Daf Yomi for Women - Hadran Michelle Cohen Farber

Is it permissible to borrow grains with the agreement to return them later in the season when their value is expected to increase? Typically, such arrangements are viewed as involving interest since the value of the grains is likely to rise. However, it is allowed if the borrower already possesses grains, even if they are not readily accessible. Should the borrower only borrow against the grains they presently own, or can it be a nominal amount? Hillel prohibited lending a loaf of bread, fearing that the price of wheat might surge before the loaf is repaid. What rationale led the rabbis to disagree with Hillel's position? Shmuel asserted that Torah scholars could lend money to one another on interest – why? Rav sanctioned a father lending to his child on interest for educational purposes, yet the Gemara dismissed this, citing the potential for sending the wrong message to children. Can a person work for a friend one day and vice-versa without incurring usury issues? Under what circumstances is this permissible? Transgressions of interest extend beyond monetary transactions to include conveying information or offering greetings. What infractions do both borrower and lender commit when doing loaning with interest? Numerous statements underscore the severe repercussions for those involved in interest-based lending. It is cautioned against lending money without witnesses, as Rav fears it may prompt the borrower to deny the loan, while Reish Lakish is apprehensive about inviting curses upon the lender due to erroneous perceptions of dishonesty.

This week’s learning is dedicated for the refuah shleima of Pesha Etel bat Sara who is undergoing surgery this week.
This week's learning is sponsored by Audrey Mondrow in loving memory of her mother Bessie “nanny” Mauskopf, Basha Leah bat Tzivia Chaya and Meir Yehudah. "A kind and devoted wife, daughter, mother, grandmother and great-grandmother. She always embraced family and was so proud of all my learning. She exemplified good middot by just being herself. May her neshama have an aliyah."
This week's learning is sponsored by Rhona Fink. "With gratitude to Hashem, we welcome our first grandson, Ezra Lev, born on the first day of Pesach to our son and daughter-in-law, Daniel Fink and Abbey Marks. May Ezra Lev grow up to be a helper with an open and warm heart, and a blessing to the Jewish people."
What is a "situmta," and does it finalize a deal once completed? Rav and Shmuel hold differing views on a scenario where a product is sold and payment is received before the product's completion. They debate the number and nature of remaining steps in the process that still consider the item in the seller's possession, thus circumventing usury concerns. Several difficulties are raised with the different opinions based on the details brought in our Mishna and are resolved. The Mishna presents a debate on selling manure as fertilizer even if one does not have any. How many different opinions are there and what is the debate between them? Regarding prepayment at a set rate, if prices subsequently drop, can the buyer withdraw from the deal to avoid loss? Here, the Mishna records a dispute: the tana kamma asserts withdrawal is permissible only if initially stipulated, while Rabbi Yehuda dissents, allowing withdrawal regardless. In a case involving a son-in-law purchasing dowry jewelry on behalf of his father-in-law, paying upfront, then witnessing price reductions, Rav Papa bars withdrawal without initial stipulation. Despite money not constituting an act of acquisition, reneging is met with a "mi she'para," a curse for breaching one's word. The rabbis and Rav Acha raise objections to Rav Papa's ruling, which are subsequently resolved. The Mishna permits lending grains to a sharecropper for planting, even if prices rise. A related braita endorses the practice but restricts it to instances where the sharecropper hasn't commenced work. Rava elucidates the disparity: the Mishna concerns scenarios where the sharecropper typically provides seeds, rendering pre-planting agreements contractual rather than loans. Conversely, the braita pertains to situations where the owner typically supplies seeds, meaning that once the sharecropper begins work, the subsequent loan of grains is no longer part of the work contract, but an actual loan, which is forbidden, as any loan of grains for grains.

What are the various methods through which individuals can engage in business transactions where payment or goods are exchanged upfront, with the agreement set at a fixed or reduced price? The Gemara delves into diverse scenarios, providing rulings on the permissibility, prohibition, or contentious nature of each. In some documented instances, Rabbis faced accusations of involvement in transactions resembling usury. Yet, on each occasion, they provided clarifications demonstrating why such actions did not constitute usury.

