Rabbi Randall J. Konigsburg, is the author of this Blog. These lessons began in 2003 as a private list under the name "Halacha L'Moshe MiSinai (HMS)". From 2006-2009 It was called "Talmidav Shel Aharon" To read these earlier lessons you can check the Archive on this site. Feel free to forward these postings to friends as long as you keep my name attached to it.
To be notified of new postings, send your name and E-mail address to hmsinai@aol.com asking to subscribe. I try to post once a week and I will not use this list for any other purpose. To unsubscribe, send your name and E-mail address to hmsinai@aol.com with a message to unsubscribe and I will take your name off the list. You can also join the Torat Emet group on Facebook to receive notifications there.
I invite your questions and comments. Click on the link to post a comment and I will try to answer your questions. I have previous lessons in the archives of this blog. All other correspondence to Rabbi Konigsburg, not related to these lessons, should be directed to my working email address: msharmelech@gmail.com
Number of Visits
In Honor and Memory of My Father and Teacher Leonard Konigsburg
On April 29, 2007 (11 Iyyar 5767) my father and my teacher, Leonard Konigsburg went to claim his portion in Olam Habah. I dedicate these lessons to my father who was an inspriation in my life and through his gentle teachings became the founder of the Konigsburg Rabbinic Dynasty.
Negative Mitzvah 62 – This is a negative commandment: Do not harden your heart and do not shut your hand toward a poor Jew.
Hafetz Hayim – As Scripture says: “you shall not harden your heart nor shut your hand from your needy brother.” (Deut. 15:7). [http://toratemetlessons.blogspot.com/2006/12/09-5767-mitzvah-38.html]. It is in force everywhere, at every time for both men and women.
In the positive Mitzvah, the Hafetz Hayim writes at length about the many different ways the Torah tells us that we need to be responsible for the poor in our community. He tell us there (you can look it up in the Archives on Dec. 25, 2006) all the many ways we can fulfill this positive commandment. But as we say in the last lesson, there is also a negative side to this law.
There are many reasons that we might fail in our obligation to the poor. We might think that the person is not really poor; we think he is guilty of trying to make his money by scamming those of us who take our Tzedakah seriously. Perhaps we have already given many times in recent days. Maybe we had a bad month and we are worried about our family income. Maybe we are not feeling very generous this week. As far as this commandment is concerned, there is no excuse for closing our hand to those who are in need. It is not just a positive commandment; there is also a negative commandment that tells us that we have sinned if we close our hand to the poor.
The Mitzvah only mentions poor Jews and we do have an obligation to Jews who are in need before those who are not Jewish. We can fulfill this part of the Mitzvah through our contributions to the Jewish Federation. Still, we should support all the poor in our community if, for no other reason, for the sake of peace. We can fulfill this part of the Mitzvah through our contributions to the United Way. We need to support all those institutions who work every day to offer food, clothing and shelter to the poor in our country and around the world. We may not be able to end poverty by ourselves, but every person we can help, deserves our Tzedakah.
Negative Mitzvah 61 – This is a negative commandment: Do not withhold from its owner an object taken in pledge, at the time that he needs it.
Hafetz Hayim – As Scripture says: “you shall not sleep with his pledge.” (Deut. 24:12). Which means: do not go to sleep while his pledged object is with you (see positive commandment #63) http://toratemetlessons.blogspot.com/2007/06/29-5767-mitzvah-63.html . It is in force everywhere, at every time for both men and women.
The above link has my comments on the positive side of this Mitzvah. It is a positive Mitzvah to return an object, given as a pledge on a loan, if the object is something a person needs for his daily life or to make a living. It can include clothing, tools of his trade, bedding, or kitchen utensils. Most times a person will pawn something that he doesn’t need but which has a value if it were to be sold. The borrower might not want to sell it for sentimental reasons or that market for the item may not be favorable at the time the borrower needs the money. In this case, the pawned object stays with the lender until the loan is paid.
