(a)When does one have to pay 'Arba'ah va'Chamishah'?
(b)In what way does the Mishnah therefore describe the Din of 'Kefel', (having to pay double) as 'more inclusive' than that of 'Arba'ah va'Chamishah'?
(c)From where do we learn that ...
1. ... 'Arba'ah va'Chamishah' is confined to an ox or a lamb?
2. ... 'Kefel' extends to any object?
1)
(a)One has to pay 'Arba'ah va'Chamishah' - for Shechting or selling an ox or a lamb that one stole.
(b)The Mishnah therefore describes the Din of 'Kefel', (having to pay double) as being 'more inclusive' than that of 'Arba'ah va'Chamishah' - inasmuch as it applies to anything that one steals, irrespective of whether it is an article that has life or one that doesn't.
(c)We learn that ...
1. ... 'Arba'ah va'Chamishah' is confined to an ox or a lamb - from the Pasuk in Mishpatim which specifically writes "Shor O Seh" (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
2. ... 'Kefel' extends to any object - since the Torah there writes " ... al Seh al Salmah al Kol Aveidah" (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
2)
(a)What does the Mishnah say about ...
1. ... someone who steals from a Ganav?
2. ... Shimon who Shechts or sells the ox that Reuven stole?
(b)From which Pasuk do we learn the former ruling?
2)
(a)The Mishnah rules that ...
1. ... someone who steals from a Ganav - is Patur from paying Kefel.
2. ... Shimon who Shechts or sells the ox that Reuven stole - is Patur from paying Arba'ah va'Chamishah.
(b)We learn the former ruling from the Pasuk there - "ve'Gunav mi'Beis ha'Ish" from which Chazal extrapolate 've'Lo mi'Beis ha'Ganav'.
Mishnah 2
3)
(a)What will be the Din if the two witnesses who testify that Reuven stole an ox are ...
1. ... the same two witnesses who ultimately testify that he Shechted or sold it?
2. ... different witnesses from the ones who ultimately testify that he Shechted or sold it?
(b)What will be the Din if someone steals an ox and...
1. ... sells it on Shabbos, to Avodah-Zarah or on Yom-Kipur?
2. ... Shechts it on Shabbos?
(c)Why the difference?
(d)What if he Shechted on Shabbos be'Shogeg?
3)
(a)The Ganav is Chayav to pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah - irrespective of whether the two witnesses who testified that Reuven stole an ox are ...
1. ... the same witnesses who ultimately testify that he Shechted or sold it, or whether ...
2. ... they are different witnesses (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(b)If someone steals an ox and...
1. ... sells it on Shabbos, to Avodah-Zarah or on Yom-Kipur - he is Chayav to pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah.
2. ... Shechts it on Shabbos - he is Patur ...
(c)... because, whereas in the former case he is only Chayav Kareis (bi'Yedei Shamayim), in the latter case he is Chayav Misah, in which case we apply the principle 'Kam leih be'de'Rabah Mineih' ...
(d)... even if he Shechts it on Shabbos be'Shogeg (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
4)
(a)What will be the Din if Reuven steals an ox from his father and Shechts or sells it after his father's death?
(b)Why is he Patur if his father died before he Shechted or sold it?
(c)And what will be the Din if he Shechted it and then declared it Hekdesh?
4)
(a)If Reuven steals an ox from his father and Shechts or sells it after his father's death - he is Chayav to pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah to his father's co-heirs.
(b)If his father died before he Shechted or sold it he is Patur (as we will learn later) - since what he Shechted or sold was his own.
(c)If he Shechted it and then declared it Hekdesh - he is still Chayav to pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah.
5)
(a)What does the Tana Kama rule in a case where Reuven steals an ox or a lamb, and subsequently Shechts it for a cure or to feed the dogs, where the animal is found to be a T'reifah or if he Shechts Chulin in the Azarah?
(b)What does Rebbi Shimon say about ...
1. ... the first two cases?
2. ... the last two cases?
(c)Based on which principle does Rebbi Shimon exempt the Ganav from 'Arba'ah va'Chamishah' in the latter cases?
(d)Why does he agree with the Tana Kama in the former cases?
5)
(a)If Reuven steals an ox or a lamb, and subsequently Shechts it for a cure or to feed the dogs, where the animal is found to be a T'reifah or if he Shechts Chulin in the Azarah - the Tana Kama rules that he is Chayav Arba'ah va'Chamishah.
(b)Rebbi Shimon ...
1. ... concurs with the Tana Kama in the first two cases, but ...
2. ... disagrees with him in the last two cases ...
(c)... because it is a Shechitah she'Einah Re'uyah (a Shechitah from which one is not permitted to eat, which Rebbi Shimon holds is not considered a Kasher Shechitah (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(d)He agrees with the Tana Kama in the former cases - since his intentions not withstanding, he is permitted to eat the meat should he so wish.
