A Presentation of Partners in Torah & the Kohelet Foundation MENTOR NOTE: Our Primary Goal in This Session Is to Introduce Y

A Presentation of Partners in Torah & The Kohelet Foundation

source Discussion Mentor Material questions notes

Mentor Practical summary note Lesson

Mentor Note:

Our primary goal in this session is to introduce your partners to some lesser known aspects of tzedakah and thereby enhance their appreciation of this mitzvah.

Six of the first seven sources in this session share a common principle; that preserving and building the dignity of the recipient of tzedakah is as important, or possibly more important than the tzedakah itself. Your goal is to help your partners discover that underlying principle and identify which source “does not belong”.

The questions posed after each source are meant to help your partner discover unique ideas in that source that are somewhat independent of the shared principle. As you go through the sources therefore, try to solicit their answers to the specific question, without directing them to the common thread. That discussion should be postponed until after completing all seven sources.

ix of the first seven sources in this session share a common principle. As you S review these sources, try to identify which source does not belong and a shared principle in the remaining six sources.

Source 1: Talmud, Ketubot 67b

רמַ ְּעּוק ָּׁבא הֲ ָּׁוה עַ ְּנָּׁיא בְּ ִשיבְּ בּותֵ יּה ַדהֲ ָּׁוה ָּׁרגִ יל ָּׁ לכ ָּׁיֹומא דְּ ָּׁשדִי לֵ יּה אַ ְּר ָּׁב ָּׁעה זּוזֵי בְּצִ ָּׁיּנֹורא דְּדַשָּׁ א יֹום אֶ ָּׁחד ָּׁאמַר אֵ יזִ יל אֶ יחֱ זֵי מַ אן ָּׁק ָּׁעבִ יד ִבי הַ הּוא טִ ָּׁיבּותא הַ הּוא ָּׁיֹומא ָּׁנ ְּג ָּׁהא לֵ יּה ְּל רמַ ְּעּוק ָּׁבא ְּלבֵ י מִ ְּד ָּׁר ָּׁשא אַ ְּתָּׁיא דְּבִ ְּיתהּו ַבהֲדֵ יּה כֵּ�ָּׁיון דחַ ְּזיּוהַּ דְּ ָּׁקא מַ ְּצלֵי לֵ יּה ְּלדַשָּׁ א ָּׁנפַ ק ַב ְּתרַ ְּייהּו ָּׁרהּוט מִ ַק ֵמיּה עַ ְּיילֵ י ְּ הַ להּוא אַ ָּּׁתּונא ַדהֲ ָּׁוה גְּ ָּׁ הרּופ ָּׁנּורא הֲ ָּׁוה ָּׁקא מִ ַיק ְּלָּׁיין ַכ ְּרעֵ יּה רדְּמַ ְּעּוק ָּׁבא ָּׁא ְּמ ָּׁרה לֵ יּה דבִ ְּיתהּו ְׁשקֹול ַכ ְּרעֵ יְך אֹותִ יב אַ ַכ ְּרעַ אי חֲלַ ש ַדעְּּתֵ יּה ָּׁא ְּמ ָּׁרה לֵ יּה אֲ ָּׁנא ְׁשכִ ְּיח ָּׁנא בְּ גַ וֵּ יּה דְּבֵ ָּׁיתא ּומִ ַק ְּר ָּׁבא אַ הַ ְּנ ָּׁ י י תִ י .

ar Ukva had a pauper in his neighborhood [whom he supported, but the M pauper did not know who his benefactor was], for every day [Mar Ukva] was accustomed to toss four zuzim in the socket of [the pauper’s] door [when he was not there]. One day [the pauper] said [to himself], “I will go and see who is doing me this kindness.” That day, Mar Ukva delayed at the study hall. His wife [who was privy to Mar Ukva’s charitable custom] accompanied him [on the way to the pauper’s house]. As soon as [the pauper] saw that [Mar Ukva] was slanting the door’s pivot [to place the money in the socket], he went out after them. [They] ran away from him [to keep Mar Ukva’s identity secret and thus spare the pauper from shame]. [Eventually, to escape the pauper,] [Mar Ukva and his wife] entered a certain oven, whose coals had been removed [but which was still burning hot]. [As they sat inside,] Mar Ukva’s feet were becoming singed. His wife [whose feet were not affected] said to him, “Take your feet and place them upon my feet.” [Mar Ukva] felt dejected. [His wife] said to him, “I am generally present in the house [were the paupers can find me easily], and [also] the benefit [they derive from] my [charity] is immediate.”

