Family, Business, & Jewish Life Through the Prism of Halacha

VOLUME 5779 • ISSUE XXI• PARSHAS KI SISAH • A PUBLICATION OF THE BAIS HAVAAD HALACHA CENTER

icyholder is giving money to the partnership, The STATE OF which includes other Jews, in exchange for the promise of a return with interest? on the THE UNION In my opinion, this is not a problem at all. Since every policyholder receives equal treatment, Bring the Parsha to Life! REVISITED: none of them is lending to another. Were the company to go bankrupt, no policyholder Adapted from a shiur by Yechiel Biberfield on A follow-up on credit unions and Parshas Ki Sisa cooperatives. would personally have to pay any other policy- holder. The promised rate of return is nothing Adapted from a shiur by Rav Shmuel Honigwachs Violating Shabbos to Save a Life more than the company declaring that it is do- ושמרו בני ישראל את השבת לעשות את השבת לדורותם -ing so well and on such strong financial foot לברית עולם Our recent article following the kol korai on credit unions (“State of the Union: May One ing that the cash value of each policyholder’s Join PenFed or First Atlantic?”) prompted stake will certainly increase by that amount. I The Gemara cites eight pesukim, including many questions from readers regarding other presented this argument to R’ Shlomo Miller the pasuk above, to prove that one may vio- entities with similar structures to credit late Shabbos to save a life. But the Gemara says unions, particularly mutual whole life insur- and he concurred. v’chai bahem is the best, since it includes even ance companies. Another issue that was raised, concerns the cases of safek sakanah, while the others only al- A mutual company, also known as a cooper- right of a policyholder to borrow money at in- low for definite danger. ative, is one in which the customers or clients terest from the company, using the cash val- are also the owners. In the case of insurance, ue accumulated within his policy as collateral. Is the permission to violate Shabbos hutra or a mutual company is one owned by its policy- Wouldn’t this present a ribbis problem? As a dechuya? holders, each of whom is therefore both insur- policyholder, isn’t my money potentially going Rosh/Maharam: It is hutra like cooking on Yom er and insured. to be loaned to other Jewish policyholders at Tov, and better than violating other mitzvos. In a traditional whole life insurance policy with interest? Chasam Sofer: This is because v’shamru teach- a guaranteed return, the policyholder is guar- I believe that this is generally not a problem es that Shabbos is hutra, but v’chai bahem anteed, as long as he continues to pay the either, because this loan facility appears not teaches that other mitzvos are only dechuya. premiums, a payout of the policy’s face value to be a true loan but simply the right to par- Vyaan Yosef and Emes Lyaakov: They explain to his beneficiaries upon his death. In addition, tially cash out the policy with the opportunity based on the Rambam that v’chai bahem is a cash value accrues within the policy, and it to buy back in at a slightly higher rate (the “in- based on oness (with no choice), while v’sham- is guaranteed to grow at a designated annual terest”). This is how literature from New York ru is the preferred choice – hutra to violate rate. A policyholder may borrow money from Life explains the feature. Presented with this (continued on back) the insurance company against this cash val- literature, R’ Shlomo accepted this argument ue at low interest. Should he die having never as well. Of course, it may be different with oth- paid back the loan, what he owes is deducted er insurers, so check with the company and a Elevate your Inbox. from the death benefit paid out to the benefi- . Scan here to receive the weekly ciary. If a policyholder chooses at any point to email version of the Halacha Journal R’ Shlomo Miller on credit unions: an update surrender his policy, he receives the accrued Corporations were created as a means to cash value less fees. shield participants in a business venture from If credit unions are forbidden because the personal liability. It has shareholders, but (continued on back) members are viewed as partners lending to shareholders are not owners. A corporation each other with interest, readers asked, would a has its own identity and legal “personhood”; mutual life insurance company be viewed this what the corporation does is not attributable way, too? And if so, would an insurance policy to its shareholders or its employees personally. like this be forbidden, because the Jewish pol- As Leon Metzger, adjunct Professor of Finance OR SIGN UP AT BHHJ.ORG (continued on back)

