Parshas Achrei– Mos Kedoshim 5786 – Intriguing Questions & Answers
Parshas Achrei– Mos Kedoshim 5786
Ask The Rav
Davening for the Success of the Lender
Q: I was asked by someone who borrowed money from another person whether he may daven for the lender’s success in business, or whether this raises a concern of ribbis devarim (verbal/usual-interest benefits). After all, perhaps he wants the lender to prosper so that in the future he will have more money to lend him, or simply wishes to benefit the lender through prayer as an added favor beyond repayment of the loan, which could be prohibited as a form of ribbis.
A: As a practical ruling, many generally permit praying for the lender’s success, and even mentioning in one’s prayers the merit of the loan. Since the borrower is not speaking directly to the lender, it does not appear as ribbis. However, the borrower should not tell the lender, “I davened for you,” when such words would not have been said had there been no loan. Certainly, one may not say, “Lend me money and I will daven for your success.” In fact, I once encountered a real case involving a Jew who was not yet observant, but heard that his neighbor needed a loan. He approached him and said he would lend him money only because it was the during the days of Rosh Hashanah. Although he himself did not attend shul, he believed davening would help, and therefore was willing to lend on condition that the borrower daven for his success in the coming year on Rosh Hashanah. The borrower was unsure whether this was permitted or whether it involved ribbis.
The Gemara (Bava Metzia 75a) teaches in the name of Rabbi Shimon bar Yochai: if one is owed money by another and was not accustomed to greeting him first, he may not now begin greeting him first. The verse says, “Any form of biting/usury” — even speech is prohibited. Rambam and Shulchan Aruch rule accordingly: if he was not previously accustomed to greeting him first, it is forbidden to begin doing so because of the loan. If he was already accustomed to it beforehand, it is permitted, since it is not because of the loan. Shulchan Aruch HaRav writes that even speaking kindly because of the loan or because of an extension of time is forbidden. This includes greeting him first if one was not accustomed to do so previously, and certainly praising him, thanking him, expressing indebtedness, or blessing him in his presence because he lent the money or extended the term. “Even speech is prohibited.”
From this wording it appears that ribbis devarim applies specifically when done in the lender’s presence. If it is done not in his presence, one may praise or bless him. The reason is that even if the lender later hears that the borrower praised or blessed him, that benefit is only indirect and not considered a direct benefit from borrower to lender. However, Tosafos in Kiddushin (8b) seem to indicate that even blessing the lender not in his presence could be ribbis, based on the verse regarding returning collateral overnight: “He will sleep in his garment and bless you.” If the lender did not legally acquire the collateral, then the collateral still belongs to the borrower, and the borrower’s blessing the lender because of the loan would seem to be ribbis devarim.
Indeed, many leading contemporary poskim understand that anything prohibited as ribbis devarim applies even when not said directly to the lender. Still, Rav Shlomo Zalman Auerbach (Minchas Shlomo I:27) wrote that it is permitted to give a gift to the lender if the lender does not know that the borrower is the giver. This implies that even if the lender benefits, if he does not know the borrower gave it because of the loan, it is permitted. Accordingly, one could argue that where the Torah says “and he will bless you,” the lender knows about the blessing, and that is why it would be prohibited. Nevertheless, his ruling is a novelty, because one could argue that if the borrower gives the lender a benefit he would not otherwise have given him, why should it matter whether the lender knows its source?
Still, regarding ribbis devarim, it makes sense that the issue is specifically when the lender knows, because then he derives benefit from the awareness itself. If he does not know, praising or blessing him would be permitted. My own inclination was that there is indeed a concern of ribbis devarim. Later I found that the sefer Marbeh Torah states simply that it is forbidden for the lender to ask the borrower to pray for him. However, it permits the borrower to say voluntarily, “Lend me money and I will pray for you,” though not as a formal condition. This is similar to rulings I received from several authorities regarding asking the borrower to learn Mishnayos for the lender’s merit: if it is merely a request and not a condition, there is less concern of ribbis.
Another case for leniency is where the borrower was already accustomed to praying for the lender before the loan. Then there is no concern, even if the lender asks him to continue doing so. Some authorities ruled there is no concern at all, since the borrower gives the lender nothing directly; rather, Hashem grants the blessing. Therefore, even if requested as a condition, they saw no issue. Nonetheless, most poskim were concerned, especially where the loan was given only on that condition.
A final novel argument appears in Seder HaRibbis citing Igros Moshe: if one writes a dedication or blessing in honor of the lender when publishing a sefer, even though the lender enjoys the recognition, it may not be considered ribbis devarim. Only explicit language of gratitude would be prohibited. If so, perhaps praying for the lender’s success or health, even if the lender knows it will be done, would likewise not be direct ribbis but merely an indirect benefit.
Practical Conclusion: Because there is significant dispute among the poskim, it is proper to be stringent unless the borrower wishes to pray for the lender entirely on his own initiative, without the lender requesting it or conditioning the loan upon it.
Is it Permitted to Learn or Teach Playing Musical Instruments During the Omer
Q: This week several people who play musical instruments asked me whether they may continue to play or learn to play instruments such as guitar or drums during the days of Sefiras HaOmer, or whether this is prohibited.
