Commentary for Bava Metzia 108:1

ש"מ חומשו כמותו ש"מ

This proves that the fifth is as the principal.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lit., 'as itself.' — It follows from the fact that the fifth has to be paid in produce, just as the principal. ');">¹</span> Raba said: With respect to robbery it is written, [<i>he shall even restore it in the principal,</i>] <i>and shall add the fifth part more thereto</i>;<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Lev. V, 24. This fifth is payable if the culprit first denied the robbery and swore falsely, and then repented. The Heb. for 'the fifth part' is [H], which is plural in form, lit., 'and its fifth parts'. This justifies the ruling that the fifth itself becomes the principal and a fifth is payable upon that — i.e., there may be many fifth parts. ');">²</span> and we learnt: If he restored the principal and then swore [falsely] concerning the fifth,<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Regretting his repentance before giving the fifth, he falsely swore that he had already paid it. ');">³</span>

Explore commentary for Bava Metzia 108:1. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.