In the aftermath of Hurriance Katrina, I've heard friends and relatives discuss the many options to donate money and supplies. I was quite upset when I overheard someone suggest a non-Jewish charity and then someone else respond with contempt that it would be better to utilize a Jewish charity instead.

The Mishnah (in Gittin 5:8) states that we should not prevent non-Jewish poor from taking gifts which the Torah reserves for the Jewish poor such as pe'ah, shich'cha, and leket "...mipnay darkay shalom," which can be translated as "for the preservation of peace."

I wish to comment on our attitudes towards our non-Jewish charities based on this translation of "...mipnay darkay shalom." Although this translation "for the preservation of peace" can be easily understood in a practical and humantarian perspective, there is a much deeper basis for allowing non-Jewish poor to take gifts reserved for Jews in need.

Afterall, everyday, three times a day, we say and acknowledge an obvious fact: Hashem is good to all, and His mercies are on all His works. (Tehillim 145:9)

But when we help those in need, especially in matters of survival and basic human needs, we can emulate Hashem Yisbarach. Therefore, consider making donations to non-Jewish charities as well as Jewish ones, it is another opportunity to emulate your Creator.

If that would be true, since the Pasuk of "Rachamav Al Kol Massav" is referring to animals, as it says in Bava metziah 85a. Would you say that it would be worthwhile to give money that should be earmarked for the poor Jews for saving the whales?

If your brother was in debt, would you get upset if someone told you to first help him before you help someone else? All Jews are family, so first we look after our family, then we help others.

I am sorry that I missed a lot of very interesting discussions on this forum: I changed jobs and had to spend a lot of time adjusting to the new team, product, etc. B"H I still was able to learn Torah and even started reading Pirkei Avoth.

quote:

Originally posted by Rav Chaim:
If that would be true, since the Pasuk of "Rachamav Al Kol Massav" is referring to animals, as it says in Bava metziah 85a. Would you say that it would be worthwhile to give money that should be earmarked for the poor Jews for saving the whales?

Rav Chaim, allow me to disagree with you. We should not equate the human beings with animals, no matter how sentient the animals are and how much evil the "Nations of the world" have done us.

First of all, the poor of the world are human beings, just as we are, and yes, I do disagree with what the Alter Rebbe said about the level of the soul of a Jew being higher than that of a person of any other nationality.

Second of all, because interpretation of "mipnay darkay shalom" as only a price of peace is too shallow. "Mipnay Darkay Shalom" - "because of the ways of peace" - I think what is meant here is that if we allow a portion of the charity earmarked for the Jewish poor to go to the aid of non-Jewish poor, then other nations will see our example and some may follow it, and peace in the world will be more viable.

That said, Gila is right; of course we can't rely on others to help us. The history of the world has demonstrated it way too harshly and way too recently. We must help our own and then help others.

I don't believe that either is mutually exclusive of the other; that is to say, we can both help ourselves and the other nations of the Earth. After all, we are the or lagoyim, the light unto the nations. Even if others won't follow our example, it is our duty to look beyond the boundaries of our race. We do not follow others, but rather we set the standard. Non-Jewish charities do valuable work as well, and tzedokoh give to them is, in my opinion, just as valid as a donation to a Jewish charity. At the end of the day, all things in moderation.

In response to Rva Chaim's post:

quote:
Originally posted by Rav Chaim:
If that would be true, since the Pasuk of "Rachamav Al Kol Massav" is referring to animals, as it says in Bava metziah 85a. Would you say that it would be worthwhile to give money that should be earmarked for the poor Jews for saving the whales?

In ordinary circumstances, I would agree that giving away money earmarked for the Jewish poor to animals would be a disgrace to the Torah's words and the mitzvah of tzedaka. Also, let me be clear that I am not comparing animals to non-Jews in a denegrating manner.

However, in these specific circumstances, where we have seen video and heard reports about the pitiful conditions the hurricane brought upon the population in several Gulf cities, I think giving a small portion of tzedaka money intended for Jews can be given to non-Jews. Afterall, for the citizens of several cities, it is a matter of survival.

Also, in response to Gila's post:

quote:

Originally posted by Gila:
If your brother was in debt, would you get upset if someone told you to first help him before you help someone else? All Jews are family, so first we look after our family, then we help others.

I repeat my response to Rav Chaim, if my brother was merely in debt, and with that same money, I could save the life of a non-Jew - I admit I would ask my brother to understand that I had the opportunity to save a life with the same money that could relive his debt.

So why not help the Jewish victims of the hurricane?

I would like to first explain what my question was. It was to the idea that there is more of a reason to forsake giving the money to Jewish charities for the verse “and His mercies are on all His works. (Tehillim 145:9)” , since this would apply to animals as well, and this all agree not to change the charity from a Jew to an animal. So that the verse says “and His mercies are on all His works” is a moot point in our discussion. Hashem, who has all the resources he wants, can give to all his creations without holding back any from humans or Jews. But we, with limited resources, must discriminate to the sources we give. Whatever we give to one place will lessen what we give to another, worthier charity.

The point that it’s for their survival, I think it’s not the case. If not a penny of Jewish money goes to the survivors, they’ll be taken care of for their survival from other monies from donations from the other 98% of the population of USA, besides the billions that the American government will give for relief. Nobody will die because Jews didn’t give.

Mifnai Darckai Sholom is definitely defined as “keeping the peace” as is evident in the other things that are brought in the Mishna there that are for Darkai Sholom.

