• A robber forgiving a robbery payment to himself

The Mishnah taught that if one stole from his father and swore to deny it, and his father died, he must return the theft to other heirs. The Gemara asks: נמחליה לנפשיה – let him forgive himself this payment, since a Mishnah taught that if the victim forgave the robber for the principal amount (but not the חומש), he need not pursue him to מדי!? Rebbe Yochanan answered that they reflect two opinions in a Baraisa, discussing someone who stole from a convert (and swore in denial), who died without heirs, where the payment is ordinarily given to Kohanim. If the robbery payment was converted to a standard debt, and then the גר died, Rebbe Yose HaGlili says that robber acquires the payment for himself (since the ger’s assets become hefker). Rebbe Akiva says he must still make the payment, so they disagree if a robber may “forgive” his payment. Rebbe Yochanan assumes the same machlokes applies where the robbery payment was not converted to a debt, and where the victim forgives the robber. Rav Sheishess objects to this interpretation, and instead explained that both Mishnayos are Rebbe Yose HaGlili; Rebbe Yose only allows the victim to forgive the robber, but a robber cannot forgive himself (except for the Baraisa’s case, where it was converted to a debt). Rava explains that both Mishnayos are Rebbe Akiva.

• If a Kohen robs a גר, who receives the payment?

A Baraisa states: הרי שהיה גוזל כהן – Where the robber of a convert who died without heirs was a Kohen,

what is the source that he cannot say, הואיל ויוצא לכהנים – “Since [the robbery payment of a convert] goes to the Kohanim of the current mishmar, והרי הוא תחת ידי – and [this robbery] is already in my possession, יהא שלי – let it be mine, and not be divided with the mishmar”? The Baraisa presents two kal vachomers to indicate the Kohen should keep the entire payment, but refutes them, concluding that the payment is divided among the mishmar. The Gemara asks, since a passuk (brought below) teaches that a Kohen may always bring his own korban, then this Kohen may bring his korban asham, and the robbery payment is always awarded to whoever brings the asham!? Ultimately, it is derived through a gezeirah shavah (לכהן לכהן) from the law of שדה אחוזה – an ancestral field. If someone is makdish his field and does not redeem it, it is divided among Kohanim of the mishmar at the beginning of Yovel. A derashah teaches that even if a Kohen bought it before Yovel, it is still divided among the mishmar.

• A Kohen’s right to bring his own korban, and receive its meat and hide

A Baraisa teaches: מנין לכהן שבא ומקריב קרבנותיו בכל עת ובכל שעה שירצה – From where do we derive that a Kohen may come and offer his own korbanos at any time and any moment he wishes (even not while his mishmar is serving)? The passuk says: ובא בכל אות נפשו...ושרת – and [the Kohen] shall come whenever his soul desires…and minister. ומניין שעבודתה ועורה שלו – And from where do we derive that the reward for its service (i.e., its meat) and its hide belong to him? The passuk says: ואיש את קדשיו לו יהיו – and a man’s holies shall be his. The Baraisa says this teaches that even a בעל מום, who cannot perform avodah himself, and so cannot even appoint another Kohen to bring his korban (rather, it is given to the current mishmar), still retains the meat and hide for himself, since he is fit to eat kodashim

Siman – Hatzolah Kit. The Hatzolah member who just declared a man dead, and was shocked to hear the dead man’s son who had previously stolen from his father and swore in denial, attempt to be mochel himself the payment, near the Hatzolah kit where a mishmar of Kohanim were dividing the payment that was given to them by a fellow Kohen who had robbed a ger who subsequently died, across the street from where an off duty Kohen was on his way to bring a korban, anticipating getting the meat and the hides.