ADDRESS 105 River Avenue, #301, Lakewood, NJ 08701 • PHONE 1.888.485.VAAD (8223) • WEBSITE www.baishavaad.org • EMAIL [email protected] SUGGESTED SOLUTIONS be ineffective and thus exempt. Based on this, The first thing to clarify is whether or not it re- some suggest that if the utensil will break by GENERAL ally needs tevila. The Torah only enumerates immersing it, it too will be exempt. However metals in the chiyuv of tevila, and the Rab- the comparison is definitely disputatious, for HALACHA banan added glass. Plastic is customarily not while in the case of Rema the tevila is ineffec- toveled. In general the Keurig [i.e. the parts tive, in the case of the Keurig the tevila is just A Kosher Keurig? that touch water] is almost entirely plastic, fine. It’s the machine that is ineffective. By: Rabbi Baruch Fried with the exception of the two pins that punc- ture the coffee packet, and an internal met- ALMOST BUT NOT QUITE... This does however lead us to a possible solu- al bowl that actually heats the water. Since, tion, and that is to sell a share of the machine however, those metal parts are intrinsic to to a non-Jew, rendering him a partner and thus the preparation and come in contact with gaining the heter of the Rema. Although this the water, according to most poskim the en- seems like a great idea, there are various ear- tire machine is considered to be of a material lier teshuvos discussing utensils that were too that needs tevila. big to be toveled, and we don’t find this solu- Another consideration is that it needs elec- tion given. The question is why? Some present tricity to function, which requires a connec- Introduction day Poskim suggest that even the Rema never tion to an outlet at all times. Therefore some In this week’s Parsha [31:21-23] we are meant that you may do so l’chatchila, rather if Poskim suggest that we can consider it at- introduced to the requirement of purify- you already bought it together with the gentile tached to the ground and thus not obligat- ing utensils acquired from a non-Jew. The then by default you are exempt. Gemara in Avoda Zara 75B tells us that each ed to be toveled. It is very difficult to rely on Ok, so let’s go a step further and sell the whole “kashering” must include immersion in a this for two reasons. First, many early Poskim Kosher Mikva. Although the process is fairly thing to a non-Jew, and just borrow it back are of the opinion that attaching a utensil to straightforward, modern application can be indefinitely. Certainly everyone agrees that quite complex. the ground does not absolve its chiyuv tevila. something belonging to a non-Jew is exempt Secondly, many Poskim think it outright ri- even l’chatchila? The catch there is that by bor- diculous that plugging in an appliance would WHAT COULD BE WRONG...? rowing it back for that long it would seem to be considered attaching it to the ground [see Over the past few years, the coffee indus- fall under the category of a non-Jew’s collateral Shevet HaLevi Vol 2, 57]. try has been transformed with the advent of entrusted indefinitely to a Jew. In this instance the Keurig. These single serve coffee packets WHEN THERE IS NO SOLUTION... the Gemara tells us it must be toveled despite [K-cups] and their brewers can almost in- A different line of reasoning contends that its non-Jewish ownership. In fact even if lent stantly provide a cup of always fresh perfectly since it cannot be immersed without break- for a mere 30 days the Taz already requires brewed hot coffee, in an endless variety of fla- ing it, that itself absolves you from doing so. tevila, if only miderabanan. [Although we do vors. For the true coffee lover, it’s the answer to There are two ways to understand this leni- find this idea of sale to a non-Jew to exempt most of life’s problems. ency. One, since it is a positive mitzva, it is from tevila in earlier sources, it is generally only As with every new fad, the observant Jew has similar to all positive mitzvos that an “Onais” used together with other factors]. more on his mind. While the various agencies [lit. Coerced] is exempt. For instance, we find have successfully taken on the kashrus angle, that someone whose tzitzis tear in a public A WAY OUT... There is one solution that seems to be accept- some other areas are left to the consumer. domain on Shabbos may continue wearing ed by all poskim, though it does seem uncon- Chief among them is the issue of tevila. The them for the time being because they can- ventional. That would be to have the machine Torah mandates that a Jew’s utensils used in not be repaired anyway on Shabbos. However dismantled or broken to an extent that it can- food preparation [provided they actually come that proof is self-contradictory, for we only al- not be used at all without a professional repair. in contact with food] must be immersed in a low wearing the tzitzis while he is in a public At that point it is Halachically not a Kli altogeth- Kosher Mikva. The Mishna [ibid] tells us that domain. As soon as a private place is reached er. It would then be repaired or re-assembled this includes a pot used for heating water. he must remove them, despite his inability to by a Jewish technician, thereby regarded to be As such it would seem that a Jewish owned repair them till after Shabbos. a Jewish made utensil. A utensil made by a Jew Keurig brewer would require immersion prior A second understanding is that any uten- and sold to a Jew [without non-Jewish own- to use. sil whose immersion will be ineffective does ership in between] is certainly exempt from The problem however, is that the said ma- not need tevila. The precedent for this is the tevila. Not surprisingly, “kosherizing” Keurigs chines generally have a computer chip which Rema [YD 120:11] who rules that a utensil has already become a business in some Frum most technicians fear would get destroyed if owned by a partnership of a Jew and non- communities. On the other hand, since this immersed in water, rendering it useless (and Jew is exempt from tevila. His source is the process is quite complicated both technically voiding the warrantee). This leaves us with sefer Issur VeHeter, who explains that since and halachically, many Rabbanim prefer the the difficult decision of giving up this advan- it will remain [partially] a non-Jewish utensil, “partnership” option mentioned above. As al- tageous machine altogether, or finding some tevila (which is in essence to purify it from its ways, check with your Rav for guidance. other solution. previous non-Jewish ownership) will always MATTERS OF INTEREST AVISSAR FAMILY RIBBIS AWARENESS INITIATIVE:

