Halacha
הלכה א
הַנּוֹתֵן מָעוֹת לַחֲבֵרוֹ סְתָם לְהִתְעַסֵּק בָּהֶן אוֹ שֶׁהִתְנוּ בְּפֵרוּשׁ שֶׁיִּהְיֶה הַשָּׂכָר וְהַהֶפְסֵד בֵּינֵיהֶם בְּשָׁוֶה וְנֶאֱבַד הַמָּמוֹן יֵשׁ מִי שֶׁהוֹרָה שֶׁיְּשַׁלֵּם הַמִּתְעַסֵּק שְׁלִישׁ כְּמוֹ שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ אִם אָבַד מִקְצָת הַמָּמוֹן. וְיֵרָאֶה לִי שֶׁהוּא מְשַׁלֵּם מֶחֱצָה שֶׁהוּא בְּתוֹרַת מִלְוֶה וְזֶה שֶׁאָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים מְשַׁלֵּם שְׁלִישׁ בַּהֶפְסֵד בְּשֶׁלֹּא הִגִּיעַ הַהֶפְסֵד לִטּל בַּעַל הַמָּעוֹת פָּחוֹת מֵחֲצִי מָמוֹנוֹ. כֵּיצַד. רְאוּבֵן שֶׁנָּתַן לְשִׁמְעוֹן מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים דִּינָר וְנָשָׂא וְנָתַן וּפָחַת תִּשְׁעִים הֲרֵי שִׁמְעוֹן מְשַׁלֵּם שְׁלֹשִׁים וְנִמְצָא רְאוּבֵן נוֹטֵל שִׁשִּׁים. אֲבָל פָּחַת שִׁמְעוֹן מֵאָה וַחֲמִשָּׁה אֵין אוֹמְרִים יַפְסִיד שִׁמְעוֹן חֲמִשָּׁה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים שֶׁאִם אַתָּה אוֹמֵר כֵּן נִמְצָא רְאוּבֵן נוֹטֵל חֲמִשִּׁים וּלְעוֹלָם לֹא יִטּל רְאוּבֵן פָּחוֹת מִשִּׁשִּׁים. לְפִיכָךְ שְׁטַר עֵסֶק הַיּוֹצֵא עַל הַיְתוֹמִים שֶׁהָיָה אֲבִיהֶן מִתְעַסֵּק בּוֹ נִשְׁבָּע בַּעַל הַשְּׁטָר וְגוֹבֶה מֶחֱצָה שֶׁהוּא בְּתוֹרַת מִלְוֶה אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁלְּעוֹלָם טוֹעֲנִין לַיּוֹרֵשׁ. הִנֵּה לָמַדְתָּ שֶׁאֵינוֹ נוֹטֵל לְעוֹלָם פָּחוֹת מִמֶּחֱצָה. וְלָמָּה אֲנִי אוֹמֵר שֶׁאֵין פּוֹחֲתִין לוֹ כָּאן כְּנֶגֶד שְׂכָרוֹ שֶׁנִּתְעַסֵּק בְּפִקָּדוֹן. שֶׁהֲרֵי אָבַד כָּל הַחֵצִי שֶׁל פִּקָּדוֹן וְלֹא נִשְׁאַר כָּאן פִּקָּדוֹן כְּלָל שֶׁנֹּאמַר אִם לֹא יִטּל שְׂכָרוֹ יֵרָאֶה כְּרִבִּית שֶׁהֲרֵי חֲצִי הַמִּלְוֶה בִּלְבַד נוֹטֵל. וְכֵן אִם הִתְנוּ שֶׁיִּטּל הַמִּתְעַסֵּק רְבִיעַ הַשָּׂכָר וְאָבַד הַמָּמוֹן כֻּלּוֹ מְשַׁלֵּם הָרְבִיעַ כֻּלּוֹ שֶׁהוּא בְּתוֹרַת מִלְוֶה אֲבָל אִם נִשְׁאַר מִן הַמָּמוֹן מְעַט כְּדֵי שֶׁאִם תוֹסִיף עַל אוֹתוֹ הַמְעַט שְׁתוּת הַהֶפְסֵד שֶׁפְּחָתוֹ יָבוֹא הַכּל רְבִיעַ הַמָּמוֹן אוֹ יֶתֶר הֲרֵי זֶה מְשַׁלֵּם שְׁתוּת בִּלְבַד מִן הַטַּעַם שֶׁכְּבָר בֵּאַרְנוּ:
כסף משנה
1.
