵי פְּלוֹנִי עָלַי נוֹתֵן כַּמָּה שֶׁהוּא שָׁוֶה, וְאֵין מַשְׁגִּיחִין בַּשָּׁנִים כְּלָל, שֶׁלֹּא צִוְּתָה הַתּוֹרָה לָתֵת עֵרֶךְ לְפִי הַשָּׁנִים, אֶלָּא בְּמַעֲרִיךְ דַּוְקָא, כְּמוֹ שֶׁפֵּרַשְׁנוּ. וְהָעֲרָכִין וְהַדָּמִים סְתָמָן לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת וְנוֹתְנִין הַכֹּל לְעוֹלָם בַּלִּשְׁכָּה שֶׁהָיְתָה מוּכֶנֶת בַּמִּקְדָּשׁ לְקָדְשֵׁי בֶּדֶק הַבַּיִת (כ"ה ברמב"ם ערכין א י). וְדִין טֻמְטוּם וְאַנְדְּרוֹגִינוֹס וְגוֹי וְעֶבֶד שֶׁהֶעֱרִיכוּ אוֹ שֶׁנֶּעֶרְכוּ, וְדִין הַגּוֹסֵס שֶׁאֵין לוֹ עֵרֶךְ וְלֹא דָּמִים, וְדִין הַיֹּצֵא לֵהָרֵג, וְדִין הַמַּעֲרִיךְ אֵבֶר אֶחָד, וְדִין הָאוֹמֵר מִשְׁקָלִי עָלַי, וְדִין הָאוֹמֵר, קוֹמָתִי עָלַי אוֹ מְלֹא קוֹמָתִי עָלַי, וְהָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי עָלַי כֶּסֶף וְזָהָב, וְלֹא פֵּרֵשׁ מֵאֵי זֶה מַטְבֵּעַ (מנחות קו ב). וְדִין מִי שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ וְלֹא הִשִּׂיגָה יָדוֹ לִפְרֹעַ מָה שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ, כֵּיצַד מְסַדְּרִין לוֹ, וְזֶהוּ שֶׁאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים (שם כג ב) בְּעִנְיָן זֶה, חַיָּבֵי עֲרָכִין וְדָמִים מְמַשְׁכְּנִין אוֹתָם, וְאֵין מַחְזִירִין לָהֶם הַמַּשְׁכּוֹן בַּיּוֹם וּבַלַּיְלָה, וּמוֹכְרִים כָּל הַנִּמְצָא לָהֶם מִן הַקַּרְקַע וּמִן הַמִּטַּלְטְלִין, אֲפִלּוּ כְּסוּת וּכְלֵי תַּשְׁמִישׁ, וְאֵין צָרִיךְ לוֹמַר עֲבָדִים וּבְהֵמוֹת, וְאֵין מוֹכְרִין לָהֶן לֹא כְּסוּת נְשׁוֹתֵיהֶם וּבְנֵיהֶם וּבְנוֹתֵיהֶם, וְלֹא אֲפִלּוּ בְּגָדִים שֶׁצְּבָעָם לִשְׁמָן, וְלֹא סַנְדָּלִים חֲדָשִׁים מִכֵּיוָן שֶׁלְּקָחָן לִשְׁמָן קֹדֶם שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ, וְכֵן הַמַּקְדִּישׁ כָּל נְכָסָיו לֹא הִקְדִּישׁ אֶת אֵלּוּ.
And that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Arakhin 2a) that there is no distinction in appraisals whether he is handsome or ugly or sick or blind or stump-legged. Rather all are appraised according to [their] years, as the Torah commanded about them. And that which they said (Arakhin 2a) that the value is not like appraisal, such that one who says, “The value of x is upon me,” gives according to what he is worth and we do not pay attention to the years at all — as the Torah only commanded to give the valuation according to years specifically for appraisal, as we explained. And [payment of] undifferentiated appraisals and values are for the upkeep of the [Temple] and we always give all of it into the cell that was prepared in the Temple for the consecrated items of the upkeep of the [Temple]. (So is it found in Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 1:10.) And [also] the law of one [the sex of which is in doubt], a gentile or a slave who appraised or were appraised; the law of one who is dying that he has no appraisal or value; the law of one who is going out to be killed; the law of one who appraises one limb; the law of one who says, “My weight is upon me”; the law of one who says, “My height is upon me,” or “My full height is upon me”; [the law of] one who says, “Gold and silver are upon me,” but he did not specify from which [type of] coin (Menachot 104b); and the law of how it is that we arrange things for one who made an appraisal and his hand could not reach to pay what he appraised — and this is what the Sages said about this matter (Arakhin 23b): We take collateral from those obligated in appraisals and values, and we do not return the collateral during the day or the night; and we sell everything that is found to them of land and movable items — even clothing and household utensils, and there is no need to say, slaves and beasts. But we do not sell for them the clothing of their wives or their children — and not even clothes that he [just] dyed for their sake nor new shoes from when he bought them for their sake before he made the appraisal. And so [too,] one who consecrates all of his possessions, does not consecrate these.
