The Talmud in Masechet Peah describes how much of a person's income they are obligated to give in Tzedakah. Less than 10% is consider 'bad'; 10% is considered the minimum. 20% is the maximum.
What do you think? Is this do-able? Is setting the bar too high maybe a problem? What do you think most people really give? Why does there even need to be a maximum?
Rivka Cohen comment #3
ReplyDeleteI think that 10% is a good number to have as a minimum for giving to tzedaka. My only problem is when they give a maximum of 20%. Why is there a maximum. I think that people who want to give a lot should be able to, but they shouldn't give to the point where they don't have any money left to support their family. For the people who want to give more than 10%, I think that the maximum should be more like 45/50%. This way the people who want to give a lot, can still give a lot without giving up all of their money.
If you are going to give a lot to tzedaka, you should at least do it anonymously. This way it doesn't appear that you are only giving this much for attention of to try and show off to make yourself look better than others. Being anonymous makes it so that you are the only one who knows how much you gave. I tank that its better to be anonymous because it doesn't matter how much you gave, or even who gave it, all that matters is that you are giving tzedaka and helping someone who needs your help.
If you are poor, you shouldn't give everything, but you shouldn't give nothing at the same time. O matter how rich you are, you should still give tzedaka. If you are poor, you should give the most that you can give without creating a worse living situation for yourself. That means that you should give as much as you can, but don't give too much.
Natasha Comment #6
DeleteI don't agree with Rivka's comment at all, I think that giving 10% to 20% is a very good amount of money. Giving 45/50% doesn't make a lot of sense to me because then you are giving half of your money away, why would you do that? It's a great mitzvah to give any amount of money that you can you shouldn't give to much away to charity because then you might need to be the one receiving the money in the end. I do agree though on giving anonymously, especially because you don't want it to look like you are only doing it make yourself look better, and you don't want to make those who don't give as much as you feel bad about how much they give. Besides giving should always be about wanting to help your community not about helping yourself, it should be about wanting to give money because if you don't then whats the point? Won't you just be upset about it instead of being happy that you probably just fed someone? Also disagreeing with Rivka again she said that you shouldn't give nothing but what if you have nothing to give? I think that you should wait a while until you can give to charity instead of making your living arrangements and ability to acquire food worse for yourself. I also don't understand her sentence on "no matter how rich you are, you should still give tzedaka," LOTS of rich people give a lot of their money to charities so its not all of them but its a enough. In my opinion she is sort of implying that rich people don't give money to charities or even help which just isn't true. Besides since most of them give their money in secret how would you know whether they gave or not? I think that people give the money to charity that they can give, also the bar is set in exactly the right place in my opinion it isn't to high or to low, which makes it perfect for a poor person to give money even if they don't have much to give.
Molly Comment #5
ReplyDeleteI personally disagree with Rivka, because I think that it is good that the maximum is 20%. I think that the reason there is a maximum is because I think if there were no maximum, very generous people might give too much which could lead them to one day being in a position of needing to be the other side of the spectrum, the one receiving the tzedaka. I think there is the maximum in favor of the people who are giving the tzedaka, so you can still have enough money to be financially stable and not end up in a bad position. This does not cause a low amount o money to be given, because the maximum is a percentage, and not an amount of money. For example, someone who has $10,000 is able to give a maximum of $2,000 to tzedaka, which is still a very large amount of money which can help greatly. Also, a person who only had $10 will only be able to give $2 to tzedaka which will allow them to still have money for themselves. I agree with Rivka that if you do give a lot of money, it should be anonymously. The reason I think that is so that people can not get praised for going tzedaka. The reason they should not be praised is because giving tzedaka is a selfless thing and when giving the money, you should think about nothing other than the difference it will make in someone else's life. If it's not anonymously, the person who gave tzedaka will be recognized and the focus could possibly be more on the giver of tzedaka instead of the receiver.
My question when reading this text was why is there a minimum? I think that if you want to do the mitzvah of giving tzedaka, you should not have a minimum requirement of how much you must give. I think it is a mitzvah to give any money at all because the money that is given to tzedaka could be spent so many different ways, and the person who wants to give tzedaka had decided to use it in this way. If the person who wants to give tzedaka is stopped because they wanted to give less than 10% of their money, I think this defeats the purpose of tzedaka. Any money helps, and even many donations of low amounts can help in a big way. So my ultimate question is why is their a minimum if giving tzedaka is a mitzvah?
