Vol.

20 Issue #12

Parshas Vayechi
Maaser Kesafim

Rabbi Michael Taubes

(MTA 76, RIETS 82)
Rosh Yeshiva - MTA
Rabbi - Kehilas Zichron Mordechai
When Yaakov Avinu, while running away from his
brother Eisav, awakens after dreaming about the Malachim
ascending and descending the ladder, he davens to
Hashem, and vows that if Hashem will provide for his
needs and see that he will return safely to his fathers
home, he will give Hashem one tenth of whatever he has
(Bereishis 28:20-22). In the Daas Zekeinim MiBaalei
HaTosafos (ibid posuk 20 s.v. im), a Midrash is cited which
indicates that Yaakov at that time instituted that one should
give away one tenth of ones money to Tzedakah. Although the Torah itself clearly presents elsewhere the
Mitzvah to support the poor by giving Tzedakah (Vayikra
25:35, Devarim 15:7-8), no guidelines are given as to specifically how much money or what percentage of ones
income must be given to Tzedakah in order to properly
fulfill this Mitzvah. The idea of giving one tenth of ones
agricultural produce to the poor is indeed documented in
the Torah (Devarim 26:12); this is known as Maaser Ani,
which was given in years three and six of seven year
Shemittah cycle. No other mention, however, of a requirement to give specifically one tenth of anything to the
poor is found in the Torah.

Based upon a Posuk in Mishlei (3:9), however, the

Yerushalmi in Peiah (Perek 1 halacha 1, 3b) implies that
one is required to give Maaser Ani, a tithe of one tenth to
the poor, from all of ones possessions, not just from agricultural produce. This view is cited by the Mordechai, in
his commentary on the Gemara in Bava Kamma (siman
192, daf 53: Bdapei Harif), where it is presented as a
source for the Mitzvah to give Maaser Kesafim. Another

14 Teves 5776

source is found in the commentary of Tosafos on the Gemara in Taanis (9a) which expounds upon a Posuk later in
the Torah (Devarim 14:22) that contains the seemingly
extraneous double use of a word in relationship to tithes
(Aser Taser). Tosafos (ibid s.v. aser) cites a statement in the
Sifrei (which is not found in our current standard editions)
that extrapolates from this entire expression that there are
indeed two tithes which must actually be given. The first
is the one tenth to be separated from ones agricultural
produce, the second is the one tenth to be given to the
poor from any other potential source of income, such as
business or other capital gains that one may have. This
too, then, is a source for the Mitzvah of Maaser Kesafim.
It is worth noting that this same idea appears in the Yalkut
Shimoni, in Parshas Reeih (remez 893) and in the Midrash
Tanchuma (ibid os 18), where it is mentioned that this gift
of one tenth of ones business income should be given specifically to those who are involved in Torah study.
The implication of the above sources is that the
obligation to give Maaser Kesafim to the poor is rooted in
the Torah, a view which seems to be accepted by the
Shaloh (Shnei Luchos Habris, Maseches Megillah inyan
tzeddakah umaaser, s.v. umikol makom), among others.
Most other Poskim, however, do not consider this to be a
Torah based obligation. The Maharil, for example (shut
Maharil, siman 54, 56), writes clearly that the Mitzvah of
Maaser Kesafim is MideRabbanan, and he consequently
allows for certain leniencies in this obligation. The Chavos
Yair too (shut Chavos Yair siman 224), in a lengthy Teshuvah where he discusses, among other things, what exactly is considered income and how to treat business expenses in this regard, likewise quotes an opinion that the
obligation of Maaser Kesafim is MideRabbanan, and that
the Pesukim mentioned above are just a remez, a hint to the
idea in the Torah. He notes there as well that the aforementioned Yalkut Shimoni (ibid) writes specifically that


the Posuk in the Torah is only a remez. The Aruch HaShulchan (Yoreh Deyah, siman 249 seif 2) likewise writes that
the requirement to give one tenth of ones money to the
poor is only MideRabbanan, and it is merely hinted at by
the Posuk in this Parsha (Bereishis, ibid posuk 22) referred
to above; the Maaser actually required by the Torah relates only to ones agricultural products, and is given to the
poor only once every three years.
Page 2

