Study Bava Kamma folio 69A with parallel Hebrew-English text, traditional commentary, and modern study tools. Free access to Babylonian Talmud online.
Text Excerpt
״חייב אתה ליתן לו״, טבח ומכר – משלם תשלומי ארבעה וחמשה. מאי טעמא? כיון דלא פסקה מילתא, אכתי גנב הוא!
Rava continues: But if the court says to the thief only: You are obligated to give the stolen animal back to its owner, without actually ordering him to pay, and he subsequently slaughtered or sold the animal, he pays the fourfold or fivefold payment. What is the reason for this? Since the court has not issued a definitive ruling in this matter, he is still considered a thief rather than a robber.
לא צריכא, דאמרי ליה: ״חייב אתה ליתן לו״.
The Talmud answers: No, this is not a challenge to the ruling of Reish Lakish. It is necessary for the baraita to state the halakha in a case where they say to him only: You are obligated to give the stolen animal back to its owner. Consequently, he remains categorized as a thief.
גופא, אמר רבי יוחנן: גזל ולא נתייאשו הבעלים – שניהם אינן יכולים להקדיש. זה לפי שאינו שלו, וזה לפי שאינו ברשותו. ומי אמר רבי יוחנן הכי? והאמר רבי יוחנן: הלכה כסתם משנה;
§ The Talmud returns to the matter itself. R' Yoḥanan says: If one stole an item and the owner has not yet despaired of recovering it, neither of them is able to consecrate it. This one, the thief, cannot consecrate it because it does not belong to him, and that one, the owner, cannot consecrate it because it is not in his possession. The Talmud asks: And did R' Yoḥanan actually say this? But doesn’t R' Yoḥanan say: The halakha is invariably in accordance with the ruling of an unattributed Mishnah, i.e., a Mishnah that states a halakha without citing it in the name of a particular Sage?
ותנן: כרם רבעי היו מציינין אותו בקזוזות אדמה – סימנא כי אדמה, מה אדמה – איכא הנאה מינה, אף האי נמי כי מפרקא – שרי לאיתהנויי מינה.
And there is a Mishnah of this kind (Ma’aser Sheni 5:1) that contradicts R' Yoḥanan’s statement, as we learned in a Mishnah: With regard to a vineyard in its 4th year, they would demarcate it with clods of earth [bikzozot] placed around it on the ground, to alert people that they may not eat or derive any benefit from its grapes without redeeming them. The Talmud interrupts its quotation of the Mishnah to explain: This particular distinguishing mark of earth is used because a vineyard in its 4th year is like earth: Just as with regard to earth there is permission to derive benefit from it through its cultivation, so too, with this fruit, when it has been redeemed by means of coins, it is likewise permitted to benefit from it.