Avraham's One Village - JEWISH & benei Noach's ONE VILLAGE Barukh haba: The JEWISH Ethicist (JWR)

Keeping Down with the Joneses (by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir)

Fri, 15 Aug 2008 19:22:56 GMT

The Jewish Ethicist - Keeping Down with the Jonses
by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem

by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem

Replacing competition for opulence with delight in simplicity.

Q. My neighbors have an annoying way of trying to match or outdo us materially. I'm thinking of borrowing something or pretending to have it, just to goad him into wasting his money on this annoying habit.

A. The urge to keep up with the Joneses (or to surpass them) is hardly new. The phenomenon is described many times in the words of our sages - almost always in the context of a discussion how to mitigate this harmful phenomenon.

Here is a selection from a long passage discussing this phenomenon:

The rabbis taught: At first when people would bring portions to a house of mourning, the rich would bring in trays of silver and gold, and the poor in baskets of woven reeds. Then the poor were ashamed, so they decreed that all would bring in baskets of woven reeds, in deference to the poor. The rabbis taught: at first they would pour drinks in the house of mourning, the rich in white glass, and the poor in [the less expensive] colored glass, and the poor were ashamed. They decreed that all would pour in colored glass, out of deference to the poor. . .

At first the [excessive expense of the] funeral of a dead person was harder on the family than his death, so much so that the relatives would just abandon the body and flee. Until Rabban Gamliel came and made light of his own status neglected his own status and went out [at his own funeral] in [simple] flax garments; and then all the people become accustomed afterwards to go out [to be buried] in flax garments. (1)

Here are two other stories, this time from the mishna:

At first anyone who knew how to read would read [the declaration on the first fruits], and anyone who did not know how to read, they would read it to him. Then some refrained from coming [because they were ashamed to show that they couldn't read]; they decreed that they would read aloud [alike] to those who know how to read and those who don't. (2)

[A fascinating historic lesson in this mishna is that even two thousand years ago, when literacy among other nations was limited to the few, any Jewish farmer would be embarrassed to be illiterate.]

Rabban Shimon ben Gamliel said: There were never such happy days for Israel as the 15th of Av and Yom Kippur, when the girls of Jerusalem would go out in borrowed white garments, so as not to embarrass one who has none. (3)

In each case, the sages noted the problem of envy, the desire to match one's neighbor at any cost and the shame incurred when one is unable to do so. In each case, the sages made a special effort to lower the bar, to prevent destructive competition and envy. Whenever "keeping up with the Joneses" appeared divisive, they instituted a regime of "keeping down with the Joneses". This included a strong element of personal example, as when Rabban Gamliel, who was the leader of Jewry and a wealthy man, ordered that he himself should be buried in simple shrouds, in order to set a good example for others.

So instead of goading your neighbor, I would recommend the opposite course of action: go out of your way to adopt modest habits that will not tend to incite competition. Obviously you do not have to adopt an ascetic lifestyle, but given the competitive tendencies of your neighbors, erring on the side of simplicity will make life more pleasant for you and your neighbors alike.

SOURCES: (1) Babylonian Talmud Moed Katan 27a-b (2) Mishnah Bikkurin 3:7. (3) Misnah Taanit 4:8

Send your queries about ethics in the workplace to jewishethicist@aish.com

To sponsor a column of the Jewish Ethicist, please click here.

The Jewish Ethicist presents some general principles of Jewish law. For specific questions and direct application, please consult a qualified Rabbi.

The Jewish Ethicist is a joint project of Aish.com and the Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem. To find out more about business ethics and Jewish values for the workplace, visit the Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem at www.besr.org.

Author Biography:

See The Jewish Ethicist's Archives

Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir is Research Director at the Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem. Rabbi Dr. Meir received his PhD in Economics from MIT, and previously at Harvard. He subsequently studied at various Israeli yeshivot, and received his ordination from the Israeli Chief Rabbinate. Prior to moving to Israel, he worked at the Council of Economic Advisers in the Reagan administration. Rabbi Dr. Meir is also a Senior Lecturer in Economics at the Jerusalem College of Technology and has published several articles on the subjects of modern business and economics and Jewish law.

JEWISH ETHICIST BOOK JUST PUBLISHED!
With expanded columns from the last four years, additional chapters, and a detailed index.

Aish.com readers and subscribers can obtain the book directly from Ktav publishers at a 10% discount from the list price.
Click here to order.

This article can also be read at: http://www.aish.com/societyWork/work/The_Jewish_Ethicist__-_Keeping_Down_with_the_Jonses.asp

The Jewish Ethicist - White Lies

Mon, 04 Aug 2008 18:08:30 GMT

The Jewish Ethicist - White Lies
by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem

by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem

Avoid social lies, especially self-serving ones.

Q. When an important customer calls, it's awkward for me to say I'm busy. So I tell my secretary to tell the caller I'm out or in a meeting. Is this an acceptable "white lie"?

A. Our tradition has a seemingly conflicted view of so-called "white lies," which are meant to smooth over social situations. (Lying to obtain undeserved personal benefit is considered fraud.) In some passages, we find this practice to be sanctioned and even favored; in others it is barely tolerated. Let us see if we can find a coherent message in these seemingly conflicting passages.

In general, such "social lies" are considered a last resort, an unfortunate necessity. One example is the story of the Talmudic sage Rav and his son Chiya. Rav had a strained relationship with his wife, and she would often do the opposite of what he requested. Their son Chiya eventually learned to relay the father's requests to the wife in an altered way that helped restore harmony. When the father eventually learned of this, he praised the son's wisdom but instructed him not to continue with this practice. Since this alteration was habitual, it carried a danger of accustoming the son to bending the truth. (1)

Another is the story of the land of "Kushta". The Talmud relates a parable of a land called Kushta (the Aramaic word for "truth") where no one ever lies, and no one dies before their time. When a visitor inadvertently tells a neighbor that his wife is not home, in order not to embarrass her by stating that she is washing her hair, he is visited by a terrible tragedy. (2) The message seems to be that such social lies, while permissible in our social reality, are an unfortunate necessity of a world accustomed to untruth.

However, in a few cases we find that alterations are totally acceptable. Here is one passage:

Rabbi Ilaa said in the name of Rabbi Elazar the son of Rabbi Shimon: It is permissible to alter [the truth] for the sake of peace, as it is written (Genesis 50:16-17) "Your father commanded before his death, saying, Thus say to Joseph: Please bear the wrongdoing of your brothers and their sin." [Yet Jacob did not actually make this command.]... The students of Rabbi Yishmael taught, Great is peace, for even the Holy One blessed be He altered [the truth] for its sake, as it is originally written [Sarah exclaimed on hearing she would give birth] "My master is old", yet later it is written [that when God reported the incident to Abraham He changed it to] "I am grown old". (3)

Here the behavior of God Himself in saving Abraham's feelings is viewed as an example for human emulation.

