What is the Pasuk referring to when it declares the Shomer liable to pay double 'for every item of guilt'?
Rashi, Ramban, Seforno and Rashbam #1 (citing Bava Kama, 63b): It is referring to where the Shomer swears falsely that the article was stolen (To'en Ta'anas Ganav), when in fact, he is the one who 'stole' it.
What are the conotaions of "al Kol D'var Pesha" ... "?
Targum Yonasan: It teaches us that a Shomer Chinam is Chayav for Pesha (negligence).
Oznayim la'Torah: It refers to his false claim (D'var
What does the word Al Kol D'var Pesha" come to include?
Bava Kama, 63a: It comes to include every article, whether it has a spirit of life or not in the Din of To'en Ta'anas Ganav. 1
See Torah Temimah, note 107. And the Torah mentions Shor and Chamor ... because they are common (Bava Kama, 54b).
Why does the Torah insert the word "Al Kol D'var Pesha"?
Bava Metzi'a, 42a: To include where the Shomer instructed his Eved or his Shali'ach to usee the article in the Din of Shole'ach Yad. 1
In spite of the principle 'Ein Shali'ach li'Devar Aveirah. See Torah Temimah, note 108.
Having said "Al Kol D'var Pesha", why does the Pasuk see fit to specify "Shor, Chamor, Seh and Salmah'?
Rashi (on Beraisa de'R. Yishmael: It is a K'lal u'Perat u'Kelal, 1 to preclude whatever is not moveable (Karka, and Avadim, which are compared to Karka) and whatever has no intrinsic value (Sh'taros), from the Din of Shevu'as Shomrim and to exempt the Shomer from paying. 2
Da'as Zekenim, Hadar Zekenim (5): The verse alludes to Hashem's claim against Aharon for making the Egel (a baby ox). The Erev Rav were from Egypt, which is compared to a donkey. They caused Yisrael (Seh Fezurah) to sin. Salmah is like Tzelem (idol). Also Aveidah refers to idolatry - "Abed Te'abdun." Ki Hu Zeh - they said "Zeh Elohecha" (Nechemyah 9:18). Ad ha'Elohim is Moshe - "Nesaticha Elohim." Devar Sheneihem - of Hashem and Aharon. Yeshalem Shenayim - two of Aharon's children (Nadav and Avihu) died.
Bava Kama, 63a: Refer to 22:6:2;3:2. (for a similar set of D'rashos). And "Salmah" comes to preclude from the Din of Kefel a Davar she'Einah Mesuyam
Why does the Torah insert "Al Kol Aveidah"?
Bav Kama, 106b: To teach us that To'en Ta'anas Ganav applies to Aveidah as well as by Pikadon..
How do we know that "ve'Nikrav Ba'al ha'Bayis el ha'Elohim" (in Pasuk 7) refers to where he swears before witnesses testify that he stole it, and that he is not Chayav to pay double if he did not swear?
Rashi: We learn it from a Gezeirah Shavah 'Sh'lichus Yad' 'Sh'lichus Yad' from a borrower, in Pasuk 10.
Rashbam: The Pasuk means simply that, if the Ganav is not found, the Shomer must swear before Beis-Din that he did not use the article for himself, and is Patur from paying, and whoever Beis-Din find guilty, the Ganav or the Shomer, is obligated to pay.
Why does the Torah insert the word "Elohim" (Judges) three times (in Pasuk 7 & 8) in the Parshah of Shomrim
Sanhedrin, 56b: We learn from these Pesukim that Dayanim are called 'Elohim'. 3
Sifri (at the beginning of Va'eschanan): We learn from here ("Ad ha'Elohim Yavo D'var Sheneihem") that "Elokim" denotes Midas ha'Din. 4
What are the connotations of the words "Ki Hu Zeh"?
Rashi #1 and Rashbam: It refers to the testimony of the witness or of the owner that the Shomer has the article in question in his possession.
Rashi #2: Chazal extrapolate from there that the Shomer is only Chayav a Shevu'ah if he admits that he did indeed steal part of the Pikadon, 1 but that part of it was stolen (Modeh be'Miktzas), 2 but not if he claims that the entire Pikadon was stolen (Kofer ba'Kol). 3
Ramban: According to the Halachah, what Chazal extrapolate from here, is that the Shomer is only Chayav a Shevu'ah if he admits to having received part of the Pikadon, but not if he denies it completely. 4
Bava Metzi'a, 5a: "Ki Hu Zeh" implies that the Shomer admits to part of the claim, to preclude where Reuven claims wheat, and Shimon admits to barley, in which case he is Patur from a Shevu'ah.
Oznayim la'Torah: It implies that a Shomer is obligated to swear only if he admits to part of what the owner is claiming, but even if he denies liability completely. 5
See also Seforno and Ba'al ha'Turim.
The Ramban points out that this is an individual opinion, and that, according to the Halachah, the Shomer is Chayav a Shevu'ah even if he claims that the entire Pikadon was stolen (See Ramban).
See Torah Temimah, note 114, who discusses the various opinions on this point at length.
Such as a Shomer Chinam who claims Geneivah va'Aveidah and a Shomer Sachar who claims Onsin (Oznayim la'Torah).
How can we make a person swear and pay by his own admission?
Rashi (in Kidushin, 65b): We learn from here that a person's admission (regarding money matters) as equal to a hundred witnessses. 1
See Torah Temimah, note 103.
What are the implications of "Ad ha'Elohim Yavo D'var Sheneihem"?
What are the connotations of the words "Asher Yarshi'un Elohim "?
Rashi: It implies that if the Shomer is found to be guilty through witnesses, then he must pay double, but if it is the witnesses who testified against him falsely, then they must pay double.
Bava Kama (64b): The Shomer is only Chayav to swear (and to subsequently pay) if, based on the testimony of the witnesses, it is the Dayanim who declare him guilty him, but not if he admits of his own accord (Modeh bi'Kenas, Patur).
What if, after claiming that the animal was stolen, the Shomer Shechts or sells it?
Bava Kama, 106b: The Torah compares "Im Lo Nimtza ha'Ganav" to Im Nimtza ha'Ganav". Consequently, just as a Ganav is Chayav Arba'ah va'Chamishah if he Shechts or sells the stolen animal, so too must a To'en Ta'anas Ganav.
What are the implications of Yeshalem Shenayim le'Re'eihu"?
Mechilta: "le'Re'eihu", 've'Lo le'Hekdesh'; "le'Re'eihu", 've'Lo le'Nochri'