But if the object is something that is vital to the borrower for his daily life or to earn a living, he may need that object to earn what is needed to pay back the loan. Jewish law commands us to give him the object when he needs it and he will return it when he is finished. We should return his tools in the morning when he goes to work and he will return them at the end of the day. We can hold his bedding by day but we need to return it to him each evening before he goes to sleep.
It is a positive Mitzvah to return to the borrower such necessary objects. It is a negative Mitzvah not to return them. This is how seriously Judaism takes this part of Jewish law. This law had to be stated both as a positive Mitzvah as well as a negative Mitzvah. It is not just a nice thing to return the object. It is not just a “charitable” act on the part of the lender. It is a requirement of the law to act in a moral way and there will be punishment if we refuse to do what is right. We are not dealing with rich people needing to raise some capital to cash in on some investment. We are dealing here with poor people who are taking a loan in desperate financial times. We must take care not to create for them impossible situations or embarrassing moments lest God, who watches out for the poor, the orphan and the widow, will take up their case and act against the heartless lender who causes these defenseless people such pain.
In Judaism we do not say “business is business.” We conduct our business practices with humanity and morality.
Negative Mitzvah 60 – This is a negative commandment: Do not take as a pledge (or take as collateral for pawn) the garment of a widow.
Hafetz Hayim – As Scripture says: “nor shall you take a widow’s raiment to pledge.” (Deut. 24:17). This applies whether she is poor or rich; and neither at the time of the loan nor after the loan was made, nor through the court. If he (the creditor) took an object in pledge from her, it is taken back from him against his will. If the object taken was lost before he returned it, he would violate this prohibition irrevocably, since he can no longer fulfill his duty to return the object taken in pledge. It is in force everywhere, at every time for both men and women.
One of the hallmarks of the Torah’s legislation is its protections for the poor. While it is true that the law of the Torah applies to both the rich and poor alike, God is seen as the defense attorney and protector of the poor and those who have no one else to protect them. This includes widows, orphans and the homeless.
In this mitzvah, we are reminded that a widow is already in a precarious financial position. To offer her financial support is the mark of one who is committed to Tzedakah, acts of Justice. To offer a loan with collateral is considered to be taking advantage of her unprotected status. Especially in the case where the collateral is an article of clothing; one does not take clothing as a pledge as this would cause too much pain for the widow who is forced to sell her clothing to cover her debts. She is to be supported because it is the right thing to do.
But even if she is not poor, a creditor cannot take an article of clothing in pledge. First of all it is a bad policy, since if we allow it in one case it would be too hard to convince people not to take an item in pledge when the widow is poor. Also, even a rich widow has a certain amount of dignity that you rob from her if you take an item of clothing in pledge.
I do note that the Hafetz Hayim does not distinguish clearly between an item of clothing taken in pledge and any other item taken in pledge. I understand this his way of saying that while the Torah mentions only articles of clothing, it is the responsibility of the community to support the widows in their midst and clothing is just one of the items that are included in the prohibition. Tzedakah is what is called for here, not a loan. We must look out for those who are at risk in our community and help them get back on their feet without crushing them under further debt.
Negative Mitzvah 59 – This is a negative commandment: Do not take as a pledge (or take as collateral for pawn) any object by main force from a debtor. Hafetz Hayim – As Scripture says: “You shall not go into his house to take his pledge.” (Deut. 24:10). The lender is not to take a pledged object from the borrower except through the court. And even the representative of the court who comes to remove it is not to enter his house to take it but is to remain outside as Scripture says, “You shall stand outside” (Deut 24:11) The borrower is to go into his house and bring the pledged object to him, as Scripture says, “and the man to whom you make the loan shall bring forth the pledge out to you”, (ibid). As for a guarantor, it is permissible to take an object in pledge from him by force, and to go into his house and take the pledge for it says, “Take his garment, for he has given surety for a stranger (Proverbs 20:16.) So too, if someone has remuneration due him from his fellow-man, whether it is wages for his labor or payment for the hire of his animal, his tools, or his house: he is permitted to take a pledge without the action of the court. He may enter the other’s house and take an article in pledge for his payment. But if he has converted the fee due him into a loan for the other to pay, it is forbidden. It is in force everywhere, at every time for both men and women.
