I have a Purim-related question. I just found out that the learning for boys that has become en vogue in many Shuls on Purim morning is often sponsored by people financially so that they can get the merits of the learning or some other Zechus for their family…I found this out because we asked the Shuls in our area if they could give the boys the name of a sick relative of ours to keep in mind and say Tehillim for while they are there and we were told we would have to cough up some money. Every Shul, but one had the same response. Any thoughts on this?Orthonomics focuses her attention on the “she’lo lishma” attitude created by these prizes, many of which are not items we would necessarily want our kids to have. But I am more troubled by the attitude of shuls that demand $ for praying for the zechus of a choleh. I am sorry, but this attitude just makes me sick, and this is not the first instance of these type tactics that I have witnessed. Of course the shul can suggest that the person contribute to sponsoring the event. Of course the shul needs to raise tzedaka. But when it comes to the point that praying for a choleh comes with a price tag attached, a quid pro quo, a bill that demands payment or you just are not part of the program, that is where I part ways with whatever organizations run these events. Just my 2 cents.
Monday, March 24, 2008
demanding $ to daven for a choleh
I hate to “steal” someone else’s post, but I feel so strongly about this issue that I want to add my two cents. Orthonomics posts a comment from one of her readers:
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I don't understand the issue.There is a program being sponsored.If you want a part of the zchus from that specific program they ask you to be a part sponsor.
ReplyDeleteI don't understand the issue.There is a program being sponsored.If you want a part of the zchus from that specific program they ask you to be a part sponsor.
ReplyDeleteI couldn't agree with you more about the troubling attitudes of the shuls. In another past post, I noted that (financial) desperation is sure to bring out bad traits. Surely this is a sign of such?
ReplyDeleteI had to limit my focus and over-rewarding seems to be the theme of the month for me. In addition, I recently chaperoned a trip. The girls and young ladies chaperoning the trip brought along various items, including siddurim. But, I believe I had the only book on the bus.
I hope Anon Mom posts the name of the choleh.
>>>If you want a part of the zchus from that specific program they ask you to be a part sponsor.
ReplyDeleteSo I guess people who are poor should just go off and die without the benefit of anyone learning and davening for them, and rich people who can buy a whole yeshiva seder worth of zechuyos get into olam haba. Free market Judaism, right?
I think zechuyos should not be treated as commodoties to be bought/sold based on quid pro quo collection of donations. If you want to donate, do it with the intent of supporting services that are going to made available to the whole community, not buying personal merits.
It is heartbreaking how the whole perspective in our community regarding what it is to be a Jew has been distorted and corrupted. This is only one little symptom of a much greater ill.
ReplyDelete1. Don't you think that a person who is blessed with wealth and who supports mosdos and gives to the poor will get greater zechusim of tzedakah? The poor will have to find chasodim they can do begufom.
ReplyDelete2. I like your point-- that the benefactors should open it to all who need. This is the idea of being kollel your tefillos with the needs of the tzibbur, and not to be mispallel for your need in isolation. The bottom line is that the greatest zechus goes to the person who enabled the public tefillos; his zechusim aren't diluted by including others; on the contrary, they are strengthened.
3. There's a connection to this week's parsha; 11:19. The Chasidah is not kosher because "osah chesed IM CHAVROSEHA."
>>>1. Don't you think that a person who is blessed with wealth and who supports mosdos and gives to the poor will get greater zechusim of tzedakah?
ReplyDeleteMy point was that those zechusim are not sacrificed or diminished (aderaba, they increase, as you noted) if one can be mezakeh and benefit others at the same time and for the same money.
You already got some great comments. Torah learning and davening is like a flame; the fire can be shared with many, and in the term you used in telling me about Sephardi Lady's post, ze nehene vezo lo chaser. The exclusionary attitude this woman encountered smacks of middas Sdom. Yisrael are said to be categorized as rachmanim bayshanim and gomlei chassadim; I never thought there was an asterik tacked to direct you to the fine print proviso requiring payment in advance.
ReplyDeleteThough tzedaka is a big zchus, I don't believe one can simply buy the way into olam habbah. I also believe that those with greater means have an obligation to give more -- I don't mean that people have a right to demand it of them but that their $10,000 may be viewed by the One Above as less of a sacrifice than the poor man's $18.
It is certainly true that the poor man's hard earned $18 is more precious than the rich man's throw-away $10,000. But what about the many poor who owe their well-being to the rich man? Does their hakaras hatov not figure in the great final judgment? What about the schools that could not stay open if not for the wealthy patrons? I don't know, really, the answer to these questions. But I do know that in times past, people would 'buy' a poor man's olam haba. Some say this is silly, and you can't 'buy' olam haba as if you were factoring an account receivable. But, as I said, who knows?
ReplyDeleteI think you are mixing two seperate issues together. In terms of hakaras hatov, schools/shuls etc. generally honor the big benefactors and not the $18 contribution. I don't think that excuses them from thanking everyone for any donation, but when push comes to shove, it is the big $ donors who keep institutions running.
ReplyDeleteHowever, in terms of schar in olam haba, that is a different story entirely. Chazal tell us the rule: l'fum tza'ara agra. If giving $18 requires more effort and sacrifice for the poor man than giving that million does for the rich man, the poor man gets more schar. Lest you think I exaggerate, see Tosfos Baba Basra 17a d"h shlosha who writes that the gemara there cannot be taken at face value that there are people with no yetzer hara, because if so, they would get no schar. Schar is based on effort expended, not based on results accomplished.
But then there is the gemara that "ein tzedakah mishtalemes ella lefi chesed sheba." Also, the Rashi by leket shikcha and pei'ah that brings that someone who loses a prutah, and an ani finds it, he is rewarded for the chesed that resulted from his money.
ReplyDeleteThere's a long Beis Halevi on this issue in the drashos in his teshuvos. I went through it several times, and each time I come out thinking something else. But I think he distinguishes between schar in olam hazeh and in olam haba. If you have a free hour (minimum), tell me what you think he's saying.
Take a look at the Esvan D'Oraysa at the end of #23.
ReplyDeleteThe Midrash Rabbah on Ruth 2: 19 says that Ruth said :that I did with him:" rather than "who did with me" to teach that more than what the baal habayis does with the poor man, the ppor man does with the baal habayis. Ruth was saying that she did a lot of good for him in return for his having given her one slice of bread.
ReplyDeleteSomewhere else there is some presentation of the notion of stewardship of wealth. Hashem wants the poor to be sustained but grants wealth to others to allow them the zchus of doing so. That indicates an obligation on the rich man's part more than on the poor man, as would be consistent with the midrash on Ruth.
Yes, a donor deserves reward for his tzedaka but the ani is recognized as well for enabling that mitzvah.
It's more than just the donor deserves reward; he is, or ought to be, the object of so much hakaras hatov. It's as if hundreds of people are being mispalel for him. The ani, who gives according to his ability, just does not have all that hakaras hatov directed at him. Now it may be that the ashir should have given more; it certainly is true that he is only the steward of his wealth, and that if he wouldn't give it to the poor, he would be akin to a steward who embezzles the money entrusted to him. But the fact is that people owe him, and their hakaras hatov has gotta mean something.
ReplyDeleteBut maybe there's a sliding scale. Maybe hakaras hatov only benefits a person according to the level of hakaras hatov he should have generated. For Rothchild, one million hakaras-hatov-units do no more than one unit of hakaras hatov does for some anonymous ani.