Today's daf is sponsored by Brooke & Yossi Pollak in honor of their daughter Avital Adin's bat mitzvah. "We are so proud of your devotion to Torah, mitzvot, and maasim tovim. Ima loves learning Mishna Yomi with you and can't wait to keep going for the next several years. Consistency, Consistency, Consistency! Mazal tov!" 
If a Jew lends money of a non-Jew to another Jew on interest, or if a non-Jew lends money of a Jew to a Jew, under which circumstances is it permissible? Ravina proposes a third explanation to elucidate the distinction in legal rulings between these scenarios, but his explanation is dismissed. If a convert engaged in borrowing or lending with interest prior to converting and then, before conversion, amalgamated the interest-bearing loan into one encompassing the entire sum, the convert is entitled to collect the full amount. Rabbi Yosi contends that if the convert was the borrower, the interest cannot be collected under any circumstances, as this might incentivize non-Jews to convert solely to evade high interest payments. The rabbis and Rabbi Meir debate whether a lender who loaned on interest can recover the principal amount only, without the interest, or if they are penalized and cannot recover any part of the loan. Various scenarios are examined where an aspect of the document is invalidated (akin to a loan involving interest), raising the question of whether the entire document becomes void or if the valid parts remain enforceable. Distinctions between different cases are analyzed, such as errors in a document versus situations where the document is based on false premises like the seller not actually owning the item being sold. The Mishna addresses the halachot concerning purchasing produce upfront at the start of the season but deferring receipt of the produce until later. This practice is often prohibited due to usury concerns, as the value of the produce may rise. It is permitted when the seller possesses the produce at the time of sale or when the market value has already been established.

Today's daf is sponsored by David and Mitzi Geffen in loving memory of David's father, Dr. Abraham Geffen, on his 9th yahrzeit. "The youngest of the 8 children of Rav Tuvia and Sara Hene Geffen of Atlanta, he was devoted to his wife Ethel, parents, siblings, children, extended family; and synagogue community of Beth El in New Rochelle, New York. He was a dedicated physician and served for years as the Director of Radiology at Beth Israel Medical Center in New York City."
Today's daf is sponsored by Goldie Gilad in loving memory of her mother, Rivka Leah bat Sara on her 5th yahrzeit. "A woman of valor, a caring mother, a fighter and brave lone holocaust survivor who jumped out of a 2nd floor window to save herself from being attacked by Russian soldiers at the end of the war. Yehi zichra baruch."
Can one loan on interest from non-Jews? Under what circumstances? A verse is brought to show that one who does not loan on interest or take bribes will retain their wealth, implying that those who loan on interest will lose their wealth. The Gemara  questions that against reality where one sees righteous people who lose their money as well, grappling with the question of 'why do bad things happen to good people.'  Rebbi raises two issues in verses from Vayikra Chapter 25, in a section related to people who become poor and those who get sold into slavery on account of their poverty. The Torah says that a Jewish slave can be sold to be a slave to a convert and that does not seem to match halakha. It also says that one cannot loan on interest to a ger toshav (one who keeps the seven Noahide laws) and  it is permitted in our Mishna. They resolve both issues and explain the verses to match the halakha. A Jew can be a guarantor on a loan from a non-Jew to a Jew with interest. Why would this potentially be a problem and under what circumstances is it permitted? The Gemara explains the cases in the Mishna where a Jew loans money of a non-Jew to a Jew on interest. There are four possible cases - two of which are permitted and two are not. A question is raised based on the law that a Jew cannot be a messenger for a non-Jew and a non-Jew cannot be a messenger for a Jew. Three answers are given, however, the second one (two different versions of Rav Ashi's answer) is rejected. 
 
 

Today's daf is sponsored by Rochelle Cheifetz in loving memory of her mother, Chana Cohen, Chana bat Moshe and Tzipora on her 3rd yahrzeit. "Your warmth and beauty created a bubble of caring around you and all you met. The hole of your absence feels irreparable. Tehi zichra baruch."
Rav Papa's ruling allowed for paying rent and compensating for depreciation, akin to the practice of the sons of Kufra, backed by a braita cited in Bava Metzia 69b. Rav Anan, citing Shmuel, asserted that orphans could collect interest. However, Rav Nachman raised doubts, prompting further investigation. It turned out that Rav Anan had observed Shmuel renting out a kettle on behalf of orphans, collecting both rent and depreciation, which he mistakenly perceived as interest collection. Yet, this wasn't deemed as interest, even for non-orphans, given the significant depreciation incurred with each use of the kettle, warranting compensation for the loss. Orphans are permitted to invest in a manner where they enjoy profits without bearing losses. Raba, Rav Yosef, and Rav Ashi proposed various suggestions for managing orphan funds. Investing in a guaranteed investment with a Jew is prohibited, but permissible with a non-Jew. Does this imply that the guaranteed item invested is entirely in the recipient's domain? This notion conflicts with a Mishna concerning laws of firstborn animals. Abaye and Rava offered explanations, with Abaye's being dismissed. While it's permissible to charge interest on a loan with a non-Jew, is this practice viewed unfavorably?