Discussion Question 1:

What is troubling about this story?

The issues your partners may identify include: 1) why Mar Ukva went to such lengths to hide his identity from his beneficiary, 2) why Mrs. Ukvah’s actions were more meritorious than her husband’s, and 3) why Mar Ukvah was singed. Each of these questions are addressed in the Mentor Summary

Source 2: Deuteronomy 15:11

ִכי לֹא ְּיֶח ַדל אֶ ְּביֹון מִ קרֶ ב ָּׁה ָּׁארֶץ עַ ל ֵכן ָּׁאנֹכִ י ְּמצַ וִָּך לֵ אמֹר ָּׁפתֹ חַ ּתפְּּתַ ח אֶ ת ְּיַדָך ְּל ָּׁאחִ יָך ַלעֶ נִ ֶיָך ְּּולאֶ ְּביֹ ְּנָך בְּאַ ְּרצֶ ָך.

or destitute people will not cease to exist within the Land; therefore I command F you, saying, “You shall surely open your hand to your brother, to your poor, and to your destitute in your Land.”

Discussion Question 2:

n that a poor person’s condition can be alleviated with money, it would appear that I given enough money there might come a time when there are no longer any poor people. Why do you imagine the Torah views the ongoing presence of poor people as an absolute?

Source 3: Maimonides, Mishneh Torah, Laws of Gifts to the Poor, 10:4

ָּׁ ל כהַ ּנֹותֵ ן ְּצ ָּׁד ָּׁקה ְּל ָּׁענִי בְּסֵבֶ ר ָּׁפנִ ים ָּׁרעֹות ָּּׁופ ָּׁ יונ כְּ בּושֹות ַב ַק ְּרקַ ע, אֲפִ לּו ָּׁנ ןתַ לֹו אֶלֶ ף ְּזהּובִ ים - אִ ֵבד ְּזכּותֹו ְּוהִ ְּפסִ ָּׁידּה.

hoever gives charity to a poor person with an unpleasant countenance and with W his face buried in the earth, he loses and destroys his merit even if he gives him 1000 gold pieces.

Discussion Question 3:

hile it is understandable that a pleasant countenance is important in dealing W with others, especially someone who is suffering from poverty, how can the merit of giving 1,000 gold coins be lost simply because the giver didn’t make the gift in an appropriate way?

אֲפִ ילּו ָּׁענִי הַ ִמ ְּת ַפ ְּרנֵס ןמִ הצְּ ָּׁד ָּׁקה יַעֲשֶ ה ְּצ ָּׁד ָּׁקה.

ven a poor man who receives his support from charity should [also] devote [some- E thing] to charity.

Discussion Question 4:

he poor person is apparently expected to give away funds he himself received T from charity. Wouldn’t it be far more efficient to calculate what he himself needs, give him this amount, and relieve both he and the community of the added burden?

Source 5a: Deuteronomy 15:8

ִכי פַ תֹחַ תִּ פְּּתַ ח אֶ ת ָּׁי ְּדָך לֹו ְּוהַעֶבֵ ט תַּ עֲבִ יטֶ ּנּו ִדי מַ ְּחסֹרֹו אֲ ֶשר ְּיֶח רסַ לֹו.

ather, you shall open your hand to him; you shall lend him his requirement, what- R ever is lacking to him.

