Bava Batra 9a (ט.) — the Talmud in English

And it was taught concerning it:

and he stipulated with the community that they would give the money in order to distribute it to anyone who came, and even to the poor of the world.

When Rabba heard this,

he too

himself also

made one purse,

he made one purse for charity,

and stipulated concerning it,

and stipulated that it should be distributed to anyone who wished.

Rav Ashi said: I, too, do not need to stipulate

For me, there is no need even to make a stipulation, because

everyone who comes,

every person who comes to give money to the charity fund,

comes with my understanding,

he gives the money with my understanding ,

and to whomever I wish, I give it,

for I distribute the money to anyone who needs it .

There were these two

an incident involving two

butchers

slaughterers,

who

agreed between themselves that each one would slaughter on a different day, and

they made an arrangement with one another

and made a stipulation between themselves

that anyone who slaughtered on his fellow’s day,

whoever would slaughter on his fellow’s day,

his hide would be torn,

the hide of the animal he slaughtered would be torn.

After some time,

one went

he went

one of them

one of them and

acted

slaughtered

on his fellow’s day.

His fellow went and

tore his hide,

the hide of the animal he had slaughtered, as they had stipulated between themselves.

They came

to court

before Rava. Rava obligated him

the one who had torn the animal’s hide

to pay!

Rav Yeimar bar Shelamya raised an objection to Rava,

but did we not learn above that the residents of a city may establish regulations in the city

and enforce their ordinance,

to penalize one who violates their regulation? If so, why could that slaughterer not penalize his fellow who violated the stipulation?

Rava did not respond to him.

Rava did not answer him.

Rav Pappa said: He did well by not answering him anything.

Rava acted properly by not answering him. For

this applies

that the residents of a city may establish stipulations and penalize one who violates their regulation only

where there is no important person

in the city.

But where there is an important person

in the city,

it is not within their power,

the other residents of the city have no authority

to stipulate

to make stipulations .

The Sages taught: One does not audit charity funds with charity collectors,

one does not investigate them concerning what they did with the money in their possession, for there is no need to suspect them .

And

likewise

one does not

audit

consecrated funds with the treasurers

concerning what they did with all the consecrated money.

And although there is no proof for this matter,

there is nevertheless

a scriptural allusion

to it.

As it is stated

when money was sent to the craftsmen who repaired the Temple, “‘

And they did not audit

[with]

the men who delivered the money into their hands

[who had sent the money with them]

to give to the craftsmen,

[and they did not ask them what they had done with all the money],

for they deal honestly.’”

And from here it is inferred that one does not audit charity collectors. But this is not a complete proof, for the verse is not speaking about charity collectors but about treasurers of consecrated funds who gave money to the craftsmen. Since there were many craftsmen, it was difficult to determine in the accounting how much had been given to each one, and for that reason they did not audit them. Thus, there is no complete proof from here that one never audits the collectors.

Rabbi Elazar said: Even though a person has a trustworthy treasurer in his home,

nevertheless

he should

bind

it

and tie the money that he gives him,

and count it

how much he gave, even though he will not subsequently audit him ,

as it is stated: “And they bound and counted.”

The king’s scribe and the High Priest bound the money and counted it before giving it to the treasurers, even though the treasurers were trustworthy and were not audited. From here we learn that even if a person has a trustworthy treasurer in his home, he must count the money before giving it to him.

Rav Huna said,

if a poor person comes and asks for food,

he is examined

whether he truly needs it

for sustenance .

And

if a naked poor person comes and asks for clothing,

he is not examined

whether he truly needs it

for clothing,

rather, it is given to him immediately.

The Gemara explains the source of the law:

Alternatively,

this may be proven from a

verse

that will be explained below,

alternatively

from

reasoning.

The Gemara explains:

Alternatively,

this law is learned from

reasoning,

for

this one

who came naked and asks for clothing

is being humiliated

he is standing naked and humiliated, and his humiliation must be prevented,

whereas this one

who asks for food

is not being humiliated,

and therefore he should first be examined to determine whether he truly needs it.

And

alternatively,

this matter is learned from a

verse,

as it is stated, “‘

Is it not to spread your bread for the hungry?’”

The intention of the verse is that one should spread bread for the poor person, and nevertheless

it is written with a shin

“perosh,” and it does not say “peros”; and from this they expounded:

“Perosh,”

that is, you must determine explicitly whether he needs it or not , and therefore investigate and inquire,

and afterward,

afterward

give it to him

give it to the poor person. [

In the prophetic books before us it is written, “Is it not to spread bread for the hungry?” and not “perosh”; see the note ].

From this verse we learn that one must examine the poor person before giving him charity, to determine whether he truly needs it. The Gemara now explains what the source in the verse is for the rule that one does not examine a poor person who asks for clothing.

And there,

in that same verse in which it is stated, “Is it not to spread bread for the hungry,”

it is written

also, “‘

When you see the naked, cover him,’”

and the Gemara expounds: “‘

When you see

— immediately,’”

as soon as you see him, give him clothing, and do not investigate him.

And Rav Yehuda said:

If a poor person comes to ask for clothing,

he is examined

whether he truly needs it

for clothing, but he is not examined concerning food,

but if the poor person asks for food, it is given to him immediately .

The Gemara explains the source of the law:

Alternatively,

this may be proven from a

verse

from a verse that will be explained below,

alternatively,

the matter is learned from

reasoning.

The Gemara explains:

Alternatively,

this law is learned from

reasoning,

for

this one,

the poor person who asks for clothing,

is suffering,

he suffers because of hunger, and therefore he must immediately be given food in order to prevent his suffering,

whereas

if

this one,

the one asking for clothing,

is not suffering .

