The recently passed legislation tying programs like SNAP and Medicaid to work requirements has sparked debate about the ethical responsibilities of both society and the individual. From a Jewish perspective, the question touches on two core values: our communal obligation to support the vulnerable and the duty of self-sufficiency. So how does Judaism balance these ideals?

Before addressing the issue, it’s important to clarify: this is not a commentary on specific legislation, which requires a nuanced understanding of policy implications, effectiveness, and unintended consequences. Rather, we aim to explore the broader relevant moral and halachic principles that Judaism offers—principles that may help inform policy discussions, even if they don’t dictate particular political outcomes.

Tzedakah Is a Duty, Not a Kindness

Judaism does not view giving to the needy as an act of generosity—it is an obligation. Everything we possess is seen as a trust from G‑d, to be used responsibly. Some of what we are given is meant for our own use; the rest is designated to help others. As the Talmudic maxim teaches: Kol Yisrael areivim zeh lazeh—“All Jews are responsible for one another.”1

Judaism thus rejects the idea of “every man for himself.” When we encounter someone in need, it’s a sign of Divine providence that we’re meant to respond—whether with financial assistance, practical support, or even a kind word. We are, in effect, G‑d’s “bankers,” entrusted with managing His resources. If we misuse this trust, those resources may simply be transferred to someone else.

But What About People Who Refuse to Help Themselves?

Of course, just as we are obligated to help others, we are equally responsible for ourselves. Jewish law recognizes limits as to who qualifies for support.

For example, someone who is still wealthy but refuses to spend on basic needs out of stinginess is not entitled to tzedakah.2 If their status is unclear, we err on the side of compassion and help respectfully.3 And if the person’s life is in danger due to neglect—even from their own stinginess—we must act to save them.4

If a person has truly lost their wealth—even due to poor choices or negligence—they are eligible for assistance. Even someone with assets may receive help if selling them immediately would result in a significant loss.5

Still, Sefer Chassidim (siman 845) warns that if someone’s poverty stems from destructive behaviors, like gambling, and charity would enable those habits to continue, one should withhold support. The goal of tzedakah is to uplift, not enable.6

The Obligation to Work

A key question in the modern discussion is: What about someone who could work but chooses not to?

Rabbi Samuel ben Moses de Medina, known as Maharashdam, rules that if a person has no money but can reasonably earn a living through work, trade, or craftsmanship, they are not entitled to charity. If every able-bodied person chose to rely on communal funds rather than work, the system would collapse.7

Some, like Rabbi Shlomo Efrayim Luntshitz, in his Torah commentary Keli Yakar, point to the Torah obligations for helping to unload or reload a burdened animal. The Torah specifies, “with him.”8 The Talmud explains that if the owner refuses to assist, one is exempt from helping.9

Rabbi Luntshitz (Keli Yakar) extends this to charity: help is owed only when the recipient is making an effort. Those who are able to work but refuse, while demanding full support, are not entitled to communal aid. If a person genuinely tries and still cannot make ends meet, however, the community is obligated to assist—generously and repeatedly.

Others point out that at the end of the day, there may be a difference between helping out an animal or helping a person, and one may very well still be obligated to help an individual regardless of whether they could have helped themselves.10

In any event, if the individual has dependents who cannot support themselves, we are obligated to help the family, even if the parent’s situation stems from their own neglect. “Children shall not die for the sins of the father,”11 the Torah promises.12

That said, great care must be taken before labeling someone “lazy.” Illness, emotional hardship, lack of opportunity, or skill mismatches may all prevent a person from working. Each case must be assessed with sensitivity and the presumption of innocence. Moreover, we are cautioned against speaking harshly to the poor or questioning their dignity.

The Rebbe: Support and Self-Sufficiency

Perhaps no figure embodied this balance more than the Rebbe, Rabbi Menachem M. Schneerson, of righteous memory. On one hand, the Rebbe spoke strongly against creating a culture of dependency. He encouraged individuals to be active, resourceful, and responsible. He critiqued so-called “poverty experts” who seemed more interested in analyzing poverty than helping people escape it.

At the same time, the Rebbe played a pivotal role in shaping one of the most impactful food assistance programs in U.S. history.

When Congresswoman Shirley Chisholm, who represented an urban district in Brooklyn, was frustrated by her appointment to the Agriculture Committee—seemingly sidelined from the issues she cared about—the Rebbe encouraged her to see the opportunity. America had surplus food, and millions of people were hungry. “What a blessing G‑d has given you!” he told her. “Use this gift to feed hungry people.”

Inspired, Chisholm worked with Senator Bob Dole to expand the Food Stamp Program and later helped establish WIC (Women, Infants, and Children), a nutrition program that now helps over 8 million people each month.

Reflecting on her career, Chisholm credited the Rebbe:

“I owe this because a rabbi who is an optimist taught me that what you may think is a challenge is a gift from G‑d... And if poor babies have milk, and poor children have food, it’s because this rabbi in Crown Heights had vision.”

So where does this all leave us?

Judaism demands that we support those in need with compassion and dignity, but it also values personal responsibility and self-reliance. Both ideals are not only compatible—they are inseparable. The goal of tzedakah is not merely to give, but to restore independence and dignity. Policies, too, should strive to balance these values, lifting the needy while empowering them to stand on their own.