He Returns What He Robbed and Not His Father's Theft

(Leviticus 5:23-24) 'And it shall be, when he sins and is guilty, that he shall restore' - immediately, what shall he do? 'He shall restore.' One might think he does not return it; therefore Scripture says 'and pay.' One might think he both returns and pays - and do not be surprised, for the thief pays double, and if he slaughtered or sold, he pays fourfold and fivefold; therefore Scripture says 'the robbery' - he pays the robbery and does not both return and pay. 'And he shall restore the robbery that he robbed' - what does Scripture teach by 'that he robbed'? That one might think he pays the fifth and the guilt-offering for what his father robbed; therefore Scripture says 'that he robbed' - he pays for what he himself robbed and not for what his father robbed. One might think he does not return it at all; therefore Scripture says 'the oppression.' And what does Scripture teach by 'that he oppressed'? That one might think he pays the fifth and the guilt-offering for what his father oppressed; therefore Scripture says 'that he oppressed' - he pays for what he himself oppressed and does not pay for what his father oppressed. One might think he does not return it at all; therefore Scripture says 'the.' 'The deposit' - what does Scripture teach by 'that was deposited with him'? As long as it is with him he returns it; if it is not with him he returns its value. And still I might say: when does he not pay the fifth and the guilt-offering for what his father robbed? When neither he nor his father swore. If he swore and not his father, or his father and not he, or both he and his father - from where? Scripture says, 'that he robbed, and that he oppressed, and that was deposited with him, and that he found.' And still I might say: when does he pay the principal for his father's robbery? When both he and his father swore; he and not his father, his father and not he, neither he nor his father - from where? Scripture says, 'the robbery and the oppression and the deposit and the lost object' - they are paid in any case. From where do we learn to apply what is stated above to below? Scripture says 'from all.' 'That he swears about falsely' - until he intends it. From here you say that he is liable for an intentional oath and for an unwitting one combined with intent regarding the deposit, but he is not liable for an unwitting one. What is he liable for the intentional one? A guilt-offering valued in silver shekels.