" I am so annoyed with myself: I forgot to bring shampoo when I went to
the swimming pool."
"Me too, but I just took a drop from somebody's gym bag."

"The world was full of thievery (chamas-which is not the usual term for
thievery)." (Biraishis 6:11) One opinion in the Medrash Rabbah (31:5) says
that this type of thievery was of very small amounts. The Medrash gives an
example of someone who had a bag of beans and everyone who walked by just
stole a few, until nothing was left.
People MISTAKENLY think that the Medrash is saying that you can't steal
even a small amount, because if everyone does it, the owner will be wiped
out. Not true: The Medrash is telling you why it so insidious or
devastating. It is forbidden because it is stealing !!!

If it isn't yours--don't take it !!!

Have a great Shabbos !!

Rabbi Chaim Flom
____________________________________________________

Dear Rabbi Flom,
Regarding using things that don't belong you : How about if you know
they won't mind?
Thanks.
Tzivy

Dear Tzivy,
Thanks for the question.
If someone gives you EXPLICIT permission to use their things without asking,1) as long as you are sure that this item is included,and 2) as long as you know they gave you permission wholeheartedly, it would be okay. If not explicit, you really run into problems.If you really are great friends and your borrowing certain items is understood, I guess it would be okay. I heard someone tell someone else that he borrowed an item, and the "lender" said "Fine, but next time ask first." That showed that it was problematic.
We tend to rationalize a lot,so we have to really make sure that we can take it before we take it.
Take care.
Rabbi Flom

However with Tefillin and the like, don't we say that the person who owns the pair - most probably lets, as he would be doing a Mitzvah?

I also remember a similar discussion that came up while learning Bava Metzia about a difference between secular standards and Jewish standards with respect to stealing someone's car in order to rush someone to the hospital.

Someone trained in CPR who starts treating someone in an emergency would be liable under secular law if they stopped giving care without a doctor taking over or telling them their patient had died. A good person can get themselves into trouble, and be sued.

Somehow my chavrusa and I deduced that under Jewish law someone who stole a car even to drive an injured person to the hospital in order to save a life would more likely be recognized as giving the car owner the opportunity to participate in this significant mitzvah of saving a life, and is kind of indemnified for any damage to the car in breaking in to steal it.... had the owner been there he would have given the keys or driven the injured person directly.

Rabbi Flom - was our reasoning sound? Can this be applied to a situation where the items being borrowed or taken are being used for a good intended purpose?

Perhaps if someone leaves bicycle repair tools on the side of a bicycle path, or ski repair tools on the side of a ski slope, and another person comes along needing to make a small repair which doesn't normally consume the tools there is an implicit permission being given?

Rabbi Flom - if I could ask further - if each item in a box or bag left open is worth less than a perutah, would each person walking by taking one, eventhough eventually it would be all gone, is it considered stealing?

Rob - that is exactly what the people in Sedom did - they each took less then a perutah and look what happened to them.

From what I remember learning, a perutah is what beis din can punish a person for or have them return it. However anything less than a perutah it's Hashem who can only exact punishment.

Thanks Sam! kind of sounds like the "lice" standard by Pharoah's magicians - that they could not do anything with things that small.

Also I wonder what would the value of a shoe strap have been in Avraham's time by the war of 4 kings and 5 kings - whether it was more than a perutah.

Dear Sam,
Thanks for the note.
I didn't go into the discussion of Tefilin, but now I will. As I did mention in my response to Tzivy, if you are a very good friend of a person and can REALLY assume that you can borrow it, you can. Similarly, the Rosh (8:26)(and it's brought in Shulchan Aruch Or Hachaim 14:4) says that you can use a person's Talis without asking him, because people are happy that their objects are used for mitzvos.There are 4 conditions to be followed:The Rosh says 1) if it was folded then you must refold it, otherwise the person IS makpid (not allow it). The next 2 points aren't in the Rosh, but 2)it can't be at a time when the owner will want to use it, and 3)you don't assume that he doesn't want you to use it, and 4)(brought in the Mishna Brura) you don't make this into a permanent arragement.The Rama applies this idea to Tefilin also. It is brought in the name of the Minchas Elozor (the Munkatcher Rav zt"l)(I never looked it up)that if it is a very expensive pair of Tefilin, we might assume that the owner wouldn't want it used without permission. I am not so sure if everyone agrees to that, because in the Rama's day,all Tefilin were probably quite expensive. The Rama says that this does NOT apply to books, because people will be afraid that they'll tear. The custom generally is now that, since books are very common and not considered a fragile object, that we generally assume the owner will allow it.Again, the aforementioned restrictions apply.
Rabbi Flom

