Distributing to the Deserving

 

One great ancient and ingrained Jewish tradition is tzedaka.  While the word is commonly rendered as "charity" in English translations, the word actually means "justice."  Everyone is obligated to help someone less fortunate then himself/herself. 

Jews are frequently accused of being clannish; this is in no small measure a spin by our enemies upon our tendencies to help our own who are in need.  During the great immigration waves to America of the early 1900's, newly-arrived Jewish immigrants were given extensive aid by various organizations and individuals within the American Jewish community.  One such recipient of this tzedaka was my great-grandmother, who arrived here a widow with three young daughters (my grandmother being one of them).  One hundred years later, my great-grandmother's descendants have returned this tzedaka many times over (even when adjusted to current dollars), not only to the Jewish community but to America as a whole.  And this does not count a multi-millionaire cousin of mine who is active in some well-known charitable organizations.

And so, before I left for my current excursion to Israel, many members of my congregation gave me tzedaka money to distribute to Israel's needy.

Problem:  I have a dollar of tzedaka to distribute (there are many money changer businesses in the city, some within a few meters of one another, all thriving in the tourist trade; changing that dollar bill into shekels would be no problem whatsoever for the recipient).  To which of these supplicants should I give that dollar:

A)  Woman on street, single mom with 5 kids, says she needs money to feed her kids for the Sabbath (Shabbat).

B)  Woman, divorced within past month, 2 young children at home and one teenager learning in yeshiva, ex-husband has severely limited wherewithal to provide support, woman got house as a result of the divorce, but is struggling to keep it.  House has 4 bedrooms, plus a basement apartment that can be rented out.  Sufficient food in kitchen to feed woman, her three children, plus 3 guests.  House has air conditioning.

Ceteris paribus, that tzedaka dollar would go to Woman A.  And that is to whom I gave a $10 bill.

Except … 

Except that Woman A has an attitude.  She was berating me for not giving her more, she wants me to buy here entire Shabbat meals (the street upon which she asks alms has a significant amount of foot traffic), and she wants me to buy her all kinds of other things.

What to do?

When I got back to the car, my son (who is now living in the city) told me that he is familiar with that woman, and she has a reputation; she really is needy but that does not stop her from having the attitude.

But Woman B happens to be my son's ex-landlady.  And before we came, he realized that his erstwhile apartment, in the basement of Woman B's house, was vacant, so he convinced his former landlady to rent it out to me and my wife for a week.

Well, it turns out that the rate Woman B was charging us was quoted to us in error.  Her ex-husband had theretofore handled the rental of the apartment, but now the house is all hers.  She had somehow gotten the wrong figure for the rent from the records left by her ex, and had charged us approximately 700 shekels less than the true rental value of the apartment.

Our son was (and has remained) on good terms with his former landlady; his reasons for relocating to his current quarters 2 blocks away had nothing to do with her or her now former husband.  Ms. B accordingly was able to approach my son and inform her of the situation.  When our son apprised us of it, we decided to give Ms. B an additional 700 shekel for the apartment.

This act of tzedaka went beyond the 700 shekels, however, because when the next tenant comes in (she seems to be on the verge of consummating a deal with someone), Ms. B will receive an appropriate amount of rent.

As for Ms. A, with her welfare entitlement mentality, she may well continue to take advantage of the kindness of tzedaka-minded visitors.  But I will not be one of them.

No Time Outs from their Time Out

The American Academy of Pediatrics publishes a journal whose title, to the surprise of few, is "Pediatrics."  Their latest issue includes a Policy Statement entitled "The Crucial Role of Recess in School."

I agree with MOST of what is in the Policy Statement, but vehemently beg to differ with their assertion that "In essence, recess should be considered a child’s personal time, and it should not be withheld for academic or punitive reasons."

It must be disclosed that during my grade school years, on account of certain of my personal childhood propensities, yes, I did spend many a recess period sitting at my desk or in the principal's office.  And my teachers, no doubt, would agree that I right well deserved those disciplinary disengagements.

This is yet another descent down the slippery slope of entitlements. Sending the child to the principal's office in lieu of recess teaches the lesson, and instills the value, of the relationship between rights and responsibilities.  Making recess the child's "personal time" which cannot "be withheld for academic or punitive reasons" can only give the troublemaking brat another entitlement to exploit, and does not facilitate the development of taking responsibility for his or her actions.

I hold pediatricians in high regard as a profession, and most of the ones I know in high regard as persons.  But when they stray from their area of expertise, they can cause all kinds of troubles and complications.

The late Dr. Benjamin Spock comes immediately to mind in that regard.