Source 5b: Talmud Ketubot 67b

אֲ ֶשר ְּיֶח רסַ לֹו - אֲפִ ילּו סּוס לִ ְּ רכֹוב ָּׁע ָּׁליו ְּועֶבֶ ד ָּׁלרּוץ ְּל ָּׁפ ָּׁניו. ָּׁא ְּמרּו ָּׁע ָּׁליו עַל הִ ֵלל הַ ָּׁזקֵ ן ֶש ָּׁלקַ ח ְּל ָּׁענִ י ֶבן טּובִ ים אֶ ָּׁחד סּוס לִ ְּ רכֹוב ָּׁע ָּׁליו ְּוכֶבֶ ד ָּׁלרּוץ ְּל ָּׁפ ָּׁניו. ַפעַם אַחַ ת, לֹא ָּׁמ ָּׁצא עֶבֶ ד ָּׁלרּוץ ְּל ָּׁפ ָּׁניו, ְּו ָּׁרץ ְּל ָּׁפ ָּׁניו ְׁש ָֹּׁלשה מִ ילִ ין.

hatever is lacking to him” – Even [if he is lacking] a horse to ride upon and “W a servant to run before him [you must provide these for him].1 They said about Hillel the Elder that he [once] took for a pauper from an aristocratic family a horse to ride upon and a servant to run before him. On one occasion, [Hillel] could not find a servant to run before [the pauper], so [Hillel] [himself] ran before him for three milin (ed. approximately 2 miles).

(1) Although they remain extravagances for the vast majority of people, they have become necessities for him, i.e. items for which he feels a lack if he does not have them. The Shitah Mekubetzes cites the view in the name of the Geonim that these expenses are covered by the charity fund only as long as the current status of the formerly wealthy man is not widely known. In this case, the charity fund will assist him in maintaining his lifestyle so that his poverty will not become public knowledge. However, once it is already publicized that he is a pauper, he is given no more than any other pauper (see also Meiri to 68a). From Artscroll Schottenstein, Ketubot 67b, note 7

hy would the Talmud mandate that a poor person receive these luxuries – a W horse and a person to run in front of him to announce his arrival – when it is quite likely that few of the community members contributing to the charity fund would themselves have had these luxuries?

Source 6: Jerusalem Talmud, Shek alim 5:15

‘אשרי משכיל אל דל’ )תהלים מא, ב( -’אשרי נותן אל דל’ אין כתוב כאן, אלא ‘אשרי משכיל,’ זה המשתדל בצדקה לעשותה.

כיצד היה רבי יונתן עושה? כשהוא רואה בן טובים )בן למשפחה טובה( שירד מנכסיו, היה הולך אצלו ואומר לו: בשביל ]מאחר[ ששמעתי עליך שנפלה לך ירושה במדינת-הים )מעבר לים(, טול ואתה פורע. משלקח - היה אומר לו: במתנה נתתי לך.

raiseworthy is he who contemplates the needy” (Tehillim 41:2) – “Praiseworthy “P is he who gives to the needy” is not written here, rather “praiseworthy is he who contemplates”. The reference here is to the one who puts an [extra] effort into fulfilling one’s tzedaka obligation. How was Rabbi Yonatan accustomed to do this? When he would see the son of good people (someone from a reputable family) who had lost his possessions, he would approach him and say: Accept this loan as I heard that you have received an inheritance overseas. Once he takes it – he would say: I gave it to you as a gift.

Discussion Question 6:

otwithstanding Rabbi Yonaton’s impressive efforts to protect the impoverished N person’s dignity, how could this ruse be permissible? Granted that there are times when bending the truth or even outright lying is acceptable (See Sessions 2 and 3), why would lying be warranted under these circumstances?

ָּׁגדֹול הַ ַמ ְּלוֶה יֹותֵר מִ ן ָּׁהעֹושֶ ה ְּצ ָּׁד ָּׁקה, ּומַ ִטיל ַב ִכיס יֹותֵר מִ כ ָּּׁולן.

lender is greater than one who gives charity, and one who puts [working capital] A in the pocket [of a pauper] is more [outstanding] than them all.

Discussion Question 7:

f given the choice, a pauper would certainly prefer an outright gift. Following the I directive to provide the pauper with what he is lacking (Sources 5a and 5b), why is it preferable to provide a loan?

Mentor Summary:

our partners may have identified the underlying principle shared by six of these Y seven sources: preserving and building the dignity of the recipient of tzedakah is as – or more – important than the tzedakah itself. This idea is inherent in the saying of Rav Elazar in Sukkah 49b: “The reward of charity depends entirely upon the extent of the kindness in it.”

If not, tell them – and then go back over the sources quickly to see how this principle helps to answer each source’s questions.

