Parshat Bereshit

Halachic Times for Jerusalem
for the Coming Week

Feature Tidbit
for Parashat B'reishit

Speak the Truth and Be Understood

The following is based on a Dvar Torah I gave at my great-nephew's Pidyon HaBen earlier this week, and is presented here in his honor - Yechezkeil ben Tzvi and Naama.

In the description of Day Four of Creation, the Sun and the Moon are referred to as the Two Great Luminaries. Within the same pasuk, the Sun is called the Great Luminary and the Moon is called the Small Luminary.

Same pasuk. What's the story?

The answer is a matter of perspective. From our vantage point on Earth, there are only two heavenly bodies that appear to us as being more than a point of light — the Sun and the Moon. In fact, apparent size-wise, the Sun and the Moon are twins. The Sun has a diameter 400 times greater than that of the Moon. (That means that the Sun's volume is 64 million times greater than that of the Moon.) One would hardly consider using the term Great Luminaries for both of them. Yet the Sun is (non-coincidentally) 400 times more distant to us than the Moon. (Both 400s are approximate figures, but very close.) The combination of distance and size results in the Sun and the Moon appearing to be the same size. And compared with planets and stars and other objects in our sky, they - and only they - deserve to be called Great.

Describing things from a human perspective is the SOP (standard operating procedure) of the Torah. But sometimes, that is not the only way the Torah puts things. We also need to know that the Sun is far larger and more powerful than the Moon. Hence their descriptions as GADOL and KATAN, respectively.

Perhaps, this is a lesson the Torah is teaching us. We must be able to tell things in such a way that the truth is presented and represented properly, and that our words should also be readily understood by those to whom we speak. Clear, not misleading, distinguishing between objective and subjective perspectives, extra explanations when called for.

Included in all this is the ability to speak to scholars and Talmidei Chachamim on the one hand, and "plain folk" on the other. 

This ability is the key to true Jewish (Torah) Education.

Word of the Month

A weekly feature of Torah Tidbits to help clarify practical and conceptual aspects of the Jewish Calendar, thereby better fulfilling the mitzva of HaChodesh HaZeh Lachem...

ROSH CHODESH MARCHESHVAN WILL BE TOMORROW, YOM RISHON (SUNDAY) AND ON YOM SHEINI (MONDAY)

The Molad was (by the time this announcement is made as part of Rosh Chodesh benching, the Molad will have occurred) this morning, Shabbat Kodesh, 1 minute and 5 chalakim (there are 18 parts to a minute) after 2:00
In Rambam's notation, the Molad is Shabbat • 8h • 23 chalakim
(Rambam begins counting hours from 6:00pm rather than midnight, so his number of hours is always 6 more than the "standard" notation. Also, Rambam does not use minutes, but rather uses only hours and chalakim, there being 1080 parts per hour.)

The Molad of Cheshvan is SHA Oct.28, 1:40am, Israel Standard time.
The actual (astronomical) Molad is FRI Oct.27, 10:00am

Since Rosh HaShana effectively eclipses Tishrei's Rosh Chodesh, it is Cheshvan that is "really" the first month of the year. 

Shabbat B'reishit is the ONLY Shabbat that is ALWAYS Shabbat M'vorchim. 

FYI - Although the only Molad never announced is that of Tishrei, it is specifically Tishrei's Molad that fixes Rosh HaShana and the "shape of the year" in our fixed calendar. As follows...

5761 - Tishrei's Molad was THU Sep 28, 17m 4p after 1 in the afternoon. By the rule of Molad Zaken (a Molad after noon), Rosh HaShana is pushed to the next day (FRI). By the rule of LO AD"U ROSH, it is pushed again to Shabbat. 

Molad of Tishrei 5762 will be MON (Sep17) 5m and 16 p after 10 at night. This is a Molad Zaken, so Rosh HaShana is pushed to the next day. Rosh HaShana 5762 will be IY"H on TUE/WED, Sep 18 & 19. 