In keeping with our trend to spare the feelings of one who has taken out a loan, we come to the issue of collateral. If the loan was made based on some article possessed by the borrower being chosen as collateral for the loan, and if the borrower defaults on the loan, then the lender is entitled to the collateral. The collateral is held by the borrower until it is needed. ( I don’t think that there is any reason that the lender cannot hold the collateral while waiting for payment on the loan, but that is not the issue here.) If the lender wants to claim the collateral, he cannot force his way into the house to take it. That is a direct violation of the Torah. He must go to the court, prove that he is owed the collateral and then the court sends a bailiff to get the object to give to the lender. But note that even here the agent for the court cannot enter the home to take the collateral. He must ask the borrower to bring out the object and give it to the agent. While it is possible for the borrower to refuse to bring it out, it would bring on him communal penalties in addition to the monetary one that the court has awarded. All of this is to protect the borrower from intrusion into his private domain and the pain of having his personal property seized. It must be turned over to the court by the borrower to fulfill his contract with the lender. The second part of this Mitzvah has to do with a third party, the guarantor of the loan. If someone has guaranteed the loan to the lender on behalf of the borrower, and the guarantor has paid the lender the money owed on the loan, the guarantor does have the right to enter into the borrower’s home to take out an object in pledge. It is telling that this law is derived not from the Torah but from Ketuvim, the third section of the Hebrew Bible. Those who have been reading these lessons a long time know that it is rare to see a quote from outside the Torah. In this case, because of the verse from Proverbs, the guarantor can enter the home of the borrower and take an object of value to reimburse his payment on the loan. Why can the guarantor do what the lender cannot? The lender and borrower are engaged in a contract. The guarantor is doing the borrower a favor. If he has to make good on the pledge he has fulfilled his position regarding the loan and is entitled to speedy restitution. The guarantor can enter the home of the lender and if he finds an object of value, he can take it and sell it in the market to recoup his expenditure on behalf of the borrower. He can do this unless he converts the money he gave to the lender into a new loan from the borrower; he then is no better than any other creditor and can be refused entry into the home just as the original lender was refused entry. This is all similar to the rules of a paid watchman verses the simple guardian who guards as a favor. If the object is lost, the paid watchman has to reimburse the owner for the loss. If the guardian, who is watching the object as a friend, loses the item, he only has to make an oath that he has no idea where the object is and he is clear of having to pay any restitution.
Best wishes to my readers for a happy, healthy and sweet New Year.
Negative Mitzvah 58 – This is a negative commandment: Do not take as a pledge (or take as collateral for pawn) any utensils with which sustaining food is made.
Hafetz Hayim – As Scripture says: “No man shall take the lower or upper millstone to pledge, for he takes a man’s life to pledge.” (Deut. 24:6). Whether he (the creditor) gave the loan for the pledged object, or he took the object after the loan was made, by his own hand or through the court, he would violate this prohibition. If the object taken in pledge was lost or stolen, he would violate this prohibition (irrevocably, past all rectification). Punishment would be deserved for the lower millstone by itself, and for the upper one by itself. And just as the distinctive characteristics of the lower and upper millstones are that they are two articles serving for one purpose, and there is punishment for the one by itself and for the other by itself, so with any two utensils that serve for one purpose: there is a penalty for each by itself. It is in force everywhere, at every time for both men and women.
In this country, we operate by the maxim “Business is Business” and that there is little relationship between what might be the moral and correct path in life and what we need to do to be successful in business. This Mitzvah is a classic example of how Judaism says that this attitude is wrong. Loaning money to someone in need is a great mitzvah. It is forbidden to charge interest on the loan. Good business practice would tell us to get some collateral on the loan. Here the Torah is teaching that there are just some objects that can not be taken as a pledge. The Torah teaches that one can not accept a millstone; neither the upper nor the lower parts are acceptable as security on the loan.
