Laws of Ribis, Part 2 - Rabbi Daniel Grabsky shlita

00:02 Speaker 1 You’re listening to “Lema’an Yishme’u,” a podcast of Machon Halacha Chabad.

00:09 Speaker 2 Hello and welcome. With Hashem’s help, we’re continuing with the laws of interest. We’ve already mentioned how the Alter Rebbe opens the laws of interest in Yoreh De’ah by saying that one must be extremely careful about the prohibition of interest. I want to add that in section 13, the Alter Rebbe returns to how serious this prohibition is and writes: “Be very careful regarding interest not to seek any grounds for leniency, for it is something that draws a person in. If today he opens a hole as small as the eye of a needle, he will widen it day by day until it becomes as wide as the entrance to a hall.” The Alter Rebbe is adding another point here. Yes, interest is serious. Some forms we’ve discussed are prohibited by Torah law; there is also interest prohibited by rabbinic law and avak ribbis, a lesser form of interest. There are different levels of the prohibition. But the Alter Rebbe adds another dimension: a person is drawn to it. Once you get used to it, you’ll find another allowance and another leniency, and from one allowance you may move to the next, G-d forbid, until you can very easily go from a rabbinic prohibition to a Torah prohibition. So that’s another reason to be so careful about interest. A person is naturally drawn to it, and the Alter Rebbe explicitly tells us to be careful, because once you’re drawn in, it keeps going further and further. I should add that the laws of interest have a great many details. It’s therefore always good to ask and consult a rabbi who is an expert in these laws, because the smallest detail can change the ruling from prohibited to permitted, or from a rabbinic prohibition to a Torah prohibition. There are so many details involved. But so that we at least know what to ask, when to ask, where there’s a problem and where there isn’t, we’re learning the general principles here, with Hashem’s help. Today we’ll begin with an interesting halacha already mentioned in the Mishnah: How can someone take a particular item, return exactly the same thing, and violate

02:31 Speaker 2 the prohibition of interest? In the language of the Mishnah, this is called lending “a se’ah for a se’ah.” The Sages decreed that such loans should not be made at all, lest one violate the prohibition of interest. So what does lending a se’ah for a se’ah mean? A se’ah is a measure. You shouldn’t lend a kilo in exchange for a kilo, ten kilos in exchange for ten kilos, a ton for a ton—or even a carton for a carton. The Sages prohibited this. What’s the problem? I ask my neighbor, “Please lend me ten kilos of potatoes. I’ve run out of potatoes.” Or, “Please lend me a tray of eggs,” and I give him back the same tray of eggs. He gave me medium eggs; I return medium eggs. He gave me ten kilos of potatoes; I bring him ten kilos of potatoes—the same variety, the same kashrus, the very same thing. And yet there’s a problem of interest here. What’s the problem? Some things don’t always have the same price, market rate, or value. Some prices are more or less fixed for a while. Some are subject to government price controls, so they stay the same for a long time. Others aren’t controlled, but may stay the same for a month, two months, a year, or two years. But there are things whose market price changes all the time, such as fruits and vegetables. We know that the price of fruits and vegetables on Sunday or Monday isn’t the same as on Friday or Thursday. Even on a single day at the market, the morning price and the afternoon price may differ. So if I borrow ten kilos of potatoes from someone—or a kilo of potatoes: he gives me a kilo and I return a kilo—hold on a moment. When I received the potatoes, let’s use ten kilos as an example, they were worth fifteen or twenty shekels. Perhaps next week,

04:42 Speaker 2 when I return them, they’ll be worth twenty-five or thirty shekels. I borrowed five kilos of avocados. Right now they’re worth about forty shekels, but perhaps next week the price will rise and they’ll be worth fifty. So if I borrowed five kilos of avocados and return exactly the same thing—five kilos of avocados, exactly the same weight—there’s no difference in what I return, but there is a difference in value. The lender has gained: he’s now receiving something worth more. The same applies to eggs or a carton of cola—anything without a fixed price, whose price fluctuates. We’ll soon talk about foreign currency too, where the rate fluctuates a great deal. So we have a problem. You return the same thing: you received a hundred dollars and return a hundred dollars. But wait—when you received the hundred dollars, they were worth 320 shekels, and now the hundred dollars you’re returning are worth 330 or 340. Of course, the value could also go up further or go down. How do we deal with these differences in value? First of all, as we’ve explained, even if there was no actual change in value—you borrowed it and returned it at the same price, and it had become neither more nor less expensive—the Sages still prohibited borrowing a se’ah for a se’ah, a given weight for the same weight, lest it become more expensive. If so, how can people lend things to one another? We have several solutions, several permitted ways of doing so, several circumstances in which the Sages did not prohibit a loan of a se’ah for a se’ah. The first option is to assign it a monetary value. All of this is explained by the Alter Rebbe in section 30. What does assigning it a monetary value mean? Instead of telling my neighbor, “Lend me potatoes and I’ll return potatoes,” I ask him, “Lend me potatoes,” or “Lend me a tray of eggs—a large tray of eggs. Lend me