Picture this... Time of the Sanhedrin (past AND future). Astronomers have reported to the Sanhedrin Committee for Kiddush HaChodesh that the Lunar Crescent MIGHT be visible on the evening following the 29th of the month. The Committee waits for witnesses to testify that they saw the L'VANA B'CHIDUSHA, the Moon's "rebirth". During the night, witnesses do indeed arrive and give their testimony. And the judges question them and find their testimony to be acceptable. The word spreads around Yerushalayim and by 5:00am, the courtyard of the headquarters of Sanhedrin is packed with thousands of Jews who want to be present when the Head of the Sanhedrin proclaims the day HOLY. (News crews and TV cameras are in place to broadcast the proceedings to Jewish communities all over Israel and the world.) Sunrise is not until 6:13am, but the winter chill and gloom has not diminished the crowd's enthusiasm one bit. Finally, the NASI's proclamation of M'KUDASH is answered by a thunderous M'KUDASH, M'KUDASH, and another Jewish month has begun.

In commemoration of the above - and in hopeful anticipation of its restoration, our Sages instituted the BLESSING OF THE MONTH which includes the announcements of the Molad and the days of Rosh Chodesh. This, in the presence of the multitudes who fill our shuls on the Shabbat before Rosh Chodesh.

The GABBAI (or someone else) announces the Molad after Y'HI RATZON and before MI SHE'ASA NISIM... Our Tradition is to use JERUSALEM SOLAR TIME which does not get adjusted for location or for daylight savings time. The table on the other side of this page gives suggested wording for the Molad announcement (which can be used by all Jewish communities. The "regular" notation and that of the Rambam do not change. Clock time for the average and astronomical Molads are adjusted for Summer Time, and should be adjusted for location. For example, the Molad of Nisan will be on Friday, 4 hours, 57 minutes and 9 chalakim. For announcement purposes, this is so all over the world. The corresponding clock time, however, is 4:37am on Friday morning for Israel, 9:37pm on Thursday night for Fort Lee, New Jersey, etc. Similarly, the actual Molad (Molad Amiti, as opposed to Molad Emtza'i) of Nisan will be 10:22am on Friday morning in Israel, and 3:22am on Friday for Fort Lee.

Sedra-Stats

First of the 54 sedras of the Torah; first of 12 sedras in B'reishit
Written on 241 lines in a Sefer Torah

22 Parshiyot; 10 open, 12 closed

146 p'sukim - ranks 8th (5th); same as Mikeitz

1931 words - ranks 8th (5th)

7235 letters - ranks 11th (5th)

Mitzvot - One (positive) mitzva in B'reishit

The book of B'reishit has the most sedras, the most p'sukim, the most words, the most letters, the longest sedras in words and letters (but not p'sukim) shorter than average p'sukim, and the smallest number of mitzvot - 3.

Aliya -by-Aliya

Numbers in [square brackets] are the mitzva-count of the Sefer HaChinuch.

Kohen - First Aliya - 34 p'sukim - 1:1-2:3

This Aliya contains the first account of Creation.

FYI - The first portion of Breishit is seldom read at Mincha of the previous Shabbat. Only when Simchat Torah is Shabbat, is it read on the previous Shabbat, and in that case, at Shacharit and Mincha. Simchat Torah never falls on Shabbat in Chutz LaAretz, but it happens here every so often, including this year and last.

There is a dispute in the Gemara as to when the world was created - in Tishrei or Nissan. The word B'REISHIT is an anagram of ALEF B'TISHREI. If anagrams were an acceptable source, then we might be able to resolve the dispute. Nonetheless, it's a nice anagram.

The Baal HaTurim points out that the G'matriya of B'REISHIT BARA is 1116, as is the numeric value of the phrase: B'ROSH HASHANA NIV'RA - on R.H. it (the world) was created. And again, if we could prove things with G'matriyas, then... But as is, the dispute stands. Our Calendar seems to side with the Tishrei opinion.

The First Rashi
Rashi quotes Rabbi Yitzchak who explains why the Torah begins with B'REISHIT and not with the mitzvot and halachic texts in Parshat BO. He says that if the nations of the world will accuse us of stealing the Land of Israel from others who have occupied it through the generations, we will be able to point to the events in the historical portions of the Torah and see that G-d takes land from whom He chooses and gives it to whom He chooses.
But what happens if the nations of the world do not accept the lessons of the Torah? Let's say that they reject the point that Rashi makes. Perhaps, they are not the ones who need convincing. We have confidence in the prophecies of the time when the nations will recognize the G-d of Israel and accept our role in this world and our relationship with Him. Maybe we cannot expect Rashi to impress most of the non-Jews of the world. At least, not yet.

