Borrowing, Hiring, And Returning Property

 

PAYING ON TIME

 

In two separate places the Torah commands us to pay workers on time.  First, "Don't oppress your fellow, and don't steal; don't leave the worker's hire with you until morning" (Vayikra 19:13).  Second, "Don't oppress the hire of the poor and needy from your brother or the proselyte in our land and gates.  Give him his hire the same day, don't let the sun set on it, for he is poor and his soul is set on it; so that he should not call against you to God, and it will be considered a sin in you" (Devarim 24:14-15.)

 

PROTECTING THE WEAK

 

In the case of a loan, the Torah is solicitous of the debtor, the one who has to pay.  The creditor is forbidden to file a legal suit against him if he can't pay, to take collateral from his vital possessions, and so on.  But in the case of a debt of wages, the Torah defends the creditor, and commands the employer who owes the money to pay promptly.

 

In each case the law comes to protect the party who is most likely to be weak and exploited.  The poor person is the one who needs to borrow money for his sustenance, and he is the one who is likely to find himself limited in his ability to compel the employer to pay on time.

 

Technically, the law applies to any hire, including renting out tools and animals and the like.  But we see from the explicit mention of the WORKER'S hire, and the rationale that "his soul is set on it," that the most important kind of hire is wages.

 

NOT A SLAVE

 

It is a legal principle that "a rental is like a sale on its day" (BM 56b).  For the duration of a rental the renter is like the owner.  This applies to some extent even to hiring people, and in the eyes of the halakha a hired worker is comparable in some ways to a bonded servant.  Many laws of hire have as their purpose the protection of the worker from being treated as a slave.

 

For instance, the worker may quit any time he likes - for the very reason that he is a free person.  God says (Vayikra 25:55) "the children of Israel are slaves to Me," and our Sages inferred: "slaves to God, but not slaves to other slaves," that is, our fellow men (BM 10a.)

 

Some sources warn a person against hiring himself out for too long a period, lest his extended hire should make him feel like a slave (SA CM 333:3 in Rema.)

 

It is forbidden to demean a bonded servant with redundant labor (Sifra on Vayikra 25:43); by extension, we learn that this is improper for a hired worker as well (Chinukh 346; Maharam Rottenburg, responsa 4:85.)

 

When a bonded servant is released, his master must give him generous gifts (Devarim 15:14); many authorities learn from this law that severance pay is praiseworthy and proper (Minchat Yitzchak VI:167, Tzitz Eliezer VII:48:10.)

 

TAKING HIS SOUL

 

Since the Torah informs us that the worker "sets his soul" on his wage, the Midrash tells us that when the employer delays payment, it is as if he takes away his employee's soul (Yalkut Shimoni on Vayikra 19:13, cited in Shulchan Arukh CM 339:2.)  We know that a conscientious worker puts his soul into his work; when his work is not properly acknowledged, he suffers not only from the lost income but also from a demeaning feeling that his contribution is not appreciated.

 

Surprisingly, one opinion in the Midrash states that the employer removes his own soul when he delays wages.  His soul too is set on the wage he pays; his humanity is gauged by whether he relates to his workers as humans with feelings and sensitivity, or as one more factor of production to which one day's difference in the timing of payment makes little difference.

 

 

CHAPTER 186 – PROHIBITION ON MUZZLING A DRAFT ANIMAL

 

The Torah forbids us from muzzling a draft animal to prevent it from eating the food it is working with (Devarim 25:4.)  A person also is permitted to eat from the field he is working in (Devarim 23:25-26.)

 

One message that this law seems to communicate is a connection to the work we do.  Many people experience a degree of alienation at work; if their work is highly standardized they may feel no connection to the product their employer produces, no pride in its quality or success.  By giving the worker a share in the fruits of his labors, the Torah is reminding us that the hired worker or animal makes an essential contribution to the final product.  Correspondingly, this should give the worker an additional incentive to put his soul into his work (See previous chapter.)

 

 

CHAPTER 187 – RETURNING LOST OBJECTS

 

The Torah commands us to return lost objects: "If you see your brother's ox or his sheep wandering, don't ignore them; surely return them to your brother" (Devarim 22:1.)  The basic message of this commandment is concern for our fellow man who is worried over his loss.  The details of this halakha however, convey additional profound lessons.