וְעִנְיַן הַסִּדּוּר הוּא, שֶׁנּוֹתְנִין לוֹ לָזֶה שֶׁיֵּשׁ עָלָיו עֲרָכִין אוֹ דָּמִים, מְזוֹן שְׁלֹשִׁים יוֹם וּכְסוּת שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ, וּכְסוּת הָרְאוּיָה לוֹ וְסַנְדָּלָיו וּתְפִלָּיו, אֲבָל לֹא שְׁאָר סְפָרִים, וּמִטָּה וּמַצָּע הָרְאוּיִים לוֹ, אֲבָל לְאִשְׁתּוֹ וּלְבָנָיו אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא חַיָּב בִּמְזוֹנוֹתֵיהֶם וּבִכְסוּתָם, אֵין נוֹתְנִין לָהֶם מָזוֹן וּכְסוּת, וּכְשֶׁנּוֹתְנִין לוֹ לְבַדּוֹ כְּסוּת שְׁנֵים עָשָׂר חֹדֶשׁ דַּוְקָא מִכְּסוּת הָרְאוּיָה לוֹ, אֲבָל הָיָה לָבוּשׁ כְּלֵי מֶשִׁי וּבְגָדִים מֻזְהָבִין מַעֲבִירִין אוֹתָם מֵעָלָיו, וְנוֹתְנִין לוֹ כְּסוּת הָרְאוּיָה לְאִישׁ כְּמוֹתוֹ לַחֹל, אֲבָל לֹא לְשַׁבָּתוֹת וְיָמִים טוֹבִים (ב"מ קיג ב). וְאִם הָיָה אֻמָּן נוֹתְנִין לוֹ כְּלֵי אֻמָּנוּתוֹ, שְׁנֵי כְּלֵי אֻמָּנוּת מִכָּל מִין וּמִין. כֵּיצַד? אִם הָיָה חָרָשׁ נוֹתְנִין לוֹ שְׁנֵי מַעֲצָדוֹת וּשְׁנֵי מְגֵרוֹת. וְאִם הָיוּ לוֹ כֵּלִים מְרֻבִּין מִמִּין אֶחָד וּמוּעָטִין מִמִּין אַחֵר אֵין מוֹכְרִין מִן הַמְּרֻבֶּה כְּדֵי לִקַּח לוֹ מִן הַמּוּעָט, אֶלָּא נוֹתְנִין לוֹ שְׁנֵי כֵּלִים מִן הַמְּרֻבִּין, וְכֹל שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מִן הַמּוּעָט. וְאִם הָיָה חַמָּר אוֹ סַפָּן אֵין נוֹתְנִין לוֹ הַבְּהֵמָה אוֹ הַסְּפִינָה, אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁאֵין לָהֶם מְזוֹנוֹת אֶלָּא מֵהֶם. וְכֵן אִם הָיָה תַּלְמִיד חָכָם וְאֵין לוֹ בַּמֶּה שֶׁיִּתְפַּרְנֵס כִּי אִם בִּשְׂכַר לִמּוּדוֹ, אָמְרוּ הַמְּפָרְשִׁים שֶׁאֵין מַנִּיחִין לוֹ סְפָרָיו, שֶׁאֵין זֶה גַּם כֵּן בִּכְלַל כְּלֵי אֻמָּנוּת. וּמִכָּאן יֵשׁ לִי רְאָיָה, שֶׁעַל הַתַּלְמִיד לְהָבִיא סֵפֶר לָרַב. וְיֵשׁ מִן הַמְּפָרְשִׁים שֶׁאָמְרוּ, שֶׁאוֹתָהּ מַסֶּכְתָּא שֶׁהוּא לוֹמֵד בְּאוֹתָהּ שָׁעָה מַנִּיחִין לוֹ, וְיָפֶה אָמְרוּ, מִשּׁוּם כְּבוֹד תּוֹרָה.
