Ketubot 31: Theft on Shabbat

We are discussing a Mishna that was introduced in daf 29.  In practical terms, that means that I had to look back at that Mishna to remember how in the world today's daf was related to some larger question  that we were learning.  Rereading the Mishna, I recalled that we were told which women of 'flawed' and 'unflawed' lineage were owed fines - well, their fathers might be owed those fines - if they were raped.  In today's daf, the rabbis are considering how they determine whether or not a fine is paid in other circumstances.

They discuss these cases in impressive detail.  Each case introduces the application of different principles.  The rabbis discuss how they balance competing interests in each case.  

Some of the principles include:

• one cannot throw more than four cubits in the public domain on Shabbat

• lifting is one of the prerequisites for 'placement', which is included under the 39 prohibited actions on Shabbat

• lifting (fat) is a prerequisite for eating (a forbidden food)

• placement is impossible without first lifting

• we acquire an object only if we lift it more than three handbreadths above the ground

• lifting is required for carrying out

• an object in one place must be lifted to move from the private to the public domain

• an object in motion, i.e. one that is dragged, need not be lifted to be transferred to the public domain

• intention matters: if one changes his mind before leaving the private domain; if he stops before proceeding, that interrupts the flow of the action

• a person's hand is deemed to be four by four handbreadths, which allows even handling objects and moving to be against rabbinic law

• acquisition of an animal occurs the moment that one removes the animal from its owner's domain

The cases include

• how to retrieve stolen teruma, for example, wine that his in someone's throat (daf 30)

• one who steals and then eats another person's forbidden fat

• when one shoots an arrow four cubits in the public domain on Shabbat and it rips a silk en route, does the descecration of the Shabbat prohibition override the fine for damages?

• if one steals a purse by carrying it from a private to a public domain on Shabbat, he is liable to the fine for theft, which took effect when he lifted the purse, plus the fine for violating Shabbat through carrying in the public domain

• If one steals a purse by dragging it from the private to the public domain, he is not liable to the fine for theft because both that crime and the crime for violating Shabbat occur simultaneously, when the purse leaves the private domain.  Thus the Shabbat prohibition overrides the fine.

• If one steals an animal by leading it out of the owner's domain and the animal dies while still within the owner's property, the theif is not liable to pay a fine.  

• If that animal dies in the public domain, the thief is liable for the theft and the animal's death

The rabbis introduce possible complications to a number of cases.  What if the thief stays low, moving the purse from one hand to another below the three-cubit 'acquisition limit'?  What if the purse is lifted in an atypical manner?  What about the size of the purse - might pulling be involved, too?

Our daf ends with conversation about the second part of the Mishna from way back (two whole days ago).  That part of the text teaches that fines are imposed on men who rape many of their close relatives.    But  the Gemara questions this.  What about Masechet Makkot 13a, which teaches that such rapists are flogged?  Are both punishments administered?  or jut one?  which one, and why?  Stay tuned...