⚖️ Mishnah Bava Kamma 9

הַגּוֹזֵל עֵצִים, וַעֲשָׂאָן כֵּלִים, צֶמֶר, וַעֲשָׂאָן בְּגָדִים, מְשַׁלֵּם כִּשְׁעַת הַגְּזֵלָה. גָּזַל פָּרָה מְעֻבֶּרֶת, וְיָלְדָה, רָחֵל טְעוּנָה, וּגְזָזָהּ, מְשַׁלֵּם דְּמֵי פָרָה הָעוֹמֶדֶת לֵילֵד, דְּמֵי רָחֵל הָעוֹמֶדֶת לִגָּזֵז. גָּזַל פָּרָה, וְנִתְעַבְּרָה אֶצְלוֹ וְיָלְדָה, רָחֵל, וְנִטְעֲנָה אֶצְלוֹ וּגְזָזָהּ, מְשַׁלֵּם כִּשְׁעַת הַגְּזֵלָה. זֶה הַכְּלָל, כָּל הַגַּזְלָנִים מְשַׁלְּמִין כִּשְׁעַת הַגְּזֵלָה:

In the case of one who robs another of wood and fashions it into vessels, or one who robs another of wool and fashions it into garments, he pays the robbery victim according to the value of the goods at the time of the robbery, but he need not return the vessels or garments. He has acquired the stolen items because they had undergone a change. If one robbed another of a pregnant cow and it then gave birth while in his possession, or if one robbed another of a ewe that was laden with wool and the robber then sheared it, the robber pays the value of a cow that is ready to give birth or the value of a ewe that is ready to be shorn. He pays the value of the animal at the time of the robbery, and the calf or the wool remains his. If one robbed another of a cow, and it became pregnant in his possession, and it then gave birth; or if one robbed another of a ewe, and it became laden with wool in his possession, and he then sheared it, then the robber pays according to the value of the animal at the time of the robbery. This is the principle: All robbers pay according to the value of the stolen item at the time of the robbery.

גָּזַל בְּהֵמָה וְהִזְקִינָה, עֲבָדִים וְהִזְקִינוּ, מְשַׁלֵּם כִּשְׁעַת הַגְּזֵלָה. רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, בַּעֲבָדִים אוֹמֵר לוֹ, הֲרֵי שֶׁלְּךָ לְפָנֶיךָ. גָּזַל מַטְבֵּעַ וְנִסְדַּק, פֵּרוֹת וְהִרְקִיבוּ, יַיִן וְהֶחְמִיץ, מְשַׁלֵּם כִּשְׁעַת הַגְּזֵלָה. מַטְבֵּעַ וְנִפְסַל, תְּרוּמָה וְנִטְמֵאת, חָמֵץ וְעָבַר עָלָיו הַפֶּסַח, בְּהֵמָה וְנֶעֶבְדָה בָהּ עֲבֵרָה, אוֹ שֶׁנִּפְסְלָה מֵעַל גַּבֵּי הַמִּזְבֵּחַ, אוֹ שֶׁהָיְתָה יוֹצֵאת לִסָּקֵל, אוֹמֵר לוֹ, הֲרֵי שֶׁלְּךָ לְפָנֶיךָ:

If one robbed another of an animal and it aged while in his possession, consequently diminishing its value, or if one robbed another of Canaanite slaves and they aged while in his possession, they have been changed. The robber therefore pays according to the value of the stolen item at the time of the robbery. Rabbi Meir says: With regard to Canaanite slaves, he says to the robbery victim: That which is yours is before you. If one robbed another of a coin and it cracked, thereby reducing its value; or if one robbed another of produce and it rotted; or if one robbed another of wine and it fermented, then he pays according to the value of the stolen item at the time of the robbery. If he robbed another of a coin and it was invalidated by the government; or if he robbed another of teruma and it became ritually impure; or if he robbed another of leavened bread and Passover elapsed over it, and therefore it is prohibited to derive benefit from it; or if he robbed another of an animal and a sin was performed with it, thereby disqualifying it for use as an offering; or if the animal was disqualified from being sacrificed upon the altar for some other reason; or if the animal was going out to be stoned because it gored and killed a person at some point after the robbery, the robber says to the robbery victim: That which is yours is before you. In all of these cases, although the value of the stolen item has been diminished or altogether lost, since the change is not externally discernible, the robber returns the item in its current state.