USING A BORROWER’S CD OR MP3 PLAYER In instances where Reuven has previously Reuven owes Shimon money. May Shimon allowed Shimon to use his CD or MP3 player The use Reuven’s CD or MP3 player without per- (ragil) without permission, most poskim per- mission if he is knows Reuven lets others use mit Shimon to use them now even though he in it without permission? currently has the status of a lender. The same would apply to taking coffee without permis- May Shimon take some of Reuven’s Taster’s sion. Choice coffee in the coffee room without per- Bring the Daf to Life! mission, if he is sure Reuven doesn’t mind? In the case of the coffee, aside from the laws of ribbis there is an issue of gezeila according Shimon may not use the CD or MP3 player to some poskim (who differentiate between מסכת חולין without Reuven’s knowledge. This is a unique consumption and borrowing) although he limitation even between friends, aimed at knows his friend would let him take. preventing a lender from dominating a bor- RAV YOSEF GREENWALD rower. Therefore, although Reuven would One should therefore be stringent and ask Dayan, Bais HaVaad definitely allow Shimon to use the CD or MP3 permission, unless specifically granted per- mission to take whenever they want. RAV CHAIM WEG player without permission just as he allows Rosh , Kollel Zichron Gershon anyone else, nevertheless since Shimon has איסור רבית דברים )עיין ט"ז קס, סק"ה(. וזה מצוי במי שאומר the status of a lender he is required to ask Valuing Mitzvos & More דף פ"ז "אני יודע שמותר לי להשתמש בזה בגלל שאני עוזר לו תמיד permission first.1 בהלואות וטובות וכדומה". Searching for Cover: Kisui HaDam דף פ"ח ואגב יש להעיר דמדין זה שכתב המחבר ז"ל נ"ל בעזה"י with Salt, Ashes, and More להביא ראיה לשיטת הש"ך בחו"מ סימן שנ"ה שהתיר לאדם 1 מפורש במחבר )קס, ז( דבלא דעת הלוה חמיר טפי, דאפילו לשאול חפץ בלא רשות כל שיודע ודאי שאין חבירו מקפיד יודע דבלא"ה היה מתיר לו להשתמש בה אסור. ועש"ך הטעם Dust & Dirt: Transcending Nature דף פ"ט ע"ש, ואף שיש פוסקים החולקים עיין בסוגיא ריש פ"ב דמ־ משום דנראה שסומך עליו שבשביל מעותיו שבידו יסבול לו. ציעא, מ"מ מדברי המחבר משמע דיתכן ד"ז ואין בו איסור, !Enjoy Your Food ואולם נראה בעזה"י דכל זה רק בדבר שלא התשמש בה דף צ' וק"ל. ואף שיש לדחוק ולפרש דברי המחבר בע"א מ"מ פשטא מעולם, רק שיודע ששמעון היה מתיר לו להשתמש בה. אבל דמלתא נראה כמש"כ. שו"ר ת"ל בספר הל"י שהבין ג"כ כנ"ל Making It Edible דף צ"א היכא דרגיל להשתמש בה כבר שלא מדעת הלוה יש להתיר. דדברי המחבר מתפרשים עפ"ד הש"ך בחו"מ שם. ומה שכ־ דיש לומר דרגיל עדיף טפי מהך דאילו היה נותן לו הנ"ל. ושו"ר תבתי להחמיר בלוקח קפה ולא בלוקח חפץ, אף שגם מצינו The Struggle for Eternity דף צ"ב שכ"כ הגר"ז בהדיא. ומ"מ כ"ז בצנעא אבל בפרהסיא אסור חולקים לאסור לקחת חפץ בלא רשות דלא כש"ך, הוא משום אפילו ברגיל כמבואר בפוסקים )עש"ך קס, סק"ט ועוד(. גם Half and Whole Comparisons דף צ"ג ששמעתי מהגר"ש פירסט שליט"א שהמנהג להקל כהש"ך נתבאר דהיכא שעושה כן באופן "אדנות" על חבירו ר"ל שמ־ בחפצים אבל באוכלים דמכליא קרנא נהיגי כדעת הגר"ז לה־ תפאר עליו בגלל שהוא המלוה שלו ולכן משתמש בשלו, יש חמיר.

