The Dean of a Yeshiva was fundraising in the home of a wealthy businessman. The businessman turned to him and asked him, “You see, I have many sons and sons in law, who in various different ways receive financial support from me. The combined sum of money which I give to the Yeshivas and Kollelim round the world where my immediate family are, well surpasses the required ten percent of money that one needs to give to Tzedakah. Aside from this I pay full school and seminary fees for my younger children. My question is, am I obligated to give any more charity to more Kollelim and the like?”
Unsure, the Dean decided to take the question to the famous Satmarer Rebbe. The Rebbe, upon hearing the question quoted a Rashi from this week’s Sedra. The verse is discussing the idea of coming to the Temple to rejoice on the festival of Shavuos; “You shall rejoice before Hashem, your G-d – you, your son, your daughter, your slave, your maidservant, the Levite who is in your cities, the convert, the orphan, and the widow who are among you”.
The Medresh [quoted in Rashi] is bothered by the ordering here; surely the slave and the maidservant should not be so early on in the list? Explains the Medresh that the list is actually two lists; ‘our four’ (son, daughter, slave and maidservant) and correspondingly ‘Hashem’s four’ (Levite, convert, orphan and widow). “If you will make Mine happy, I will make yours happy” says Hashem.
Explained the Rebbe, the Chessed that one does at home can be a dubious type of kindness; when one gives to ones own family often a person is not actually ‘giving’. A person has a natural tendency to support and give to his own family, when he fulfils this desire he is actually doing himself a favour thereby actually being a ‘taker’ rather than a ‘giver’. A person may walk past a beggar on the street and be pained to see his pangs of hunger so he decides to throw him some money. But there is a subtle difference between doing so to satisfy your desire because you can’t bear to see him sitting there, and doing so to satisfy his desire to have some food to eat.
When one gives to ‘Hashem’s four’ one shows that the giving to ‘your four’ is for the right reason; after showing that your are a true giver Hashem assures that He will look after ‘your four’. And so concluded the Rebbe, you must still give to ‘Hashem’s four’. [While the concept is definitely true please consult your Rabbi for your correct personal situation!]
In this week’s Sedra the Torah lists out the kosher and non-kosher animals. One reason behind not eating non-kosher animals is that we are what we eat. If an animal with particular bad characteristics is eaten it will cause us to inherit their same bad character traits. However amongst the animals listed we find the ‘Chassidoh’ – the stork. The ‘Chassidoh’ comes from the word ‘Chessed’ – kindness, “because the animal does kindness with its mate”.
Why then does the Torah forbid us from eating stork? Notice the subtlety in the words of the Rabbis, “with its mate” – it only does kindness with its own species. This shows a selfish type of kindness and therefore we cannot eat it.
The question that bothered me however was: is this really so bad to only do Chessed with its own type? At least it is doing some form of kindness. Many people who don’t do any Chessed would gain from eating such an animal; they would start doing Chessed at least within their own family – surely charity starts at home?
However with the understanding of our first Rashi we can suggest that the problem with the stork is that his Chessed is purely ‘natural tendency’. It does Chessed because this is the innate nature that it has within it. A person must strive to step out of himself and not just fulfil that what comes naturally to him i.e. to do Chessed with his family, but must also do Chessed with the outside world.
Good Shabbos,
Yaakov