Rachel Comment #5
ReplyDeleteI agree with Rivka and , because I think that 10% is a good number. It pushes people who have a lot of wealth to give money, and give tzedekah to those in need. However, I agree with Molly on disagreeing with Rivka's point about giving 45-50%. Rivka's logic is that people can give a lot of money, and still have some money left over. I strongly disagree with her point. Like Molly said: If you give 45-50% away, you are essentially giving away half of all the money you make. If it is a poor man giving this much away, he will not be able to support his family or even himself. If it is a rich man giving it away, then he wil lose a lot of his wealth. This maximum also causes people to feel like they need to do more, even when they don't. It also brings up the point about competition, and if you only give 5%, but your friend give 10%, you might continue to give more just to impress your friends, and won't have the actual thought of Tzedekah in mind. Another problem with having the maximum so high, is that it could make others jealous if they aren't giving as high a price, because they aren't capable of giving that much money. I think giving a lot of money is admirable, but the Talmud is right. The restriction of 20% is smart, because it helps keep Tzedekah under control, and doesn't cause people to feel bad.
Another problem that we addressed in class, was that when people give a lot, some of the time they do it for people to recognize their wealth. For example, many school and synagogues are named after people because of donation. Is this true generosity, or is it showing off? I think that a lot of the time it varies. When someone dies, and people donate it in their honor, it is true generosity. However, when someone gives a lot of money just to be famous, the generosity goes away. Another example, is when people are categorized into three groups: Gold, Silver, and Bronze, or even 1,2,3. The people who are in the first group, who give a lot, may be doing this out of selfishness. In the following article it talks about how companies who say they are giving, also get things in return. This relates to our text because a lot of the time when people are giving, they get something in return, like fame or pride.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=121718372
The people in the last group are recognized as berely giving and are embarrassed. For some people, even being in the last group takes a lot out of their daily lives and privileges. Even f it may not appear to be so, they are giving a lot of what they can. This also leads to a important mitzvah which says you cannot embarrass. Clearly, if embarrassing is against the torah then their shouldn't be a reason to display who is giving, and how much they are. Therefore, I agree with Rivka on this point because giving anonymously is mostly better. If you do not give anonymously, it is still kay, because sometimes people are doing it for he good and deserve to be recognized.
Another question I would like to adress is the question about reality, and how much people actually give. I think that for non-jews, most people do not give as much as 10% because they don't have a reason to. However, many non-jews who do give, tend to give a lot more than 20% which is the maximum. Though this is a confusing concept to grasp, I think it makes sense. When people don't have guidelines, they either do more than what is expected or less than expected. I think that mos Jews follow these guidelines, because Jews fully believe in Tzedekah, and it is clearly a mitzvah from what we have learned here. I know, that when I am older I will definitely follow hese laws, because they are important to recognize.
Alana comment #3
ReplyDeleteI agree with Molly in disagreeing with Rivka and Rachel. I think that there should be a maximum because then people who really can not give anything other then the minimum of 10 percent do not feel bad. However, if there was no maximum I think like Molly said, that very wealthy people would give much more and it would make people who could not afford to give that much feel like they were not as good as them.
My problem however with this text is that they give us a minimum of 10 percent in which we must give. I think it is unfair to make people give a certain amount because everyone comes from a different background and may not be able to give 10 percent of their money away to charity. This then probably makes them feel bad since they cannot fill the requirements given. Also, like Rachel said I think it is unfair to give awards and share how much people are giving because it also makes people who did not donate as much as the highest donor feel as though they aren't as good.
http://www.angriesout.com/needy-narcissism.htm
In the link above I think it also states a good point in that "If you give too much, then you are contributing to the problem." I think by this they mean that while it is good to give it should be a selfless act and when you start giving too much it just begins to discourage the needy from doing anything to help themselves. I think that while a minimum is not necessary a maximun is a good way to keep everyone from giving too much.
