R. Nahman said: Those who accept charity from Gentiles26 are incompetent as witnesses;27Footnotes
provided, however, that they accept it publicly, but not if they accept it in private. And even if
publicly [accepted], the law is applicable only if, when it was possible for them to obtain it privately
they yet degraded themselves by open acceptance. But where [private receipt] is impossible, it
[public acceptance] is vitally necessary.28
When there multiplied they who acceptedLater, I will try to answer some of the issues raised by muman613
charity of Gentiles, Israel became on top and they below, Israel went forward and they backward.32
Footnote
(32) A euphemism for the reverse: Israel became below etc. This sentence has fallen out of the text in some modern
editions.
Did not the gentiles make offerings on the altar in Jerusalem?
R. ‘Ukba b. Hama said: The rule applies to the matter of accepting sacrifices
from them. For it has been taught:4 Of you,5 but not all of you, thus excluding an apostate. ‘Of you’,
that is to say, among you [Israelites] is a distinction drawn but not among the gentiles.6 But are you
correct in this? Perhaps this is the meaning [of the Baraitha]: As regards Israelites, you may accept
sacrifices from the righteous but not from the wicked, but as regards gentiles you may not accept
sacrifices from them at all?7 — You cannot entertain such a view, for it has been taught: [It would
have sufficed had Scripture stated], a man,8 why does it state, ‘a man, a man? To include gentiles,
that they may bring either votive or freewill-offerings like an Israelite.
Footnotes
(4) V. supra p. 19.
(5) Lev. I, 2.
(6) I.e., sacrifices may he accepted from all gentiles without exception.
(7) And so when the Baraitha states that no distinction is made among the gentiles it is entirely negative, i.e., on no
account and in no circumstances may sacrifices be accepted from gentiles.
(8} Lev. XXII, 18. The verse, translated literally, reads: A man, a man of the children of Israel . . . that bringeth his
offering etc. It is suggested that the repetition of ‘a man’ extends the law to include such persons other than those
contemplated in the ordinary meaning of the verse; in this case, gentiles.
Also does this apply to Noachides? I can understand not using charity from those who engage in Avodah Zara...There is a difference of opinion how to understand Rambam Hilchot Melachim (Laws of Kings) 10:10 in the standard editions on this issue.
How came Baba b. Buta to do this [to give advice to Herod], seeing that Rab Judah has said in the
name of Rab (or it may be R. Joshuah b. Levi) that Daniel was punished only because he gave advice
to Nebuchadnezzar, as it is written, Wherefore, O king, let my counsel be acceptable unto thee, and
atone thy sins by righteousness and thine iniquities by showing mercy to the poor, if there may be a
lengthening of thy tranquility etc.,16 and again, All this came upon the king Nebuchadnezzar,17 and
again, At the end of twelve months etc.?18 — If you like I can say that this does not apply to a slave
[of an Israelite, such as Herod was.] who is under obligation to keep the commandments [of the
Torah], or if you like I can say that an exception had to be made in the case of the Temple which
could not have been built without the assistance of Royalty.
From whence do we learn that Daniel was punished? Shall I say from the verse, And Esther called
to Hatach,19 who, as Rab has told us, was the same as Daniel? This is a sufficient answer if we
accept the view of those who say that he was called Hatach because he was cut down [hatach] from
his greatness.20 But on the view of those who say that he was called Hatach because all matters of
state were decided21 [hatach] according to his counsel, what answer can we give? — That he was
thrown Into the den of lions.
Footnotes
(16) Dan. IV, 24.
(17) Ibid. 25.
(18) Ibid. 26. The twelve months’ reprieve is regarded as a result of Daniel's advice.
(19) Esther, IV, 5.
(20) חתך to cut, this being his punishment.
(21) חתך denotes ‘to determine’, ‘to decide’, as well as ‘to cut’.
Here's a link to a recent rabbinical ruling by Rabbi Dov Lior (in Hebrew) forbidding Jews from accepting charity money for Pesach from pro-christian missionary organizationsAlthough I respect Rav Lior I disagree with him on this.
http://www.inn.co.il/News/News.aspx/273929
The article sites other big rabbis both in the eyes of the religious zionist world and the charedi world who forbid taking the charity.