נָתַן לְאֻמָּנִין לְתַקֵּן, וְקִלְקְלוּ, חַיָּבִין לְשַׁלֵּם. נָתַן לְחָרָשׁ שִׁדָּה, תֵּבָה וּמִגְדָּל לְתַקֵּן, וְקִלְקֵל, חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם. וְהַבַּנַּאי שֶׁקִּבֵּל עָלָיו לִסְתֹּר אֶת הַכֹּתֶל, וְשִׁבֵּר אֶת הָאֲבָנִים אוֹ שֶׁהִזִּיק, חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם. הָיָה סוֹתֵר מִצַּד זֶה וְנָפַל מִצַּד אַחֵר, פָּטוּר. וְאִם מֵחֲמַת הַמַּכָּה, חַיָּב:

If one gave items to craftsmen to fix and they damaged them, the craftsmen are liable to pay for the damage. For example, if one gave a chest, a box, or a cabinet to a carpenter to fix, and he damaged it, he is liable to pay. And a builder who committed to demolish a wall and while demolishing it he broke the stones, or who damaged them, is liable to pay. If he was demolishing on this side of the wall, and the wall fell from another side and caused damage, he is exempt from liability. But if a stone fell and caused damage due to the force of the blow, he is liable.

הַנּוֹתֵן צֶמֶר לְצַבָּע, וְהִקְדִּיחָתוֹ יוֹרָה, נוֹתֵן לוֹ דְּמֵי צַמְרוֹ. צְבָעוֹ כָאוּר, אִם הַשֶּׁבַח יוֹתֵר עַל הַיְצִיאָה, נוֹתֵן לוֹ אֶת הַיְצִיאָה, וְאִם הַיְצִיאָה יְתֵרָה עַל הַשֶּׁבַח, נוֹתֵן לוֹ אֶת הַשֶּׁבַח. לִצְבֹּעַ לוֹ אָדֹם, וּצְבָעוֹ שָׁחֹר, שָׁחֹר, וּצְבָעוֹ אָדֹם, רַבִּי מֵאִיר אוֹמֵר, נוֹתֵן לוֹ דְּמֵי צַמְרוֹ. רַבִּי יְהוּדָה אוֹמֵר, אִם הַשֶּׁבַח יָתֵר עַל הַיְצִיאָה, נוֹתֵן לוֹ אֶת הַיְצִיאָה, וְאִם הַיְצִיאָה יְתֵרָה עַל הַשֶּׁבַח, נוֹתֵן לוֹ אֶת הַשֶּׁבַח:

In the case of one who gives wool to a dyer and it was burned in the cauldron during the dyeing process, thereby completely ruining the wool so that there is no enhancement, only loss, the dyer gives the owner the value of his wool. If he dyed it unattractively [ka’ur] so that the dye is not absorbed well by the wool, if the enhancement, i.e., the amount that the value of the wool has increased by being dyed, exceeds the dyer’s expenses, the owner of the wool gives the dyer the expenses. And if the expenses exceed the enhancement, he gives him the value of the enhancement. If the owner gave wool to a dyer to dye it red for him and instead he dyed it black, or to dye it black and he dyed it red, Rabbi Meir says: The dyer gives the owner of the wool the value of his wool. Rabbi Yehuda says: Here too, if the value of the enhancement exceeds the dyer’s expenses, the owner of the wool gives the dyer the expenses. And if the expenses exceed the enhancement, he gives him the value of the enhancement.

הַגּוֹזֵל אֶת חֲבֵרוֹ שָׁוֶה פְרוּטָה, וְנִשְׁבַּע לוֹ, יוֹלִיכֶנּוּ אַחֲרָיו אֲפִלּוּ לְמָדַי. לֹא יִתֵּן לֹא לִבְנוֹ וְלֹא לִשְׁלוּחוֹ, אֲבָל נוֹתֵן לִשְׁלִיחַ בֵּית דִּין. וְאִם מֵת, יַחֲזִיר לְיוֹרְשָׁיו:

One who robs another of an item having the value of at least one peruta and takes a false oath to the robbery victim claiming his innocence, and then later wishes to repent, must bring the money, which includes the principal together with an additional one-fifth payment, to the robbery victim, even if this necessitates following after him to a distant place like Media. The robber may not give the payment to the robbery victim’s son to return it to the robbery victim, and neither may he give it to his agent, but he may give the payment to an agent of the court. And if the robbery victim dies, he returns it to his heirs.

