חוץ מפחות שוה פרוטה בקרן כו': אמר רב פפא לא שנו אלא שאין גזילה קיימת אבל גזילה קיימת צריך לילך אחריו חיישינן שמא תייקר
But Raba said [that the misappropriated article was still extant in this case as the reason that the son need not pay a Fifth for his own false oath is because] we were dealing here with a case where [the misappropriated article was kept in] his father's bag<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' Cf. [G], bisaccium.
');"><sup>6</sup></span> that was deposited with others.<span class="x" onmousemove="('comment',' So that while the son took the oath that the article was not with him, he meant to swear truly and could therefore not be made liable for perjury; cf. Shebu. 36b.
');"><sup>7</sup></span> The principal therefore must be paid since it was subsequently discovered to be in existence, whereas the Fifth has not to be paid since when the son took the oath he meant to swear truly, as at that time he did not know [that there was a misappropriated article in the estate].
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
