Print this Article
Can a woman give Tzeddaka without her husband’s consent?
Adapted from an article by Dayan Yitzchak Basser שליט”א
Women throughout history have been exemplary spenders. The Torah praises the generosity of the women of the Dor HaMidbar, who – imbued with the enthusiastic spirit of giving that pervaded the Jewish nation during the construction of the Mishkan – spared no expense and donated even their brass mirrors and precious jewelry.
The Seforno explains the verse[1] “ויבואו האנשים על הנשים” – “the men came with the women [to donate to the Mishkan]”, that the reason why the men accompanied their wives to the donation stations was in order to verify that they consent to their spouse’s donations.
Obviously, this is not always the case. A wife may wish to give Tzeddaka without her husband’s consent, which gives rise to the discussion of whether such a contribution is valid according to Halacha or not. We must further inquire, what would be the Halacha if a woman is married to a miserly husband who expressly objects to giving Tzeddaka: may she give a portion of the household income to charity?
A Woman Donating Her Husband’s Money
The Rosh in his responsa[2] was asked about a woman who was appointed by her husband to be in charge of the household finances. This woman had pledged a certain amount of money to Tzeddaka. When the husband learned of this he insisted that she should not honor her pledge. Was she permitted to donate the money against her husband’s wishes?
The Rosh responded that although the Gemara[3] states that it is permitted to accept a minor donation to Tzeddaka from a married woman, that is only if the husband did not specifically indicate whether or not he consents to the donation. In such a case we may assume that the husband would consent. However, if the husband explicitly objects to the donation then we certainly may not accept any money from the woman. In this instance, although the husband placed his wife in charge of the household finances, he may still revoke this authority at any time, and thus accepting the money would not be permitted. The Shulhan Aruch[4] quotes this opinion as the Halacha.
The Miserly Husband
The Noda B’Yehuda[5] was asked about a woman whose husband was a miser, yet she gave to charity in an amount befitting their wealth. The question was whether the town’s Tzeddaka officers were permitted to accept her gifts.
In his response, the Noda B’Yehuda emphatically prohibits taking such money. Notwithstanding the fact that a Bet Din – a rabbinic court – may compel someone to fulfill their obligation to give Tzeddaka in an amount commensurate to his wealth, that law applies only to a qualified tribunal. A wife may not – on her own accord – perform the duties assigned to Dayanim. Furthermore, even a qualified Bet Din would not have the authority to take money from a miser without his knowledge. Rather, they must first inform him that they will be collecting his obligation to charity from his property against his will. Certainly, a woman has no right to donate her husband’s money without his knowledge.
Modern Times
The Aruch HaShulhan[6] notes, that the ruling of the Noda B’Yehuda only applies in the times when Bet Din had the ability to compel someone to give their fair share of Tzeddaka. However, in contemporary times, when Bet Din lacks the wherewithal to do so, a woman is permitted to be the one to force her husband to give, by doing so without his knowledge. However, he emphasizes that this is only permitted based on the directive of the local Rav, who can determine what amount is indeed obligatory in accordance with the person’s wealth.
The Shevet Halevi[7] disagrees with this ruling, referencing the Halacha that even when Bet Din forces a person to give Tzeddaka, they may only take his property in his presence, with his knowledge[8]. Surely a woman – even if she were to act on the directive of the Rav – would have no more authority than that of a Bet Din.
When the Woman is the Breadwinner
The above discussion is in the case that the husband earns the household money, and the wife wishes to donate some of it to Tzeddaka. The Poskim also discuss what would be the Halacha if the woman is the primary breadwinner. Does she then have the right to give whatever money she chooses to Tzeddaka?
The Halacha is that a man is obligated to support his wife financially. In exchange for this support, our Sages instituted that whatever money the woman earns belongs to her husband (the wife still has the option to waive her right to be supported by her husband, in which case she retains whatever she earns)[9]. We must now inquire, what if the husband does not actually support her, would he still be entitled to his wife’s earnings?
This question is addressed by the Maharit[10]. He distinguishes between whether the woman supports her husband from the outset of the marriage, and where the husband initially supports his wife, and only later she becomes the breadwinner. In the former case, the wife definitely retains the money she earns, whereas in the latter case – there is a debate among the Aharonim as to the Maharit’s intention. Some maintain that he issues no ruling and remains in doubt whether the money belongs to the husband or the wife, while others maintain that in such a case the Maharit would rule that it belongs to the husband[11]].
The Hazon Ish[12] rules that even if the husband supported his wife only at the very beginning of the marriage, he still retains ownership of all her subsequent income. Since he was providing for her when she earned her first paycheck, he acquired that paycheck. When he uses that money to continue supporting her, he has provided her from money that belongs to him. That entitles him to acquire the next paycheck. This cycle repeats itself, causing the husband to perpetually acquire his wife’s income! [It is noteworthy that there is some debate among the Aharonim in the event that the woman’s parents support the couple[13]]
Another consideration is that even if the money does belong to her, there is further disagreement among the Aharonim whether she may keep it outright, or whether it must be invested in a manner that enables the husband to benefit from the profits that accrue[14]. If that would be the case, then the wife would not be able to donate the money without her husband’s consent, even if she is the breadwinner.
In summary: if the wife is the primary breadwinner, there is a debate as to the status of the household money, and according to some it may depend on the arrangement at the outset of the marriage.
On a final note, the Shevet Halevi[15] quotes the Maharshal who rules that although a woman is generally only able to make a minor donation to Tzeddaka – if she is the breadwinner she may assume that her husband gives her permission to make any donation she wants. Even if technically the money is his, since if he were to protest his wife’s generosity she may discontinue earning money, we assume that he gives her permission to donate and spend the money as she sees fit.
Sources:
[1] שמות ל”ה, כ”ב
[2] תשובות הרא”ש כלל י”ג סי’ י”א
[3] ב”ק קי”ט ע”א
[4] יו”ד סי’ רמח ס”ד
[5] מהדו”ת יו”ד סי’ קנ”ח
[6]יו”ד סי’ רמח ס”ק י”א וי”ד
[7] ח”ה סי’ קלב אות ז’
[8] יו”ד סי’ רמ”ח ס”ק א’
[9] כתובות נ”ח ע”ב
[10] ח”ב, חו”מ סי’ ס”ז
[11] ע’ פתחי חושן ח”ט פ”י אות כ”א
[12] אהע”ז סי’ ע’ ס”ק ו’
[13] ע’ שו”ת גבעת שאול סי’ ל”ג ושו”ת מהרש”ם ח”ד סי’ צ”ב
[14] ע’ אג”מ אה”ע ח”א סי’ ק”ו ע”פ חי’ רעק”א אהע”ז סי’ פ’ סק”א, ובית מאיר שם שחולק עליו
[15] ח”ב סי’ קי”ח