The following passage is well-known:

How do we dance before the bride [and praise her]? The academy of Shammai say, the bride as she is [we praise whatever good qualities we genuinely perceive]. And the academy of Hillel say, "A lovely and gracious bride". The academy of Shammai said to the academy of Hillel, And what if the bride is lame or blind, you say to her "lovely and gracious"? And the Torah says (Exodus 23) "Distance yourself from falsehood". The academy of Hillel said to the academy of Shammai, "If someone makes a poor buy in the marketplace, would you praise it to them or disparage it to them?" (4)

The academy of Hillel point out that beauty is in the eye of the beholder; the person who bought the item evidently liked it, and the groom evidently finds his bride lovely and gracious. This is not an occasional subterfuge but a general instruction that the guests should praise the bride.

If we look carefully, we can see a difference between the cases that are tolerated and those that are encouraged. Both cases where the modification is accepted are cases where it is made for the benefit of the person being misled: to avoid making Abraham feel old and disdained, and to avoid making the bride feel unattractive. Both cases where it is merely tolerated are those where a person makes the change for the benefit of someone else: Chiya bar Rav for his father, the guest in Kushta for his wife.

While "social dissembling" may sometimes be necessary to salvage social relations, the temptation to make this a habit is very great. So in this case the behavior is barely tolerated. But when it is done for the benefit of the person being spoken to, and particularly when it is matter of judgment and not something objective as in the case of the beautiful bride, we can be more lenient.

In your case the misleading is meant for your own benefit, and furthermore it is not really social in nature but rather commercial. One possible solution is for the secretary to always avoid giving too many details. Even when you are truly in a meeting, he can say merely that you are "unavailable"; then this description will not be interpreted as meaning "he is too busy for you". With a little forethought, almost all social lies can be avoided, particularly in a business context.

SOURCES: (1) Babylonian Talmud Yevamot 63a (2) Babylonian Talmud Sanhedrin 97a (3) Babylonian Talmud Yevamot 65b (4) Babylonian Talmud Ketubot 16b

Send your queries about ethics in the workplace to jewishethicist@aish.com

To sponsor a column of the Jewish Ethicist, please click here.

The Jewish Ethicist presents some general principles of Jewish law. For specific questions and direct application, please consult a qualified Rabbi.

Author Biography:

See The Jewish Ethicist's Archives

JEWISH ETHICIST BOOK JUST PUBLISHED!
With expanded columns from the last four years, additional chapters, and a detailed index.

Aish.com readers and subscribers can obtain the book directly from Ktav publishers at a 10% discount from the list price.
Click here to order.

This article can also be read at: http://www.aish.com/societyWork/work/The_Jewish_Ethicist__-_White_Lies.asp

Fair fares

Mon, 28 Jul 2008 03:38:49 GMT

Fair fares

By Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Q: I recently got into a cab and the driver offered a flat price instead of the meter. I learned from bitter experience that when they do this, if you ask for the meter they go the long and slow way. Do I have to give in to this extortion?

A: There are two sides to this question — your side and the driver's side. Let's start with your side.

Given that cab rides are regulated with standard fares, and cab drivers are required to take customers by the shortest route, the cab driver's demand for a fixed fee above the standard rate is extortion. He is taking advantage of the fact that he has you "over a barrel" since he knows it is not worth the extra few dollars (or shekels) he is demanding for you to get out of the cab and hail another one (who in all likelihood will offer you the same deal). Jewish law takes a dim view of such extortion, and in many cases holds that when a person is taken advantage of in this way, he is required to pay only the going price. Here is an example:

"If someone is fleeing and found a ferry before him, and said to him, take a dinar [a very large sum] and ferry me across — [the ferryman] is entitled only to his [usual] price. [The passenger] can say, I was only kidding." (1)

In this case the ferryman customarily takes all customers for a fixed price; from his point of view there is no special reason to ask a higher price from this particular customer (who understandably is in unusual haste). If the customer asked for a special service, for example to row more quickly, then certainly the ferryman would be entitled to extra. But when the reason for the surcharge is solely that this particular customer is over a barrel, Jewish law doesn't sanction it.

Following this same logic, most taxi and limousine commissions have rules stating that taxi drivers are not allowed to charge extra for services that are not "extras", and if they do customers are required to pay only the regular price. (Sometimes they state that the customer is required to pay only what appears on the meter, but since the meter will be blank this would be a bit unfair.)

However, I also want to look at the taxi driver's point of view. We have to ask ourselves, why are tactics like this more prevalent in some times and places than in others?

In most areas the taxi fare is composed of three parts: a flat rate for getting a cab, a per-mile (or per-kilometer) charge, and a per-minute waiting charge. If these three charges are set fairly, and the number of cabs granted permits (medallions) is reasonable, then drivers will have no incentive to engage in this kind of trick. If the flat fee is high enough they would rather get you to your destination quickly and pick up someone else. But in some places the fee structure is poorly structured, encouraging mischief.

Sometimes the problem is even worse: permissible fares are just too low to allow cabbies to make an honest living. This is why the only cab drivers in some US cities are poor immigrants living on a few hundred dollars a week. In this case the ethical course of action for them is not to gouge customers but rather to lobby for a change in the rules or perhaps even go on strike. Still, it is possible to understand the cab driver's point of view.

The Talmud affirms that local authorities are entitled to regulate commerce: "And the townspeople are authorized to regulate weights and measures and wages, and to punish offenders". (2) However, this authority needs to be used in a responsible way that doesn't take unfair advantage of the regulated. Indeed, on the very next page of the Talmud we learn that this authority has to be subject to oversight to ensure that it is in the public interest.

So the simple answer to your question is, chances are local regulations allow you to passively consent to an unfair price and in the end pay only whatever the fair price is (you would have to estimate this). Even better would be to file a complaint, if you have the time and energy. This is the best course of action if you feel you are being taken advantage of.

However, if you have reason to believe that it is the cab driver who is being taken advantage of, by a fee structure that doesn't allow him to make an honest living, it may be that the best thing is just to give the driver a break and agree to the suggested price.

NOTE: The above analysis is predicated on the assumption that the flat price is meant to get a higher rate, not to evade taxes or charges. Even if you give in to the driver's threats, you should demand a receipt for the price you end up paying.

SOURCES: (1) Babylonian Talmud, Bava Kamma 116a (2) Babylonian Talmud, Bava Basra 8b

The Jewish Ethicist - Spending Your Kid's Money (by Rabbi Dr. Aher Meir)

Fri, 25 Jul 2008 17:49:57 GMT

The Jewish Ethicist - Spending Your Kid's Money

by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem

by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem

Gifts to children should be used only for their benefit.

Q. Relatives gave us presents for our new baby son. Some told us to put the money in a savings account for him, but we could really use the money right now.

