Skip to main content

Righteous Righteousness - Parashat Vayakhel-Pekude 5778, March 16, 2018

This week’s double parasha, Vayakhel-Pekude, presents the building of the mishkan – the portable Tabernacle.

Through their donations, the Jewish People provided the material and labor needed for the construction of the mishkan. Indeed, the people’s generosity led Moshe to end the call for donations.

The Torah writes:

All the wise people came – those completing all the sacred work, each of them from his work that they were doing – and they said to Moshe, saying, ‘The people are bringing more than enough for the labor of the work that Hashem has commanded to perform.’ Moshe commanded that they proclaim throughout the camp, saying, ‘Man and woman shall not do more work toward the gift for the Sanctuary!’ And the people were restrained from giving.

On the surface, this final verse is difficult to understand – why were the people restrained from giving to this holy cause of building the mishkan? Even if enough supplies had been given, certainly there existed a need for operational funding! Why did Moshe stop the donations?

In his commentary on our parasha, Rabbenu Levi ben Gershon – Gershonides – addresses this question. He explains that we learn from this verse that even when giving to a worthy cause such as the mishkan or tzedakah, one must not over-commit himself or herself. Gershonides explains that this lesson is summarized by our Rabbis in their dictum: one who spends money (on a mitzvah), should not spend more than twenty percent of his or her income, in order to ensure that his or her commitment will not lead to poverty and reliance on others. Gershonides universalizes this lesson. He explains that the Torah wants us to be vigilant to prevent our own righteous actions from leading to harm. While charity is a righteous act, if others see that it leads to poverty, they will scoff at the institution of charity and refrain from giving to important and holy causes.

The Jewish People were committed to giving whatever was asked of them for the building of the Tabernacle – even to an unsustainable level. This quality of the Jewish People is highly praiseworthy. According to Gershonides, Moshe, as leader of the Jewish People, restrained the people from over-committing in order to protect the people from harming themselves and from negatively impacting the institution of charity.

The Torah creates a maximum for charitable giving that few people reach – twenty percent of one’s assets. These unique individuals must remind themselves to heed Gershonides’s lesson when giving. The rest of us, however, must look to the model that the Jewish People provided of giving selflessly to holy causes. In our day, we, as a people, do not appear to be in danger of jeopardizing charity’s “good name” – on the contrary, we must work to uphold our commitment to charity. However, considering this lesson broadly, even in performing acts of righteousness, we must always consider the result of our actions. Gershonides reminds us that even righteousness must be done righteously. Unexamined righteousness can lead to harm.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Honor and Glory - Parashat Termuah 5780, February 28, 2020

This week’s  parasha , Termuah, and next week’s parasha , Tetzave, introduce Hashem’s command regarding the plans for the  mishkan  and its vessels – including the clothing worn by the  kohanim . One of the vessels that Hashem commands to be built is the  menorah  – the candelabra. The description of the plans for the menorah are described in Parashat Terumah and the description of its service is described in Parashat Tetzave. In Parashat Tetzave, the Torah says, “and they will take for you pure olive oil pressed to be lit to raise an everlasting candle.” Each evening the  kohanim  were obligated to light the candelabra with enough oil to last the night. In the morning, the  kohanim  were obligated to fix and relight the  menorah , as necessary, thus ensuring that the candelabra would constantly be lit. The Rambam – Maimonides – explains, based on a later verse, that the  mitzvah  to light the candelabra in the mishkan creates “honor and glory” for the  mishkan . It seems obvious

Unity Through Shared Purpose - Parashat Tetzaveh 5780, March 6, 2020

This coming week, we will celebrate the holiday of Purim. We know that Megilat Esther is the record of the miraculous saving of the Jewish People that occurred in Shushan and in the surrounding areas of King Achashverosh’s reign. One of the culminating themes in the  megila  is the unity within the Jewish People that was forged as a result of this miracle. This unity expressed itself in a number of ways. One of the expressions was the re-acceptance of the Torah that occurred in that generation –  kiyemu ve’kibelu . This re-acceptance included a unified acceptance of the mitzvah of Purim that was legislated by the Anshei Kinesset HaGedola – the Men of Great Assembly. Another expression of this unity is the emphasis on forging brotherhood within the Jewish People – we read the  megila  in big groups, we give money to the poor and we give food gifts to our fellow Jews. Clearly, unity is a fundamental theme of Purim. Given this focus on unity, there is a striking difference between P

Promoting Justice through Litigant Participation - Parashat Mishpatim 5776 - February 5, 2016

Parashat Mishpatim continues the Torah’s presentation, which began in last week’s parasha , of the mitzvot that were revealed to b'nei yisrael at Mount Sinai. One of the topics that is shared between the two parashiyot is the primacy of creating a judicial system with integrity. The Torah admonishes us not to testify as a group with evil people. The Torah admonishes judges to not show favoritism to a poor person. The Torah forbids judges to accept bribes. In last week’s parasha, the Torah records Yitro’s suggestion of the four qualities that a judge should have: accomplished, G-d-fearing, committed to truth and money-despising. Basing himself on the Mechilta, Rashi elaborates on the quality of commitment to truth. Rashi explains that these are trust-worthy people, and that, because it is reasonable to rely on them generally, people will listen to the judgments that they render. The first part of Rashi’s comment is easily understood – a judge must be trust-worthy. Trust-wor