As you go, and as time allows, tease out other issues inherent in the sources. For instance:

Source 1: The reason why it was so important to Mar Ukva that he go to such great lengths to hide his identity from his beneficiary is because he was very concerned with protecting the dignity of the pauper. Mrs. Ukvah’s actions received even more merit in that her assistance was immediate – reflecting a strong concern for the needs of the pauper at that moment. Mar Ukvah being singed was certainly not a punishment – both he and his wife were saved from death from the burning hot oven. The miracle performed for his wife was greater however to indicate that her merit was greater than his merit. (Nefesh Yehuda to Menoras HaMaor 199:3)

series 1 ■ volume 11 ■ mentor edition ■ copyright 2010 © Partners in torah ■ page 6 Partners in Torah is a division of Torah Umesorah Source 2: This source is the one that does share the same underlying principle as the others, for here the source focuses on the condition of poverty and that condition’s necessary place in God’s design. For more clarification, see the Ramchal in the footnote here.2 Your partners do not have this source and it is up to you whether and when to introduce these ideas.

(2) Ramchal, Derech Hashem Volume 2, chapter 2, sub-chapter 3: The elements of good and evil exist as opposites. Thus, for example, pride is a bad trait, while its opposite, humility, is a good one. Mercy is a good quality, while callousness is its opposite. The trait of being happy and satisfied with what one has is a good one, while its opposite is bad. The same is true of all other traits. The Highest Wisdom determined every possible quality that can be included within the limits of the nature that man must have in order to fulfill his ultimate purpose. G-d then brought into existence all these qualities, together with their causes, effects, and everything that surrounds and accompanies them, decreeing that they should be able to exist in man. In order for these qualities to exist, it was necessary that individuals be divided into different stations in life. Each of these stations is then a test for a particular individual, allowing all these bad qualities to exist, while giving him the opportunity to strive against them and embrace the good. Thus, for example, if wealth and poverty did not exist, there would be no opportunity for people to demonstrate either generosity or indifference. The fact that wealth exists allows the rich to be tested by his advantage, determin- ing whether he will be generous or indifferent to the poor who need his help. The poor are likewise tested to determine whether or not they will be satisfied and thank G-d for the little that they have. The rich man’s wealth is a challenge in another way as well. It tests him to determine whether he will become haughty and proud, and whether he will allow his wealth to sway him to pursue worldly vanities and abandon the G-dly. On the other hand, it also gives him the opportunity to be humble and modest despite his riches, and to reject worldly vanities in favor of Torah and devotion to G-d. There are many similar examples. [Every man’s predic- ament in life is therefore his challenge.] The Highest Wisdom divided these challenges among the human race in a manner decreed fitting and proper to fulfill its profound plan. Every individual therefore has his own challenge in the battle with his [Evil] Urge. This is his assignment and responsibility in this world, and within its framework he must strive for success. His deeds are then judged by G-d’s attribute of justice with true precision, depending on the particular responsibility that was given to him.

series 1 ■ volume 11 ■ mentor edition ■ copyright 2010 © Partners in torah ■ page 7 Partners in Torah is a division of Torah Umesorah Source 3: As can be seen from the discussion between Turnus Rufus and Rabbi Akiva (Source 8 below), tzedakah is not a vehicle designed to ensure that the needy will have the means to live – G-d has numerous other ways for the person to receive the funds he needs. Rather, tzedakah is a vehicle for us to reap the reward for assisting G-d’s children in their time of need.

To clarify, Tzedakah thus has two elements: the provision of the person’s need and the method of its delivery. Providing for the needs of the pauper and doing so with neither sensitive consideration for his particular difficulties nor care for his dignity is considered merely a monetary transaction – it fulfills no mitzvah, and leaves the pauper without any benefit he would not otherwise have received from HaShem. (Based in part on Shaalos U’teshuvos, Beis Halevi, Drush Aleph, Drush L’tzedakah.)

Source 4: This source demonstrates that tzedakah is not simply a system for ensuring the poor have sufficient funds. If that was its purpose, the net amount needed by the pauper would be granted him and no more. While there are certainly other insights to be gleaned from the pauper’s obligation to give charity, it is apparent that giving to others preserves and enhances the dignity of the giver.

