Categories of Ribbit: Difference between revisions
From Halachipedia
→Rentals
| Line 9: | Line 9: | ||
#It is forbidden to charge interest for a rental.<ref>Teshuvot Maimoniyot 15 records the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer Mtuch that interest is permitted for a rental. His proof is Macot 3a. However, the Bet Yosef 160:21 disagrees with this opinion.</ref> | #It is forbidden to charge interest for a rental.<ref>Teshuvot Maimoniyot 15 records the opinion of Rabbi Eliezer Mtuch that interest is permitted for a rental. His proof is Macot 3a. However, the Bet Yosef 160:21 disagrees with this opinion.</ref> | ||
#If someone got money not as a loan or as a deposit to safegaurd but because of theft or as a debt of rental or wages, even though one can't charge interest, if the one who is obligated to pay wants to pay more he can do so. However, some forbid in all cases.<ref>Brit Yehuda 2:17. He explains that Rabbi Eliezer Mtuch holds that there is no prohibition of interest when it was a case of a rental or wage. The Bet Yosef end of 160 rejects this opinion as does the Shach. However, the Bach 161 accepts it as a legitimate opinion. The Maharashdam YD 222 cited by Brit Yehuda claims that there's only a dispute if the one who deserves the rent or wage charges the interest but if the one who has the money decides to give extra that is permitted. Masat Binyamin 37 agrees. Brit Yehuda follows that opinion.</ref> | #If someone got money not as a loan or as a deposit to safegaurd but because of theft or as a debt of rental or wages, even though one can't charge interest, if the one who is obligated to pay wants to pay more he can do so. However, some forbid in all cases.<ref>Brit Yehuda 2:17. He explains that Rabbi Eliezer Mtuch holds that there is no prohibition of interest when it was a case of a rental or wage. The Bet Yosef end of 160 rejects this opinion as does the Shach. However, the Bach 161 accepts it as a legitimate opinion. The Maharashdam YD 222 cited by Brit Yehuda claims that there's only a dispute if the one who deserves the rent or wage charges the interest but if the one who has the money decides to give extra that is permitted. Masat Binyamin 37 agrees. Brit Yehuda follows that opinion.</ref> | ||
# There is a dispute if money returned due to | # There is a dispute if money returned due to an erroneous sale is considered like a loan for the purposes of interest.<ref>Chatom Sofer YD 85 and Maharam Shik YD 161 dispute whether money that was taken because of a sale and then the sale falls through whether it is like a loan and it is permitted to pay interest or not. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=1278&st=&pgnum=160&hilite= Maharshag 1:4] argues with the Maharam Shik.</ref> | ||
===Renting Coins=== | |||
#It is forbidden to rent money to someone else because that is considered Biblical interest.<ref>Rama Y.D. 176:1</ref> | |||
##There is a minority opinion that one can rent out coins if they stipulate that the renter is exempt from all responsibility including damages from theft, loss, and unexpected circumstances. Ashkenazim rely upon this opinion for rabbinic interest, while Sephardim reject this opinion.<ref>Rama Y.D. 176:1 accepts the Trumat Hadeshen 302, while in 177:6 he only uses it for rabbinic interest. Shach there opines that the Trumat Hadeshen is even relevant to Biblical cases. Gra 176:2 completely rejects the Trumat Hadeshen. Bet Yosef 176:1 writes that the Trumat Hadeshen doesn’t actually allow it in practice.</ref> | |||
#If the person is planning on using the coins to show them off or to learn from them and isn’t going to be allowed to use them then It is permitted to rent them just like one can rent out any utensil.<ref>Tosefta, Tosfot Bava Metsia 69b, Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 176:1</ref> | |||
## If one is renting coins for show or learning purposes the borrower can’t accept responsibility for the coins if there’s an unexpected circumstance in which the coins are damaged.<ref>Rama Y.D. 176:1</ref> | |||
===Renting Utensils=== | |||
# It is permitted to rent utensils even if the renter has permission to sell them and replace them.<ref>Tur and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 176:2</ref> However, one can’t do this with utensils that don’t depreciate with use such as gold or silver utensils.<Ref>Taz 176:1</ref> | |||
# It is forbidden to rent out a car, ship, or pot such that they pay rent and if the item breaks the renter must pay for the value of the item at the time of the damage.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 176:3</ref> This is only permitted for items that depreciate with use.<ref>Rama 176:3</ref> | |||
## According to Ashkenazim they may not stipulate that if it breaks then the renter should pay the value of the item when it was originally rented. According to Sephardim this is permitted.<ref>Shulchan Aruch and Rama 176:4. The Rambam Malveh Vloveh 8:13 holds that it is permitted to stipulate that the renter will pay the original value of the rented item if it breaks since if it is still around it can be returned as such even if it is worth less due to ware or market fluctuation. Bet Yosef 176:4 cites that the Rashba 69b, Ran 69b, and Mordechai b”m 5:330 agree with the Rambam. On the other hand, the Tur 176:4 holds that doing so is forbidden since the obligation of paying back the original value of the item indicates that it was like a loan and the rent was interest. Rabbenu Yerucham 1:27b agrees and thinks that it is only rabbinic interest, while Ramban b”m 70a s.v. ha damrinan is similarly strict but isn’t sure if it is rabbinic or Biblical interest.</ref> | |||
===Rentals of Real Estate=== | |||
