(א) הַצְדָקָה הֲרֵי הִיא בִּכְלַל הַנְּדָרִים. לְפִיכָךְ הָאוֹמֵר הֲרֵי עָלַי סֶלַע לִצְדָקָה אוֹ הֲרֵי סֶלַע זוֹ צְדָקָה חַיָּב לִתְּנָהּ לָעֲנִיִּים מִיָּד וְאִם אִחֵר עָבַר בְּ (דברים כג כב) "בַל תְּאַחֵר" שֶׁהֲרֵי בְּיָדוֹ לִתֵּן מִיָּד וַעֲנִיִּים מְצוּיִין הֵן. אֵין שָׁם עֲנִיִּים מַפְרִישׁ וּמַנִּיחַ עַד שֶׁיִּמְצָא עֲנִיִּים. וְאִם הִתְנָה שֶׁלֹּא יִתֵּן עַד שֶׁיִּמְצָא עָנִי אֵינוֹ צָרִיךְ לְהַפְרִישׁ. וְכֵן אִם הִתְנָה בְּשָׁעָה שֶׁנָּדַר בִּצְדָקָה אוֹ הִתְנַדֵּב אוֹתוֹ שֶׁיִּהְיוּ הַגַּבָּאִין רַשָּׁאִין לְשַׁנּוֹתָהּ וּלְצָרְפָהּ בְּזָהָב הֲרֵי אֵלּוּ מֻתָּרִין:
(1) A [pledge to] tzedakah is a form of a vow - Neder, and therefore one who says, "I pledge to give a selah for tzedakah," or "This selah is for tzedakah" is obligated to give it to the poor immediately, and if he delays, then he has transgressed the commandment not to delay [fulfilling a vow] (Deut. 23:22) since he had the money on hand and poor people are easy to find. If there are no poor people there, he should set it aside and leave it until he finds some poor people. However, if he stipulates that he is not [obligating himself to] give [the coin] until he finds a poor person, then he need not set it aside. So also if he makes the condition at the time he took the vow for tzedakah or to donate something that the collectors are permitted to exchange it or to change it with a goldsmith, then they are permitted to do so.
1) Why does Rambam need to emphasize the issue of delaying a vow in this location? Isn’t it enough to refer us to the general Halacha of vows as it is stated in its appropriate location? Why does Rambam want to plunge us into the world vows when we were just getting the hang of the world of Tzedakah?
2) It seems as if the need to give the Tzedakah immediately is due to it being a vow [note carefully the positioning of Rambam’s sentences], if so, why not bring this set of Halachot in the laws of vows entirely?
3) Why does Rambam incorporate into this Halacha the issue of whether or not the coin may be changed or exchanged, it seems to be an entirely new idea and should have been given its own Halacah?
Explanation:
It seems like Rambam is presenting an entirely new model of Tzedakah in this new chapter. However, given that there are several levels of understanding here, let’s present this methodically.
a) vow as subjctive vs. mitzvah as objective reality.
b) vow as not recommended vs. mitzvah as ideal.
c) vow as Lo Ta’aseh vs. Mitzvah as Ase’h and Lo Ta’aseh.
d) vow as sanctifying the coin vs. Mitzvah as sanctifying the man.
(כג) מִי שֶׁנָּדַר נְדָרִים כְּדֵי לְכוֹנֵן דֵּעוֹתָיו וּלְתַקֵּן מַעֲשָׂיו הֲרֵי זֶה זָרִיז וּמְשֻׁבָּח. כֵּיצַד. כְּגוֹן מִי שֶׁהָיָה זוֹלֵל וְאָסַר עָלָיו הַבָּשָׂר שָׁנָה אוֹ שְׁתַּיִם. אוֹ מִי שֶׁהָיָה שׁוֹגֶה בַּיַּיִן וְאָסַר הַיַּיִן עַל עַצְמוֹ זְמַן מְרֻבֶּה. אוֹ אָסַר הַשִּׁכְרוּת לְעוֹלָם. וְכֵן מִי שֶׁהָיָה רוֹדֵף שַׁלְמוֹנִים וְנִבְהָל לְהוֹן וְאָסַר עַל עַצְמוֹ הַמַּתָּנוֹת אוֹ הֲנָיַת אַנְשֵׁי מְדִינָה זוֹ. וְכֵן מִי שֶׁהָיָה מִתְגָּאֶה בְּיָפְיוֹ וְנָדַר בְּנָזִיר וְכַיּוֹצֵא בִּנְדָרִים אֵלּוּ. כֻּלָּן דֶּרֶךְ עֲבוֹדָה לַשֵּׁם הֵם. וּבִנְדָרִים אֵלּוּ וְכַיּוֹצֵא בָּהֶן אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים נְדָרִים סְיָג לִפְרִישׁוּת:
(23) If a person has made vows in order to adjust his characteristic traits and to improve his behavior, he is indeed alert and deserves praise. Examples: One who was a glutton forbade himself meat for a year or two; or one who was addicted to drinking forbade himself wine for a long time, or vowed never to become intoxicated. So too, one who ran after bribes, hastening to get rich, forbade to himself the gifts or the favors coming from the residents of a particular town. So too, one who became arrogant because of his good looks vowed to become a nazirite. Such vows are designed to serve God, and concerning them the sages declared: "Vows are a fence around self-restraint" (Avoth 3:13).
