Study Arakhin folio 18B with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
כענין שנאמר ״מראשו ועד רגליו״, ראשו ולא ראשו בכלל, רגליו ולא רגליו בכלל?
This is similar to the matter that is stated with regard to a metzora: “And the tzara'at covers all the skin of him who has the mark from his head to his feet, as far as the priest can see…it is all turned white: He is pure” (Leviticus 13:12–13). This verse is understood as follows: The mark reaches from his head, but his head is not included; it reaches to his feet, but his feet are not included. Therefore, one might have thought the prohibition against consuming leaven on the festival of Passover likewise does not apply to the endpoints mentioned in the verse.
תלמוד לומר: ״עד יום האחד ועשרים לחדש בערב״. רבי אומר: אינו צריך, ״ראשון״ ו״ראשון״ בכלל, ״שביעי״ ו״שביעי״ בכלל!
Therefore, the verse states: “You should eat unleavened bread, until the 21st day of the month in the evening” (Exodus 12:18). This proves that the 7th day of the Festival is included. R' Yehuda HaNasi says: It is not necessary to cite this verse, as the prohibition against consuming leaven is from the 1st day of Passover, and the 1st day is included; and the ban continues until the 7th day, and the 7th day is included. Accordingly, with regard to valuations, even without a verbal analogy R' Yehuda HaNasi should maintain that the 20th year is included in the preceding period.
אפילו תימא רבי, שקולי משקלי קראי. מכדי כתיב: ״מבן חדש ועד בן חמש שנים״, תו ״מבן חמש ועד בן עשרים״ למה לי? הילכך אישתקלו להו.
The Talmud answers: You may even say that the opinion in the Mishnah is in accordance with that of R' Yehuda HaNasi, as the verses offset each other, and therefore their meaning is unclear without the verbal analogy. The Talmud elaborates: Since it is written: “From one month old until 5 years old” (Leviticus 27:6), this ostensibly includes the 5th year within the stated category. If so, why do I need this mention of 5 years as well: “And if it is from 5 years old until 20 years old, then your valuation should be for the male 20 shekels” (Leviticus 27:5)? Therefore, with regard to the 5th year, as both verses mention that year, the verses offset each other. Consequently, even according to the opinion of R' Yehuda HaNasi the verbal analogy is necessary.