Anonymous

Charity: Difference between revisions

From Halachipedia
1,879 bytes added ,  28 February 2022
Line 244: Line 244:
* Some explain that it is permitted to test Him since He promised to enrich someone who gives tzedaka, so it isn’t a test of Hashem, it is merely revealing his promise.<ref>Maharshal (cited by Derisha 247 and Shach 247)</ref>
* Some explain that it is permitted to test Him since He promised to enrich someone who gives tzedaka, so it isn’t a test of Hashem, it is merely revealing his promise.<ref>Maharshal (cited by Derisha 247 and Shach 247)</ref>
* Another explanation is that testing Hashem is problematic because if one’s test isn’t fulfilled one might question Him, but for tzedaka there is a certain protective power that it will not lead to questioning Him.<ref>Badei Hashulchan (247:1 Biurim)</ref>
* Another explanation is that testing Hashem is problematic because if one’s test isn’t fulfilled one might question Him, but for tzedaka there is a certain protective power that it will not lead to questioning Him.<ref>Badei Hashulchan (247:1 Biurim)</ref>
==Taking Tzedaka from Non-Jews==
==From Who It Is Permitted to Take Tzedaka?==
===Married Women===
#There are many factors that would allow collecting even a large donation today from married women today.<Ref>Shulchan Aruch Y.D. 248:4 codifies the gemara Bava Kama 119a that it is forbidden for a collector of tzedaka to accept a large donation from a married women because there is a concern that her husband wouldn't agree with that donation. The Raavan (end of Bava Kama) says that it is permitted nowadays to accept donations from women since it is common for women to in charge of finances of their husband's money. Maharshal b"k 10:59 cites this and notes that it depends on every situation. Yad Avraham 248 cites this Maharshal. [https://www.hebrewbooks.org/pdfpager.aspx?req=991&pgnum=61 Chavalim Beneyimim EH 5:34] writes that it is permitted to accept a large tzedaka donation from a woman since the common practice today is for a couple to split their property and since she has joint ownership she can give a large gift. Maharit CM 2:67 says that a woman can keep her salary for herself if she is the sole provider for the food in the house and even in that case he suggests that perhaps she willingly cedes her rights to the salary and it belongs to her husband. He is also discussing work outside the house. Rav Reuven Feinstein (Etz Erez p. 798) writes that his father, Rav Moshe Feinstein, held that if a woman works outside the home that money belongs to her. Shevet Halevi 11:309 disagrees and holds that a husband owns his wife’s salary even if she works outside the house. Laws of Tzedakah and Maaser p. 28 writes that there's reason to accept a large donation from a women who is working or if she's in charge of running financial decisions of the household but in all cases it is advisable that a husband and wife discuss in advance how much tzedaka a wife can distribute to avoid any conflict.</ref>
===From Non-Jews===
# A non-Jew who volunteers to do mitzvot according to many opinions is rewarded. However, they may not observe mitzvot as an obligation because doing so is considered creating a new religion.<ref>The Rambam Melachim 10:10 writes that a non-Jew who wants to fulfill mitzvot and receive reward we shouldn't stop him. On the other hand, in 10:9 he writes that we shouldn't let him do a mitzvah that he isn't obligated in because he is creating a non-religion in doing so. He should either convert or only keep the 7 mitzvot of bnei noach. The Radvaz explains that the distinction is whether he intends to create a new religion. If he just does a mitzvah voluntarily not intending that it is an obligation that is acceptable, while if he is does it with the intention of being a commandment he should be stopped. While it seems from the Rambam and Radvaz that the non-Jew is rewarded for doing a mitzvah voluntarily it isn’t absolutely clear. It is possible that the non-Jew is doing the mitzvah voluntarily to get rewarded but isn’t actually going to be rewarded. That is the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 2:7.  
# A non-Jew who volunteers to do mitzvot according to many opinions is rewarded. However, they may not observe mitzvot as an obligation because doing so is considered creating a new religion.<ref>The Rambam Melachim 10:10 writes that a non-Jew who wants to fulfill mitzvot and receive reward we shouldn't stop him. On the other hand, in 10:9 he writes that we shouldn't let him do a mitzvah that he isn't obligated in because he is creating a non-religion in doing so. He should either convert or only keep the 7 mitzvot of bnei noach. The Radvaz explains that the distinction is whether he intends to create a new religion. If he just does a mitzvah voluntarily not intending that it is an obligation that is acceptable, while if he is does it with the intention of being a commandment he should be stopped. While it seems from the Rambam and Radvaz that the non-Jew is rewarded for doing a mitzvah voluntarily it isn’t absolutely clear. It is possible that the non-Jew is doing the mitzvah voluntarily to get rewarded but isn’t actually going to be rewarded. That is the position of Rav Moshe Feinstein in Igrot Moshe YD 2:7.  
* However, in light of the Rambam responsa 148 (Blau, Pear Hadur 60) it seems clear that the Rambam holds that a non-Jew who does a mitzvah voluntarily is indeed rewarded. He seems to apply it to all the mitzvot. The Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben also says this, but Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that it is a scribal error. The other proofs against Igrot Moshe like Pirush Mishnayot of Rambam Trumot 3:9 are dealt with in that teshuva.</ref>
* However, in light of the Rambam responsa 148 (Blau, Pear Hadur 60) it seems clear that the Rambam holds that a non-Jew who does a mitzvah voluntarily is indeed rewarded. He seems to apply it to all the mitzvot. The Meiri Sanhedrin 59a s.v. ben also says this, but Igrot Moshe YD 2:7 writes that it is a scribal error. The other proofs against Igrot Moshe like Pirush Mishnayot of Rambam Trumot 3:9 are dealt with in that teshuva.</ref>
Anonymous user