1. RIBBIS FROM A NON-JEW, PART 2

In our previous issue we spoke about Ribbit from a non-Jew from a Biblical standpoint. Nevertheless, Hachamim forbade lending to a non-Jew with Ribbit, if that Ribbit would’ve been classified as Ribbit D’Oraita. The reason for this decree is in order that we keep our distance and not learn from their way of life.

There are however two exceptions to this rule. The first one is if one is lending in order to earn a living, and not merely to amass wealth. The second is that a Talmid Hacham whom Hachamim trusted would not be influenced by the Akum, may lend to them with Ribbit. Tosafot add that in our times when we are subject to the pressures of taxes, and our business dealings inevitably involve Nochrim, it is permitted to charge them Ribbit. These interactions will not cause us to leave our protected communities, as we are already dwelling among them.

The Hochmat Adam writes that it is still a Middat Hassidut – a pious measure – to refrain from relying on this leniency. Some add that those living in Eretz Yisrael would still be subject to this decree (see also Radak, Tehillim 15:5).

Some include a Mumar L’Hach’is (one who wantonly rejected the Torah without personal gain), and a Moser (an informant) in the above Heter. There is some discussion whether the Ribbit can be collected when the borrower became a Mumar between the origination of the loan and its collection (see Shulhan Aruch, Yore De’a 159).

2. SE’AH B’SE’AH: MEASURE FOR MEASURE

Hachamim prohibited borrowing a certain measure of fruit, or other commodities, with the agreement to pay the exact amount of the same item. The reason for this prohibition is because the asset may increase in value before satisfying the obligation, and the borrower is actually returning assets of greater value than he borrowed.

There are two notable exceptions to this prohibition: a) if the borrower has a similar item in stock, or b) there is a fixed market value to the item.

The aforementioned prohibition can apply to foreign currencies as well. A foreign currency is considered a commodity, and therefore would be subject to the prohibition of lending Se’ah B’Se’ah when borrowing and repaying in that currency. For example, if one borrows Canadian or Israeli currency in the United States to be paid back in the same currency that was borrowed, he transgresses this prohibition. If the borrower owns a minimal amount of that currency, it would be permissible.

When borrowing the local currency on the other hand, one may return the exact amount, even if it had appreciated in value. Even if inflation caused the value to drop sharply, one nevertheless repays only the amount borrowed.