0

Shavua tov! On Makkos טז. on the end of the amud, the guemara asks if just the in shiliach haken and ones we encounter “bitlu ve lo bitlu”. And suggests gezel and mashcuno and pea. Gezel, it finishes with “כיון דחייב בתשלומים, אין לוקה ומשלם״ until here all good. The mishna in pessachim (2:04) says regarding someone who stealed teruma from a cohen in pessach “ במזיד, פטור מיתשלומים ומידמי עצים״. Well it seems that the guemara in makkot should know that there is a case where someone stealed (gezel), he has alredy eaten the teruma so he cannot return it to him (as whe saw that gezel, if the person returnes it he doesnt receive lashes) and he neither needs to pay him nothing, so he is not חייב בתשלומים, and he doesnt need to pay nothing, so he, according to this guemara, should receive lashes. If the reason of the guemara is to say that because he needs to pay he doesnt receive lashes, in a place where he doenst pay, he should receive lashes. Understand? If not please tell I can try to explain it better. Thanks!

2
  • Welcome to MiYodeya Rony and thanks for this first question. It is a bit hard to follow but I hope you get good answers from someone who knows the sugya well. Since MY is different from other sites you might be used to, see here for a guide which might help understand the site. Great to have you learn with us!
    – mbloch
    Commented Mar 12 at 3:35
  • 1
    I’m not sure if I understand your question exactly, but the Mishnah in Pesachim says he’s pattur because it’s considered as if he didn’t steal anything since it’s worthless. Therefore, why would he get lashes if it’s worthless and not considered stealing in the first place?
    – Chatzkel
    Commented Mar 12 at 4:14

0

You must log in to answer this question.

Browse other questions tagged .