daf bit: Gittin 55

[cellio]

The mishna teaches (in the name of Rabbi Yochanan ben Gudgada): if a beam which was wrongfully appropriated is built into a palace, restitution for it may be made in money. (Other commentary says this applies to any building, not just a palace.) Beit Shammai says that the building must be demolished and the beam returned, while Beit Hillel says the owner of the beam can only claim its actual cost. The rabbis follow Hillel. (55a)

(Eminent domain, anyone?)

This case surprises me for one reason: in the case of theft (the torah talks about livestock) the thief must make restitution and pay an additional amount. I don't see any commentary here on what "wrongfully" means; it could also mean accidentally, but would seem to include theft too. So why is there no penalty in that case, according to Beit Hillel? Is it covered elsewhere?

Comments

[530nm330hz.livejournal.com]

Don't forget about makkot, lashes. That was the primary means of criminal punishment; the extra fifth was more akin to civil damages.

As for meilah, that's the misappropriation of hekdesh and, IIRC, also carries a penalty of a fifth.

[cellio]

Makkot: good point -- the thief is still risking something he'll care about. That's good.

Meilah: thanks.