#It is permitted to stipulate two prices for rent, one for immediate payment and a higher rate for paying at the end. The reason is that since one is only obligated to pay rent at the end, paying at the beginning at a discount isn’t the real price and is permitted.<ref>Gemara Bava Metsia 65a, Tur and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 176:6</ref> However, many hold that nowadays this leniency won’t apply since the practice in many places is to have the rent due from the beginning of the month or rental period. If so, it would be forbidden to have a two tiered system for the price of rent.<ref>Torat Ribbit 14:7 writes that if in a certain place it is assumed that rent is due at the beginning of the rental and not the end, the Chachmat Adam 136:10 forbids offering two prices for rent. His reason is that once the rent is due immediately it is considered a sale and offering a more expensive price later is forbidden. He also quotes that the Machaneh Efraim 31 writes that it is permitted since essentially it is due at the end but the practice is just to have a condition to pay it up front it is no different than in the days of the gemara. Torat Ribbit himself adds a leniency if it is clear that the price for the payment at the end is the fair market price and the earlier price is a discount that it could be permitted based on the Chachmat Adam 139:5.</ref> | |||
# Even when or where it is permitted to charge extra for rent it is only permitted when stipulated in advance of the renter beginning to rent. It can not be stipulated once he already began his rental period<ref>Talmid Harashba 65a, Bet Yosef 176:6, Darkei Moshe 176:3, Rama 176:6. Bet Yosef has a doubt whether this constitutes Biblical or rabbinic interest.</ref> and certainly not after the rental period has finished.<ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 176:6. Taz 176:8 ventures that this is Biblical interest even according to the Bet Yosef since the obligation to pay after the rental period is halachically considered a loan. Shach in Nekudat Hakesef 176:3 disagrees and thinks that the Bet Yosef’s unresolved quandary is still relevant since the obligation was generated by a rental. Chelkat Binyamin 176:67 cites both the Shach and Taz. He adds that there’s an additional reason to assume it is rabbinic; according to the Rambam (cited in 166:2) all interest that isn’t obligated from the time of the loan is rabbinic.</ref> | |||
# When and where it is permitted to have a two tiered rent system it is even permitted when the renter makes this stipulation and payment significantly before he begins the rental.<ref>Bet Yosef 176:6 quotes the Hagahot Maimoniyot in the name of the Baalei Hatosfot Rashba says that it is forbidden to have a two tiered system when the renter doesn’t start immediately upon agreement of the rent. Doing so would appear as interest since it appears as though the payment is a loan in order for the owner to offer a discount. Yet, the Maggid Mishna cites the Rashba, Rav Shlomo Ben Aderet, as being lenient since the acquisition of the rental is complete once the rental price is finalized. That acquisition makes it a real rental and not a loan even from the moment of the agreement. Chelkat Binyamin (Tziyunim 176:167 and Biurim) clarifies that this means that the acquisition for the rental acquires him the house with respect to being able to live there when the rental will begin (unlike the Nekudat Hakesef 176:1 who implies that it means that it is completely in the possession of the renter immediately). Nekudat Hakesef 176:1 follows the Rashba, Rav Shlomo Ben Aderet.</ref> | |||
# If a person is renting a field for work for a certain price and also offers the renter a loan in order to invest in the field itself, they can arrange that the rental price will be higher because of this loan.<ref>Gemara Bava Metzia 69b, Tur and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 176:5. Baal Hatrumot 46:4:48 cited by Bet Yosef 176:5 quotes Rabbenu Moshe who says that it is forbidden to have the renter pay back the loan as well as the higher rent. Rather he should pay for the higher rent and not the capital of the loan. Bet Yosef comments that this Rabbenu Moshe isn’t the Rambam who makes no mention of this qualification. Indeed, the Chelkat Binyamin (176 fnt. 134) notes that the Shulchan Aruch and commentaries don’t make this qualification either and as such we don’t follow it.</ref> This is only permitted even after the rental begins before the rental is due.<ref>Chelkat Binyamin 176:44</ref> | |||
===Worker Salaries=== | |||
# It is forbidden to add to a worker’s salary for late payment after the worker began and certainly not after the wage is due. That would be considered interest.<ref>Tur and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 176:7</ref> It is permitted to stipulate immediately before the worker begins to work that if he is paid in advance he would be paid at such a rate and if later at a higher rate.<ref>Tur and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 176:7</ref> This may not be done well in advance of the worker beginning his work since doing so appears as interest.<ref>Gemara Bava Batra 87a, Tur and Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 176:8</ref> | |||
===Worker's Salary=== | ===Worker's Salary=== | ||
