הדר פשטה שער אין כאן גילוח אין כאן אי שער אין כאן גילוח יש כאן הכי קאמר אע"פ ששער אין כאן מצות גילוח אין כאן
— He replied:<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' I.e., Rabina to R. Aha.
');"><sup>26</sup></span> No; the query has application where, e.g., one of the two hairs fell out of itself<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Before he started to shave the two hairs.
');"><sup>27</sup></span> and the other was shaved by him: Shall we say that [since] now there is no minimum of hair left unshaved [the duty of shaving has been performed], or was there perhaps no performance of shaving since originally he had left two hairs [unshaved] and when he [made up his mind to] shave them now, there were not two hairs to be shaved? On second thoughts Raba himself solved it thus: There is neither any hair here, nor is there the performance of shaving here. But if there is no hair [left] here, was not the duty of shaving surely performed here? — What he meant was this: Though there remained no hair, yet the performance of the injunction of shaving was not performed here.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' [I.e., he has not fulfilled the relevant precept (Tosaf.).]
');"><sup>28</sup></span>
Sefer HaChinukh
It laws: For example, that which our Rabbis, may their memory be blessed, said (Sanhedrin 57a) how much would the theft be that obligates the robber in repayment? Any theft that is worth a small coin (perutah). But less than that is not in the category of repayment, even though he has transgressed a Torah prohibition. And as we shall write at length in the negative commandment of "You shall not rob" (Sefer HaChinukh, 20, 29), [it is] because Israelites are the children of Avraham, Yitschak and Yaakov - generous men, the children of generous men. And it is a well-known thing that that even a poor Israelite will pardon less than the worth of a perutah that was stolen from him, and he will not want to seek it at all. And therefore, they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bava Kamma 105a) that one who robs three bundles, worth three perutah at the time of the theft, and they depreciate in the hand of the robber and became worth two perutah - even though he returned two - he is obligated to return the third; since we judge according to the time of the robbery, and [the] third was already worth a perutah at that time. [If] he stole two that are worth one perutah [together] and he returned one, there is robbery here [but] there is not repayment here.
Ask RabbiBookmarkShareCopy