I found in the Responsa of "Ateret Paz" other suggestions to explain how public acceptance of charity money from the Gentiles is a desecration of G-d's name (Chilul Hashem) and is forbidden to be taken when the Jew can survive without it.How does this affect when The Jews cannont survive without it? Let me explain, when there is Jews in Judea & Samaria who are fighting tooth and nail to build up Jewish homes or when JTF is spreading the Kahanist message to Jews in Israel? I personally only want The Jews to hear the Kahanist message & to destroy their enemy. Is it going against G-d if I was to give charity to help that goal? I'm confused here.
2 Answers he raises fit well with Kahanist ideology.
Quoting from Rabbi Palaji (responsa, Shma Avraham 51) and based on the Talmud Baba Batra, 10b, it seems that taking the charity money from the Gentiles causes a lengthening of the exile and the very lengthening of the exile is a desecration of G-d's name.
The answer that "Ateret Paz" favors is that he debases himself publicly in the eyes of the Gentile for the sake of monetary benefit.
We are afraid if the guy is so willing to publicly debase himself for money before the Gentiles, he is the type of guy that might not tell the truth in his testimony like the wicked עד חמס of Shmot {Exodus} 23:1 and Dvarim {Deut.} 19:6 that the Torah deems to be untrustworthy.
it has been taught: [It wouldThis derivation that we accept votive or freewill-offerings from Gentiles (as well as perhaps a few other verses of this nature) has been used as a precedent to accept donations from Gentiles that can be classified as similar in nature to the votive or freewill-offerings of Lev. XXII, 18 and not to classic charity. I will provide more details, G-d willing and bli neder, at a later date.
have sufficed had Scripture stated], a man,8 why does it state, ‘a man, a man? To include gentiles,
that they may bring either votive or freewill-offerings like an Israelite.
Footnote
(8} Lev. XXII, 18. The verse, translated literally, reads: A man, a man of the children of Israel . . . that bringeth his
offering etc. It is suggested that the repetition of ‘a man’ extends the law to include such persons other than those contemplated in the ordinary meaning of the verse; in this case, gentiles.
Sha'azrek, an Arab, made a gift of a lamp to the synagogue of Rab Judah.The Pri Adama commentary on the Rambam Hilchot Melachim 10:10 as well as Tosafot ask
It doesn't talk about the penalty, but overall interesting.
Beg to disagree with great Rabbonim & even with my dear commander Rav Yehuda... Very sorry, but in my humble opinion, some leftist jew-hating ShaBaK snitch brought up that we shouldn't take charity from Gentiles.
To jew-haters, it will accomplish these:
1. Our front-line struggle in givaot, small villages, will be underfunded & collapse. Our fighters go hungry & can't buy security equipment, medical aid, legal defense, etc.
2. Alliance with Bible-believing Christians will be undercut. There are over 20 million Christians only in USA who support our struggle for Authentic Judaism, Judea/Samaria, against arab terror & sand-nazis... Together, we are very strong & it is very hard for jew-haters, leftists, sand-nazis to tackle us both. These Christians are sincere & donate generously, often cutting their own needs.
Our guys took from Rubashkin & very gratefull... so is it OK to take from a Jewish crook who stole from goyim rather than from goyim directly???
Is it OK to steal? Do the Aseret HaDibrot mean something???
So b4 yelling at me, think about that.
I do believe that when Gentiles help our cause, we must accept gratiously & thanks them. Exception is if they are proven missionaries or have other alterior motives.
http://www.torah.org/advanced/mikra/5757/sh/dt.57.2.05.html
MURDER-ADULTERY - KIDNAPPING/STEALING
The B'nei Yisra'el had not only been the victims of genocide, seeing their own babies thrown into the Nile, but they had also been witness to the destruction and murder of much of Egyptian society. The Torah is sensitive to the notion that our environment affects us and that our (even necessary) involvement in war can lead to a significant lowering of our moral compass. Witness the specific commands regarding the sanctity of the Mahaneh - war camp (See Ramban's commentary on D'varim 23:10). We had just arrived at Sinai fresh from our first war (against Amalek) - and had to be warned that in spite of what was done to us and in spite of what we had just been commanded to do (defend ourselves), human life is still sacred and we must never lose that awareness: Lo Tirtzach - Do Not Murder.