06:53 Speaker 2 a tray of eggs.” How many eggs are in it? Twenty-four. Now I tell him, “I won’t return a tray of eggs to you next week. I want to turn this into a sum of money—to assign it a monetary value. How much did the tray of eggs cost you? Thirty-two shekels. So I’ve now received thirty-two shekels’ worth from you, and next week I’ll return thirty-two shekels.” It doesn’t matter whether the price of eggs rises or falls. I’ve converted the loan from a weight, a number of items, or a particular measure into a sum of money. Now there’s no problem. The price can go up or down; I know I have to return the amount I received. We’ve agreed that the eggs were worth thirty-two shekels, and next week I’ll return thirty-two shekels. Whether the price rises or falls makes no difference. That’s the first option: assigning it a monetary value. The lender won’t always agree. He may worry that next week there will be a shortage of eggs and thirty-two shekels will no longer buy him a tray of eggs, as happened before Pesach. Suddenly egg prices shot up, and a person doesn’t want the money. He wants eggs: “Bring me eggs. Get me eggs.” But when the lender agrees, this is one option: assign the loan a monetary value. That’s what I’ll return to you in a week, a month, or two months. Another option is when it’s a small amount. As we mentioned, this is a decree of the Sages, out of concern that the price might rise. Even if it does rise, the prohibition would still be rabbinic. So the Sages did not prohibit every circumstance. They did not prohibit a small amount. As the halacha says, a woman may borrow a loaf of bread from her neighbor and return a loaf of bread—a loaf in exchange for a loaf. True, the price of flour and bread might rise, but even if it does, by how much

09:06 Speaker 2 Will its price go up? Right now it costs seven shekels. It might go up to seven shekels and ten agorot, or it might be six shekels and ninety agorot. There is no great concern here: even if the price rises a lot, because the quantity is small, the difference—the gain or loss—will be very small, and the Sages did not impose their restriction on a small amount. Of course, the question is what counts as a small amount. Today, the halachic authorities speak of twenty shekels: anything worth up to twenty shekels is considered a small amount, and there is no need for concern. You can borrow small things. You can take a few potatoes and return a few potatoes, or take one avocado and return one avocado. As long as the value is up to twenty shekels, there is no problem. Once it goes above that amount, this allowance no longer applies, and we need to find another one. So, as we said, the first allowance is to assign the items a monetary value. The second is a small amount, on which the Sages did not impose their restriction. If I cannot use the option of assigning a monetary value, and the allowance for a small amount does not apply, there is another situation in which the Sages did not impose their restriction. They did not impose it when the item has an established price and is readily available. Say I need a package of tissues from my neighbor, but I have run out of tissues. I could go to the grocery store to get some, but the store is a bit farther away, and I am not going there right now. I ask my neighbor for some and will return them to him. But the item has an established price; there are no rises or falls, no concern that its price will suddenly change. In such a case, the Sages did not impose their restriction. Two conditions are needed: it must have an established price that does not fluctuate much, and it must be readily available. What counts as an established price? There is a difference of opinion. According to the Beis Yosef, the price must generally remain unchanged for at least a full month. So there are still items subject to government price controls. Their prices do not change every month, and there are many other products

11:14 Speaker 2 whose prices generally do not move much. They are not like the fruits and vegetables we discussed, whose prices do change every day. Some items have a price that holds for a long time. According to the Rema, one may be lenient even if the price has remained unchanged for just three days. Three days is also enough to consider it an established price, so the Sages’ restriction on lending a se’ah for a se’ah does not apply. But again, both conditions are needed together. Sometimes the price is established, but the item is unavailable. If milk has a fixed price and there is suddenly a shortage of milk—or as happened when there was suddenly a shortage of eggs, even though they seemingly had a fixed price—that does not help. Even if the price is fixed, I would have to run around the whole country, and I might not find even one bottle of milk or one tray of eggs. So that does not help. Both conditions are needed together: an established price and the ability to obtain the product easily. If either condition is missing, I cannot use this allowance. So again, with items that have an established price, I can take a bottle of Coke from my neighbor and return a bottle of Coke. It has an established price. We are not concerned that the price of Coke will suddenly rise or fall sharply, and Coke is currently available in all the stores. I can even take a case of Coke and return a case of Coke, because it is available here in Israel. But if I am in Russia, in Ukraine, or in a country where Coke is unavailable—or Coke with the hechsher I want is unavailable—and I want to take some from my neighbor and say, “Yes, I’ll return it to you,” then wait a moment. Maybe Coke has an established price there, but it is unavailable. The containers arrive only once a month, every two months, or every three months. I do not know when the next container will arrive. So it may have an established price, but it is not readily available. Once

13:12 Speaker 2 it is not readily available, this allowance also falls away. We cannot rely on it. So the first allowance is to assign a monetary value. The second is a small amount. The third is when a market price has been established—meaning that there is an established price and the product is readily available. There is one more allowance, the fourth and last. Another case in which the Sages did not impose the restriction on lending a se’ah for a se’ah is when the borrower already has some of that product. For example, I need a tray of eggs from my neighbor. This is not a small amount; it costs more than twenty shekels, and I am concerned because eggs are not readily available. There is no established market price for this purpose. The lender says to me, “Wait, tell me, do you have one egg? Do you have one egg left at home?” I say, “Yes, I have one egg left.” If so, the restriction does not apply. If I have one egg left, I do not need to worry about a rise in price. I want ten kilos of potatoes from my neighbor. My neighbor asks me, “Do you have one potato?” “Yes, I do.” “All right, take ten kilos of potatoes and return ten kilos of potatoes to me.” But what is the basis for this allowance? If I have one potato and the price rises, I received ten kilos of potatoes worth twenty shekels. The price goes up, and they are now worth thirty shekels. How does my having one potato help? The Sages did not impose their restriction in a situation like this because I already have a potato. This is called “he has some.” Part of the increase in the price of potatoes is already reflected in what I own. We do not look only at the lender; we also look at the borrower. I have a potato now, and when its price rises, the price rises for the lender but also for the borrower. So alongside each potato he gave me, I already have a potato of my own whose value has risen. The price change is the same

