Rabbi Mati Kirschenbaum
There is no way to hide it – prices are skyrocketing. In July inflation in Poland reached 15,5% and the rate of prices increase hasn’t been so high in almost 25 years. No wonder then that the government has raised interest rates in order to reduce the dynamic of growing prices. The consequences of inflation are affecting everyone, from young adults worried if they’ll be able to afford getting a mortgage or to continue paying off their mortgage, up to senior citizens worried about the diminishing purchasing power of their pensions. This is not a uniquely Polish problem – after the Russian invasion on Ukraine almost all of Europe is facing rising costs of living. Governments of European countries are implementing various strategies to prevent the lowering of the standard of living of citizens. Germany and Spain have decided to help reduce the transport costs for citizens by introducing cheap or free of charge railway transport. Great Britain has offered all its citizens an energy grant, it has lowered communal taxes payed by most households and it is assisting citizens eligible for social benefits with a special grant compensating the increased costs of living. In Poland the government has introduced a mortgage “grace period” for those with a mortgage, there are also plans to offer everyone an energy grant. The introduction of each type of assistance for citizens is accompanied by discussions regarding their effectiveness and appropriateness. The latter ones stem from differences in opinions about which groups should receive support. Therefore, discussions about helping citizens in difficult times are at the same time public debates about the threshold of poverty which requires the society’s intervention.
In this week’s Parashat Ree Moses lists the social groups which the Israelites were supposed to support financially by providing a share in the tithes after entering the Land of Israel. They included the landless Levites, widows, orphans and foreigners. The common denominator of these groups was that they didn’t have any land, the main means of production, which made the survival of individuals belonging to these groups dependent on the material support of the community. But this didn’t mean that material assistance was to be limited only to individuals unable to support themselves on their own.
Moses tells the Israelites that they should provide financial aid in the form of a loan to every Israelite who needs it. This loan was going to be canceled in the Sabbath year. What’s important, Moses forbade the Israelites to avoid lending money to others when the Sabbath year, in which all the debts would be annulled, was coming. So the lenders had to face the possibility of the debt’s imminent cancellation.
The law established by Moses proved to be too strict. Wealthy Israelites were not willing to lend money without a guarantee of its return. That’s why in the first century B.C.E. Hillel the Elder introduced the institution of a prozbul, a clause in loan agreements officially transferring the lender status from individuals to rabbinic courts. This secured the interests of the lenders, since loans given by courts were not canceled during the Sabbath year. The guarantee that loans would be re-payed increased their availability, which was beneficial for the borrowers.
The laws established by Moses and Hillel were answers to traits of human nature which impede our willingness to help our neighbors in need. Moses ordered the Israelites to help those unable to provide for themselves as a reaction to a lack of solidarity which makes us ascribe poverty to individual traits, irrevocably separating the needy from the affluent. By calling the poor “brothers of the rest of the community” Moses called into question this excluding division. The institution of prozbul introduced by Hillel stemmed from understanding the challenge that most of us face in finding a balance between egoism and altruism. Both sages understood that an effective fight with poverty requires a social system in which supporting those in need would go hand in hand with accepting the efforts of individuals to secure prosperity for themselves. In the Babylonian Talmud in tractate Ketubot we find a discussion about the extent of help that society should provide to those in need.
According to an anonymous opinion of the sages the community should provide those seeking help the support allowing them to survive. However, the sages were against helping impoverished wealthy men who wanted to maintain their high material status. In spite of that, the Talmud relates the story of Hillel who bought an impoverished wealthy man a horse, acted as his herald and announced his arrival to the next village.
The Rabbis also share a story of a recently impoverished man who asked Rabbi Nehemiah for a chance to eat at his house. Nehemiah agreed, expressing his concern if the man, accustomed to meat and wine, would be satisfied with a modest bowl of lentils that he could offer him. Rabbi Nehemiah’s premonition turned out to be right and the man he was helping soon died. Rabbi Nehemiah felt really guilty about that. But the sages were convinced that the man himself was the one to blame, since he wasn’t able to adjust to a more modest lifestyle.
Finally the Rabbis share a story of an impoverished wealthy man who wanted to maintain his former lifestyle at the expense of the community. When Rava, one of the most prominent sages living in Babylonia, criticizes the costs of providing such meals, his interlocutor states that he was leading a lavish life because that was the Eternal’s will. Right after that Rava’s sister unexpectedly brings him the poor man’s favorite food as a gift. Rava treats this as a sign from heaven, he apologizes to him and offers him a lavish meal. What’s important, this story seems to treat this act as a one-time event.
The above stories seem to suggest that in a time of crisis most Talmudic sages would recommend that we undertake actions that secure the basic needs of the greatest number of those in need. The wealthy could count on support if their high material position had, due to its symbolism, an impact on maintaining the existing social-religious order. In contemporary democratic societies such a role is fulfilled by the highest state officials, such as the President of Poland.
The debates we find in the Talmud prove that questions about the most fair division of funds aimed at alleviating poverty in difficult times have a long history. I think that the Talmud is not giving us answers to them on purpose. The lack of answers is supposed to encourage us to reflect on today’s poverty and the ways to overcome it. I am sure that actions inspired by such reflections will help us deal with the aftermath of inflation. I also hope that they will expedite the arrival of a world in which poverty and war will be just a bad memory. May this day come soon and in our lifetime. Shabbat Shalom.
Translated from Polish by: Marzena Szymańska-Błotnicka
Leave a Reply