a loan as an act of vileness equal to the taking of interest. In the Book of Sirach (29, 2) it says: "Lend to thy fellow-man in time of need, and return it to thy fellow-man at the promised time". If, however, taking interest had been forbidden in dealing with an alien, it would have been hard for such a one, notwithstanding the law, to get a loan, and therefore, for this very reason, the prohibition of interest could not be enforced against him. Thus one reads:

If thou lend money to any of my people that is poor by thee, thou shalt not be to him as an usurer, neither shalt thou lay upon him usury.

If thou at all take thy neighbour's raiment to pledge, thou shalt deliver it unto him by that the sun goeth down. (Exod. 22: 24, 25.) And if thy brother be waxen poor, and fallen in decay with thee, then thou shalt relieve him; yea, though he be a stranger, or a sojourner; that he may live with thee.

Take thou no usury with him, or increase: but fear thy God; that thy brother may live with thee.

Thou shalt not give him thy money upon usury, nor lend him the victuals for increase. (Lev. 25: 35, 36, 37.)

Deut. 15: 7, 8 also contains an urgent appeal to assist a needy brother with a loan.

It is branded as an act of vileness to refuse a loan because of the imminence of the year of release which extinguishes all debts (Deut. 15, 9).

Thou shalt not lend upon usury to thy brother; usury of money, usury of victuals, usury of anything that is lent upon usury:

Unto a stranger (nochri) thou mayest lend upon usury; but unto thy brother thou shalt not lend upon usury. (Deut. 23, 19; 20.) The choice of the word "nochri" proves that thereby an alien is meant to whom it is permitted to lend upon interest.

The Prophet Ezekiel compares the usurer to a murderer, for just as the latter sheds blood the usurer sheds it likewise through robbing of the means of living.

In thee have they taken gifts to shed blood; thou hast taken usury and increase, and thou hast greedily gained of thy neighbours by extortion, and hast forgotten me, saith the Lord God. (Ezek. 22, 12.) In another passage the same Prophet says in a similar vein:

Hath given forth upon usury, and hath taken increase: shall he then live? he shall not live: he hath done all these abominations; he shall 10 Bloch, Israel and the Nations.

surely die; his blood shall be upon him. (Ezek. 18, 13.) Compare also ibid. 1, 17.

II. The Prohibition of Interest in the Talmud.

Rabbi Gamaliel says: There is a prohibition of interest before (i. e. before receipt of the money), and a prohibition of interest afterwards. One must not give a present to anybody after the repayment of the money and tell him, "Because thou hast left thy money with me unused". Creditor and debtor, witness and surety are guilty of a fivefold crime in every single transaction of interest. Baba Metsia 75 b.

Look, how blind are those who take interest! exclaims a Talmudic sage. If somebody insults his fellow creature, calls him evil-doer, villain, he takes bloody revenge on the insulter, and yet these usurers bring witnesses, a scribe, pen and ink, and seal with their signatures: So-and-So has denied the God of Israel. ibid. 71 a.

If one lends on interest, his fortune dwindles away. ibid. 71 a.

Usurers are like murderers. They can just as little make amends as they. ibid. 61b.

Who offends against the law of taking interest is incapable of giving evidence. Mishna Rosh Hashana 1,8; Sanhedrin 3,3; Shebuoth 7,4; Baba Metsia 75 b.

Rabbi Simon ben Yochai says: "Taking interest is a grievous sin; for even a friendly greeting is interest. This happens, if A. never saluted B. in his life; but B. has become his creditor, and now he forestalls him with his greeting. This forced salutation is interest." Tosefta Baba Metsia 6, 17.

He who abides by the prohibition of taking interest, takes the yoke of heaven on himself; he who breaks loose from it, breaks loose also from heaven. He who acknowledges the prohibition of taking interest, acknowledges God as Father and Redeemer of Israel; he who denies it denies also the redemption of Israel through God. Baba Metsia 61b; Sifra Behar 6; Yalkut I, 666.

Those who take interest shall some day sink their teeth in their own flesh and say: Oh, if instead of practising usury we had carried heavy burdens and worked by the sweat of the brow! Midrash Rabba on Ex. 31.

Rabbi Anan says in the name of Samuel: The money of orphans may be lent on interest. To this Rabbi Nachmann replied: Because they are orphans, one permits them what is forbidden? Baba Metsia 70 a.

Herr Rohling teaches:

Rab Jehuda says that Rab said, "Man (i. e. the Jew) is permitted to lend his children and members of his household money on interest so that they may taste the savour of usury". Baba Metsia 75 a: "The Talmudic Jew" p. 68; 69.

Rohling adds that "this is perfidiously calculated to train usurers".