If you have never seen an ancient mill, it consists of two round stones. The lower one is fixed on the ground and the upper is tied to a windmill or a water wheel that turns, grinding the corn/wheat between the two stones and creating flour. Millstones can not work except as a pair. To take either one as a pledge would leave the mill useless and the miller without a livelihood. To create smaller amounts of flour, some homes had smaller “mills” that would be moved by hand to grind the wheat. Without it, how could the family bake bread for their meals?
This is the crux of the matter. Taking the millstone would not only leave the miller without means of earning a living, but would prevent the miller from feeding his family. Thus all items used in making basic food elements are not allowed to be taken as collateral; you cannot leave a family unable to provide itself with food. That is why if you take both millstones, you are also in violation because it, all the more so, makes it impossible to make food to feed the family. Violating this commandment by taking both as collateral would mean a separate violation for each part of the whole that was taken in pledge. You can’t take the water wheel nor interfere in any way to take from a person what a family needs to survive.
Like modern bankruptcy laws, there are some items that are protected from creditors. So too here, Jewish law insists that items needed for food preparation are not acceptable as a pledge. We don’t leave borrowers without the means to survive.
Business cannot be only about making money. It is also about customer relationships, community building and making the world a better place. When a person finds themselves in a difficult economic condition, we don’t take advantage of their situation; we lend a helping hand to lift them back on their feet.
Negative Mitzvah 56 – This is a negative commandment: Do not refrain from lending money to another Jew for fear of the year of sh’mittah (release), and that the loan will be cancelled.
Hafetz Hayim – As Scripture says: “Beware lest there be a base thought in your heart, saying, “The seventh year, the year of release is at hand” and your eye may be evil, etc. (Deut. 15:9). This is a great sin since the Torah disapproves, calling it base and scoundrelly. It applies to both men and women: by the law of the Torah, at the time that the rule of the jubilee is in effect; and at the present time, by the law of the Sages. Now, Rabbenu Yonah wrote: “At a time when he will not lose his loan, how much more certain it is that if someone hardens his heart not to grant a loan, his sin will be very great.”
Negative Mitzvah 57 – This is a negative commandment: Do not demand payment of a loan over which the seventh year (sh’mittah) has passed.
Hafetz Hayim – As Scripture says: “He shall not exact it of his fellow and his brother because Hashem’s release has been proclaimed (Deut. 15:2)” All this applies at the time that the rule of the jubilee is in effect. In the present, however, when the law of sh’mittah (release) in money matters is only by the ruling of the Sage, one would not violate a prohibition but would rather be doing something forbidden by the Sages.
Let us start with the background. Just as every seventh day is a day of rest and we count seven weeks from Pesach and end with the holiday of Shavuot; so too we count seven years to the year of Sh’mittah, the year of release, when debts would be cancelled and planting/harvesting would be forbidden. At the end of 49 years, that is, seven seven-year cycles, there is a Jubilee year proclaimed where not only debts were cancelled but slaves when free and land sold would revert to its original owner.
In an agricultural society, such laws are needed to prevent land from being collected into large holdings that crowd out the smaller farmers. It prevents farmers from bad crop years and from crushing debt. It also makes sure that anyone who sells their land or their bodies to escape debt, once every 50 years they get a chance to start life over again.
It is not easy to ask someone to forgive a debt. A loan is a business agreement and to ask a lender to forgive a debt is to cost his business money. It should not surprise us that a lender might think, “the year of sh’mittah (release) is almost here and any loans I make may end up cancelled. I think I will not make any more loans until the year has passed.” Who could blame a lender from wanting to make a loan that is almost sure to be cancelled by law?
But, under Jewish law, a loan to a fellow Jew is not really a loan; it is an act of Tzedakah, an act that makes the world a kinder and more just place. The loan is not really being cancelled rather it is transformed into a charitable gift. This is why the Torah considers one who would refrain from loaning money when the year of release is near as one who is “hard hearted”. He is thinking only of his own business and not being considerate of the hard times the borrower is going through. It is therefore a great sin to demand payment of a loan that was cancelled in a sh’mittah year and to not allow it to be cancelled.