Malka Comment #5
ReplyDeleteWhy is a maximum needed? If we give money to tzedaka, isn't it our choice to give as much as we want? It is our hard earned money, we should chose to do what we want with it. Wether we keep it. Or give a little. Or all of it. In my opinion, there shouldn't be a maximum of 20%.
There is already a minimum of 10% already, so why should there be a maximum?
What if we don't have anything to give? How must one fulfill the mitzvah of giving 10% of their earnings, if they don't earn anything at all?
Rivka Cohen comment #4
DeleteThere needs to be a maximum because someone could give up everything that they have. While this may be a good thing for the poor, it's a bad thing for the person giving the money. What If they have a family? If they give up everything that they have, they are left with nothing to provide for their family. There needs to be a maximum, but maybe the maximum shouldn't be as low as 20%, but no higher than 50% of what they earn.
Anna Comment #3
DeleteI agree with Malka in the fact that if a person does not make money, how are they supposed to give 10% of their earnings? I think that the mitzvah of tzedakah should apply to all, regardless of your earnings or financial position. To me, the most important lesson that we can take away from the mitzvah of tzedakah is that everyone has something to give, even if it is not always money. I believe that along with the financial boundaries (the 10-20%) of tzedakah, the Torah should also give time boundaries. You can always volunteer and donate your time. Even the poorest people could give back to the community. Perhaps the commandment could be something like 10-20 hours. I know that although this is not a financial donation, which could be more beneficial in the short term, the intention and the message behind this type of performance of the mitzvah of tzedakah remains the same as the financial intention.
If you have no earnings, 10% doesn't seem to apply: .10 x 0 = 0. But even a person who earns very little should know there are those who earn less than they do.
DeleteGabi Comment #5
ReplyDeleteI agree with Alana and Molly in the fact that there should be a maximum. Like Molly said, this prevents people from giving 100% and then being in need of the tzedakah themselves. In life, we are told a lot that we should give 100%, but this is one case where it is not true. When I applied our unit on Self vs. Other to this text, I realized that in this text we put ourselves before others. We need to make sure that we have enough money to take care of ourselves before even thinking about giving money to others. And when we do give money to others, we have a limit so that we will be able to continue taking care of ourselves.
I also agree with the minimum. I know that it is good to give tzedakah and "every donation counts", but some people might just give tzedakah to say that they did it or to feel good about themselves. While one extreme would be to give 100% like I said earlier, the other extreme would be to give 1%, or even less. People might give one dollar out of their income just to fulfill the commandment of giving tzedakah, but a look at this text makes us realize that taking the easy way out does not in fact fulfill the commandment. More is required and expected of us, and the Talmud puts this responsibility on our shoulders for good reasons.
Liana Brown Comment #4
ReplyDeleteI disagree with Gabi, because although I think that everyone should have to give some Tzedakah, some people may not be able to reach that minimum amount. There may be some families who fall into an in-between category. They get by without the support of others, and are able to give a little, but cannot give the minimum amount. I also see where Gabi is coming from, that some people only give a little to say they gave tzedakah, but I still think that there are those who give as much as they can. A question I had about this text was what if a donation is made from an entire family? Are you allowed to exceed the maximum if the money is from more than one person, but made in one large donation? I understand the need for a maximum, because like Alana said if you give too much than it could just be contributing to the problem. But, a wealthy family could want to give on behalf of their family. Does this count as exceeding the maximum?
Another question I had about this text was if the maximum was established so that we would still have money for ourselves, or so that we wouldn’t embarrass those who weren’t able to give more than that. Gabi believes that it’s because we should put ourselves before others and save our money for our own personal needs. But, I think in this text it is to put others before ourselves. We give tzedakah to benefit others, but there’s a maximum because some people may not be able to give more than that, and the recipients may be too embarrassed to receive more than that. I think in many cases it is important to put yourself before another, but in this text I think it’s telling you to consider others around you when you are giving money.