And what is the real meaning of the passage? Rab says, that, for educational purposes, a paterfamilias may lend to his children and household and accept a surplus in order to give them an object lesson of how hard a thing it is to pay interest. Rohling omits the comment of the Talmud on Rab's dictum, viz. “Rab means well, but he is wrong all the same, for it might teach the minors to care for lucre". This clear statement is moreover interpreted by the marginal classic commentary of Rashi (11th century), in the face of which Herr Rohling complains of "perfidiousness"!

He who knew how to discriminate in Egypt between the first-born and those who were not first-born will visit his judgment upon him who lends money on interest to a Jew, and who says: the money does not belong to him but to a non-Jew of whom it is not forbidden to take interest. Baba Metsia 61b.

Takers of interest were altogether in the black books of the rabbis who extended the prohibition to pagans also.

III. The Prohibition of Taking Interest of
Non-Jews.

He who does not lend his money on interest never slips, that means,
neither to the non-Jew. Makkoth 24a.

He that by usury and unjust gain increaseth his substance, he shall gather it for him that will pity the poor. Prov. 28, 8. Who is it who pities the poor? It is King Sapor (a Neo-Persian king who robbed the Jews and distributed their money among the poor). Rabbi Nachman says in the name of Hunna: Taking interest of a Gentile is also forbidden. Then Rabba asked Rabbi Nachman: Does it not say, thou mayst take interest from the alien? (Answer) this means: Thou mayst give interest to the alien. (Question): Does this need permission? (Answer): Certainly, to except thy brother to whom thou must not give any interest.

(Question): I ask thee: We have heard that one may take interest from non-Jews, and that one may give interest to them, and that this is valid also in reference to a "Ger Toshab", i. e., to a non-Jew who observes a moral law? (Answer): It is permitted only to support one's life. Baba Metsia 70b; Yalkut III, 961.

From this it follows:

(a) that the Talmud explains the Biblical law, "Unto a stranger thou mayest lend upon usury", to the effect that interest may be given to a non-Jew;

(b) that taking interest is permitted only in an emergency, to support one's life.1

IV. Usury in Rome.

The Hebrew people was, from the very beginning, given to agriculture. The institutions of the Hebrew commonwealth, the theocratic constitution, the unique agricultural legislation, are only thinkable in an agricultural State. All the Biblical feasts of pilgrimage are agricultural feasts. Gideon is threshing wheat when appointed judge and chief of the army; Boas, the progenitor of the dynasty of David, is a farmer; Elisha is appointed a prophet while ploughing with a dozen teams of cattle. That the language of the Hebrews also reveals their original agrarian character is well known to experts.

The Biblical prohibition against taking interest was, as long as the Jewish commonwealth was in existence, practicable and strictly observed. Josephus (Antiq. IV, 8, 25) explicitly reports that the Jews strictly observed the Mosaic prohibition against taking interest.

Conditions were different in Rome, the capital of the world. There usury was practised to an enormous extent classes of its population.

by all

(1) As late as the 9th century, the Gaon Mar Amram, who lived in Babylonia under the Khalifate, decided that it was forbidden to lend money on interest directly to non-Jews, and permitted it only indirectly by buying goods from them at a reduction. (Frankl, Sketch of a History of post-Talmudic Responses, p. 78.)

Even Brutus, before the battle of Pharsalia and his pardon by Caesar whose party he joined, practised usury and was satisfied with four percent per month. Cicero's Letters supply us with an interesting report about the money transactions of the patriot and republican hero.

In the year 51 B. C., while he was governor of Sicily, two Romans, M. Scaurus and P. Manilius, called on him with a very cordial letter of recommendation from Brutus. They had a claim of 106 talents against the town of Salamis in Cyprus, and Scaurus asked Cicero to appoint him prefect of Salamis in order to collect the money due to him in this way. This was too much even for Cicero who as a rule was not very considerate towards the "subjects" of Rome. Consequently, he did not confer on Scaurus the desired office, but pressed the Salamines so hard that they declared themselves ready to pay. However, they only wanted to pay the interest at the rate of 12 percent a year, the rate Cicero himself had fixed a short time before for the provinces; Scaurus, on the strength of his bond, asked 48 per cent and produced two decisions of the Roman Senate which, especially for this debt, cancelled the legal rate of interest. These special decisions Scaurus had got through the inter cession of Brutus!

Thereupon, Cicero suspendend his law of interest and imposed upon Salamis the payment of 48 percent a year, and the poor Cypriots had to submit. When it came to calculating the amount due, the Roman creditor claimed almost double the sum which the debtors acknowledged. The latter wished to deposit the whole sum until the accounts were examined and put right; but Cicero, though he found their account correct, did not permit the deposit, in order that Scaurus should not lose the interest while the lawsuit was pending.

Brutus, nevertheless, found that his friend Cicero had proceeded too leniently against the debtors and confessed the truth: the money lent to the Salamines belonged to himself, Scaurus and Manilius were-only straw men. Meticulous Cicero, in his perplexity, wrote long letters to his friend Atticus in which he urgently begged him to make his excuses to Brutus for his in