To not rob: To not rob — meaning to say, to not take with strength and force and publicity that to which we do not have a right, as it is stated (Leviticus 19:13), “and you shall not rob.” And the explanation came about it (Bava Kamma 79b), that the expression, “robbery (gezelah)” relates to one that grabs something from the hand of his fellow or takes it out of his domain against his will by way of force and in the open, like the matter that is stated (II Samuel 23:21), “and he robbed the spear from the hand of the Egyptian.”
The root of the commandment is well-known, as it is something that the intellect distances greatly. And it is fitting to distance it, since the one who robs one weaker than he, knows that when one more powerful than he comes upon him, he will also be robbed, etc. And it is a reason for the destruction of civilization.
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sanhedrin 57a) that it is forbidden from Torah writ to rob even the smallest amount. But the negative commandment of “you shall not rob” only applies to the value of a small coin (perutah), since the Torah only makes liable [here] for something that is money; and less than the value of a small coin is not called money. But nonetheless, it is forbidden from Torah writ — like half a measure, for which we do not administer lashes, but it is [still] a Torah prohibition. And Rambam, may his memory be blessed, wrote (Mishneh Torah, Robbery and Lost Property 1:2), “It is forbidden to rob or oppress even a gentile and an idolater. And if he robbed him or oppressed him, he must return [it].” And in the Gemara (Bava Kamma 119a), they, may their memory be blessed, said that it is even forbidden to destroy the money of, and to rob and steal from, people that it is permitted to destroy their persons, such as the heretics. And they said as the reason for this, lest proper seed will come from them and their money would go to them. And it is also possible to say that their, may their memory be blessed, intention in the distancing of this was so that a man not accustom his nature to this, as habituation to lowly and bad traits would be a lack in the soul. And it is a strong “rope to drag iniquity”.
And also from the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bava Kamma 98b), that the robber is obligated to return the stolen object itself, as it is stated (Leviticus 5:23), “the stolen object that he robbed” — and they, may their memory be blessed, explained, “he returns like what he robbed.” And because of this they said (Gittin 55a; Rashi s.v. mipnei), it is according to the law that even if he robbed a mareish — the explanation of which is a beam — and he built it into a mansion, he takes apart all of the mansion and returns the beam to its owner. But as a result of the Ordinance of the Penitents, they ordained that he gives its money and he become exempt. And I have already written above (Sefer HaChinukh 130) how the court has the power to do this. And [also] what is the law of the one who robs his fellow in a settlement and wants to return it in the wilderness. And the law of one who robs his fellow and absorbs it into the account [of what is owed], that he fulfills his obligation with this. And if he returned it to his purse, he has fulfilled [it], and that is when there is money in it — since we establish [the law] like Rabbi Yitschak, that says (Bava Kamma 118b), “a man is in the habit of feeling in his purse and he will count his money”; and counting without intention exempts [the one who returns it from further action] with regards to [items] that are not living things. And the law of one who robbed and died [that is] — whether he “fed” the stolen object to his sons before the loss of hope [by the owners] or after the loss of hope — if he left the land, the sons are obligated to pay the money of the stolen object, but the orphans are not obligated to pay from the movable objects [that the father leaves them]. But because of the Ordinance of the Gaonim that they ordained thus for the betterment of the world, the movable properties of orphans are liened even for an orally agreed loan. And the law of one who buys from the robber is like the law of one who buys from the thief — that there is a distinction between [a thief] who is famous and one who is not famous. And that which they said (Bava Kamma 119a) that it is forbidden to benefit from a man about whom it is assumed that all that he has is from stolen property; but if a little of what is in his hand is not from stolen property — even though it is sparse — it is permitted to benefit from him, until one knows clearly that that actual thing from which he benefits is stolen. And the rest of the laws of robbery, the laws of despairing and of changing domains and the rest of its details are elucidated in the ninth and tenth chapters of [Bava] Kamma. And I have written a few of them in the Order of Vayikra (Sefer HaChinukh 130).
And this prohibiton is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females. And one who transgresses it and robs from the worth of a small coin and up has violated a negative commandment. But we do not administer lashes for this negative commandment, since it is rectified by the positive commandment of returning [it], as it is stated (Leviticus 5:23), “that he shall return the stolen object that he robbed, etc.” And even if he negated the positive commandment about it — meaning to say, that he burned the stolen object or hurled it to the Great Sea — he is not lashed, since it is a negative commandment that is given to repayment, such that he repay what it was worth. And if he denied it and swore falsely, he adds a fifth and brings a guilt-offering, as it is elucidated in [Bava] Kamma and at the end of Makkot 16a.
שֶׁלֹּא לִגְזֹל – שֶׁלֹּא לִגְזֹל. כְּלוֹמַר, שֶׁלֹּא נִטֹּל מָה שֶׁאֵין לָנוּ זְכוּת בּוֹ בְּכֹחַ וּבִזְרֹעַ בְּפִרְסוּם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא יט יג) וְלֹא תִגְזֹל, וּבָא הַפֵּרוּשׁ עָלָיו, (ב"ק עט ב) שֶׁלְּשׁוֹן גְּזֵלָה נוֹפֵל עַל הַחוֹטֵף דָּבָר מִיַּד חֲבֵרוֹ אוֹ הוֹצִיאוֹ מֵרְשׁוּתוֹ בְּעַל כָּרְחוֹ דֶּרֶךְ אֹנֶס וּבְפִרְסוּם כְּעִנְיָן שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (שמואל ב כג כא) וַיִּגְזֹל אֶת הַחֲנִית מִיַּד הַמִּצְרִי.
To not rob: To not rob — meaning to say, to not take with strength and force and publicity that to which we do not have a right, as it is stated (Leviticus 19:13), “and you shall not rob.” And the explanation came about it (Bava Kamma 79b), that the expression, “robbery (gezelah)” relates to one that grabs something from the hand of his fellow or takes it out of his domain against his will by way of force and in the open, like the matter that is stated (II Samuel 23:21), “and he robbed the spear from the hand of the Egyptian.”
שֹׁרֶשׁ הַמִּצְוָה יָדוּעַ, שֶׁהוּא דָּבָר שֶׁהַשֵּׂכֶל מַרְחִיקוֹ הַרְבֵּה, וְרָאוּי לְהַרְחִיקוֹ, כִּי יוֹדֵעַ הַגּוֹזֵל הַחַלָּשׁ מִמֶּנּוּ כִּי בְּבֹא עָלָיו תַּקִּיף מִמֶּנּוּ יִהְיֶה גַּם הוּא נִגְזָל וכו', וְהוּא סִבָּה לְחֻרְבַּן הַיִּשּׁוּב.
The root of the commandment is well-known, as it is something that the intellect distances greatly. And it is fitting to distance it, since the one who robs one weaker than he, knows that when one more powerful than he comes upon him, he will also be robbed, etc. And it is a reason for the destruction of civilization.