A. Jewish law, like secular law, recognizes strict limits on the property rights of minor children. For example, the mishna states that if a young child finds a lost object, the object belongs not to the child but to the parent. The Talmud explains that the reason is that the parents should not resent the child's enrichment, at the same time that they are called upon to endure great expenses for his upbringing. (1) The commentators add that the same reasoning applies to gifts - normally, gifts given to children pass to the ownership of the parents, as long as the parent is the one supporting the child. (2)

It follows that if the family members mentioned the bank account as a mere recommendation and not as a stipulation, you may use the money for household needs.

However, the possibility also exists that the idea of putting the money in a bank account was an actual stipulation of the giver. Of course infants don't have bank accounts, but the idea would be to put the money in trust for the youngster, with you the parent as trustee. Jewish law equally recognizes the idea of a trustee for the assets of minor children; usually this is necessary if the parent is deceased, missing or incompetent, but there is no fundamental reason a parent can't be a trustee also. If indeed there was a stipulation, then the money doesn't belong to you.

However, even in this case there is some flexibility. A trustee for a minor child is bidden to disburse the money in the best interests of the child. Sometimes this even means spending money on the trustee; for example, the Talmud teaches that if the trustee needs to buy nice clothes in order to make a good impression on others when he is negotiating the interests of his charges, he can take the money from the trust. (3)

So if you "could really use money right now", as you say, for basic household expenses that are needed for the child as well, this should be acceptable even if the giver stipulated that the money should be in trust for the child.

It seems to me that whether the savings account idea was an actual stipulation or just a suggestion, the course of action should be the same. Ideally the money should be saved for the child, but if it is needed for vital household expenses that benefit the child, then the amount taken from the gift should be carefully recorded so that it may be returned to the child's name if and when the household financial situation stabilizes.

It would be ideal of course to get the explicit permission of the giver, but it may be quite awkward at times to second-guess gifts, not to mention revealing to strangers that your budgetary situation is strained.

SOURCES: (1) Babylonian Talmud Bava Metzia 12a-b. (2) Nimukei Yosef commentary there (3) Babylonian Talmud Gittin 52b

Send your queries about ethics in the workplace to jewishethicist@aish.com

To sponsor a column of the Jewish Ethicist, please click here.

The Jewish Ethicist presents some general principles of Jewish law. For specific questions and direct application, please consult a qualified Rabbi.

Author Biography:

See The Jewish Ethicist's Archives

JEWISH ETHICIST BOOK JUST PUBLISHED!
With expanded columns from the last four years, additional chapters, and a detailed index.

Aish.com readers and subscribers can obtain the book directly from Ktav publishers at a 10% discount from the list price.
Click here to order.

This article can also be read at: http://www.aish.com/societyWork/work/The_Jewish_Ethicist__-_Spending_Your_Kids_Money.asp

Busy work

Thu, 24 Jul 2008 18:49:11 GMT

Busy work

By Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Q: Sometimes an employee has pretty much finished his inbox, but if I send him home early or let him lounge I'm afraid his work ethic will suffer together with that of other workers. So usually I invent some task I don't really need, but I feel kind of guilty.

A: There is no doubt that giving busy work is ethically problematic. The Torah warns us not to give an indentured servant "crushing labor:"

"If your brother becomes impoverished and is sold to you, do not work him like a slave. . . This is because I brought them out of Egypt, and they are My slaves. Don't work him with crushing labor, fear God" (Leviticus 25:39-43).

The expression is reminiscent of the "crushing labor" imposed on the Hebrew slaves in Egypt. (Exodus 1:13-14.)

Interestingly, the sages of the Talmud understood this commandment to refer not to very difficult labor, but rather to demeaning labor such as busy work:

"Don't work him with rigor" — don't say to him, 'Warm the cup,' but really there is no need; "Cool the cup for me" but he doesn't need; "Hoe under the vine until I get back". (1)

And even though today there are no indentured servants, the ethical lesson is clear: Giving busy work can be demeaning and should be avoided. The great medieval explanation of the commandments, the Sefer HaChinuch (346), writes on this commandment that even though it is no longer binding, "it is proper for a person to heed this commandment even today, with the poor belonging to his household, and to take great care with it. And let him remember that wealth and poverty are a turning wheel in the world." (2)

However, your concerns about work ethic and morale are also echoed in our tradition. In the time of the Mishna, it was the responsibility of the man to provide income while the wife's responsibility was to take care of household production. If the wife is wealthy and can hire servants (in the time of the Mishna a dishwasher, clothes washer, etc. was a person, not a machine), then she is exempt from working herself, but the Mishna states that she should not be completely idle because "idleness leads to license." Likewise, a husband may not forbid his wife to work, because "idleness leads to ennui". (3)

Here is another example: What happens if a day laborer is taken on but it then becomes clear that the employer erred and there is actually no work for him to do? If it will be impossible for the worker to find another job that day, the employer has to take responsibility and pay for the worker's missed day. But since the worker also benefits since he gets a day off, the pay is less than the usual pay for a day's work. But the Talmud makes an exception for "the residents of [the town of] Machoza, who if they are idle become weakened." (4) Evidently the men of Machoza engaged in specialized physical work, and their work was also their workout. If they were idle, they couldn't just go home; perhaps they would have to spend the day in the gym (or whatever the 7th century equivalent was) to maintain their condition.

The Talmud also tells us that if one person "borrows" another's idle servant, the borrower is exempt since the master is better off if the servant is not idling. (5)

These three examples show that the employer may have a valid interest in keeping a worker busy: to keep him from ennui, to keep him involved in work to keep his ability current, and to keep his work ethic alive. It is true that none of the three examples deal with busy work per se, but all show that there is a benefit to work even above and beyond the actual fruits of the labor.

So I generally write that what is improper is gratuitous busy work, busy work that doesn't serve any valid workplace goal. However, even when the assignment is justified for the above reasons, the extent and nature should be commensurate with these goals. If for instance the worker has a special reason to want to leave early, so that his early departure won't in this case affect workplace morale, then there is no justification for keeping him busy until closing just because in general that is better for morale. If the object is to keep him sharp, like the "residents of Machoza", then find a task which actually fulfills this objective. If the object is to keep his motivation high, try to find a task which he enjoys and finds challenging, even if the results may not be so critical — for example, ask him to write up a business idea even if he is a lower-level employee.

Busy work can be demeaning and demoralizing, showing the worker that his time is worthless in the eyes of the employer. Yet idleness and early departures have their own corrosive effect on morale. To the extent employees have to be kept busy, tasks given to them should be tailored as closely as possible to their abilities and interests.

SOURCES: (1) Sifra Behar on Vayikra 25:43 (2) Chinuch 346. The exemption for an ordinary worker is in Sifra Behar on Vayikra 25:42. (3) Kesubos 59b (4) Bava Metzia 77a (5) Bava Metzia 97a

Lie to outsmart discriminator? (by Rabbi Dr Asher Meir)

Mon, 21 Jul 2008 04:33:40 GMT

Lie to outsmart discriminator?

By Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Q: A want ad states "Only city residents," but I live out of town. The demand for local residents is illegal and unfair. Can I give the address of a friend who lives in town?

A: Many jurisdictions have laws forbidding discrimination on the basis of characteristics which have no obvious relation to job performance. This began with race discrimination, but today extends to a wide variety of traits including sex, marital status, sexual preference, and sometimes even place of residence. You state that in your area the employer's demand is illegal. What rights does that give you?

King David proclaimed before G-d, "With a pure one, You show Yourself pure; but with a crooked one, You deal crookedly" (II Samuel 22:27). But there are limits to how far human beings may emulate this quality.

Let's start with the rules that apply for a fair employer who plays by the rules. In this case, we may not make misleading statements, nor even give a misleading impression on any trait of interest to the employer. We learn this from the following Talmudic story:

[The rabbinic sage] Shmuel said: It is forbidden to mislead others, even heathens. And this position of Shmuel was not stated explicitly but rather learned from a story. Shmuel once crossed in a ferry, and told his valet, satisfy the ferryman. He satisfied him, but he [Shmuel] was upset. Why was he upset? Abaye said, he gave him a non-kosher chicken as if it had been [kosherly] slaughtered." (1)

Non-Jews in Babylonia were not insistent on kosher meat, but they did have some appreciation when a Jew makes the gesture of giving them kosher meat; thus, this gesture must not be feigned. Even though the valet didn't explicitly state that the chicken was kosher, the ferryman had a reasonable expectation that it was; thus, the valet had an obligation to disabuse him of this expectation. By the same token, if an employer has some reasonable basis to value a particular quality, and has a reasonable basis to assume the applicant has it, it is forbidden to give him a false impression.

However, in your case the demand is unreasonable, even illegal. This case is also discussed in Jewish law.

In the section of the Mishna dealing with forbidden misleading behavior, we read, "It is forbidden to paint a person".(2) The Talmud asks, what does it mean to paint a person? The example given is a classic case of lying on one's resume. An elderly man who wanted to be acquired as a slave died his hair and beard black. After he was purchased, the dye was washed off and his poor master realized that he had bought an aged servant who was useless to him, yet whose livelihood he was still responsible for.

A few years ago a similar query reached the eminent authority Rabbi Moshe Feinstein in New York. He states that dying one's hair in order to appear younger to obtain a job is permissible "as long as there is no fraud, for example where he knows that he can work just like a younger person." (3) Rabbi Feinstein is referring to a case where the discrimination against an older person is unjustified, since he can work just as well as someone younger in all respects.

This however is still different than an outright lie. Many people dye their hair; the employer has no reason to assume that a dark-haired person is necessarily naturally dark. Even so, actively giving a false impression is generally forbidden. However, in this case the person is giving a true impression of his work ability, which is after all what the employer is ultimately interested in.

So if you are certain that you are able to get to work on time, and stay late if necessary, "just like a local person" (to paraphrase Rabbi Feinstein), it would be justifiable for you to take means that are occasionally used by ordinary persons. If it is not unusual for someone to give a mailing address in another city for convenience, or to have a phone number with a city dialing code, then you could put such an address or phone number on your resume.

However, it is not permissible to lie outright and state that you actually live in the city — just as Rabbi Feinstein didn't permit outright lying about the applicant's age. If the employer puts you on the spot with such a question, and you are unable to finesse it, I would recommend emphasizing that you have no problem getting to and from work on time, and reminding the employer that his questions are improperly (and illegally) intrusive.

SOURCES: (1) Babylonian Talmud, Chullin 94a (2) Babylonian Talmud, Bava Metzia 60a-b (3) Responsa Igros Moshe, Yoreh Deah II 61

The Jewish Ethicist - Saving for Your Children (by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir)

Thu, 03 Jul 2008 23:05:49 GMT

The Jewish Ethicist - Saving for Your Children
by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem

by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem

Children should be given a good start in life, but there is no need to provide for the forever.

Q. I think it's important to leave a legacy to my children. How much should I save towards this end?

A. The sages of the Talmud had a nuanced view of bequests. On the one hand, they strongly encouraged a person to leave the bulk of his or her assets to their family, and not give it all away to strangers or charity. But saving specifically for a legacy is also not encouraged. Children need to be given a good start in life; afterwards we should be most concerned about our spiritual legacy.

The following two stories from the Talmud seem to show a particularly dismissive attitude towards saving for grown children.

Shmuel said to Rabbi Yehudah: Sharp-witted one, grab and eat, grab and drink; for this world, whence we must depart, is like a wedding feast. Rav said to Rabbi Hamnuna: My son, if you have, enjoy; for in the nether world there is no enjoyment, and death will not wait. And if you say, I would leave it to my children? Who can promise provision in the nether world. People are like the plants of the field; these flourish and these whither. (1)

Today we might interpret this as saying, make sure you children know you expect them to be self-sufficient, and that they shouldn't rely on you for financial security. In the world of the Talmudic sages the message is a bit different; nobody has true financial security; rather, we fulfill our earthly responsibility to earn a living and trust in God that He will provide for us through our efforts. Likewise, we have confidence that God will provide for our children; however, with regard to them there is not even any responsibility to exert ourselves for them; they have the responsibility to exert themselves for themselves and their families.

The Talmud tells about the great sage Rabbi Shimon ben Lakish:

<BLOCKQUOTE[HIS way was to] go come, sit eat and drink [whatever earned]. . When passed away [to his children] a bushel of saffron. On this he cited the verse (Psalms 47:?), ?And they left their wealth to others?. (2)< blockquot>

However, there is also a very well-known story which seems to have the opposite message. "Choni the circle-maker", who in time of drought "threatened" God that he would not leave his circle until He brought rain, was later involved in the following incident:

One day he was traveling and saw a man planting a carob tree. He said to him, how long will it be until it bears fruit? He said, as long as seventy years. He said, are you certain you will live seventy years? He said, I found a world with carob trees; just as my fathers planted for me, so I plant for my children. (3)

(Rabbi Shimon Golan explains that Choni, who was so impatient that he impertinently demanded that God provide rain this instant, needed a reminder that God's providence looks over the long term, and not always the here and now.)

