Commentary for Sanhedrin 113:18

כיוצא בו בגזל מאי היא אמר רב אחא בר יעקב לא נצרכה אלא לפועל בכרם

But if robbery is a capital offence, should not the Tanna have taught: He incurs a penalty? — Because the second clause wishes to state, 'but that of a Cuthean by an Israelite may be retained,' therefore the former clause reads, '[theft of an Israelite by a Cuthean] must not be kept.'<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' But actually it is punishable too. [This is merely a survival of old Semitic tribal law that regarded theft and robbery as a crime against the state, and consequently punishable by death. V. Muller, D. H., Hammurabi, 88] ');">³⁵</span> But where a penalty is incurred, it is explicitly stated, for the commencing clause teaches: <font>'For murder, whether of a Cuthean by a Cuthean, or of an Israelite by a Cuthean, punishment is incurred; but of a Cuthean by an Israelite, there is no death penalty'</font>?<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Thus the Tanna does refer to punishment; since then he omits a reference to punishment in the clause under discussion, it shows that the heathen is not executed for robbery. In the whole of this discussion the punishment referred to is death. ');">³⁶</span>

Explore commentary for Sanhedrin 113:18. In-depth commentary and analysis from classical Jewish sources.