steals

Concerning him who commits fornication or swears falsely or steals. A bishop or an elder or a deacon who is discovered in fornication or in swearing falsely or in theft, shall be deposed, but shall not be expelled. For God says that he does not punish twice for one crime.

Concerning him who steals the oil or the wax or anything that is the property of the church. If any of the clergy steals the wax belonging to the church, or the oil, let him be deposed, and what he has stolen he shall refund fivefold. Silver vessels and clothes, if they have been seen a few days, no man shall take from them for himself alone anything ; for this action is a sin. And he who does this shall be expelled, and they shall punish him.

Concerning him who steals the oil or the wax or anything that is the property of the church. If any of the clergy steals the wax belonging to the church, or the oil, let him be deposed, and what he has stolen he shall refund fivefold. Silver vessels and clothes, if they have been seen a few days, no man shall take from them for himself alone anything ; for this action is a sin. And he who does this shall be expelled, and they shall punish him.

For let us learn what the sacred word says in the book of Wisdom: My son, keep my words, and hide my commandments with you. Say unto Wisdom, You are my sister; and make understanding familiar with you: that she may keep you from the strange and wicked woman, in case such a one accost you with sweet words. For from the window of her house she looks into the street, to see if she can espy some young man among the foolish children, without understanding, walking in the market-place, in the meeting of the street near her house, and talking in the dusk of the evening, or in the silence and darkness of the night. A woman meets him in the appearance of an harlot, who steals away the hearts of young persons. She rambles about, and is dissolute; her feet abide not in her house: sometimes she is without, sometimes in the streets, and lies in wait at every corner. Then she catches him, and kisses him, and with an impudent face says unto him, I have peace-offerings with me; this day do I pay my vows: therefore came I forth to meet you; earnestly I have desired your face, and I have found you. I have decked my bed with coverings; with tapestry from Egypt have I adorned it. I have perfumed my bed with saffron, and my house with cinnamon. Come, let us take our fill of love until the morning; come, let us solace ourselves with love, etc. To which he adds: With much discourse she seduced him, with snares from her lips she forced him. He goes after her like a silly bird. And again: Do not hearken to a wicked woman; for though the lips of an harlot are like drops from an honey-comb, which for a while is smooth in your throat, yet afterwards you will find her more bitter than gall, and sharper than any two-edged sword. And again: But get away quickly, and tarry not; fix not your eyes upon her: for she has thrown down many wounded; yea, innumerable multitudes have been slain by her. If not, says he, yet you will repent at the last, when your flesh and your body are consumed, and will say, How have I hated instruction, and my heart has avoided the reproofs of the righteous! I have not hearkened to the voice of my instructor, nor inclined mine ear to my teacher. I have almost been in all evil. But we will make no more quotations; and if we have omitted any, be so prudent as to select the most valuable out of the Holy Scriptures, and confirm yourselves with them, rejecting all things that are evil, that so you may be found holy with God in eternal life.

Now the greatest part of offenses with us are capital; as if any one be guilty of adultery; if any one force a virgin; if any one be so impudent as to attempt sodomy with a male; or if, upon another's making an attempt upon him, he submits to be so used. There is also a law for slaves of the like nature, that can never be avoided. Moreover, if any one cheats another in measures or weights, or makes a knavish bargain and sale, in order to cheat another; if any one steals what belongs to another, and takes what he never deposited; all these have punishments allotted them; not such as are met with among other nations, but more severe ones. And as for attempts of unjust behavior towards parents, or for impiety against God, though they be not actually accomplished, the offenders are destroyed immediately. However, the reward for such as live exactly according to the laws is not silver or gold; it is not a garland of olive branches or of small age, nor any such public sign of commendation; but every good man hath his own conscience bearing witness to himself, and by virtue of our legislator's prophetic spirit, and of the firm security God himself affords such a one, he believes that God hath made this grant to those that observe these laws, even though they be obliged readily to die for them, that they shall come into being again, and at a certain revolution of things shall receive a better life than they had enjoyed before. Nor would I venture to write thus at this time, were it not well known to all by our actions that many of our people have many a time bravely resolved to endure any sufferings, rather than speak one word against our law.

More encompassing in use is the rule of twofold restitution than the rule of fourfold or fivefold restitution; For the rule of twofold restitution applies both to what has life and what does not have life, while the rule of fourfold and fivefold restitution applies only to an ox or a sheep, for it is written, “If a man shall steal an ox or a sheep and kill it, or sell it, he shall pay five oxen for an ox and four sheep for a sheep” (Ex. 21:37). One who steals from a thief does not pay twofold restitution; And the one who slaughters or sells what is [already] stolen does not make fourfold or fivefold restitution.