We are the ones who need to see in the Torah that G-d is in control. This goes for Jews who feel that we are usurpers here, and this goes for proud Jews who feel that they have accomplished everything here without the help of G-d and without His okay. Whether the Arabs and other people accept what we claim from the Torah is one thing. Do we, the Jewish People, really believe that this Land is ours? 

It is. And we should not be squeamish about asserting our possession of Eretz Yisrael. 

The lesson of the famous first Rashi is for us. The Torah is not just a book of mitzvot and laws. It tells us other things. Hebron belongs to the Jewish People because Avraham Avinu bought it and passed its title to Yitzckak. It does not matter how many Arabs live there and how many Jews do or don't live there. Hebron is ours, Jerusalem is ours. Eretz Yisrael is ours. We do not have to apologize for it. We should seek out ways of living peacefully with our neighbors, how to deal fairly and safely with the Arabs who live among us. G-d has repeated the promises to the Avot so many times in the Torah, that we should have no doubts as to whose claim is legitimate.

Sadly, the protesters in Paris Square and their ilk, don't seem to get the point. But there are probably many points from the torah that they don't get.
Let us not forget the deal that goes along with the Land. We have to continuously pay our rent to the Landlord, in the form of faithfulness, keeping of the mitzvot, learning and living Torah. This is our commitment to G-d, our deal with Him. Let us hope that more and more Jews will make a stronger commit ment to Torah and to Eretz Yisrael.

I don't know where I get the chutzpa to write about any of the Torah, but I have special difficulty in writing about the account of Creation. There is so much to say and suggest, that it is paralyzing.

I would, however, like to present again one of the main views about the two essential phases of Creation. There are other ways to understand the opening p'sukim of the Torah, but this is one...

The first two p'sukim describe the totally, exclusively Divine aspect of Creation of Something from Nothing — YEISH MEI'AYIN. Before B'reishit, perhaps nothing existed — except G-d. With the Divine Command of B'reishit, everything that now exists came into existence for the first time. All matter, all energy, thoughts, concepts, time — everything. According to this point of view, SHAMAYIM and ARETZ mean everything in the universe. The first form that all of Creation had was TOHU VAVOHU, chaos. That's the second pasuk. And here's an important aspect of this view — this stage of Creation occurred BEFORE day 1 of Creation. Not on the first day - before the first day. And not a day before, not an instant before nor and eon before. It is pointless speculation to attempt to give a time-frame for the first two p'sukim, because TIME has meaning only in the context of the ordered world that began to take shape on Day 1.

No wonder we are not supposed to concern ourselves with what had happened before the world was created.

And then came Day 1,2,3,4,5,6. And what happened on those days? G-d put everything in order, distinguished one thing from another. It was creation of Something from Something. YEISH MI'YEISH. Forming, shaping. The kind of Creation that we emulate in our daily lives.

And how long was one of these days of Creation? Maybe they each were a thousand years long. Or maybe they each were 24 hours long. Either that Torah talks "our language" or not. Take your pick. Either answer fits one of our angles. 

Shabbat B'reishit is a time of rediscovery and re-creation. just like on Shavuot we read the events of Matan Torah and we try to put ourselves into the events, to make them fresh, as if today the Torah was given, so too should we enthusiastically read and hear the description of Creation and put ourselves into the position of discovering G-d through the world and nature that He brought into existence for us. Don't just see things as "once upon a time..." — get excited!

Levi - Second Aliya - 16 p'sukim - 2:4-19

Next we have a restatement of Creation, focusing on Gan Eden, the formation of Adam, Adam's dominance over Nature, and his first prohibition - eating from the Tree of Knowledge of Good & Evil.

"It is not good that man shall be alone" is explained in different ways, including that only G-d is singular. man needs to know that as great as he can become, as much as he can accomplish, he is not a god.

