The Torah in Parashat Behar (Vayikra 25:37) introduces the prohibition of “Ribit” – lending to a fellow Jew on interest. The Sefer Ha’hinuch notes that the Torah repeats this command, first forbidding “Neshech,” and then forbidding “Marbit.” These two terms, the Sefer Ha’hinuch writes, are synonymous; the Torah does not add any new information by forbidding “Marbit” after commanding that a lender may not demand “Neshech.” The reason for the repetition, the Sefer Ha’hinuch explains, is to impress upon us the importance of this law, and the severity of charging interest. The Sefer Ha’hinuch draws an analogy to a parent, who, when admonishing a child, will repeat the warning several times for emphasis, in order to impress upon the child how severe a matter this is. This is done out of love and concern for the child, to ensure that the child distances himself from negative behavior. Likewise, G-d, in His great love for us, repeated the prohibition against charging interest in order to draw our attention to the gravity of this violation, so that we distance ourselves from it. The classic case of Ribit is “Ribit Ketzutza” (“fixed interest”), such as when a person lends 100 Dinarim on condition that the borrower repays 120 Dinarim within the year. This type of Ribit is forbidden on the level of Torah law. Another example of Ribit which the Torah forbids is where the lender takes the borrower’s home as collateral, uses it, and gives it back after the receiving from the borrower the full sum which he had lent. In this case, the lender has received back the loan as well as rights to the home rent-free. As such, he transgresses the Torah prohibition of Ribit. The lender would have to deduct the cost of rent for the interim period from the amount owed to him by the borrower. The Sages forbade certain forms of Ribit which are permissible according to Torah law, but resemble forbidden interest. One example is where a person lends money on condition that he will receive the principal in full, as well as a percentage of the profits earned with this money. Since the principal is guaranteed, this resembles a loan, as opposed to a business venture, and is therefore forbidden by force of Rabbinic enactment. The Sages also forbade “Ribit Mukdemet” (“preliminary Ribit”), meaning, giving gifts to somebody from whom one wishes to borrow money, and then receiving the loan. The gifts received before the loan resemble interest, and such a loan is therefore forbidden. The same is true of “Ribit Me’uheret” – giving the lender a gift after repaying the full sum of the loan. Another example of Ribit which the Sages forbade is the case where the lender did not have the cash which the borrower requested, so he gave him agriculture produce valued at that amount as a loan. Later, the borrower sells the produce back to the lender at a discounted price, and then, when repaying the loan, he gives the lender the full sum – meaning, the full value of the produce which he received as his loan. This does not constitute Ribit on the level of Torah law, but the Sages nevertheless forbade such as an arrangement, which falls under the category of “Ha’aramat Ribit” – a way that a lender can receive interest through a legal loophole. A person may pay a broker to convince somebody to lend him money. Since the brokerage fee is not going to the lender, this does not violate the prohibition of Ribit. The Sages warn, “Kol Ha’osek Be’ribit Mitmotet” – those who lend on interest in violation of Torah will suffer financial ruin. The Sefer Ha’hinuch goes so far as to say that a single coin earned through lending on interest can cause numerous treasuries to be destroyed. This prohibition applies in all times, in all places, and to both males and females. If one lent on interest in violation of Torah law, the Bet Din would force the lender to return the interest to the borrower. In the case of interest which is forbidden Mi’de’rabbanan (by force of Rabbinic enactment), the Sages do no