Fraud is four pieces of silver. A claim is [a minimum] of two pieces of silver. An admission is [a minimum] of that which is worth a perutah. There are five [rules involving] that which is worth a perutah: An admission is [a minimum] of that which is worth a perutah. A woman can be betrothed with that which is worth a perutah. Someone who benefits a perutah’s worth from that which belongs to the sanctuary has committed sacrilege. One who finds that which is worth a perutah must proclaim it [as a lost object]. One who steals that which is worth a perutah from his fellow and swears [falsely] to him [that he did not steal it], must go after him [to return it] even as far as Medea.

There are five cases in which one must add a fifth: One who eats terumah, or the terumah taken from the tithe, or the terumah from a tithe taken from doubtfully tithed produce, or dough offering, or first fruits, must add a fifth [to the value of the principle when he makes restitution]. One that redeems [the fruit of] a fourth year plant, or his second tithe, must add a fifth. One that redeems that which he dedicated [to the Temple] must add a fifth. One that derives a perutah’s worth of benefit from that which belongs to the sanctuary must add a fifth [when he makes restitution]. One who steals that which is worth a perutah from his fellow must add a fifth [when he makes restitution].

If he stole from his father and ate it on his father’s property, or of strangers and ate it on the property of the strangers, or of strangers and ate on his father’s property, he does not become a “wayward and rebellious son,” until he steals from his father and eats on other’s property. Rabbi Yose bar Yehudah said: “Until he steals from his father and mother.”

If he stole from his father and ate it on his father’s property, or of strangers and ate it on the property of the strangers, or of strangers and ate on his father’s property, he does not become a “wayward and rebellious son,” until he steals from his father and eats on other’s property. Rabbi Yose bar Yehudah said: “Until he steals from his father and mother.”

If one steals the sacred vessel called a “kasvah” (Numbers 4:7), or cursed by the name of an idol, or has sexual relations with an Aramean (non-Jewish) woman, he is punished by zealots. If a priest performed the temple service while impure, his fellow priests do not bring him to the court, but rather the young priests take him out into the courtyard and split his skull with clubs. A layman who performed the service in the Temple: Rabbi Akiva says: “He is strangled.” But the Sages say: “[His death is] at the hands of heaven.”

MISHNAH: If one serves heave to his workers or his guests, he pays the principal and they pay the fifth, the word of Rebbi Meïr. But the Sages say, they pay principal and fifth and he pays them the price of their meal. He who steals heave but does not eat it pays double restitution for the value of heave. If he ate it, he pays twice the principal and a fifth. The principal and the fifth from profane food and a principal the value of heave. If he stole heave of the Sanctuary and ate it, he pays two fifths and the principal since double restitution does not apply to the Sanctuary. One does not pay with gleanings, forgotten sheaves, peah, and abandoned property, nor with First Tithe whose heave was taken, nor with Second Tithe, nor with dedicated food that was redeemed, for dedicated food cannot redeem dedicated food, the words of Rebbi Meïr. But the Sages permit the latter.

Rebbi Zeïra in the name of Rebbi Abba bar Mamal: If someone steals someone else’s animal tithe, if it still exists he returns it as is, if he ate it, he ate what he ate. Rebbi Eleazar in the name of Rebbi Mana: He cannot ask him to give anything; if it is worth less than a peruṭah one cannot say that he should give. Rebbi Ḥinena said, that is, if it was worth less than a peruṭah from the start. But if it was worth a peruṭah from the start, one tells him to pay.

MISHNAH: Simson followed his eyes, therefore the Philistines pierced his eyes. Absalom beautified himself with his hair, therefore he was hung by his hair. Because he came to his father’s ten concubines, therefore ten lances were put into him, as it was said: “Ten squires, Joab’s weapons carriers, surrounded him.” And because he stole three steals, his father’s opinion, the court’s opinion, and Israel’s opinion, therefore three staves were stuck into him, as it was said: “He took three staves in his hand and stuck them into Absalom’s heart.”

“And because he stole three steals, his father’s opinion, the court’s opinion, and Israel’s opinion.” His father’s opinion, as it is written: “It was after forty years.” David himself did not rule more than forty years, and here, it says so? But it is from the time that Israel demanded a king. “For your servant made a vow.” He said to him, what else do you want? He said to him, write me a tablet that two men should go with me. He said to him, tell me whom you want and I shall write. He said to him, write it to open and I shall take whom I want. He wrote it open. He went and added two people each until he had added 200 people. That is what is written, “with Absalom went 200 invited people from Jerusalem, going in their simplicity.” Invited, from David. Going in their simplicity, of Absalom. “They did not know anything,” of Aḥitophel’s counsel. Rebbi Huna in the name of Rebbi Aḥa: They all were presiding judges. Then they saw the things. They went to change sides. They said: Master of all universes: Let us fall in David’s hand and do not let fall David in our hands! For if we fall in David’s hand, he will have mercy on us. But if, Heaven forbid, David would fall in our hands, we would not have mercy on him. That is what David said, “He saved me in peace from my confidant, for the majority were with me!” “The court’s opinion”. “And Absalom said, who would make me the judge of the land.” “So Absalom would act.” “And Israel’s opinion.” Absalom insinuated himself with the men of Israel.”