Mishnah 3
6)
(a)What does the Mishnah say about a case where the witnesses who testified both that Reuven stole an ox or a lamb and that he subsequently Shechted or sold it, turn out to be Eidim Zomemin?
(b)What if the two events are witnessed by two different pair of witnesses ...
1. ... both of which turn out to be Eidim Zomemin?
2. ... only the second pair of witnesses are Eidim Zomemin?
(c)And what does the Tana finally say if one of ...
1. ... the latter witnesses turns out to be an Eid Zomem?
2. ... the former witnesses is an Eid Zomem?
6)
(a)In a case where the witnesses who testified both that Reuven stole an ox or a lamb and that he subsequently Shechted or sold it, turn out to be Eidim Zomemin - the Mishnah obligates them to pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah.
(b)If the two events are witnessed by two different pair of witnesses ...
1. ... both of which turn out to be Eidim Zomemin - then the first pair must pay Kefel, and the second pair, two or three times (See Tiferes Yisrael).
2. ... and only the second pair of witnesses are Eidim Zomemin - then the Ganav pays Kefel, and they pay two or three times.
(c)The Tana finally rules that if one of ...
1. ... the latter witnesses turns out to be an Eid Zomem - the second testimony is null and void.
2. ... the former witnesses turns out to be an Eid Zomem - then the entire testimony is null and void.
7)
(a)In the previous ruling, what will be the Din in the first case?
(b)Is it correct to say that, in the second case, if the second pair of witnesses then become Zomemin, they are Chayav to pay two or three times?
(c)Why is that?
(d)On what principle is this based? What is the 'status' of the second witnesses' testimony, if the first testimony is Bateil?
7)
(a)In the previous ruling, in the first case - the Ganav is obligated to pay Kefel, whereas they are Patur from the Din of 'Arba'ah va'Chamishah ...
(b)... even if the second witnesses then become Zomemin ...
(c)... because if the Ganav did not steal, he did not Shecht or sell either (See also Tos. Yom-Tov).
(d)This is because - Eidim Zomemin are only Chayav on the basis of the claim 'You were with us', whereas in this case, their testimony is Bateil for the above reason, rendering them 'Eidim Mukchashim (and not Zomemin).
Mishnah 4
8)
(a)What does the Mishnah say in a case where two witnesses testify that Reuven stole an ox or a lamb, and that one witness or he himself testifies that he Shechted or sold it?
(b)Seeing as it obvious that one witness cannot obligate a person to pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah, why does the Tana see fit to add the last case?
(c)This speaks where he admitted to having Shechted or sold it after witnesses testified that he stole it. What will be the Din if witnesses arrive and testify that he stole the animal after he already admitted that he did?
(d)Why is that?
(e)And what is then the reason for the previous ruling?
8)
(a)In a case where two witnesses testify that Reuven stole an ox or a lamb, and that one witness or he himself testifies that he Shechted or sold it - the Mishnah rules that - although he is Chayav to pay Kefel, he is Patur from Arba'ah va'Chamishah.
(b)Although it is obvious that one witness cannot obligate a person to pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah, the Tana see fit to add the last case - to teach us that just as if a second witness subsequently arrives to support the first one, the Ganav becomes Chayav to pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah, so too will he be Chayav if two witnesses arrive to support his admission and he will become Chayav to pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah.
(c)This speaks where he admitted to having Shechted or sold it after witnesses testified that he stole it. But if witnesses arrive and testify that he stole the animal after he already admitted that he did - then he remains Patur ...
(d)... because by admitting, he obligated himself to pay for the theft (even though he may have known that he would be Patur for admitting to a fine).
(e)Whereas in the previous case - his admission did not implicate him at all, in which case it is not acceptable.
9)
(a)What do the following cases have in common: Where after stealing an ox or a lamb, one Shechts it on Shabbos or to Avodah-Zarah?
(b)Why is that?
(c)On what grounds does the Mishnah exempt a Ganav who steals an ox ... from ...
1. ... his father and Shechts or sells it after his father's death?
2. ... the owner and declares it Hekdesh, before Shechting or selling it?
9)
(a)If, after stealing an ox or a lamb, one Shechts it on Shabbos or to Avodah-Zarah - he is Patur from Arba'ah va'Chamishah ...
(b)... because he is Chayav Misah, in which case we apply the principle 'Kam leih be'de'Rabah mineih'.
(c)The Mishnah exempts a Ganav who steals an ox ... from ...
1. ... his father and Shechts or sells it after his father's death - because, since he inherited it from his father, he did not Shecht or sell the animal fully be'Isur.
