Q&A: The Burglar Who Breaks In
The Burglar Who Breaks In
Question
Rabbi Michi, hello.
I’m learning the topic of the burglar who breaks in, in tractate Sanhedrin 72.
I still haven’t understood in which case the Torah permitted killing the thief, and in which case he has to pay double restitution.
It’s clear that a burglar who breaks in is liable to death. But in which case would he be liable for double payment? Maybe when no encounter took place between him and the homeowner?
Answer
I didn’t understand the question. A thief is liable for double payment. What does that have to do with a burglar who breaks in?
Discussion on Answer
That’s not correct. That’s the whole novelty of the discussion there.
A burglar who breaks in is not just an ordinary thief; it is a specific law concerning a particular kind of theft in which it is known that the thief would be killed by the owner with permission, and therefore he is exempt from payment by the rule of kim lei bid-rabba minei (if I remember correctly, there is a dispute in the Talmudic passage there about what is defined as a burglar who breaks in).
The thief becomes liable for double payment if he is not liable to death, meaning in an ordinary case of theft.
A burglar who breaks in is also someone who comes to steal. He breaks into a person’s house and wants to steal. The thief’s obligation to pay double may perhaps be talking about a case where the thief did not see the homeowner and was therefore not liable to death.