נָתַן לוֹ אֶת הַקֶּרֶן וְלֹא נָתַן לוֹ אֶת הַחֹמֶשׁ, מָחַל לוֹ עַל הַקֶּרֶן וְלֹא מָחַל לוֹ עַל הַחֹמֶשׁ, מָחַל לוֹ עַל זֶה וְעַל זֶה חוּץ מִפָּחוֹת מִשָּׁוֶה פְרוּטָה בַקֶּרֶן, אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לֵילֵךְ אַחֲרָיו. נָתַן לוֹ אֶת הַחֹמֶשׁ וְלֹא נָתַן לוֹ אֶת הַקֶּרֶן, מָחַל לוֹ עַל הַחֹמֶשׁ וְלֹא מָחַל לוֹ עַל הַקֶּרֶן, מָחַל לוֹ עַל זֶה וְעַל זֶה חוּץ מִשָּׁוֶה פְרוּטָה בַקֶּרֶן, צָרִיךְ לֵילֵךְ אַחֲרָיו:

If he gave the robbery victim the principal value of the stolen item but did not give him the additional one-fifth payment, or if the owner forgave him concerning the principal but did not forgive him concerning the additional one-fifth payment, or if he forgave him concerning this and concerning that, with the exception of the value of less than one peruta of the principal, he need not pursue him to repay the remaining debt. By contrast, if he gave the robbery victim the additional one-fifth payment but did not give him the principal, or if the robbery victim forgave him concerning the additional one-fifth payment but did not forgive him concerning the principal, or if he forgave him concerning this and concerning that, with the exception of the value of one peruta of the principal, he must pursue him to repay the remaining debt.

נָתַן לוֹ אֶת הַקֶּרֶן וְנִשְׁבַּע לוֹ עַל הַחֹמֶשׁ, הֲרֵי זֶה מְשַׁלֵּם חֹמֶשׁ עַל חֹמֶשׁ, עַד שֶׁיִּתְמַעֵט הַקֶּרֶן פָּחוֹת מִשָּׁוֶה פְרוּטָה. וְכֵן בְּפִקָּדוֹן, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ה) בְּפִקָּדוֹן אוֹ בִתְשׂוּמֶת יָד אוֹ בְגָזֵל אוֹ עָשַׁק אֶת עֲמִיתוֹ אוֹ מָצָא אֲבֵדָה וְכִחֶשׁ בָּהּ וְנִשְׁבַּע עַל שָׁקֶר, הֲרֵי זֶה מְשַׁלֵּם קֶרֶן וָחֹמֶשׁ וְאָשָׁם. הֵיכָן פִּקְדוֹנִי, אָמַר לוֹ אָבָד, מַשְׁבִּיעֲךָ אָנִי, וְאָמַר אָמֵן, וְהָעֵדִים מְעִידִים אוֹתוֹ שֶׁאֲכָלוֹ, מְשַׁלֵּם קֶרֶן. הוֹדָה מֵעַצְמוֹ, מְשַׁלֵּם קֶרֶן וָחֹמֶשׁ וְאָשָׁם:

