[Avodah] Lashon Hara about non-Jews

[Michael Makovi]

> Actually, it is forbidden by the Torah to take interest from a
> gentile. The Torah permits interest to a nochri, which, as the Hertz
> Chumash teaches, is a gentile passing through the land, not an
> inhabitant. Elsewhere (I forget where; maybe Vayikra 25:35) the Torah
> prohibits interest to a ger toshav. Rabbi Isidore Epstein in his The
> Jewish Way of Life quotes Rav Hertz as well as the exact Gemara in
> question (I have to check it) and brings Tosafot that we permit
> interest from a gentile only because pragmatically, the taxes imposed
> by gentile governments made it impossible not to charge interest.
>
> It seems to me that perhaps the Torah prohibits interest only from a
> gentile inhabiting eretz yisrael. Just as it is permitted to take
> interest from a nochri passing through the land without settling,
> perhaps the Torah is prohibiting interest only from our neighbors in
> the land. If so, then again, just as I posited for lashon hara, taking
> interest from a gentile would be perhaps a loophole due to the fact
> that the Torah deals only with cases pertaining to eretz yisrael, and
> ignores chutz la'aretz, as Rabbis Moshe Shmuel Glasner and Eliezer
> Berkovits have pointed out regarding keeping Shabbat in a land where
> Sunday is the day of rest (they say the Torah is not concerned with
> how we do it; the Torah's concern is only that we are able to keep
> Shabbat in the land where we control the economy; the chiyuv even in
> chutz la'aretz notwithstanding).
>
> Mikha'el Makovi
>

I just checked my original sources:

First, Rav Hertz (Devarim 23:21) says that the permission of interest
to a gentile extends only to the nochri, i.e. a gentile passing
through the land on a visit or business trip. To take interest from a
ger toshav, on the other hand, is forbidden. Then Rav Hertz says that
Rabbinically, it is forbidden to take interest from a gentile in
general.

Rabbi Epstein (late principal of the rabbinic school at Jews' College;
The Jewish Way of Life, page 78 - this book is rare so I will be
quoting extensively) says, "This prohibition [of interest - my
insertion], as it is clear from the context [Vayikra 25:36 - my
insertion], applies equally to "a stranger or a sojourner" - a non-Jew
- as to a Jew."

There, a footnote says:

"It is to be noted that the non-Jew to whom the Bible permits the
lending of money on interest (see Deuteronomy xxiii. 21) is
specifically described as Nachri, "a foreigner, that is a non-Jew who
is on a business-visit in Palestine and borrows money for trading
purposes" (see S. D. Luzzatto, Commentary on the Pentateuch, and Dr.
J. H. Hertz, The Pentateuch and Haftorahs, ad locum) but not to a
non-Jewish sojourner or resident in Palestine who is in need of
support. See Makkoth 24a. " 'He putteth not his money on interest'
(Psalm xv. 5), means not even from a heathen." From Baba Metzia 70b it
is clear that the Rabbis of the Talmud did not approve of the taking
of interest even from non-Jews. The Biblical law of Deuteronomy xxiii.
21 is explained to mean that interest may be paid to a non-Jew [my
note: davka *paid to*, not taken from]. This receives some support
from the causative "tashshich" (usually rendered "thou mayest bite"
[that is, lend on] interest) which many grammarians render "thou
mayest cause to bite [that is, allow him to take] interest".
Alternatively, the Talmud declares that the taking of interest from a
non-Jew is permitted only in an emergency to support one's life.
Apposite this is the gloss of Tosafoth on this Talmud passage in the
name of Rabbenu Tam (Jacob ben Meir of Ramerupt, 1100-1171): "That
nowadays the prohibition against taking interest from non-Jews is not
observed due to the many high taxes which we must pay to the kings and
rulers to be allowed to live. We live among the nations and are denied
every other livelihood." Once a breach has been made in Jewish law and
custom by force of untoward combinations and circumstances brought
about by a hostile world, it became difficult to re-establish the
observance of the law even with the improvement of conditions. See
also Joseph Albo, Ikkarim iii, 25.

Me again: We see from this that one way or another, interest from a
gentile is not be taken. The Talmud suggests that either you can pay
interest to him, or interest is allowed for a life-threatening
situation. Rabbis Epstein and Hertz, and Luzzatto, on the other hand
suggest that interest was permitted to the transient gentile but not
the settled one. (It seems to me that since the Talmud is not sure of
the answer, it means there was no Sinaitic kabbalah on the matter.
Therefore, we are free to offer our own speculations, though they have
no value l'maaseh due to the sealing of the Talmud.) If I may take the
suggestion of Epstein, Hertz, and Luzzatto a step further: the Torah
deals with gentiles in Israel, viz. the ger toshav and the nochri. But
it never legislates for the gentile in chutz la'aretz while we are in
galut, nor for the gentile who lives in Israel without being a ger
toshav. Both cases are outside the Torah's purview; the former because
the Torah envisions us in the land, and the latter because the Torah
envisions us in political control of the land (precluding non-gerei
toshav from settling). Therefore, Chazal had to legislate a d'rabbanan
to deal with these unanticipated cases.

Mikha'el Makovi