מִדִּינֵי הַמִּצְוָה. מָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (סנהדרין נז א) שֶׁאִסּוּר דְּאוֹרָיְתָא לִגְזֹל אֲפִלּוּ כָּל שֶׁהוּא. אֲבָל לָאו דְּלֹא תִגְזֹל אֵינוֹ חָל אֶלָּא בְּשָׁוֶה פְּרוּטָה, כִּי הַתּוֹרָה לֹא תְּחַיֵּב אֶלָּא בְּדָבָר שֶׁהוּא מָמוֹן, וּפָחוֹת מִשְּׁוֵה פְּרוּטָה אֵינוֹ נִקְרָא מָמוֹן. אֲבָל מִכָּל מָקוֹם אָסוּר הוּא דְּבַר תּוֹרָה, כְּמוֹ חֲצִי שִׁעוּר שֶׁאֵין לוֹקִין עָלָיו וְהוּא אִסּוּר דְּאוֹרָיְתָא. וְכָתַב הָרַמְבַּ"ם זִכְרוֹנוֹ לִבְרָכָה (גזילה ואבידה א, ב) אֲפִלּוּ גּוֹי וְעוֹבֵד עֲבוֹדָה זָרָה, אָסוּר לְגָזְלוֹ אוֹ לְעָשְׁקוֹ, וְאִם גְּזָלוֹ אוֹ עֲשָׁקוֹ יַחְזִיר. וּבַגְּמָרָא (ב"ק קיט, א) אָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה, שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ אֲנָשִׁים שֶׁמֻּתָּר לְאַבֵּד גּוּפָם, כְּגוֹן הַמִּינִין, אָסוּר לְאַבֵּד מָמוֹנָם וְלִגְזֹל אוֹ לִגְנֹב לָהֶם. וְאָמְרוּ בְּטַעַם זֶה, שֶׁמָּא יֵצֵא מֵהֶן זֶרַע רָאוּי וְיִהְיֶה מָמוֹנָם לָהֶם. וְעוֹד אֶפְשָׁר לוֹמַר שֶׁכַּוָּנָתָם זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה בְּהַרְחִיקָם זֶה, כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יַרְגִּיל הָאָדָם טִבְעוֹ בְּכָךְ, כִּי גְּרִיעוּת יִהְיֶה בַּנֶּפֶשׁ בְּהַרְגִּילָהּ בַּמִּדּוֹת הַפְּחוּתוֹת וְהָרָעוֹת, וְהוּא חֶבֶל חָזָק לִמְשֹׁךְ הֶעָוֹן (עפ"י ישעיהו ה יח).
From the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Sanhedrin 57a) that it is forbidden from Torah writ to rob even the smallest amount. But the negative commandment of “you shall not rob” only applies to the value of a small coin (perutah), since the Torah only makes liable [here] for something that is money; and less than the value of a small coin is not called money. But nonetheless, it is forbidden from Torah writ — like half a measure, for which we do not administer lashes, but it is [still] a Torah prohibition. And Rambam, may his memory be blessed, wrote (Mishneh Torah, Robbery and Lost Property 1:2), “It is forbidden to rob or oppress even a gentile and an idolater. And if he robbed him or oppressed him, he must return [it].” And in the Gemara (Bava Kamma 119a), they, may their memory be blessed, said that it is even forbidden to destroy the money of, and to rob and steal from, people that it is permitted to destroy their persons, such as the heretics. And they said as the reason for this, lest proper seed will come from them and their money would go to them. And it is also possible to say that their, may their memory be blessed, intention in the distancing of this was so that a man not accustom his nature to this, as habituation to lowly and bad traits would be a lack in the soul. And it is a strong “rope to drag iniquity”.