15:14 Speaker 2 for me and for him. For both of us, the price went up, and that is why the Sages did not impose their restriction in such a case. There is more to discuss about how to understand this allowance, but that is the basic idea. If he already has some, it helps. What does “he has some” mean? He has the very same product. I cannot borrow a case of Coca-Cola from my neighbor on that basis if I have one bottle of Pepsi at home. That does not help; the two have different prices in the stores. It has to be the same product. How much of the product must I have? If we look in the Shulchan Aruch and in the Mishnah, it says that a person can borrow wine from his neighbor even if he has only one drop of wine at home. He can borrow oil from his neighbor if he has only one drop of oil. Very well. There are a few drops left in my Coke bottle, and I tell my neighbor, “Yes, I have one bottle—I have one drop of Coke. Give me five cases of Coke.” The halachic authorities rule that today this does not help. Why not? In the past, a drop of oil or a drop of wine had some value. People bought these things by the jug, and the borrower could say to the lender, “Here, I’m already returning one drop to you.” The lender would take it and use it. People once made use of a drop of wine or a drop of oil; it had a use. Today, give someone one drop of Coke. What will he do with it? Even if you give him half a bottle of Coke that has been open for three days, he will say, “I gave you a sealed bottle, fresh and properly fizzy. You’re giving me old Coke from a bottle that was opened a week ago.” Even if it is half full, it does not count. So there must be a way to return the item. You want a case of Coke? Have a bottle of Coke at home. You want a case of wine? Have a bottle of wine at home. But if you have a few drops here and there, the halachic authorities rule that today it does not help.

17:04 Speaker 2 So the allowances are: assigning a monetary value, a small amount, an established market price, or already having some of the item. When a person borrows money from a friend, the Sages said that the liquid, readily usable money in that country is considered its currency—the currency of that place. True, there may be inflation or deflation, and that money may have more or less purchasing power. The Sages were not concerned about this and said that lending one unit of local currency for the same unit poses no problem. We do not worry about changes in its value. But once you are not borrowing the local currency, and instead you are dealing with another currency, it is as though you are borrowing money and repaying it in produce. We said that borrowing one type of produce and repaying it with the same produce can be a problem. Certainly, borrowing money and repaying it with produce is a problem, because the price of the produce can rise or fall. I ask my friend, “Lend me a hundred dollars.” He says, “No problem—take a hundred-dollar bill.” I receive a hundred-dollar bill. Today it is worth 320 shekels. But what will it be worth in a week? Two weeks? A month or two? It could be worth 310 shekels. It could be worth 330, 340, or 350 shekels. If I received a hundred dollars worth 320 shekels, and a few months later I return a hundred dollars, the lender may have gained twenty or thirty shekels because the exchange rate went up. So how do I deal with the issue of exchange rates? First of all, as we said, lending and repaying in the same local currency is no problem. A shekel for a shekel is no problem. In the United States, a dollar for a dollar

19:05 Speaker 2 No problem. In Belgium and France, euros—euros are no problem. But Belgium uses euros and England uses pounds sterling, so someone in Belgium cannot take out a loan in pounds sterling. That is not the currency used there. Each place goes by its own currency. In the United States, people would not make a loan in shekels against shekels—or dollars against sh—uh, dollars against shekels. Once it is not the local currency, you run into a problem. How do you solve it? One solution, as we mentioned, is to fix the monetary value. If the lender agrees, I say, “Lend me a hundred dollars, and I won’t repay you a hundred dollars. I’ll repay you the value of a hundred dollars.” In other words, today you gave me a hundred dollars, worth a hundred and twenty—uh, a hundred and twenty shekels. When I repay you, I’ll repay you according to what it was worth then. So a hundred dollars is three hundred and twenty shekels. I’ll repay you three hundred and twenty shekels. If he agrees, excellent. The exchange rate goes up, the exchange rate goes down—it makes no difference. I received a hundred dollars, which was three hundred and twenty shekels, and I repay him three hundred and twenty shekels. But if he says to me, “Listen, I have no use for three hundred and twenty shekels. I like dollar bills. I need to go abroad, I need dollars, and then I’ll have to go buy dollars,” he does not agree. I can tell him, “Listen, in a month I’ll repay you a hundred dol—three hundred and twenty shekels in dollars, at the exchange rate then. If the dollar goes up, I won’t be able to repay you a hundred dollars. I may only be able to repay you ninety dollars, ninety-one dollars. If the rate goes down, I’ll have to repay you more dollars, because now three hundred and twenty shekels are worth a hundred

20:58 Speaker 2 and five dollars, a hundred and four dollars.” If he agrees, that is still called fixing the monetary value. You received a hundred dollars and converted the loan into three hundred and twenty shekels. On the repayment date, you give him the value of three hundred and twenty shekels. He can then tell you, “Give me three hundred and twenty shekels’ worth in eggs, potatoes, euros, sterling—whatever you want.” But what you agreed on was three hundred and twenty shekels, and that is what he gets. So fixing the monetary value is a solution when, of course, the lender agrees. The allowance for a small amount generally does not apply to foreign currency. As for an established market price, we do not have that allowance for dollars, even though there is an official exchange rate published once a day. Once a day is not enough to make it a fixed rate. In practice, dollar traders do not go by the official rate published once a day, because every hour, or even more often, the rate keeps moving up and down. If, G-d forbid, there is a war, or a prime minister says something about considering raising interest rates or lowering interest rates, there can be very large changes in the exchange rate within a few minutes. That is why dollar traders watch the rate throughout the day, and it is not considered a fixed rate. True, some wanted to say that perhaps dollars are common in Israel, that they are used there and count as money there. Igros Moshe wrote that many years ago. Many halachic authorities disagreed with Igros Moshe. It is very doubtful whether Igros Moshe would agree with it today. In the past, apartment prices in Israel were quoted in dollars. People spoke in dollars for many things—tzedakah and all sorts of things—but the situation has changed. The government prohibited contractors from displaying apartment prices in dollars. They may display prices