The message seems to be that it is appropriate to make sure that your children have productive assets that will enable them to make a living, rather than piling up possessions to leave them after you are gone. This theme is also evident in the Torah commandment of the jubilee, which requires that even if a person has sold a field, when the jubilee year comes around the field must be returned to the person or his heirs, thus providing them a minimal basis for their livelihood. (Leviticus chapter 25.) However, the main responsibility of providing children with a livelihood is when they are young, to give them a good start in life when they start a family. It is considered a mitzvah (the fulfillment of a Divine commandment) to provide a youngster with instruction in a trade so that he will be self-sufficient later on. (4)

At any rate, if a person does have assets when he passes away they should be given to the heirs. We find that many commandments of the Torah relate to the disposition of estates, and the following Talmudic story is also instructive:

When [Mar Ukva] died, he said: Bring me the accounting of my charity donations. He found that it amounted to seven thousand dinar. He said: My provisions are light and the way is long; he immediately gave away [to charity] half of his possessions. (5)

Although Mar Ukva felt that giving additional charity was a foremost priority, in order to increase his merit as he approached the World of Truth, note that he did not give away all his possessions. His legacy to his children was equally important to him. Indeed, the 16th century authority Rabbi Moshe Isserless writes that if a person leaves a vague will stating merely that his assets should be disposed "in the best way", they should be given to his children, for this is the best way to divide someone's estate. (6)

The Chasidic tradition has an interesting interpretation of this principle. God grants each person material resources in order to carry out his unique mission in life. However, our mission is so vast that a person cannot complete it in one lifetime. However, our children are meant to carry on our spiritual mission in this world. Thus it is logical that they should also inherit any wealth that is left over when we die. This is like the baton we pass our children in the relay of the generations. (7)

SOURCES: (1) Babylonian Talmud, Eiruvin 54a (2) Babylonian Talmud, Gittin 47a (3) Babylonian Talmud, Taanit 23a (4) Shulchan Arukh Orach Chaim 306:6 (5) Babylonian Talmud, Ketubot 67b. (6) Shulchan Arukh Choshen Mishpat 282 (7) Likutei Halachot (Breslav), laws of inheritance.

Send your queries about ethics in the workplace to jewishethicist@aish.com

To sponsor a column of the Jewish Ethicist, please click here.

The Jewish Ethicist presents some general principles of Jewish law. For specific questions and direct application, please consult a qualified Rabbi.

Author Biography:

See The Jewish Ethicist's Archives

JEWISH ETHICIST BOOK JUST PUBLISHED!
With expanded columns from the last four years, additional chapters, and a detailed index.

Aish.com readers and subscribers can obtain the book directly from Ktav publishers at a 10% discount from the list price.
Click here to order.

This article can also be read at: http://www.aish.com/societyWork/work/The_Jewish_Ethicist__-_Saving_for_Your_Children0.asp

Dipoma dilemma

Wed, 25 Jun 2008 17:23:05 GMT

Diploma dilemma

By Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Q: A job applicant reported a college degree, but we couldn't verify it with the college and the applicant gave some lame excuse. I know she is now applying for a job with a colleague. Should I tell him she's a liar?

A: Publicizing the misdeeds of others is a trying ethical decision because it upholds one important ethical responsibility while possibly violating another. You would like to protect your colleague from a bad experience with this candidate, yet also protect the privacy and good name of the candidate herself. This tension is expressed in the two sides of a single verse from the Torah: "Don't go about as a talebearer among your people; don't stand idly by the blood of your fellow" (Leviticus 19:16). The first half warns us against malicious gossip, which can harm someone's reputation or invade their privacy. Yet the second half warns us not to stand idly by when our fellow man faces loss or danger; we are bidden to take action to protect him.

The way we balance these two ethical duties is the subject of much discussion in our tradition; the book Chafetz Chaim by Rabbi Yisrael Meir HaKohen of Radin is in large measure devoted to precisely this task. According to Rabbi HaKohen, disclosing someone's wrongdoing is justified only when:

It is indispensable for a constructive purpose;

It will not cause disproportionate harm to the person being discussed.

If you had a firm basis to believe that your colleague was likely to hire this individual, and that hiring her presented a clear and present danger of loss, then the first condition would be fulfilled. If you were sure that your colleague's response would be limited to taking your information into account in the hiring decision, then the second condition would be fulfilled.

However, as you describe the case the first condition is doubtful. First of all, let us point out that you don't have definite proof that this applicant is lying. You have convincing evidence, which is certainly sufficient to justify your decision not to hire her. But this kind of inferential evidence would not be sufficient to go ahead and inform someone else, unless there was a really compelling reason to think that damage would result. But that doesn't seem likely in the case you describe. There is no particular reason to assume that this person will be hired; perhaps your colleague will carry out the same background check you did and come up with the same information. Even if the person is hired, lying on a resume is certainly a devious practice but does not guarantee the person will not be an effective worker; only recently we have a seen a number of high-profile cases of prominent and successful managers who lied on their resumes.

The second condition also needs to be examined. You have to know the person you are talking to. For example, if there is some danger that the information you provide would be publicized, or recorded where it could be used later, there is a good chance it could cause undeserved harm to the applicant. It is fair that she be turned down for a job if she can't back up her story, but it's not fair that she have her reputation ruined in the long term.

Under the circumstances, it would be acceptable to say nothing. Another possibility is to encourage your colleague to study the matter without expressing yourself in a clearly negative way. For example, you could say, "We didn't get around to verifying this applicant's credentials; it might be a good idea to contact the college." Again, this depends on your colleague. If this statement will cause him to do more thorough checking than usual, then it is constructive and not harmful. But if it will cause him to throw out the application summarily it might be excessive.

In any case, in this scenario stating that the applicant is "a liar" is certainly exaggerated and unjustified.

The Jewish Ethicist - Click Fraud (by Dr Rabbi Asher Meir)

Sun, 22 Jun 2008 16:49:22 GMT

The Jewish Ethicist - Click Fraud
by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem

by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem

I'd like to help out a struggling business. Can I click on his web ads in order to generate revenue for his site?

I',d like to help out a struggling business. Can I click on his web ads in order to generate revenue for his site?

Q. I'd like to help out a struggling business. Can I click on his web ads in order to generate revenue for his site?

A. Let's give some background to this question. In traditional advertising, the advertiser would pay a media outlet a fixed fee for a particular advertising space, whether a newspaper ad, billboard, or anything else. The entire burden of market research is on the advertiser to evaluate if the medium is reaching his customers. The internet created a new degree of accountability in advertising; the advertiser can know exactly how many people viewed the page; exactly how many people clicked on the ad, if it is one that leads to the advertiser's web page; and even how many clicks led to a sale. So now in additional the traditional "column inch" method, we have three new methods: pay-per-visit ("per eyeball"); pay per click (PPC); or pay per sale (commission).

The rub with the PPC method is that it can be gamed. Buying a product to generate a commission is both unusual and harmless; rates per visit are usually so low that making fake visits has little impact. But it is not hard to click repeatedly on an ad to generate meaningful revenue for the site or the advertising firm.

When this is done by or formally on behalf of the beneficiary it is a clear violation of the agreement and is known as click fraud. Click fraud is a crime in many places and grounds for a lawsuit anywhere. So if the business is asking or encouraging you to boost their PPC income by repeatedly clicking on ads, they are violating their agreement and the clicker is aiding and abetting them.

Your question relates to something more innocent: an unaffiliated third party who is simply interested in helping the business.