It is often the fate of slaves (or any "lower class") that they dream of overturning the oppressive class and allowing themselves the freedoms enjoyed by their overlords (Orwell's Animal Farm is a good example). As we are told in Vayyikra (Leviticus) 18, Egyptian society was promiscuous in the extreme and practiced every kind of sexual abomination. Coming from this type of society, it is reasonable to assume that at least some of the B'nei Yisra'el would have thought about "enjoying" such activities. After commanding us regarding proper respect for parents, the Torah commands us about the sanctity of the marital bond. Therefore, the next step in the B'rit is: Lo Tin'af - Do Not Commit Adultery.
[Parenthetic note: The "Halakhic p'shat" of the next Statement is "Do Not Kidnap". This is learned from context (see Rashi ad loc.); since the other statements all carry the possibility of capital punishment, this one must also include a capital crime. The only type of "stealing" which involves the potential for capital punishment is kidnapping.]
People who have been treated badly usually have one of two reactions (and often both at the same time) - they either wish to continue to be subjugated (note the difficulty that many long-term prisoners have with managing their own lives) or they wish to subjugate others. This would be especially true of slaves, who have been used for material gain with no regard for their humanity. We might have reacted in one of these ways, subjugating others or looking for others to subjugate us. Whereas God prohibits the latter - after a fashion - in its earlier prohibition of idolatry, He prohibits the former here. Therefore, the Torah commands us to restrain ourselves from using others for our own material gain: Lo Tignov - Do Not Kidnap.
I don't know what your honor is talking about... but last time I look at 10 Commandments... there is one that forbids STEALING. Question is:
Is charity from a Jew who stole from goyim is acceptable... but charity from goy is not???
In general, charity from Gentiles been accepted by Jews with gratitude through the ages. King Solomon took charity from King of Tyre to build Beis HaMikdosh. If I do research, I'll find much more & poskim.
I believe current issue with refusing Christian charity originated by leftists & arabs & pushed by ShaBaK snitches. We pay in Jewish blood for it when terror comes.
It is forbidden to steal from anyone, the issue with the 10 Commandments is a side thing, we have 613 Commandments and in them not to steal is included as well. But yea in the 10 Commandments its against Kidnapping and it has with it the DEATH penalty, as opposed to other theft that has penalties (such as paying double and other measures) but not the death penalty. That is why their is this distinction and its not part of the 10 Commandments but part of the 613 Commandments.
Its also not good to take charity from a thief especially if the money received is from stolen money, but what you claimed about Rubashkin wasn't and isn't true. He didn't steal from anyone.
Issue is MORAL...
We still didn't answer my humble question.
If we condone stealing... from goyim... from anyone... we become corrupt & all falls down. ShaBaK snitches, leftists, arabs beg us to...
As far as Rubashkin... don't believe corrupt pseudo-frumies who cover him. Rubashkin did steal by forging invoices. He stole from banks. What he stole from his workers... he was not even tried for.
Filthy despeakable scumbag dressed as a religious Jew. There are thousands more parasitic useless crooks like him out there.
Shandes al haGoyim!
Shame!!!
Question was:
Is charity from a Jew who stole from goyim is acceptable... but charity from goy is not???
At least we agree that stealing is no good. Some dudes think that it's OK as a way of life.
You can make lots of money by filing an appeal for Rubashkin, since poor dude "didn't steal" & bad anti-semites put him for 20+. Chabad will pay you at least $1M if successful.
Unfortunately, invoices he brought to underwriters he made himself & screwed banks out of $20M. That's the fact. Folder with these fake invoices was found in his office. No loshon hara. It's a sad mussar for everyone to learn.
If you doubt I'm jewish, c'mon over I'll put my circumsized d#@k for you to examine closely. LOL!
I am beginning to believe those who think you are trolling our forum. We will see how many more questionable things you say.
Muman,
Last time I learned Ivris, there was a word "Gneyva". Also "Ganav". From that, derived "Lo Tignov" & "Al Tignov" meaning, literally, "Not to STEAL". Unless there is new Ivris arose in frum shtetls, whereas it is OK to steal (which many corrupt crooks there do) I stick to my Torah & 10 Commandments. Very sorry to disagree...