When a person gives money to a colleague to use for business purposes without making any stipulation, or explicitly states that they will share the profit and the losses equally, and the money is lost, there is an opinion that states that if only a portion of the money is lost, the administrator should pay the investor one third, as we have explained. It appears to me, however, that the administrator should pay the half that is a loan. Our Sages' statement that he should bear one third of the loss applies when the loss is not great enough for the investor to receive less than half of his money.What is implied? Reuven gave Shimon 120 dinarim to invest in a business. Shimon did business with the money and lost ninety dinarim. Shimon should pay 30. Thus, Reuven receives 60.
If, however, Shimon lost 105 dinarim, we do not say that Shimon must pay only 35 dinarim. For if so, Reuven will receive only 50, and Reuven should never receive less than 60.
For this reason, if a legal document recording an investment contract involving the deceased father of orphans was presented against them, the possessor of the contract must take an oath. Afterwards, he is entitled to collect the half that is a loan. This applies even though we always advance arguments in support of an heir. Thus, we can derive from this that an investor never receives less than half.
Why do I not say that the extent of the loss the administrator must bear should be reduced in consideration of his wage for taking care of the portion of the investment considered as an entrusted article? Because the entire half considered as an entrusted article was lost, and no portion remained. Hence, it is not appropriate to say that if he does not receive a wage, his efforts will appear as interest. For all that he receives is the portion that he gave as a loan.
Similarly, if it is stipulated that the administrator would receive one fourth of the profit, in the event of the loss of the entire investment, he must pay the entire fourth that was given to him as a loan. If, however, enough of the money remains so that if the administrator adds one sixth of the loss to the small portion that remains, the investor would receive a fourth or more of his original investment, the administrator is required to pay only one sixth of the loss, because of the reasons we have explained.
הלכה ב
הַמִּתְעַסֵּק שֶׁהִפְסִיד וְחָזַר וְטָרַח עַד שֶׁהִרְוִיחַ אֵינוֹ יָכוֹל לוֹמַר לְבַעַל הַמָּעוֹת בּוֹא וְנַחְשֹׁב הַהֶפְסֵד שֶׁהִפְסַדְנוּ תְּחִלָּה וְתַפְסִיד שְׁנֵי שְׁלִישִׁים וְנַחְשֹׁב הָרֶוַח שֶׁהִרְוַחְנוּ בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה וְתִטּל שְׁלִישׁ אֶלָּא מְחַשֵּׁב בָּאַחֲרוֹנָה בִּלְבַד עַל הָרֶוַח אוֹ עַל הַהֶפְסֵד וְאֵין לוֹ אֶלָּא בַּרֶוַח שֶׁהוֹסִיף עַל הַקֶּרֶן:
כסף משנה
2.
When an administrator loses money and then labors until he profits, he cannot tell the investor: "Let us first calculate the loss that we suffered originally, of which you will bear two thirds. And then we will calculate the profit that we accrued at the end, of which you will receive only a third." Instead, we calculate only the profit or the loss that was ultimately arrived at. And the administrator receives only a share of the profit that he gained beyond the principal.הלכה ג
נָתַן לוֹ מָאתַיִם יְרִיעוֹת בְּמָאתַיִם דִּינָרִים בְּעֵסֶק וּכְתָבָן שְׁנֵי שְׁטָרוֹת מֵאָה בְּכָל שְׁטָר מְחַשֵּׁב לוֹ עַל כָּל שְׁטָר בִּפְנֵי עַצְמוֹ וּבַעַל הַמָּעוֹת הוּא שֶׁהִפְסִיד עַל עַצְמוֹ. נָתַן לוֹ מֵאָה יְרִיעוֹת בְּמֵאָה דִּינָרִים וְחָזַר וְנָתַן לוֹ בָּעֵסֶק אַחֵר מֵאָה חָבִיּוֹת שֶׁל יַיִן בְּמֵאָה דִּינָרִין וְכָתַב לוֹ שְׁטַר עֵסֶק בְּמָאתַיִם דִּינָרִין אֵינוֹ מְחַשֵּׁב לוֹ אֶלָּא בִּשְׁטָר אֶחָד, הוּא שֶׁהִפְסִיד עַל עַצְמוֹ. כֵּיצַד. שֶׁאִם מָכַר הַמֵּאָה יְרִיעוֹת בְּמֵאָה וּשְׁלֹשִׁים וְהַמֵּאָה הֶחָבִיּוֹת בְּשִׁבְעִים בַּעַל הַמָּעוֹת נוֹטֵל הַכּל מִפְּנֵי שֶׁעָשָׂה שְׁטָר אֶחָד הֲרֵי הַכּל מָאתַיִם וְלֹא הִרְוִיחַ כְּלוּם. אֲבָל אִלּוּ הִנִּיחָם שְׁנֵי עֲסָקִים כְּשֶׁהָיוּ הָיָה מַרְוִיחַ הַמִּתְעַסֵּק בְּחֶלְקוֹ בַּבְּגָדִים עֶשְׂרִים וּמַפְסִיד בְּחֶלְקוֹ בָּחָבִיּוֹת עֲשָׂרָה וְהָיָה נוֹטֵל עֲשָׂרָה. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה:
כסף משנה
3.
