By Rabbi Gil Student

In honor of Rabbi Jonathan Sacks’ sixth yahrtzeit, 20 Cheshvan 5787, which falls on Shabbos Parashas Vayeira, I would like to explore his argument for the highest priority charity and support it from the responsa literature. In 1991, Rabbi Sacks took office as the Chief Rabbi. It was a time when all the talk in the diaspora Jewish community was about continuity, given the high rates of intermarriage. The first book that Rabbi Sacks published in office was titled Will We Have Jewish Grandchildren? (Vallentine Mitchell, 1994) and it packs a punch. Not only intermarriage but also late marriage, low fertility rates and general indifference threaten the continuity of the Jewish people.

I. Continuity and Education

Rabbi Sacks contrasts that uncontested view of the general Jewish community with the revival and growth of what he calls traditional (i.e. Orthodox) Jewry. That community responded to the Holocaust by focusing on education, raising disciples. The broader Jewish community responded differently: “They built Holocaust museums and monuments, funded chairs and periodicals, wrote Holocaust theology and sponsored visits to Auschwitz. A generation of young Jews, those who grew up in the 1970s and 1980s, has been liberally exposed to literature, films and lectures about the Holocaust, and it is this generation which is choosing to marry out of Judaism at the rate of one in two” (Will We Have Jewish Grandchildren, 2024 edition, p. 46). The antidote to the problem, Rabbi Sacks’ solution to Jewish continuity, is Jewish education. This book accompanied a massive campaign to increase the number of Jewish schools in the UK and the number of Jewish children in those schools. Rabbi Sacks argues in the book that education must be our highest priority. He demonstrates this with a decision that he faced in 1993. “About a year ago, I received an invitation to lunch with the Prime Minister at Chequers. At the same time I received an invitation to take part in the opening ceremony of a new Jewish school in London. Both events were on the same day, at roughly the same time. I could not attend both. Which took precedence?… On that occasion, I regretfully declined the Prime Minister’s invitation and opened the school” (ibid., pp. 52-53).

Rabbi Sacks proceeds to quote from communal enactments of communities devastated by the Chmielnicki massacres in seventeenth century Poland who had to rebuild. We have records of their communal ordinances, including their prioritizing communal funds for education (ibid., pp. 54-55). We see Rabbi Sacks’ argument for the primacy of education emerge in responsa regarding specific cases of halachic uncertainty.

II. Charity of the Deceased

In mid-sixteenth century Turkey, a wealthy man passed away without leaving instructions for the disposal of his charity funds. Local rabbis allocated some money to his poor brother, but his sons objected that they should inherit and distribute it. The question was brought to the Maharshdam, Rav Shmuel Di Medina of Salonica (Responsa Maharshdam, Yoreh De’ah, no. 158).

Maharshdam says that we must determine the deceased’s intentions. Since these are unknown, the money should go to the highest level of charity. Rav Ya’akov Ben Asher (14th cen., Germany-Spain) quotes his father, Rav Asher (known as the Rosh), as saying that a town may reallocate to a study hall money that was donated to a synagogue or cemetery (Tur, Yoreh De’ah 259). Maharshdam argues that if money designated for a synagogue can support Torah study, certainly money whose intended purpose is unknown can. Giving it to a lesser charity risks misusing the donation.

Which Torah study organization takes priority? Maharshdam quotes the Gemara (Shabbos 119b) that the world survives because of the Torah study of children, who due to their age are free of responsibility from sin. Additionally, more people doing a mitzvah together has greater merit than fewer people. Therefore, concludes Maharshdam, the money should be given to the highest charity — a large elementary school.

Similarly, Rav Ephraim Navon (18th cen., Turkey) addresses a related question. A man donated money to establish in a small town a part-time kollel of ten men studying Torah. However, the town could not find ten men willing to enroll. The donor wished to change the endowment from a kollel to a full-time elementary school teacher. Rav Navon permitted this reallocation for technical reasons but adds that this new purpose is higher than the original because the Torah study of children sustains the world (Machaneh Ephraim, Hilchos Tzedakah, no. 11).

III. G-d’s Place

However, Rav Raphael Yosef Chazzan (19th cen., Turkey-Israel) challenges this argument. He quotes the Gemara (Berachos 8a) which states that nowadays G-d only has the four cubits of halachah. Therefore, He loves the distinguished gates of halachah more than all the synagogues and other study halls. According to this passage, high-level Torah study merits higher priority than any other study. This seems to contradict the earlier passage, which gives priority to children’s Torah study.

This question gains greater strength when we note that the priority of high-level Torah has practical implications. Rambam (Mishneh Torah, Hilchos Tefillah 8:3) rules, based on the above Gemara, that it is better to pray in a study hall than a synagogue. Shulchan Aruch (Orach Chaim 90:18) rules likewise. Since the two passages seem to contradict and the latter is quoted authoritatively, Rav Chazzan argues, it would seem that an elementary school should not be given priority over adult Torah study (Ma’archei Lev, vol. 1 no. 25).

Rav Chaim Palaggi (19th cen., Turkey) favors the interpretation of Rav Chazzan. However, he struggles with the many authorities who side with the Maharshdam. Rather than taking a minority view against the majority, in an impressive act of intellectual humility Rav Palaggi adopts a middle position that gives due weight to the majority with which he disagrees (Chaim Be-Yad, nos. 64-65).

IV. Jewish Behavior

Perhaps a reconciliation of the two passages lies in the Rambam’s interpretation. Rav Chazzan and Rav Palaggi follow Maharsha’s interpretation that the Gemara is praising high-level study of halachah. In the introduction to his commentary to the Mishnah (ed. Kafach, vol. 1, p. 21), Rambam sees the passage about the four cubits of halachah as a general declaration about the uniqueness of true loyalty to the letter and spirit of halachah. Synagogues and study halls may be full of people studying Torah but not enough of those students apply these teachings properly to develop a faithful Torah personality. Only someone who internalizes the messages of halachah can reach out fully to G-d. If so, the distinguished gates of halachah may overlap with elementary schools. Schools that teach proper character traits, that teach Jewish values and behaviors, seem to qualify as remaining within the four cubits of halachah, whether for adults or children. An elementary school that trains its students to follow Jewish tradition, to embrace and internalize the messages of Judaism regarding behavior and thought, serves in the same capacity as a high-level kollel. Both types of institutions are distinguished gates of halachah. Elementary schools have the additional benefit of purity, discussed above.

This understanding conforms with Rabbi Sacks’ emphasis on Jewish education. His concern extended beyond the teaching of information. Jewish schools are necessary because they form a generation whose knowledge of Judaism shapes its conduct and commitments.

Rabbi Sacks’ vision of Jewish continuity through Jewish education is another example of traditional wisdom that is so desperately needed in the modern world. His argument to prioritize communal funding is not only halachically correct but also life-saving advice for the Jewish community. In this post-October 7 world, we see the non-Orthodox leadership waking up to this absolute necessity of prioritizing Jewish education. Once again, Rabbi Sacks was both traditional and prescient.