Still other authorities rule that giving Maaser Kesafim to the poor is required neither by the Torah nor by
the Rabbanan, but is rather a Minhag, a proper custom.
This position is articulated by the Bach, in his commentary
on the Tur (Yoreh Deyah, siman 331 s.v. av), when he
discusses what type of Tzedakah may be given with
Maaser Kesafim money, as opposed to Maaser Ani
money, and is agreed to by Rav Yaakov Emden (shut
shailos Yaavetz vol. 1 siman 6), who, quoting the above
cited Posuk in this Parsha (ibid), writes that giving Maaser
money to the poor is a Middas Chasidus, an act of piety
learned form Yaakov Avinu; he then proves that there is no
actual obligation, even on the level of a Mitzvah MideRabbanan. In an earlier Teshuvah (ibid, siman 1), Rav Yaakov
Emden quotes from his father the Chacham Tzvi that the
Bachs position is correct, and he himself brings proofs to
his fathers view in a subsequent Teshuvah (ibid, siman 3).
The Chavos Yair, in the aforementioned Teshuvah (ibid),
agrees to this position himself as well; this seems to be the
majority view. The Pischei Teshuvah (Yoreh Deyah, ibid,
seif katan 12) notes that this position that giving Maaser
Kesafim is only a Minhag was actually presented much earlier by the Maharam of Rothenburg. He then adds, however, that some hold that although it is only a Minhag,
once one has observed the Minhag, he shouldnt stop doing
so except in a situation of great need. Some of the above
quoted Poskim discuss how many times one must observe
this practice before it is considered that he has permanently adopted the Minhag.
One of the issues which depends upon whether
giving Maaser Kesafim is an actual Mitzvah (from the Torah or from the Rabbanan) or whether it is simply a Minhag is the question of to whom one is required to give
Maaser Kesafim money. The Shulchan Aruch (Yoreh
Deyah siman 249 seif 1) writes that one must support the
poor by giving them as much as they need, keeping in

Vo l. 20 I s su e # 12

mind how much he can afford; giving one tenth is considered the average contribution, while one who wishes to
be generous should give one fifth, as suggested by the Gemara in Kesubos (50a). The Ramo (ibid) adds, though,
that Maaser Kesafim money must be used specifically to
be given to the poor, and not for any other Mitzvah or to
assist any other worthwhile cause. The Shach (ibid)
quotes those who disagree and say that expenses for a
Mitzvah which one otherwise would not have done may
be paid for with ones Maaser money. The view of the
Ramo (ibid) is most likely based on there being a strong
connection between Maaser Kesafim and Maaser Ani;
the latter had to be given to poor people and not used
even for Mitzvos. The view of the other Poskim probably
is that since giving Maaser Kesafim is simply a Minhag, its
rules do not necessarily parallel those of the Mitzvah to
give Maaser Ani. The Chasam Sofer (shut Chasam
Sofer, Yoreh Deyah siman 232) makes this very distinction; in his previous Teshuvah (ibid, siman 231) he suggests that if when one first decides to undertake the practice of giving Maaser Kesafim, one has in mind specifically that he would like to use the money to pay for other
Mitzvos or to support other charitable causes and not just
give it to the poor, he may do so.

In terms of how to calculate ones income for the

purpose of determining how much the one tenth is that he
must give away, Rav Moshe Feinstein (shut Igros Moshe,
Yoreh Deyah vol.1 siman 143) writes that money which is
held back from ones paycheck for withholding taxes is
considered as if it was never his, and thus is not viewed as
part of his income; Maaser Kesafim need not be deducted
from that portion of ones salary. This is unlike money
which one actually has, but uses to pay for sales tax and
the like, which is nevertheless considered part of ones
income. He also discusses how to treat household expenses, such as funds needed for child support, in terms
of whether such money is subject to Maaser Kesafim.
Rav Yosef Karo, in one of his Teshuvos (shut avkas
rochel siman 3), seems to rule that funds spent on all essential household needs are not subject to the requirement
of Maaser Kesafim, but it is questionable as to whether or
not this view is accepted; Rav Ovadyah Yosef (shut yichaveh daa vol. 3 siman 76 os 4) discusses this matter,
quoting numerous opinions. It is worth noting that the