23:06 Speaker 2 only in shekels, and the whole market switched to shekels. Yes, people still speak in dollars, but dollars are far less common than they used to be, far less useful than they used to be. So it is hard to say that the dollar is considered a currency here today. Yes, it is a currency, but it is not used like the shekel. Most people do not walk around with dollars in their pockets. Most stores will not accept dollars if you want to pay in a store, and they do not have the same standing as shekels. So in practice, one should not rely on that to make a dollar loan in Israel unless one of the allowances applies. The last allowance we discussed—that the borrower already has some of the item—is very useful here. The lender can say to the borrower, “You want a hundred dollars? No problem. Tell me, do you have one dollar?” He checks his pocket: “Yes, I have a dollar.” Good, excellent. Since you have a dollar, I can lend you a hundred dollars, a thousand dollars, five thousand dollars, and you can repay me five thousand dollars in a month, two months, a year, two years. There is no problem, because he already has one. As we said, once he has one, any rise or fall in value affects both the borrower and the lender. For every dollar he received, he has a dollar of his own that also rose in value. The Sages therefore did not prohibit this, and it is permitted. So if he has one dollar, you can do this in Israel. You should know that this solution works when the lender and borrower both know that the borrower has one. I should add that this one dollar has to be usable and readily available. So if a person—a student, a young married man—has a dollar, but what kind of dollar does he have? Thank G-d, he has a dollar bill from the Rebbe that he received from the Rebbe. It is framed and kept in his safe. That does not count as having a dollar. True, it is a dollar, but it is a dollar worth far more than a dollar. It is a dollar that he will never

25:01 Speaker 2 use. He is not going to take it to a store to buy something, and he will not give that dollar back to the lender. It is a dollar with an entirely different value. A dollar from the Rebbe does not count as “he has one.” If the lender wants to lend to the borrower, he needs to ask him, “Do you have an ordinary dollar? Not a dollar from the Rebbe—do you have an ordinary dollar?” That will work. What if he does not have even one ordinary dollar? Then make sure he gets one. The lender can give him one as a gift: “Here, take a dollar so you’ll have one.” Now he has a dollar. The borrower now has one dollar—excellent. Now the lender can lend him a hundred dollars, five thousand dollars, ten thousand dollars. Once the borrower has one, the issue is resolved. So if he does not have one, you can give him a dollar as a gift, and then he will have one. To illustrate the point, there was an incident involving an organization in Ukraine that arranged a trip to Mezhibuzh for participants coming from Israel. They promised them a hotel there, luxury accommodations, and everything they would need to stay there and enjoy themselves. One of the things they promised was Coca-Cola with the hechsher of the Eidah Hachareidis. The participants were very happy about that. Whenever they had traveled with that company before, Coca-Cola from Israel with the Eidah Hachareidis hechsher had arrived for them. They felt comfortable drinking it. Then, suddenly, a problem arose. The group arrived in Ukraine, but the container the travel company had ordered from Israel was stuck and had not yet arrived. They needed a container of Coke. It was not available; perhaps there was no established market price. They could not get it. They called another Jewish company that also organized these kinds of trips and asked, “Can you bring us a pallet of Coca-Cola? We’ll return it to you.” Even though they were competitors, the other company said, “No problem, take a pallet of Coca-Cola.” Then they thought, “Wait a moment, there is a problem here with borrowing a quantity and repaying the same quantity. This is not a small amount. A pallet of Coca-Cola”

27:10 Speaker 2 Coke. The heter of an established market price doesn’t apply here. You can’t get Coca-Cola in Ukraine. What about fixing its monetary value? They said, “That won’t help us.” What does that mean? “You’ll pay me back the price of the Coca-Cola.” “I’m not interested in selling the Coca-Cola, because by the time I order a pallet of Coca-Cola from Israel, it’ll take two months to arrive. I have groups coming soon, and I need to bring them Coke from Israel too.” What’s the solution? That lender, the competitor, told him, “All right, here, take a bottle of Coca-Cola. Take a case of Coca-Cola for free.” Now he has some. Once he has some, I can give you a whole pallet, and you can return a whole pallet to me. That’s how they found a practical solution: a single bottle of Coke can make it possible to lend a whole pallet of Coca-Cola. This is an example of “he has some.” The lender can give the borrower some as a gift; once the borrower has some, everything is in order, and the restriction on lending a measure of produce in return for the same measure does not apply. After the fact, if there was a foreign-currency loan—a loan of dollars in Israel—and none of the heterim applied: he didn’t have any, they didn’t fix its monetary value, there was no established market price, and it wasn’t a small amount—what do you do? The halachic authorities disagree about this, so you need to ask a rav what to do. Generally speaking, if the exchange rate rises, we would not agree to give the lender the extra amount he would gain. After all, he entered into this transaction; in fact, both of them did. And if the rate falls, we would agree to repay him a hundred dollars, even though those hundred dollars are now worth less. At least the lender hasn’t gained anything. But there is room to ask a rav what to do after the fact. Perhaps he had a dollar and didn’t know it. So if a dollar loan was made in Israel after the fact, ask a rav