וְכֵן מִדִּינֵי הַמִּצְוָה, מָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (ב"ק צח ב), שֶׁהַגּוֹזֵל חַיָּב לְהַחְזִיר הַגְּזֵלָה עַצְמָהּ, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (ויקרא ה כג) הַגְּזֵלָה אֲשֶׁר גָּזָל. וּפֵרְשׁוּ זִכְרוֹנָם לִבְרָכָה (שם) יַחְזִיר כְּעֵין שֶׁגָּזַל. וּמִפְּנֵי כֵן אָמְרוּ, כִּי בַּדִּין הוּא שֶׁאֲפִלּוּ גָּזַל מָרִישׁ פֵּרוּשׁ קוֹרָה וּבְנָאָהּ בְּבִירָה, מְקַעְקֵעַ כָּל הַבִּירָה וּמַחְזִיר מָרִישׁ לִבְעָלָיו, אֶלָּא מִפְּנֵי תַּקָּנַת הַשָּׁבִים תִּקְּנוּ (גיטין נה, א וברש"י ד"ה מפני), נוֹתֵן אֶת דָּמֶיהָ וְיִפָּטֵר. וּכְבָר כָּתַבְנוּ לְמַעְלָה (מצוה קל), אֵיךְ יֵשׁ כֹּחַ בְּיַד חֲכָמִים בָּזֶה. וְדִין הַגּוֹזֵל חֲבֵרוֹ בַּיִּשּׁוּב וְרָצָה לְהַחְזִיר לוֹ בַּמִּדְבָּר מַה דִּינוֹ, וְדִין הַגּוֹזֵל חֲבֵרוֹ וְהִבְלִיעַ לוֹ בַּחֶשְׁבּוֹן, שֶׁיָּצָא יְדֵי חוֹבָתוֹ בְּכָךְ, וְאִם הֶחְזִיר לְכִיסוֹ יָצָא, וְהוּא שֶׁיֵּשׁ בָּהּ מָעוֹת, דְּקַיְמָא לַן כְּרַבִּי יִצְחָק דְּאָמַר (ב"ק קיח, ב) אָדָם עָשׂוּי לְמַשְׁמֵשׁ בְּכִיסוֹ וְיִמְנֶה מְעוֹתָיו. וּמִנְיָן שֶׁלֹּא מִדַּעַת פּוֹטֵר בַּמֶּה שֶׁאֵינוֹ בַּעַל חַיִּים. וְדִין הַגּוֹזֵל וּמֵת, בֵּין שֶׁהֶאֱכִיל הַגְּזֵלָה לַבָּנִים קֹדֶם יֵאוּשׁ אוֹ אַחַר יֵאוּשׁ, אִם הִנִּיחַ קַרְקַע, חַיָּבִין הַבָּנִים לְשַׁלֵּם דְּמֵי הַגְּזֵלָה, אֲבָל מִן הַמִּטַּלְטְלִין לֹא יִהְיוּ חַיָּבִין הַיְּתוֹמִים לְשַׁלֵּם, אֶלָּא מִפְּנֵי תַּקָּנַת הַגְּאוֹנִים שֶׁתִּקְּנוּ כֵּן שֶׁאֲפִילּוּ בְּמִלְוָה עַל פֶּה יִשְׁתַּעְבְּדוּ מִטַּלְטְלֵי דְּיַתְמֵי מִפְּנֵי תִּקּוּן הָעוֹלָם. וְדִין הַלּוֹקֵחַ מִן הַגַּזְלָן כְּדִין הַלּוֹקֵחַ מִן הַגַּנָּב שֶׁיֵּשׁ חִלּוּק בֵּין מְפֻרְסָם לְשֶׁאֵינוֹ מְפֻרְסָם. וּמָה שֶׁאָמְרוּ (שם קיט, א) שֶׁאָסוּר לֵהָנוֹת מֵאָדָם שֶׁחֶזְקָתוֹ שֶׁכָּל שֶׁיֵּשׁ לוֹ מִן הַגָּזֵל, אֲבָל אִם הָיָה קְצָת מַה שֶׁבְּיָדוֹ שֶׁלֹּא מִן הַגָּזֵל אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוּא מוּעָט, מֻתָּר לֵהָנוֹת מִמֶּנּוּ עַד שֶׁיֵּדַע בְּבֵרוּר שֶׁאוֹתוֹ דָּבָר מַמָּשׁ שֶׁהוּא נֶהֱנֶה בּוֹ גָּזוּל. וְיֶתֶר דִּינֵי גְּזֵלָה וְדִינֵי יֵאוּשׁ וְשִׁנּוּי רְשׁוּת וּשְׁאָר פְּרָטֵיהֶן מְבֹאָרִים בִּפְרָקִים תְּשִׁיעִי וַעֲשִׂירִי מִקַּמָּא [שם], וּקְצָת מֵהֶן כָּתַבְתִּי בְּסֵדֶר וַיִּקְרָא (במצוה קל).