 

DESPAIRING OF FINDING AN OBJECT

 

Even when we can clearly identify who lost an object, the finder is not obligated to return it if he is sure the owner has despaired of finding it (SA CM 262:5.)  Nonetheless, it is proper to return such an item (SA CM 259:5.)

 

The Maharal points out that this rule seems unfair.  After all, the finder didn't do anything to deserve this object, while the person who lost it exerted himself to acquire it.  He explains that this exemplifies the difference between a purely utilitarian approach to ownership, which underlies many of our instincts of fairness, and the Torah's approach which is based on fundamental categories.

 

Torah law doesn't take account of who SHOULD be owner of an object, but rather who ACTUALLY owns it.  Ownership requires some form of connection to an object, either a material connection when the object is in our control, or an emotional connection when we consider the object as belonging to us.  Once the object is lost, it has left our domain; once we despair of finding it, we no longer relate to it as ours.  Nothing remains to connect us to the loss!  Therefore, the finder may keep it.

 

This can teach us that our material possessions are ephemeral; they don't have a permanent spiritual connection to us.  When we enter the next world, continues the Maharal, we are not accompanied by our wealth!  Rather, we bring with us the merit of our Torah and good deeds, which are our only true and lasting acquisitions in this world.

 

Even so, our Sages were concerned with the accepted ideas of fairness, and told us that it is proper to return an object when we are sure of its previous owner.  By encouraging such a restoration but not requiring it, the halakha achieves fairness but still conveys the underlying message that ownership is ephemeral and conditional, and that only our Torah and mitzvot are lasting acquisitions (Beer HaGolah pp. 31-33.)

 

TWO KINDS OF OWNERSHIP

 

The mitzva of returning a lost object specifies "the lost object of your brother" – limiting this particular commandment to Jews (Devarim 22:3, BK 113b.)  Yet the Yerushalmi suggests that the great kiddush Hashem (sanctification of God's name) involved in returning the lost objects of non-Jews makes this return also an instance of the mitzva! (Yerushalmi BM 2:5, story of Abba Osha'ya.)  We can explain this using a teaching of Rav Nachman of Breslav that distinguishes between two levels of ownership. 

 

The lowest level of ownership is that of bare possession.  (This is comparable to the "utilitarian" concept of ownership mentioned in the Maharal.)  Above this is ownership which carries with it an acknowledgment and an expression of Divine providence – an awareness that our possessions are given to us as a trust to be used in carrying out God's will.  This is the level demanded of God's chosen people (Likutei Hilkhot, Gezeila 1; cf. Bekhorot 13b.)

 

Therefore, returning a lost object to a Jew AUTOMATICALLY involves restoring this particular possession to its proper place in the chain of providence.  The Jewish people and the land of Israel are at the center of this chain, whereas the role of other peoples and other lands is defined in relation to ours.  But while restoring a non-Jew's object doesn't ipso facto restore it to its Divine mission, the great sanctification of God's name involved is itself the greatest possible fulfillment of the object's potential to serve holiness.  This too may then be considered a fulfillment of the commandment (Based on Likutei Hilkhot Aveida 1:9.)

 

LOST OBJECT OF A NON-JEW

 

While the lost object of a Jew must always be returned, as indicated there are a few situations where we are not required to return an object to a non-Jew.  We can explain this using the teaching of Rav Nachman of Breslav mentioned above.

 

Returning a lost object to a Jew always involves restoring this particular possession to its proper place in the chain of providence - which is the highest level of ownership.  But since non-Jews don't automatically have as direct a role in the chain of providence as Israel does, the Jew's discovery of the lost item may itself be providential.  So in this case the requirement to return the object depends on other circumstances also (Likutei Hilkhot Aveida 1:9.)

 

NEVER DESPAIR!

 

In Hebrew we refer to repentance as "teshuva" – return.  Sometimes a person's behavior gets "lost," straying far from the Divine soul to which it properly belongs.  Rav Nachman of Breslav teaches that just as a person retains his connection to a lost object and also the right to have it restored as long as he doesn't despair of it, so a sinner should steadfastly trust that he will find the strength to repent.  No matter how deeply we are lost in sin, we should never despair of the possibility of return (Likutei Hilkhot Aveida 2:2.)