Are there halachos which specify who is qualified for tzedakah?

Question

Following a very interesting and animated discussion at the Shabbos table this past Friday night, I wanted to delve more into the halachos of who is an oni? I understand very clearly from the Neviim and from the Torah that we're supposed to especially look after three kinds of people: widows, orphans, and the poor.

The real meat of my question is as follows: Am I fulfilling any obligation and share of giving tzedakah by giving to someone who is admittedly poor, but who essentially lives off of the community, shows no desire to work or to learn Torah, and has no rabbinic letter of approval?

I would feel much more inclined to give to someone if they were at least either

1. Looking for a job.
2. Learning Torah.
3. Working with a Rabbi; some rabbinic figure is aware of their situation and is trying to work with them to help them.

When I posed this question at the table, I got two people telling me that in no way would I be chayev to give tzedakah to such a person. Would I be?

Answer 1

A source that may bear on this is Aruch Hashulchan, Yoreh De'ah 250:7. After citing the various details about how much you're supposed to give to a poor person, he says that all of this applies only to those who יושבים בביתם ומסוה הבושה על פניהם - they sit at home with a veil of shame over their face (i.e., they're too embarrassed to go out and ask for tzedakah); by contrast, he says, there are no fixed rules regarding people who go around collecting door-to-door - everyone should just give them a little something (as in Will's answer).

Now, that first category sounds to me like it's describing a person who is not working - and yet there is an obligation to give him tzedakah and to "fill all of his needs" (ibid. :1-2). Although I guess that's not really dispositive, because perhaps Aruch Hashulchan simply means that he "sits at home" after he's finished his day job (or, perhaps, is unable to find one).

Answer 2

I heard that R.H.S Schachter says there is no mitzvah to give such a person Tzedaka. While this may be obvious, perhaps support for this position can be brought from the case of helping a person with his animal's burden. The halacha is that one only needs to help if the owner also participates, but not if the owner says "I'll stand aside and let you have the mitzvah". So too here, you should only need to help him if he is at least trying to help himself.

With regards to tzedakah specifically, it is obviously forbidden for a person to take tzedaka when he doesn't really need it. This applies to when he really has money, but I don't see why it shouldn't also apply to when he has the ability to earn money. "Mai chazis" that he's worth more than other people that they should work for him and give him money?

As for the title of the question, see the end of my answer "Is the market-based distribution of income fair or unfair?" which discusses what is considered poor for different levels of tzedaka.

Answer 3

There is a whole chapter (251) in Yore Dea devoted to these details. For practical guidance, consult your rabbi.

Answer 4

Yes. You are obligated to give him tzedakah.

"If there be among you a needy man, one of thy brethren, within any of thy gates, in thy land which the LORD thy God giveth thee, thou shalt not harden thy heart, nor shut thy hand from thy needy brother" Deuteronomy 15:7

I asked R' Herschel Schachter the following question, face to face: "When someone approaches me in shul and asks me for money, am I obligated to give to him?" His answer was "yes, you should give him something"

If a fellow Jew asks you for money, you have a chance to fulfill a mitzvah d'oraisa (Torah level command) by giving him.

The minimum amount that counts as "something" is a prutah.

How much is a prutah? According to R' Mordechai Willig, a major posek and long time synagogue rabbi, and one of the Roshei Yeshiva of Yeshiva University: a prutah is the monetary equivalent of 1,000th of an ounce of silver.

If silver is trading at over $10 an ounce, one penny would not be a prutah.

Silver has been high recently, but as long as it hasn't gone over $50 an ounce, a nickel would be more than a prutah.

Therefore: some have the practice of carrying around a roll of nickels in their tallis bags and/or briefcase.

If a fellow Jew asks for money, and you give him a nickel, you have just fulfilled a mitzvah d'oraisa.

Think about how much money we spend on matza, lulav&esrog, tefillin - and here, G-d is giving you the opportunity EVERY SINGLE DAY to fulfill a mitzvah d'oraisa for a nickel!

There are forty nickels in a roll. If you can afford $2 to fulfill forty mitzvos d'oraisa, I would highly recommend doing it.

How often you replace the roll of nickels depends on your own personal finances, and how many Jews ask you daily for charity.

If the recipient refuses to take such a "lowly sum" (I once had a guy throw the nickel back at me) then you are not obligated to give him anything.

Answer 5

BH

Another perspective based on some sources mentioned in other answers, but not yet elaborated upon:

There is an obligation to fill the needs of a poor person that are lacking.

This applies even if the poor person was used to riding on a horse with a servant running in front of him, and he lost that, then people are obligated to fill what he lacked.

Source: Rambam, Hilchos Matanos Aniyim, Chapter 7, halacha 3 [and Gemara etc.]:

"3 We are commanded to give a poor person according to what he lacks. If he lacks clothes, we should clothe him. If he lacks household utensils, we should purchase them for him. If he is unmarried, we should help him marry. And for an unmarried woman, we should find a husband for her.