Belsky, zt”l ruled that the bracha on dried Yes. Although on Shabbos the tefillos contain cranberries is Ha’odama. Although the cran- fewer brachos, one must still fill the quota OU DAILY berry plant survives from year to year, and in of 100 brachos. On Friday night, one recites fact can live for over a hundred years, since the 11 brachos during Maariv, and an addition- LIVING berries grow on or near the ground, the bra- al 47 brachos are recited during Shacha- Weekly Questions cha is Ha’odama. The Mishnah Berurah (203:3) ris, Musaf and Mincha. One must eat three Laws Related to Brachos writes that there is a dispute as to which bra- meals on Shabbos which adds another cha to recite on berries that grow on low bush- 18 brachos, and there are a few addition- es that are within three tefachim (9 to 12 inch- al brachos recited for Kiddush, HaMapil and es) of the ground, and the minhag ha’olam after using the restroom. Still, on an av- (the accepted practice) is to recite Ha’odama. erage Shabbos, one will find themselves about 18 brachos short. Therefore, Shulchan Individuals who grow their own cranber- Aruch (OC 290:1) writes that one should eat ry bushes may have cranberries that grow sweet fruit and smell various fragrant spic- higher than 3 tefachim. On berries that grow es to accumulate extra brachos throughout on those bushes, one should recite Ha’ei- the day. Bedieved one can rely on answer- What bracha should one recite on dried tz. However, commercially grown cranberries ing Amen to the brachos of Krias Hatorah cranberries? are grown in bogs, on or near the ground, so and Haftara (an additional 27 brachos). There Most dried cranberries are sugar infused. This their bracha is Ha’odama. is also an opinion that reciting the prayer “Ein means the cranberries are soaked in sugar Does the obligation to recite one hun- Kelokainu”, which has in it all the compo- water and then dried to look like raisins. Rav dred brachos apply even on Shabbos? nents of a bracha, is equivalent to having re- cited 12, and some say 20, brachos. (continued from front pg.) at NYU’s Stern School of Business, writes: “It is a that the case is somewhat akin to that of an terest from a different Jewish partner. He feels myth that shareholders own corporations. Cor- animal descended from three chaya and one that further research into the matter is neces- porations own themselves. Shareholders, how- behaima “grandparents,” which the Pri Mega- sary, including consultation with legal authorities, ever, have certain rights.” dim rules is treated like a chaya in that its chai- and that at present one may continue to make But the corporation doesn’t exist in Halacha. lev is permitted to be eaten. payments and take interest from a credit union. In Halacha, only people can own things. Given The original article explained R’ Moshe Fein- However, because the issue is not settled, one that the corporation exists under dina d’mal- stein’s view of corporate shareholders: A share- should consult with his posek. Some authorities chusa, how does Halacha treat it? holder is not Halachically an owner unless he is on secular law feel that the defining feature of a corporation is liability protection, which credit R’ is reputed to a major owner with a real say in the operation unions have, and that this would suggest they are have held that Halachically, what’s owned by a of the company. more like corporations. corporation is not viewed as having an owner at R’ Shlomo Miller doesn’t fully accept this view. all. But most poskim rule that it is not logical to However, he is concerned that perhaps a cred- The credit union on the Lower East Side view the assets as ownerless, so the sharehold- it union is not legally viewed as an entity inde- A reader of the article called to say he had infor- ers are considered the Halachic owners. Talmi- pendent of its members in the same way as a mation about the credit union that was the sub- dim of R’ say in his name that corporation and is fundamentally just a part- ject of R’ Moshe’s teshuva, having discussed the a corporation with a majority of non-Jewish nership—which is a valid Halachic structure. matter with R’ Moshe at the time, and that it was shareholders is seen as non-Jewish for Halachic And, if it is in fact a partnership, it is forbidden founded by Jewish socialists and had virtually all purposes like ribbis. R’ Shlomo Miller maintains for a Jewish partner to lend or borrow at in- Jewish members.

