#8: Thou Shalt Not Steal (Copy)

(13) You shall not steal.

MISHNA: The captives are not redeemed for more than their actual monetary value, for the betterment of the world... GEMARA: A dilemma was raised before the Sages: With regard to this expression: For the betterment of the world, is it due to the financial pressure of the community? Is the concern that the increase in price will lead to the community assuming financial pressures it will not be able to manage? Or perhaps it is because the result of this will be that they will not seize and bring additional captives, as they will see that it is not worthwhile for them to take Jews captive?

(13) You shall not defraud your fellow [Israelite]. You shall not commit robbery. The wages of a laborer shall not remain with you until morning.

(2) לא תגנוב, the term “stealing” also includes the “stealing,” i.e. kidnapping of human beings. Even deceiving your fellow man deliberately is called “stealing” גנבת דעת הבריות, “stealing people’s minds, misleading them to believe that lies are truth.

(1) To not oppress: To not hold on to that which is in our hand of someone else’s by way of force or delay or deception — like delinquents who delay people, saying, “Go and return,” so as to cause that what is in their hand of someone else’s to remain with them. And this is an extremely bad trait, and [so] our perfect Torah distanced us from it and warned us about it in this place, as it is written (Leviticus 19:13), “You shall not oppress your neighbor” — as one who holds the money of someone else in this manner that we said is called an oppressor. And also included in oppression is anyone who is liable specific money to his fellow and he oppresses him, such as one who suppresses the wage of a wageworker and similar to it. As we do not require that the money actually come from the hand of the oppressed to the hand of the oppressor; but rather anyone that has a claim of specific money against him and he delays it as a result of his violence or any angle of deception is called an oppressor. And even though oppression, robbery and theft are one matter even if the act of one is different from the other, as the intention of the three of them is that a man not take that which is someone else’s in any way; since people pilfer each other in these three ways, Scripture specified all of them and warned about each one on its own. And similar to this is what they, may their memory be blessed, said in Metzia (Bava Metzia 111a), “Rava said, ‘This is oppression, this is [also] robbery. And [so] why did Scripture divide them [and specify each one]? To [have one who commits it] transgress two negative commandments.’”

(2) And the explanation of this matter and the main reason according to my opinion is from two angles. The one is that [in] everything that God, blessed be He, wanted to distance from us a great distancing for our good, He multiplied for us many warnings (negative commandments) about it. And there is also a [direct] benefit found for us in the multiplication of the warnings. And it is like they, may their memory be blessed, said (Makkot 23b) that the Omnipresent wanted to give merit to Israel; therefore He multiplied the commandments for them. And the intention in their saying commandments is also about the warnings (and not just the positive commandments). As He multiplied many warnings about that which was possible to inform with one warning; like here that it was possible to warn them more generally, “You shall not take the money of others not according to the law.” But [instead] the warnings to us about the thing were multiplied, so that we can receive much reward for separating from sin. And so too, in every place where they, may their memory be blessed, said, “[So as] to [make one] transgress it with many negative commandments,” we will explain the matter like this. As it should not be explained, God forbid, that God, may He be blessed, wanted to come to His creatures with ploys, so that He would multiply the vengeance upon them. As God, blessed be He and blessed be His name, desires to give merit to His creatures, not to make [them] liable. But He prompts them with one prompting after another, in order that they learn to take rebuke and merit greatly in their distancing from sin. And this reason for those that know knowledge is honey and milk.

(3) The root of the commandment is well-known, since it is from the commandments that the intellect obligates.

(4) The laws of the commandment are in Bava Kamma, and primarily in the ninth chapter and the tenth chapter. (See Tur, Choshen Mishpat 359.)...

(5) And the French rabbi (Rabbi Moshe of Coucy, in SeMaG, Negative Commandments 156), wrote in the tally of the commandments that since we find that Rava said that oppression and robbery are one, we will not count oppression in the number of the negative commandments. And he counts in place of this, “and not be like Korach and his congregation” — meaning to say, that we not [take part] in a controversy. And in our opinion — ours — the intention of Rava was not that they should not be counted as two negative commandments, but rather to have one transgress robbery with two negative commandments, and so too [in the case of] oppression. And since their content is different, we will count them as two negative commandments — like robbery and theft. As even though the matter of both of them is that we not take the money of others, there is no doubt that they are considered two negative commandments of the six hundred and thirteen commandments.