The practice you describes involves a number of ethical difficulties. One is your taking action to influence an arrangement between two other people where you have no direct interest in the matter. Jewish law takes a dim view of this practice. Here are two examples:

The Talmud states: "'And who has done wrong among his people' (Ezekiel 18:18) - Rav said, this refers to someone who comes with a power of attorney." (1) The commentators explain that this doesn't mean any person who uses a power of attorney to act on behalf of someone else; after all, that's what a power of attorney is for. It refers to the case where the litigant is perfectly capable of bringing suit on his own behalf, but for some reason is refraining or delaying. If some third party then swoops in and aggressively prosecutes a case in which he has no personal interest, he is involving himself in someone else's affairs. Rashi's commentary mentions the verse in Proverbs (26:17), "Like someone who grabs a dog by the ears, is a bystander who meddles in a dispute not his." (Perhaps this is the source for the phrase "Let sleeping dogs lie", meaning "don't revive a dormant feud".)

Another interesting parallel is the case of someone who sells a debt. In many cases, someone who sells a bill of indebtedness is still formally entitled to forgive the debt; at the time of the loan the debtor borrowed from one particular lender knowing his habits, and obtained an inalienable right to have the lender waive payment. However, someone who waives a debt after he has sold it is liable for the full amount. It's none of his business to intervene in a debt now involving two other people. (2)

All this applies only to repeated clicking. There is certainly nothing wrong with a site urging visitors to "Please support our site by taking an interest in the services of our advertisers." A single visit to the advertiser's site, even without any serious interest, is a fulfillment and not a frustration of the pay per click scheme. Ultimately all they are paying for is a chance to expose their services to the public, and by clicking once you give them that.

SOURCES: (1) Babylonian Talmud Shevuot 20a. (2) Babylonian Talmud Ketubot 86a.

Send your queries about ethics in the workplace to jewishethicist@aish.com

To sponsor a column of the Jewish Ethicist, please click here.

The Jewish Ethicist presents some general principles of Jewish law. For specific questions and direct application, please consult a qualified Rabbi.

Author Biography:

See The Jewish Ethicist's Archives

JEWISH ETHICIST BOOK JUST PUBLISHED!
With expanded columns from the last four years, additional chapters, and a detailed index.

Aish.com readers and subscribers can obtain the book directly from Ktav publishers at a 10% discount from the list price.
Click here to order.

This article can also be read at: http://www.aish.com/societyWork/work/The_Jewish_Ethicist__-_Click_Fraud1.asp

JWR TODAY: Wednesday, June 18, 2008‏

Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:51:46 GMT

JWR TODAY: Wednesday, June 18, 2008‏

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com/
The intersection of faith, culture and politics

Wednesday, June 18, 2008

*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:**:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*

WELCOME to the newsletter read by, among others, Washington power
brokers, editorial page editors, and society's most important and
influential citizenry. THEY'RE in great company!

**<>**<>**<>**<>****<>**<>**<>**<>**

[ J E W I S H L I V I N G ]

---> reality check
Still Dancing Around Jerusalem
By Jonathan Tobin

Obama's pandering and immediate retractions and his critics' jibes are
the latest installment of a cynical game

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0608/tobin061808.php3

---> ess, ess/ eat, eat!
The Kosher Gourmet
By Steve Petusevsky

Chilled fruit and vegetable soups

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/ess/ess_chilled_soups.php3

*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:**:-.,_,.-:*'``'*:-.,_,.-:*

[ D A I L Y I N S P I R A T I O N ]

NEW SERIES!

"Thank You/ Gratitude: Formulas, stories and insights" By Rabbi Zelig
Pliskin

Few of us realize that cultivating a genuine sense of gratitude will
impact on our happiness, our marriage, even on our sense of self-worth.
Being ungrateful for the many blessings in our lives distances us from
our Creator and spoils our relationships with other people

TODAY: Picture How Great You Will Feel When You Master Gratitude

http://jewishworldreview.com/inspiration/thank_you.php3

[ Godcast --- Uplifting Downloads ]

TODAY: Souls Need A Check Up? by Rabbi Mordechai Becher

Why don't we do for the spirit what we do for our cars, our teeth, our
many appliances and electronic devices? Actually the Jewish calendar has
built in inspection stations to tune up our spiritual vitality and
realign our connection with G-d

RUN TIME: 8 minutes

http://jewishworldreview.com/jwisdom/becher.php3

<^><^><^><^><^><^><^><^><^>

[ W O R T H 1 0 0 0 W O R D S ]

* The Wizard of Id
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/wiz/wiz.asp

* Andy Capp http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/a_capp/a_capp.asp

* 9 to 5 http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/9_to_5/9_to_5.asp

* Baloo http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/baloo/baloo.asp

* Bottom Liners
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/bottomliners/bottomliners.asp

* Bliss http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/bliss/bliss.asp

* The Born Loser
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/born_loser/born_loser.asp

* Bound and Gagged
http://jewishworldreview.com/strips/bound_and_gagged/b_and_g.asp

* Flo & Friends http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/flo/flo.asp

* Frank & Ernest
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/frank_and_ernest/frank_and_ernest.asp

* The Grizzwells
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/grizzwells/grizzwells.asp

* Herman http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/herman/herman.asp

* Mallard Filmore
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/mallard/2000/mallard1.asp

* Moderately Confused
http://jewishworldreview.com/strips/moderately_confused/mc.asp

* Momma http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/momma/momma.asp

* One Big Happy http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/obh/obh1.asp

* Prickly City
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/pc/prickly_city.asp

* The Other Coast http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/toc/toc.asp

* Shoe http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/shoe/shoe.asp

* State of the Union http://www.jewishworldreview.com/strips/sou/sou.asp

* Robert Arial http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/arial/arial1.asp

* Chuck Asay http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/asay/asay1.asp

* Chip Bok http://www.jewishworldreview.com/toons/bok/bok1.asp

* John Branch http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/branch/branch.asp

* John Cole http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/cole/cole1.asp

* John Deering http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/deering/deering1.asp

* Brian Duffy http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/duffy/duffy.asp

* Jake Fuller http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/fuller/fuller1.asp

* Joe Heller http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/heller/heller1.asp

* Jerry Holbert http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/holbert/holbert1.asp

* Steve Kelley
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/toons/kelley/skelley1.asp

* Jeff Koterba http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/koterba/koterba1.asp

* Chan Lowe http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/lowe/lowe.asp

* Dick Locher http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/locher/locher.asp

* Jeff Stahler http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/stahler/stahler1.asp

* Wayne Stayskal
http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/stayskal/stayskal1.asp

* Gary Varvel
http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/varvel/varvel1.asp

* Michael Ramirez
http://jewishworldreview.com/toons/ramirez/ramirez1.asp

* " "¤" "¤" "¤" "¤" "¤" "¤" "¤" "¤" "¤"

[ PoliticalMavens.com H I G H L I G H T S ]

* Marilyn Penn: In The Moment
http://politicalmavens.com/index.php/2008/06/17/in-the-moment/

