הלכות ערכים וחרמין

When a person pledges the airech of someone less than 20 years old and he does not stand before [a court for] appraisal until he exceeds that age, the donor is required to give only the airech of one less than 20. For the airech is defined only at the time that it is pledged and not at the time one stands before the court. 18a derives this from the exegesis of Leviticus 27:17.

All of the arechim that are explicitly mentioned in the Torah are to be given when the one who makes the pledge is wealthy. If, however, he was poor and he does not have the means, he is [required to] give everything that he possesses - even if it is only a sela are discussed in Halachah 4. - and he discharges his obligation, as [Leviticus 27:8] states: "If he is too poor [to pay] the airech... the priest should evaluate him is pledged is considered and on that basis, we determine the sum the one who made the pledge must pay;
b) if the one who made the pledge is poor, we evaluate his capacity to pay (Radbaz).
Once the poor person pays the lesser amount, he is not obligated to pay any more even if later he becomes wealthy (Halachah 7). according to his capacity."

Which source teaches that if he possesses only one sela, it is sufficient to give that sela? [Leviticus, ibid.,] states: "All of your arechim will be in holy shekalim." must be at least a shekel. In his Commentary to the Mishnah (Arachin 2:1), the Rambam states that if he paid less than a shekel, it is as if he did not pay anything at all. This teaches that there is no airech less than a sela, not more than 50. mentioned in the Torah.

If the person does not possess even a sela, we do not take less than a sela from him. Instead, the entire amount is considered as a debt incumbent upon him. If he acquires property and becomes wealthy, he must pay a full airech as prescribed by the Torah.

When a rich person [pledged an airech] and then became poor, or when a poor person pledged an airech and became wealthy [before he was evaluated], he must give a full airech. remains a debt incumbent upon him. If, however, he pledged an airech when he was poor, became wealthy, and then became poor again [before he was evaluated], he may give the airech required of a poor man.

When a rich man says: "I pledge my airech" or "I pledge the airech of so-and-so," and a poor person heard and says: "I pledge whatever he said," the poor person is obligated to pay the airech required of a wealthy man, i.e., a full airech., but instead, taking vow to pay the amount the wealthy person had pledged. The Ra'avad differs with the Rambam and maintains that the poor man is judged according to his own financial capacity. The Ra'avad supports his view from Arachin 17a where there appears to be a difference of opinion among the Sages. Although the Rambam interprets that passage differently (see his Commentary to the Mishnah, Arachin 2:1), the Kessef Mishneh notes that the Ra'avad's view seems more appropriate to the text's simple meaning.
If, however, a poor person pledges the airech of a wealthy man, saying: "I pledge his airech," he is liable only for a poor man's airech, i.e., what he is capable of paying.

What is the difference between a person who is liable for a poor man's airech and one who is liable for the airech of a wealthy man which is the entire sum [mentioned in the Torah]? Once everything that he owns is expropriated from a poor man, even if it is only one sela, and then he becomes wealthy, he is not liable to pay the greater sum. 17b; Radbaz). If, however, he would have been liable for the airech of a wealthy man, the entire airech would remain a debt for which he is liable until he becomes wealthy and pays it [in total].

When a person explicitly mentions the sum of the airech, saying: "I pledge my airech of 50 selaim" or "I pledge the airech of so-and-so, 30 selaim," his financial capacity is not evaluated.. The rationale is that he mentioned a specific amount and hence, he is obligated for that amount (Radbaz). Instead, we expropriate everything that he possesses and the remainder remains a debt for which he is liable until he becomes wealthy and pays.

Similarly, if one says: "I pledge my worth" or "I pledge the worth of so-and-so," we do not evaluate his possessions. [The rationale is that] a pledge of worth is like an explicit vow. favor the Rambam's view. It is like someone who said: "I pledge a maneh. to the Temple treasury." He is obligated to give an entire maneh.

When a person says: "I pledge an airech" without explaining his words, he is not considered as having pledged three shekalim. there is. I.e., he is liable to pay three shekalim if he possesses that sum (Chapter 1, Halachah 20). If, however, he does not possess that sum, we do not say that he has taken an explicit vow. Instead, his worth is evaluated, as above. Instead, he is judged according to his financial capacity, as is the law with regard to other arechim.