And also from the laws of the commandment is that which they, may their memory be blessed, said (Bava Kamma 98b), that the robber is obligated to return the stolen object itself, as it is stated (Leviticus 5:23), “the stolen object that he robbed” — and they, may their memory be blessed, explained, “he returns like what he robbed.” And because of this they said (Gittin 55a; Rashi s.v. mipnei), it is according to the law that even if he robbed a mareish — the explanation of which is a beam — and he built it into a mansion, he takes apart all of the mansion and returns the beam to its owner. But as a result of the Ordinance of the Penitents, they ordained that he gives its money and he become exempt. And I have already written above (Sefer HaChinukh 130) how the court has the power to do this. And [also] what is the law of the one who robs his fellow in a settlement and wants to return it in the wilderness. And the law of one who robs his fellow and absorbs it into the account [of what is owed], that he fulfills his obligation with this. And if he returned it to his purse, he has fulfilled [it], and that is when there is money in it — since we establish [the law] like Rabbi Yitschak, that says (Bava Kamma 118b), “a man is in the habit of feeling in his purse and he will count his money”; and counting without intention exempts [the one who returns it from further action] with regards to [items] that are not living things. And the law of one who robbed and died [that is] — whether he “fed” the stolen object to his sons before the loss of hope [by the owners] or after the loss of hope — if he left the land, the sons are obligated to pay the money of the stolen object, but the orphans are not obligated to pay from the movable objects [that the father leaves them]. But because of the Ordinance of the Gaonim that they ordained thus for the betterment of the world, the movable properties of orphans are liened even for an orally agreed loan. And the law of one who buys from the robber is like the law of one who buys from the thief — that there is a distinction between [a thief] who is famous and one who is not famous. And that which they said (Bava Kamma 119a) that it is forbidden to benefit from a man about whom it is assumed that all that he has is from stolen property; but if a little of what is in his hand is not from stolen property — even though it is sparse — it is permitted to benefit from him, until one knows clearly that that actual thing from which he benefits is stolen. And the rest of the laws of robbery, the laws of despairing and of changing domains and the rest of its details are elucidated in the ninth and tenth chapters of [Bava] Kamma. And I have written a few of them in the Order of Vayikra (Sefer HaChinukh 130).
וְנוֹהֵג אִסּוּר זֶה בְּכָל מָקוֹם וּבְכָל זְמַן בִּזְכָרִים וּנְקֵבוֹת, וְהָעוֹבֵר עָלֶיהָ וְגָזַל מִשָּׁוֶה פְּרוּטָה וּלְמַעְלָה, עָבַר עַל לָאו, אֲבָל אֵין לוֹקִין עַל לָאו זֶה לְפִי שֶׁהוּא נִתָּק לַעֲשֵׂה דַּהֲשָׁבָה, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר וְהֵשִׁיב אֶת הַגְּזֵלָה וְגוֹ' וַאֲפִלּוּ בִּטֵּל עֲשֵׂה שֶׁבָּהּ, כְּלוֹמַר, שֶׁשָּׂרַף אֶת הַגְּזֵלָה אוֹ הִשְׁלִיכָהּ לַיָּם הַגָּדוֹל, מָקוֹם שֶׁאֵינָהּ נִמְצֵאת לְעוֹלָם, אֵינוֹ לוֹקֶה, לְפִי שֶׁהוּא לָאו שֶׁנִּתָּן לְתַשְׁלוּמִין שֶׁיְּשַׁלֵּם מָה שֶׁהָיְתָה שָׁוָה. וְאִם כָּפַר בָּהּ וְנִשְׁבַּע לַשֶּׁקֶר יוֹסִיף הַחֹמֶשׁ וְיַקְרִיב אָשָׁם כְּמוֹ שֶׁהִתְבָּאֵר בְּקַמָּא וּבְסוֹף מַכּוֹת (טז א).
And this prohibiton is practiced in every place and at all times by males and females. And one who transgresses it and robs from the worth of a small coin and up has violated a negative commandment. But we do not administer lashes for this negative commandment, since it is rectified by the positive commandment of returning [it], as it is stated (Leviticus 5:23), “that he shall return the stolen object that he robbed, etc.” And even if he negated the positive commandment about it — meaning to say, that he burned the stolen object or hurled it to the Great Sea — he is not lashed, since it is a negative commandment that is given to repayment, such that he repay what it was worth. And if he denied it and swore falsely, he adds a fifth and brings a guilt-offering, as it is elucidated in [Bava] Kamma and at the end of Makkot 16a.