(Continuation of Mishnah #1): (Even) if Shimon told his son David 'my property is Konam (like a Korban, which one may not benefit from) to you'; David inherits him;

If he said 'my property is Konam to you in my life and after death', David does not inherit him. His portion reverts to his (father's or own) sons or brothers;

If David does not want (or cannot afford) to lose his portion, he borrows this quantity, and the creditors collect it from his share of the inheritance.

(Gemara - Rav Yosef): (If one stole from his father, and he knows of no other heirs to give it to,) he must get rid of the theft. He may even put it in the Tzedakah box.

(Rav Papa): He must say 'this is what I stole from my father.'

Question: Why can't he keep the money (if he is the sole heir)? He can pardon himself!

(Mishnah #2): If the owner pardoned the thief from paying the principal, but not from the Chomesh (the thief need not travel to return what he owes).

This shows that the theft can be pardoned!

Answer #1 (R. Yochanan): Mishnah #2 is like R. Yosi ha'Glili, who holds that theft can be pardoned. Mishnah #1 is like R. Akiva, who holds that it cannot be pardoned.

(Beraisa - R. Yosi ha'Glili) Question: Why does it say "if the man has no redeemer (heir) to whom to return the theft"? Every Yisrael has heirs!

Answer: Rather, the verse discusses a convert;

Reuven stole from a convert and swore falsely to him. He heard (a false report) that the convert died. He wanted to repent. He was taking the money (to give to the Kohanim) and his Asham to Yerushalayim; he met the convert on the way. The convert agreed that the theft should be like a loan. The convert died; Reuven keeps the money.

R. Akiva says, he may not keep the theft.

Summation of answer: R. Yosi (ha'Glili) holds that theft can be pardoned, and R. Akiva holds that it cannot. Neither distinguishes between pardoning oneself or another person. 5. Really, R. Yosi holds that Reuven keeps it even if the convert never made it a loan. The Beraisa discusses when he made it a loan to teach the extremity of R. Akiva's opinion, that even if he made it a loan, Reuven cannot keep it.

Question (Rav Sheshes): If so, R. Yosi should teach that a thief can pardon himself, and all the more so we would know that one can pardon another, and R. Akiva should teach that one cannot pardon another, and all the more so one cannot pardon himself!

Answer #2 (Rav Sheshes): Both Mishnayos are like R. Yosi. One can pardon only another, but he cannot pardon himself.

Question: If so, why can the thief keep the money (in the Beraisa)?

Answer: It was converted to a loan.

Answer #3 (Rabah): Both Mishnayos are like R. Akiva. One cannot pardon himself, but he can pardon others.

Inference: R. Yosi holds that one can pardon even himself!

Question: If so, when did the Torah obligate to give Gezel ha'Ger (what was stolen from a convert who later died without heirs) to Kohanim? (He can pardon himself!)

Answer (Rava): The case is, he stole from and swore falsely to a convert, then confessed after the convert died. When he confesses, the theft is acquired to Hash-m, i.e. it must be given to Kohanim.

Question (Ravina): If Reuven stole from a female convert (and she died), what is the law?

It says "(if the) man (who was robbed has no heirs)" - the law applies only to a man;

Or, perhaps the Torah normally speaks this way (it does not come to exclude women)?

Answer (Rav Aharon - Beraisa) Question: Perhaps Gezel ha'Ger applies only to (stealing from) a "man (convert)". What is the source to include even from a female?

Version #1 - Answer: "To return (the theft...) that is returned" - the Torah discusses two returnings (to male and female converts).

Version #2 - Answer: "(To return the theft to him, the theft) that is returned" - the Torah discusses two thefts.

Question: If so, why does it say "man"?

Answer: Regarding a man, you must investigate whether or not he has heirs (children). A minor surely has no children.

(Beraisa): "To Hash-m, to the Kohen" - Hash-m acquires the theft and gives it to a Kohen of the division serving that week (when the thief returns it).

Suggestion: Perhaps the thief may give it to any Kohen he wants!

Rejection: "Except for the ram of atonement with which he will atone for him" - the Torah discusses a Kohen in that division (who could offer the Asham).

(Beraisa) Question: If a Kohen stole from a convert, what is the source that he cannot say 'since I am a Kohen, I may keep it'?

A Kal va'Chomer should teach that he may keep it!

Version #1: A Kohen receives what others stole. All the more so, he should keep what he stole!

Version #2A (Rashi - R. Nasan): Initially, a Kohen (Reuven) has no stake in the Korban of another Kohen (Shimon; Shimon may offer it himself if he wants), until it comes to Reuven;

If Shimon gave it to Reuven to offer, he cannot take it back;

Version #2B (Rashi - R. Nasan): Initially, a Kohen (Reuven) has no share in Terumah until the owner of the produce gives it to him;

Once he receives them, he keeps them; (end of Version #2)

Reuven has a share in Gezel ha'Ger even before it comes to Reuven (i.e. if it was given to a Kohen of Reuven's division). All the more so, once he has it (i.e. what he himself stole), no one should be able to take it from him!

Answer: The Kal va'Chomer is faulty!

In the source (what a Yisrael stole from a convert, or a Kohen's Korban, or Terumah) just like Reuven initially has no share, also other Kohanim initially have no share;

But when Reuven stole from a convert, just like Reuven has a share, other Kohanim (of the division) also have a share!

Rather, all Kohanim (of the division) share Reuven's theft.

Question: It says "a man's Kodoshav will be to him" (since a Kohen may offer his own Korbanos, he also gets (to keep) the theft)!

Answer #1: The case is, Reuven is Tamei (since he cannot offer his own Korbanos, he does not get to keep the theft).

Rejection: We said that he has a share. A Tamei Kohen has no share (in what was stolen from a convert)!

Answer #2: We learn a Gezeirah Shavah "l'Kohen-l'Kohen" from an inherited field.

(Beraisa) Question: If Levi made his field Hekdesh, and Reuven (a Kohen) redeemed it, what is the source that Reuven cannot say 'since if one does not redeem his field before Yovel, it is divided among the Kohanim, and I am a Kohen, I may keep it? A Kal va'Chomer supports me!'

A Kohen receives what he did not redeem. All the more so, he should keep what he redeemed!

Answer: "Like a Cherem field (that is given to Kohanim), it will be to the Kohen his inheritance" - this is not his inheritance;

Rather, it is divided among all the Kohanim in Yovel.

(Beraisa): Question: What is the source that a Kohen can offer his own Korbanos whenever he wants?

Answer: "He will come with all desire of his soul, and serve".

Question: What is the source that (the reward for) offering it (the meat) and the skin are his?

Answer: "A man's Kodoshav will be to him";

Version #1: If he is a blemished Kohen, he gives his Korbanos to a Kohen of the division. He himself gets the meat and skin.

(Version #2: If he is a blemished Kohen, he gives his Korbanos to Kohanim of the division, they get the meat and skin. (end of Version #2)

If he is old or sick, he gives his Korbanos to any Kohen he wants. Kohanim of the division get the meat and skin.