Arakhin 3b — the Talmud in English

And we answer:

“to include”

slaves,

for if he has a circumcised Canaanite slave to sell, and the slave wishes that he sell him only in the Land of Israel, we compel his master to bring him up and sell him there. [And in Ketubot Rashi explained that this concerns a Hebrew slave, whom his master can compel to go up with him to the Land of Israel].

And he raises an objection:

And according to the one who teaches

in the Mishna there

“slaves” explicitly,

and if so, there is no need to include them, for they were taught explicitly in the Mishna: “all”—

“to include what?”

And we answer:

“to include”

one who compels the members of his household to go up, even

from a

dwelling-place

that is good

outside the Land of Israel

to a bad dwelling-place

in the Land of Israel; and his wife cannot prevent him.

And as for that which we learned:

“and not all may take out”

the members of their household from the Land of Israel to outside the Land of Israel—

“to include what?”

“To include a slave who fled from outside the Land to the Land”

for his master cannot compel him to return.

And as for that which we learned there:

“all bring up to Jerusalem,”

“all”—

“to include what?”

And we answer:

“to include”

that even

from a good dwelling-place

in the rest of the Land of Israel

to a bad dwelling-place

in Jerusalem, he can compel his wife to go up.

And we raise an objection:

“and not all may take out”

from Jerusalem to the provinces—“all”—

“to include what?”

And we answer:

“to include”

even

from a bad dwelling-place

in Jerusalem

to a good dwelling-place

in the provinces. For even in this case his wife can prevent him.

Until now they explained what “all” includes; from here onward they explain the Mishnayot in which it is written: “kohanim, Levites, and Israelites.”

And we raise an objection: This that is written,

“all are obligated in the sukka, kohanim, Levites, and Israelites,”

behold, it is

obvious

that everyone is obligated. For

if these are not obligated—

who is obligated?!

And we answer:

“Kohanim was necessary for him”

to inform us that they are obligated. For

it might enter your mind to say

that they are exempt,

since it is written: “You shall sit in sukkot,” and the Master said: “

You shall sit”

that the dwelling in a sukka should be

“like the way you dwell”

in a permanent dwelling.

Just as a dwelling

that is permanent ordinarily has

a man and his wife

with him,

so too a sukka

one is obligated only with

a man and his wife

with him.

And these kohanim, since they are people of the Temple service,

and they cannot dwell, a man and his wife, during the Festival, for they do not engage with their wives, so that they should not become impure and be disqualified from the Festival service imposed upon them , and if so, let us say that they should not be obligated in the sukka,

it teaches us

that

although they are exempt at the time of the service

from the sukka, nevertheless

when it is not the time of the service, they are obligated.

And they compare this to

“those traveling on the roads,”

who are also exempt by the exposition “You shall sit like the way you dwell.” For just as in dwelling in his house throughout the year he does not refrain from going out on the road, so too in dwelling in a sukka.

For the Master said: Those traveling on the roads are exempt from the sukka during the day

when it is the time of their traveling,

and obligated at night

when they lodge in an inhabited place. And we do not say that since during part of the time they are exempt, the mitzva of sukka has entirely ceased to apply to them; and the same applies to the kohanim: whenever it is possible for them to sit in a sukka, they are obligated.

And we raise an objection: This that is written,

“all are obligated in ritual fringes, kohanim, Levites, and Israelites.”

Behold, it is

obvious

that everyone is included in the mitzva? And we answer:

“Kohanim was necessary for them”

to inform us that they are obligated. For

it might enter your mind to say

that they are exempt,

since it is written, “You shall not wear shaatnez,”

and adjacent to it is

“You shall make for yourself twisted threads,”

and it can be inferred from this that specifically

“one for whom shaatnez is not permitted is obligated in the mitzva of ritual fringes; but these kohanim, since shaatnez is permitted for them”

in the priestly garments [for the sash was of shaatnez]

should not be obligated

in ritual fringes,

it teaches us

that despite the inference they are obligated, for they too are included in the prohibition of shaatnez.