All creatures were brought before Adam as "candidates" for partner-to-Adam. None was suitable, but Adam named them all (as people have done throughout the ages).

In the first account of Creation, Man was the final act of Creation, but not so much the purpose and focus of creation. In this second account, Man seems to be the focus of creation. We have to see things both ways.

The accounts of Creation are very cryptic. Why have them at all? Perhaps it is to challenge each of us to understand some tiny point in this whole grand portion of the Torah that can make our existence more meaningful. (Hey, that was cryptic, too.)

Shlishi - Third Aliya - 27 p'sukim - 2:20-3:21

The wording of the Torah implies that Adam was first created as a combined male-female being, then (still on Day Six) he was physically separated as Adam and Chava, with the command and challenge of recombining spiritually, emotionally, and in some ways, physically - "and they shall become one flesh".

Next the Torah tells us cryptically of the episodes of the Serpent's enticement of Chava, the eating from the Tree, the punishments for the Serpent, Chava, and finally, Adam.

The sin(s) of Adam and Chava are not just personal sins, but more importantly, they help us define and understand (a little) human nature.

R'vi'i - Fourth Aliya - 21 p'sukim - 3:22-4:18

This Aliya begins with the expulsion from Gan Eden, which is also seen as a metaphor for a re-definition of the role of humans in this world and of their (our) relationship with G-d.

The Torah continues with the "births" of Kayin and Hevel and Kayin's killing of Hevel following the attempt of each to make an offering before G-d.
Kayin's punishment and fate is presented, as is his lineage. 

It is possible that Kayin sired different species of humanoids. This is how some want to explain the evidence of the existence of pre-historic man. Kayin's whole line was destroyed in the Flood. (Almost, that is. Naama, who descended from Kayin, was No'ach's wife, the mother of us all.)

Chamishi - Fifth Aliya - 8 p'sukim - 4:19-26

This portion contains the story of Lemech, the great-great-great-grandson of Kayin and his accidental killer, Lemech's two wives Ada and Tzila.
The Torah mentions more descendants of Kayin and their roles as the "firsts" in various fields of human activity.

This portion also contains Lemech's lament for having killed Kayin.
Noteworthy among the descendants of Kayin that are mentioned by the Torah is the sister of Tuval-Kayin, Na'ama. Rashi (quoting B'reishit Rabba) says that she was the wife of No'ach. What is significant about that is that Kayin's line was not completely severed by the Flood. Although we refer to all of mankind as Bnei No'ach, who descended from Adam through Sheit, on the mother's side there is Na'ama and before her, Kayin.

Kayin and Hevel were not born in the conventional way, as we know it. Sheit is the first mentioned human to he conceived and born in the way all the rest of us were. His birth is mentioned in the end of Chamishi.

In case your Chumash does not have the same Aliya breakdown as is presented here, don't worry. There are different opinions.

Reading B'reishit after the long haul of the Holidays truly gives us the feeling of a clean start each year. A good feeling.

Shishi - Sixth Aliya - 24 p'sukim - 5:1-24

The lineage from Adam through Sheit (Seth) to No'ach (into the next Aliya) is set down, with the age of the father at the birth of the son, and each person's age at his death. These numbers help us construct the first part of our timeline. Although many sons and daughters are born to this list of patriarchs of the world, only one representative of each generation is named. Some say that only the named individual had the longevity that is recorded; the "average man and woman in the street lived much shorter lives. Others say that the lifespan of the human was much longer before the Flood.

Shishi concludes with mention of Chanoch, who was taken from this world (possibly not by death) at the relatively young age of 365.

Sh'vi'i - Seventh Aliya - 16 p'sukim - 5:25-6:8

Metushelach lived to 969 years, the oldest age recorded in the Tanach. According to Tradition, he died immediately prior to the Flood, which was held up for 7 days of mourning. The generations continue to be counted until No'ach appears on the scene. The Torah describes the deterioration of society and G-d's "regret" for having created Man. No'ach alone found favor in G-d's eyes.

Haftara - 25 p'sukim -Shmuel Alef - 20:18-42

When Rosh Chodesh is Sunday (or Sunday and Monday), then the special Haftara for Erev Rosh Chodesh preempts the regularly scheduled Haftara of the week. 