Jason Comment #4
ReplyDeleteThis text is very interesting because it leaves us with a lot of questions. For example, what is the line that you have to give tzedukah rather than receive it? The issue in modern times is that you pay a high percentage of your monthly income to taxes and expenses. This leaves you with a lot less money than you first started with. This leads me to another question; Do you give 10% after taxes/expenses, or before taxes/expenses? This amount of cash is going to be substantially higher before taxes than after, therefore, lowering the amount of money given. A lot of these taxes go to schools and police forces, etc. Is that enough? Is giving to a homeless guy enough? The text says to not enrich someone, rather, help them along the road. (Job opportunity, a bed, a house, a table, and kitchen supplies)
Adina Halzel Comment #4
ReplyDeleteI feel that there should be a maximum amount that one can give, but it should be raised from 20%. The people that have a lot of money can give more than 20%. If everything was done anonymously when it came to giving and recieving Tzedekah then this entire case would be much easier to deal with. I think if it is anonymous then people will give the amount of Tzedekah that they are able to give because it is the right thing to do. If no ones name was ever mentioned then people wouldn't try and give a lot of Tzedekah just to get the credit for it. This way no one should feel guilty for not being able to give enough and no one should give too much that they run out of money for themselves.
I agree with the question that Molly raised when she asked why is there a minimum? This does not make much sense to me. Giving Tzedekah is a mitzvah and not everyone is required to do it. This is an optional thing that should make someone feel good about themselves for doing the mitzvah. If someone is poor and barely has enough money to provide for himself and yet wants to complete the mitzvah by giving a little bit of Tzedekah, setting the bar at 10% can be a bit too high. I don't think there should be a minimum so that even the poor people whom want to help others are capable to. Without a minimum requirement the poor people could give and still have enough to provide for them self at the same time.
Ely Comment #5:
ReplyDeleteI would like to address what everyone has said so far. Quite the מחלוֹקת! About the minimum, some people have said that there should be a minimum because giving less than 10% isn't giving very much at all, and some others have said that a minimum isn't necessary because someone who gives ANY amount is giving צדקה and helping a little, and also because some people may not be able to afford giving away 10%. Now I would like to bring up two points. In class, I mentioned the story of the man who, when he saw someone begging for money, would ask them to give HIM some money (because NO ONE is exempt from giving 10%). If they did give him money, he would see that they followed the מצוות diligently, and he would then return the money and give them what they were begging for. This goes to show that everyone must give some money. HOWEVER, the story does not mention anything about a minimum (how can this poor person be expected to give all of his 10% away to one man?!), which is where my second point of interest comes in. A huge theme behind מצוות is כוונה. This means intention. If you are just praying by saying the words in a prayerbook, then you aren't really doing the prayer as well as one who really understands what they're saying, and maybe even adds in a few words of their own. The same principle seems to work here. It may not be only how MUCH you give, but how you do the giving.
#5
ReplyDeleteI agree with Molly and Natasha. I believe that the minimum should be 10%, but I also agree that any amount of money is generous, even if it is just 1%. I also agree that the maximum should be 20% because many people are too generous, and would end up giving everything they have away. Then they become the people who are in need. There is nothing wring with giving over 20%, just try not take away from yourself too much.
I do not think that giving away 100% of your income is a good idea. I agree with Rachel when saying that not only will it cause problems for you, but you are essentially putting your family's life at risk too. I also agree with Rachel when she says that even the maximum is a little much, because some people might feel that there is an obligation to give more because of the maximum number. I think that all people, both rich and poor, should give what they think is right. I don't agree with the Talmud when saying that less than 10% is bad. Giving is giving, and either way it makes you a generous selfless person. I agree that the Talmud should have a maximum to keep giving tzedakah under control, but it should also eliminate people from feeling bad when they don't give more.
I agree with Rivkah in the fact that giving anonymously is the best way to go. Rachel explained that many wealthy people give publicly just to be recognized, which is considered selfish. This takes the generosity out of giving at all. If you want to donate a large amount of money, anonymously is the best and most generous way to do it.
I think that most Jews give at least 10%, and those who can't afford it give what they can. I think that non- Jews give what they can as well, but they might go over 20% because they don't have the guidelines that we do. I also think that they publicly give, and not anonymously. I thinks that there are Jews that even give 20% or over. I thinks that Jews want to help as much as they can and I believe that most Jews would give 100% if they could.
I wish the average Jew gave 10%. The average American only gives 3%, and poorer Americans give more than richer Americans. http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/22/magazine/22FOB-wwln-t.html
Delete