Page 86 - Tzurba M'Rabanan Volume1

84 · Hilchot Avoda Zara Ii Tzurba M’Rabanan

Sanhedrin, which limited the prohibition to re- The Hagahot Ashri (Bava Batra 1:36) ex-
ceiving charity from gentiles, and the Gemara in plains the distinction in the following manner.
Bava Batra, which implied that there is an out- Charity has the unique ability to cause atone-
right prohibition with no distinction between ment, as opposed to other good deeds. Hence,
receiving in private or public. Each of the Acha- specifically charity, which would cause atone-
ronim gave different explanations to resolve the ment, could extend the gentile rule over the
contradiction. However other Acharonim, such Jewish people and hence extend the exile. It is
as the Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh, reject the prem- interesting to note that the Rambam (Maaseh
ise that there is a contradiction in the first case. Korbanot 3:2) when listing what sacrifices we can
Rabbi Chaim Ben Atar, better known as the accept from gentiles only lists a burnt offering
Ohr HaChaim HaKadosh, in his commentary but not a sin offering, which is generally brought
Rishon Letzion on the Shulchan Aruch explains for purposes of atonement. 24
22
that the question of the Derisha regarding the
contradiction between the two Gemarot doesn’t Conclusion
have merit. Both Gemarot understand that there Although the prohibition to receive charity from
is a prohibition against accepting charity from a gentiles is found explicitly in the Talmud, never-
gentile (even in private). The Gemara in Sanhe- theless there seems to be some equivocation as
drin only made a distinction between receiving to the scope and reason for the prohibition. The
money in private versus public regarding becom- different answers given have wide halachic rami-
ing invalidated as a witness. Although one trans- fications. The Rambam limits the prohibition to
gresses even when taking in private, one is only idolaters and not a ben Noach. The Derisha limits
rendered invalid as a witness if he takes in public. the prohibition to where the charity is received
This opinion is accepted by Rav Wosner in his by intermediaries and not the poor themselves.
Responsa Shevet HaLevi. The Taz limits the prohibition to where charity
23
was only given to Jews specifically, whereas the
Is the Prohibition Limited to Charity or Binyan Tzion limits to the prohibition to unso-
Does It Include Other Things As Well? licited charity. The Shenot Chaim holds that the
Based on the prohibition (brought in Bava prohibition is only from ruling kings as opposed
Batra) to receive charity from gentiles, Tosafot to individual gentiles, and we suggested that this
(Bava Batra 8a, s.v. yativ) ask why it was permit- could be the opinion of Rashi as well.
ted for a gentile to donate candles to a shul, as Although there are many reasons to be lenient,
mentioned in Arachin 6b. Tosafot explains that some modern day poskim are stringent for anoth-
a donation to a shul is more similar to a korban, er reason entirely: A concern for missionizing.
which we do accept from a non-Jew, as stated This might definitely be a concern, yet this is not
by the Gemara in Nazir (62a). Tosafot though the problem mentioned by any of the Rishonim
do not explain why there is a problem with ac- and Acharonim, and needs to be assessed in its
cepting charity but not with accepting a sacrifice. own merit.
Seemingly, both of them cause merit for the gen-
tiles and prolong the exile.

22. Rishon Letzion on Y.D. 254:1
23. Responsa Shevet HaLevi 2:126
24. Based on Tosafot’s comparison of a donation to a shul to the offering of a sacrifice, the Rema (Yoreh Deah 254:2) paskens that it is permitted
to accept a donation from a non-Jew to a shul (assuming certain criteria are met), but it is forbidden to accept a donation to a shul from a Jewish

This volume is not to be distributed. Copies are for the personal use of purchaser only.