(I forgot to write where the Mishna is.) The Mishna is Gittin 59 a-b

Perhaps I neglected to ackowledge them earlier, but I very much appreciated Gila, Alex, and Leiser's comments above. However, I was hoping Alex would give more detail and cite the Alter Rebbe's statements he mentioned.

But my question seems to remain unresolved, ...how then are we to interpret "mipnay darkay shalom" from the Gemara in Gittin 59a-59b with respect to chairty and non-Jews?

Did Rav Chaim answer this question and it is still unclear to me? This is where I'm holding: I can accept Rav Chaim's point that the pasuk from Bava Metzia would be more appropriate in our example (of the Hurricane) than the original pasuk I presented from Tehillim. I might be able to accept Rav Chaim's point that our tzedakah may not constitute a life saving effort for the survivors at this stage of the disaster recovery. I maintain my opinion that once you have lost all your belongings and live at the mercy of the government and others' generosity, it is indeed a matter of survival.

Nevertheless, the Rambam (Hilchos Matanos Aniyim 1:9) says the gifts should be given to righteous converts, "even so, we do not prevent poor non-Jews from these gifts (of leket, shich'cha, pe'ah), rather [the non-Jews] come grouped together with the poor Jews and take them (leket, shich'cha, pe'ah), for the preservation of peace."

B.Silvey

Like I wrote, that because Darkai Sholam, to keep the peace, you don�t prevent them from coming in from collecting. What would happen if you would prevent them. They�ll have fits, which can lead to riots and lynchings. So to keep the peace, we say don�t prevent them, so they might not make a blood libel. In our case, this wouldn�t apply. Since nobody cares or notices where the money is coming from, how would this promote peace between Jews and gentiles?

I still maintain that it�s not a life threatening issue. (I forgot to mention the insurance money that would be coming in besides all the rest from Gov. (that is very generous, especially for a high profile case like this) and million other donors.)

So if what I write is correct, that there is no way to make this promote good will, since the receivers don�t know where the donations come from, hence, there is no Darkai Shalom, then it starts falling into other problems. Firstly, Lo Sichaneim, not giving presents to non Jews. (If there is Darkai Shalom, so you�re giving to promote peace between you so they don�t attack us, so you�re doing for our benefit, so it�s not giving a present.) Also, by giving past their basic needs, you�re providing them to pick up their lifestyle, which might not be too Kosher even for a Ben Noach. There might be a problem of Lifnai Eever. So the money would be better spent feeding a widow and children in Yerushalayim.

Thank you for the clarification Rav Chaim. You have certainly convinced me.

I will pass along the details of this discussion thread to the two people who motivated me to begin it.

B Silvey signing off.

Kol Tuv.

quote:

Originally posted by B Silvey:
Perhaps I neglected to ackowledge them earlier, but I very much appreciated Gila, Alex, and Leiser's comments above. However, I was hoping Alex would give more detail and cite the Alter Rebbe's statements he mentioned.

I was referring to the Tanya; last two paragraphs of Chapter 1: "...From this soul <nefesh from kelipat nogah> also derive the good characteristics that are to be found in the innate nature of every Jew, such as compassion and charity ...The souls of the nations of the world, however, derive from the other impure kelipot which contain no good whatsoever..."

Something tells me that R" Schneur Zalman of Liadi was just plain wrong in this assertion.

quote:

Originally posted by Rav Chaim:
So if what I write is correct, that there is no way to make this promote good will, since the receivers don't know where the donations come from,...

Doesn't the Talmud (or was it R" Hillel?) teach us that the highest form of charity is when the recipient does not know who the donor is?

quote:

...hence, there is no Darkai Shalom, then it starts falling into other problems. Firstly, Lo Sichaneim, not giving presents to non Jews.

Why? If my Gentile friend invites me to his birthday party, should I not bring him a present?

quote:

(If there is Darkai Shalom, so you're giving to promote peace between you so they don't attack us, so you're doing for our benefit, so it's not giving a present.)

That certainly is not a present. The present is in your intent, not in the amount of money you spent on it: if you are giving so that he would not kill you - it's a bribe, not a present; but if you are giving to make him feel better - then it's a present.

quote:

So the money would be better spent feeding a widow and children in Yerushalayim.

That I agree with.

quote:

Originally posted by Alex:

quote:

Originally posted by Rav Chaim:
So if what I write is correct, that there is no way to make this promote good will, since the receivers don't know where the donations come from,...

Doesn't the Talmud (or was it R" Hillel?) teach us that the highest form of charity is when the recipient does not know who the donor is?

A few points here:

1. I think this is only referring to giving charity to Jews.

2. The giving of charity to non-Jews is, as Rav Chaim wrote, to promote goodwill among the non-Jews. So if they don't know that it has come from Jews, the purpose of the gift has been defeated.

3. The Rambam wrote that the very highest form of charity is helping someone to establish a business. Doing so preserves the poor person's sense of dignity.

From Bachya ben Asher's Commentary on Parashas Shoftim 16:20:

quote:

"Justice, Justice, shall you pursue..." - "The double emphasis means: Justice (Tzedek)under any circumstances, whether to you profit or loss, whether in word or action, whether Jew or non-Jew. It also means: Do not use unjust means to secure justice"

Wouldn't this argue that tzedakah shouldn't see anything but the need of the other, just as Elokim (Justice) and Adonai (Mercy) is one and the same - regardless of it's Jew or a Gentile, good or bad person who is in need?

I think the verse is only referring to justice (Tzedek) rather than charity (Tzedakah).