This is a deep and difficult question and I am going to try and suggest a few ideas for the time being which may at least get us thinking in the right direction.

1. I think I have a proof from Rashi Bava Metzia 37a DH Hacha that the person who lost out will not necessarily have the money transferred to him by Heaven. The Gemara there discusses someone who says to 2 people that he stole from one of them but does not know from which one. Rashi explains that to avoid receiving a punishment from Heaven he clearly has to pay to both. [I noticed that you stressed in the question that you are not referring to Latzeis Yedei Shamayim, but even so I think this Rashi is relevant to our discussion because Rashi is explaining how he can save himself from receiving the punishment b'Yedei Shamayim].

Rashi explains further that if he would merely leave the money in doubt in a safe place until Eliyahu ha'Navi will come, then the person who was stolen from would lose out. We seem to learn from the fact that Rashi writes that he will lose out, that Min ha'Shamayim we do not say that the money will automatically find it's way back to the rightful owners.

2. There is actually a Gemara concerning monetary matters, similar to Kesuvos 30a, concerning capital punishment that you cited. This is in Sanhedrin 8a that Hakadosh Baruch Hu said that it is not sufficient that bad judges take money from one person and give it to another against the Din of the Torah, but in fact what they do is even worse than this, because they put Hash-m to the trouble of returning the money to the truthful owners. [However if what I wrote in (1) is correct, we will have to say that Sanhedrin 8a is only referring to perverse judgments by the Beis Din of this world, but merely because the Din in Shamayim is different than the Din of the human Beis Din, does not necessarily mean the loser will automatically get his money back].

3. I suggest we also look at Rashi Bava Kama 104a DH she'Kvar who discusses Dinei Shamayim and writes that even though the Beis Din here is not capable of rendering the offender liable, but nevertheless he will receive a punishment for what he did if he does not pay up. I think the answer to one of your questions may lie in this Rashi because he stresses that there are certain things which in reality a person is responsible for, but nevertheless a human Beis Din is not able to force him to pay. I understand that the thinking behind this is that human judges can only make someone pay up if it is totally clear that the offender did the damage. In contrast if, for instance, he left the door open and the animal went out and damaged it is not entirely clear that the person did the damage because several things might have happened in between to stop the damage occurring. It is only in Heaven - where they always know the inner truth of everything that happens in the world - that they can say for sure that the person who opened the door was truly to blame. It is only if he took a dog and held him next to the victim until he bit him, that we humans can be certain that the attacker was responsible.

4. I find it difficult to understand why one should say that the punishment is only given in Heaven. The Gemara does not say that the Din is "in Heaven" but rather "in Dinei Shamayim" or "in the hands of Heaven". I thought this meant that the Din is being administered by the Beis Din in Heaven, but the judgment can take effect in this world.

5. There are practical applications to being liable by the laws of Heaven. See Meiri here end 56a in the name of Gedolei ha'Doros that somebody who is obliged to pay up in Dinei Shamayim and has not yet done so, is invalidated to give testimony in Beis Din. Meiri writes that he agrees with this opinion because according to the Torah he is obliged to pay up, so until he pays up he is a Gazlan.

6. See also Rashi Bava Metzia 91a DH Rava who discusses Kam Lei bede'Rabah Minei and writes that even though the Torah exempts him from 2 punishments nevertheless this is only because the Beis Din does not have the power to punish him twice, but the individual has not fulfilled his obligation until he pays up. Rashi also writes that if the person who was damaged grabbed the money owed to him, the Beis Din would not take it away from him. Some Poskim maintain (see Rabbi Akiva Eiger to Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat #28 Shach #2 in the name of Rashba and Ran) that in every case where the offender is obliged to pay in the Dinim of Heaven, even though the Beis Din here do not have the power to make him pay, nevertheless if the victim grabs the money, he is entitled to keep it.

Thank you for your very interesting and important question

Shabbat Shalom

D. Bloom

This is a deep and difficult question and I am going to try and suggest a few ideas for the time being which may at least get us thinking in the right direction.