And the matter of the arrangement is that we provide for the one that has appraisals or values [that he owes], thirty days of food and twelve months of clothing — clothes that are suitable for him — and his shoes and his tefillin, but not other books. And [we provide him with] a suitable bed and bedding. But we do not provide food and clothing for his wife and children, even though he is obligated in their food and clothing. And when we give him alone clothing for twelve months, it is only that which is suitable for him, but if he wore silk items and golden clothing we take it off of him, and we provide him with suitable clothing for a man like him for weekdays, but not for Shabbat and holidays (Bava Metzia 113b). And if he was a craftsman, we provide him with tools of his trade — two craft tools from each and every type. How is this? If he was a carpenter, we provide him with two planes and two saws. And if he had many tools of one type and few of another type, we do not sell the many in order to buy him of the few. Rather we provide him with two of the many and all that he has of the few. But if he was a donkey driver or a shipowner, we do not provide him with the beast or the ship, even though their [sustenance] is only from them. And so [too,] if he is a Torah scholar and he has nothing with which to earn his livelihood besides his study, the commentators said that we do not leave him his books, as this is also not included in tools of a trade — and from here I have a proof that it is upon the student to bring the book to the teacher. But there are some of the commentators who said that we leave him the tractate that he is studying at that time — and they said well, on account of the honor of the Torah.
וּמָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (שם כג, א) שֶׁנִּשְׁאָלִין עַל הָעֲרָכִין וְעַל הַדָּמִים כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁנִּשְׁאָלִין עַל שְׁאָר נְדָרִים וְהֶקְדֵּשׁוֹת. וְאָמְרוּ גַּם כֵּן (שם כד, א) שֶׁאִם הָיוּ בְּנִכְסֵי הַמַּעֲרִיךְ בְּהֵמוֹת אוֹ עֲבָדִים וּמַרְגָּלִיּוֹת, וְאָמְרוּ הַתַּגָּרִים אִם יִלָּקַח לְעֶבֶד זֶה כְּסוּת בִּשְׁלֹשִׁים דִּינָר מַשְׁבִּיחַ בּוֹ יוֹתֵר מִשִּׁשִּׁים, וְאִם תַּמְתִּינוּ לִבְהֵמָה זוֹ עַד חֹדֶשׁ יָמִים מַשְׁבַּחַת הִיא כִּפְלַיִם בְּדָמֶיהָ, וּמַרְגָּלִית זוֹ אִם מַעֲלִין אוֹתָהּ לְמָקוֹם פְּלוֹנִי תִּשְׁוֶה מָמוֹן רַב אֵין שׁוֹמְעִין לָהֶם כְּלָל, אֶלָּא מוֹכְרִין הַכֹּל בִּמְקוֹמָם וּבִשְׁעָתָן שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְנָתַן אֶת הָעֶרְכְּךָ בַּיּוֹם הַהוּא קֹדֶשׁ לַיְיָ. וּבָא הַפֵּרוּשׁ עָלָיו, שֶׁזֶּה הַכָּתוּב מְלַמֵּד עַל כָּל דְּבַר הֶקְדֵּשׁ, שֶׁאֵין מְפַרְנְסִין אוֹתָן, וְאֵין מַמְתִּינִין לָהֶם לְיוֹם הַשּׁוּק, וְאֵין מוֹלִיכִין אוֹתָן מִמָּקוֹם לְמָקוֹם, וְזֶה הַכְּלָל, שֶׁאֵין לְךָ בָּהֶם אֶלָּא מְקוֹמָן וּשְׁעָתָן בִּלְבַד. וּבַמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים? בְּמִטַּלְטְלִין, אֲבָל הַקַּרְקָעוֹת מַכְרִיזִין עֲלֵיהֶם שִׁשִּׁים יוֹם רְצוּפִים בֹּקֶר וָעֶרֶב, וְאַחַר כָּךְ מוֹכְרִין אוֹתָם.
