(ב) וְכָל הָרוֹאֶה עָנִי מְבַקֵּשׁ וְהֶעֱלִים עֵינָיו מִמֶּנּוּ וְלֹא נָתַן לוֹ צְדָקָה עָבַר בְּלֹא תַּעֲשֶׂה שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (דברים טו ז) "לֹא תְאַמֵּץ אֶת לְבָבְךָ וְלֹא תִקְפֹּץ אֶת יָדְךָ מֵאָחִיךָ הָאֶבְיוֹן":
(2) Anyone who sees a poor person begging and averts his eyes from him and does not give him tzedakah transgresses a negative mitzvah, as it is said, (Deut. 15:7) do not harden your heart and shut your hand against your destitute brother.
1) What is meant by “anyone who sees”, what if I don’t see him? What if I know about him but don’t physically let him into my eyesight, is there still a transgression?
2) What is meant by the redundant phrase “and averts his eyes from him”, isn’t it siifficient to simply say “and he doesn’t give him Tzedakah”?
3) The verse seems to identify two unethical actions: “harden your heart” and “shut your hand”, similar to question 2, isn’t shutting one’s hand enough to transgress, why talk about the heart?
It seems pretty obvious that redundancy in Rambam’s wording directly parallels the redundancy in the Torah. The Torah discusses not giving in addition to hardening of the heart, and Rambam discusses not giving and averting one’s eyes. It seems that Rambam is addressing the redundancy in the Torah by subtly explaining what “hardening of the heart” means in this context.
Let’s explain in this way. Is someone ever in the position where they truly have nothing to give? Think hard here. Is Tzedakah limited to money and assets, or is there more that we have to offer than cold cash?
Well, first off, we can always offer advice, expertise, experience etc. These all have value and can help a person a whole lot. The Talmud says something even more basic than that, let’s see those sources:
וְאָמַר רַבִּי חֶלְבּוֹ, אָמַר רַב הוּנָא: כׇּל שֶׁיּוֹדֵעַ בַּחֲבֵרוֹ שֶׁהוּא רָגִיל לִיתֵּן לוֹ שָׁלוֹם, יַקְדִּים לוֹ שָׁלוֹם, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״בַּקֵּשׁ שָׁלוֹם וְרׇדְפֵהוּ״. וְאִם נָתַן לוֹ וְלֹא הֶחֱזִיר — נִקְרָא ״גַּזְלָן״, שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר: ״וְאַתֶּם בִּעַרְתֶּם הַכֶּרֶם גְּזֵלַת הֶעָנִי בְּבָתֵּיכֶם״.
And Rabbi Ḥelbo said that Rav Huna said: One who is aware that another person is accustomed to greet him is not only obligated to return his greeting, but he must greet him first, as it is stated: “Seek peace and pursue it” (Psalms 34:15). If the other person extended his greeting to him and he did not respond, he is called a robber, as it is stated: “It is you who have eaten up the vineyard, the spoils of the poor is in your houses” (Isaiah 3:14). The only way to steal from a pauper who owns nothing is to rob him of his dignity by refusing to return his greeting.
אמר ר' יוחנן טוב המלבין שינים לחבירו יותר ממשקהו חלב שנאמר ולבן שנים מחלב אל תקרי לבן שינים אלא לבון שינים
Rabbi Yoḥanan said: One who whitens his teeth towards his friend by smiling at him is better than one who gives him milk to drink, as it is stated: “And his teeth white [leven shinayim] with milk” (Genesis 49:12). Do not read this expression as leven shinayim; rather, read it as libbun shinayim, the whitening of teeth. Likewise, the phrase: With milk, can be read as: Than milk.
Given these insights into the broad reach of Tzedakah, the redundancy Rambam is emphasizing is pretty clear - Tzedakah is not just about “giving” or “not giving”. It takes heart and open eyes. In other words, it calls for care and real investment in the needy people around us. So it isn’t so bad to not give as it is to have the audacity to pretend as if you don’t even know the poor man exists - “averting your eyes”. And it really isn’t enough that you can’t bring yourself to give money, but you even “harden your heart” as if denying the existence of someone elses needs, or at least being emotionally closed and impartial to those needs.
So this ‘Halacha’ of Rambam also serves as somewhat of an introduction to these set of laws, just as the previous ‘halacha’ was an introduction.
One more technical that addresses the first question raised. The commentators discuss and conclude that “seeing” the poor person is just a common way of speaking, obviously knowing about them and ignoring them violates this prohibition even though one has not physically seen the poor person.