When an investor gives an administrator 200 curtains for 200 dinarim in an iska agreement, and composes two separate legal documents concerning the partnership, the administrator may calculate each legal document as a separate investment. The investor caused himself a loss.If he gave him 100 curtains for 100 dinarim and then gave him another investment of 100 barrels of wine for 100 dinarim, but wrote one investment contract for 200 dinarim, they must consider it a single contract. The administrator caused himself a loss.
What is implied? If he sold the 100 curtains for 130 dinarim and the hundred barrels for 70, the investor receives the entire amount, because one contract was composed, and the administrator did not make any profit. If, however, he had left them as two separate investments as they originally were, the administrator would have earned a profit of 20 dinarim in the deal involving the cloth, and would have lost 10 in the deal involving the barrels. Thus, he would have earned a total profit of 10 dinarim. The same principles apply in all analogous situations.
הלכה ד
אֵין הַמִּתְעַסֵּק יָכוֹל לַחֲלֹק הַמָּעוֹת שֶׁל עֵסֶק אוֹ סְחוֹרָה וְלוֹמַר אֶטּל אֶת הַחֵצִי שֶׁבְּתוֹרַת מִלְוֶה לְעַצְמִי וְאֶשָּׂא וְאֶתֵּן בּוֹ וְאַנִּיחַ הַחֵצִי שֶׁבְּתוֹרַת פִּקָּדוֹן בְּבֵית דִּין. שֶׁלֹּא נָתַן לוֹ מָמוֹן זֶה אֶלָּא לְהִתְעַסֵּק בְּכֻלּוֹ. וְאִם חָלַק וְעָשָׂה זֶה אֲפִלּוּ בְּבֵית דִּין הַגָּדוֹל לֹא עָשָׂה כְּלוּם אֶלָּא הַשָּׂכָר אוֹ הַהֶפְסֵד בֵּינֵיהֶן עַל אוֹתָן הַדְּרָכִים שֶׁבֵּאַרְנוּ:
כסף משנה
4.
An administrator may not divide the money or the merchandise he was entrusted, saying; "I will take the half that I was given as a loan for myself and do business with it, and I will place the half that is considered an entrusted object in the court for safekeeping." For he was given this money solely with the intent that he do business with the entire amount. If he dissolved the investment contract and did the above, even if he entrusted the money to the nation's highest court, his actions are of no consequence. The profit or the loss should be divided among them according to the principles we have explained.הלכה ה
הַמִּתְעַסֵּק שֶׁנָּתַן מַתָּנָה לַאֲחֵרִים מִן הַמִּטַּלְטְלִין שֶׁל עֵסֶק אוֹ מִמְּעוֹת הָעֵסֶק וְהֵבִיא בַּעַל הַמָּעוֹת רְאָיָה בְּרוּרָה שֶׁאֵלּוּ הַמְּטַלְטְלִין אוֹ הַמָּעוֹת מִשֶּׁל עֵסֶק הֵן מוֹצִיאִין אוֹתָן מִיָּדוֹ. וַאֲפִלּוּ שִׁנָּה הַמְקַבֵּל אוֹתָם וּמְכָרָם וּנְתָנָם מַתָּנָה לַאֲחֵרִים אוֹ הִפְסִיד חַיָּב לְשַׁלֵּם. וְהַכּל בִּרְאָיָה בְּרוּרָה. כְּבָר בֵּאַרְנוּ שֶׁהַמִּתְעַסֵּק שֶׁמֵּת נִשְׁבָּע בַּעַל הַמָּעוֹת וְגוֹבֶה מֶחֱצָה. וְאִם יֵשׁ שָׁם עֵדִים שֶׁהַמִּטַּלְטְלִין אֵלּוּ מִן הַמָּעוֹת שֶׁל עֵסֶק הֵם נוֹטֵל אוֹתָם בַּעַל הַמָּעוֹת בְּלֹא שְׁבוּעָה. וְאֵין בַּעַל חוֹב וְלֹא אִשָּׁה נוֹטְלִים מֵהֶם כְּלוּם אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הָיָה בָּהֶם רֶוַח הֲרֵי חֵלֶק הָרֶוַח שֶׁל מֵת שֶׁל יוֹרְשָׁיו וְיִטּל בְּאוֹתוֹ חֵלֶק בַּעַל חוֹב וְהָאִשָּׁה:
כסף משנה
5.
