[Don’t forget to see the Halacha
Encounters below!]
The Torah commands “Lo sachmod bais rayecha, you shall
not covet your neighbor’s house; you shall not covet your neighbor’s
wife, etc. ”
At first glance this seems to be legislating the emotions
of the heart, which are beyond a person’s control. It is, after
all, human nature to appreciate something beautiful and be
attracted to it.
The Ibn Ezra gives a beautiful and penetrating analysis of
this commandment with an analogy. He describes a peasant who
sees a beautiful princess for the first time. No matter how
attracted he is to her, he would never dream of marrying her.
He knows this is impossible. The idea does not enter his mind
because it is beyond reality. He likens it to someone admiring
the grace and mobility of a bird soaring in the sky. The thought
would never occur to him that just as the bird flies, so too
I would like to fly. He realizes that he was not created like
a bird. The bird was created with the capacity to fly and that
is its role in creation.
This is the perspective that one should have towards the property
and possessions of others. They are completely divorced from
him and unobtainable. What he has was meant solely for him.
There is a precise calculation for every possession. The Gemorah
in Sota Daf Bais says that the heavenly Bas Kol declared the
daughter of Ploni to Ploni, the house of Ploni to Ploni, the
field of Ploni to Ploni. The Creator who fashioned the world
with such infinite wisdom decides what each one needs and what
is good for him. How can we have the audacity to know better
than Hashem what is good for us? The Kad Hakemach says that
the first commandment “Anochi Hashem” is related to “Lo
Sachmod.” We must internalize the concept of “Anochi
Hashem Elokecha, I am Hashem your G-d, I am Hashem who
took you out of Egypt.” If one lives his life with this belief,
which is the essence of everything, then he will accept the
concept that Hashem created the world with Yashrus, justice
and fairness. Hashem has a master plan for each and every creation
and “Ain adam nogeia bemuchan afilu kemalei nima, No
one is able to interfere with this Divine decision, nor can
he divert by even a hairsbreadth from that which is ordained
for another.”
Rabbi Shultz is a Rebbe in Arie Crown Hebrew
Day School and learns both second and night seder at the Kollel.
Halacha Encounters
Switched Coats
Rabbi Moshe Rosenstein
It has happened to almost everyone
at some point in their lives – on the coldest Shabbos night
of the year, after davening, Reuvain walks over to the coat
rack to get ready to bundle up and brave the elements. As
he chats with his friends, he leafs through the hanging coats,
wondering if he may have left his coat on the other rack. One
by one his friends find their coats and leave, bidding him
a “Good Shabbos.” Finally, Reuvain is left alone in the coatroom
with only one coat left on the rack. While it does indeed
look nearly identical to his, he knows it is not, as his had
a small tear in the back of the left pocket. Looking outside
at the howling wind and whirling snow, looking around him and
realizing that he is the last one left in the shul and some
other Chicagoan is toasty warm in his coat, Reuvain scratches
his head and wonders if it is permissible to take that one
coat that was left behind “for him.”
The
Halachic Background
The Gemora [Bava Basra 41a] and Shulchan Aruch [Choshen
Mishpat 136:2] are clear regarding this din. “If
someone’s clothing was switched in a house of mourning or
a house where there was a party, he may not use the [clothing
that was switched with his own].” The Shulchan Aruch is
discussing a case where the switch has already taken place,
and only later did the parties realize that the item they
had taken is not their own. The Halacha, however, is the
same if one realizes that his item was taken and another
item accidentally left in its stead. He may not take the
item that does not belong to him even though his item was
taken by the owner of the item left behind. The reason for
this prohibition is that since the real owner is not present
to allow use of his item, “borrowing” (i.e. using) that item
is forbidden and is considered to be gezel, stealing [sho’el
shelo mida’as].1 Depending on the circumstances,
the item left behind may indeed have the status of an aveidah,
a lost item, and the finder may have the responsibility to
see to it that it is returned to its rightful owner (hashavas
aveidah). However, this in no way would permit him to
use the item in the interim. The only time it is permissible
to use an aveidah that one finds is if it is picked
up after the true owner realizes his loss and
gives up hope of finding his item. This status is referred
to as “yei’ush.” The ramifications of this status
will be discussed below.
The
Practical Halacha
We will discuss how the poskim instruct us to deal
with various different practical scenarios of switched articles
of clothing.
An
item is missing and there is another, similar item left
in its place:
Even if one is completely certain that his item (coat, towel,
hat, etc.) was taken accidentally and he is certain
that the item left behind belongs to the person who took his
(i.e. it is very similar and hanging in the same place his
was left), under most circumstances it will not be permissible
for him to take the item left behind, even for temporary use.
There is, however, an exception to this rule. If the finder
can assume that enough time has passed and the true owner of
the item left behind has already realized that he accidentally
took the wrong item, it is permissible for the finder to take
and use the item left behind.2
He must have taken the wrong item home – this is similar
to his coat, but it’s not his:
Even if he already took the item home accidentally, and only
then realizes that it is not his own, it is not permissible
to use the item. If there is a way for him to find out whose
it is, he should do so. Otherwise, the item should be treated
like an aveidah and he should return it to the place
he took it from, as the real owner may return to look for it
there. Even after the lapse of a significant amount of time,
and even if we can be sure that by now the original owner has
given up finding his item (yei’ush), it will still not
be permissible to use the item. Since when it was originally
taken yei’ush did not yet set in, it is considered to
have been “stolen” by the finder. Therefore, it is an item
that “came into his hands in a prohibited manner” and may not
be used.
Some poskim, however, do not consider this a permanent
status. They contend that if two criteria are met, the finder
may indeed use the item he took home. If both
· a very long time has passed and
· the finder knows for sure that
his original (now lost) item is in the hands of the owner of
the item he now has.
If these conditions are met, the poskim say, it can
be assumed that the original owner has not only given up hope
of finding his item, but he has also resolved himself to considering
this switch permanent.3 Some add that before using
the item the finder should estimate its monetary value and
write in his monetary record books that should he find the
actual owner he will pay him back for the item.4
There is, however, an exception to this leniency. If the
switched items are exactly the same, then there is no
way for the finder to ever be sure that the original owner
has even realized that a switch took place. Under these circumstances,
it will not be permissible for him to use the item he has found.5
A
prevalent custom not to be particular about allowing use
of an item
There are certain rulings found in the later poskim that
should be mentioned regarding this topic. As with all issues
of this nature, a shailoh should be asked if one feels
that a situation has arisen that would require clarification
of the Halacha.
The Aruch
HaShulchan6 ruled regarding switched galoshes
that since it is the norm to leave all the galoshes together
at the entrance to a building, and since the prevalent practice
is not to be particular about letting others take one’s own
galoshes, this halacha would not apply. HaGaon Rav Moshe
Feinstein zt”l, however, limited the application of
this ruling only to a situation where there is a clearly
defined minhag not to be particular about switching
items. In a situation where there is no well-defined common
practice, one may not be lenient even regarding common, everyday
items.7 Rav Moshe zt”l suggests that every
shul (or other public place) have a well defined policy clearly
posted regarding this matter. That would, in effect, make
the “minhag” of that institution clearly defined.8
Additionally,
if the finder knows who the owner of the left-behind coat is,
and knows that the owner would not mind allowing him to use
his coat, it will be permissible. [For more on this, see Parsha
Encounters for Parshas Noach, “It Takes a Thief.”]
______________________________
8 It should be noted that a more encompassing
leniency is to be found in the poskim. HaGaon Rav Yaakov
Kaminetsky zt”l, in a seemingly novel approach to this
halacha, is quoted as ruling that it is permissible for the
finder to take the coat item left behind. Since the first
person to take the wrong coat in effect “stole” the coat that
he took, the one whose coat was taken may take the coat left
behind as “payment” for the stealing of his coat. While the
ruling does not include the following caveat, it would seem
clear that this would only be permissible if the coat left
behind is of equal or lesser value to the coat that
was taken. See there for more details regarding this ruling.
Rabbi
Rosenstein is a full-time member of the Kollel and is a frequent
contributor to Halacha Encounters.
Now
Available Online!
The Five Minute Hilchos Tefillah Shiur is
available in Real Audio format on the Chicago Community Kollel
website at: http://www.cckollel.org/halachashiur-fs.html
Come and hear
over 60 5-minute shiurim on
the laws, customs and deeper meanings of our daily Tefillos.