Sie sind auf Seite 1von 7

When Your Vacation Home Becomes Everyone's Vacation Home

By Rabbi Reuven Brand

For technical information regarding use of .this document, press ctrl and click here

I.

Introduction- This shiur outline gives a Jewish perspective on a Wall Street Journal article on borrowing and lending a vacation home. Is it acceptable to say no when the home is not in use? Is it permissible to charge rent? From the perspective of borrower a. Midas Sdom-Can he invoke kofin al midas Sdom? i. The Mishna in Avos quotes one opinion that someone who says "what's mine in mine and what's your's is your's" is following midas Sdom. {} ii. The Gemara states that we can compel someone to change their ways if they are following midas Sdom. {} iii. The Gemara has a discussion about someone who squats in a home that is not for rent and it allows the squatter to save money because he would have rented elsewhere. This is called }{ . 1. Rashi, in defining midas Sdom, writes: }{ . b. There is a machlokes between Tosfos and Mordechai about whether means that one can take the initiative and use the property without permission: (see also nimukei yosef b.k. there): i. Tosafos state explicitly that the landlord can prevent the squatter from moving in. The only question that is up for discussion is whether he must pay rent if he already squatted. {} ii. Mordechai, in addressing the same issue, takes a different approach, implying that if there is no way for the landlord to rent the property, one can use it without permission. However, Mordechai writes that even if renting it is a theoretical possibility, one must take that into consideration. {} c. Shulchan Aruch and Rama: {a} i. Shulchan Aruch writes that we cannot force the squatter to pay rent if . ii. Rama writes that ,we can't force the landlord to allow the squatter to live there, but give Mordechai's reason. I.e., we really follow Mordechai that you can't force someone but only because there is a theoretical possibility of renting it out. If there is no possibility at all (e.g. the condo association doesn't allow short term rentals), then the squatter can use the home without permission. iii. Shulchan Aruch adds a caveat and that is if there is going to be even a slight amount of wear and tear on the property, such as darkening of the paint, then it is not considered .

II.

iv. If the squatter ever mentioned that he is willing to pay, then it is not considered and the squatter must pay. III. From the perspective of the lender a. The Value of Chesed- Chazal tell us that the Torah begins with an act of chesed and ends with an act of chesed. {} b. The mitzvah of Hachnasas orchim- Chazal state that taking in guests is one of the midos of G-d and we should try to emulate that midah. {} c. Parameters of the obligation of chesed (see essay in R. Daniel Feldman's Divine Footsteps) i. Mishna- There is - no shiur for the mitzvah of chesed. {} ii. Limits based on model of hashavas aveidah {} 1. No requirement when there is discomfort. 2. If there is clear financial loss, there is no obligation. a. Sma explains that it must be clear financial loss because we can always find an excuse and say that we are going to be negatively impacted in some way. {} This can also be applied to chesed. 3. Personal needs- The Gemara states that one's own needs come first when it comes to chesed. However, if one takes this approach too often, it will lead one to become someone who always needs help from others. {}

1. :

2. :

3. .

4. " : 5. '

. 6a "

6. ' :

7. .

8. .

9. :

01. :

11. ", " " :

21. .

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen