Year: 2019

Halacha of Multi-Level Marketing Found In a MISHNAH!

MLM Schemes and the Mishnah

Over a quarter of a century ago, I nearly got involved in a Multi-Level Marketing scheme. At the last moment, my father, z”l, heard about it and warned me off. I then consulted my posek, who said these immortal words to me: “It’s assur. And even if it’s muttar, it’s still assur.”
As the years progressed I’ve looked into it more, and I see the wisdom of these words. Unfortunately, and astonishingly, there is precious little in writing about this from rabbinic authorities. The one person who really campaigned against such things was the late and great Rabbi Eli Teitelbaum z”l. Perhaps the dearth of literature on this topic is because the question is rarely posed, with people preferring not to see it as a halachic question. And in one case where I convinced someone to ask a shaylah about it, both poskim that he consulted were not equipped to answer the question.

The problem is that people don’t understand the insidiousness of these schemes. Rabbi Teitelbaum did a good job of explaining it in this article, but it’s not quite enough, for reasons that I shall explain.MLM schemes are just pyramid schemes in disguise (despite what people will try to tell you otherwise). With these schemes, the physical product being sold is never actually worth the amount for which it is being sold – if it was, then they would just use conventional marketing. Rather, what is being sold is a combination of the product, plus the opportunity to make money. And, for mathematical reasons, all these schemes end up being pyramids whereby the people at the top make money, and the people at the bottom naively lose money (and often relationships too). There’s not a single MLM scheme you can show me which doesn’t have a lot of unhappy and disappointed people at the bottom.

Now, there seems to be a way to make this halachically permissible, as did the poskim that I mentioned earlier. They said that as long as you describe the situation clearly and honestly to the person that you recruit, then it’s fine. You have to spell out that you are selling a marketing opportunity which might not be profitable for them.

But there’s a problem with this, which I was happy to discover is made clear by a Mishnah:

מִי שֶׁנִּתְעָרֵב מַיִם בְּיֵינוֹ, לֹא יִמְכְּרֶנּוּ בַחֲנוּת אֶלָּא אִם כֵּן הוֹדִיעוֹ, וְלֹא לְתַגָּר אַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהוֹדִיעוֹ, שֶׁאֵינוֹ אֶלָּא לְרַמּוֹת בּוֹ.
“If someone’s wine became mixed with water, he cannot sell it in a store unless he informs the customers. And he may not sell it to a merchant even if he informs him, as it will only serve for him to deceive with it. (Mishnah, Bava Metzia 4:11)

This Mishnah is amazing! It tells us that halachah requires us to take a different set of factors into account when we sell to a consumer versus when we sell to a distributor. You can sell a defective item to a consumer, as long as you notify them of its defects. But you can’t sell it to someone who will be selling it to others, as there is no way that you can be sure that they will do the same, and there is every incentive for them not to do so.

This would perfectly apply to MLM schemes. With MLM, you are trying to turn purchasers into distributors. And so telling them about the risks doesn’t help and is irrelevant. Ultimately, these schemes make money for people at the top via selling to naive people at the bottom, who pay money in the naive belief that they are going to make money. Even if you personally make the situation clear to the person that you are selling to, this is not how it will continue. The system requires people at the bottom making a foolish, misinformed decision. The person that you sell to is virtually guaranteed to overstate the wealth-making opportunities.

As my own posek so wisely told me over 25 years ago: It’s assur. And even if it’s muttar, it’s still assur.

The Excessive ‘Out With the Old’ Attitude

Among Jewish institutions, it appears the more shallow an institution, the more care they take to preserve their history. Why is the devotion to the writings of, say, Lithuanian scholars any less than that of their counterparts?

This weakens those who write and teach in the present. Why bother when you won’t be remembered either? Per “Mazla”, even a Sefer Torah is given devotion, except there are inexplicable degrees of devotion, which is where “luck” comes in. But with Torah scholars, there is no mystery: anything which doesn’t exactly fit current fashion in its externalities and/or not written by the figureheads collects dust. “Editor-types” are not respected, let alone cultivated.

Koheles 1:8-11:

כל הדברים יגעים לא יוכל איש לדבר לא תשבע עין לראות ולא תמלא אזן משמע. מה שהיה הוא שיהיה ומה שנעשה הוא שיעשה ואין כל חדש תחת השמש. יש דבר שיאמר ראה זה חדש הוא כבר היה לעלמים אשר היה מלפננו. אין זכרון לראשנים וגם לאחרנים שיהיו לא יהיה להם זכרון עם שיהיו לאחרנה.

