Parshas Mishpatim (Shekalim) 5786
- Torah Tavlin
- 7 hours ago
- 2 min read
Monetary, Interpersonal Laws and Din Torah (64)
A borrower can take a mashkon (collateral) at the time of the loan, but he may not enter the borrower’s house later to forcibly take a mashkon - even if the agreed time of payment has passed. If he finds an item of the borrower in the street he cannot take it. Rather he should claim his money in a Beis Din, or with a Rav.
Obligations of the Borrower. Paying a debt timely, as agreed, are Torah obligations (1). If one borrows with the intention to not pay back, he transgresses a Torah issur (2), of holding back money owed to others. If one has money to pay and he pushes off the lender telling him to come back tomorow, even if he intends to pay later, he has transgressed an issur in Tanach (3).
Effort of Payment. It is the responsibility of the borrower to deliver the payment to the lender, and he cannot make him come and take his money. If the lender left town, the borrower is not obligated to go after him to deliver the payment (4). Nowadays where it is so easy to forward money to far places, the halacha would probably change. If the borrower meets the lender in any random place after the due date, he can ask for payment there as long as the borrower will have sufficient funds to get home.
Payment Sent. If one sends payment with a messenger or by mail he has not fulfilled his obligation till it gets to the hand of the lender. Even if an oness [circumstance beyond his control] happens, he is not off the hook till payment arrives to the lender. If he gave the payment to the lender’s wife (5), the Shulchan Aruch Harav rules that he has fulfilled his obligation (6).
Full Payment. Once the due date arrives, he must pay the whole amount and he cannot pay in smaller installments against the will of the lender. Some say that even when paying before the due date, he cannot pay in smaller installments against the will of the lender, because smaller amounts get wasted. Even though the Mechaber does not rule that way (7), he still holds that the borrower has a justified grudge [tarumos] against the borrower for paying in such a manner.
(1) ויקרא יט:לו (2) שם:יג (3) משלי ג:כח (4) ש"ך חו"מ עד:א (5) עיין מחלוקת הפוסקים בחו"מ ע"ב (6) שו"ע הרב הל' מציעא ופקדון ל"א (7) שו"ע חו"מ עג:ד