A: Regarding the Three Weeks, the Biur Halachah (Siman 551:2, s.v. me-ma’atin) cites the Pri Megadim that one whose livelihood comes from playing music for non-Jews at celebrations may do so for the sake of earning a living. It is implied from his words that without the justification of livelihood, it would be forbidden—even if his intention is not for personal joy. Accordingly, one might suggest that someone learning to play an instrument would also be forbidden during the Three Weeks, and perhaps likewise during Sefiras HaOmer.
However, there is a major distinction between the two cases. There, the musician enters a place of celebration and plays in an atmosphere of festivity, which naturally arouses joy even if that is not his intent. Here, by contrast, the playing is not for celebration at all, but for study and training. Therefore, one may argue that it is permitted even without the justification of livelihood.
The Igros Moshe (Orach Chaim III:87) writes regarding someone who wishes to teach music that if it is for livelihood, it is permitted even during Sefirah, since for him it is not an occasion of joy. But if it is for personal enjoyment, it is forbidden even to teach, because that too is a form of pleasure, and the custom during Sefirah is to refrain from matters of joy. Without his words, one might have reasoned that even if one enjoys it, it should still be permitted, since as long as it is being done for teaching purposes it is not inherently an act of celebration. Enjoyment alone is not necessarily prohibited.
I also found in Sha’arim Metzuyanim B’Halachah (122:1), citing Shu”t Zecher Simchah (67), regarding teaching music to students, that there is room to be lenient. It is not comparable to parties or banquets whose purpose is joy, whereas learning music is not in that category at all. Therefore, where there is financial loss or loss of valuable time, one may be lenient. This is also the view of the Maharam Shik, who permits where there is monetary loss. Likewise, Moadei Yeshurun cites Rav Eliyahu Meir Bloch zt”l as permitting it during the Three Weeks because it is merely learning, and it would seem the same would apply during Sefirah.
It appears that if someone is still in the early stages of learning and is not yet skilled enough to derive pleasure from the playing itself, it may be permitted even without financial loss, since it is viewed mainly as the effort and burden of learning. However, once he is experienced and proficient enough that he gains enjoyment from playing, it should only be permitted in a case of financial loss or something significant that would otherwise be missed.
Certainly, if it is possible to postpone the lessons until after Sefirah, it is preferable to do so whenever practical, even for a beginner. But if there is a need, there is room to be lenient. Someone whose livelihood is teaching others may certainly teach, because generally there is no special joy in teaching beginners.
I also found in Ashrei HaIsh from Rav Yosef Shalom Elyashiv zt”l that he permitted it during the Three Weeks, at least until Rosh Chodesh Av, in a case of financial loss when the person was not yet proficient in playing. Certainly that would apply during Sefirah as well.
The Maharam Shik writes that if one is not doing it for livelihood, but merely out of vanity or self-display, one should not permit it on grounds of financial loss. On the contrary, spending money on something without benefit is itself the loss. Furthermore, it conflicts with the remembrance of the Churban. Perhaps, however, if one is learning music in order to bring joy to a simchas mitzvah, there may be room to permit it.
Practical Summary:
- For livelihood (teaching or professional playing): generally permitted.
- For beginners learning seriously: room to be lenient, especially if stopping would cause loss of progress.
- For experienced players who enjoy it recreationally: better to refrain during Sefirah unless there is financial loss or need.
- If it can easily wait until after Sefirah: preferable to postpone.
- For mitzvah purposes (wedding, simchas mitzvah, etc.): may be more lenient depending on circumstances.
Separating Challah from Sourdough Dough
Q: Nowadays, many people regularly eat sourdough bread, and some make it at home on a regular basis. Therefore, it is worthwhile to clarify several practical halachos regarding separating challah from sourdough dough.
A: Regarding the proper time to separate challah from sourdough dough: in any dough, the ideal time to separate challah from sourdough is immediately after the kneading is completed. Although regarding ordinary bread it is explained in the Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah (Siman 327), that it is preferable to wait and separate challah after the dough has fully risen, nevertheless with sourdough bread it would appear that one should not wait.
The reason is that sourdough dough is commonly left to ferment for a long time, such as twenty-four hours or more, and it is not advisable to wait so long without separating challah, because there is concern that one may ultimately forget to do so. Even regarding regular bread, according to strict law it is permitted to separate challah immediately after kneading. The custom to wait is only a stringency, in deference to the view cited by the Beis Yosef (Siman 327, בשם ספר התרומה סימן פה) that it is preferable to separate challah after the dough has risen. Therefore, one should not be stringent here in a way that may lead to forgetting the mitzvah entirely.
Another practical point concerns the minimum quantity required for challah. For one making sourdough bread at home, usually a single dough batch does not contain the minimum amount required for challah, which is at least the halachic measure of five quarter-kav units (chamesh revai’im). The reason is that people commonly prepare small sourdough batches in separate pans, unlike ordinary bread where one often makes one large dough first and then divides it into smaller portions.
Therefore, someone making sourdough at home generally does not need to separate challah, unless several doughs are placed together in a manner that halachically combines them, as will be explained.
The proper way to combine them so they become obligated in challah from the outset is as follows:
- Place several pans containing sourdough dough inside one large container, such as a box.
- Bring the pans close together until they touch one another.
Another method of combining them is by means of a cloth:
- Place the pans on one large cloth, such as a towel.
- Bring the pans together until they touch one another.
- Then cover everything with that same cloth from above and from the sides.