Imagine that someone (Shimon) bought land, worked it, had crops coming, and now it is discovered that the land was stolen. The one from whom the land was originally stolen comes and reclaims the land and the crop, and Shimon is left with nothing. So he goes to the land seller (who is, as it turned out, a thief) and wants to collect his money from the seller. But the seller has no cash, and his fields have also been sold. Shimon then goes and collects from the purchasers of the thief's land. By right, he should be able to collect the price of the field and the crops.
However, the Sages limited his collection rights for the world's benefit. If someone could always come and collect not only a field but also unexpected and unlimited crops, people would be so nervous about buying fields that commerce would stop.
An oath is serious, and there is only one money-related oath in the Torah. It happens when someone in court admits to a part of the claim. Say the lender claims that someone owes him 200 coins, and the borrower admits that yes, indeed, he owes money, but only 100 coins. In that case, the Torah says the court can require an oath from the borrower. Why is that? The borrower can rationalize and say, "I will return the money later, so now, to avoid being a bad guy, I will just say that I only owe a part." With the oath, he won't say it.
By right, the same oath applies if someone returns a wallet with 100 coins, and the owner claims that there were 200. However, the Sages canceled the oath, or people would never return lost objects.
Art: Harvest in Provence by Vincent Van Gogh
No comments:
Post a Comment