[Avodah] R Asher Weiss

[Arie Folger]

RSMashbaum asked:
> > See SA OC 696:4 (talking about Mishloach Manos): "V'im ein lo, machlif im
> > chaveiro, zeh sholeich l'zeh seudaso v'zeh sholeiach l'zeh seudaso k'dei
> > l'kayem umishloach manos ish l'rei'eihu." Not a complete parallel, but
> > there is a similarity...
>
> Can anyone see why this is mentioned (by Chazal)  by mishloah manot, but
> not by matanot l'evyomin?

Obvious: the purpose of MM is to increase friendship, which is the result of 
showing how much you think about your friends. It is, in a sense, a mere 
token. However, 'Hazal legislated that MM be related to the Purim meal, and 
hence it should be substantive. Since with the subterfuge mentioned in the 
SA, the spirit of MM is still maintained, pulling such a trick is permissible 
when circumstances demand it.

Matanot leevyonim is however tzedaqah. The purpose is helping the poor, not 
just being nice to them. It is about giving them that, which they can't 
afford at all (the Purim meal, but also taking care of their other needs). 
Hence, the subterfuge would not be in the spirit of this obligation, and 
therefore wouldn't work.

BTW, this matter is a classical case of haaramah in halakhah, some of which is 
permissible (hetter 'isqa, mekhirat 'hametz), some of which isn't 
(hetter 'isqa to a poor man with no expected revenues).

PS: this thread should get a more meaningful name. There is no way Yankel 
Internet User would understand this thread is meaningful for him when he is 
researching fulfilling mitzvot in unusual ways when the standard ways aren't 
fully available (I need a better name, but this comment will allow search 
engines to index the topic a bit, a tiny bit, better).
KT,
-- 
Arie Folger
http://www.ariefolger.googlepages.com