And that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Arakhin 23a) that we ask about appraisals and values [in order to annul them] in the [same] way that we ask about other vows and consecrations. And they also said (Arakhin 24a) that if there were animals or slaves or jewels among the possessions of the appraiser and the traders say, “If he buys clothing of thirty dinar for this slave, he will increase his value by more than sixty”; or “If you wait on this animal for a month, its value will increased by double”; or “If they bring this jewel to place x, it will be worth much money” — we do not listen to them at all. Rather we sell everything in their place and in their time, as it is stated (Leviticus 27:23), “and he shall give the appraisal on that day, a sacred donation to the Lord.” And the understanding came about this that this verse teaches about all consecrated things that we do not sustain them, we do not wait with them for the market day and we do not take them from one place to [another]. And this is the principle — that they only have their place and time alone. And what are these words speaking about? About movable items. But we proclaim [the intention to sell] lands sixty consecutive days — morning and evening — and afterwards, we sell them.
וְהוֹאִיל וַאֲתָא לִידַן עִנְיַן סִדּוּר, נִכְתֹּב כָּאן מַה שֶׁאָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה בְּעִנְיַן סִדּוּר בְּבַעַל חוֹב בְּפֶרֶק הַמְּקַבֵּל שָׂדֶה מֵחֲבֵרוֹ בְּבָבָא מְצִיעָא (קיג, ב,), דְּאָמְרִינַן הָתָם תָּנֵי תַּנָּא קַמֵּהּ דְּרַב נַחְמָן בַּר יִצְחָק כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁמְּסַדְּרִין בַּעֲרָכִין כָּךְ מְסַדְּרִין בְּבַעַל חוֹב, וְהֵבִיאוּ (שם) בָּזֶה הַרְבֵּה קֻשְׁיוֹת וְתֵרוּצִין, וְסוֹף הָעִנְיָן מֵבִיא בַּגְּמָרָא מַעֲשֶׂה דְּאֵלִיָּהוּ דְּאַשְׁכְּחֵהּ רַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ דַּהֲוָה קָאֵם בְּבֵית הַקְּבָרוֹת שֶׁל גּוֹיִם, אֲמַר לֵהּ מַהוּ שֶׁיְּסַדְּרוּ בְּבַעַל חוֹב? וְרַשִׁ"י זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה וַאֲחֵרִים גָּרְסִי מִנַּיִן שֶׁיְּסַדְּרוּ בְּבַעַל חוֹב, כְּלוֹמַר, דִּפְשִׁיטָא לֵיהּ לְרַבָּה בַּר אֲבוּהּ דִּמְסַדְּרִין, אֲבָל הָיָה שׁוֹאֵל מֵאֵלִיָּהוּ מֵאֵיזֶה מִקְרָא אָנוּ לְמֵדִין אוֹתוֹ. וְאַהְדַּר לֵיהּ אֵלִיָּהוּ דְּהָכִי הוּא דְּגָמְרִינַן מִיכָה מִיכָה מֵעֲרָכִין, כְּלוֹמַר, דִּכְתִיב גַּבֵּי הַלְוָאָה (ויקרא כה לה), וְכִי יָמוּךְ אָחִיךָ וּמָטָה יָדוֹ עִמָּךְ וְהֶחֱזַקְתָּ בּוֹ. דְּהַיְנוּ הַלְוָאָה, כְּדִכְתִיב בְּסוֹפֵהּ אַל תִּקַּח מֵאִתּוֹ נֶשֶׁךְ וְתַרְבִּית וְגוֹ', וּכְתִיב בַּעֲרָכִין (שם כז ח) וְאִם מָךְ הוּא מֵעֶרְכֶּךָ, וּבָא הַפֵּרוּשׁ הַמְּקֻבָּל (ערכין כד א) הַחֲיֵהוּ מֵעֶרְכֶּךָ.
And since the matter of arranging [this debt] has come to our hand, we shall write here that which they, may their memory be blessed, said about a [general] debtor in the chapter [entitled] HaMekabel Sadeh Mechavero in Bava Metzia 113b: That there we say, “A teacher taught in front of Rav Nachman bar Yitschak, ‘In the [same] way that we arrange things with appraisals, so do we arrange things with a debtor.’” And they brought many challenges and solutions and the end of the matter is that which the Gemara brings, “A story of Eliyahu, who Rabbah bar Avoua found standing in a graveyard of gentiles. He said to him, ‘What is [the law] about their arranging things for a debtor?’” And Rashi, may his memory be blessed, and others had a textual variant [instead], “From where [do we know] about their arranging things for a debtor?” [This is] meaning to say, it was obvious to Rabbah bar Avoua that we arrange [things for a debtor], but he was asking Eliyahu, from which verse we learn it. “And Eliyahu answered him, ‘That this is how we learn it, “destitution, destitution,” from appraisals.’” [This is] meaning to say that it is written about a loan (Leviticus 25:35), “And if your brother becomes destitute and his hand falters with you, you shall strengthen him” — which is a loan, as it is written at its end (Leviticus 25:35), “Do not take from him interest or increase, etc.”; and it is written about appraisals (Leviticus 27:8), “And if he is destitute from [paying] the appraisal” — and the received tradition (Arakhin 24a) comes [that its understanding is], revive him from his appraisal.
