QUESTION: I was exercising on the beach in a frum area and there were two men who were wearing Yarmulkahs that were offering passersby a very bizarre business proposal. They were offering free haircuts to anyone who could do more dips than them on a waist-high set of parallel bars (which was located on the beach). If, however, the barbers were to do more dips, then the challenger must agree to get a haircut from the barber for $15.
I took the challenge and as it happened, I did more dips than the barbers could. However, they just packed their things and said, "We have to go now," – I was unable to get my free haircut. I was very disturbed by this behavior. Was it considered theft? Was it just lying? Should I judge them favorably and assume one of them had an emergency? Please tell me what the Halacha is in this case.
ANSWER: The behavior of these two men constitutes a clear violation of Halacha regarding keeping one's word in business dealings.
According to Halacha, one who reneges on his word, whether in business or any other commitment, is worthy of the curse of "Mi Shepara" (see Bava Metzia 47b-49a and Choshen Mishpat 204:4). The content of the Mi Shepara is as follows: "He who punished ('Mi Shepara') the generation of the flood, the Tower of Babel, S'dom and Amora, and the Egyptians by the sea will punish the one who does not keep his word." This curse is serious and harsh, yet a Beis Din (Jewish court) would not hesitate to pronounce it upon someone who unlawfully reneges on his word.
The men made a clear business proposal with specific terms: free haircuts for anyone who could do more dips than they could, with the alternative being a paid haircut if they won the challenge. When you fulfilled your part by doing more dips, they were halachically obligated to honor their commitment. Their sudden departure without providing the promised free haircut constitutes reneging on their word.
One should not renege on a deal once an agreement has been reached, even if no money has changed hands (Choshen Mishpat 204:11). The only exception to this rule is if new information, developments, or financial considerations suddenly arise that would have deterred one from getting involved in the agreement in the first place (Chsam Sofer, Choshen Mishpat 102; Rav Vosner ZT”L in his Shevet Halevi 4:206; see also Tzitz Eliezer 8:40). A simple claim by the barbers of, "We have to go now" without any explanation or provision for fulfilling the commitment later does not qualify as such an exception.
Anyone who unjustifiably reneges on a deal is not conducting himself as is expected of a Jew (Rambam, Hilchos Mechira 7:1), and is labeled by our sages as a "Mechusar Amana" – a person of untrustworthy character (Bava Metzia 49a; Rambam, Hilchos Mechira 7:9).
While you ask whether you should judge them favorably and assume that they had an emergency, the fact that they provided no contact information or means to fulfill their obligation later suggests this was not a genuine emergency but rather an intentional evasion of their commitment. Had there been a legitimate emergency, they would have been expected to provide some means of contact to fulfill their obligation at a later time.