[For Trivia Buffs: Machar Chodesh itself is preempted on three occasions (each occurs from time to time - not every year) ...test yourself before you read any further... Parshat Sh'kalim, Parshat HaChodesh, and R'ei (it would also happen on Chanuka, but 29 Kislev cannot fall on Shabbat).]
The connection between the Haftara and Erev Rosh Chodesh is obvious. The opening words are: And Yonatan said to him, tomorrow is Rosh Chodesh... 

The real question is why the Sages decided on a special Haftara for Erev Rosh Chodesh in the first place. No other "erev" gets a special reading. Why does Machar Chodesh? 

Perhaps it is because Rosh Chodesh is so understated and often ignored. This became a way - in addition to Rosh Chodesh benching - to say: Hear ye hear ye, tomorrow is Rosh Chodesh. It seems that the connection is mainly in the opening words. Rabbi Jacobs points out in his A Haftara Companion that there are some lessons we learn from this passage in the Navi, and the knowledge makes us more aware of the specialness and sanctity of Rosh Chodesh. We see that Rosh Chodesh was celebrated with a special meal which was to be eaten in a state of ritual purity. Many have the custom today of marking Rosh Chodesh with a special meal. The Haftara also serves as a source of the minhag of abstaining or reducing one's work on Rosh Chodesh. Rabbi Jacobs refers to a deeper connection between Rosh Chodesh and the Jewish People (which might explain why we take the extra opportunities to highlight Rosh Chodesh). The cycle of the Moon alludes to Jewish History. For 15 days (or so) the Moon increases in brightness and fullness, corresponding to the 15 generations from Avraham Avinu to Shlomo HaMelech. This is followed by 15 days of decline, matching the 15 generations from Shlomo to the destruction of the Beit HaMikdash and the Babylonian exile. But this is followed by MACHAR CHODESH. Tomorrow will see the brightening of the Moon and the fate of the People of Israel. The cycle continues until the Complete Redemption, when the Moon (and Klal Yisrael) will be completely restored.

MEANING IN MITZVOT by Rabbi Asher Meir

Each week we discuss one familiar halakhic practice and try to show its beauty and meaning. The columns are based on the commentary “Meaning in Mitzvot” on Kitzur Shulchan Arukh, which is serialized on Yeshivat Har Etzion’s Virtual Beit Midrash, www.vbm-torah.org.

HIERARCHY OF BLESSINGS

Before eating, halakha obligates us to make a blessing on the food. There are various blessings, each one corresponding to a different category of food. However, these categories are not exclusive but rather hierarchical: each category includes the one above it. There are four levels of blessings, which we may arrange from most inclusive to most specific as follows:

1. The most inclusive blessing is shehakol. This blessing applies specifically to food which doesn’t grow from the ground, but as the most general blessing it can exempt any kind of food.

2. The second level is borei pri ha-adama. This applies specifically to vegetables, but can exempt also fruit.

3. The third level is borei pri ha-etz, which applies to all fruits.

4. The fourth level includes three different blessings, each of which applies to only one single kind of food: On bread we say hamotzee; on wine we say borei pri hagen; and on baked goods which are not bread we say borei minei mezonot. (However, borei pri haetz does not exempt grain products. So there are minor exceptions to the hierarchy.)

We always strive to say the most specific berakha we can. For instance, it is improper to say shehakol or borei pri ha-adama on fruit. We can understand this rule as an extension of the prohibition to say a vain blessing. Blessings are meant to demonstrate a connection between HaShem and the world; we show that His name relates to earthly categories. Saying a vain blessing seems on the contrary to create a division between HaShem and the world. 

Taking this idea one step further, we want the blessing to correspond as closely as possible to its object. So we try and make the blessing as close to eating as possible, and we also make the language of the berakha correspond as closely as possible to the particular of food we are eating.
But why particularly do we have these four categories? And why is there a hierarchy among them? Is it really so obvious that meat is less important than fruit?

Surprisingly, these four categories, and the hierarchy among them, are hinted at in the story of Creation! In the various commands and blessings given to the first creatures, a clear division and hierarchy of foods is implied.