Although shaatnez is permitted

during

the time of the service

in the Temple,

when it is not the time of the service it is not permitted. [According to its simple meaning, it is permitted only at the actual time of the service ;

but the view of Rabbenu Tam in Menahot 41a is that every garment designated for the service, in a place suitable for the service, is considered the time of the service, and shaatnez is permitted].

And we raise an objection: This that is written,

“all are obligated in phylacteries, kohanim, Levites, and Israelites,”

is obvious!? And we answer:

“Kohanim was necessary for him”

to inform us that they are obligated. For

it might enter your mind to say

that they are exempt,

since it is written, “And you shall bind them as a sign upon your hand, and they shall be as frontlets between your eyes,”

and perhaps we learn that they depend upon one another, and specifically

any

person who

is present in the mitzva

of phylacteries

of the hand is present

also

in the mitzva

of phylacteries

of the head. And these kohanim, since they are not present in the mitzva of the hand, for it is written

“and linen trousers

he shall wear upon his flesh” [and the same applies to the tunic], and they expound

that

there shall not be anything interposing between him

[between the garment]

and between his flesh.

And since the phylacteries must be placed directly upon his flesh, as explained in tractate Menahot, that the place of the phylacteries of the hand is beneath his garments, as it is written, “And it shall be for you as a sign,” and not as a sign for others, and it follows that the phylacteries interpose between the priestly garment and the flesh of the koen, and therefore the kohanim do not put on phylacteries of the hand,

let it enter your mind to say

that also

in the mitzva

of phylacteries

of the head as well they should not be obligated; it teaches us that not

do the phylacteries

of the hand and of the head

prevent one another. As we learned: “The phylactery of the hand does not

prevent the phylactery of the head, and the phylactery of the head does not prevent the phylactery of the hand.”

And further we raise an objection:

And what is different about the hand

that they are exempt

because it is written, “He shall wear it upon his flesh”; the head also

should be exempt, for

it is written, “And you shall place the mitre upon his head,”

and when he places phylacteries on his head, they are an interposition between the mitre and his head!?

And we answer:

The tanna taught: His hair

of the High Koen

was visible between the frontplate

on the forehead

and the mitre

on his head,

for there,

in that space, he would

place phylacteries; and therefore there is no interposition here, and he can fulfill both.

and therefore there was no intervening object, and he could fulfill both mitzvot.

And we raise an objection: This that is written:

“all are obligated in the sounding of the shofar, kohanim, Levites, and Israelites”—

obvious!?

And we answer:

“Kohanim was necessary for him.”

For

it might enter your mind to say

that they are exempt,

since it is written, “It shall be a day of sounding for you,”

which implies only one day, and from this we learn that only

“one who exists only in the sounding of one day is obligated”

in the sounding of the shofar on Rosh Hashana.

“And these kohanim, since they are present in the

mitzva of

sounding

during the pouring of the wine with the communal offerings

throughout the entire year, as it is written, “And you shall sound with the trumpets over your burnt offerings,”

let it enter your mind to say that they should not be obligated

in the shofar of Rosh Hashana,

it teaches us

that they are obligated.

And he rejects it:

“Are they comparable?”

Are those soundings of the pouring of the wine comparable to this? For

there

in the offerings, the sounding is with

trumpets,

whereas

here

on Rosh Hashana the sounding is with a

shofar.

And we answer with another resolution: for this reason it was

necessary

to include kohanim and Levites, that they are obligated, for

it might enter your mind to say

that they are exempt,

since we learned: “The order of the day of Yom Kippur

of the

Jubilee is equal to that of Rosh Hashana with regard to sounding and with regard to the blessings”

of kingships, remembrances, and shofarot! And since they are compared to one another, one might say that whoever

is present in the mitzva of the Jubilee is present in the mitzva of

sounding of

Rosh Hashana,

whereas whoever

is not present in the mitzva of the Jubilee is not present in the mitzva of Rosh Hashana.

And these kohanim, since they are not present in the mitzva of

returning fields in the

Jubilee

like an Israelite in every respect,