וְגָמְרִינַן מִיכָה מִיכָה לְסַדֵּר בְּבַעַל חוֹב כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁמְּסַדְּרִין בַּעֲרָכִין. וְאֵין לְפַקְפֵּק אַחַר דִּבְרֵי אֵלִיָּהוּ, וְכֵן פָּסְקוּ כָּל הַגְּאוֹנִים וְרַבֵּנוּ אַלְפָסִי. וְאַף עַל גַּב דְּרַבִּי יַעֲקֹב מִשְּׁמֵהּ דְּרַבִּי פְּדָת וְרַבִּי יִרְמְיָה מִשְּׁמֵהּ דְּאִלְפָא אָמְרוּ דֶּרֶךְ פְּשִׁיטוּת בַּגְּמָרָא דְּאֵין מְסַדְּרִין בְּבַעַל חוֹב, אָנוּ אֵין לָנוּ אַחַר דִּבְרֵי אֵלִיָּהוּ פִּקְפּוּק, וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁמָּצָאנוּ לְרַבֵּנוּ תָּם שֶׁכָּתַב כְּמַאן דְּאָמַר אֵין מְסַדְּרִין וּרְאָיוֹתָיו בְּסִפְרוֹ, אַחֲרֵי רַבִּים לְהַטּוֹת (שמות כג ב). גַּם הָרַמְבַּ"ם זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה (בהלכות מלוה ולוה א ז) פָּסַק כִּשְׁאָר הַגְּאוֹנִים דִּמְסַדְּרִין, וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם אַף עַל פִּי כֵן כָּתַב, דְּאֵין שְׁלִיחַ בֵּית דִּין מַנִּיחַ לְבַעַל חוֹב אֶלָּא כֵּלִים שֶׁאִי אֶפְשָׁר לוֹ בְּלֹא הֵם, כְּגוֹן מִטָּה וּמַצָּע וּמָה שֶׁהוּא לָבוּשׁ, וְנִרְאֶה שֶׁהִזְקִיקוֹ לָרַב לוֹמַר כֵּן, כְּשֶׁרָאָה בְּפֶרֶק זֶה דִּמְקַבֵּל גַּבֵּי שְׁלִיחַ בֵּית דִּין שֶׁאָמְרוּ בַּמִּשְׁנָה (שם קיג א) הָיוּ לוֹ שְׁנֵי כֵּלִים נוֹטֵל אֶחָד וּמַחְזִיר אֶחָד, אֶת הַכַּר בַּלַּיְלָה וְאֶת הַמַּחְרֵשָׁה בַיּוֹם, וְלֹא מָנוּ כְּלֵי הָאֻמָּנוּת, וְזֶה וַדַּאי מִן הַנִּרְאֶה שֶׁאֵינוֹ הֶכְרֵחַ גָּדוֹל, דְּכֵיוָן דְּקַיְמָא לַן דִּמְסַדְּרִין בּוֹ כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁמְּסַדְּרִין בַּעֲרָכִין שָׁוִין הֵם בְּכָל דָּבָר, וְאַף עַל גַּב דְּלָא חֲשִׁיב לְהוּ בַּמִּשְׁנָה אֵין בְּכָךְ כְּלוּם, דְּלָאו כִּי רוֹכְלָא חֲשִׁיב וְתָנֵי בְּכָל מָקוֹם. וּנְקַט כַּר וּמַחְרֵשָׁה, וְהוּא הַדִּין לְכָל מַה שֶּׁרָאוּי לְהַנִּיחַ לוֹ. וּכְלָלָא דְּמִלְּתָא, לְפִי הַנִּרְאֶה וְהַמֻּסְכָּם לְכָל גְּאוֹנֵי הָעוֹלָם אֲשֶׁר יָצָא לָהֶם שֵׁם בַּתּוֹרָה שֶׁמְּסַדְּרִין בְּבַעַל חוֹב כְּדֶרֶךְ שֶׁמְּסַדְּרִין בַּעֲרָכִין בְּשָׁוֶה, וְיֵשׁ לָהֶם עַל מַה שֶּׁיִּסְמוֹכוּ מִדִּבְרֵי הַגְּמָרָא וּמִדְּאֵלִיָּהוּ זָכוּר לַטּוֹב, כִּדְכָתְבִינַן.