Rebbi Joḥanan asked: Can movables be taken into possession by dragging? Rebbi Abba bar Mamal said, what is his problem? With hard hides. But soft hides are not taken into posession until lifted. A baraita disagrees with Rebbi Abba bar Mamal: If somebody steals another person’s pouch and removes it on the Sabbath, he is obligated since he already is obligated for the theft of the wallet before he comes in conflict with the holiness of the Sabbath. But if he was dragging it until he left, he is free since the obligations of capital crime and restitution fall on him simultaneously. Therefore, if the obligations of capital crime and restitution do not fall on him simultaneously he is obligated. Rebbi Mattania said, explain it with large pouches which usually are dragged.

HALAKHAH: “If a man performs preliminary marriage using ‘orlah, or kilaim of a vineyard,” etc. The first-born of a she-ass, Rebbi Eleazar said, may be used to preliminarily marry a woman; Rebbi Joḥanan said, it may not be used to preliminarily marry a woman. Rebbi Immi in the name of Rebbi Eleazar: The first-born of a she-ass may be used to preliminarily marry a woman by an argument de minore ad majus. Since you say that a firstling, whose prohibition cannot be lifted during its lifetime, can be used to preliminarily marry a woman, this one, whose prohibition can be lifted during its lifetime, not so much more? What is the difference between them? If somebody transgressed and redeemed it without the knowledge of its owner. Rebbi Eleazar said, it is not redeemed. Rebbi Joḥanan said, it is redeemed. A baraita supports Rebbi Eleazar and disagrees with him. A baraita supports Rebbi Eleazar: If somebody steals the first-born of another person’s she-ass, he has to pay double restitution. The end disagrees with him: For even though he has no interest in it now he will later. The Mishnah disagrees with Rebbi Eleazar: One may not use the first-born of a she-ass to preliminarily marry a woman. Rebbi Eleazar explained that, after breaking of [the foal’s] neck. For Rebbi Eleazar said, everybody agrees that after its neck was broken it cannot be redeemed.

Rebbi Aḥa said, would that not be obvious from the reasoning of the rabbis? Is the rebellious son liable for double restitution for his first theft? Or since he is warned of a capital offense should he be freed? Let us hear from the following: If somebody steals another’s wallet and removes it on the Sabbath he is liable since he already is liable for the theft of the wallet before he comes in conflict with the holiness of the Sabbath. Is he not forewarned of a capital offense and you say, he is liable! Here also, even though he is forewarned of a capital offense, you say that he has to be liable. Rebbi Yannai bar Ismael said, Rebbi Hoshaia follows his own opinion, as we have stated: He who takes out is guilty even if he did not put down. Similarly, he who takes out is guilty even if he did not take up with the intent to take out, for warning is possible only at the moment of his taking out. It was stated: If he was dragging it until he left, he is free since the obligations of capital crime and restitution falls on him simultaneously. Therefore, if both obligations do not fall on him simultaneously, he is liable. Rebbi Yose ben Rebbi Abun said, explain it with large pouches which usually are dragged; one cannot infer anything from this.

MISHNAH: The obligation to make double restitution is more frequent than that of paying quadruple or quintuple restitution since the obligation to make double restitution applies both to living things and to inanimate objects; but the obligation of paying quadruple or quintuple restitution only applies to oxen and sheep, as it is said: “If a man steal an ox or a sheep,” etc. He who steals from a thief does not pay double restitution, nor does the one who slaughters or sells after a thief pay quadruple or quintuple restitution.

It was stated: “It was stolen from the man’s house”, but not from the woman’s house? Is not “his neighbor” only written in respect of the borrower? But one has to say that “he who steals from a thief does not pay [double restitution, nor does the one who slaughters or sells after a thief pay] quadruple or quintuple restitution. If something was stolen which then was stolen from him; [when in the end the stolen object was found, to whom does he pay? To the first owner, to the second, to both of them? If something was stolen which then was stolen from him]; the owners apprehended the second thief who swore to them. If you say that one takes it away from the second, he has to bring a sacrifice for the oath. If you say that one does not take it away from the second, he does not have to bring a sacrifice for his oath. If something was stolen which then was stolen from him and the second thief decides to return it, if you say that he has to return it to the owners, they might not inform the first thief. If you say that he has to return it to the first thief, that one might not inform the owners. What does he have to do? He returns it to the owners in the presence of the thief.