When an administrator gives other people a present from movable property belonging to the investment agreement or from money belonging to the investment, and the investor brings clear proof that this movable property or this money belongs to the investment, it may be expropriated from the recipient. Even if the recipient changed it, sold it or gave it away as a present to others, or destroyed it, the administrator is obligated to pay for it, provided the investor brings definite proof that the recipient was given property or funds belonging to the investment.We have already explained that if the administrator dies, the investor may take an oath and collect half of the money invested. If there are witnesses who testify that merchandise was purchased with the money of the investment, the investor may take it without taking an oath. Similarly, no other creditors or wives of the administrator may expropriate anything from these goods unless there was a profit. For the portion of the profit belonging to the deceased belongs to his heirs, and from that portion, his creditors and wives may expropriate money that is due them.
הלכה ו
הַנּוֹתֵן מָעוֹת לַחֲבֵרוֹ לִקַּח בָּהֶם פֵּרוֹת לְמַחֲצִית שָׂכָר וְלֹא לָקַח אֵין לוֹ עָלָיו אֶלָּא תַּרְעֹמֶת. וְאִם נוֹדַע בִּרְאָיָה בְּרוּרָה שֶׁלָּקַח וּמָכַר הֲרֵי זֶה מוֹצִיא מִמֶּנּוּ הַשָּׂכָר בְּעַל כָּרְחוֹ:
כסף משנה
6.
When a person gives a colleague money to purchase produce, with the profits to be split among them, and the colleague fails to do so, all the investor has against him are complaints. If he has definite proof that he purchased produce and then sold it, he may expropriate the profit from him against his will.הלכה ז
נָתַן לוֹ מָעוֹת לִקַּח בָּהֶן פֵּרוֹת לְמַחֲצִית שָׂכָר לוֹקֵחַ בָּהֶן מִכָּל מִין שֶׁיִּרְצֶה. וְלֹא יִקַּח לֹא כְּסוּת וְלֹא עֵצִים. וְכֵן כָּל כַּיּוֹצֵא בָּזֶה. הַמּוֹשִׁיב אֶת חֲבֵרוֹ בַּחֲנוּת לְמַחֲצִית שָׂכָר אִם הָיָה אֻמָּן לֹא יַעֲסֹק בְּאֻמָּנוּתוֹ לְפִי שֶׁאֵין עֵינָיו עַל הַחֲנוּת בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁעוֹסֵק בְּאֻמָּנוּתוֹ. וְאִם הָיָה שֻׁתָּף עִמּוֹ בֶּחָצֵר מֻתָּר. וְלֹא יִהְיֶה לוֹקֵחַ וּמוֹכֵר דְּבָרִים אֲחֵרִים וְאִם לָקַח וּמָכַר הַשָּׂכָר לָאֶמְצַע:
כסף משנה
7.
When a person gives a colleague money to purchase produce with the profits to be split among them, the colleague may purchase any type that he desires. He should not, however, buy garments, wood or the like.When a person hires a colleague to run a store with the profits to be split among them, if the person hired as the storekeeper is a craftsman, he should not work at his craft, for his attention is not focused on the store while he is working at his craft. If, however, his partner was present in the courtyard at that time, it is permitted. The person hired as the storekeeper should not purchase and sell other merchandise. If he does, the profit should be split.