If the robber gave the robbery victim the principal and took a false oath to him concerning the additional one-fifth payment, asserting that he had already paid it, then the additional one-fifth is considered a new principal obligation. The robber pays an additional one-fifth payment apart from the additional one-fifth payment about which he had taken a false oath. If he then takes a false oath concerning the second one-fifth payment, he is assessed an additional one-fifth payment for that oath, until the principal, i.e., the additional one-fifth payment about which he has most recently taken the false oath, is reduced to less than the value of one peruta. And such is the halakha with regard to a deposit, as it is stated: “If anyone sins, and commits a trespass against the Lord, and he defrauds his counterpart with regard to a deposit, or with regard to a pledge, or with regard to a robbery, or if he exploited his counterpart; or he has found that which was lost, and deals falsely with it, and swears to a lie…he shall restore it in full, and shall add the fifth part more to it” (Leviticus 5:21–24). This one must pay the principal and an additional one-fifth payment, and bring a guilt-offering. If the owner asked the bailee: Where is my deposit? And the bailee said to him: It was lost. And the owner said: I administer an oath to you, and the bailee said: Amen, therefore accepting the oath; and the witnesses testify about the bailee that he consumed it, then he must pay the principal. If the bailee admitted on his own that he had taken a false oath, then he must pay the principal and the additional one-fifth payment, and bring a guilt-offering.

הֵיכָן פִּקְדוֹנִי, אָמַר לוֹ נִגְנָב, מַשְׁבִּיעֲךָ אָנִי, וְאָמַר אָמֵן, וְהָעֵדִים מְעִידִין אוֹתוֹ שֶׁגְּנָבוֹ, מְשַׁלֵּם תַּשְׁלוּמֵי כֶפֶל. הוֹדָה מֵעַצְמוֹ, מְשַׁלֵּם קֶרֶן וָחֹמֶשׁ וְאָשָׁם:

If the owner asked the bailee: Where is my deposit, and the bailee said to him: It was stolen; and the owner said: I administer an oath to you, and the bailee said: Amen, therefore accepting the oath; and the witnesses testify about the bailee that he stole it, he must pay the payment of double the principal. If the bailee admitted on his own that he had taken a false oath, then he must pay the principal, the additional one-fifth payment, and bring a guilt-offering.

הַגּוֹזֵל אֶת אָבִיו, וְנִשְׁבַּע לוֹ, וּמֵת, הֲרֵי זֶה מְשַׁלֵּם קֶרֶן וָחֹמֶשׁ לְבָנָיו אוֹ לְאֶחָיו. וְאִם אֵינוֹ רוֹצֶה, אוֹ שֶׁאֵין לוֹ, לֹוֶה וּבַעֲלֵי חוֹב בָּאִים וְנִפְרָעִים:

The mishna continues: In the case of one who robs his father and the father demands that he return the stolen item, and he takes an oath to his father that he did not rob him; and then the father dies; and then the son admits that he robbed him and took a false oath, necessitating the return of the principal and the giving of the additional one-fifth payment to his father’s heirs, of which he is either one of several or the only one; what should he do? This son pays the principal and the additional one-fifth payment to his father’s sons or brothers, and brings a guilt-offering and does not keep his own share. And if he does not want to forfeit his share or where he does not have sufficient funds to pay the other heirs while forfeiting his share, he borrows money in the amount of the value of the stolen item and the creditors come and are repaid in part from his share in the stolen item.

הָאוֹמֵר לִבְנוֹ, קוֹנָם אִי אַתָּה נֶהֱנֶה מִשֶּׁלִּי, אִם מֵת, יִירָשֶׁנּוּ. בְּחַיָּיו וּבְמוֹתוֹ, אִם מֵת, לֹא יִירָשֶׁנּוּ, וְיַחֲזִיר לְבָנָיו אוֹ לְאֶחָיו. וְאִם אֵין לוֹ, לֹוֶה, וּבַעֲלֵי חוֹב בָּאִים וְנִפְרָעִים:

In the case of one who says to his son in a vow: It is forbidden like an offering [konam], and for that reason you may not derive benefit from my property, if the father then dies the son inherits from him, because it is no longer the father’s property once he dies. The mishna continues: If the father stated in his vow that his son may not derive benefit from his property in his life and in his death, then even if the father then dies the son does not inherit from him, as the prohibition is still in effect. And instead of taking his inheritance, he returns his portion in the estate to his sons or to his brothers. And if he does not have sufficient funds to subsist without his inheritance, he borrows money in the amount of the value of his share in the inheritance and the creditors come and are repaid from his share.