HALAKHAH: “If somebody deposits an amphora with another person,” etc. Did not Rebbi Eleazar say, to what can the situation be compared? One who steals an amphora from another person’s wine cellar. Even if the owner does not realize the theft, it is necessary that he know of its return. He said, there is a difference because [the trustee] has authority over it. Rebbi Eleazar said, some say because the trustee has authority over it. What means “for its needs”? If the owner insisted on a specified place, at another place, whether it is for his needs or its needs, he is (not) liable. There are those who say that the trustee is not authorized; there is no difference whether at this place or at another place; for his needs he is liable, for its needs he is not liable.

Rebbi Yasa said, all these rules would be reasonable if they were the opposite. It was stated: You should know that this is the case. Who according to reason should be guilty, son or daughter? One would say, a daughter. But the Torah freed the daughter and declared the son guilty. Who according to reason should be guilty, the younger or the older? One would say, the older. But the Torah freed the older and declared the younger guilty. Who according to reason should be guilty, one who steals from others or one who steals from father or mother? One would say, one who steals from others. But the Torah freed the one who steals from others and declared the one who steals from father or mother guilty. To teach that all of these [rules] are only the King’s decisions.

Rebbi Yasa said, all these rules would be reasonable if they were the opposite. It was stated: You should know that this is the case. Who according to reason should be guilty, son or daughter? One would say, a daughter. But the Torah freed the daughter and declared the son guilty. Who according to reason should be guilty, the younger or the older? One would say, the older. But the Torah freed the older and declared the younger guilty. Who according to reason should be guilty, one who steals from others or one who steals from father or mother? One would say, one who steals from others. But the Torah freed the one who steals from others and declared the one who steals from father or mother guilty. To teach that all of these [rules] are only the King’s decisions.

Rebbi Yasa said, all these rules would be reasonable if they were the opposite. It was stated: You should know that this is the case. Who according to reason should be guilty, son or daughter? One would say, a daughter. But the Torah freed the daughter and declared the son guilty. Who according to reason should be guilty, the younger or the older? One would say, the older. But the Torah freed the older and declared the younger guilty. Who according to reason should be guilty, one who steals from others or one who steals from father or mother? One would say, one who steals from others. But the Torah freed the one who steals from others and declared the one who steals from father or mother guilty. To teach that all of these [rules] are only the King’s decisions.

Rebbi Yasa said, all these rules would be reasonable if they were the opposite. It was stated: You should know that this is the case. Who according to reason should be guilty, son or daughter? One would say, a daughter. But the Torah freed the daughter and declared the son guilty. Who according to reason should be guilty, the younger or the older? One would say, the older. But the Torah freed the older and declared the younger guilty. Who according to reason should be guilty, one who steals from others or one who steals from father or mother? One would say, one who steals from others. But the Torah freed the one who steals from others and declared the one who steals from father or mother guilty. To teach that all of these [rules] are only the King’s decisions.

Rebbi Yasa said, all these rules would be reasonable if they were the opposite. It was stated: You should know that this is the case. Who according to reason should be guilty, son or daughter? One would say, a daughter. But the Torah freed the daughter and declared the son guilty. Who according to reason should be guilty, the younger or the older? One would say, the older. But the Torah freed the older and declared the younger guilty. Who according to reason should be guilty, one who steals from others or one who steals from father or mother? One would say, one who steals from others. But the Torah freed the one who steals from others and declared the one who steals from father or mother guilty. To teach that all of these [rules] are only the King’s decisions.

Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rav Hoshaia: he is guilty only if he steals money. Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: he is guilty only if he shows contempt for money. What means showing contempt for money? Where do we hold? If about him who says, here you have five and give me for three, he is an idiot. Here you have three and give me for five, he is a regular person. But we deal with one who says, here you have five and give me for five.

MISHNAH: He who steals the chalice, or who curses by charms, or who copulates with a Gentile woman, one strikes him. If a priest officiated while impure, his brother priests do not bring him to court but the young priests take him outside the courtyard and smash his brain with bats. A non-priest who officiated in the Temple: Rebbi Aqiba said, by strangulation, but the Sages say, by the hands of Heaven.

HALAKHAH: “He who steals the chalice,” etc. קסווה cista. Rav Jehudah said, it was a Temple vessel, as one says and the libation chalices.

Rebbi Abba, Rebbi Joḥanan in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: he is punishable only if he steals money. Rebbi Zeˋira in the name of Rebbi Hoshaia: he is punishable only if he shows contempt for money. What means showing contempt for money? Where do we hold? If about him who says, here you have five and give me for three, he is an idiot. Here you have three and give me for five, he is a regular person. But we deal with one who says, here you have five and give me for five.