Why aren’t older works republished, especially in our time, when scanning and typesetting are far cheaper? And if they are, who exactly is reading them? Are they widely available? Are they quoted? And if having even a simple website is improper, how about Google Drive, or the like? And shouldn’t the budget increasingly reflect future technology, new mediums, etc. to a degree (even if Torah study must always be largely one-on-one)?

If you’re not committed to the past, you’re not committed to the future.

The Lawless, Anti-Torah Israeli Regime

A State of Law and Order? G-d Forbid!

Friday, 22 January 2016

The expression, ‘a state of law and order’ has been bandied around a lot in Israel over the past few years. Most recently, the mantra has taken on a renewed and intense fervor. Yet, it’s fevered declaration not only undermines the actual rule of law, but has become to be an existential threat to the very nature and destiny of the Nation of Israel.
Israel is charged with being a nation of Justice and Righteousness, and while the rule of law plays an important role in establishing justice, it is not the only, nor even the central pillar. There have been many states built around the value of law that were anything but righteous. Many societies that placed the value of order above all else, were void of any semblance of justice.
In fact, elevating the value of law and order above all others precludes the creation of a just and righteous nation. In such a society, law and order simply become a vehicle for demanding loyalty to a repressive state bureaucratic mechanism. It creates a society of rules, not mores; demanding obedience through fear of punishment and retribution, not compliance through consent and approbation.
A society focused on ‘law and order’ creates an adversarial dialectic between the state and its citizens, whereas when society’s emphasis is on the values of justice and righteous, a natural harmony between the nation and its leadership can flourish.
In a Torah society, magistrates and marshals (police) neither create nor are they above the law. In fact, the opposite, they are held to a higher standard. Even a king is subservient to the Torah.
While the political elites in the State of Israel shout their mantra of ‘law and order,’ a recent survey by the Midgam Institute (http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/206136), reveals that nearly three-quarters of the population thinks that these same elites are buried up to their elbows in corruption.
The Torah demands that there be ‘shofitm’ (judges or magistrates) and ‘shotrim’ in every gate. The two go hand in hand. Not only does the Torah recognize that local leadership is key for the vitality of the nation, it suggests that enforcement without adjudication is a detriment to the health of the community. Pushing for a police station in every town, without local courts and judges will eventually lead to a type of a police state, in function, if not in name.
We see this dichotomy through the Bible’s description of two very different models of government, that of King Saul’s and King David’s.
While King Saul’s leadership was favorable and popular at the beginning of his rule, when his kingship lost legitimacy (despite retaining the reigns and power), Saul became ruthless and oppressive, lashing out at anyone who he perceived (even without evidence) as a threat. King Saul even ordered the slaughter of the kohanim-priests and the Tabernacle at Nov. (The parallel with the current regime restricting Jewish access to the Mount should not be lost).
Yet, when King David ‘loses’ the kingdom, by losing the heart of the nation, he accepts the judgment, and despite retaining the tools of power (including a well-fortified capital), he doesn’t fight the people’s will, but recognizes the judgment and leaves. David’s stepping down from power, recognizing that he was no longer leading, allowed him to later return to lead the nation. It is no small coincidence either that the Temple (the heart of the nation) plays a central role in David’s rule. In fact, it is David’s purchase of the field on Mount Moriah, the building of an altar and the bringing of offerings that stops the plague caused by Shaul’s destruction of Nov. Justice and righteousness is the salve for strict authoritarianism.
According to the Torah model, the leaders are not only under the same law, they are actually held to a higher standard.
The Torah does not demand fealty to a bureaucratic state mechanism (this is not to suggest that conformance with societal rules and norms is not a value) but rather demands loyalty to G-d, His Torah, and His prophets. Unlike some who have suggested otherwise, an observant Jew does not ‘believe in the state,’ but rather, it is the observant Jew’s duty to push the state into becoming a vehicle of G-d’s Will. A state that expresses any other will is an anathema to the Torah ideal and does not represent the Jewish Nation.
From The Jewish Nation, here.

Rabbi Chaim Pinchas Scheinberg Zatzal’s Aliyah Experience

Excerpted from Rabbi Yaacov Haber:

When my Rebbe, Rav Chaim P. Scheinberg, moved to Israel with his family and his Yeshiva in the early sixties he made a going away speech for a large group of his students and friends. He commented on how when he would walk through the streets of New York and see so much crime, promiscuity, and lack of respect for ideals and morals — he would ask himself on a regular basis, “What am I doing here?”

So he went to visit Eretz Yisroel. On that visit, he toured the length and breadth of the country. As he traveled, he looked around and he saw so much crime, promiscuity and lack of respect, just like back home! — The difference was, he said, he found himself asking, “What are THEY doing here?”

Find the rest over here.