Your full of Sh^t. Rav Kahane was for learning Torah, respecting others Jews and non-Jews and especially not making up lies about them. Your just here to lie and instigate. Its apparent by the flagrant lies you make up constantly here, and you are new!
There are a number of Mitzvot in the Torah that relate to stealing. The most well-known source is found in the 'Ten Commandments'; The Torah commands us, "Do not steal (loh tignov)-1 " It is less well-known that in Parshas Kedoshim, the Torah further commands us, Do not steal -2. " The Talmud explains that the Torah is teaching two separate kinds of stealing; the stealing referred to in the 'Ten Commandments' actually relates to kidnapping a person-3 . In contrast, the stealing discussed in Parshas Kedoshim, refers to stealing the property or money of another person. The Rabbis explain that the hebrew word used for stealing in this verse, (the root of the word is 'gonev') means one specific kind of stealing - stealing in secret, where nobody else is present-4 . An example of this is if one burgles a home whilst no-one is home.
Whence do we learn a formal prohibition16 against abduction?17 — R. Josiah said: From Thou shalt not steal.18 R. Johanan said: From They shall not be sold as bondsmen.19 Now, there is no dispute: one Master states the prohibition for stealing [i.e., abduction], the other Master for selling [the kidnapped person].
Our Rabbis taught: Thou shalt not steal. — 20 Scripture refers to the stealing of human beings. You say, Scripture refers to the stealing of human beings; but perhaps it is not so, the theft of property [lit., 'money'] being meant? — I will tell you: Go forth and learn from the thirteen principles whereby the Torah is interpreted. [one of which is that] a law is interpreted by its general context: of what does the text speak? of [crimes involving] capital punishment: hence this too refers [to a crime involving] capital punishment.21
Another [Baraitha] taught: Ye shall not steal:22 The Writ refers to theft of property. You say thus, but perhaps it is not so, Scripture referring to the theft of human beings? — I will tell you: Go forth and learn from the thirteen principles whereby the Torah is interpreted,[one of which is that] a law is interpreted by its general context. Of what does the text speak? of money matters;23 therefore this too refuse to a money [theft].
Although I respect Rav Lior I disagree with him on this.You have no idea ChabadKahanist how much spiritual power they get for their charity, which far outweighs what they seem to lose.
My reasoning is simple because if you take money from them that is less money they can spend on missionary tracts & money in your pocket.
Better in your pocket than to be spent on missionary tracts.
Behold this was the iniquity of your sister Sdome: she and her daughters had pride, surfeit of bread, and abundance of idleness, and yet she did not strengthen the hand of the poor and needy...Although the translation could be improved, I more or less relied on the Jerusalem Bible translation for the sake of ease.
Raba expounded: As a reward for the four tears which Orpah dropped upon her mother-in-law, she
merited that four mighty warriors should issue from her; as it is said: And they lifted up their voice
and wept again.
Quote from ChabadKahanistYou have no idea ChabadKahanist how much spiritual power they get for their charity, which far outweighs what they seem to lose.I see your point
Here's one quote from the midrash about this topicמדרש זוטא - שיר השירים (בובר) פרשה אTranslation: If the sons of the generation of the flood and the men of Sdome (Sodom) had performed charity, they would not have perished. And thus it is explicit regarding Sdome, even though they had in their hands all the transgressions, their verdict was not sealed except on account that they did not want to give charity, as it says in Yechezkel/Ezekiel 16:49Although the translation could be improved, I more or less relied on the Jerusalem Bible translation for the sake of ease.
אלו היו בני דור המבול ואנשי סדום עושים צדקה לא היו אבודים, וכן מפורש על סדום, אף על פי שהיו בידם כל העברות לא נחתם גזר דינם אלא על שלא רצו לתן צדקה, שנאמר גאון שבעת לחם [ושלות השקט] היה לה ולבנותיה ויד עני ואביון לא החזיקה -יחזקאל ט"ז מ"ט
In general, charity from Gentiles been accepted by Jews with gratitude through the ages. King Solomon took charity from King of Tyre to build Beis HaMikdosh.I don't believe the precedent of the King of Tyre can be used as a proof.