CCAR RESPONSA
Contemporary American Reform Responsa
24. Priorities in Charitable
Distribution
QUESTION: Does tradition set priorities in the distribution of
charitable funds which have been collected? In this community there are day schools, afternoon
schools, Jewish community center programs, senior adult housing, nursing homes and many
other groups which claim priority from the charitable funds. What kind of priorities does the
halakhah set? (Rabbi B. Greenspan, Pembroke Pines, FL)ANSWER:
Charity has been emphasized in Judaism since Biblical times. The Torah suggested that
one tenth be collected for the poor, and that corners of the field and the gleanings of the harvest
be left for them so that they could participate in the harvest. This was a way of providing for
individuals who needed food and basic sustenance (Lev. 19, 27.30 ff; Nu. 18.26; Deut. 12.17; II
Ch. 31.5 f; Neh. 13.12). Many Biblical books continue this emphasis and frequently
chastise those who neglect the poor while amassing fortunes themselves (Deut. 15.7 f; Amos 2.6
ff; Isaiah 1.17; Jeremiah 7.6; Mal. 3.5; Prov. 31.10; Job 29.16; etc.). Categories of poor, such as
widows, orphans and the sick were mentioned, but no priorities were
established. These thoughts were reinterpreted by the later Mishnaic and Talmudic
literature. By that time, portions of the Jewish population lived in urban settings, so the earlier
manner of distribution through gleanings and abandoned corners of the field were no longer
appropriate. The Mishnah provided for the poor through the continuation of the tithe as
well the placement of gifts in a special area of the Temple from which individuals could help
themselves according to their need without shame. There are a variety of rules in the
Talmud which deal with the poor and define those eligible for gifts. So, for example, those
who still have enough provisions for two meals may participate in public food distribution in a
soup kitchen, while those who still possess enough for twenty-four meals may not participate in
distributions from a charitable box. Furthermore, those whose possessions consist of two
zuzim could not glean in the fields (M. Peah 8.7, 8; J. Peah 29b). There
were, of course, other rules, too, about the sale of possessions and family responsibility for those
relatives who were poor (Ket. 68a; Shulhan Arukh Yoreh Deah 253.1; 257.8). Local poor
individuals were always given priority over those at a distance, and members of the family over
outsiders (B. M. 71a; M. B. K. 11.9; Shulhan Arukh Yoreh Deah 251.3). The
Jewish community took care of its own poor and except under special circumstances charity
from non-Jews was not accepted. On the other hand, non-Jews could be beneficiaries of Jewish
charity (M. Git. 5.8; 61a f; Shulhan Arukh Yoreh Deah 254.2). Charity in the
form of food or clothing was arranged by loans to the poor (Yeb. 62b f); items were sold below
cost when the prices had risen excessively (Sefer Hassidim #1049). Every
effort was made to adopt orphans (San. 19b; Ket. 50a) or to arrange for orphanages although the
latter is a development of modern times. The first Jewish orphanage was opened in London in
1831. Different forms of giving were listed but unsystematically and few priorities on
distribution were provided; among the noblest was the anonymous gift through which the
recipient and the donor were unknown to each other. A large number of sayings which encourage
charity are scattered through the Talmud and the Midrashic literature (M. Avot 1.2;
B. B. 9a, b, 109b; Ber. 55a; Ket. 67b; Shab. 156b; Taan 20b, etc.). Even the poor are to be
charitable (Git. 7b). A system for the collection of charitable funds was established in
every community and one or two treasurers took care of this task. In fact, no community was to
be without such individuals who looked after the poor (Yad Hil. Matnat Aniyim, 9.1-3).
Efforts to organize patterns for the distribution of charity were undertaken by the twelfth century
Sefer Hassidim, and Maimonides (1135-1204) in his Yad (Hil. Matnat Aniyim), as
well as Caro (Shulhan Arukh Yoreh Deah 250 f) and subsequently by Elijah ben Avraham
of Smyrna (Meil Tzedaqah). Each of these works listed various gradations of giving and
distribution independently without much reference to any earlier effort. The loftiest goal was the
procurement of employment for the poor or the provision of a dowry for an orphaned girl; both
would remove the recipients from the rolls of the poor and would eliminate a drain on the
community (Shab. 63a.; Mak. 24a; Yad Hil. Matnat Aniyim 10.7 f). No distinction was
made between Jew and non-Jew (Git. 61a) nor of rank within the Jewish community (Ket. 6, 7a:
Yad Hil. Matnat Aniyim 8; Shulhan Arukh Yoreh Deah 251). Much effort
was expanded on ransom for captives, or if that was not possible, at least proper provisioning for
those who were held captive (Rieger, Geschichte der Juden in Rom, II, p. 316;
Shulhan Arukh Yoreh Deah 252.1). This could extend to selling items from the synagogue
in order to help captives (Israel Abraham, Jewish Life in the Middle Ages, pp. 337 ff).
Funds were made available for Israel and they were collected by Sheluhim who regularly
visited communities (Abraham Yaari, Shiluheh Eretz Yisrael). In the medieval
period, vigorous charitable organizations looked after the feeding, housing, educational and
dowry needs of the poor (M. Güdemann, Geschichte des Erziehungswesens und
Kultur, I, 50 ff; A. Cronbach, “Me’il Tzedakah,” Hebrew Union College Annual, Vols.
9-14). This was necessary as poverty was endemic in a sizable portion of the Jewish community
during many centuries. Hospitals are mentioned early in the literature, however, they
were actually hostels for traders and poor travelers. The first reference to such a Jewish
“hospital” is in 1210. A leper hospital existed in Heidelberg, in 1349, but this seems to have been
an exception (Abraham Cronbach, Religion and Its Social Setting, p. 131). Few financial
provisions were made for sick care, unless the sick were indigent. Every effort was made to
assure that they were regularly visited (Or Zarua 2.51). In some cases, individuals
unwilling to make such visits were fined (Abraham Cronbach, op. cit. p.
137). Educational institutions were not recipients of charity, although wealthy
individuals endowed them. In the Talmudic and later Medieval periods, it was the duty of each
community to establish and support such institutions. Elementary schools were always provided
for in conjunction with synagogues; parents of the children paid tuition according to their ability,
while poor students were fed and housed by the community (Cronbach, op. cit., p. 128).
Considerable sums were expanded on direct support for educational institutions but this was not
considered charity. It was an obligation supported by taxes and tuition. Scholarships for poor
students were provided in the form of food, lodging or books as a charitable contribution (Turei
Zahav to Shulhan Arukh Yoreh Deah 249.2; S. Dubnow, Pinqas Hamedinah, #528
and #588). Institutions of higher learning were established and supported by patrons. Their future
depended on this help, and when the economic conditions changed, they closed or moved to a
new location. None of these sources dealt with institutions which are now the major
recipients of charitable funds such as vocational institutions, special education units, social
service agencies, hospitals, etc. In other words, the earlier Jewish communities faced so many
basic needs that other matters could not be considered. We may conclude from this
that tradition provides little guidance for our age, especially as we have been fortunate enough to
overcome the basic problems of previous ages. All sources agree that communities need
primary education, sick care, and centers of higher learning. They do not deal with their funding
in detail.July 1986
If needed, please consult Abbreviations used in CCAR Responsa.