FAMILY FIRST
Family comes first. Someone who has destitute relatives or family members studying in yeshiva or kollel, should give them top priority. This includes supporting one’s sons in yeshiva and kollel (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 251:3; see also Pischei Tshuvah 249:2).
Someone who cannot meet the financial needs of his own family should spend all his tzedakah funds on their needs (Rama, Yoreh Deah 251:3 and Gra ad loc.).
Community tzedakah funds should not be used to support someone as long as there are family members who can be leaned on for support (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 251:4).
(Shu’t Igros Moshe, Yoreh Deah 2:113; also see Ahavas Chesed 2:19:2). If paying tuition without resorting to maaser funds creates hardship, one should ask a shaylah. Yeshiva gedolah tuition and expenses may be paid from maaser.
HOMETOWN ADVANTAGE
Tzedakah moneys should be distributed locally rather than sent out-of-town (Gemara Bava Metzia 71a). Thus, after meeting one’s family obligations, one should distribute the majority of one’s remaining tzedakah to local community needs. One should make sure to set aside enough money to give a small contribution to each person who comes to the door for a legitimate cause.
When there are limited resources, support of talmidei chachamim precedes non-talmidei chachamim (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 251:9). However, supporting local poor people precedes giving to out-of-town talmidei chachamim (Pischei Tshuvah 251:3).
When distributing tzedakah funds to out-of-town people, those who live in Eretz Yisroel should be given more than those from Chutz La’Aretz (Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 251:3; see Shach).
One should always give precedence to people who need food over people who need clothing (Gemara Bava Basra 9a; Shulchan Aruch, Yoreh Deah 251:7). Life-threatening emergency situations should be prioritized. In most instances, one should prioritize to provide tzedakah to a needy woman ahead of a man.
DIVERTING OR A DIVERSION
Whether one may divert tzedakah money from one individual or organization to another is, indeed, a dispute among early poskim. Why should one be permitted to divert the funds? Explaining this approach requires that we note a new factor that the Gemara did not discuss. In Rabbah bar Avahu’s case, the donor simply declared, "This coin goes to tzedakah," without specifying a specific individual or organization. However, what happens if someone holding a wad of hundred dollar bills declares, "I dedicate this money to the Asher Richman Hebrew Academy." Must he contribute this amount of money to the Richman Academy, or may he afterwards decide to send them to the Pauper Yeshiva? Does halachah require him to honor a pledge to a specific organization or individual, or is he simply required to donate this amount of money to any tzedakah? If indeed the pledge is simply a generic requirement to donate this amount to tzedakah, then it should follow that one may actually contribute the funds to a charity different from what he originally intended.
13 TH CENTURY CHUTZPAH
Early authorities discuss this question. A major posek of 13 th century Germany reports a very unusual din Torah. A pauper claimed that a wealthy individual promised him a specific amount of money and had not paid it, whereas the rich man denied ever pledging any money. The poor man contended that the pledge obligated the donor to pay him and that the case is therefore no different from any plaintiff claiming money from a defendant who denies that he owes any. The halachah, in such instances, is that the defendant is required to swear an oath (shevuas heses) denying the claim. Similarly, the Mordechai (Bava Kamma #172) ruled that the affluent man is required to swear that he never pledged any money to the pauper! He does not report whether this pauper was subsequently offered any positions as a publicity director for any major Torah institution.
The poskim prove from this Mordechai that when one pledges money to an individual tzedakah, the particular tzedakah can demand payment. Otherwise, what claim does the pauper have on the rich man? Even assuming that the rich man pledged him money, this is merely an obligation to give tzedakah, which the affluent man may donate anywhere. If the pauper indeed has a claim, it must follow that a pledge automatically includes a debt to the specific individual. Following this line of reasoning, money pledged to one tzedakah cannot be subsequently rerouted to a different one, however legitimate the need (Shach, Choshen Mishpat 87:51; Machanei Efrayim, Hilchos Tzedakah #7).
This allows us to answer our third question asked above: "I have a pushka in the house from an organization with which I have no contact. I would like to donate the money instead to my son’s yeshiva, to demonstrate my hakaras hatov." The answer is that although supporting the Torah institutions that educate our children is vital, since this money is already designated for one organization, one may not transfer it to another.
PUSHKA BORROWERS ANONYMOUS
All of this does not answer Susan’s question whether she may borrow money from the pushka. Even if money pledged to one institution cannot be transferred to another, until the money becomes the property of the institution, one may borrow it, as we learned before. Thus, we need to determine whether money in the pushka is already the property of the institution or not.
Now we reach an interesting question: What is the status of money in the pushka? Do I still have some control over it, and may I, therefore, borrow it, subject to the above conditions? Or is it now the property of the tzedakah and I may not?
This halachah depends on the following: Who owns the pushka? If I own the pushka, then placing money in the pushka requires me to donate it to tzedakah, but it is not yet their property and I may borrow it. As I mentioned above, this situation may create liability for the funds, should they be stolen.
On the other hand, if the organization assumes that money placed in the pushka belongs to them, then I may not borrow any of that money. The reason for this is that since the pushka is their vessel, money placed inside is equivalent to being given to the gabbai, the tzedakah treasurer (based on Shulchan Aruch Choshen Mishpat 200:3). Most authorities follow this latter interpretation of the halachah.
HABITUAL BORROWERS
Some people are in the habit of borrowing money from the pushkas on a regular basis. Now, after reading my words, they may realize that this practice is sometimes forbidden. Nevertheless, there is a method whereby a person may put money into any pushka and yet still be able to borrow it afterwards
; he should make a condition in advance that when he puts money into the pushka, he is not donating it to the institution, but simply pledging it to them. This way, the money is not yet the property of the institution, and one may borrow it. Although this solution will not help for the money already in the pushka, it can be used to avoid this problem in the future.
Some contemporary authorities suggest that someone who usually borrows from the pushka might be considered as if he made this condition from the beginning, i.e., that he is not giving the money yet to the tzedakah cause, but only pledging it (Derech Emunah, Matanos Aniyim 7:note 121).
To answer Susan’s question, I would suggest that she make a condition, henceforth, that when she places money in the pushka, she is not donating it at this time. In so doing, she reserves the right to borrow from the pushka, although she also creates a responsibility for herself, should the money be stolen. She may decide that she is better off curbing her habit of borrowing from the pushka and make an appointment to join Borrowers Anonymous.
Making change from the pushka benefits the tzedakah which would rather not distribute, transport or deposit its money as small change, but rather in the form of bills (Tzedakah Umishpat Chapter 8, footnote 25, page 148).