Are handouts in the Torah

I don’t think peshuto shel mikrah supports outright charity. Vayikra 25 details the progression and downward spiral from selling ones livelihood (ancestral field) to taking an interest free loan to selling oneself as a slave. No word on handouts. Perek 15 in Devarim discusses graciously giving loans without worrying about shemitah canceling them. There is no mention of charity in the pesukim. (See ibn Ezra, Chizkuni and R DZ Hoffman to verse 8) 

Outright (financial) gifts do not seem to be part of the biblical framework

The Torah definitely encourages us to share our bounty with the less fortunate on many occasions

The highest of the 8 levels of charity for Rambam isn't handouts, rather interest free loans or other intervention that can help a fellow stand on his own two feet

I think the word tzedakah in tanach does not refer to handouts, rather to justice/righteousness, it was reinterpreted that way in light of the emphasis on charity, with the added nuance of it even being the just thing to do which is the connotation of tzedek

(I’m wondering if it was introduced as a response to the christian notion of charity and grace

Im theorizing, and this may be a bit simplistic, that it is judaism and christianity l’shitasam

Judaism, which believes that man can overcome evil and live a virtuous life, embracing the commandments as doable, with the ability to earn ones reward from God, is correspondingly light on handouts, which is demeaning and life denying to the recipient (nahama dkisufa).

As opposed to the antinomian christianity, which holds that man is unable to vanquish evil, and everything handed to him is via divine grace and charity conditioned on correct beliefs, therefore, in the spirit of its version of imitatio dei, is pro unearned handouts to the poor

Charis, which means grace in greek, is the word from which charity is derived.

In addition, maybe after the bayis was destroyed and the jews went into exile there was presumably less opportunity to work the land and even if the jews did there is no obligation to give tithes from the produce as they are land based obligations that are dependent on being located in Israel proper and they were outside of it so the emphasis shifted to monetary tithes and distributions etc)

Of course the TB and the monei hamitzvos read the pesukim as supporting cash handouts ואני לא באתי אלא לפשוטו של מקרא

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Sukkos: Pesach in the fall

This piece attempts to uncover an entirely new way of looking at the significance of Sukkos in what essentially amounts to a paradigm shift about the chag Vayikra 23:42-43 בַּסֻּכֹּת תֵּשְׁבוּ שִׁבְעַת יָמִים כׇּל הָאֶזְרָח בְּיִשְׂרָאֵל יֵשְׁבוּ בַּסֻּכֹּת. לְמַעַן יֵדְעוּ דֹרֹתֵיכֶם כִּי בַסֻּכּוֹת הוֹשַׁבְתִּי אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּהוֹצִיאִי אוֹתָם מֵאֶרֶץ מִצְרָיִם אֲנִי י"י אֱלֹהֵיכֶם. There is no other biblical record of our forefathers ever having stayed in booths, certainly not immediately after the exodus. The rishonim (ad loc) quote a disagreement (bavli sukkah 11b) between R Eliezer and R Akiva as to the identity of the pasuk's obscure referent: כי בסכות הושבתי – איזו סכות היו, ר' אליעזר אומר ענני כבוד היו, ר' עקיבא אומר, סכות ממש then saying that it works out acc to R Eliezer but acc to R Akiva what exactly are we celebrating?; see there for various solutions. The rishonim have in common an understanding that the holiday is somehow related to hitherto un
Read more

Are Jews innately unique

This write up attempts to explain why Haman planned for genocide whereas the Greeks opted for religious suppression As reflected in the differing formulations of al hanissim for Purim and Chanuka respectively, Haman was out for Jewish blood whereas Antiochus was for eradicating Jewish rites and rituals.  Practically speaking, Judaism would have been a relic of the past had either of them had their way.  That different approaches were employed may have been a function of most Jews having been religiously observant during the Purim story as opposed to during the Chanukah story when most were already hellenized—easier to annihilate a people than to get them all to change their ways as opposed to by the Chanukah where only a minority were still practicing it made more sense to just stamp out what remaining observance there was than to exterminate an already mostly hellenized nation.   Perhaps a more philosophical approach can be suggested: There's a well known divide amongst Jewish thi
Read more

Zionism done right

This piece attempts to provide some color to a comment of Chazal regarding the Bnos Tzelafchad's חיבת הארץ as well as explain away an apparent inconsistency in a specific Amora's approach to it Bamidbar 27 opens with the daughters of Tzelafchad making their case to share in the distribution of EY by inheriting their sonless father Tzelafachad's portion instead of his brothers. Chazal posit a love for the land of Israel as their motivation, explaining that the reason this narrative is juxtaposed with the previous chapter owes to it being illustrative of an inferred contrast therein that only the men died out in the midbar as only they had cast aspersions on the land (to the extent of wanting to return to Egypt) as opposed to the women that were lovers of the land and wanted to proceed apace even after the report of the spies. Namely, ibid 26:64: וּבְאֵלֶּה לֹא הָיָה אִישׁ מִפְּקוּדֵי מֹשֶׁה וְאַהֲרֹן הַכֹּהֵן אֲשֶׁר פָּקְדוּ אֶת בְּנֵי יִשְׂרָאֵל בְּמִדְבַּר סִינָי with Rash
Read more