💾 Archived View for auragem.space › texts › jewish › t › Shulchan%20Arukh%2C%20Yoreh%20De%27ah%20251 captured on 2022-07-16 at 15:58:22. Gemini links have been rewritten to link to archived content
-=-=-=-=-=-=-
251 ‎[1] If one wilfully and repeatedly transgresses even one of the Biblical commands and does not repent, we are not obliged to support him or to lend him money; (but we should support the heathen poor with the Jewish poor for the sake of peace). ‎[2] One who transgresses even one command in a sheer spirit of defiance; as, for example, when he eats the flesh of an animal not slaughtered according to the ritual rules in a place where kosher meat is available,—such a person it is forbidden to ransom if made captive. (But when one is a transgressor on account of an irresistible appetite, they may ransom him if they wish, but they are not obliged to.) ‎[3] Helping one's grown up sons or daughters in need when he is not obliged to—in order to give his sons an opportunity of studying the Law, or to keep his daughters in the right path—and presenting gifts to one's father in need,—all this comes under the general head of Charity. In fact, such charity is to be preferred to other forms. Not only a father or child, but any relative should be given preference to a stranger; a brother of one's father, to a brother of one's mother; the poor of his own house to the poor of the city at large; the poor of his own city to the poor of other cities; and the poor that dwell in the Holy Land to those that dwell in other lands. ‎[4] The community can compel a father to support an impoverished son, and even where the son is an adult, the father is taxed more than the other wealthy men. (And so with other relatives). ‎[5] Once a man has contributed a sum of money to the Gabbaïm, neither he nor his heirs have any power over it, but the community can do with it what is pleasing in the eyes of God and man.
RMI.—But if he made the donation without specification, before the money reaches the Gabbai, we give it to his poor relatives, because we presume that he meant it for his poor relatives. And this, only if he had poor relatives at the time of the donation. But if they were rich at the time and then became poor, we do not give it to them. All this applies to one making an individual donation; but if he donates in connection with other members of the community, we presume that he leaves it to the judgment of the community to dispose of it in any manner deemed fit. ‎[6] Let the poor be members of thy household. ‎[7] Feeding the hungry should precede clothing the naked. ‎[8] If a man and a woman ask for food, the woman is given the preference; and so, too, if they ask for clothing. So also, if two orphans, a man and a woman, come to be married off, the woman is given the precedence. ‎[9] If many poor seek help and there is not enough money in the treasury to help them all, a priest is given preference before a Levite; a Levite before an ordinary Israelite; an Israelite before a Halal; a Halal before a child of unknown fatherhood; such a one before a foundling; a foundling before a bastard; a bastard before a Nathin; a Nathin before a proselyte; a proselyte before an emancipated slave. This applies only in case they are equal in learning. But between a bastard a scholar and a high priest an ignoramus, the scholarly bastard is given the preference; and so whosoever is greater in learning is preferred. However, if the father or teacher of the charity distributor is among the poor seeking aid, the teacher, or the father (provided he too is a scholar) is given the preference, even if there is a far greater scholar among them. ‎[10] If one comes and says, "Give me food," no investigation is made to see that he is not an impostor, but he is given food at once. If he is destitute and asks for clothing, the case is investigated, and if he is found worthy, he is immediately furnished with raiment. ‎[11] Rabbi [Judah the Prince] grieved that he had given his bread to an illiterate, because those years were years of dearth and what the illiterate ate might have been given to a scholar. But if it had not been a time of scarcity, he would have been obliged to sustain him. However, if one is on the point of starvation, he must be given food, even though there is a possibility that a scholar will later be in need on account of it. ‎[12] Two poor men who are required to give to charity, may pay their obligations by giving alms to one another.
RMI.—This refers to Charity in the ordinary sense. But if the community imposes it as a fine upon them for some misdemeanor that they give a certain sum to Charity, they can not give it to one another; for that would not be paying a fine. ‎[13] A congregation in need of a Rabbi and a Public Reader, but unable to engage both, should give the preference to the former, provided he is a distinguished rabbi well versed in the Teachings and Laws; otherwise, a Reader should be engaged.
RMI.—The Rabbi should not be maintained out of the charity fund, as it is a disgrace both for him and for the city; but the community should provide him another source of income. However, gifts of individuals are perfectly honorable. ‎[14] The community authorities may use even school-funds if necessary, for the payment of the annual per-capita tax of thirty Peshitim to the commander of the city's troops, because it is a matter of life and death; for if they will not come to terms with him now, many poor people, not having the wherewithal to pay, will be beaten and stripped naked.
Version: Section on Charity, trans. Louis Feinberg. N.Y. School of Philanthropy, 1915
License: Public Domain