16,374
edits
Being Careful With Other People's Money: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
Being Careful With Other People's Money (view source)
Revision as of 03:06, 7 January 2015
, 7 January 2015Text replacement - "S"A" to "Shulchan Aruch"
No edit summary |
m (Text replacement - "S"A" to "Shulchan Aruch") |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
One who steals something from another person, violates a Torah prohibition.<ref> Sefer Hachinuch Mitzva 259, Rambam Hilchot Gezeila 1:2, Shulchan Aruch CM 348:2, Kitzur | One who steals something from another person, violates a Torah prohibition.<ref> Sefer Hachinuch Mitzva 259, Rambam Hilchot Gezeila 1:2, Shulchan Aruch CM 348:2, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 182:1 </ref> | ||
==General Rules== | ==General Rules== | ||
# Rav Yehudah in Bava Basra (165a) informs us that most people steal, a minority engage in illicit sexual activity, and everyone says Avak Loshon Hara. The Rishonim explain that the Gemara is not referring to outright stealing such as shoplifting but more subtle forms of stealing that afflict our interactions as buyers, employers, landlords, etc. A person who keeps stolen money is both subject to severe punishments for stealing and also sets himself up to one day become a victim. Thus, it is incumbent upon everyone to be aware of the Halachos of other people's money. <ref>רשב"ם ב"ב קסה., ח"ח שפת תמים פ"ג</ref> | # Rav Yehudah in Bava Basra (165a) informs us that most people steal, a minority engage in illicit sexual activity, and everyone says Avak Loshon Hara. The Rishonim explain that the Gemara is not referring to outright stealing such as shoplifting but more subtle forms of stealing that afflict our interactions as buyers, employers, landlords, etc. A person who keeps stolen money is both subject to severe punishments for stealing and also sets himself up to one day become a victim. Thus, it is incumbent upon everyone to be aware of the Halachos of other people's money. <ref>רשב"ם ב"ב קסה., ח"ח שפת תמים פ"ג</ref> | ||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
# Stealing is prohibited even if one is taking a friend's possession as a practical joke or to annoy him, even if he has every intention of returning the item after the joke has run its course. <ref>ב"מ סא:ערה"ש שמח</ref> | # Stealing is prohibited even if one is taking a friend's possession as a practical joke or to annoy him, even if he has every intention of returning the item after the joke has run its course. <ref>ב"מ סא:ערה"ש שמח</ref> | ||
===Stealing from a Non-Jew=== | ===Stealing from a Non-Jew=== | ||
# It is absolutely forbidden to steal from a non-Jew. <ref> Rambam Hilchot Gezeila 1:2, Shulchan Aruch CM 348:2 and 359:1, Kitzur | # It is absolutely forbidden to steal from a non-Jew. <ref> Rambam Hilchot Gezeila 1:2, Shulchan Aruch CM 348:2 and 359:1, Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 182:1. In fact, the Tosefta Bava Kamma 10:8 writes that it is worse to steal from a gentile than from a Jew because of desecration of G-d's name.</ref> | ||
==Borrowing Without Permission== | ==Borrowing Without Permission== | ||
<p class="indent">The gemara records a story in which the sharecropper of Mari Bar Isak took fruit to some of Amoraim while Mari Bar Isak was away. Some of the Amoraim ate the fruits, while Rav Ashi did not. Rashi explains that Rav Ashi was concerned that the sharecropper was taking Mari Bar Isak’s fruit without permission and didn’t want to benefit from stolen goods. If so, what were the other Amoraim thinking? Tosfot (Bava Metsia 22a s.v. mar) explains that they assumed that the sharecropper was giving his own fruits. Then Tosfot adds that it would not have been a correct justification if the other Amoraim assumed that the sharecropper took Mari’s fruits, but once Mari would find out about it, he would be okay with it. Tosfot proves that an expression of intent isn’t effective for past events from the topic of yeush shelo medaat, assuming someone would relinquish ownership if an item is lost. </p> | <p class="indent">The gemara records a story in which the sharecropper of Mari Bar Isak took fruit to some of Amoraim while Mari Bar Isak was away. Some of the Amoraim ate the fruits, while Rav Ashi did not. Rashi explains that Rav Ashi was concerned that the sharecropper was taking Mari Bar Isak’s fruit without permission and didn’t want to benefit from stolen goods. If so, what were the other Amoraim thinking? Tosfot (Bava Metsia 22a s.v. mar) explains that they assumed that the sharecropper was giving his own fruits. Then Tosfot adds that it would not have been a correct justification if the other Amoraim assumed that the sharecropper took Mari’s fruits, but once Mari would find out about it, he would be okay with it. Tosfot proves that an expression of intent isn’t effective for past events from the topic of yeush shelo medaat, assuming someone would relinquish ownership if an item is lost. </p> | ||
| Line 23: | Line 23: | ||
==Benefiting from stolen goods== | ==Benefiting from stolen goods== | ||
# It is forbidden to buy something that a thief stole, whether the thief is Jewish or non-Jewish.<ref>Kitzur | # It is forbidden to buy something that a thief stole, whether the thief is Jewish or non-Jewish.<ref>Kitzur Shulchan Aruch 182:8 </ref> | ||
==Sources== | ==Sources== | ||
<references/> | <references/> | ||
[[Category:Between Man And His Fellow]] | [[Category:Between Man And His Fellow]] | ||