And

alternatively,

this law is learned from a

verse,

for

here it is written, “Is it not to spread bread for the hungry,”

“your bread,”

and it implies in this verse that one must

spread it immediately,

as soon as the poor person asks, and there is no need to examine him,

as we read it,

and not as Rav Huna expounded from the form in which it is written with a shin —

And

conversely, it is proven from the verse that a poor person asking for clothing must be given it immediately, for

there,

in that verse,

it is written “‘

When you see the naked, cover him,’”

and Rabbi Yehuda expounds that “‘when you see’” means

when it becomes clear to you

that the poor person is not an impostor; only then must you give him clothing.

The Gemara cites a beraita in accordance with the opinion of Rabbi Yehuda —

It was taught in a beraita in accordance with the opinion of Rav Yehuda:

A poor person who

says, “Clothe me,” is investigated

to determine whether he is not an impostor; but if he says,

“Support me,”

and give me food,

he is not investigated

and is given it immediately!

We learned there: One may not give less

one does not give

to a poor person traveling from place to place

less

than a loaf

of bread purchased

for a pondion

that

is a coin; this amount is

when

when

four se’a

of wheat are purchased

for a sela.

The explanation of the words of the beraita is that one must give the poor person a loaf of bread made from a quarter-kav of wheat . According to the calculation, when four se’a are sold for a sela, a loaf made from a quarter-kav is sold for a pondion. For four se’a are twenty-four kav, and a sela is forty-eight pondions . It follows that twenty-four kav [four se’a] are sold for forty-eight pondions [one sela], and according to this calculation one pondion can purchase half a kav of wheat. However, the baker takes half the value of the loaf for grinding, baking, and selling it. It follows that a loaf sold in the marketplace for one pondion contains a quarter-kav of wheat —

This measure was stated with regard to a poor person who does not remain in the city, but if the poor person

stays overnight

in the city,

they give him

also

provision for lodging,

lodging needs, as explained below.

What is provision for lodging?

Rav Pappa said: A bed

on which to sleep

and a pillow

to place beneath his head.

And if the poor person

remained

in the city,

they give him

on the eve of Shabbat

food for three meals.

It was taught: If he was

the poor person

going from door to door

and collecting donations,

one does not attend to him

to give him from the charity fund, for since he has learned to go from door to door, that is sufficient for him.

There was a certain poor man

an incident involving a poor man

who used to go from door to door, and he came before Rav Pappa

who was a charity collector, and asked him for money from the charity fund . And Rav Pappa

did not attend to him,

he did not give him anything, as we learned above, that one does not attend to a poor person who goes from door to door.

Rav Sama, son of Rav Yeiva, said to Rav Pappa: If the master does not attend to him,

if you do not give him, then certainly

another person

will not attend to him either,

another person will not give him, saying: If Rav Pappa did not give him, neither will we give him . And then

he will die

the poor man will die.

He said to him:

Rav Pappa,

But is

it not

taught:

that

if he was a poor person who goes around from door to door, one does not attend to him

and one does not give him money from the charity fund?

He said to him:

Rav Sama: What they said in the beraita, that

one does not attend to him—

the meaning is

with regard to a large gift

, that one does not give him the money for a meal, since he goes around from door to door;

but

nevertheless,

one does attend to him with regard to a small gift .

And then others will give from their own money .

Rav Asi said: A person should never refrain himself [

from giving]

at least

a third of a shekel a year

, and if he gave less than this, he did not fulfill the mitzva of charity.

As it is stated: “

And we undertook upon ourselves the mitzva of imposing upon ourselves a third of a shekel a year for the service of the House of our God.”

And Rav Asi said: Charity is equivalent to all the mitzvot, as it is stated

in the aforementioned verse,

“And we undertook upon ourselves the mitzva

to impose upon ourselves a third of a shekel.”

And the Gemara infers:

It is not written here “mitzva,” but “mitzvot,”

in the plural; and from here it follows that charity is equivalent to all the mitzvot. And although this verse was stated only with regard to the contribution for the maintenance of the Temple, it is all the more so true of charity.

Rabbi Elazar said: Greater is

the reward of

the one who performs the act,

the one who solicits others for charity,

than that of the one who acts,

the one who gives the charity.

As it is stated: “

And the act of charity shall be peace, and the service of charity quietness and security forever.”

Thus, with regard to the one who solicits others, “peace” is stated, whereas this is not stated with regard to the one who gives charity .

And now the Gemara speaks of the virtue of charity:

A person is obligated to give charity, and against his will he will give the money. However, if

he merits

the person , the verse

“Is it not to share your bread with the hungry”

is fulfilled in him, and he gives his money to the poor. But if

he does not merit

, the verse

“And the poor who are driven out you shall bring home”

is fulfilled in him. This refers to the kingdom of Rome, which always cries, “Give, give,” because we are in need [of money]. That is, he will give the money to the gentiles.

Rava said to the people of Mehoza: Please, I beg you

,

act with one another,

compel one another and solicit each other for charity,

so that you will have peace with the kingdom,

so that you will have peace with the kingdom. For if you do not give money to the poor, the Almighty will incite the kingdom against you, and you will be compelled to give the money to the kingdom.

And Rabbi Elazar said: When the Temple

was

standing

,

a person would weigh his shekel

, half a shekel,

and it would atone for him

his sin.

Now, when the Temple is not standing, if they perform charity, it is good

and their sins are atoned for.

But if not, the gentiles come and take

their money

by

the power of the

arm.

And nevertheless,

what the gentiles take from the Jewish people

is considered

for Israel

as charity.

Because by levying taxes on the wealthy, the poor are relieved of their obligation to the kingdom, and this is akin to charity.

As it is stated: “

And your exactors shall be charity.”

Rava said: This matter,

this matter [mentioned below],

was related to me

Rav Sheshet told me ,