Rashi DH "Iska" explains that the rich in Bavel will go to Gehenim because they did not agree to Shabsai's business proposal of sharing the profits 50/50. Perhaps if his request had been for less than 50%, he would have had many offers.
Thank you
alex lebovits, toronto, canada
I don't think Rashi is telling us the reason that he was denied business, but rather is defining the simple definition of "Iska," which was common business practice back then. It would obviously not be appropriate for the Gemara to condemn the people of Bavel just because someone didn't have their financial way with them.
All the best,
Yaakov Montrose
plese explain this, are you saying the gemara is teling us how much one is allowed to earn, and above that we must not keep?
jeff milrad
No, the Gemara is not telling us anything of the sort. It is merely stating that the people in Bavel didn't let Shabsai enter into a normal business arrangement with them. This was despite the fact that he was desperate, and there was apparently no justification for not allowing him to earn a livelihood just like anyone else.
All the best,
Yaakov Montrose
Dear R' Yaakov.
I would like to suggest learning the Gem. a little different than expected
Rav Nosson Bar Abba tells us that the wealthy of Bavel will end up going to Gehinnom. He tells us that the reason is because they are not Rachmanim; thereby showing us that they are not descendants of Avraham Avinu.
He then tells of an incident that happened to Shabsai Bar Marinus that illustrates this point.
Perhaps we could say the following is what happened:
Shabsai bar Marinus visited Bavel and he requested merchandise to do business with (from the wealthy people who lived there.) He requested it on the normal terms of 2 shares going to the investor and 1 to the trader. The wealthy people readily agreed to these terms and GAVE him merchandise (since this was the normal practice of business and they were businessmen out to make money!) Shabsai then went out to trade; but being new to Bavel, did not have enough 'connections' in Bavel as yet, and was unable to support himself on his 1/3 share. He then asked the wealthy people of Bavel to change the profit sharing to 50/50 so that he would be able to make a living and support himself. (and this is what Rashi says when he uses the word "machtzis"). This they refused; and probably told him that "Listen, Business is Business!". Or perhaps they even quoted a posuk to support their actions-" Lo yaaseh ken bimkomeinu"! They were unwilling to be 'rachmanim'! and go the extra step.
To go on with the example of R' Nosson.
After not being able to support himself in business, he asked for food. And the Gem. says "mezonei nami lo zaynuhu"-they would not feed him. If they didn't want to give him food;-why doesn't the Gem just say "vlo yehavu leh"- they would not give him.? The answer is that they GAVE him food. But that is still not enough. For if one comes from Avraham Avinu; and a person comes to the door and asks for food; one doesn't just wrap up a 'sandwich to go' and shut the door behind him. He should feed that person and go an extra step; similar to the way Avraham (who was rich by the way) would feed a person.
And since they did not do either of the above, Rav Nosson says they are not "rachmanim" and are not descendants of Avraham Avinu.
Thank you for reading this long winded explanation.
Does it have any merit?
Be well,
Alex Lebovits
I think that, to quote your terminology, "perhaps we could say the following is what happened." I could imagine a "Darshan" making a Derasha out of it, as the Musar which comes out of it is correct. However, I don't believe that there is any hint that this is the Peshat of the Gemara.
All the best,
Yaakov Montrose
Dear Rabbi Montrose,
I would like to bring to your attention that Rashi says beferush that it was "lemachtzis". If all Rashi had wanted was to tell us what Iska was, he would not have had to mention what the terms were. he would just have to say ""schora lehistaker lechalek haschar.
In fact, when looking up the meaning of "iska" in the Jastrow dictionary he writes: "a.fr.-Esp. iska, giving goods to trade with on shares (usually two shares of the profit going to the investor and one to the trader)"!
So to quote you- I ask: "It would obviously not be appropriate for the Gemara to condemn the people of Bavel just because someone didn't have their financial way with them." !
Thank you for your time and knowledge.
Alex Lebovits
Au contraire. I think that Rashi is specifically telling us that he was asking for regular terms by specifically saying "l'Mechtzis." If you are asking me a question on Rashi from Jastrow's paranthetical statement above, I will give you a choice of answers:
1) The custom in Bavel was l'Mechtzis, not like the "usual" Iska. [Perhaps this would give credence to a different Peshat: that they wanted to give him less than the Minhag in Bavel, and he didn't feel he should be taken advantage of because he was an "outsider."]
2) Check what Jastrow's source is for the statement that this is usually the case.
All the best,
Yaakov Montrose
now that you replied to his question, my queston still remains unaswered, are you indicating that the gemora inidcates to us how much a person is allowed to earn as his lving. if we don't do 50/50 as you are apparently indicating what happens to us. what about the people who do not even give 10% . I am very curious to here what you have to say. are you saying that uness you give at least 50% in tzedka you are not going to get business. If this is the case i would like you to put this in writing to me.
thank you,
jeff milrad
Jeffrey, we are not discussing Tzedakah. We are discussing a deal where one person provides the capital of the business (i.e. an investor), and someone else runs the business (i.e. a manager/salesman). The provider of the capital receives half of the money for essentially providing the capital (and often the risk), while the person who runs the business works for his half of the money doing the shlepping and selling.
All the best,
Yaakov Montrose