Source 5: This source gives a clear indication that the dignity of the recipient is paramount to the mitzvah of tzedakah. Of note here is that the need to protect the previously wealthy person’s image is so important that even communal funds are used to temporarily support the ruse of his continued prosperity! For further clarification, see the footnote associated with this source.

Source 6: By emphasizing that one who “contemplates the needy” is praiseworthy, it is apparent that tzedakah is again not simply a system of wealth distribution. Rather, it is incumbent upon the giver to strategize ways to deliver the gift in the manner most preserving of the recipient’s dignified status as a member of the community.

As noted earlier. the reward of tzedakah comes only from giving with “kindness”. The extent of our reward therefore depends on the degree of kindness extended in the process. Dispensing tzedakah with a pleasant facial expression adds an element of “kindness” to the act of giving. Furthermore, it is only by “contemplating the needy”, i.e., discerning how and when to provide for this person’s needs, that we can optimize that reward. If the pauper is hungry for example, offering him prepared food and sparing him the added trouble of purchasing and preparing his food is more valuable than the kindness inherent in discreetly giving him funds. Finally, the charge to “contemplate the needy” sometimes requires us to contemplate and decide between competing or conflicting considerations. True, we must stay as far away as possible from lying, but genuine contemplation may suggest that protecting the newly impoverished person’s dignity is an even stronger consideration.

series 1 ■ volume 11 ■ mentor edition ■ copyright 2010 © Partners in torah ■ page 8 Partners in Torah is a division of Torah Umesorah Source 7: Rashi explains that providing a loan is greater than charity because the pauper will not be embarrassed by having to accept charity. True, the pauper may opt for an outright gift, as we previously mentioned, but the obligation to “contemplate” sometimes forces us to choose between competing considerations. In some situa- tions therefore, preserving a person’s dignity in not accepting charity may carry more weight than his preference for an outright cash gift.

Source 8 [optional]: Talmud Bava Batra 10:a

ְּוזּו ְׁשאֵ ָּׁלה ְּטּור ְּנּוסרּופּוס ָּׁה ָּׁר ָּׁשע אֶת רַ ִבי עֲקִ ָּׁיבא: אִם אֱ -ֹלקֵ םיכֶ אֹוהֵב עֲ ִניים הּוא מִפְּ נֵ י ָּׁמה אֵ ינֹו ְּמ ְּפר ְּנ ָּׁסם? ָּׁ מַ א רלֹו: כְּדֵ י שֶׁנִּ יצֹול ָּׁאנּו ָּׁבהֶן מִ ִד ָּׁינּה ֶשל ֵגיהִ נֹּם. ָּׁא רמַ לֹו: אַ ְּדרַ ָּׁבה! זּו ֶשמְּחַ ַייבְּּתָּׁ ן ְּלגֵ יהִ נֹּם. אֶ ְּ משֹול ְּלָך ָּׁמ ָּׁשל. ְּל ָּׁמה הַ ָּׁד ָּׁבר דֹומֶ ה? ְּלמֶ לֶ ְך ָּׁב ָּׁשר ָּׁו ָּׁדם ֶש ָּׁכעַס עַל עַ ְּ בדֹו וַחֲ ָּׁ ב ֹוש בְּבֵ ית ָּׁהאֲ סּורִ ין ְּלהַאֲכִ ילּו ְּו ֶשלֹא ְּלהַ ְׁשקֹותֹו. ְּו ָּׁהלַ ְך ָּׁא ָּׁדם אֶ ָּׁחד ְּוהֶאֱכִ ילֹו ְּוהִ ְׁש ָּׁקהּו. כְּ ֶש ָּׁשמַע הַ ֶמלֶ ְך לֹא כֹועֵ ס ָּׁע ָּׁליו? ְּואַ תֶּ ם ְּקרּויִן עֲ ָּׁבדִ ים, ֶשנֶאֱמַ ר: ִ“כי לִ י ְּבנֵי יִ ְּש ָּׁראֵל עֲ ָּׁבדִ ים.” ָּׁא רמַ לֹו רַ ִבי עֲקִ ָּׁיבא: אֶ ְּ משֹול ְּלָך ָּׁמ ָּׁשל. ְּל ָּׁמה הַ ָּׁד ָּׁבר דֹומֶ ה? ְּלמֶ לֶ ְך ָּׁב ָּׁשר ָּׁו ָּׁדם ֶש ָּׁכ עַס עַלבְּ נֹו וַחֲ ָּׁ בשֹו בבֵ ית ָּׁהאֲ סּורִ ין ְּוצִ ּוָּׁה ָּׁע ָּׁליו ֶשלֹא ְּלהַאֲכִ ילֹו ְּו ֶשלֹא ְּלהַ ְׁשקֹותֹו. ְּו ָּׁהלַ ְך ָּׁא ָּׁדם אֶ ָּׁחד ְּוהֶאֱכִ ילֹו ְּוהִ ְׁש ָּׁקהּו. כְּ ֶששָּׁמַע הַ ֶמלֶ ְך לֹא דֹורֹון ְּמ ַש ֵגר לֹו? וַאֲ נַ ן ְּקרּויִן ָּׁבנִ ים, ִד ְּכתִ יב: ָּׁ“בנִ ים אַ תֶּ ם לַ ה’ אֱ -ֹלקֵ יכֶ ם.

