Bava Kamma 79 contains an interesting discussion as to the penalties for theft by a gazlan (for our purposes a mugger) or by a ganav (which we will define as a thief). The gemara states in the name of R' Elazar on 79b that if a person was seen hiding out in the forest waiting for animals to come his way and then is later seen slaughtering or selling a sheep/ox he must pay 4 or 5 x the value of the animal. Later the gemara asks - if he was seen preparing to rob, why is he a ganav - he is a gazlan? The gemara answers that since he hides he is actually a ganav.
This of course creates a question as to what defines a gazlan? If this guy who was openly preparing his trap and was seen by more than just the witnesses to the theft (according to Rashi) is considered a ganav, what is a gazlan. The gemara offers two answers, both with a link to Nach. R' Avohu says that the gazlan would be like Benayhu ben Yehoyada who actively took a spear from an Egyptian and killed him with the spear. R' Yochanan says that the the gazlan was like the people of Shechem who ambushed those people who wandered through their mountain passes.
The gemara follows this with a discussion as to why the ganav pays 2, 4 or 5 while the gazlan pays no fine. The gemara states in the name of R' Yochanan Ben Zakai that the ganav intimates that Hashem is less important to him than humans. The ganav steals in hiding because he is afraid of being caught by man, but is not afraid that Hashem will see him. In contrast, the gazlan openly robs, showing that he is unconcerned with man or G-d. Since the ganav is less concerned about G-d, we punish him more severely by making him pay a 2x, 4x or 5x penalty depending on his actions.
The gemara later attempts to explain this through a parable (mashal). R' Gamliel states that two people threw parties - the first person threw a party and did not invite the king's sons, but did invite local townspeople. The second host invited neither the king's sons nor the local townspeople. Who got punished more severely? The one who opted for the locals and not the king's sons. This mashal implies that if a person is more concerned with the local populace's perception of his acts, he will be dealt with more severely by the king.
If you have seen this post being carried on another site such as JBlog, please feel free to click here to find other articles on the kosherbeers blogsite. Hey its free and you can push my counter numbers up!
No comments:
Post a Comment