116 —החזרת ספרים, דקדוקי הלכה, ואיסור נגישה ללווים

Shalom u'Vrachah!

Wednesday, the 11th of Kislev, 5704.

Haraha"g vavac"h iy"a chov"b nechbad venaaleh... Shalom u'Vrachah!

Your letter was received along with one dollar. You complain about being troubled regarding sending books, etc. There was never any intention to trouble you. As is known from our Sages (Chullin 7b), "Yisrael are holy; some desire..."—and as is explicitly written in the letter sent about the book: anyone can return the book for any reason (see Sotah 44a: "Therefore the Torah suspended it..."), if he does not want it. The dollar is returned herewith, as stated in Chullin there. The kuntres "U'Maayan" does not need to be returned to us and should remain with you—it was sent to several people without any monetary concern—and I am confident that if you study it you will find valuable words within it, etc., and you are not obligated to agree with the book.

I am especially surprised by your letter, as I saw you reference—in regard to sending books—the verse and Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat siman 97, apparently referring to se'if 2: "It is forbidden to press a debtor to pay when one knows he cannot pay; even showing oneself before him is forbidden because he is embarrassed when he sees his creditor and cannot pay." Since you touched on a halachic matter, and in my humble opinion your words are puzzling, I saw fit to elaborate a bit on clarifying this issue.

The puzzlement in your words comes from several reasons: A) The verse—"Do not be like a creditor to him"—and the Shulchan Aruch applies only when it is known that he cannot pay, as per the Talmud and poskim. If the lender is unsure whether the borrower can pay, whether one should be stringent is discussed by Minchat Chinuch (mitzvah 67), who notes that from the language of Shulchan Aruch (CM 97:2) there is no prohibition at all; see there for his reasoning. All the more so in our case. B) What is even more puzzling about your citation of this law—that it is forbidden to press—is that this law applies only between a borrower and lender. The distinction is simple: both from the perspective of the one pressing—"A servant borrows for a lender" (see Ramban on Shemot 22:24), about which it says "You have made man ride over us" (Bava Metzia 75b). Also consider that a person does not brazenly face his creditor (per Rashi's version in Bava Kama 107a) because he has done him a favor; this applies also to pressing and shaming—and from the perspective of obligation—he must repay him—which does not apply in our case at all. Furthermore, even regarding charity where there is a mitzvah—even though its obligation is not like repaying a loan (where even if one cannot pay he still has an obligation at that moment), whereas with charity if one has no livelihood he is exempt—see Yoreh Deah beginning of siman 246 and siman 251 etc.—but regarding charity there is no concept of "a servant borrows for a lender," so the rule of "do not be like a creditor to him" does not apply. As stated in Bava Batra (8b), they needed an additional verse for those who press regarding charity; it is only rabbinic and not biblical law. Even this prohibition regarding charity applies only when demanding payment—as Rambam writes (Laws of Gifts to the Poor ch.7 halacha 11), quoted in Shulchan Aruch YD 248:7—not like by loans where even appearing before him is forbidden. Accordingly, it is clear from Yerushalmi Horayot (3:4)—the story with Rabbi Elazar etc.—that our sages despaired after seeing him go home etc.; seemingly they did not need to appear before him since they knew he had lost his wealth. One could answer perhaps they did not know he truly had nothing left; especially according to Bereishit Rabbah ch.4 s.8 where he said "pray for me." But from the language of poskim it is clear that prohibition applies only when demanding payment—and certainly in cases of sale or when initially informing someone they are under no obligation to buy.

C) In several places in Talmud and poskim it appears that one method of selling merchandise was by going door-to-door with goods (Bava Batra 22a etc.), and no one objected at all—certainly when done via written correspondence rather than verbally, as then it is easier for someone to decline; thus there should be no concerns at all.

With blessings for immediate teshuvah and immediate redemption,
Rabbi Menachem Schneerson

Summary

The Rebbe clarifies halachic distinctions between loans and sales or gifts, explaining that prohibitions against pressuring debtors do not apply here. He encourages careful study before forming judgments and emphasizes acting with sensitivity but without unnecessary concern.