If the sun has risen on him, he is guilty of bloodshed. He shall make restitution. If he has nothing, then he shall be sold for his theft.
To judge the case of the thief who must pay double, four-fold, or five-fold
The cited verse
The Hebrew (Masoretic Text)
אִם־הִמָּצֵא תִמָּצֵא בְיָדוֹ הַגְּנֵבָה מִשּׁוֹר עַד־חֲמוֹר עַד־שֶׂה חַיִּים שְׁנַיִם יְשַׁלֵּם
In Maimonides’ words
How Maimonides defines this commandment in his Sefer HaMitzvot — his own words, shown as a primary source.
היא שצונו להורות בדין הגנב שנקנוס אותו בדין תשלומי כפל או תשלומי ארבעה וחמשה או נהרגהו אם בא במחתרת או נמכרהו, ובכלל כל משפטי הגנב כמו שהתבאר בכתוב. וכבר התבארו דקדוקי דין זה כלם בפרק ז' מקמא ובח' מסנהדרין ובג' ממציעא ובמקומות מעטים מכתובות וקדושין ושבועות. (ואלה המשפטים, הלכות גנבה ואבדה פ"ג):
That is that He commanded us to administer the laws of the thief - that we fine him with the law of double-payment or four or five times, we kill him if he comes surreptitiously, we sell him and all of the regulations of the thief more generally, as explained in Scripture. And all of the analyses of this law have already been explained in Chapter 7 of [Bava] Kamma, 8 of Sanhedrin, 3 of [Bava] Metzia and in a few places in Ketubot, Kiddushin and Shevuot. (See Parashat Mishpatim; Mishneh Torah, Theft 3.)
Hebrew: Sefer HaMitzvot, Warsaw 1883 (public domain). English: Sefaria Edition, trans. Rabbi Francis Nataf, 2021 (CC0). Via Sefaria; translator’s footnotes omitted.
Literary form: a case law — "if X, then Y"
Applicability
How the catalog describes where and when this commandment applies. These are independent descriptions, not a verdict on which laws still count.
No applicability flags are recorded for this commandment.
Classical halakhic consequences
The consequences the classical halakhah attaches to this commandment, grouped by who imposes them. Where a category has none recorded, that absence is itself meaningful.
Imposed by a court
- A monetary penalty
At the hands of Heaven
No divinely-imposed consequence is recorded.
Ritual remedy
- Restitution (tashlumin)
How the streams of Judaism treat this commandment
The streams of Judaism read the same commandment differently — an ongoing plurality, not a ranking. Each position below is reported as the catalog records it; none is presented as the correct one.
- Orthodox Binding, with modification
- Conservative Kept as an ethical principle
- Reform Kept as an ethical principle
- Reconstructionist Kept as an ethical principle
- Karaite Binding
24 of 613 commandments have been examined in depth so far — this one is queued.
How later traditions received this commandment
How later traditions read or reworked this commandment, each attributed to its own voice. The catalog’s own classification of each reception is shown as it records it, never adopted as GEBible’s.
Qumran (the Dead Sea Scrolls)
- CD 9:10-16 The catalog describes this reception as: adjacent Concerns restitution and oaths regarding property recovered where no owner or witness is present — an adjacent restitution-law topic rather than direct engagement with the graduated multiple-payment theft penalty
Philo of Alexandria
- De Specialibus Legibus 4.2-12 rationalized it
Josephus
- Ant. 4.271-272 reinterpreted it
The New Testament
- Luke 19:8 The catalog describes this reception as: echoed Zacchaeus volunteers fourfold restitution (apodidōmi tetraploun) as supererogation, alluding to the fourfold sheep penalty rather than invoking it as binding law
Beside the older legal codes of its world
The commandment set beside the ancient Near-Eastern legal collections scholars compare it to — a descriptive comparison, not a claim of dependence.
- code of hammurabi multiple restitution for theft of livestock/property: thirtyfold for property of a god or palace, tenfold for property of a commoner (muškēnum), with death if the thief cannot pay Relationship to the parallel: parallel with divergence §8 Roth, Law Collections 2nd ed. (1997)
- code of hammurabi tenfold restitution by a herdsman who fraudulently sells or alters the brand of entrusted animals (false claim plus sale) Relationship to the parallel: parallel with divergence §265 Roth, Law Collections 2nd ed. (1997)
- laws of eshnunna graduated fixed penalties for trespass/theft varying by circumstance (day/night) Relationship to the parallel: parallel with divergence §§12-13 Roth, Law Collections 2nd ed. (1997)
- hittite laws fixed compensation amounts for theft of cattle and sheep (counted by category), with reduced amounts in the later recension rather than biblical-style graduated multiples Relationship to the parallel: parallel with divergence §§57-59 Roth, Law Collections 2nd ed. (1997)
Where this commandment meets modern human-rights frameworks
One modern normative lens, attributed to it — not GEBible’s assessment. Each row names the framework it measures against and the catalog’s own classification of the relation.
This framework catalogues tensions; it records agreement in only one of its entries. The near-total tension rate is the shape of the instrument, not a finding.
No tension with the catalogued modern frameworks is recorded here.