1. I think I have a proof from Rashi Bava Metzia 37a DH Hacha that the person who lost out will not necessarily have the money transferred to him by Heaven. The gemara there discusses someone who says to 2 people that he stole from one of them but does not know from which one. Rashi explains that to avoid receiving a punushment from Heaven he clearly has to pay to both. [ I noticed that you stressed in the question that you are not referring to latzeis yedai shamayim, but even so I think this Rashi is revelant to our discussion because Rashi is explaining how he can save himself from receiving the punushment bedai shamayim].

Rashi explains furhter that if he would merely leave the money in doubt in a safe place until Eliyahu Hanavi will come, then the person who was stolen from would lose out.

We seem to learn from the fact that Rashi writes that he will lose out, that Min Hashamayim we do not say that the money will automatically find it's way back to the rightful owners.

2. There is actually a Gemara concerning monetary matters, similar to Kesubos 30a concerning capital punishment that you cited. This is in Sanhedrin 8a that Hakadosh Baruch Hu said that it is not sufficient that bad judges take money from one person and give it to another against the din of the Torah, but in fact what they do is even worse than this, because they put Hash-m to the trouble of returning the money to the truthful owners.

[ However if what I wrote in (1) is correct, we will have to say that Sanhedrin 8a is only referring to perverse judgements by the Beit Din of this world, but merely because the din in shamayim is different than the din of the human beit din, does not necessarily mean the loser will automatically get his money back].

3. I suggest we also look at Rashi Bava Kama 104a DH She-Kvar who discusses dinei shamayim and writes that even though the Beit Din here is not capable of rendering the offender liable, but nevertheless he will receive a punushment for what he did if he does not pay up. I think the answer to one of your questins may lie in this Rashi because he stresses that there are certain things which in reality a person is responsible for, but nevertheless a human beit din is not able to force him to pay. I understand that the thinking behind this is that human judges can only make someone pay up if it is totally clear that the offender did the damage. In contrast if, for instance, he left the door open and the animal went out and damaged it is not entirely clear that the person did the damage because several things might have happened in between to stop the damage occuring. It is only in Heaven - where they always know the inner truth of everything that happens in the world - that they can say

4. I find it difficult to understand why one should say that the punushment is only given in Heaven. The Gemara does not say that the din is "in Heaven" but rather "in dinei shamayim" or "in the hands of Heaven". I thought this meant that the din is being administered by the beit din in Heaven, but the judgement can take effect in this world.

5. There are practical applications to being liable by the laws of Heaven. See Meiri here end 56a in the name of Gedolei Hadorot that somebody who is obliged to pay up in dinei shamayim and has not yet done so, is invalidated to give testimony in beit din. Meiri writes that he agrees with this opinion because according to the Torah he is obliged to pay up, so until he pays up he is a gazlan.

6. See also Rashi Bava Metzia 91a DH Rava who discusses Kam Lei b'd'Rabah Minei and writes that even though the Torah exempts him from 2 punishments nevertheless this is only because the Beit Din does not have the power to punish him twice, but the individual has not fulfilled his obligation until he pays up. Rashi also writes that if the person who was damaged grabbed the money owed to him, the beit din would not take it away from him. Some Poskim maintain (see Rabbi Akiva Eiger to Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat #28 Shach #2 in the name of Rashba and Ran) that in every case where the offender is obliged to pay in the dinim of Heaven, even though the beit din here do not have the power to make him pay, nevertheless if the victim grabs the money, he is entitled to keep it.

Thank you for your very interesting and important question

Shabbat Shalom

D. Bloom

Follow-up reply:

Here is a very short additional comment connected with our above discussion. One should simply realize that the question of whether Hash-m will meet out justice in this world, or only in heaven, is something which we call "Cheshbonot Shamayim" - the reckoning of Heaven. We do not always have the apparatus to know what "accounts" are being made up there. We have the Gemara and Shulchan Arukh which teach us how to administer justice in this world, but Hash-m has his own way of repaying for areas of the Halacha for which the Beit Din do not possess the power to intervene.

KOL TUV

D. Bloom