Leviticus 27:20

And if he will not redeem the field, or if he have sold the field to another man, it shall not be redeemed any more.

EXPOSITORY (ENGLISH BIBLE)

Ellicott's Commentary for English Readers

(20) And if he will not redeem the field.—That is, if after all the advantages which the law affords to the vower to redeem his patrimonial inheritance before the jubile year, he is base enough to forego the privilege of redemption, thus showing no desire to perpetuate his family name,—

Or if he have sold the field to another man.—Better, and if he yet sells the field to another man, that is, if in addition to this absence of family honour he surreptitiously sells the field which he has vowed to the sanctuary to another man, thus adding sacrilege to baseness,—

It shall not be redeemed any more,—then he loses all right ever to redeem it at all.

Matthew Henry's Concise Commentary

27:14-25 Our houses, lands, cattle, and all our substance, must be used to the glory of God. It is acceptable to him that a portion be given to support his worship, and to promote his cause. But God would not approve such a degree of zeal as ruined a man's family.

Barnes' Notes on the Bible

Some part of a field of his possession - Rather, a part of the land of his inheritance.

The seed thereof - i. e. the quantity of seed required to sow it properly. Thus the value of about 5 1/2 bushels (an homer) was about 6 pounds, 9 shillings, 2d. (50 shekels. See Exodus 38:24.)

Jamieson-Fausset-Brown Bible Commentary

16-24. if a man shall sanctify unto the Lord some aprt of a field of his possession, &c.—In the case of acquired property in land, if not redeemed, it returned to the donor at the Jubilee; whereas the part of a hereditary estate, which had been vowed, did not revert to the owner, but remained attached in perpetuity to the sanctuary. The reason for this remarkable difference was to lay every man under an obligation to redeem the property, or stimulate his nearest kinsman to do it, in order to prevent a patrimonial inheritance going out from any family in Israel.

Matthew Poole's Commentary

If he will not redeem the field, to wit, when the priest shall set a price upon it, and offer it to him in the first place to redeem it.

If he have sold; he, who? Either,

1. The man that vowed it; if he after such a vow made shall neglect to pay his vow, and shall sacrilegiously sell the same land to another man; or, if he sell it, i.e. suffer it to be sold to another, and will not prevent that by redeeming it to himself. Or rather,

2. The priest, or some in his name, who, though not expressed, is sufficiently understood out of the foregoing clause, If he will not redeem or buy again the field, to wit, of the priest, who is now the seller of it; or, or rather and, for this seems to be added by way of accumulation, if he, i.e. the priest, of whom he might have redeemed it, upon his refusal, offers it to sale, and

have sold the field to another man. Add to this, that none but the priest could sell this land, after it was once vowed and declared to be so, and offered by the priest to him again to redeem it, which is apparently the present case.

It shall not be redeemed any more, i.e. he shall for ever lose the benefit of redemption.

Gill's Exposition of the Entire Bible

And if he will not redeem the field,.... He that sanctified it, does not care to give for it the settled price of the fifth part besides, but chooses it should be disposed of for the uses he devoted it to:

or if he have sold the field to another man; that is, either the original owner having bought it and sold it again, or rather the priest, the treasurer, as Jarchi, who had the disposal of it, for the uses and purposes for which it was devoted, when sold by him:

it shall not be redeemed any more; it was not in the power of him that sanctified it to make a purchase of it again; the buyer of it might not sell it to him again, for otherwise, by that means, he might come at it cheaper than the law directs; besides, there is another reason for it, which is suggested in Leviticus 27:21.

Geneva Study Bible

And if he will not redeem the field, or if he have {k} sold the field to another man, it shall not be redeemed any more.

(k) For their own necessity or godly uses.

EXEGETICAL (ORIGINAL LANGUAGES)

Leviticus 27:20

Keil and Delitzsch Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament

In case he did not redeem it, however, namely, before the commencement of the next year of jubilee, or sold it to another man, i.e., to a man not belonging to his family, he could no longer redeem it; but on its going out, i.e., becoming free in the year of jubilee (see Leviticus 25:28), it was to be holy to the Lord, like a field under the ban (see Leviticus 27:28), and to fall to the priests as their property. Hinc colligere est, redimendum fuisse ante Jubilaeum consecratum agrum, nisi quis vellet eum plane abalienari (Clericus). According to the distinct words of the text (observe the correspondence of ואם...ואם), the field, that had been vowed, fell to the sanctuary in the jubilee year not only when the owner had sold it in the meantime, but also when he had not previously redeemed it. The reason for selling the field at a time when he had vowed it to the sanctuary, need not be sought for in caprice and dishonesty, as it is by Knobel. If the field was vowed in this sense, that it was not handed over to the sanctuary (the priesthood) to be cultivated, but remained in the hands of the proprietor, so that every year he paid to the sanctuary simply the valuation price, - and this may have been the rule, as the priests whose duties lay at the sanctuary could not busy themselves about the cultivation of the field, but would be obliged either to sell the piece of land at once, or farm it, - the owner might sell the field up to the year of jubilee, to be saved the trouble of cultivating it, and the purchaser could not only live upon what it yielded over and above the price to be paid every year to the sanctuary, but might possibly realize something more. In such a case the fault of the seller, for which he had to make atonement by the forfeiture of his field to the sanctuary in the year of jubilee, consisted simply in the fact that he had looked upon the land which he vowed to the Lord as though it were his own property, still and entirely at his own disposal, and therefore had allowed himself to violate the rights of the Lord by the sale of his land. At any rate, it is quite inadmissible to supply a different subject to מכר from that of the parallel גּאל, viz., the priest.