* Monica Crowley: A Word from the Wise (?)
http://politicalmavens.com/index.php/2008/06/16/a-word-from-the-wise/

* Julia Gorin: More on the Inevitability of Greater Albania
http://politicalmavens.com/index.php/2008/06/14/more-on-the-inevitability-of-greater-albania/

* Heather Robinson: Guantanamo Detainees Granted More Protections Than
Any Enemy Combatants in U.S. History
http://politicalmavens.com/index.php/2008/06/14/granted-more-protections/

* Judith A. Klinghoffer: 'America Cannot Do A Damn Thing'
http://politicalmavens.com/index.php/2008/06/11/america-cannot-do-a-damn-thing/

<^><^><^><^><^><^><^><^><^>

[ T O D A Y I N H I S T O R Y ]

On this day in …

* 1586, English colonists sailed from Roanoke Island, N.C., after
failing to establish England's first permanent settlement in America

* 1778, American forces entered Philadelphia as the British withdrew
during the Revolutionary War

* 1812, the United States declared war against Britain

* 1815, Napoleon Bonaparte met his Waterloo as British and Prussian
troops defeated the French in Belgium

* 1858, the United States and China signed a treaty promoting "peace,
amity and commerce."

* 1928, Amelia Earhart became the first woman to fly across the Atlantic
Ocean as she completed a journey with pilots Wilmer Stultz and Louis
Gordon from Newfoundland to Wales in about 21 hours

* 1940, during World War II, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill
urged his countrymen to conduct themselves in a manner that would prompt
future generations to say, "This was their finest hour."

* 1948, the United Nations Commission on Human Rights finished drafting
an International Declaration of Human Rights

* 1979, President Carter and Soviet President Leonid I. Brezhnev signed
the SALT II strategic arms limitation treaty in Vienna

* 1983, astronaut Sally K. Ride became America's first woman in space as
she and four colleagues blasted off aboard the space shuttle Challenger

* 2002, a practitioner of that "religion of peace" detonated a
nail-studded bomb in a Jerusalem bus, killing 19 passengers and himself.
ALSO: President Bush sent to Congress his detailed proposal for creation
of a new Homeland Security Department. AND: Minnesota Gov. Jesse Ventura
announced he would not seek a second term.

<^><^><^><^><^><^><^><^><^>

[ I N S I G H T ]

* Tony Blankley: Democracy in decline
http://jewishworldreview.com/0608/blankley061808.php3

* Argus Hamilton skewers politics and contemporary "culture"
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0608/hamilton061808.php3

* From the Belle Tower by Celia Rivenbark: Perfect attendance award is
for little, viral losers
http://jewishworldreview.com/0608/rivenbark.php3

* Kathleen Parker: Calling all fathers --- and mothers, too (OUCH!)
http://jewishworldreview.com/kathleen/parker061808.php3

* John Stossel: Legalize All Drugs
http://jewishworldreview.com/0608/stossel061808.php3

* Jack Kelly: AWOL on ANWR
http://jewishworldreview.com/0608/jkelly061808.php3

* Paul Greenberg: On suing the enemy
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/greenberg061808.php3

* Richard Z. Chesnoff: Time To Put Out The Cigar, Ehud
http://jewishworldreview.com/richard/chesnoff061808.php3

* Ed Koch: As the world churns
http://jewishworldreview.com/0608/koch061808.php3

* Jonah Goldberg: Canada's thought police (IMPORTANT!)
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/jonah061808.php3

* Michelle Malkin: The Marines Vs. Haditha Smear Merchants
http://jewishworldreview.com/michelle/malkin061808.php3

* Dick Morris: McCain's defining issue
http://jewishworldreview.com/0608/morris061808.php3

* Walter Williams: Airport tyranny
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/williams061808.php3

* Thomas Sowell: Tim Russert (1950-2008)
http://jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell061808.php3

<^><^><^><^><^><^><^><^><^>

[ L I F E S T Y L E S ]

* GET A JOB! by Marty Nemko: Go From Great to Greatest — Ready to take
your career to the next level? These smart moves will propel you to the
top http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0608/nemko.php3

* Copycats clone company sites to scam customers
http://jewishworldreview.com/0608/cloned_sites.php3

* Dr. Peter H. Gott: Healing hemorrhoids with honey; Can a supplement
treat ringing in the ears?
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/gott1.asp

* Frugal Living by Sara Noel: Readers' wisdom
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/frugal_living.php3

* Bruce Williams on JWR: Serious injuries lead to insurance questions;
annuities; more
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/bruce1.asp

<^><^><^><^><^><^><^><^>

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com/

Want to drop us a note? You may send it to JWR's editor in chief:
mailto:blj@jewishworldreview.com EVERY letter is read and valued!

ENJOYING THIS NEWSLETTER? WE NEED YOUR HELP AND WE NEED IT NOW!

Please help us keep on keeping on. To make a tax-deductible
donation, please go to:
https://www.kerenyehoshuavyisroel.com/keren/jwr/donate.cfm

NOT COMFORTABLE DONATING ELECTRONICALLY?
We can arrange for you to send your gift through CONVENTIONAL MAIL.
Make your request by pressing reply.

© 2008, JewishWorldReview.com: Permission to distribute this newsletter
-- NOT articles' text -- is not only granted, it's also ENCOURAGED, as
is using the "e-mail a friend" option!

<^><^><^><^><^><^><^><^><^>

Impatient Patients

Fri, 13 Jun 2008 15:01:58 GMT

Impatient Patients

By Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | Q: I'm often stuck in the doctor's waiting room for hours! Doesn't he owe me something for my wasted time?

A: The Shulchan Aruch (authoritative Code of Jewish Law) states: "One who puts someone into a room and closes the door on him, preventing him from working, is liable for his lost time." This is certainly how the patient (or parent) feels — as if he or she is trapped in the doctor's office.

But realistically, a patient is not imprisoned in the waiting room, and it's not really fair to expect the practitioner to compensate you for your time — which after all you're not using for the doctor's benefit.

Still, so many readers asked this question that I am devoting a special column to how we can deal with this exasperating situation with dignity. Like most interpersonal dilemmas, the key to curing the waiting-room blues is mutual thoughtfulness.

Patients should keep in mind that there are many valid reasons for delays. Greed and sadism are not really the only factors at work! For one thing, the carelessness and missed appointments of patients themselves compels practitioners to overbook in order to keep hard at work at all times. When people do show up, long lines are the result. A better on-time record for patients will ultimately mean shorter waits at the doctor's.

Another reason is emergency calls. As one doctor exclaimed when I asked him about this problem, "How am I supposed to know when some woman is going to come in with chest pains?" We expect the physician to put his regular schedule aside when we have a medical emergency; we need to have patience for the extra wait this imposes on us when, thank G-d, there is no emergency.

