Today’s daf is sponsored by the Hadran Women of Long Island in honor of the marriage of the granddaughter of our friend and co-learner Rookie Billet. "As the new couple builds their בית נאמן בישראל, continuing the paradigm that you and Rabbi Heshie have established, we are certain that they will be a source of nachat to you, your family and the Jewish nation." When someone steals from a convert who then dies, if the thief wants to repent, he/she must pay the principal, one-fifth and bring a sacrifice. All are given to the family of kohanim working at the Temple on the week that the thief comes to bring the sacrifice. The principal must be paid before the sacrifice. What if the money and the sacrifice are brought to two different families of kohanim on two different weeks? If they were brought the same week but one to a family who was not serving, one is penalized and needs to give the item received to the other - who is penalized and why? This is a subject of debate among Rabbi Yehuda and the rabbis. The guilt offering brought after stealing is compared to the guilt offering brought for meila - misuse of consecrated property. Three braitot each quote Rebbi (Rabbi Yehuda haNasi) explaining Rabbi Yehuda's position in particular cases. The Gemara helps to better understand each braita. The tenth chapter starts with a discussion of someone who eats the stolen item from the thief or passes it on by inheritance to the heirs - can the owner demand the money back from the one who consumed it or the heirs, or only from the thief? The Mishna rules that the owner cannot demand it from a third party. Rav Chisda holds that it depends on whether or not the owner has given up on getting his item back (ye'ush). In the case where there was ye'ush, the owner cannot demand it from the one who consumed it as the combination of the owner's ye'ush and passing it on to someone else allows it to change ownership and therefore the original owner has no claim with the third party - he/she can only claim it from the thief. But if the original owner has not given up, then the one who consumed is considered as if he/she stole it from the original owner as it was still in the owner's possession at the time of consumption. He understands that the Mishna must be referring to a case where there was ye'ush. Are heirs viewed as buyers (meaning that when the item passes to them, it is considered moving into another's domain) or not? Rami bar Hama and Rava disagree about this which leads them to a disagreement about how to understand the case in the Mishna regarding the heirs.