Dear Rob,
Regarding your question about "stealing" someone's car in order to take someone to the hospital.This is a fascinating topic!! The Gemara in Baba Kama 60b says "It is forbidden (ossur) to save one's self with someone else's money". Some Rishonim learn it as this simple reading. Tosfos, however says that the Gemara's discussion was "Do I have to pay the owner if I use his object"--to which the Gemara says "Yes". i.e.They translate the Gemara's term "ossur" as "chiyav"(obligated-to pay)(The commentaries discuss why.). In fact, this is how the Shulchan Aruch paskins (decided the law).In Choshen Mishpat 359:4 he says "Even if one's life is in mortal danger, and he has to take someone else's property, he can only do so if he has intention to repay the owner." In Choshen Mishpat 480:3 the Shulchan Aruch says, that if A is chasing B, and C tries saving B (I hope that wasn't too confusing)and breaks an object, he DOES NOT have to pay for it. Really, the law is that he should have to pay, but the Rabbis made a decree that he doen't have to pay, in order that people shouldn't be discouraged from saving others. The Aruch Hashulchan (Choshen Mishpat 380:7)says that we can't obligate B (even though he was saved) because he didn't break anything!!!
Regarding using tools left at the side of the road : In my answers to Tzivy and Sam, I talked about "assuming the person doesn't mind", but I would always be on the conservative side and not take something if I had any doubts.
I hope this has been helpful.If not, please let me know.
Rabbi Flom

Dear Rob,
I alluded to your question in my dvar Torah, but I will elaborate now.
People make a mistake and think that stealing less than a "shaveh perutah" (what I referred to in my dvar Torah as a "small amount")is essentially permitted in Jewish law, but where people are going to take advantage and wipe out another person it is forbidden.(i.e. If everyone would take a bean from the bean seller, he'd be out of business. NOT TRUE!! The Rambam (Hilchos Geneiva 1:2) says "It is forbidden to steal even the smallest amount from the Torah!!" What confuses people is the fact that in JEWISH LAW, we can't take a person to court for less than a "shaveh perutah". (i.e.Even the courts can't demand the thief to pay back less than a shaveh perutah.)By Bnai Noach (non-Jews) the Rambam (Hilchos Melachim 9:9-10)says "A Ben Noach (non-Jew) is obligated (thru punishment) on less than a shaveh perutah, because the concept of "measurements (shiurim)" was given to the Jews only.
I hope what I wrote is satisfactory. If not, please let me know.
Rabbi Flom

Dear Rabbi Flom:

Do I understand correctly then that due to our having a mitzvah of weights and measures, we have an exemption for stealing a diminimus amount of less than a perutah?

But gentiles do not have such an exemption? And we are guilty if we scheme to build something of value from valueless quantities?

Is there a conflict with the following principle?

It has been said that righteous converts are no longer related to their birth families.

If a brother and sister were born to gentile families and converted, might they be permitted to marry each other?

Apparently rabbeim have ruled that in some ways yes, since they are no longer related, they are not prohibited by the mitzvah of prohibited relations, however...

Since taking on the yoke of Torah cannot free a person from a restriction they already had, that they still cannot be married.

Perhaps this interesting principle is not a hard and fast rule, however...

I would ask, in nearly every matter it is the same law for a born-Jew or righteous convert...

Could it be that before conversion they would be liable for a less-than perutah theft, but as a righteous convert they are not liable?

Are there any other things prohibited to a gentile that are permitted to a rightous convert? Such as having food for 2nd day of Yom Tov on Shabbos cooked for them on the 1st day of Yom Tov, or attending a Pesach Seder with non-mevushal wine? Or are these categorically different?

Thank you.

Dear Rabbi Flom:

Thank you for the clarification of car theft in the process of another mitzvah...

Perhaps the concern my chavrusa and I had remains, since it is criminal liability with significant wrongful death penalties at risk far greater than the value of any car which might just need a new piece of window glass and a key lock... or at most the penalty for stealing a car would be to return the car or the value of the car.

