In Parshat Mishpatim, Shmot 22:24 we read: “Im Kesef Talve et Ami…”, “If (or when) you lend my people money, the poor man with you, you shall not behave towards him as a creditor, you shall not charge him interest.”

Does the word “im” mean “if” or “when”? Is it an obligation to lend money or is it a nice thing to do?

Rambam’s opinion is that lending money to the poor is one of the 613 mitzvot and that it is more important than giving charity since the suffering of the one who is reduced to the humiliation of openly begging is not to be compared with the one who is too proud to do so but waits for a helping hand.

Rashi quotes a parable from Sifra to show that lending is a better way to help those in need than giving charity: “Don’t let him fall so that it will be difficult to raise him up again, but lend him a helping hand, just when his means begin to fail him. To what may this be compared? It can be compared to a burden on a donkey’s back. While it is still on the donkey, one person can grab it and fix it, but once it falls to the ground, even five people can’t lift it back again.”

Rambam and Rashi both imply that “im’ means “when”.

Ibn Ezra and Sefer Hasidim say that “im” means “if”- in certain circumstances we may not be obligated to lend money:

Ibn Ezra explains that it is only an obligation for those who have the money to lend.

Sefer Hasidim explains situations where the duty of lending does not apply:

If you are dealing with a rogue who never pays his debts or one who has plenty of money but pretends to be poor; or one who has no money but has food. But he would rather do business and keep his children short of food. Or one who drinks but leaves his children without food…In such case better to give him the food and not lend him even if you put him to shame by providing him food as charity every week. Since he is dishonest he deserves to be shamed. If you lend or give money to such a type of person he will squander it and it will never be used to keep the home going. He should give directly to his wife and children if they are decent people.

We see from here that in both lending money and giving Tzedaka we have to use our judgment.

Walking down the streets of Jerusalem one often sees people begging for money. We don’t really know who is poor and who is not. What we do know is that if we see that the person is smoking (which is often the case) then it would be better to give them food rather than money since if we give them food we know that they will have something to eat while if we give them money, they may just use it to buy more cigarettes.

Unfortunately, dishonest people can ruin future loans for other people who really need them. If a person accepts money, even though he doesn’t need it for basic food and clothing and the lender finds out, he may not be in a rush to lend to another person who may really need it. Before lending, it pays for us to do our research and see if the person needs the money for necessities or if they need it to cover their cable TV and cell phone bills.

Let’s hope that the day will come where the economy will turn around and people won’t have to rely on loans or charity but will earn enough to feed and clothe their families respectfully.