Chofetz Chaim, in his treatise entitled Ahavas Chessed
(inyan maaser kesafim, perek 18 os 2), offers specific
guidelines as to how to properly observe the practice of
giving Maaser Kesafim, including recommendations that
one keep written records in a notebook about how much
he gives to Tzedakah, as well as that one should take a
reckoning of ones income and ones Tzedakah contributions once or twice a year. He adds later (ibid perek 20 os
6) that one who is careful about giving Maaser Kesafim is
treated as though Hashem Himself were his partner in
business.
Vo l. 20 I s su e # 12

Thought Before Action...or Action

Before Thought?

Zeve Kornwasser (18)

As Yaakovs life slowly comes to a close, he decides to call all of his children in for one last opportunity
for a bracha. Yaakov individualizes each blessing based on
each childs strengths and weaknesses. Immediately after
rebuking Shimon and Levi, Yaakov calls Yehuda to be
blessed. Rashi says that after having heard his older siblings blessings, Yehuda was hesitant to step forward. It
was only after Yaakov began his bracha, that Yehuda finally
did so.
Throughout Yehudas bracha, Yaakov highlights
traits of might, glory, leadership, and strength. Yaakov
begins the bracha by praising Yehudas strength. Yadcha
boref oyvecha, yishtachavu lecha bnei avicha. Your hand shall
be on the nape of your enemies; your fathers sons shall
bow down before you.(Breishis 49:8) Intrigued by the
juxtaposition of these two phrases, the Meshech Chochma
asks the obvious question. What is the connection between
dominating your enemies and having your brothers bow
before you?
The Meshech Chochma answers that Yaakov gave
this bracha to his son based on an event that would unfold
almost 1000 years later. At the beginning of the reign of
Shaul Hamelech, the first king of Bnei Yisroel, he was
commanded by Shmuel to eradicate the entire nation of
Amalek. Shaul succeeded in defeating the army of Amalek,
but he returned with the best of Amaleks oxen and sheep
and their king, Aggag, all still alive. On the other hand, the
men of Shevet Yehuda destroyed all of Amaleks possessions in total compliance with Hashems command.
The Gemara in Yoma 22b discusses the problem
with Shauls actions. Rav Mani explains that Shaul was
hesitant about killing out the entire nation of Amalek. He

Page 3

learns this from a pasuk in Shmuel Aleph that says, vayarev

bnachal, literally meaning and they fought in the valley.
R Mani explains that Shaul was worried about the issue of
eglah arufah, the practice to kill a cow when a dead body is
found in the field outside of a city, which takes place in a
valley. The cow symbolizes how it was the citys fault for
not having escorted the man to his destination. Shaul argued with the decree of Hashem. He said if the Torah
places such value on one life how can I go and kill an entire
people? Shaul continued to question Gods decree by asking, if the people (Amalek) were sinners why do I have to
kill the children and the animals?
The Gemara replies to Shauls doubts by quoting a
pasuk from Mishlei. Al tehi tzadik harbeih. Do not be
overly righteous(Mishlei 7:16) The Maharsha says that this
pasuk is referring to Shaul. The Meiri says that misplaced
mercy results in cruelty toward others. Although Aggag
was later killed, he fathered children in the interim, from
whom Haman was descended.
Interestingly enough, when the Bnei Yehuda went
into battle at the beginning of sefer Shoftim there was not
the same hesitation which Shaul had. The commandment
of God was fulfilled to the fullest by Shevet Yehuda. God
commanded Yehuda, Vayomer Hashem, Yehuda yaaleh and
God said Yehuda shall go up. (Shoftim 1:2) Two pesukim
later Yehuda does exactly as Hashem commanded. The
result was Yehuda slaughtering the Canaani and the Prizi at
Bezek.
It is for this reason that Yaakov blessed Yehuda in
the manner that he did. The connection between Yadcha
boref oyvecha, and yishtachavu lecha bnei avicha is made
clear by the Meshech Chochma. He says beautifully that
the former caused Yehuda to be zocheh to the latter. It was
only because of Yehudas ability to finish the job and not
question God that he merited the malchus to come from
him.
This was a message that Yaakov felt was necessary
to convey before his death. He wanted to make it clear to
all of his children that Hashem is just in every way shape
and form. Yaakov Avinu felt so strongly about this, that he
felt the need to highlight the consequences and rewards of
following Hashem with a whole heart.
In a day and age in which Why? is the dominant
question, this message should surely carry over. While the
rest of the world may have doubts about belief in God, it is
crucial that we remain strong. It is from the advice of Yaakov and the actions of Shaul that we see how important it
is to have bitachon in Hashem regardless of the situation.