And [so] we learn, “destitution, destitution,” to arrange things with a debtor in the way that we arrange things with appraisals, and we should not hesitate about the words of Eliyahu. And so did all the Geonim and Rabbenu Alfasi rule. And even though Rabbi Yaakov in the name of Rabbi Pedat, and Rabbi Yirmiyah in the name of Ilfa, said that we do not arrange things for a debtor, in the way of it being obvious in the Gemara — [nonetheless] we do not hesitate about the words of Eliyahu. And even though we found that Rabbenu Tam wrote like the opinion that we do not arrange things, and his proofs are in his book, “after the many do we incline.” And Rambam, may his memory be blessed, also ruled like the other Geonim that we arrange things (Mishneh Torah, Laws of Creditor and Debtor 1:7). And nonetheless, he wrote that the agent of the court only leaves the debtor items that are essential to him, such as a bed and bedding and that which he wears. And it appears that what forced the Teacher to say this is when he saw in this chapter [entitled] Mekabel regarding an agent of the court: That they said in the Mishnah (Bava Metzia 113a), “If he had two items, he takes one and returns one — the pillow at night, and the plow during the day.” And they did not list tools of the trades. But from what it appears, this is certainly not a great compulsion [to rule as he did]. As since it is established to us that we arrange things with him in the way that we arrange things with appraisals, they are the same in every matter. And even though the Mishnah did not enumerate them, this is no matter; as it is not like a peddler that enumerates [all of his wares] and repeats [them] in every place. [Rather] it mentioned pillow and plow, and the law is the same for everything that is fitting to leave him. And the principle of the matter, according to that which seems — and that which is agreed by all the savants of the world whose fame about Torah has been disseminated — is that we arrange things with a debtor exactly in the way that we arrange things with appraisals. And they have what to rely upon from the words of the Gemara and from that of Eliyahu — may he be remembered for the good — as we we have written.
וְאִם תִּשְׁאַל וְהֵיכִי מְסַדְּרִין לוֹ כְּסוּתוֹ, וַהֲרֵי אָמְרִינַן בַּגְּמָרָא (ב"ק יא, ב) מִנֵּיהּ וַאֲפִלּוּ מִגְּלִימָא דְּעַל כַּתְפֵּהּ, אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר, דִּלְשׁוֹן גֻּזְמָא הוּא, אִי נָמֵי מִגְּלִימָא הַחֲשׁוּבָה בְּיוֹתֵר, כְּגוֹן כְּלֵי מֶשִׁי וְזָהָב מֵאוֹתָם הוּא דְּאָמְרִינַן, שֶׁאֵינָם בִּכְלַל הַסִּדּוּר. וְיֶתֶר רֻבֵּי דִּינֵי עֲרָכִין, מְבֹאָרִים בַּמַּסֶּכְתָּא הַבְּנוּיָה עַל זֶה הִיא מַסֶּכֶת עֲרָכִין [ה' ערכין פי"ד].
And if you ask, “And how do we arrange his clothing; and behold, we say in the Gemara (Bava Kamma 11b), ‘His clothing, and even the cloak that is on his shoulder’” — it is possible to say that it is an expression of exaggeration. And also [one could say it is referring to] a very precious cloak — such as [one] of silk and gold — from those that we said are not included in the arrangement [of what he keeps]. And the rest of the many laws of appraisals are elucidated in the tractate that is built upon this, and that is Tractate Arakhin. (See Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 4.)
