We see from daf èØæ: That the reason a person isn't chaiav malnutrition if he robbed, because he is always chaiav tashlumin, so he doesn't receive Malkut and pay. I was studying massechet pessachim and the Mishnah 02:04 says that a person who steals terumat chametz bepessach doesn't have to pay nothing, because chametz doesn't have a value in pessach. Connecting our guemara with this Mishnah, if the reason of the guemara is that he pays so he doesn't receive Maluku, in this case where he doesn't pay, he should receive malkut for stealing! Not only this, but the guemara should have written that yes indeed there is a case where we encounter bitlu in gezel. Thanks! If it is hard to understand please message me back I can try to explain it better. Thank you very much! Hatzlacha!
Rony Hakim
Sao Paulo, Brasil
Hi,
Great and well explained question.
I have two points that can answer your question.
1. When we say that a Lav that has Tashlumin, is not a Lav that has Malkos, it means the Lavim are categorised. The Lav of Gezel, is in a different category, and even if we find a case that there is a Lav of Gezel and even so, the Gallon is Potur from paying for any reason, this kind of Lav, is not in the Malkos category.
2. If the Teruma is really worthless, then there is no Issur Gezeila, since the Issur is only when stealing more than a Shave Peruta. Whether the Ganav needs to pay a Karen plus the Chomesh or not, os a question that arises from Hilchos Terumos, not Hilchos Gezeila, where the market value is the criteria if there is Gezel or not.
I hope this helps,
Aharon Steiner