14 Oct JUDAISM’S BALANCE OF ITS FINANCIAL BURDEN

On the one hand, never
before have Jews been
as prosperous as they
are now. Both the vast
majority of individuals
and the community in
general are currently
blessed with wealth well
beyond what we have experienced in history.
On the other hand, never before have we felt
this kind of financial burden to participate in
the Jewish community. Most of us feel it in
some way or another. All of us have heard
the real pain people are feeling. Is religious
affiliation supposed to be this financially
challenging?
The Talmud discusses the concept of
religious financial burden in a number
of places. Generally, it offers one of two
competing thoughts on the matter — either
we must spend lavishly on Judaism or
Judaism does not want to be financially
burdensome. How can both be true? Rav
Elazar Fleckeles (19th cen., Bohemia) posed
this question in a 1782 letter to his teacher
Rav Yechezkel Landau (18th cen., Austria).
His answer can guide us on how to think
about religious spending.
I. Spend A Lot
Rav Fleckeles (Olas Chodesh, vol. 3,

derush 3, pars. 234-243) encyclopedically
lists every place the Gemara offers these
two competing ideas. I will offer here a few
examples:
#1) The Gemara (Zevachim 88a) says that
we may not fix utensils used in the Temple
that were damaged or developed a hole.
Rather, we must replace them. Rambam
(Mishneh Torah, Hilkhos Kelei Ha-Mikdash
1:14) adds that we may melt them down and
then remake them new. Why can’t we fix the
utensils? Rashi (Zevachim 88a s.v. ve-ein)
says that fixing the utensils is not proper
because it makes it look like the Temple is
impoverished.
#2) The Gemara continues that if the
priestly garments get too dirty, we do not
wash them. Rather, we replace them. The
Gemara (ibid., 88b) explains that “there is
no poverty in a place of wealth” (ein aniyus
be-makom ashirus). The Temple is a place
of wealth and gold. Therefore, we only use
new, clean clothes in the Temple service.
#3) The Mishnah (Shekalim 4:1) quotes
R. Yishmael who says that if there are
any leftover items in the donations for the
Temple service, the attendants sell them
and give the profit to the Temple funds. R.
Akiva disagrees. The Gemara (Kesubos
106b) explains R. Akiva’s disagreement as

due to the idea that “there is no
poverty in a place of wealth.”
The Temple does not need to
engage in retail transactions
in order to earn a few dollars.
(See also Shabbos 102b and
Menachos 88b)
II. Don’t Spend Too Much
#4) On the other hand, the
Gemara (Yoma 39a) says that
the lottery receptacle used in
the Temple to decide which
kohen performs which services
was unsacred and made of wood. It was not
made of silver or gold because “the Torah
is concerned for the money of the Jewish
people” (ha-Torah chasah al mamonan
shel Yisrael). The Torah does not place
unnecessary financial burdens on us.
#5) The Mishnah (Yoma 43b) says that the
terumas ha-deshen, the daily removal of
ashes from the Temple altar and placement
of new coals, was done with a silver shovel
(fire-pan). Why a silver shovel when nearly
all the other utensils were made from gold?
The Gemara (ibid., 44b) says that the Torah
is concerned with people’s money. Rashi
(ad loc., s.v. chasah) explains that the coals
wear away at the shovel. It needs to be
replaced frequently. If it was made of gold,
the replacement would be a bigger expense
than silver.
#6) The Gemara (Menachos 76b) says that
normally, you have to buy fine flour for a
minchah (meal offering). However, for the
lechem ha-panim (showbread), you may
buy wheat kernels before they are ground

and sifted. Why does the lechem ha-
panim have this cheaper alternative? The

Gemara says that the Torah is concerned
for people’s money. Since we have to bring
the lechem ha-panim every week and it
consists of a lot of bread (12 loaves), the
Torah allows us to be the flour wholesale
rather than retail (so to speak). (See also
Rosh Hashanah 27a and Menachos 89a.)
Rav Fleckeles asked his famous teacher,
what are the overarching rules? When do
we say to spend lavishly on a mitzvah and
when do we say that the Torah is concerned
for our money?
III. A Theory of Religious Spending
Rav Yisrael Lipschitz (19th cen., Poland;
Tiferes Yisrael, Shekalim 8:4, Bo’az 3)
offers his own theory to explain these
different concerns — apparently unaware
of the decades-earlier correspondence on
the subject. Rav Lipschitz suggests that
with sacred community money, we do not
look for profit and we do not care about
relatively minor expenses. However, when
we are dealing with non-sacred or personal
expenses, the Torah does not require
unnecessary spending. Rav Lipschitz

explains all these passages and more with
this approach.
Rav Yechezkel Landau (Noda Bi-Yehudah,
vol. 2, Kuntres Acharon, 7) points out that
these two concepts do not necessarily
contradict each other. Case in point, silver is
not considered poor. Therefore, the choice of
silver over gold to reduce the expense does
not constitute poverty in a place of wealth.
Where the biblical text specifically requires
gold, we use gold. Otherwise, the Sages
had the option of using silver to reduce the
expense without decreasing the atmosphere
of wealth.
In general, Rav Landau explains, the
essential sacred utensils must be made
lavishly — there is no poverty amidst the

wealth. Other items that are either non-
essential or non-sacred should be made with

concern for the expense.
IV. Conclusion
If we were to analogize these approaches to
our own lives, we might proceed as follows.
It is not clear that either of these sages would
agree with this next step.
According to Rav Lipschitz, when dealing
with sacred money, we do not worry about
minor expenses and we do not try to make
profit. When dealing with individuals, we
worry about even minor expenses. This would
seem to translate well into contemporary
communal and personal spending habits.
When dealing with communal expenses,
we can impose religious requirements that
are not technically necessary if they do not
entail major expenses. But on individuals,
we have to be careful not to impose any
unnecessary expenses. Regarding even
a small unnecessary financial burden on
an individual, we say that the Torah is
concerned with people’s money.
According to Rav Landau, the key distinction
is not sacred vs. non-sacred but essential vs.
non-essential. On key elements of religion,
we spend lavishly even on their unnecessary
aspects. There is no poverty regarding those
key parts of religion. Perhaps we can include
among these items tefillin and matzah, for
example. Regarding non-essential religious
items, or items that are not even technically
religious, we do not spend lavishly. Rather,
the Torah is concerned with people’s money.