בבא קמא ז׳Bava Kamma 7

Mishnah

משנה: גָּנַב עַל פִּי שְׁנַיִם וְטָבַח וּמָכַר עַל פִּיהֶן וְנִמְצְאוּ זוֹמְמִין מְשַׁלְּמִין לוֹ אֶת הַכֹּל. גָּנַב עַל פִּי שְׁנַיִם וְטָבַח וּמָכַר עַל פִּי שְׁנַיִם אֲחֵרִים אֵילּוּ וָאֵילּוּ נִמְצְאוּ זוֹמְמִין הָרִאשׁוֹנִים מְשַׁלְּמִים כֶּפֶל וְהָאַחֲרוֹנִים מְשַׁלְּמִים תַּשְׁלוּמֵי שְׁלֹשָׁה. נִמְצְאוּ הָאַחֲרוֹנִים זוֹמְמִין הוּא מְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי כֶפֶל וְהֵם מְשַׁלְּמִים תַּשְׁלוּמֵי שְׁלֹשָׁה. אֶחָד מִן הָאַחֲרוֹנִים זוֹמֵם בָּטְלָה עֵדוּת שְׁנִיָיה. אֶחָד מִן הָרִאשׁוֹנִים זוֹמֵם בָּטְלָה כָל הָעֵדוּת שֶׁאִם אֵין גְּנֵיבָה אֵין טְבִיחָה וְאֵין מְכִירָה.

MISHNAH: One was convicted of theft on the testimony of two witnesses and of slaughtering or selling on their testimony; if they are found perjured they pay everything to him. If he was convicted of theft on the testimony of two witnesses and of slaughtering or selling on the testimony of two others who all were found perjured, the first group pays double restitution and the second group triple. If the second group were found perjured, he pays double restitution while they pay triple. If one of the second group was found perjured, the second testimony is invalidated. If one of the first group is found perjured, the entire testimony is invalidated since if there is no theft there is no slaughter or sale.

Halakhah

הלכה: גָּנַב עַל פִּי שְׁנַיִם כוּל׳. אָמַר רִבִּי זְעִירָא. הָדָא אָמְרָה. עָד זוֹמֵם אֵין נִפְסָל בְּבֵית דִּין אֶלָּא מֵעַצְמוֹ נִפְסָל. פָּתַר לָהּ בְּהַתְרָיָיה. וְתַנֵּי כֵן. אָמַר רִבִּי יוֹסֵי. בַּמֶּה דְבָרִים אֲמוּרִים. בִּשְׁתֵּי עֵדִיּוֹת וּבִשְׁתֵּי הַתְרָיוֹת. אֲבָל בְּעֵדוּת אַחַת וּבְהַתְרָיָיה אַחַת כָּל עֵדוּת שֶׁבָּטְלָה מִקְצָתָהּ בָּטְלָה כוּלָּהּ. מָהוּ שֶׁבָּטְלָה מִקְצָתָהּ בָּטְלָה כוּלָּהּ. הָיוּ עוֹמְדִין וּמֵעִידִין עָלָיו בָּעֲשָׂרָה בְנִיסָן שֶׁגָּנַב שׁוֹר בְּאֶחָד בְּנִיסָן. טָבַח וּמָכַר בָּעֲשָׂרָה בְנִיסָן. הוּזְּמוּ בַחֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בְּנִיסָן. כָּל עֵדוּת שֶׁהֵעִידוּ מֵעֲשָׂרָה בְנִיסָן עַד חֲמִשָּׁה עָשָׂר בְּנִיסָן לְמַפְרֵיעָהּ הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ פְסוּלוֹת. אָמַר רִבִּי בָּא בַּר מָמָל. תִּיפְתָּר בְּמֵעִידִין עָלָיו בְּכֶרֶךְ אֶחָד. וְלֵית שְׁמַע מִינָּהּ כְּלוּם. וְתַנֵּי כֵן. הֵן הָיוּ הָרִאשׁוֹנִים וְהֵן הָיוּ הָאַחֲרוֹנִים. הוּזְמוּ בָרִאשׁוֹנָה אֵין בְּכָךְ כְּלוּם. בַּשְּׁנִיָיה הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ עֵדוּת אֶחָד. שְׁלִישִית הֲרֵי אֵילּוּ שְׁתֵּי עֵדִיּוֹת. וְהֵיכִי דָמֵי. אִם בְּמֵעִידִין עָלָיו בְּכֶרֶךְ אֶחָד. לֵית שְׁמַע מִינָּהּ כְּלוּם. לָא אַתְיָיא דָא אֶלָּא עַל יְדֵי עֵדוּת סַגְיָא.

