charity
Hello Rabbi
1We studied the issue of the lost keeper {Sheikh or Shas}, I saw the rabbi’s lessons from 2003 and they are long and profound – Yesher Kaach
Could the Rabbi direct me {sources or halacha} regarding the question of when a person is obligated to give charity? The question arose when we studied the Prota of Rabbi Yosef. Apparently, if a person has the right not to give charity at the moment or to choose who to give to, why is there here – “in that which is not for the best…”?
2. I find the Rabbi’s approach to accepting the authority of the Sages a bit difficult {surely the Rabbi will tell me to take a tranquilizer, and everything will be fine..} and the Rabbi’s opinion that a person should follow only his understanding {of course, after researching the matter}. I remembered the Rabbi’s view when we studied the second explanation in the opinion of Rav Yosef that since the Torah obligated him to keep it, his level of obligation is higher. I told the students that despite the explanations of Peni Yehoshua {the reward of a mitzvah} and Rabbi Hirsch {that obligation raises the level of obligation}, in my opinion this is precisely why a keeper of a loss will be a keeper for free – isn’t it enough that they oblige me to return a loss, will they also add obligations to me??? But I qualified that I am oblivious to explanations, but apparently the Sages thought differently…
Good news for the rabbi
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
- In any case, it is not certain that a poor person will knock on the door, and therefore even if there was an obligation to give to every poor person, it is still a guaranteed profit. Therefore, even if he does not have to give to every poor person, there are still situations in which he does, and even in these situations he dies because of the handling of the loss. This is enough to make him a wage earner.
- A hired guard does not necessarily have to guard more. Simply put, he is also a guard as a female guard. This only adds liability if something happens (theft and loss). The discussion is not about what he deserves, but about what legal boundary he falls into. If this thing is indeed hired, then he is a hired guard. Even if morally you think it is unfair, this is the legal situation. The sages can always amend a regulation that exempts guards from loss due to moral considerations. The discussion here is legal, not moral. Now I wonder whether a hired guard can make a condition like any other guard (Mishnah BM 3:1). Ostensibly, he can take on the task of taking care of a loss on the condition that there is a free guard for it. This must be discussed because there is no second party here. He cannot make a condition with the Torah, after all, it obligates him. This is not a voluntary contract like a regular guard who has everything in his hands. On the other hand, he can not take care of the loss. This is a halachic, not a legal, obligation. Therefore, perhaps it is possible to make a condition. Like the stipulation of a man who saves his friend on the condition that he pay him a fee beyond the void.
Discover more from הרב מיכאל אברהם
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Thank you very much
In what situations must I give. For example?
https://www.yeshiva.org.il/ask/93809
Leave a Reply
Please login or Register to submit your answer