nd this very question the wicked Turanus Rufus asked of Rabbi Akiva: If your A G-d is a lover of the poor, for what reason does He not sustain them? [Rabbi Akiva] said to [Turanus Rufus]: [G-d makes people needy] in order that, through [our giving] them [charity], we may be saved from the judgment of Gehinnom.

[Turanus Rufus] said to [Rabbi Akiva]: On the contrary! This [giving of charity] is what [actually] condemns you to [be punished in] Gehinnom! I shall illustrate this concept for you with a parable. To what is this matter similar? [It is analogous] to [the case of] a human being who was angry at his servant and confined [the servant] in prison and ordered that no one feed him or give him drink. And one man [subsequently] went and fed [the servant] and gave him drink [in defiance of the king’s order]. When the king hears [about this man’s actions,] is he not angry at [the man]? And you [Jews] are called servants [of G-d], as it says: “For unto Me the children of Israel are servants!”

Rabbi Akiva said to [Turanus Rufus]: I shall illustrate [the situation] for you with a [different] parable. To what is the matter of giving charity similar? [It is analogous] to [the case of] a human king who was angry at his son and confined [the son] in prison and ordered that [no one] feed him or give him drink. And one man [subsequently] went and fed [the son] and gave him drink [thereby saving his life]. When the king hears [about this man’s actions,] does he not send [the man] a gift? And we [Jews] are called sons [of G-d], as it is written: “Sons are you to Hashem, your G-d.”

The following (fictitious) story demonstrates some of the important aspects of this session, and you may find it a useful way of communicating these ideas to your children.

Once upon a time there was a Rabbi who was teaching a number of students in his study late one Thursday night. There was a knock on the door and a man came in; he seemed a little startled as if surprised to see the Rabbi was not alone. He pulled himself together and said, “Rabbi, I have a question in Jewish Law for you! Can you use milk for Kiddush on Friday night instead of wine?”

The Rabbi said no, and then added: “That was a very good question, an excellent question in fact! As a reward for asking such a question, I want to give you $100!” The man was elated, took the money, and walked out – at which point the Rabbi went back to his students.

They of course were all confused. “Why did you give that man $100 for the question? It’s not a difficult question. Any of his friends or neighbors could have told him that one may not use milk for kiddush!”

The Rabbi replied: “Students, weren’t you paying attention? Didn’t you see what was going on? He didn’t come for a question! First, he was startled upon entering my study – and yet it was me he was coming to see! Why was he startled to see me? Second, he asked a question the answer to which any of his neighbors might have known – so why come to me?

Obviously, he was not startled to see me, but all of you. He asked me a question that many would have known, because he did not really come here to ask a question – otherwise he would have asked those neighbors. So why did he come to see me? He came for tzedakah, but was startled upon seeing me with a group, and was ashamed to ask for tzedakah. He was put on the spot and quickly thought of a real life question to ask me with all of you here. It was from that question that I knew how much to give him. If he needed to know if he can use milk for kiddush, he obviously does not have any wine. Further, if he is asking about using milk for kiddush, he clearly doesn’t have meat either! I then had to find a way to give him the money without embarrassing him, so I rewarded him for the question!”