Translation:Shulchan Aruch/Choshen Mishpat/74

Paragraph 1- A claim on a loan may be made in any place. Even if one lent in a populated area, the lender may make a claim in the desert and force the borrower to repay there if the borrower has enough money to return to the city and repay the loan. If the lender claims that he is certain that the borrower has enough for money for the return and repayment and the borrower claims he only has enough for the return, the borrower must take a heses oath. If, however, the borrower wants to pay back in the desert, the lender does not have to accept the money until he returns to the city if he does not want to because he lent him in the city. However, the borrower may force the lender to accept in any populated area, even if it was not the place of the lender, the borrower or the loan and even if there are numerous deserts before the lender will reach the city. A caravan is considered a populated area. If the lender lent in the desert, the borrower may force the lender to accept the repayment in the desert. If the borrower says he wants to go the desert and the lender replies that he also wants to go the to the desert, it is as if the lender lent in the desert and he must accept repayment in the desert, even if he lent him in a populated area.

Paragraph 2- If the lender affixed a set time for repayment and the borrower wants to pay back so that he is not responsible for the money until the set time and the lender does not want to accept and the set time has arrived, the borrower is in the right, even if he is rushing the payment in order to avoid mishaps that will arrive in the future, such as the switching of currency or the implementation of taxes or service, because the negative impact is not yet observed, even though it will arrive tomorrow or later on that day after the payment is made. The borrower has no duty to care about the negative impact to his counterparty. If, however, the time has not yet arrived and it is common and recognizable that the currency will imminently be swapped or that taxes and services will be implemented, the borrower cannot force the lender to accept the debt before the set time. If, however, there are none of these concerns or anything similar, we do not listen to the lender’s argument even if the lender does not want to accept the early payment, because the affixing of a time is solely for the benefit of the borrower. Paragraph 3- A debt on collateral in which the lender eats the fruits and is in a place where the borrower cannot buy the lender out until a set time has the status of a purchase of fruits with a set time and the lender may refuse to accept the money before the set time unless the borrower leaves fruit for the lender to eat. If a borrower tells the lender to take his money and it is at the set time and the borrower does not want to accept and the money is piled and placed in the borrower’s possession and was then stolen or an unavoidable accident occurred, the borrower is obligated to pay. With respect to a deposit, however, in such a case the guardian would be exempt.

Paragraph 4- If one lent another with a set time and the borrower wants to pay a portion within the time, there are those that say that the lender cannot stop him and say to pay the entire debt at once because even a dinar by dinar payment is considered repayment but the lender has the right to have complaints on the borrower. If, however, the borrower gave him a field or even two fields as collateral, the borrower cannot force the lender to give back half the collateral for half the money. The same is true where the set time has been reached and the lender does not have to accept partial repayment. Paragraph 5- If one lent another on collateral of moveable items or on land worth more than the debt and the borrower comes and says to take the value of the debt from the collateral and return the rest, there is no merit to this claim. The same is true if the collaterals are not worth more than the debt and the borrower cannot force the lender to take the collateral as repayment and return the document.

Paragraph 6- If a borrower said at the time of repayment that he does not have money or moveable items but just land and that the lender should take it as repayment but the borrower says he does not want land and wants to wait until the borrower gets money and the borrower cannot force him to accept the land since he is not making a claim on the loan now, the lender is in the right.

Paragraph 7- If one lends another with a specific currency and the currency is then voided but can be used in another country and the lender has a way to get to such other court, the borrower can repay him with the currency that he lent him and say to go use it in the other country. If the lender has no way of getting there or he has a way but the government requires travelers be frisked for the voided currency the borrower must repay the currency that is used at that time. The same applies for a kesubah. This is all where he made a condition to repay money. If, however, he didn’t make any condition he can repay with the currency of the loan in all cases. If the borrower made a condition to repay money that can be used he must repay money that can be used in all circumstances. If the king instituted how a party that owes money must repay, the law of the land is the law and he must pay as the king instituted. There are those that disagree. See later in Siman 369 for the rules of the laws of the land. Also see Yoreh Deah Siman 165 with respect to these rules.