Chesapeake Torah

Community Kollel of Baltimore
Learning Opportunities for Everyone
Vayayshev

.
This week’s edition is sponsored by Mayer and Beth Gutman
In honor of Rav Moshe Hillel Glazer Shlita

This week’s topic:Pricing Problems /Onaa

(You may wish to glance at the end of Shemos 2005 for more on this topic)

In this week’s Parsha we learn that Yosef , the brilliant and handsome seventeen year old brother , was sold to the merchants .The posuk tells us that he was sold for a mere 20 pieces of silver .Asks the Daas Zkaynim, “Isn’t that a paltry sum for such a fine servant as Yosef ?” Let’s add to this equation that it appears that the brothers are letting themselves be victims of over/underpricing .
Let’s go back to another situation of Halachic price problems, my favorite:Yakov and Esav .

Didn’t Yaakov underpay Esav for the huge benefits that came with the bechora ?.Wasn’t Yaakov guilty of Onaa/overcharging-undercharging
A long list of Meforshim asks this question . Personally, I encountered it first from the Maharil
Diskin quoting the Maharam Shif (end of Baba Kamma)
There are many ways for us to solve these issues ,but first let’s remind ourselves what the rules of overcharging are .

Less than 1/6.
Usually ,if you overcharge somebody 1/6 over/under the market value ,we say that things are okay .There occurs forgiveness vkhjn. There is an understanding that it’s difficult to get prices exactly correct , and it’s understandable to be somewhat off the mark .

Shtuss/1/6
However, if you overcharge by a full sixth ,then the transaction is valid ,but the overcharged amount must be refunded .

Bittul Mekach/More than 1/6
In the event, though ,that you overcharge more than a sixth ,then the entire transaction is in jeopardy.
Now how does all of this fit into our Chumash cases ? Well we’ll have to find some exceptions to these dinim of overcharging .
Before we get very far though, let me tell you the easiest answer for Yaakov Avinu. The Rashbam, Ramban ,and Sforno ,all discuss the idea that Yaakov gave Esav a separate cash payment . That would mean ,that besides the soup and bread ,Yaakov gave Esav a separate substantial sum of money. This might quickly solve any problems of an undercharge violation .Of course, though ,many Meforshim , including the Ramban himself reject this view, so onward to our research !

If you look in Choshen Mishpat 227 29,23 you’ll find the following exclusions from the Halacha of overcharging.

Selling servants, real estate ,hekdesh, and documents.
Now let’s think about that. Yosef was being sold as a servant (although,it’s hard to understand who gave the brothers the legal power to sell a brother) The brothers received a paltry amount for that sale ,but not to worry .There is just no issue of overcharging by servants . . Or is there ? We’ll see.
Yaakov was buying a double portion from Esav in Eretz Yisroel, plus maybe the Machpela also .This is a real estate issue and over there you don’t have the rules of pricing ,or do you ?
These exclusions will not solve our problems completely for two reasons:
a) The Rema tells us that there are Poskim that hold that these items are only exempt from the 1/6 rule . You are not excused though from the 50% rule . We are given an example of a person who sells a piece of land worth $1000 for the price of $2000..The 1,000 price hike represents 50% of the whole 2,000. It would appear that Yaakov had been off by at least this 50%. As far as Yosef goes, he too was quite a worthy servant physically and mentally . Twenty silver pieces might not be close at all .
b) The Sma quotes the Maharshal that even when Halacha gives you an exclusion ,that’s only insofar as Beis Din goes . In regards to interfering in the validity of the transaction or insisting that money be returned, yes ,there are exclusions . Yet ,the Aveyra of cheating /hurting a friend Lo Sonu
will still apply .So you see ,even if we can find a way “out of” the price rule ,there still may be a Torah violation of improper business ethics .
Let’s try something else . The Shulchan Aruch also teaches us that if a private person,
sells his items from home ,there’s no problem of a price violation . The Poskim explain that it’s hard for a private person , who is not set up for commerce ,to part with his personal property . He probably only gave it up because he was offered a high price .The Halacha goes on to say though, that even if this was not the case the transaction is still valid . The Halacha discusses both whether the seller was on the “cheating “ or being “cheated” end.
This concept may help us with our Chumash people . Both Esav and the shevatim were private individuals not engaged in the day to day business of selling servants or birthrights .Thus ,the pricing being way off might not be so serious as we thought .
Another Halachic possibility:. The Maharam Shif dismisses the pricing issue with another approach .There is a halacha ,that in war ,if one needs to buy a weapon or horse ,there are no price rules as this is classified as chayay nefesh
specially needed for a life situation . The Maharam explains that Esav was in a dire situation due to his hunger ,so he would’ve fit into this Halacha. So he concludes ,that by using this Halacha about people in urgent need , we can allow Yaakov to buy things at that low price of soup and bread.. There is no discussion in the Maharam’s piece here about the Yosef sale. Nevertheless, we might be able to say that since the brothers were desperate to get rid Yosef, this may be deemed as an
urgent situation …..to them .This is a difficult Halacha to comprehend and perhaps we’ll research it in the future..
The Daas Zkaynim and Kli Yakar have a very simple solution to deal with the birthright pricing..
The entire transaction was a gamble. Maybe Esav would die before Yitzchok, due to his hunting profession. .If that happens , it’s Yaakov take all ,for free ! Therefore, Yaakov ,didn’t exactly pay for the bechora ,he just purchased a possible option .One that he might not ever need to activate .The Meforshim call this Tovas Hanaweh
Once this is no longer a regular purchase, just a chance at an option ,the rule of pricing no longer applies .
Now what about Yosef, he was a sure thing ,no gamble? Well, not exactly .The Daas
Zkaynim , tells us in the name of the Pirkei D’ Rebbi Eliezer ,that Yosef actually became devalued .
The horrid experience of being trapped with snakes and scorpions seems to have altered his apppearance .
Perhaps this would account for the brothers’ willingness to accept such a bad price (They all were able to get a pair of shoes out of it ,at least ..Targum Yonason) The Daas Zekaynim also informs us that there is an argument about how much each brother actually received. The amount of 20 silver pieces may have.
been actually given to each brother. This opinion would definitely help balance any price unfairness
What about pre Chanuka pricing ? We’ll touch on that next week .bezras Hashem .
For now ,just remember ,we poskin that all you really need is one candle even on night 8! It sounds a little bit like the Chachamim were trying to make things easy for people . We’ll see. There’s another side to this .

From last week ,Rav Aryeh Zigdon of our Kollel challenges us as follows .
We had learned that the Aruch Hashulchan holds that the kinyan of”hischayevuss”
self obligation /admission is limited to semi -tangible items . The psak had been that you cannot sell the future right to live in a particular house . The right to live somewhere in the future is intangible. Asks Rav Zigdon, how exactly is this any different from rental ? Isn’t that also just a matter of selling the right to live in a particular spot ? Why isn’t that a problem of davar shelo baw l’olam/something net yet in this world?
Perhaps it depends on how specific you are about the time frame .
The answer to this question can be found in the Rambam, as well as some other Rishonim.. Rav Zigdon and I plan to write about this issue in a later publication .

Not to be relied upon for Halacha L’Maaseh
Have a good Shabbos . Tzvi Karp