The mitzvah of giving charity, tzedaka, is among the most central of mitzvos that define Jewish communal life. The Torah urges us to be attentive to the needs of our fellows, and to come to the assistance of those who require it.
Of the importance of the mitzvah of tzedaka, the Sages teach that charity, “weighs up against all other mitzvos of the Torah” (Bava Basra 9a). We likewise find that charity is “of great importance, for it brings closer the redemption” (Bava Basra 10a).
Would the world be better off if there were no poor people in it? The verse in Parashas Re’eh suggests that this is the case: “But there will be no poor among you, for Hashem will surely bless you in the land which Hashem gives you for an inheritance to possess” (Devarim 15:4).
At the same time, just several verses later, the Torah states, “There will always be poor people in the land. Therefore I command you to be openhanded toward your fellow brothers who are poor and needy in your land” (Devarim 15:11). Whereas the first verse refers to poverty as a negative phenomenon that will ultimately pass from the Jewish People, the second verse treats it as a given fact of social life.
Rashi addresses the apparent contradiction between the verses. Citing Chazal he explains, “When you perform the will of Hashem, the poor will be found among others and not among you; when you do not perform the will of Hashem, the poor will be among you.” Poverty, indeed, is thus a negative phenomenon. Yet, it always was and always will be. The question, dependent on our own actions, is whether it will be present among Israel, or among others.
In the present article we will discuss the halachic dimensions of poverty. Is there a duty in Torah law and ethics to avoid poverty, and how far does this duty extend? What are the criteria for poverty vis-à-vis receiving tzedaka? How much is a poor person permitted to receive? These questions, among others, are discussed below.
Avoiding Poverty
Being self-sufficient is a recurring ideal in the writings of the Sages. Thus, the Gemara (Pesachim 112b) writes: “Make your Shabbos like a weekday, and do not rely on others for support.” This means that a person should not buy special and additional food for Shabbos, and should save his resources – even at the expense of not honoring Shabbos – to ensure that he does not require assistance from others if this seems to be a threat.
Moreover, the Mishnah in Pe’ah (8:9) writes, “Whoever is entitled to receive tzedaka and does not, will not pass away until he supports other people. The verse writes of him: Blessed is the person who trusts in Hashem, and Hashem is his security.” The Rash and Rosh explain that a person should even take a job involving heavy labor and rely on Hashem, rather than take charity.
A further source (Bava Basra 110a) notes that a person should be prepared to do any kind of work in order to avoid receiving charity. Thus, Rav Cahana famously instructed that a person should “skin a carcass, even in public, and refrain from dependency on others.” The Rashbam explains that there is no shame or Chilul Hashem in so doing. Having a job is in no way lowly.
In this sense we find in the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De’ah 255:1) that even an honored Torah scholar who became poor should take a job – even a lowly one – so as to refrain from receiving tzedaka. Yet, the Aruch Hashulchan writes that if the Torah will be disgraced by his doing so, he should not do so. This depends on the times and places.
Receiving Charity for Mitzvos
The obligation of a poor person to limit his expenses applies even to mitzvos. Examples include not eating seuda shlishis, the third Shabbos meal generally considered an obligation, spending less money on the first two Shabbos meals (as noted above), limiting one’s Yom Tov expenses (see Shut Betzeil HaChochma (5:47), who proves the point from Tosfos in Beitza 15b).
The Bach (Orach Chayim 242) and the Mishna Berura (242:1) explain that a poor person who has to receive charity should be given money even for expenses of the third Shabbos meal. Certainly, a person who can save during the whole week to enable him to buy food for the third Shabbos meal should do so, and one should also spend less on the first two Shabbos meals to ensure food for the third – all this rather than take tzedaka. However, if that is not possible and he must accept charity, he should be given enough to enable him to enjoy the Shabbos.
Concerning other mitzvos, the Yerushalmi (cited in Tosafos, Kiddushin 31a) writes that a person must collect charity in order to honor his parents – this by contrast with a person’s own service of Hashem, for which there is no obligation to collect charity (see also Biur Halacha 656, s.v. afilu mitzva overes; Shut She’elas Yaakov 1:26).
Notable exceptions are the mitzvos of lighting the Chanukah candles and drinking the Four Cups on Seder Night. For these mitzvos we find an explicit ruling in the Mishnah requiring a person to even collect door-to-door in order to perform the mitzvah.
When a Person Must Receive Charity
Notwithstanding all of the above, a poor person must take tzedaka if he or his family will suffer from malnutrition, become ill, be unable to maintain their studies or be unable to perform other basic social functions (such as marrying off children at minimal standards) if they do not take.
This principle is derived from the Yerushalmi (Pe’ah 8:9), where we find: “Whoever needs to take charity and does not is considered a murderer, and it is forbidden to take pity on him.” The Smag (positive commandments 162) explains that this refers to a person who is either old, ill, physically challenged, or has many daughters and is unable to marry them off. His explanation is cited by the Beis Yosef and even by the Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De’ah 255:2) and Shach (255:1).
The Semag even writes that a father should receive tzedaka to be able to support his daughters. Thus, if a person is unable to marry off his daughters and provide them with a basic dowry without taking tzedaka, he should do so.
As the Yerushalmi implies, a person who refuses to receive charity when he needs it, is held liable for the unfortunate results. In the words of the Rambam, such a person is considered “a murderer, liable with his soul” (Matnos Aniyim 10:19).
Note that many authorities have ruled that receiving a Kollel stipend is not considered receiving charity, and one does not have to be impoverished to receive the monthly stipend. According to Shut Shevet Haleivi (Vol. 8 no. 315:1) the principles of hired laborers apply to Kolel students (see also Teshuvos Vehanhagos 3:470:9; Pischei Choshen 3:8:3, Shut Be’er Sarim 5:56), so that the concern to not receive charity does not apply.
Defining Poverty: General Perspectives
Defining poverty is not an exclusively Jewish or Torah-related problem. Many societies and cultures grapple with the question of how poverty should best be defined, and which kind of assistance should be offered to the poor in light of the definition.
There are three basic approaches to defining poverty. One approach is the classic “poverty line” concept, where a poor person is defined as somebody falling beneath a specific certain standard of living. This “line,” which is often expressed in terms of a bulk income, incorporates food, clothing, living quarters, education and medical expenses.
An alternative method for defining poverty is relative to the average income (or wealth) in a given society. For instance, a person might be considered poor if his income or wealth is less than half of the average for the given region or society.
The main problem with the first method is how to define the line. The problem with the second is that it ignores the individual’s actual standard of living, focusing solely on the social par. If the entire society doubles its income, the poor will become much poorer in this sense even if their income does not fall, because the real difference between the poor and the rich will have grown drastically.
Both of the options above are objective measures of poverty. This can ignore subjective factors. For instance, students will be categorized as poor even though they are to a degree poor by choice and studying towards a career. A third option is thus completely subjective, based on the personal perspective of the person involved. If he or she sees himself as poor, he is defined as poor.
Torah Law Definitions for Poverty: Communal Donations
In Torah law we find a representation for the first and the third approaches. The second approach, defining poverty as being relative to the rest of society, does not appear. However, we do find that changing social standards will be influential in determining the line beneath which a person will be considered poor.
The qualification for receiving several distributions found in the Mishnah is very specific. The Mishnah (Pe’ah 7:8) states that somebody who has enough food for two meals must not take from the tamchui – a communal soup kitchen intended to distribute daily provisions. Likewise, somebody who has enough food for fourteen meals – a week’s supply – must not take from the communal charity fund which allocates weekly donations to the poor.
This halachah is ruled by the Rambam, who states (Matnos Aniyim 9:13) that somebody who has the resources to pay for 14 meals (to sustain himself for a week) may not receive donations from the communal charity box. When it comes to receiving donations from these communal collections, the poverty line is thus defined by a rigid and fixed figure.
Personal Donations: A Yearly Income
The Mishnah that follows teaches that for purposes of personal mitzvos vis-à-vis the poor – both mitzvos of the field (leket, shikchah, pe’ah) and the general mitzvah of tzedakah – the poverty line is defined by the possession of 200 Zuz.
Later authorities explain that the intention is not for the precise sum of 200 Zuz or the modern equivalent. Rather, the idea is that a person should have a stable income. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh De’ah 253:2) writes: “Some say that these quantities were only said for their times. Today, however, a poor person (who does not have a steady job) may receive donations until he has sufficient moneys to establish a fund from which he and his household can sustain themselves.”
In a similar sense, when the Or Zarua (Tzedakah 14) was asked about receiving charity for somebody who possessed 200 Zuz, he replied: “Everything depends on his and his household’s sustenance.”
Moreover, commentaries explain that the amount of 200 Zuz was the amount of money that was required to live for a year (see Rash on the Mishnah; Or Zarua 14) in the time of the Gemara. Based on this, halachic authorities rule that a steady annual income is the standard for receiving donations: A person who has a steady income that will provide him support for the next year may not receive charity.
This is based on the next Mishnah in Pe’ah, which states even a person does not have available cash to buy food, if he “has 50 Zuz and is doing business with them, he may not receive.” The Rash (based on the Yerushalmi) explains that 50 Zuz that produce an income are worth more than 200 Zuz that do not. Clearly, having a steady income is tantamount to having 200 Zuz, and therefore somebody with a steady income that allows him to support his family may not take charity (see Shut Shevet Haleivi 2:120), Tzedaka Umishpat 2:6; Derech Emuna, Matnos Aniyim 9:84).
This is a type of relative definition for poverty, since the income required for a year changes from place to place and from time to time, depending on the prevailing basic standard of living.
Subjective Poverty
We also find a subjective definition for poverty. This is stated specifically in connection with a wealthy person who lost his fortune. For such a person, the Gemara teaches that we must maintain his previous standard of living, if he needs it.
Based on the verse in Devarim (15:8) the Gemara (Kesubos 67b) derives that a poor person must be provided with whatever he needs to maintain his previous standards, even “a servant to run in front of him and a horse for him to ride on.”
The Gemara narrates the tale of a poor person who came to Rabbi Nechemia to ask for charity. Rabbi Nechemia asked the man what he was used to eating, and he replied: “The best meat and wine.” Rabbi Nechemia then asked if he would be prepared to make do with lentils, to which he agreed. The poor man subsequently died as a result of the change in his diet. In this case, the Gemara states that the poor man was responsible for his own death, since he should not have maintained such a high standard of living at the expense of the community.
Yet, the Gemara notes another story about a poor man who came to Rava to ask for charity. This man was used to eating stuffed chickens and old, superior wine. The poor man based his expensive practice on the verse (Tehillim 145:15): “You give them their food when they need it” – “each according to his needs.” At that moment, Rava’s sister, whom he had not seen for thirteen years, walked in, carrying a stuffed chicken and superior wine. Rava saw this as a sign from Heaven that this food was designated for the poor man, to whom he gave it. In one of his explanations, the Maharsha explains that the poor man needed a stuffed chicken and old wine temporarily, for health purposes.
Although the charity principle of a rich man who became poor is also ruled by halachic authorities, later Poskim qualified the halachah. For instance, Shut Maharashdam (Yoreh De’ah 166) writes that the halachah applies only to somebody for whom lowering standards can constitute a health hazard and even a danger of death. Indeed, the Maharsha comments on the second tale of the Gemara, as we noted, that the poor man needed a stuffed chicken and superior wine only temporarily, for health purposes.
Certainly, we do not provide a previously rich person with a high standard of living where this comes at the expense of another poor person’s basic standard of living.
Conclusion
Torah law urges us, both as a community and as individuals, to care for the poor among us. As we know from personal experience, defining poverty for purposes of receiving charity is not a simple matter, and halachic authorities, from the time of the Talmud and until today discussed the matter in addressing the forever contemporary issue of allocating charity funds.
As we have seen, the basic poverty line that halachah defines is a standard of living. This standard of living changes, depending on accepted standards for basic living – yet, it does not depend on the gap between rich and poor. There is no principle whereby the income must be redistributed to close the gap between the rich and the poor.
Another standard that halachah recognizes is the subjective poverty of a rich person who lost his wealth. This standard is less practically applicable, and later authorities tend to limit its application to special cases.
It is incumbent on people to ensure that they do not become poor and if they do, they should make every effort to leave that status. However, somebody who is unable to make ends meet, and cannot, even with great effort, provide himself and his family with basic sustenance, should not feel ashamed to receive charity from others. Furthermore, people who wish to dedicate their life to Torah study are acting in a laudable manner even if they are forced to accept charity (even after receiving their kollel stipend) as a result. Thus, Rav Moshe Feinstein (Yoreh Deah 2, 116) rules that it is wrong for one to stop learning just because he doesn’t want to accept charity.
Each person has a give-and-take with his surroundings, and charity – giving and receiving – is an integral part of every healthy society.
