Calculations regarding stolen blessings and mitzvos

Summary: an elaborate construction from the Chasam Sofer.

Post: In parashat Mishpatim, the following pasuk and Rashi:

37. If a man steals a bull or a lamb and slaughters it or sells it, he shall pay five cattle for the bull or four sheep for the lamb.		לז. כִּי יִגְנֹב אִישׁ שׁוֹר אוֹ שֶׂה וּטְבָחוֹ אוֹ מְכָרוֹ חֲמִשָּׁה בָקָר יְשַׁלֵּם תַּחַת הַשּׁוֹר וְאַרְבַּע צֹאן תַּחַת הַשֶּׂה:
five cattle, etc.: Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai said: The Omnipresent was considerate of people’s honor. [For] a bull, which walks with its [own] feet, and the thief was not disgraced by carrying it on his shoulder, he pays fivefold. [For] a lamb, which he [the thief] carries on his shoulder, he pays [only] fourfold because he was disgraced by it. Rabbi Meir said: Come and see how great the power of work is. [For the theft of] a bull, which caused [the owner] to stop working, he [the thief] pays five. [For the theft of] a lamb, which did not cause [the owner] to stop working, [the thief pays] four. -[From Mechilta, B.K. 79b, Tosefta B.K. 7:3]		חמשה בקר וגו': אמר רבן יוחנן בן זכאי חס המקום על כבודן של בריות, שור שהולך ברגליו ולא נתבזה בו הגנב לנושאו על כתפו, משלם חמישה, שה שנושאו על כתפו, משלם ארבעה הואיל ונתבזה בו. אמר רבי מאיר בא וראה כמה גדולה כחה של מלאכה, שור שבטלו ממלאכתו משלם חמשה שה שלא בטלו ממלאכתו ארבעה:

The Chasam Sofer refers us to this pasuk and Rashi. Then, he writes:

"It is stated in Chullin {daf 87a} 

Another [Baraitha] taught: ‘He shall pour out . . . and cover it’: that is, he who poured it out shall cover it up. It once happened that a person slaughtered but another anticipated him and covered up the blood, and R. Gamaliel condemned the latter to pay ten gold coins.7

The question was raised: Was this the reward for [being deprived of the performance of] the
commandment or for [being deprived of] the Benediction? But where would there be any practical difference [between these two views]? In the case of the Grace after meals.8 If you say that it was the reward for [being deprived of the performance of] the commandment, then here there is also but one [commandment]; but if you say that it was the reward for [being deprived of] the Benediction, then here the reward should be forty gold coins. 

What is the answer then? — Come and hear from the following incident. A certain min9 once said to Rabbi, ‘He who formed the mountains did not create the wind, and he who created the wind did not form the mountains, for it is written: For, lo, He that formeth the mountains and createth the wind’.10 He replied. ‘You fool, turn to the end of the verse: The Lord, [the God] of hosts, is His name’. Said the other: ‘Give me three days’ time and I will bring back an answer to you’. Rabbi spent those three days in fasting; thereafter, as he was about to partake of food he was told. ‘There is a min waiting at the door’. Rabbi exclaimed, ‘Yea they put
poison into my food.’11 Said he [the min]. ‘My Master, I bring you good tidings; your opponent could find no answer and so threw himself down from the roof and died’. He said: ‘Would you dine with me?’ He replied. ‘Yes’. After they had eaten and drunk, he [Rabbi] said to him, ‘Will you drink the cup of wine over which the Benedictions of the Grace [after meals] have been said, or would you rather have forty gold coins?’ He replied: ‘I would rather drink the cup of wine’. Thereupon there came forth a Heavenly Voice and said: The cup of wine over [which] the Benedictions [of Grace have been said] is worth forty gold coins. R. Isaac said: The family [of that min] is still to be found amongst the notables of Rome and is named ‘The family of Bar Luianus.'

{Thus, for each of the four blessing of Birkat HaMazon, 10 gold coins.}


And Tosafot there write:

או ארבעים זהובים אתה נוטל. שתיה לא שייכא לשכר ברכה אלא היה רוצה לסלקו מברכת המזון לפי שהיה צדוקי וא"ת או נ' זהובים ה"ל למימר דהא איכא ברכת בפה"ג שלאחר בהמ"ז וי"ל דסבר כמ"ד בערבי פסחים (דף קג: ושם ד"ה לאו) דאין צריך לברך אכסא דברכתא אלא אכסא קמא ותו לא:

that there should have been 50 gold coins, for there was the Borei Pri HaGafen which was after Bikas HaMazon. And there answer is a bit farfetched. 