As the economy of ancient Israel moved from agriculture to commerce, the laws of release became a burden to the economy. The sage Hillel created a way to have the commercial loans turned over to the courts to collect even after the year of release had started. When the Romans exiled us from the land, all the laws of Jubilee and Sh’mittah ended. Only by the edict of later sages did the laws relating to loans continue but since most monetary matters are now regulated by secular law under the principle of “dina d’machulta dina” “the law of the land is the law” there really is not much need for these regulations relating to loans. Modern Rabbis see the laws that forgive debts as still in force and the pious should still hold by them. Given the restrictions and limits that began with Hillel and because of the Exile, very few really insist on releasing debts in the seventh year in any but a voluntary way. In the modern State of Israel, many of the agricultural laws, including the laws of release have come back into play. Crops are not planted and all debts are assumed to be turned over to the courts and are able to be collected. In all cases, the idea of releasing debts is very limited but making free loans to those in needs remains a very important mitzvah.
Torat Emet
16-5769: Mitzvah N-54-55
August 9, 2009
Negative Mitzvah 54 - This is a negative commandment: Do not lend to another Jew and charge him interest, be it money, something to eat or anything else.Hafetz Hayim: Scripture says, “You shall not give him your money at interest, nor give him your provisions of food in usury” (Leviticus 25:37). The terms “Neshech” and “Marbit” (interest and usury) are one thing but Scripture divided them into two terms to make the lender the transgressor of two prohibitions. The lender also violates the prohibition: “Neither shall you put interest upon him” (Exodus 22:24) as well as the injunction: “Do not take interest or increase from him” (Leviticus 25:36) It is in force everywhere, in every time, for both men and women. Negative Mitzvah 55 – This is a negative commandment: Do not borrow from another Jew at interest. Hafetz Hayim: Scripture says, “You shall not give interest to your brother.” (Deuteronomy 25:36) Which is an admonition to the borrower. He would also violate the injunction “nor shall you put a stumbling-block before the blind.”(Lev. 19:14) This is in effect everywhere, at every time for both men and women.
As I wrote in the last installment: “Jewish law forbids charging interest to another Jew. In an agricultural society, loans are what make farming possible. The need to buy seed, invest in machinery and fertilizer and the constant threat of draught and disease means that a farmer needs money to be able to support his family. Think back to the story of Joseph in Egypt. He taxes the farmers in the years of plenty and then distributes the grain during the seven years of famine. At the end of the famine, he knows that he needs to supply the famers with seed in order for them to once again earn a living from farming.
In this setting, loans are really a form of charity. The farmer is in need and if interest is charged, it will only make it more difficult to earn a living from farming. If the farmer gets too far into debt, he can only sell his field and then himself as an indentured servant to pay off what he owes. Charging interest only speeds up the amount of debt the farmer has to pay and causes him to lose land and freedom sooner. To make a loan without charging interest is a way of helping the farmer and prevents poverty in society. This is why the Torah forbids charging interest to other Jews.
We can see from the Mitzvot above, that the Sages had only the harshest words for someone who would charge interest to another Jew. Such a Jew clearly had no intention of helping a fellow Jew without making a profit on the transaction. The Sages thus found a way to heap one sin on top of another. There are no less than four separate sins for a Jew who would charge interest to another Jew.
I can only speculate that this must have been a common occurrence to charge interest to another Jew. That is why it is mentioned no less than four times in the Bible. If you add Negative Mitzvah 55, you see that even the borrower who accepts this arrangement is charged with two sins. He has taken illegal interest and has caused the lender to sin when he accepts the loan. The lender may not be inclined to charge interest but the loan is so risky that the borrower offers to accept a loan with interest. The lender is thus encouraged to make the loan and incur all four sins.
It is better to give the money as charity rather than try and profit from the tribulations of another Jew. The Sages clearly had nothing good to say about money lending in the Jewish community.