29:08 Speaker 2 which exchange rate to use for repayment. Ask a rav about it. This week, in Parshas Ki Seitzei, we read: “You shall not charge your brother interest: interest on money, interest on food, interest on anything that can bear interest.” The Gemara says in the chapter Eizehu Neshech, Bava Metzia 75b: Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai said, “‘Interest on anything that can bear interest’—even speech is forbidden.” In other words, the verse says, “You shall not charge your brother interest: interest on money, interest on food, interest on anything.” The word davar, “anything,” can also be read as “a word.” I’m not allowed to give the lender anything extra. He lent me money; I can’t now give him a little bottle as a gift. He lent me money; I can’t teach his son for free. No, I can’t give the lender anything additional. Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai says, “Interest on anything”—even speech. I can’t come to him now with thanks and compliments and thank him. Just a moment: lender and borrower. The borrower can’t give the lender any benefit. “Interest on anything”—even speech is forbidden. There’s even a disagreement about whether this is a Torah prohibition or a rabbinic prohibition. We have a verse, “interest on anything,” which includes even speech. Some of the Rishonim say it’s prohibited by the Torah. Others say it’s not a Torah prohibition; the verse is an asmachta, a textual support for a prohibition enacted by the Sages. The Sages derived it from the verse and used the verse as a support, but it isn’t actually a Torah prohibition. In any case, in practice it is forbidden to say appreciative things to the lender. That creates a big problem when we want to repay a loan. He lent me money, and I want to repay him. What does a person naturally say when he’s received a loan? It helped him a great deal, so he says thank you. But if I can’t even say thank you, what do I do? Well,

31:21 Speaker 2 the halachic authorities disagree about what we do, what we can say and what we can’t say. Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach initially wrote in Minchas Shlomo, volume 1, that saying “thank you” is a matter of courtesy nowadays, and there’s no problem saying it to a lender. Say thank you. Don’t shower him with thanks or make grandiose statements. Just say thank you politely and repay the money. That’s fine. We’ve already mentioned that the Alter Rebbe writes explicitly that when repaying a loan, you need to be especially careful not to add anything. So the question is whether saying thank you is forbidden. Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach, z”l, ruled that it was permitted, but then immediately retracted that ruling. This is brought in Minchas Shlomo, volume 2—the first printing of volume 2. He writes that after he saw and recalled what the Alter Rebbe wrote, he retracted his ruling: you can’t say thank you. What does the Alter Rebbe write? “Even speaking kindly on account of the loan or an extension of time is forbidden—for example, greeting him first if one was not previously in the habit of greeting him first. Needless to say, one may not praise him to his face”—you can’t compliment him—“or thank him, express gratitude to him, or bless him to his face for lending to him or extending the time for repayment. As it says, ‘Interest on anything that can bear interest’—even speech is forbidden. If he needs to ask him for a loan or an extension of time, he should ask only in words of supplication, not with words of praise, flattery, or other such expressions.” The Alter Rebbe says explicitly here that it is forbidden to praise him. It is forbidden to thank him. So what about “thank you”? You may not thank him, express gratitude to him, or bless him. I can’t give him a blessing. I can’t thank him. So what can I say? Yes, you can repay the money and leave politely, but that’s very difficult and, seemingly, not the usual way to behave. So Rabbi Shlomo Zalman Auerbach

33:30 Speaker 2 retracted his ruling and said that according to the Alter Rebbe, you really can’t say thank you. There are still halachic authorities today who argue that even according to the Alter Rebbe you can say thank you, because nowadays the significance of “thank you” has diminished greatly compared with earlier times. Perhaps it counts for nothing, and you can say it. Rabbi Asher Weiss rules that you can say thank you. But given that the Alter Rebbe actually writes that thanking him is forbidden, we seemingly have a problem. Some people want to say, “May you merit to perform more mitzvos.” Rabbi Shlomo Zalman says no—that’s worse than thank you. You certainly can’t say that; it’s a blessing. And the Alter Rebbe also writes explicitly that you may not bless him. So you can’t say, “May you merit to perform more mitzvos,” either. What are we left with? Perhaps some people want to try a little trick: say to the lender, “Thank you very much for the loan—but I’m not allowed to thank you,” or, “I’d very much like to thank you, but I’m not allowed to.” The halachic authorities learned from the Chumash, from the story of Lavan and from other places, that you can’t use a trick like that. You’re thanking him or blessing him and then saying it’s forbidden. Or you say, “If it were permitted, I’d say it.” That misses the point. The point is that you should not thank him or bless him. So why say all that? What option do we have? We cannot thank him for the loan. We cannot make the lender feel good about what he did. But you can simply tell him that the loan helped you. Instead of saying thank you, tell him, “You should know, your loan helped me a great deal. Because of it, I was able to marry off

35:24 Speaker 2 my son. Because of it, I started a business. Because of it, I was able to do this or that.” So speak positively about the loan; tell him it was a great help. After all, handing the money back without saying anything isn’t right either. There still has to be some courtesy and recognition of the good he did. He helped you, he gave you a loan, and now you’re repaying it. You need to recognize that good; doing without that is also out of the question. So one option is to tell him how much the loan helped. It helped you marry off a child. It helped you start a business. It helped you with something else. Then you’re talking about the loan, not the lender, and that is why the halachic authorities permitted it. Of course, don’t make it too grandiose or pile on too many descriptions. Don’t exaggerate. Just say, briefly and respectfully, “Your loan helped me a great deal. I used it to do this and that, and it helped me.” Sometimes there’s another possibility: if the lender went to some trouble to arrange the loan. You asked someone for a loan. It wasn’t a hundred shekels that he could just take out of his pocket. You said, “Listen, I need a loan from you. Can you give me ten thousand shekels?” He said, “Listen, I have it, but I need to withdraw it from the bank. I need to [unclear]. I need to go to the bank and take out the money.” The lender had to go to some trouble to get you the money. You can thank him for that trouble: “Thank you. Thank you very much for going to the trouble of getting me the loan.” You’re allowed to thank him for the trouble, but you can’t thank him for the loan itself. So if he went to some trouble, thank him for the trouble. If he didn’t, tell him how much the mitzvah he did—the loan—helped you. That way, you can also express your gratitude without violating the prohibition of prohibited