Page 4

Surprises

Ben Tzion Zuckier (17)

Vayechi starts with the statement "Yaakov lived in

the land of Egypt" (Bereishit 47:28). Rashi comments that
the parsha does not begin with new paragraph in the Torah.
Rashi explains that this suggests that as soon as Yaakov
died, the "eyes and hearts of the Jewish people were
closed" because of the suffering of the servitude which began after his death.
Rav Moshe Feinstien in his Darash Moshe poses
two questions. First, Yaakov was still alive at the beginning
of the parsha, so why is the allusion to the servitude placed
there? Second, even after Yaakov died, the servitude didn't
begin until Yosef and his brothers died, as is indicated by
the first few pesukim of parshat Shemot. If the servitude didn't start until much later, why does the Torah, at the beginning of parshat Vayechi, connect it to the death of Yaakov?
Rav Moshe answers, that Hashem started to find
fault with the Jews for failing to appreciate that they were
in exile. Even though they lived in luxury, for Pharoh
treated them kindly, they should have realized that
Hashem had not brought them to Egypt solely to enjoy it.
During Yaakov's lifetime, they missed the fundamental
lesson that being under the jurisdiction of another nation is
itself a great exile, even when that nation treats them with
kindness. The Jews first recognized this important fact
only after their father died, when they discovered that
without Pharoh's permission they couldn't bury Yaakov
with his fathers. They then realized that they were in exile
and suddenly became aware of its implications. Yaakov,
however, had begun to feel the exile from the moment he
left his home in Canaan to set out for Egypt. For this reason, he didn't want to go to Egypt at all, in spite of the
famine, until Hashem promised him "I shall go down with
you to Egypt and I shall also surely bring you
up" (Bereishit 46:4). The allusion to the exile at the hour
of Yaakov's death indicates that this was the factor that
showed Bnei Yisrael that they had in fact been in exile the
entire time they were in Egypt.
Rav Nissan Alpert, the great student of Rav Moshe
Feinstein, offered his own reason why this parsha is not set
off by a paragraph break. He said that life can be unpredictable and mysterious, a "closed book," its final chapter hidden from those in its midst. When people are in distress,
they don't know where their salvation will come from. Did
Yaakov ever dream that these years in Egypt would be his
best? Did he ever imagine that he would see the face of his
son Yosef again? That Yosef would have remained righteous?
There were many such surprises. At the end of the day,
there is a very good reason why the Hebrew word for this

Vo l. 20 I s su e # 12

world is olam (ayin, lamed, mem), which has its roots in the
word ha'leim (hei, ayin, lamed, mem), hidden.
Rav David Feinstein quotes the Gemara (Yoma 71a),
which cites the pasuk, "For
they add to you length of Rabbi Michael
days and years of life and
Taubes
peace" (Mishlei 3:2). The
Gemara explains "years of
Rosh Yeshiva
life" to be a reference to the
years of a person's life that Rabbi Baruch Pesach
are changed from bad to Mendelson
good. A person who lives
Rabbinic Advisor
through hardships and suffering appreciates the pleasant years that may follow Ezra Epstein
much more than a person Avi Rothwachs
who has known only peace.
Editors in Chief
Yaakov appreciated his years
of peace and quiet all the
more so after his years of Yehuda Goldberg
suffering.
Ben Tzion Zuckier
The Torah teaches
us this important lesson
Executive Editors
without ever writing a word
about the message of appre- Ari Hagler
ciating life and learning
Distribution Coordinator
from all of our experiences,
even the bad ones. As we
conclude sefer Bereishit and
say the words Chazak chazak
venitchazeik, may we strengthen ourselves and our commitment to Hashem with the knowledge that everything
He does for us and in our best interest.