Adam and Chava: Diet After creating man and woman on the sixth day and giving them dominion over the animals, HaShem describes man’s diet and contrasts it with that of animals: “I have given you all seed-bearing herbage on the face of all the earth, and all trees giving tree-fruit bearing seed; I have given it to you to eat. But to all the beasts of the earth and birds of the sky, and to all that crawls on the ground, all that has a living soul in it, [I have given] all the green herbage to eat.” (Bereshit 1:29-30.) 

Here there is a clear distinction made: while both man and beast may eat vegetables, fruit is specially set aside for mankind. Meanwhile, meat is forbidden to both man and beast (see Rashi). The high moral level of all things with a “living soul” makes it inappropriate for them to eat each other.
We soon learn that there is a fourth level. In Bereshit 2:17 Adam is warned against eating the fruit of the “tree of knowing good and evil”. If eating meat is beneath his level, eating the tree of knowledge is beyond his level at this stage of creation. Man is not yet ready to have his eyes opened to good and evil without being tempted to evil himself.

The Talmud makes various suggestions as to the identity of the “tree of knowledge”; among these are wheat (whose complicated production demonstrates man’s advanced practical intellect) and grapes (which is used to make wine, which releases our inhibitions and helps to expose our true inner selves). So these are appropriate foods to identify with this fourth, higher level.

We know that Adam and Chava did not withstand the moral challenge presented them by God, and they ate of the forbidden tree. The result was that both man and the earth suffered a curse. Part of the curse of man was God’s admonition, “and you shall eat of the herbs of the field” (Bereshit 3:18). This admonition symbolizes that man has lost part of his special status, and has lowered himself towards the level of the beasts.

Later on, the spiritual level of mankind declined so far that these distinctions stopped being relevant for him at all. This resulted in the flood, and afterwards even animal meat was permitted to mankind (Bereshit 9:3). The only moral symbol left in the human diet is that eating meat from an animal while it is still alive is forbidden (Bereshit 9:4). (Note that in this verse, when meat is permitted to man, it is likened to vegetables.)

The Torah relates to us in our current lowered state, while at the same time directing our climb back to the moral perfection intended for us in Gan Eden. While permitting all kinds of foods, the halakha sensitizes us to the spiritual distinctions among them. This is accomplished by the prohibited foods, particularly the many kinds of forbidden meat, and also by the four-level hierarchy of blessings instituted by our Sages.

Rabbi Meir is in the process of writing a monumental companion to Kitzur Shulchan Aruch which beautifully presents the meanings in our mitzvot and halacha. He is also directing the Jewish Business Response Forum at the Center for Business Ethics and Social Responsibility, Jerusalem College of Technology - Machon Lev. The forum aims to help business people run their firms according to Torah, by obtaining prompt, relevant responses to their questions.

THE JERUSALEM INSTITUTE OF JEWISH LAW
Rabbi Emanuel Quint, Dean 

Lesson # 59 (part one) - Collateralized Loans

It was stated in Lesson 45 “It should be remembered that it is a Torah commandment and the responsibility of every Jew to lend money to those who are in need, even if the needy person is wealthy. In the phrase “If you lend money to any of My people” (Exodus 22:24), the word “if” is not fully permissive. It permits the lender the right to refuse only if he is not in a position to lend. If he can lend, however, he must surely do so. Rambam enumerates this as positive commandment 197, one of the 613 mitzvot.”

The lender is permitted to secure himself. He may attempt to do so by seeking a guarantor, or a mortgage on the property of the borrower, or collateral for the loan. This lesson discusses some of the questions regarding the collateral held by the creditor. What can he do with the collateral? 

The lender may ask that collateral be posted by the borrower before the loan is made and that the collateral stand as security from which the lender may exact payment if the loan is not repaid according to its terms. The lender may assume that the collateral deposited with him by the borrower may legally be deposited by the borrower. A husband may give his wife’s clothing or jewelry as collateral without her permission, unless he made them for her. Except for the last mentioned case, the husband does not require his wife’s permission. In all events, the lender is not required to ask the husband whether he has his wife’s permission; he may assume that the husband has permission. If the wife uses self-help and seizes from the lender the clothing or jewelry that the husband gave as collateral without her permission, she may take an oath that her husband did not receive her permission. If she does so, the collateral will remain with her in those cases where her permission is required. 