HALAKHAH: “A person convicted of theft on the testimony of two witnesses,” etc. Rebbi Ze‘ira said, this implies that a perjured witness is not disqualified by the court but is disqualified by himself. Explain it by warning, as it was stated: “Rebbi Yose said, when has this been said? For two testimonies with two warnings. But for one testimony and one warning any testimony which is partially disqualified is totally disqualified.” What does it mean that if it is partially disqualified it is totally disqualified? If they were standing and testifying against him on then tenth of Nisan that he had stolen an ox on the first of Nisan. He slaughtered or sold on the tenth of Nisan. They were shown to be perjured on the fifteenth of Nisan. Any testimony which they delivered between the tenth and the fifteenth of Nisan is retroactively disqualified. Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said, explain it if they deliver their testimony in one group and you cannot infer anything, as we have stated: “They were the first and they were the later [witnesses]. If they were shown to be perjured at first, there is nothing. At the second time, there is one testimony. At the third time, there are two testimonies.” And how is that if they give testimony in one group, you cannot infer anything? It comes only based on multiple testimony.

עַד כְּדוֹן בְּשֶׁבָּאוּ עֵידֵי גְנֵיבָה וְעֵדֵי טְבִיחָה כְּאַחַת. בָּאוּ עֵידֵי גְנֵיבָה וְלֹא קִיבְּלוּם וְאַחַר כָּךְ בָּעוּ עֵידֵי טְבִיחָה. אָמְרִין לָהֶן. הֲווּ יוֹדְעִין שֶׁכְּבָר בָּאוּ עֵידֵי גְנֵיבָה וְלֹא קִיבַּלְנוּם וְעַל יְדֵיכֶם אָנוּ מְקַבְּלִין אוֹתָן. נִמְצְאוּ עֵידֵי טְבִיחָה זוֹמְמִין מְשַׁלְּמִין עַל יְדֵי עֵידֵי גְנֵיבָה. רִבִּי חִזְקִיָּה לֹא מַר כֵּן אֶלָּא. עַד כְּדוֹן בְּשֶׁבָּאוּ עֵידֵי גְנֵיבָה וְעֵידֵי טְבִיחָה כְּאַחַת. בָּאוּ עֵידֵי טְבִיחָה וְלֹא קִיבְּלוּ אוֹתָן וְאַחַר כָּךְ בָּעוּ עֵידֵי גְנֵיבָה. אוֹמְרִין לוֹהֶן. הֲווּ יוֹדְעִין שֶׁכְּבָר בָּאוּ עֵידֵי טְבִיחָה וְלֹא קִיבַּלְנוּם וְעַל יְדֵיכֶם אָנוּ מְקַבְּלִין אוֹתָן. וְנִמְצְאוּ זוֹמְמִין עֵידֵי גְנֵיבָה. מְשַׁלְּמִין עַל יְדֵי עֵידֵי טְבִיחָה.

“One was convicted of theft on the testimony of two witnesses,” etc. So far if the witnesses for theft and those for slaughter came together. If witnesses for theft appeared but were not accepted and after that came witnesses for slaughter. One tells them “witnesses for theft already had appeared but were not accepted, but on the strength of your testimony we shall accept them.” If the witnesses for slaughter turn out to be perjured, they pay because of the witnesses for theft. Rebbi Ḥizqiah does not say so but: So far if the witnesses for theft and those for slaughter came together. If witnesses for slaughter appeared but were not accepted and after that came witnesses for theft. One tells them “witnesses for slaughter already had appeared but were not accepted, but on the strength of your testimony we shall accept them.” If the witnesses for theft turn out to be perjured, they pay because of the witnesses for slaughter.

Mishnah

משנה: גָּנַב עַל פִּי שְׁנַיִם וְטָבַח וּמָכַר עַל פִּי עֵד אֶחָד אוֹ עַל פִּי עַצְמוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי כֶפֶל וְאֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשָּׁה. גָּנַב וְטָבַח בַּשַּׁבָּת. גָּנַב וְטָבַח לַעֲבוֹדָה זָרָה. גָּנַב מִשֶׁלְּאָבִיו וּמֵת אָבִיו וְאַחַר כָּךְ טָבַח וּמָכַר. גָּנַב וְהִקְדִּישׁ וְאַחַר טָבַח וּמָכַר מְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי כֶפֶל וְאֵינוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשָּׁה. רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר קֳדָשִׁים שֶׁהוּא חַיָיב בְּאַחֵרָיוּתָן מְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשָּׁה וְשֶׁאֵינוֹ חַיָיב בְּאַחֵרָיוּתָן פָּטוּר.

MISHNAH: A person convicted of theft on the testimony of two witnesses, who slaughtered or sold by the testimony of a single witness or his own confession, pays double restitution but does not have to pay quadruple or quintuple. One who stole and slaughtered on the Sabbath, or stole and slaughtered for idolatry, or stole from his father and after his father’s death slaughtered or sold, or stole, dedicated it, and afterwards slaughtered or sold, pays double restistution but not quadruple or quintuple. Rebbi Simeon says, for sancta for which he is liable by a warranty he has to pay quadruple or quintuple, but if there is no warranty, he is not liable.

