More Discussions for this daf
1. To'en Ta'anas Ganav 2. shlichus yad 3. Fine of Kefel on a person who claims armed robbers stole
4. Mistake in the Daf Outline 5. Listim Mezuyan
DAF DISCUSSIONS - BAVA KAMA 57

Andy Goldfinger asked:

On Daf 57, items 2 a-d:

The gemara concerns a finder who falsely claims that the avedah was stolen from him. He claims that it was taken by armed robbers, which would exempt him from any liability for payment. The gemara then goes on to explain why these robbers are liable for kefel even though in general armed robbers are not.

I do not understand why this question is asked. In reality there are no armed robbers -- it was a false claim. The finder falsly made this claim and therefore he is a ganef rather than a gazlan and is himself liable for kefel. The issue of whether armed robbers are liable for kefel would be relevant only if they actually existed, and only relative to whether THEY need to pay kefel!

Can you help me understand this?

Thank you.

Andy Goldfinger, Baltimore, Maryland, United States

The Kollel replies:

Dear Andy,

The Nesivos haMishpat 341:9 explains as follows - A Shomer who steals is not a normal Ganav to pay Kefel, he didn't do an act of Kinyan, he just held back the article. So he only pays Kefel because of To'en Ta'anas Ganav which has its own rules (see later 63b). The rules are only if he claims something called Geneivah from others and then was found to be a Ganav himself. His Geneivah claim, although false, is relevant.

All the best,

Reuven Weiner