37:20 Speaker 2 Things a borrower says to a lender that constitute ribbis. Let’s continue with ribbis through words. We mentioned that all ribbis is forbidden—even speech can be forbidden. Another example brought in the Gemara: if someone was not accustomed to greeting the lender at length, he may not start doing so. You borrowed money from someone you used to see now and then in shul or at a farbrengen. You never said hello to him. Now, suddenly, you’ve borrowed money from him. “Hello! How are you? So good to see you! How have you been?” Wait—before this, you didn’t say hello to him, and now you do. That’s forbidden, because of the loan. So what should you do—ignore him as if you don’t see him? We have to distinguish between different situations. If you used to say hello to him before, you can say hello afterward. We’ll discuss these points in a moment. That’s what it means to be accustomed to it: if you used to greet him, give him the same greeting afterward. But if you didn’t used to greet him, what do you do now? Certainly, making some addition, something out of the ordinary, is forbidden. Still, now you know each other. True, you know each other because of the loan, but you do have a connection, even if it came about through the loan. If you greet him now the way you ordinarily greet anyone else you know, the greeting isn’t because of the loan; it’s because you know him. True, you got to know him through the loan, but you’re greeting him because you know him, not because of the loan. It’s an ordinary greeting. You can say hello once there’s a loan between you. But going out of your way to greet him first—that’s different. He comes into shul, and you get up, go over, help him with his tefillin: “Hello! Good morning! How are you?” That’s already

39:15 Speaker 2 going out of your way to greet him first, and that is forbidden. If you didn’t do it before the loan, you may not do it afterward. Any addition once there is a loan between two people is forbidden. So we’ve discussed when greeting him first is permitted and when it isn’t. A lender may not ask the borrower for a favor. Before, there was no loan between them, though they knew each other. Now the lender has lent the borrower money, and from time to time he needs favors. Certainly he may not ask him for a financial favor, but he says, “This doesn’t involve money. You’re standing over there anyway—let me know when you see the shuttle vehicle arrive.” The borrower ordinarily wouldn’t do that for the lender, but now he feels uncomfortable refusing him. So he does it for the lender because of the loan. Here too, it is forbidden. Don’t ask the borrower to do things you weren’t accustomed to asking of him. The Alter Rebbe says this explicitly in section 10: “The lender, too, is warned against ribbis through words—for example, he must not say, ‘Let me know if so-and-so comes from such-and-such a place,’ even though he is troubling him only to speak,” it’s only a matter of words, “if he was not accustomed to doing this for him before, and now he relies on his loan to give him an instruction because the borrower feels beholden to him, this is ribbis.” So the lender, too, is warned against ribbis through words. We mentioned the exception when it was already customary; that comes up in several sections, including sections 10 and 11 of the Shulchan Aruch. Customary—what does that mean? A regular practice. As they say in yeshivah, if there’s a regular practice, it’s fine; if there wasn’t, it isn’t. Anything extra that the borrower does for the lender is forbidden, unless he had done the same thing before—it was already his practice

41:16 Speaker 2 to do it. How far does that go? What are the limits? As a general rule, yes: if you used to greet him before, you can greet him afterward. If you used to babysit his children before, you can babysit them afterward. But how far does that go? You have to be careful about a few things. First, don’t explicitly connect it to the loan. You or your wife used to babysit for this person, and now there’s a loan between these neighbors. Can you still babysit for him? No problem—go ahead. But don’t say, “I’m babysitting for you because you lent me money,” or “I’m giving you a gift because you lent me money.” The moment you explicitly say that, you make it forbidden. Purim comes around, and you want to give your neighbor mishloach manos? No problem. If you would have given him mishloach manos before the loan, you can give him mishloach manos afterward. But don’t add a note saying, “Thank you very much for the loan.” The moment you connect the favor to the loan, it’s forbidden. That’s what it means to make the connection explicit. What you were accustomed to doing is permitted, as long as you don’t explicitly connect it to the loan. Once you do, it becomes forbidden. So don’t add a note to the mishloach manos saying, “Thank you for the loan.” Give him mishloach manos without mentioning the loan. Explicitly connecting them is forbidden. At the time of repayment—that we’ve already discussed. When you’re repaying him, don’t add a cup of cola or a cup of coffee. Don’t add a thank-you or mishloach manos. Leave that for another time, not at the time of repayment. When you repay him, give him back