(כד) וְאַף עַל פִּי שֶׁהֵן עֲבוֹדָה (לַשֵּׁם) לֹא יַרְבֶּה אָדָם בְּנִדְרֵי אִסּוּר וְלֹא יַרְגִּיל עַצְמוֹ בָּהֶם. אֶלָּא יִפְרשׁ מִדְּבָרִים שֶׁרָאוּי לִפְרשׁ מֵהֶן בְּלֹא נֵדֶר:
(24) Even though they are a form of divine service, one should not impose on himself many vows of prohibition nor make frequent use of them, but should rather abstain from things that are to be shunned, without making vows.
(כה) אָמְרוּ חֲכָמִים (גמרא נדרים נט א) "כָּל הַנּוֹדֵר כְּאִלּוּ בָּנָה בָּמָה". וְאִם עָבַר וְנָדַר מִצְוָה לְהִשָּׁאֵל עַל נִדְרוֹ כְּדֵי שֶׁלֹּא יְהֵא מִכְשׁוֹל לְפָנָיו. בַּמֶּה דְּבָרִים אֲמוּרִים בְּנִדְרֵי אִסָּר. אֲבָל נִדְרֵי הֶקְדֵּשׁ מִצְוָה לְקַיְּמָן וְלֹא יִשָּׁאֵל עֲלֵיהֶן אֶלָּא מִדֹּחַק שֶׁנֶּאֱמַר (תהילים קטז יד) (תהילים קטז יח) "נְדָרַי לַה' אֲשַׁלֵּם": סְלִיקוּ לְהוּ הִלְכוֹת נְדָרִים בְּסִיַעְתָּא דִּשְׁמַיָּא
(25) The sages have asserted: "Anyone who makes a vow is as if he built a high place for idolatry" (Nedarim 60b). If he transgressed and made a vow, it is his duty to seek absolution from his vow, so that it might not become an obstacle on his way.— —
There are two possible explanations here, and perhaps they are both correct. Rambam is clearly inferring that there is something that is positive about vows, where at the same time there lays an innate danger in the taking of them. A vow is a great motivator/inhibitor. On the other hand, it leads to the ruinous state of living in a false reality. As the sages put it elsewhere, “is it not enough that which the Torah has forbidden that you see the need to create more prohibitions?” (Yerushalmi Nedarim 9:1).
Rambam is either predicting the natural progression of events. In which, at first, one takes the oaths out of nessecity, but without due precaution it becomes habit and they vow even without urgent need to do so. This ultimately ends up in the creation of subjective religious rite and experience, such are the false realities of the world of vows.
The other way of interpretating Rambam’s cascade is to see it as a holistic approach to vows. That is, Rambam writes Halacha 23 for those in absolute need, Halacha 24 to clarify to those who do not need to take vows that they should not do so. And Halacha 25 to explain why Rambam felt this way in Halacha 24.
Regardless of how we may choose to understand Rambam, it is clear that taking vows is less than ideal, to say the least. With this in mind, let’s return to the issue of Tzedakah. (We will revisit Rambam’s closing words in Halacha 25).
The first obvious distinction between chapters 7 and 8 emerges directly from Rambam’s approach to vows in general. Vows are an assertion of subjective human assessment onto the immediate environment. This is in stark contrast to Mitzvah which touches on fundamental realities that are consistent across existence.
In Chapter 7 we are introduced to the Mitzvah of Tzedakah. G-d mandates this act of awareness of wants and needs of ourselves and others. It touches on the need for an awareness that allows us to develop the traits of conscious generosity and reciprocity. It also addresses the need for this awareness on an individual level to manifest in the collective consciousness of the community, and so on.
Yet, across time, generosity has always - perhaps must always, as we will see in later Halachot - maintained an element of free and self-motivated choice. Given the difficulty the human condition presents in upholding generosity as a value, instead of forcing all of the Tzedakah to be given, people took to vows as a tactic in motivating themselves of their own accord.