2. ... the owner and declares it Hekdesh, before Shechting or selling it - because he Shechted or sold what belonged to Hekdesh (See Tos. Yom-Tov), and not to the owner.
10)
(a)What do the Chachamim (not cited in our Mishnah) learn from the Pasuk in Mishpatim "ve'Gunav mi'Beis ha'Ish"?
(b)Rebbi Shimon qualifies the previous ruling. Regarding what kind of Kodshim does he obligate the Ganav to pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah?
(c)To whom is he obligated to pay?
10)
(a)The Chachamim (not cited in our Mishnah) learn from the Pasuk in Mishpatim "ve'Gunav mi'Beis ha'Ish" that - someone who steals from Hekdesh is Patur from Kefel and Arba'ah va'Chamishah (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(b)Rebbi Shimon qualifies the previous ruling. He obligates the Ganav - for Kodshim that the owner is responsible (See Tiferes Yisrael).
(c)... to pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah to the owner of the Hekdesh animal.
11)
(a)One of the cases where Rebbi Shimon obligates the Ganav to pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah is where he Shechted the animal Inside the Azarah in the name of the owner. Seeing as the Korban is Kasher, why is he then Chayav to pay?
(b)The other case is where it is a Ba'al-Mum, and where he Shechted it outside the Azarah. How can it be considered the property of the owner, seeing as it has not yet been redeemed?
(c)Why can Rebbi Shimon not be speaking about a case where the Ganav Shechted somebody else's Kodshim animal that is Tamim outside the Azarah?
(d)Like whom is the Halachah?
11)
(a)One of the cases where Rebbi Shimon obligates the Ganav to pay Arba'ah va'Chamishah is where he Shechted the animal inside the Azarah in the name of the owner. He is then Chayav to pay - in the event that the blood subsequently spilt (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(b)The other case is where it is a Ba'al-Mum, and where he Shechted it outside the Azarah, which is considered the property of the owner, despite the fact that it has not yet been redeemed - because Rebbi Shimon also holds 'Kol ha'Omeid Lipados, ke'Paduy Dami' ('An animal that is fit to be redeemed is considered as if it has already been redeemed').
(c)Rebbi Shimon cannot be speaking about a case where the Ganav Shechted somebody else's Kodshim animal that is Tamim outside the Azarah - since he also holds 'Shechitah she'Einah Re'uyah, Lo Sh'mah Shechitah' ('An unfit Shechitah is not a Kasher Shechitah').
(d)The Halachah is - like the Chachamim.
Mishnah 5
12)
(a)What does the Mishnah say about a Ganav who sells the bulk of the stolen ox or lamb but retains a little for himself or who is a partner in the animal that he stole?
(b)Based on the Pasuk "u'Tevacho O Mecharo", what must he retain in order to be Patur?
(c)What does this preclude?
12)
(a)The Mishnah rules that, if a Ganav sells the bulk of the stolen ox or lamb but retains a little for himself or who is a partner in the animal that he stole (See Tos. Yom-Tov) - he is Patur from Arba'ah va'Chamishah.
(b)Based on the Pasuk "u'Tevacho O Mecharo", he must retain - a part of the animal that becomes permitted to eat via the Shechitah in order to be Patur.
(c)This precludes for example - the wool of a sheep or the horns of an ox.
13)
(a)The Tana includes in his current list a case where the Ganav renders the animal a Neveilah in the course of the Shechitah, or where he performs Nechirah or Akirah. What is ...
1. ... Nechirah?
2. ... Akirah?
(b)What will the Rabbanan of Rebbi Shimon, who hold 'Shechitah she'Einah Re'uyah Sh'mah Shechitah' say in this case?
(c)Why is that?
(d)What does the Mishnah rule in a case where the Ganav stole the animal in the domain of the owner and Shechted or sold it ...
1. ... outside his domain or vice-versa, or where he both stole it and Shechted or sold it outside the owner's domain?
2. ... inside his domain?
13)
(a)The Tana includes in his list a case where the Ganav renders the animal a Neveilah in the course of the Shechitah (See Tos. Yom-Tov), or where he performs ...
1. ... Nechirah - tearing it open from its nostrils to its heart or ...
2. ... Akirah - tearing out its Simanim (the wind-pipe and the esophagus).
(b)Although the Rabbanan of Rebbi Shimon hold 'Shechitah she'Einah Re'uyah Sh'mah Shechitah' - they agree in this case that he is Patur ...
(c)... because Nechirah and Akirah are not considered Shechitah at all.
(d)The Mishnah rules, in a case where the Ganav stole the animal in the domain of the owner and Shechted or sold it ...
