Talking Talmud

More on the halakhot about slaughtering an animal that was stolen or consecrated, but slaughtered in the wrong place in the Temple - such that the slaughtering itself considered the very last moment, because otherwise, the act that is considered the moment of slaughtering would complicate the prohibitions against certain animals, like one stolen or consecrated. Also, a new mishnah: When a person steals an ox or a sheep - and there are witnesses to that effect, and also to the fact that the thief then slaughtered the animal or sold it, and then the witnesses are found to be conspiring witnesses - they need to pay the complete pay-back. Plus, all the permutations of when the witnesses saw what.

The daf discusses a three way disagreement between Rabbi Meir, Rabbi Yehuda, and Rabbi Yochanan HaSandlar on the status of food cooked on Shabbat and how it relates to our case of slaughtering on Shabbat. Rava tries to understand the case if a stolen ox owned by two people but the thief increases his crime to only one of the owners.

A practice from Neharde'a - where writing a document of agency or power of attorney was not permitted. (With the discussion of what the issues were) Also, a new mishnah - about stealing and then slaughtering it, when does one need to pay the penalty of the 4 or 5? Including the return of "kim leih be-derabbah minei" - when one I'd only given the harsher punishment for two violations in one act.

More on R. Yochanan's position... and attempts to determine whether he really held the position ascribed to him. With a counter from chases in another mishnah: kerem revai, orlah, graves - all of which were demarcated spaces so that people wouldn't fall into violations of impurity on the one hand, but theft on the other (which leads back to R. Yochanan). Also, more on those pious, righteous, discreet people who would act to deconcretize to protect the ignorant from stealing... in this case, taking it further, to the poor and making sure that they aren't stealing. But what if the items are being held by a thief? Also, more on the implications of the various cases in the shemitah year.

Selling a stolen animal and the penalty incurred during the time when the owner is or is no longer hoping to get the animal back - subject to a machloket on whether the despair of the owner getting the animal back. The extra 4 and 5 payment only kicks in once the theft is "forever." After despair, the thief takes full possession, and the original owner is compensated. There is an important discussion here regarding whether the animal is sold or slaughtered. Plus, note R. Sheshet's view and R. Nachman's view. Also, a clearly articulated dispute between R. Yochanan and Resh Lakish - until the reasons for their dispute are put through the wringer, and nothing is clear anymore. Including why a thief (and also an owner) would consecrate a stolen animal.

Is a changing an object a mechanism by which someone can acquire an object or does it always maintain its identity as the original object? Why does the rule of fourfold and fivefold payment only apply to the sheep and ox?

How a thief acquires a stolen item, via the thief's changing the item or the despair of the owner that it will never be recovered (the thief still has to compensate the owner for the item). Plus, Abaye's arguments against the impact of despair on the thief's taking possession of that which he has stolen. Also, the difference between a "ganav" (who steals with stealth) and a "gazlan" (who steals brazenly), and which is more likely to cause despair.

When the thief pays back what he owes plus the double, is the value assessed from the time of theft, or from the time of judgement? What if the value of an animal stolen increases? Also, what about the stolen item undergoing significant change while in the possession of the thief? That process means that the thief actually acquires the stolen item. But this is difficult. The thief comes out ahead! Plus, a comparison to Yaakov in the house of Lavan.

What do the different animals mentioned in the verse teach us about these categories of theft? Also, the question of whether the main case in the verse is theft or a custodian who claims theft - which makes a real difference - and the two interpretations are read through every detail.

What happens when a person comes to collect the item that another US safeguarding, and the guardian says - it was lost (or stolen). The guardian can be asked to swear to the veracity of his claim. But then other means (witnesses) attest to the fact that that claim was a lie. What kind of compensation does he have to pay the owner? Also, an investigation into baraitot that teach the handling of a thief - if he's found or not. And running through the text, the ongoing dispute whether the case is a thief or a claim of theft. And how do the biblical verses teach the details of the false claim?