DailyHalacha.com for Mobile Devices Now Available

Click Here to Sponsor Daily Halacha
"Delivered to Over 6000 Registered Recipients Each Day"

      
(File size: 978 KB)
Can A Congregation or Community Rely On A Designated Charity Fund and Restrict People From Soliciting From Individuals

The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh Dei'a section, 256:1; listen to audio clip for precise citation) writes that every Jewish community bears the obligation to establish a "Kupa" – a fund that collects money from every member of the community and distributes it to those in need on a weekly basis. Beyond the required Kupa, the Shulchan Aruch adds, some communities also maintain a "Tamchui," a soup-kitchen that provides food for the poor on a daily basis. The Shulchan Arukh rules that whereas the establishment and maintenance of a communal Kupa is mandatory, a community does not bear a strict obligation to run a Tamchui.

The question arises as to whether a community with a Kupa fund is entitled to bar a needy person from soliciting from individuals. May the managers of the communal fund tell the individual that after receiving money from the fund he is no longer entitled to go door-to-door to collect money from the community members?

Rabbi Moshe Feinstein (Russia-New York, 1895-1986), in his Iggerot Moshe (Y.D. 1:169), rules unequivocally that this is forbidden. The Kupa system was established not to supplant private solicitation, but rather as an additional measure to assist the poor. Even after a needy person collects from the communal fund, he is still entitled to approach the donors individually to ask for further assistance.

Likewise, an individual donor may not proclaim himself as the exclusive donor representing the rest of the community or congregation. It is told that a poor person once came to collect charity in a synagogue, and one congregant handed him $100 and said that this donation is given on behalf of everyone in the synagogue. This donor thought he was acting magnanimously by contributing on behalf of the others, but in truth, he actually impaired the poor person's efforts by restricting his access to other potential donors. Had this person been able to approach the other congregants, he may have very likely received larger sums. Just as the communal fund cannot claim to represent every community member's exclusive donation to the given cause, so may a private individual not proclaim himself the representative donor on behalf of others.

Summary: A poor person who received a donation from the community's charity fund may nevertheless approach the community's members individually to request further assistance. Similarly, a person should not give a poor person an amount of money and claim that he gives on behalf of the entire community, barring the poor person from collecting privately.

 


Recent Daily Halachot...
Nidda – The Status of Stains Found on Colored Garments
Immersing in a Mikveh With Long Nails and Nail Polish (Part 2)
Immersing in a Mikveh With Long Nails and Nail Polish (Part 1)
If a Woman Did Not Immerse In The Mikveh on the Night After the Seventh Day
May a Woman Immerse in the Mikveh Before Sundown on the Seventh Day?
When May a Woman Begin Counting the Seven “Clean Days”?
If No Wine is Available Under the Hupa; The Recitation of Birkat Erusin
The Custom to Refrain From Eating Meat On the Day of Immersion In A Mikveh
Weddings in Synagogues
Laws and Customs of the Meal at a Wedding
Does the Officiating Rabbi Drink the Wine Under the Hupa?
Who Has the Right to Choose the Officiating Rabbi at a Wedding?
If the Sheba Berachot Were Recited Out of Order
The Great Rewards of Hachnasat Kalla – Helping a Couple Marry and Build a Home
Must the Hatan’s Family Lineage Appear in the Ketuba?
Page of 239
3585 Halachot found