Page 66 - TzurbaFlipUSA_Neat

However, the explanation of the Kesef Mishneh is difficult due to a different ruling of the Rambam: The Rambam explicitly
states that if one damages another’s property, as soon as one pays the damages, he receives atonement, as opposed to if he
damages the person himself.

ט הכלה ה קרפ קיזמו לבוח תוכלה ,ם”במר . 12
לבא ול רפכתנ םלשל בייח אוהש המ םלשש ןויכ וריבח ןוממ קיזמהש ,ונוממ קיזמל ופוגב וריבח קיזמ המוד וניא
לחמנ אלו ול רפכתמ ןיא תויבנ יליא לכ בירקה וליפאו ול רפכתמ ןיא םירבד השמח ול ןתנש פ”עא וריבחב לבוח
.ול לוחמיו לבחנה ןמ שקביש דע ונוע

Rambam, Hilchot Chovel Umazik 5:9
A man who inflicts physical injury upon another is unlike one who damages another’s property. As one who
damaged another’s property obtains atonement from him as soon as he has paid what he is required to pay. If,
on the other hand, he injured another person, even though he has paid compensation for the five counts he does
not obtain atonement; even if he has offered up all the rams of Nevayot, he does not obtain atonement and his
sin is not forgiven unless he asks forgiveness from the injured person and he [the injured] pardons him.

In contrast to the Kesef Mishneh, the Lechem Mishneh distinguishes between two types of damaging of a person’s assets.
The first is where one steals from another: In this case, it is considered a more direct attack on the person and the perpetrator
must ask forgiveness from the person. However, where he only damaged another’s property, he is exempt as soon as he pays
compensation for the damage.

םש ,הנשמ םחל . 13
וניא וריבח תא לזוגהד ל”ז וניבר בתכ ב”פ הבושת ’להבד ג”עא .’וכו וריבח ןוממ קיזמהש ’וכו קיזמ המוד וניא
דועו הריבע התואמ הנהתנד ןלזג ינאשד ל”י .הליזגה ול בישהש פ”עא ותוא סייפיו לזגנל הצרי םא אלא ול רפכתמ
אל קיזמלו ול קיזהש אלא אוהה קזיהמ הנהתנ אלש ןוממה קיזמ לבא וחרכ לעב ונממ חקלש לזגנל הברה רעיצש
ול רפכתנש ןאכ ל”ז וניבר בתכ ךכלו יד וקזיה ול םלשש ןויכ לזגנה ומכ קזינה ךכ לכ רעטצנ אל ונממ האנה האב
:אנביתכדכ לזגנב כ”אשמ דימ

Lechem Mishneh, ibid
As one who damaged another’s property, etc. – Even though in Hilchot Teshuva, Chapter 2, our teacher taught
that one who steals from another only receives atonement if he beseeches him and appeases him, even if he
has returned the stolen object; nevertheless, one can say that a robber is different for he derived benefit from
that sin, and furthermore he caused much distress to the victim by taking it against his will. However, one who
caused damage to a person’s property, where he did not derive benefit from that action, but just caused damage,
and the one who damaged did not derive benefit from it, the victim is not as distressed as the victim of a robbery.
[Therefore,] since he paid the damage, that is sufficient, and that is why our teacher writes here that he receives
atonement immediately, as opposed to the case of robbery, as I have written.

64 · Halachot of Yom Kippur Tzurba M’Rabanan