1. ... outside his domain or vice-versa, or where he both stole it and Shechted or sold it outside the owner's domain that - he is Chayav Arba'ah va'Chamishah (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
2. ... inside his domain - that he is Patur (Ibid).
Mishnah 6
14)
(a)What distinction does the Mishnah draw between a case where an animal dies whilst the Ganav is pulling it out of the owner's domain, and where it dies whilst he is carrying it out?
(b)Why the difference?
(c)How much is he Chayav in the latter case?
(d)In which similar case does the Tana also rule that the Ganav is Chayav Kefel when the animal dies?
14)
(a)The Tana rules in a case where an animal dies whilst the Ganav is pulling it out of the owner's domain that - he is Patur, but Chayav if it dies whilst he is carrying it out ...
(b)... because in the latter case he has already acquired it, whereas in the former case he has not.
(c)In the later case, he is Chayav - Kefel (See Tos. Yom-Tov).
(d)The Tana also rules that the Ganav is Chayav Kefel where the animal dies - after he has pulled it outside the owner's domain.
15)
(a)What will be the Din where the Ganav gives the animal to a Kohen in lieu of five Sela'im for his firstborn son or to his creditor to pay for his debt, and it dies as the latter is taking it out of the owner's domain?
(b)In which two cases will he be Chayav?
(c)And what if the Ganav hands the animal to one of the four Shomrim and it dies?
(d)What are the four Shomrim?
15)
(a)If the Ganav gives the animal to a Kohen in lieu of five Sela'im for his firstborn son or to his creditor to pay for his debt, and it dies as he latter is taking it out of the owner's domain - the Ganav (See Tos. Yom-Tov ) is Patur.
(b)He will be Chayav however - (like in the previous set of cases), if the Kohen or the debtor picks it up or where it dies after he has pulled it out of the owner's domain.
(c)And the same will apply if the animaal dies after the Ganav has handed the animal to one of the four Shomrim ...
(d)... a Shomer Chinam, a Chomer Sachar, a Socher or a Sho'el.
Mishnah 7
16)
(a)Why does the Mishnah forbid rearing small animals in Eretz Yisrael?
(b)Where, besides in Syria, does the Mishnah permit them to be reared?
(c)What is the significance of Syria?
(d)Why is the Tana then not concerned about 'Yishuv ha'Aretz' there?
16)
(a)The Mishnah forbid rearing small animals in Eretz Yisrael - because of 'Yishuv Eretz Yisrael' (they destroy the vegetation [See Tos. Yom-Tov]).
(b)Besides in Syria, the Mishnah permits them to be reared - in the deserts of Eretz Yisrael.
(c)The significance of Syria lies in the fact that - David ha'Melech conquered it and many Jews went to live there.
(d)Nevertheless, the Tana is not concerned about 'Yishuv ha'Aretz' there - because 'Kibush Yachid Lo Sh'meih Kibush' (it was never considered part of Eretz Yisrael).
17)
(a)Why does the Tana forbid ...
1. ... rearing chickens in Yerushalayim?
2. ... Kohanim to rear chickens anywhere in Eretz Yisrael?
(b)And where does he prohibit the rearing of Chazirim?
(c)What is the story behind the prohibition that took place when a Chashmona'i king laid siege to Yerushalayim, which was ruled by his brother?
(d)What did they then proclaim?
17)
(a)The Tana forbids ...
1. ... rearing chickens in Yerushalayim - because they tend to peck around in the trash-heaps and are liable to carry bones of Sheratzim to locations where Kodshim are being eaten and to render them Tamei (See Tos. Yom-Tov)...
2. ... and Kohanim to rear chickens anywhere in Eretz Yisrael - because, by the same token, they may render Tamei the T'rumah that they eat there.
(b)He also prohibits the rearing of Chazirim - anywhere.
(c)The story behind the prohibition took place when a Chashmona'i king laid siege to Yerushalayim - which was currently being ruled by his brother. The understanding was that the besieging army would send up the wall lambs for the Korban Tamid each day, against the money that the besieged king would send down. Until one day, when the former sent up a Chazir, which, as it was being hauled up, clawed against the wall, at which point the whole of Eretz Yisrael shook.
(d)The Chachamim then proclaimed - 'Cursed be the man who rears Chazerim!' (See also Tos. Yom-Tov).
18)
(a)On what condition is one permitted to ...
1. ... rear dogs?
2. ... place traps to catch doves?
(b)How many Milin are there in thirty Ris?
18)
(a)One is permitted to ...
1. ... rear dogs only on condition that - they are tied on a chain (See Tos.Yom-Tov).
2. ... place traps to catch doves - provided they are placed at least thirty Ris from inhabited territory.
(b)Thirty Ris is equivalent to - four Milin (one Mil equals seven and a half Risin (See also Tos. Yom-tov)).
