THE THREE DIN-TORAHS
Long ago, about 250 years ago, an infamous miser died, and no one wanted to pay their respects at the funeral. The Rabbi of the town was the beloved Rabbi Levi Yitzchak of Berditchev. And when he personally led the funeral procession, the community trickled out behind him. After the funeral, the Rabbi explained that he had presided over three court cases (in the town’s Jewish court) which had convinced him of this “miser’s” hidden generosity.
The Case of the Wine Merchant: A wine merchant came to town with a purse filled with other people’s money to purchase wine for them. When he came to the market he noticed his purse was missing. He searched but to no avail. He was ruined man! He fainted in despair. Even when revived, he was distraught and desperate. The news traveled around town. This miserly rich man filled up a purse with a 1,000 coins (the amount said to be lost) and rushed to the merchant, saying he found the money. The merchant was overjoyed and thankful. The news spread through the town that the money had been found. The theif who took the purse was perplexed. How could this money have been found, if he himself took the money? Then he realized, how a most generous man must have given his own money. Filled with remorse he begged the rich man to take the money. The rich man refused, and when the case came to court, the Rabbi sided with the rich man.
The Case of the Phantom Paycheck: Mr X. wasn’t doing too well in town and he wasn’t particularly fond of his wife. So he told her he was going abroad to seek new business opportunities and would be back in a few years. She asked him how she would support herself and the children while he was gone. He assured her that she would be able to recieve his weekly paycheck at the office of the rich man. His work abroad was for that firm, he explained. Off he went, and on Thursday she went to the office to collect the paycheck. The secretary looked through all the accounting books and found no record of such an arrangement. The woman was terribly upset, and the ruckus brought out the boss. He assessed the situation in an instant, and apologized to the woman, telling the secretary to have her included on all future payrolls. This went on for a couple of years, until the husband returned. He didn’t expect to see much surviving at home, and was shocked to see how well-fed and clothed the children were. When he found out that the rich man had been providing her with steady income, he rushed over and started to explain himself. This was all a terrible misunderstanding, he said. I now have the money to repay you. But the rich man refused payment. When the case came before the Rabbi, he again ruled: Nothing in the books can make the rich man take your money.
The Case of the Guarantor: A fellow out on his luck came to the rich man for a loan. When asked for a guarantor, he said he had none. But the rich man insisted on a guarantor. So pressed, he said: The Almighty G-d is my guarantor. The rich man accepted that, and let him the money. Time elapsed, and the rich man called about the loan. The poor fellow said he was putting the money together. The next week the rich man called again, and still no luck. Then the rich man stopped calling. A few months later the guy got teh money together and went over to the rich man. The rich man refused the money, saying that the guarantor paid up already. Guarantor? What Guarantor? The Almighty, said the rich man. An unexpected business windfall was sufficient payment. Again they went off to the Rabbi, who ruled in favor of the rich man.
These 3 cases convinced Rabbi Levi Yitzchak that this man was far from miserly, only he preferred to give charity in clever, discreet ways.
As a add-on to the story, I thought of a little insight to the differences in these 3 cases.
Think about the three cases for a minute. #1 with the wine merchant and the lost purse, that was a crises. The man was ill, distraught and clearly needed the money right away. So the rich man stepped up to the situation.
#2 in the case of the Phantom Paycheck was also a crises, look she was a deserted lonely woman, but there’s an added twist here. This was no one shot deal as with case #1 and the wine merchant, in this Phantom Paycheck, his contribution would have to be ongoing and consistent. Payroll after payroll, indefinitely!
Now, case #3, the case of the Guarantor wasn’t a crises, it was an ordinary loan!
These cases reflect human nature when it comes to responding to a need. Many people rush to respond to a crises. The urgency speaks to them. But quite a few drop out when the crises is an ongoing long-term condition. Less people respond when there is no crisis, when there’s less urgency. This supposed miser responded with generosity – even when it was long-term and even when there was no crisis.
Most of us aren’t wealthy, at least right now, and can’t commit to a Phantom Paycheck or covering someone’s whole financial loss. But each of us, in our own way, can try to be there for others in times of crisis or need, even if the need be an ongoing one. And we also ought to be there for each other, even if there is no crisis, even if we just can back someone up, or be there for them, it can be very meaningful and appreciated.