וְנוֹהֶגֶת מִצְוַת עֲרָכִין בְּכָל מָקוֹם וּבְכָל זְמַן, בִּזְכָרִים וּנְקֵבוֹת כְּלוֹמַר נוֹהֶגֶת לְעִנְיָן שֶׁאִם הֶעֱרִיכוּ עֶרְכָּן נִתְפָּס וְהוּא קֹדֶשׁ. וּמִכָּל מָקוֹם אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים דְּבַזְּמַן הַזֶּה לְכַתְּחִלָּה אֵין מַעֲרִיכִין, וְכִדְאָמְרִינַן בְּמַסֶּכֶת עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה פֶּרֶק קַמָּא (יג, א) אֵין מַקְדִּישִׁין וְאֵין מַעֲרִיכִין וְאֵין מַחְרִימִין בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה, וְאִם הִקְדִּישׁ אוֹ הֶעֱרִיךְ אוֹ הֶחְרִים בְּהֵמָה תֵּעָקֵר, פֵּרוֹת כְּסוּת וְכֵלִים יֵרָקְבוּ, מָעוֹת וּכְלֵי מַתֶּכֶת יוֹלִיכֵם לְיָם הַמֶּלַח. וְאִי זֶהוּ עִקּוּר? נוֹעֵל דֶּלֶת בְּפָנֶיהָ, וְהִיא מֵתָה מֵאֵלֶיהָ. וְזֶה הַהֶקְדֵּשׁ פֵּרוּשׁוֹ, הֶקְדֵּשׁ דְּבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, דְּהָא גַּבֵּי עֲרָכִין תָּנֵי לֵיהּ דִּסְתָמָן נָמֵי הָוֵי לְבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת. וְאַף עַל גַּב דַּאֲמַר שְׁמוּאֵל בַּעֲרָכִין (כט, א) הֶקְדֵּשׁ שָׁוֶה מָנֶה שֶׁחִלְּלוֹ עַל שָׁוֶה פְּרוּטָה הֲרֵי זֶה מְחֻלָּל, וְהַיְנוּ נָמֵי הֶקְדֵּשׁ דְּבֶדֶק הַבַּיִת, דְּאִלּוּ הֶקְדֵּשׁ דַּעֲנִיִּים וַדַּאי אֵינוֹ בַּר חִלּוּל, אֶלָּא פּוֹרְעִין אוֹתוֹ מֻשְׁלָם, וְלָאו דַּוְקָא דְּקָאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל שֶׁחִלְּלוֹ דִּיעֲבַד, דְּהוּא הַדִּין דְּקָסָבַר דִּמְחַלְּלִין אוֹתוֹ עַל שָׁוֶה פְּרוּטָה לְכַתְּחִלָּה, כִּדְמוֹכַח בַּגְּמָרָא מְבֹרָר, לָא קַשְׁיָא מִדֵּי הַהִיא בְּהָא דְּאָמְרִינַן הָכָא בְּהֵמָה תֵּעָקֵר וכו', דְּהָכִי קָתָנֵי דִּינָא, וּשְׁמוּאֵל קָאָמַר תַּקַּנְתָּא, וְהָכִי נִרְאֶה דְּתָרְצִינְהוּ רַבֵּנוּ אַלְפָסִי זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה בְּהִלְכוֹתָיו בְּפֶרֶק קַמָּא דַּעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, דְּמַיְתֵי לְהוּ הָתָם תַּרְוַיְהוּ בַּהֲדֵי הֲדָדֵי.
And the commandment of appraisals is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females — meaning that it is practiced such that if they appraised, their appraisal is effective and [the amount] is consecrated. And nonetheless, the Sages said that at this time we should not appraise from the outset. And [it is] as we say in Tractate Avodah Zarah 13a [in the] first chapter, “We do not consecrate, and we do not appraise and we do not dedicate at this time. But if one did consecrate, or appraise or dedicate, a beast should be destroyed; produce, garments, or vessels should rot; money or metal vessels, he should take to the Dead Sea. And what is destroying? He locks the door before it, and it dies on its own.” And the understanding of this consecration is consecration for the [Temple] upkeep — as with regards to appraisals, it was taught with it, that their undifferentiated [pledge] is also for the [Temple] upkeep. And even though Shmuel said in Arakhin 29a, “Consecrated items worth a maneh (a hundred large coins) that they desanctified upon that which is worth a perutah (the smallest coin), is desanctified (it is effective).” And this is also about consecrated items of the [Temple] upkeep, as with consecration for the poor, it is certainly not something that can be desanctified, but rather we pay it in full; and that which Shmuel said, “desanctified,” in the past is not [meant] to be precise, as he holds that we can desanctify it on the worth of the smallest coin at the outset, as is clearly proven in the Gemara — it is not a difficulty at all: That which we say about it here, “A beast should be destroyed, etc.” — such is the law; but Shmuel said the solution [to the problem created by the law]. And it appears that this is how Rabbenu Alfasi, may his memory be blessed, solves [it] in his Laws in the first chapter of Avodah Zarah, as he brings both of [these statements] together there.
