More Discussions for this daf
1. Liability for your agent's transgression 2. Nifratzah Ba'Lailah 3. Giving to an Ani
4. Is a penny saved always a penny earned? 5. Tosfos "Elah l'Chavreih"
DAF DISCUSSIONS - BAVA KAMA 56

Shmuel schnitzer asked:

Why does Tosfos seem to say the only time a person is Chayiv Bdei Shamyim is when the person cant get his money back ( i.e the witnesses dont have money to pay) ? isnt a loss of money for a certain period of time considered a hezik (gramoh), in which a person should be chayiv b'dei shamyim aswell? we do see that money is worth money from the law of ribbis.... and the gemeroh in makkos 3a seems to be that if eidim testify that reuvain owes shimon $100 earlier then he realy does & we figure an amount they should pay, from the fact that they dont just give malkus isnt that a proof that a loss of money is in fact a hezik?

Shmuel schnitzer, balt,usa

The Kollel replies:

I agree with you that a temporary loss of money is also considered a Hezek, but I do not think that is what Tosfos 56a DH Ella is referring to.

(1) Rather the Gemara starts off by saying that if someone hired false witnesses to testify in his own favor, he would not only be liable in the Din of Heaven, but he would even be forced by Beis Din in this world to return the money that he falsely accrued. This is because the false money is in his possession, and he therefore is capable of returning it to the victim.

(2) Therefore the Gemara states that the case where the Beraisa teaches that he is liable in the Dinim of Shamayim must be where Reuven hired false witnesses to testify that Shimon owed money to Levi. By the time we find out that Levi has wrongly received money from Shimon, Levi has already spent this money and has no additional money with which he can pay Shimon. Alternatively Levi has in the meantime left the country and cannot be tracked down and therefore Shimon cannot receive his money back from Levi. Consequently Reuven has caused a permanent loss to Shimon but he only caused this in an indirect way, which is why he is only liable in the Din of Heaven, whilst in this world he is exempt.

(3) The reason that the person cannot get his money back is because the person who wrongfully received the money no longer has money with which to pay, not because the witnesses do not have money, as you wrote.

Kesivah u'Chasimah Tovah

Dovid Bloom