If the parties agree that the lender may use the collateral in consideration for reducing the indebtedness by a stipulated sum their agreement is binding. If the indebtedness is not reduced, the arrangement is not legal even if the borrower agrees that the lender may use the collateral, since the collateral will be in the nature of interest and the borrower may not waive the prohibition against taking or giving interest. This prohibition would apply even if the collateral is a Torah book and the lender can claim that he is performing a good deed with the collateral by studying Torah. There is an opinion that even if there is an agreement between the lender and the borrower regarding the lender’s use of the collateral, he nevertheless should not use it, since people will not realize that the loan will be reduced by the value of the use of the collateral. 

Unless so agreed upon between the parties, and except as later stated, the lender may not make use of the collateral. If the lender did use the collateral, then it is as if has transgressed the Torah command not to take interest. To use the collateral would in essence give the lender more than he loaned and would be akin to interest on the loan. However, the use does not amount to actual interest because it was not agreed upon when the loan was made that the lender would be permitted to use the collateral and the loan would not be reduced by the value of the use of the collateral. Had such an agreement been made, it would be actual interest. Furthermore, the lender has illegally used someone else’s property and it is akin to robbery and the lender is now liable if anything happens to the collateral even if destroyed by force majeure. Even absent an agreement, if the collateral is of a type that is usually leased to others, then the lender may use the collateral and give the rental value to the borrower, or the lender may lease the collateral to others without obtaining the permission of the borrower and reduce the debt by the amount of the rental income. If the value of the collateral will depreciate greatly, then it may not be leased by the lender to others even if the proceeds of the lease will be applied to reduce the loan.

The borrower cannot require the lender to accept the collateral in payment of the loan. The borrower borrowed money, and the collateral is only security for the lender. In the event that the borrower does not have money or assets with which to repay the loan, then the lender will collect out of the collateral. In case of default in repayment of the loan, the collateral belongs to the lender. While the lender holds the collateral he is deemed for the sake of care required to be taken of the collateral to be similar to a paid bailee of an object. A paid bailee is a person who gets paid for guarding an object. For example, a lady places her fur coat into a storage for the summer. The storage company receives compensation and the lady gets the benefit of her coat being guarded. Here too the lender has the collateral for his protection and the borrower has the benefit of the loan. When the storage company has the coat in its custody it is liable if anything happens to the coat through its negligence, or if the coat is lost or stolen. Similarly the lender is liable if anything happens to the collateral through his negligence or is lost or stolen. In those situations where the lender is liable for the loss of the collateral, if the collateral is equal to the amount of the loan, then the loan is cancelled and the lender is free of liability for the loss.

If the loan exceeds that value of the collateral, then the borrower pays the difference to the loaner. If the collateral exceeds the amount of the loan, then the lender pays to the borrower the difference between these values. 
The parties may agree when the collateral is given that it shall be in lieu of payment of the whole loan if the borrower does not repay the loan. In such event, if the lender loses the collateral, he cannot obtain the difference between the loan and the value of the collateral if the loan was greater. If the parties do not make any such stipulation, then the actual value of the collateral is calculated against the amount of the loan. If the borrower gives two items as collateral and one is lost then the respective values of the items are determined to calculate how much of the loan is satisfied against the loss of the item of collateral. 

A paid bailee is not liable if the object he is guarding is lost through force majeure. Thus the storage company will not be liable for the fur coat if there was an earthquake and the storage facilities were destroyed and the coat destroyed. Similarly, if the collateral held by the lender is lost or damaged through force majeure, the lender is not liable and the borrower must still repay the loan. 

The subject matter of this lesson is more fully discussed in Volume 2, Chapter 72 of A Restatement of Rabbinic Civil Law by E. Quint and on sale at local Judaica bookstores. 

Comments & questions to quint@inter.net.il

With the Chagim and other responsibilities I have fallen behind in answering your communications. I apologize and hope to get back on track after the chagim. - EQ

Special Features