And IMHO, the reason he should pay 10 zehuvim for a mitzvah snatched from his friend, is that behold, it is brought in Rashi {here in parashat Mishpatim, cited above}:

Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai said: The Omnipresent was considerate of people’s honor. [For] a bull, which walks with its [own] feet, and the thief was not disgraced by carrying it on his shoulder, he pays fivefold. [For] a lamb, which he [the thief] carries on his shoulder, he pays [only] fourfold because he was disgraced by it.

Behold it is evident that Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai maintains that the primary obligation to pay for a theft is five times, except that for a sheep, since he was disgraced, he only pays four.


And behold, Eliezer, the servant of Avraham, gave to Rivkah two bracelets on her hands, of weight 10 gold. And Rashi explains {in Chayei Sarah}:

22. Now it came about, when the camels had finished drinking, [that] the man took a golden nose ring, weighing half [a shekel], and two bracelets for her hands, weighing ten gold [shekels].

כב. וַיְהִי כַּאֲשֶׁר כִּלּוּ הַגְּמַלִּים לִשְׁתּוֹת וַיִּקַּח הָאִישׁ נֶזֶם זָהָב בֶּקַע מִשְׁקָלוֹ וּשְׁנֵי צְמִידִים עַל יָדֶיהָ עֲשָׂרָה זָהָב מִשְׁקָלָם:

weighing ten gold [shekels]: An allusion to the Ten Commandments [inscribed] on them. — [Gen. Rabbah 60:6]

עשרה זהב משקלם: רמז לעשרת הדברות שבהן:

If so, parallel to each dibbur was 1 zahav. And it is evident that each dibbur {which is a single mitzvah} is worth a single zahav. However, according to the calculation, after Mattan Torah, the coinage of kodesh was double that of chullin, as is stated in Rashi in parashat Pekudei, pasuk 23, that that of kodesh was double.


And if so, the mitzvah is equal to two gold coins. And according to Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai, the thief is liable to pay five times for the ox. If so, the calculation is precise, that 2 {gold coins} X 5 = 10 gold coins.


Meanwhile, this is not so according to Rabbi Meir {who is Rabban Yochanan ben Zakkai's disputant above}, who says:

Rabbi Meir said: Come and see how great the power of work is. [For the theft of] a bull, which caused [the owner] to stop working, he [the thief] pays five. [For the theft of] a lamb, which did not cause [the owner] to stop working, [the thief pays] four.

It is evident that the primary obligation of paying is only 4X, but that by the ox, since he caused him to stop working, he needs to pay 5X. If so, the reward for a mitzvah is only 8 gold coins, as is understood.


And there is to say that Rabbi {in the gemara in Chullin above} held like Rabbi Meir (for in his teaching {?}, a plain Mishnah is in accordance with Rabbi Meir}, and according to him, the reward for a blessing was only 8 gold coins, and five blessings inclusive of Borei Pri HaGafen of the cup of blessing would only amount to 40. And the question of Tosafot is thus resolved."

This is a very neat and entertaining construction, though I am not convinced that this is actually the intent of Rabbi, or the intent of the gemara. If it is just meant as a neat construction, then it is fine. But to say that it is peshat in the gemara, and that there is a hidden multiplier of 8 rather than 10, strikes me as a bit ridiculous. This it an extremely salient point that surely would not have been left implicit in the discussion in the gemara.

On a related note, here is the Rambam about this:

טז  [יד] וכן מי ששחט חיה או עוף, ובא אחר וכיסה הדם שלא מדעת השוחט--חייב ליתן כמו שיראו הדיינים.  ויש מי שהורה שהוא נותן קנס קצוב, והוא עשרה זהובים; וכן הורו הגאונים שכל המונע הבעלים מלעשות מצות עשה שהן ראויין לעשותה, וקדם אחר ועשאה--משלם לבעלים עשרה זהובים.

At least as cited, the Geonim associate this with the mitzvah, rather than specifically with each bracha. Is it an either / or situation? What about mitzvos for which one would not have otherwise pronounced a blessing?

I myself wonder if Tosafot's question is rather strong, and indeed better than the answer anyone offers. And whether there is a distinction between drinking the kos shel bracha and leading the bentching, such that only the former was offered. And therefore whether this story only illustrated valuing mitzvos highly, with forty being a representative high number, rather than being a calculation of ten coins per blessing. In which case, the penalty would indeed be for the stolen mitzvah, rather than for the stolen blessing.

See more on this topic here.