43:03 Speaker 2 the money, and that’s it. Even if you were accustomed to bringing each other a cup of coffee or helping each other in some way, that allowance doesn’t apply at the time of repayment. When you repay him, just return the money without the cup of coffee. Then there’s doing something in public. The Sages forbade it when it’s done in public. You can’t do a favor for the lender publicly. People will think, “Hey, why are you doing him such a favor? There must be a loan involved.” They may hear about the loan; people generally do, because a loan is made with a document or witnesses. Then they’ll say, “Look what’s going on—they’re violating the prohibition of ribbis.” What counts as public? For example, buying him an aliyah to the Torah. In shul, you never used to buy him an aliyah, and now suddenly you do. That’s public, and it’s forbidden. But someone might ask: What if he used to buy him an aliyah before as well? That’s permitted. If you did the same thing publicly before the loan, you can continue doing it publicly afterward. Public before, public afterward. If you used to buy him an aliyah before the loan, you can buy him one afterward. But if the favors you did for him before were private, and now you want to do something publicly—something everyone will see and know about—that’s forbidden, unless you did exactly the same thing before. Another example of something public: you want to lend him your car. The lender needs a car, and people can see whose car it is. They know this car belongs to one person or another. He needs a car and will be driving around the streets in it. That’s public. You can’t let the lender use

44:52 Speaker 2 Your car, once there’s a loan involved. The lender benefits from it, and it’s something done in public. If you were already in the habit of lending him the car publicly before the loan, you can continue afterward. But if not, you can’t. Another example of something public that’s forbidden is letting him use an apartment. Say the lender is coming from abroad. He arrives here in Israel, and you have an apartment available for rent. You don’t live there, and you feel awkward about it. He gave you a large loan, and now he’s coming. He happens to be coming to your neighborhood, and the apartment is vacant. “Here, take the apartment free of charge.” Wait a minute—why? You charge everyone else to use the apartment. There’s a daily rate, there’s a monthly rate, and suddenly you’re giving him an apartment for free. Something is going on here. Since it’s public, it’s forbidden. Unless you were already in the habit of letting him use the apartment publicly before the loan; then you can continue afterward. Things you weren’t in the habit of doing publicly beforehand cannot be done afterward. Those are the rules concerning something you regularly did before: you can do it afterward, provided you don’t explicitly link it to the loan, it isn’t at the time of repayment, and it isn’t public. Everything we’ve discussed until now concerns interest during the term of the loan. I received a loan in Tishrei and repaid it in Nissan. Throughout that period, from Tishrei to Nissan, I have to be careful not to do the lender a favor, with all the details we discussed. What about before the loan and after the loan? Is there an issue of interest then too? Sometimes there is. This is called interest paid in advance and interest paid afterward. Rabban Gamliel says—this is also on page 75b, in the chapter Eizehu Neshech—that we have an issue of interest paid in advance and interest paid afterward. Rabban Gamliel says: “There is interest paid in advance and interest paid afterward. How so? If he intended

47:03 Speaker 2 to borrow from him and sent him gifts, saying, ‘This is so that he will lend to me’”—the borrower started sending the lender gifts before the loan so that he would get a loan—“this is interest paid in advance. If he borrowed from him and repaid his money”—or, in another case, he has already repaid the lender—“and he sends him gifts, saying, ‘This is for your money, which lay idle with me,’ this is interest paid afterward.” In other words, the Gemara is speaking about either before or after the loan, and nevertheless there is an issue of interest paid in advance or afterward. This appears in the Alter Rebbe’s ruling in section 7. If you pay attention to the wording of the Gemara—and it appears this way in the Alter Rebbe’s ruling too—the issue isn’t speech. The issue is that he gives the lender something. He actually goes and gives him something, a gift; he presents him with gifts. And not only that: what does the Gemara say? He states it explicitly. He explains: “Why am I giving you a gift now? Because I want a loan from you next month.” “Why am I giving you a gift now? Because a month ago you gave me a loan.” Once he makes that connection and actually gives something in return for the loan, it’s forbidden, even if it was before or after the loan. This is a decree of the Sages called interest paid in advance or afterward. So be careful not to give things that are too substantial when a loan is involved. The Alter Rebbe discusses a small gift where the person doesn’t intend it as payment and doesn’t say it’s because of the loan. He says it’s permitted, though some forbid it, and someone who is stringent should be stringent for himself not to intend it as such, or not—once it’s connected to the loan. But if a long time has passed and you want to give him a gift, and you don’t say or intend that it’s because of the loan—say you repaid him in Tishrei, and now Purim arrives—of course you can give him mishloach manos. Just don’t

49:12 Speaker 2 think of those mishloach manos as connected to the loan. Give him mishloach manos, and everything is fine. But once it’s something so substantial that the connection to the loan will be apparent, or you explicitly say it’s connected to the loan, there may be a problem of interest paid in advance or afterward. We’ve spoken about the prohibition relating to a loan. There’s a mitzvah to lend, but once there’s a loan, we have the issue of the borrower adding words or providing an additional benefit to the lender. Sometimes that issue doesn’t apply. I ask a neighbor or my study partner, “Lend me an item, and I’ll return it.” Say a woman is in the middle of baking challahs for Shabbos, and suddenly her mixer breaks. She goes to her neighbor: “May I please borrow your mixer?” “Of course, take it.” She takes the mixer and bakes challahs with it. What will she naturally do? She’ll return the mixer with a roll or a challah. “Thanks to your mixer, I managed to bake challahs. Here, take one.” There’s something of additional value here. I received a mixer, and I’m returning a mixer plus a roll. I borrowed someone’s pen. I used it, and I’m returning the pen along with a cup of coffee. “Your pen really helped me. I needed it for an exam, and I’ve finished the exam. Here, I made you a cup of coffee as well, in addition to returning the pen you lent me.” I go to another neighbor because I need a drill. I return the drill with a bottle of cola and thank him. Is there an issue here too? Well, we need to distinguish between a loan, borrowing an item, and renting one. When something is a loan, the Torah forbids interest, and the Sages added many restrictions on providing anything extra. But when it isn’t a loan—when you’re borrowing or renting an item—it’s permitted. After all, I’m allowed to rent out a drill and receive money for it. I’m allowed to rent out a car and receive