Even if the personal habit of this poor person was to ride on a horse and to have a servant run before him7 and then he became impoverished and lost his wealth, we should buy a horse for him to ride and a servant to run before him.8 [This is implied by Deuteronomy 15:8 which] speaks [of providing him with] "enough to [fill the] lack that he feels."9 You are commanded to fill his lack, but you are not obligated to enrich him.10

ג לְפִי מַה שֶּׁחָסֵר הֶעָנִי אַתָּה מְצֻוֶּה לִתֵּן לוֹ. אִם אֵין לוֹ כְּסוּת מְכַסִּים אוֹתוֹ. אִם אֵין לוֹ כְּלֵי בַּיִת קוֹנִין לוֹ. אִם אֵין לוֹ אִשָּׁה מַשִּׂיאִין אוֹתוֹ. וְאִם הָיְתָה אִשָּׁה מַשִּׂיאִין אוֹתָהּ לְאִישׁ. אֲפִלּוּ הָיָה דַּרְכּוֹ שֶׁל זֶה הֶעָנִי לִרְכֹּב עַל הַסּוּס וְעֶבֶד רָץ לְפָנָיו ��ְהֶעֱנִי וְיָרַד מִנְּכָסָיו קוֹנִין לוֹ סוּס לִרְכֹּב עָלָיו וְעֶבֶד לָרוּץ לְפָנָיו שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים טו ח) "דֵּי מַחְסֹרוֹ אֲשֶׁר יֶחְסַר לוֹ". וּמְצֻוֶּה אַתָּה לְהַשְׁלִים חֶסְרוֹנוֹ וְאֵין אַתָּה מְצֻוֶּה לְעַשְּׁרוֹ:"

But what if the poor person asks to fill what he was lacking, and the person he's asking doesn't have enough to give him?

[see Halacha 5 there]:

"5 When a poor person comes and asks for his needs to be met and the giver does not have the financial capacity, he should give him according to his financial capacity.

How much? The most desirable way of performing the mitzvah is to give one fifth of one's financial resources.12 Giving one tenth is an ordinary measure.13 Giving less [than that] reflects parsimony. A person should never refrain from giving less than a third of a shekel a year.14 A person who gives less than this has not fulfilled the mitzvah. Even a poor person who derives his livelihood from charity is obligated to give charity to another person.

ה בָּא הֶעָנִי וְשָׁאַל דֵּי מַחֲסוֹרוֹ וְאֵין יַד הַנּוֹתֵן מַשֶּׂגֶת נוֹתֵן לוֹ כְּפִי הַשָּׂגַת יָדוֹ וְכַמָּה עַד חֲמִישִׁית נְכָסָיו מִצְוָה מִן הַמֻּבְחָר. וְאֶחָד מֵעֲשָׂרָה בִּנְכָסָיו בֵּינוֹנִי. פָּחוֹת מִכָּאן עַיִן רָעָה. וּלְעוֹלָם לֹא יִמְנַע עַצְמוֹ מִשְּׁלִישִׁית הַשֶּׁקֶל בְּשָׁנָה. וְכָל הַנּוֹתֵן פָּחוֹת מִזֶּה לֹא קִיֵּם מִצְוָה. וַאֲפִלּוּ עָנִי הַמִּתְפַּרְנֵס מִן הַצְּדָקָה חַיָּב לִתֵּן צְדָקָה לְאַחֵר:"

and the note [12] elaborates upon the obligation for a "5th" on chabad.org, that it shouldn't be more than a 5ht:

"12.
This also reflects an upper limit. As Ketubot 50a states: "Even a person who distributes money to charity with largess should not distribute more than a fifth." This concept is derived from Jacob's vow to tithe (Genesis 28:22). There the verb which conveys the promise to tithe is repeated, allowing for the concept of giving two tithes. See also Hilchot Arachin 8:13 which cites Leviticus 27:28 which speaks of a person designating a dedication offering "from all that is his." The Rambam continues:

[Implied is that he should not give] "all that is his," as our Sages explained. This is not piety, but foolishness, for he will lose all his money and become dependent on others. We should not show mercy to such a person. In a similar vein, our Sages said: "A man of foolish piety is among those who destroy the world." Instead, a person who distributes his money for mitzvot should not distribute more than a fifth, and he should conduct himself as our Prophets advised [cf. Psalms 112:5]: "He arranges his affairs with judgment," both with regard to matters involving Torah and worldly concerns.

Yayin Malchut notes that in his Commentary to the Mishnah (Pe'ah 1:1), the Rambam writes that as an act of piety, a person may give more than a fifth. Nevertheless, there is not necessarily a contradiction between the two. In his Commentary to the Mishnah, the Rambam is speaking about giving to a needy person who asks for alms. In response to that acute need, one may give more that a fifth. Here the Rambam is speaking about giving to charity when there is no acute need. Hence a limit can be established. See also Ketubot 67b which states that these restrictions apply during a person's lifetime. He may leave a greater percentage of his resources to charity in his will.

In Iggeret HaTeshuvah, Rav Shneur Zalman of Liadi states that one may give more than a fifth of his resources to charity to atone for his sins, for just as one is not concerned with the amount one gives when it comes to healing a physical wound or blemish, so too, one should not be worried about cost when healing a spiritual blemish."

The question is if this applies to one fifth of the giver's total resources at the time the poor person asks, or one fifth of what that person makes going forward etc., and what if he already gave one fifth from the income he made before, can he give one fifth of the total if the poor man asks again?