הַגּוֹזֵל אֶת הַגֵּר וְנִשְׁבַּע לוֹ, וּמֵת, הֲרֵי זֶה מְשַׁלֵּם קֶרֶן וָחֹמֶשׁ לַכֹּהֲנִים וְאָשָׁם לַמִּזְבֵּחַ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (במדבר ה) וְאִם אֵין לָאִישׁ גֹּאֵל לְהָשִׁיב הָאָשָׁם אֵלָיו, הָאָשָׁם הַמּוּשָׁב לַה' לַכֹּהֵן, מִלְּבַד אֵיל הַכִּפֻּרִים אֲשֶׁר יְכַפֶּר בּוֹ עָלָיו. הָיָה מַעֲלֶה אֶת הַכֶּסֶף וְאֶת הָאָשָׁם, וּמֵת, הַכֶּסֶף יִנָּתֵן לְבָנָיו, וְהָאָשָׁם יִרְעֶה עַד שֶׁיִּסְתָּאֵב, וְיִמָּכֵר וְיִפְּלוּ דָמָיו לִנְדָבָה:

With regard to one who robs a convert and takes a false oath denying having done so, and then the convert dies, the robber, in order to achieve repentance, pays the principal, i.e., the stolen item or, if it is no longer extant, its monetary value, and an additional one-fifth of its value to the priests, and presents a guilt-offering to the altar, as it is stated: “But if the man has no kinsman to whom restitution may be made for the guilt, the restitution for guilt that is made shall be the Lord’s, even the priest’s; besides the ram of the atonement, whereby atonement shall be made for him” (Numbers 5:8). If the robber was bringing the money and the guilt-offering up to Jerusalem and he died before paying the priests and bringing his offering, the money shall be given to the robber’s children, and the animal designated for the guilt-offering shall graze until it becomes blemished and consequently disqualified from being sacrificed. And the animal shall then be sold and the money received for it shall be allocated for communal gift offerings.

נָתַן הַכֶּסֶף לְאַנְשֵׁי מִשְׁמָר, וּמֵת, אֵין הַיּוֹרְשִׁים יְכוֹלִין לְהוֹצִיא מִיָּדָם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שם) אִישׁ אֲשֶׁר יִתֵּן לַכֹּהֵן לוֹ יִהְיֶה. נָתַן הַכֶּסֶף לִיהוֹיָרִיב וְאָשָׁם לִידַעְיָה, יָצָא. אָשָׁם לִיהוֹיָרִיב וְכֶסֶף לִידַעְיָה, אִם קַיָּם הָאָשָׁם, יַקְרִיבוּהוּ בְנֵי יְדַעְיָה, וְאִם לֹא, יַחֲזִיר וְיָבִיא אָשָׁם אַחֵר, שֶׁהַמֵּבִיא גְזֵלוֹ עַד שֶׁלֹּא הֵבִיא אֲשָׁמוֹ, יָצָא. הֵבִיא אֲשָׁמוֹ עַד שֶׁלֹּא הֵבִיא גְזֵלוֹ, לֹא יָצָא. נָתַן אֶת הַקֶּרֶן וְלֹא נָתַן אֶת הַחֹמֶשׁ, אֵין הַחֹמֶשׁ מְעַכֵּב:

If the robber gave the money to the members of the priestly watch and then died before they sacrificed his guilt-offering, the heirs cannot remove the money from the priests’ possession, as it is stated: “And every man’s hallowed things shall be his; whatsoever any man gives to the priest, it shall be his” (Numbers 5:10). The mishna continues: If the robber gave the money to the priestly watch of Joiarib and then gave the guilt-offering to the priestly watch of Jedaiah, the following priestly watch, to sacrifice on his behalf, he has fulfilled his obligation. By contrast, if he first gave the guilt-offering to the priestly watch of Joiarib and then gave the money to the priestly watch of Jedaiah, if the animal designated for the guilt-offering is extant, then members of the priestly watch of Jedaiah, who received the money, should sacrifice it. But if it is no longer extant because the priestly watch of Joiarib had already sacrificed it, he should return and bring another guilt-offering; for one who brings his stolen item to the priests before he brings his guilt-offering has fulfilled his obligation, but one who brings his guilt-offering before he brings his stolen item has not fulfilled his obligation. Although he cannot sacrifice the offering before paying the principal, if he gave the principal but did not yet give the additional one-fifth payment, the lack of having given the additional one-fifth payment does not preclude sacrificing the offering.