וְהָעוֹבֵר עַל זֶה וְהֶעֱרִיךְ בִּזְמַן הַבַּיִת וְלֹא הִשְׁלִים לָתֵת בָּעֵרֶךְ הַקָּצוּב בַּתּוֹרָה, אוֹ שֶׁלֹּא עָשָׂה בַּדָּבָר בַּזְּמַן הַזֶּה מָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה מִדִּינָא לְאַבֵּד הַכֹּל, אוֹ מַה שֶׁאָמַר שְׁמוּאֵל בְּתַקַּנְתָּא בִּטֵּל עֲשֵׂה זֶה, וְעָנְשׁוֹ גָּדוֹל מְאֹד, שֶׁמָּעַל מַעַל בַּשֵּׁם, וְאִם עָבְרוּ עָלָיו שְׁלֹשָׁה רְגָלִים אַחַר שֶׁהֶעֱרִיךְ יֵשׁ בַּדָּבָר עוֹד עֹנֶשׁ אַחַר שֶׁעוֹבֵר מִשּׁוּם בַּל תְּאַחֵר. וְיֵשׁ שֶׁפֵּרְשׁוּ, שֶׁמִּיָּד עוֹבֵר גַּם כֵּן מִשּׁוּם בַּל תְּאַחֵר. דִּבְכָל מִדֵּי דְּאִיהוּ חַיֵּב נַפְשֵׁהּ וַחֲזִי לְשַׁלּוֹמֵי כִּצְדָקָה וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהּ לְאַלְתַּר אִית בֵּהּ מִשּׁוּם בַּל תְּאַחֵר, לְאַפּוֹקֵי קָרְבָּן דְּלָאו אִיהוּ חַיֵּב נַפְשֵׁהּ, דְּלָא עָבַר עֲלַהּ עַד שְׁלֹשָׁה רְגָלִים, וּכְדִבְרֵי רַבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן (ר"ה ד, ב) עַד שְׁלֹשָׁה רְגָלִים וְחַג הַמַּצּוֹת תְּחִלָּה. וְיֵשׁ שֶׁאָמְרוּ, שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ בִּצְדָקָה וְכָל שֶׁכֵּן בִּשְׁאָר נְדָרִים גַּם כֵּן אֵין עוֹבְרִין מִשּׁוּם בַּל תְּאַחֵר, עַד שְׁלֹשָׁה רְגָלִים, וְכִדְאַשְׁכְּחַן בַּגְּמָרָא (שם ה ב) גַּבֵּי לֶקֶט שִׁכְחָה וּפֵאָה, וְאֵין מְחַלְּקִין בֵּין חַיֵּב נַפְשֵׁהּ לְלֹא חַיֵּב נַפְשֵׁהּ. וּמַה שֶּׁאָמְרוּ בַּגְּמָרָא בְּרֹאשׁ הַשָּׁנָה (ו, א) וּצְדָקָה מִחַיַּב עֲלָהּ, כְּלוֹמַר, לְאַלְתַּר מִחַיַּב בָּהּ בַּעֲשֵׂה [הלכות ערכין פ"ד].
And one who transgresses this and appraises at the time of the [Temple] and does not fulfill [it] to give the amount specified in the Torah; or that at this time he did not do in the thing that which they, may their memory be blessed, said to destroy everything according to the law — or that which Shmuel said as its solution — has violated this positive commandment. And his punishment is very great, as he has “misappropriated a misappropriation of the Lord.” And if three festivals have passed him by after he appraised, there is another punishment in the matter, since he is [also] transgressing, “do not delay.” And there are those that explained that he transgresses immediately also on account of “do not delay”: That in everything that he obligated himself and it is fit to pay, like charity and that which is similar to it, “do not delay” [applies] immediately. [This is] to exclude a sacrifice, as he did not obligate himself, such that he does not transgress until three festivals — and like the words of Rabbi Shimon (Rosh Hashanah 4b), “Until three festivals, and the holiday of [Pesach] is first.” And there are those that said that even regarding charity — and all the more so, other vows — we do not transgress on account of “do not delay,” until three festivals. And [it is] like we find in the Gemara (Rosh Hashanah 5b) concerning gleanings, forgotten sheaves and the corner, “And we do not differentiate between if he obligated himself or he did not obligate himself.” And that which they said in the Gemara, in Rosh Hashanah 6a, “And for charity, he is liable for it” — meaning, immediately — [means] he is liable for it with a positive commandment. (See Mishneh Torah, Laws of Appraisals and Devoted Property 4.)