One thing patients can do to shorten waits is to call ahead. If you have a two o'clock appointment, call the receptionist at one! If she says that the doctor is just now taking patients with 11:30 appointments, you know that you don't have to arrive any earlier that 3:15 or so. Of course doctors and receptionists should be forthcoming with this information.

Physicians should contribute their share too. If you really care about your patients' time, don't wait for them to call - have the receptionist call up patients and inform them that their appointment is delayed! If possible, allow them to reschedule. A small extra investment in receptionist hours can save your patients dozens of hours each day.

Practitioners can also adopt more effective scheduling practices. Dr. Leon Zacharowicz informs me that he has dramatically cut no-shows at his practice by not giving exact times for distant appointments. Instead, the patient is at first given a generous advance "window" in which to schedule; a few days beforehand the patient calls to set an exact time. (Example: in November the patient is told to call "in two months". Only at the beginning of January does the patient call back and set an exact time. Of course the practitioner has to learn to keep enough empty slots for patients who have been instructed to call.)

If emergencies are an ongoing part of a practice then the schedule should partially reflect this. (Probably obstetricians and cardiologists have more of these than dermatologists.)

The best advice of all is: take it easy! Learn to take advantage of the waiting time. It is ironic that the harried parent who is chafing at the long line at the pediatrician is the same parent who complains that he or she just doesn't have enough time to spend with the children. And the busy executive who is apoplectic about the wait at the periodontist is the same person who complains that he or she has no time for Torah learning.

A final note: for anyone who thinks that long waits at the doctor are something new, here is an excerpt from a letter written eight hundred years ago by Maimonides, who was not only one of the greatest scholars and leaders in Jewish history but also a prominent physician: "I do not return to Fostat until the afternoon. Then I am famished, but I find the antechambers filled with people, Jews and Gentiles, nobles and common people, judges and policemen, friends and enemies — a mixed multitude who await the time of my return. . . . [I] ask them to bear with me while I take some light refreshment, the only meal I eat in twenty-four hours. Then I go to attend to my patients and write prescriptions and directions for their ailments. Patients go in and out until nightfall and sometimes even, as the Torah is my faith, until two hours or more into the night."

SOURCES: (1) Shulchan Aruch, Choshen Mishpat 420:11; Maimonides' letter to Shmuel Ibn Tibbon

The Jewish Ethicist - New Kid in Town (by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir)

Wed, 11 Jun 2008 21:57:58 GMT

The Jewish Ethicist - New Kid in Town
by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem

by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir, Business Ethics Center of Jerusalem

Should new residents get the same welfare benefits as veterans?

Q. Recently our state has been flooded with impoverished people from out of state. These people never paid in to our welfare system, and they probably never will. Are we obligated to support them alongside veteran residents?

A. Supporting the poor is a cardinal religious responsibility in Judaism. The Torah commands us, "When there will be a needy person from one of your brethren, in one of your gates in your land which the Lord your God gives you, don't harden your heart and don't shut your hand from your needy brother" (Deuteronomy 15:7).

However, since resources may be limited for this commandment, there is a need for establishing priorities. These are learned from another verse: "When you lend money to My people, to the poor among you, don't be unto him like a creditor" (Exodus 22:24). The sages of the Talmud inferred from the verse "to my people" that "My people and a foreigner, My people have priority," from the words "to the poor" that the poor have precedence (for a loan) over the wealthy; and from the words "among you" they learned, "the poor of your city and the poor of another city, the poor of your city have precedence." (1)

So there is no question that your state's welfare budget shouldn't be sent to poor people in other states, or other countries. But what about people from other places who are visitors or immigrants to your area?

According to Jewish law, townspeople are responsible for the basic needs of everyone in their town, but there is a different level of responsibility towards for visitors than there is towards residents. Here is an adaptive translation of the relevant Talmudic passage: "Food parcels are given out every day, funds are distributed from week to week. Food parcels are given [even] to the poor of the world, funds to the poor of that city." (2)

In other words, no one is left to go hungry, but the needs of visitors are provided only from day to day. This would correspond to some kind of emergency aid or perhaps a soup kitchen. The charity fund, which was usually given in money and provided for a longer period, is distributed only to residents.

However, among town residents no distinction is made between veteran residents and new arrivals. Once a person is a resident of a particular area, then his neighbors become responsible for his welfare. In general Jewish law assumes that after 30 days a person is considered a resident, but that's only a rule of thumb. If it's clear that a new resident has come to stay he becomes a resident right away, both in terms of his obligation to give charity (or pay taxes) and his entitlement to receive it. Likewise if a person is clearly just on an extended visit he can keep visitor status for a longer time.

It is interesting to note that in a 1999 decision, the US Supreme Court ruled that states may not discriminate between recent immigrants and veteran residents in giving welfare benefits. Even the judges who opposed the decision agreed in principal, but felt that a limited period of reduced eligibility could be viewed as a "good-faith residency requirement" to ensure the person really has moved, much like the 30-day period established by Jewish law.

The fact that people did not pay in is highly relevant for a social insurance program like Social Security or unemployment benefits. Such programs do routinely give variable benefits depending on how much and how long people paid in. But when it comes to people's most basic needs the community needs to provide alike for new and old.

SOURCES: (1) Babylonian Talmud Bava Metzia 71a. (2) Babylonian Talmud Bava Batra 8b.

Send your queries about ethics in the workplace to jewishethicist@aish.com

To sponsor a column of the Jewish Ethicist, please click here.

The Jewish Ethicist presents some general principles of Jewish law. For specific questions and direct application, please consult a qualified Rabbi.

Author Biography:

See The Jewish Ethicist's Archives

JEWISH ETHICIST BOOK JUST PUBLISHED!
With expanded columns from the last four years, additional chapters, and a detailed index.

Aish.com readers and subscribers can obtain the book directly from Ktav publishers at a 10% discount from the list price.
Click here to order.

This article can also be read at: http://www.aish.com/societyWork/work/The_Jewish_Ethicist__-_New_Kid_in_Town1.asp

Avraham's One Village - JEWISH & benei Noach's ONE VILLAGE ***Barukh haba***: The JEWISH Ethicist (JWR)

Keeping Down with the Joneses (by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir)

The Jewish Ethicist - White Lies

Fair fares

The Jewish Ethicist - Spending Your Kid's Money (by Rabbi Dr. Aher Meir)

Busy work

Lie to outsmart discriminator? (by Rabbi Dr Asher Meir)

The Jewish Ethicist - Saving for Your Children (by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir)

Dipoma dilemma

The Jewish Ethicist - Click Fraud (by Dr Rabbi Asher Meir)

JWR TODAY: Wednesday, June 18, 2008‏

Impatient Patients

The Jewish Ethicist - New Kid in Town (by Rabbi Dr. Asher Meir)

Avraham's One Village - JEWISH & benei Noach's ONE VILLAGE Barukh haba: The JEWISH Ethicist (JWR)