[The following laws apply when a person] states: "I pledge my airech" and then repeats: "I pledge my airech.". This halachah is speaking about an instance where the donor is poor and does not have the money to pay either - let alone both - of his pledges. If he possesses [only] ten selaim and gives nine for the second airech and one for the first, he fulfills the obligations of both of them. first. The donor could not give the entire amount for the second airech, since he was already liable for the first. For arechim are not like debts. 20:1, the Rambam writes that if a creditor whose lien begins later expropriates property from a debtor first, the court expropriates it from him and gives it to the creditor with the prior lien. This, however, applies only with regard to landed property and not to movable property (ibid.:2). Although everything he possesses is on lien to the first [airech], for that airech, if he did not do so and paid a lesser amount, he fulfills his obligation. once the Temple Sanctuary has collected its due, it has been collected., as quoted by Rabbenu Yitzchak Alfasi (Ketubot 94a), although the wording of Arachin 7b, 8a, does not imply such a conclusion.
The difference between the two situations is that the two debts are owed to two different people. Hence giving one is taking from the other. Thus the chronological sequence when the liens were established is important. Arechim, however, are always given to the Temple treasury. Thus they are both being given to the same place. Hence there is no point in having the money expropriated.
If, however, he gave nine [selaim] for the first [airech] and one for the second, he fulfilled his responsibility for the second airech, but not for the first. [The rationale is that] everything that he possesses is on lien to the first airech and when he gave nine, he retained a sela. Thus he did not give everything in his possession., he should not consider the second airech at all. Therefore the remainder of the first airech should remain [a debt incumbent] upon him until he becomes wealthy and pays it.

When a person says: "I pledge two of my arechim," and he possesses only less than that sum, there is an unresolved question. Is [the money he possesses] on lien to them both? Hence he should give half of what he possesses for one airech and the other half, for the other and in this way fulfill his obligation. Or is he required to give one full airech - or everything that he possesses. - for one airech and the other airech should remain a debt [incumbent] upon him which he will pay - either as a wealthy man or as a poor man - according to his financial capacity., the donor remains liable for the second.

When a person sets aside his airech or his worth and [the funds] are stolen or lost, he is liable to replace them even if he did not accept responsibility for them until they reach the Temple treasurer,. The standard published text has a somewhat different version. as [implied by Leviticus 27:23]: "You will give your airech on that day, sanctified unto God." 1:2; Hilchot Ma'aseh HaKorbanot 14:4-6. Even though he set them aside, they are nevertheless considered as ordinary property until they reach the Temple treasurer., it becomes consecrated.

[The Temple treasurers are entitled to] seize collateral for airechim or pledges of worth. They take what they vowed [from the donors] against their will. They are not required to return the collateral by day or by night. They sell all the landed property and movable property in their possession including their clothing, household articles, servants, and livestock, taking their payment from everything.
They may not, however, sell the clothing of the [donor's] wife, that of his sons, clothing that he had dyed for them, nor new sandals that he purchased for them. 1:5. Similarly, when a person consecrates all of his property, he has not consecrated these [articles].

[When a person] pledges arechim, the worth of an entity, or he consecrates a maneh to the Temple treasury and does not possess [the immediate resources to meet his pledge, we expropriate] all the movable property he owns, leaving him only: his head and arm tefillin, his sandals, a chair to sit on, and a bed and a mattress appropriate for him to sleep on. If he is poor, we give him a bed and a straw mat to sleep on. And we give him food for 30 days and clothing for twelve months for himself alone. 6:3 and commentaries). We do not [make these provisions] for his wife and children although he is obligated to provide for their livelihood and their clothing, 12, 2; 13:6. We leave him only garments that are fitting for his [social standing].

If he was a craftsman, we leave him two of every type of the tools of his trade.
What is implied? If he was a carpenter, we leave him two planes and two saws. If he had many tools of one type and a few of another type, we do not sell many of those of which he possesses a lot and purchase some of those of which he possesses a little. Instead, we leave him two tools of those which he possesses a lot and all those he possesses of those which he possesses a little.

If there were livestock, servants, and pearls among his possessions and merchants said: "If clothing worth 30 [zuz] is purchased for this servant, his value will increase by 100"; "If we wait to sell this cow to a meat market, its price will increase by ten [zuz]; or "If this pearl is taken to this-and-this place, it will be worth much money, but here it will only be worth a small amount," we do not heed them. Instead, what is done? We sell everything in its place and at its time as it is, as [the above prooftext [implied by Leviticus 27:23]: "You will give your airech on that day, sanctified unto God." [This teaches that] every entity [that is] consecrated [to the Temple treasury] is not embellished, nor do we wait to take it to the market, nor do we bring it from place to place. Instead, consecrated articles are sold only in their place and at the time [they were consecrated]. 6:5).