51:23 Speaker 2 money for it. So why is it permitted with a rental but forbidden with a loan? Maybe I’ll go to my neighbor and, instead of saying, “Lend me a thousand shekels,” I’ll say, “Let me borrow a thousand shekels.” I’ll change the wording, and then I’ll be able to return 1,100 or 1,200 shekels. Of course not. What’s the difference between a loan and borrowing or renting an item? The Gemara says, “A loan is given to be spent.” When you lend someone money, you don’t expect him to return the same banknotes. He’s going to use the money. There’s a very interesting sicha about this idea, this concept. When you give someone money, he’s going to use it and then return a thousand shekels to you. He might return it in 100-shekel notes, 200-shekel notes, or 50-shekel notes; he returns the same amount. He used the money and repays it. You ask your neighbor for a bottle of oil. You use up the oil and bring him a bottle of oil. Granted, it may not be the same brand or the same oil. You used the oil, and you bring him different oil. That’s a loan. You take something from someone and return something of equal value, but not the exact same thing. The principal itself was used up; the item was used up, and you return a different item or different money. Borrowing an item, by contrast, has no issue of interest. When a neighbor lends you a drill, he isn’t giving it to you so that you can take it apart, remove all its parts, and later return a different drill. When the neighbor lent the mixer, she expected the very same mixer back. That’s borrowing an item. You return the exact same item, and there’s no issue of interest. So often, when we wonder whether there might be an issue of interest, we need to check whether this is a loan

53:21 Speaker 2 or the borrowing of an item. With the borrowing of an item, there’s no issue of interest. There’s no issue of interest with renting, either. A neighbor wants to rent out his drill for ten or twenty shekels an hour. There’s no problem. You take the drill, return that drill, and you can pay him, because this wasn’t a loan. You couldn’t do whatever you wanted with the item. You couldn’t sell the car or the drill, or do as you pleased with it. You return the same item as it was. There’s no problem: you can pay him for it, thank him, or give him a cola or coffee in addition—whatever you want—because this is borrowing or renting an item. When it’s a loan, that’s forbidden. So with money, I can’t say, “Let me borrow a thousand shekels,” or “Rent me a thousand shekels, and I’ll return them to you.” What are you going to do with those thousand shekels? You aren’t going to put them under your mattress and leave them unused, are you? That would be a deposit, which is an entirely different matter. You’re going to buy things with the money and use it. If so, it’s a loan. It isn’t borrowing or renting an item; it’s a loan, and the Torah forbids interest on a loan. So when borrowing or renting an item, you can give something extra. It isn’t interest because it isn’t a loan. Once it’s a loan, all the stringent laws of interest we mentioned apply. Another common issue involving interest comes up when someone goes to buy something in a store and encounters two prices. The seller has to be careful about this, and the store owner has to be careful, especially if he advertises it—unless he has a heter iska. As we discussed, with a heter iska there generally isn’t a problem of interest when it’s connected to a business transaction. You go into a store and you see

55:11 Speaker 2 There’s a sign there: “Want to buy an air conditioner? This air conditioner costs 2,000 shekels. Cash discount: 1,800 shekels.” What does that actually tell us? You can buy it for 1,800 or for 2,000. You pay 1,800 shekels in cash—great, take the air conditioner. You want to pay by credit card? The seller, the store, won’t receive the money for another month, and if you pay in installments, it will take even longer. So he asks for an extra 200 shekels, which is a huge percentage. There’s a problem of interest here. He is explicitly asking for extra money. So first of all, a seller may not advertise something like this unless he has a heter iska. If you want to advertise two prices, you need a heter iska. Without one, you cannot advertise a cash discount, because you are effectively telling people that you charge extra because the money will not reach you right away—that this is, in effect, a loan. There is a loan here: you do not receive the money immediately. The credit card company will give you the money in a month or two, or even if it’s only in two weeks. There is a loan here, and you may not ask for extra money on that loan. So you go to a store and they’re selling an air conditioner for 2,000 shekels. You want to bargain with the store owner: “Lower the price for me. Make it 1,900, 1,800.” No problem—you can bargain with him to give you a discount. But if you ask, “What about a cash discount? How much will you sell it to me for in cash?” and he says, “All right, 1,800 shekels in cash,” and you say, “Oh, then make it 1,500 shekels in cash,” and he says, “No, 1,800 is my final price”—now you may

56:57 Speaker 2 buy it only for 1,800 shekels. If you now pay him 2,000 shekels by credit card, you are effectively showing that you paid him 1,800 shekels for the air conditioner and another 200 shekels for the loan—the time he has to wait to receive the money. And that is forbidden. If the difference is very small and the store owner tells you, “Listen, it’s 1,800 shekels in cash. By credit card I have to charge you another one or two percent as a fee”—that one- or two-percent fee is not money the store earns. It’s a fee that credit card companies generally charge stores, between one and two percent, for processing the card payment. So he can ask for that. But 200 shekels is not one or two percent; it’s much more. If it is a minimal fee, and he is genuinely charging a fee of up to one or two percent, that is possible. Once it is a larger amount, it is no longer just a fee. He is also charging for the time he has to wait to receive the money. That involves a prohibition against interest. If it is clear that the extra charge is because he has to wait longer for the money, it is forbidden. So, in closing: when you go to a store, be careful as soon as the question of a cash discount comes up, unless there is a heter iska. May we merit to be scrupulous in observing all the mitzvos, particularly the prohibition against interest, and may we merit the true and complete Geulah immediately, right now.