(continued from front pg.) Shabbos to keep olate Shabbos to save the baby. Shabbos again The EVENTS & Mishna Berura (8) - Even if the baby is not yet

on the in the future. alive, we still violate Shabbos. This is based on HAPPENINGS Bring the Parsha to Life! There are a num- v’shamru, because v’chai bahem applies only AT THE BAIS HAVAAD ber of other naf- if it’s alive. ka minos between these two derivations: When is it permissible to sue in court? Can Tosafos -- Eliyahu was allowed to approach a you go to Beur Halacha 329:1 — V’shamru applies if he dead child in Sefer Melachim even though he an industry can continue to keep mitzvos (even not Shab- was a Kohen because he was sure he could arbitration bos), but v’chai bahem shows we violate Shab- resurrect him, so it was pikuach nefesh. Al- group? Can you send bos even if he won’t live long enough to keep though v’chai bahem applies only to a live a lawyer’s more mitzvos. person, v’shamru allows violating mitzvos for letter Shulchan Aruch 330:5 – If a woman dies during the potential to do future mitzvos even for one threatening a lawsuit? childbirth before the baby emerges, we may vi- currently dead. These and other questions were the When your heter topic of the recent iska needs to Business Halacha satisfy the law Breakfast this past Sunday in Shaare Ezra and The Law. Congregation in Long Branch, NJ. The event began with introductory remarks from Rabbi Yosef Kushner, shlit”a, followed OUR CHOSHEN MISHPAT by Rabbi Ariel Ovadia, shlit”a, and ended PROFESSIONALS WILL GET IT DONE with a lively Q&A hosted by Rabbi Dovid Grossman, shlit”a. These halacha semi- nars provide participants with practical CONTACT THE BUSINESS HALACHA DIVISION 1.888.485.VAAD(8223) EXT. 309 halachic guidance on contemporary issues EMAIL: [email protected] in business halacha.

RABBI YEHOSHUA WOLFE, MENAHEL RABBI YEHOSHUA GREENSPAN, SAFRA D’DAYNA Business Bais Din Zichron Medical Kehilla & Halachic 105 River Ave, #301, Lakewood, NJ 08701 Halacha & Dispute Gershon Halacha Bais Din Awareness 1.888.485.VAAD (8223) Services Resolution Kollel for Center Primacy & Education www.baishavaad.org Dayanus Initiative [email protected]

Midwest Rabbi Dovid Aron Gross Brooklyn Rabbi Dovid Housman South Florida Rabbi Yosef Galimidi, Menahel Rabbi Meir Benguigui, Safra D’dayna