Halakhah

הלכה: גָּנַב וְטָבַח בַּשַּׁבָּת כול׳. לֹא כֵן אָמַר רִבִּי אַבָּהוּ בְשֵּׁם רִבִּי יוֹחָנָן מֵזִיד בְּחֵלֶב וְשׁוֹגֵג בְּקָרְבָּן מַתְרִין בּוֹ וְלוֹקֶה וּמֵבִיא קָרְבָּן. מָאן תַּנִּיתָהּ. [רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן. דְּתַנִּינָן.] רִבִּי שִׁמְעוֹן אוֹמֵר קֳדָשִׁים שֶׁחַיָיב בְּאַחֵרָיוּתָן מְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי אַרְבָּעָה וַחֲמִשָּׁה וְשֶׁאֵין חַיָיב בְּאַחֵרָיוּתָן פָּטוּר.

HALAKHAH: “One who stole and slaughtered on the Sabbath,” etc. Did not Rabbi Abbahu say in the name of Rebbi Joḥanan: If he is intentional error about fat but in error about a sacrifice, he can be warned, is whipped, and brings a sacrifice. Who stated it? [Rebbi Simeon, as we have stated]: “Rebbi Simeon says, for sancta for which he is liable by a warranty he has to pay quadruple or quintuple, but if there is no warranty, he is not liable.”

רִבִּי יוֹסְטָא בֵּירִבִּי מַתּוֹן שָׁאַל. הַפּוֹדֶה כַלְכָּלָה מִיַּד הַגִּזְבָּר מָהוּ שֶׁתיבטל לְמַעְשְׂרוֹת. מָתִיב רֵישׁ לָקִישׁ. וְהָתַנִּינָן. גָּנַב וְהִקְדִּישׁ וְאַחַר כָּךְ טָבַח וּמָכַר. כְּמַה דְאַתְּ אָמַר תַּמָּן. הַמַּקְדִּישׁ אֵינוֹ כְמוֹכֵר. וְדִכְוָותָהּ הָפּוֹדֶה אֵינוֹ כְלוֹקֵחַ. מִילְּתֵיהּ דְּרֵישׁ לָקִישׁ אָמְרָה. מְכִירָה כְפִדְיוֹן. אָמְרֵי. רָאוּי הוּא לִפְדּוֹתוֹ וּלְאוֹכְלוֹ.

Rebbi Justus ben Rebbi Matton asked: If somebody redeems a string of dry figs from the Temple treasurer, does it become ṭevel for tithes? Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish asked: Did we not state about him who “stole, dedicated it, and afterwards slaughtered or sold”? As you say there, the one who dedicates is not like a seller, so one who redeems is not like a buyer. The word of Rebbi Simeon ben Laqish implies that selling is like redeeming. They said, he has the choice of redeeming and eating it.

אָמַר רִבִּי לָעְזָר. רָאוּ אוֹתוֹ שׁוֹחֵט שׁוֹר שָׁחוֹר בַּיַּעַר חֲזָקָה גָּנוּב הוּא. חָשׁ לוֹמַר. שֶׁמָּא רָאוּהוּ רָבוּץ. תִּיפְתָּר בְּשֶׁרָאוּהוּ מוֹשֵׁךְ.

Rebbi Eleazar said: If they saw him slaughtering a black ox in a forest, it is prima facie evidence that it was stolen. Could you not assume that it was lying down? Explain it if they saw him dragging it.

יֵשׁ בְּטוֹבֵחַ מַה שֶׁאֵין בְּמוֹכֵר וְיֵשׁ בְּמוֹכֵר שֶׁאֵין בְּטוֹבֵחַ. שֶׁהַטּוֹבֵחַ בַּשַׁבָּת חַיָיב וְהַמּוֹכֵר בַּשַׁבָּת פָּטוּר. אָמַר רִבִּי יַנַּאי בֵּירִבִּי יִשְׁמָעֵאל. מָצִינוּ שֶׁהַמְכִירָה חַיָיבִין עָלֶיהָ בַּשַׁבָּת. הַגַּע עַצְמָךְ. בָּאוֹמֵר לַחֲבֵירוֹ. תְּלוֹשׁ מִן הַקַּרְקַע הַזֶּה וּקְנֵה אוֹתוֹ. לֹא קְנָייוֹ. אָמַר רִבּי יוֹסֵי בֵּירִבִּי בּוּן. תְּלִישָׁה הִיא שֶׁמְחַיֶיבֶת אוֹתוֹ וְלֹא מְכִירָה.

There is a rule about the slaughterer which does not apply to the seller and to the seller which does not apply to the slaughterer, for he who slaughters on the Sabbath is criminally liable but he who sells on the Sabbath cannot be prosecuted. Rebbi Yannai ben Rebbi Ismael said, we find a case of sale for which one is criminally liable on the Sabbath. Think of it, if somebody said to another: tear something off from this ground to acquire, did he not acquire? Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, the tearing makes him liable, not the sale.