Dear Rob,
Maybe due to the length of my response (sorry about that)it wasn't understood, but I wrote explicitly, that if a third party saves someone, he doesn't even have to pay, and if it is the person saving himself, he CAN "steal" the object, but must pay for it.
Take care.
Rabbi Flom

Dear Rob,
This was the very theme of my answer to your question last week. I wrote [" The Rambam (Hilchos Geneiva 1:2) says "It is forbidden to steal even the smallest amount from the Torah!!" What confuses people is the fact that in JEWISH LAW, we can't take a person to court for less than a "shaveh perutah". (i.e.Even the courts can't demand the thief to pay back less than a shaveh perutah.).)By Bnai Noach (non-Jews) the Rambam (Hilchos Melachim 9:9-10)says "A Ben Noach (non-Jew) is obligated (thru punishment) on less than a shaveh perutah, because the concept of "measurements (shiurim)" was given to the Jews only."]
It is black on white that it is forbidden on a Torah level for a Jew to steal less than a "shaveh perutah" (a small amount).
As always, if my answer is not clear, feel free to ask. Usually, I don't go into all details because I like to keep things short. If you'd like, later on, I could give you some "lomdus" about "chatzie shiur" (i.e.stealing less than a perutah or less than a kezais-eating a small amount of treif etc.)
Hatzlacha in your learning.
Rabbi Flom

Dear Rabbi Flom:

On the car thief saving a life (his own or another) he has to be prepared to pay back straight damages, when borrowing it for this mitzvah without pemrission, and remains without penalty, but in fact for saving another's life we don't require him to pay it back?

If someone hear's "chicken little" report that the sky is falling and did not know to ignore it, and stole a car to take her out of town to a place with no sky, do we hold them harmless for stealing the car - to not have to pay - if their intention was to save a life? Or can a Beis Din determine that her claim should not have been believed, and one of them must repay?

There have been some interesting cases under secular law for example in New Orleans where a bus was left to get washed away and IMHO a hero stole the bus and drove many to safety, yet was at risk under the omnibus grand theft auto laws.

quote:

Originally posted by rob:
Dear Rabbi Flom:

On the car thief saving a life (his own or another) he has to be prepared to pay back straight damages, when borrowing it for this mitzvah without pemrission, and remains without penalty, but in fact for saving another's life we don't require him to pay it back?[Quote]
Rob--I don't get this question : Third party is not liable, the person saving himself is liable.

[Quote]If someone hear's "chicken little" report that the sky is falling and did not know to ignore it, and stole a car to take her out of town to a place with no sky, do we hold them harmless for stealing the car - to not have to pay - if their intention was to save a life? Or can a Beis Din determine that her claim should not have been believed, and one of them must repay?[Quote]
I would imagine that Bais Din could declare some people as fools or thieves and not heroes.

[Quote]There have been some interesting cases under secular law for example in New Orleans where a bus was left to get washed away and IMHO a hero stole the bus and drove many to safety, yet was at risk under the omnibus grand theft auto laws.

Was he actually convicted? I can't imagine a jury would, unless he was a known car thief in the first place.
Take care.
Rabbi Flom

quote:

Regarding your question about "stealing" someone's car in order to take someone to the hospital.This is a fascinating topic!! The Gemara in Baba Kama 60b says "It is forbidden (ossur) to save one's self with someone else's money". Some Rishonim learn it as this simple reading. Tosfos, however says that the Gemara's discussion was "Do I have to pay the owner if I use his object"--to which the Gemara says "Yes". i.e.They translate the Gemara's term "ossur" as "chiyav"(obligated-to pay)(The commentaries discuss why.). In fact, this is how the Shulchan Aruch paskins (decided the law).In Choshen Mishpat 359:4 he says "Even if one's life is in mortal danger, and he has to take someone else's property, he can only do so if he has intention to repay the owner."

I have attempted to quote from your Nov 6 22:44 posting...

I understand your posting to mean that whenever taking use of someone else's property for a lifesaving mitzvah, he must be prepared to pay.

I am further understanding this to apply to both the situation of saving one's own life, and saving another's life.

And reconciling with your other posting, I am asking if it can be summarized per my Nov 6 17:08 posting:

For either type of life-saving car thief, he must be prepared to pay, however in the case of the theft being to save a 3rd party's life, we don't actually require him to pay?

Does that clarify the intent of my question?

Dear Rob,
My quote about the person whose life is at stake was "Even if one's life is in mortal danger, and he has to take someone else's property, he can only do so if he has intention to repay the owner."
My quote about saving someone else's life (what I called third party}was "In Choshen Mishpat 480:3 the Shulchan Aruch says, that if A is chasing B, and C tries saving B (I hope that wasn't too confusing)and breaks an object, he DOES NOT have to pay for it. Really, the law is that he should have to pay, but the Rabbis made a decree that he doen't have to pay, in order that people shouldn't be discouraged from saving others."
Take care.
Rabbi Flom

Dear Sam,
One additional comment about using other people's things: Maybe it is my own "mishigas" but generally speaking you can't the object out of that building!! Once that happens, then the object can get lost, and I don't think that most people would want their objects taken out of the building on "an assumption that they don't mind if someone else uses it".
Take care.
Rabbi Flom