Why does the Torah insert the (otherwise superfluous) word "u'Matah Yado Imach"?
Moshav Zekenim: To preclude someone who has departed from the way of Torah, 1 whom one is not obligated to support.
Oznayim la'Torah #1: To obligate one to help his fellow-Jew even if he himself his own property is also unstable, as Chazal said in Gitin, 7a 'If a person's Parnasan is strained, he should give away part of it as Tzedakah and, on Amud Beis, 'Even a poor man is obligated to give Tzedakah'.
Oznayim la'Torah #2: To be sure you cannot help ll the Aniyim, but one who is 'with you', in your town, whom you recognize ? Hashem is sinalling to you that He has given the poor man's Parnasah into your hands and He expects you to respond. 2
Moshav Zekenim: Like we find "ve'Nikleh Achicha le'Einecha" in Ki Seitzei, Devarim 25:3, from which the Chachamim learned that someone who sinned is only called "Achicha" after he has received Malkos, which is why someone who transgressed be'Meizid may not testify until after he received Malkos.
See Oznayim la'Torah, DH 'u'Matah Yado Imach' #2.
Since the Torah writes "u'Matah Yado Imach", why does need to insert "Ki Yamuch Achicha"?
What are the implications of the words "ve'Hechezakta bo"?
Rashi: It means that one should support him, to prevent him from falling any further. 1
Seforno: It means that if he has fallen, one should raise him by offering him a loan.
Moshav Zekenim: The Hif'il (causative form) of "Vechezachta bo" 2 teaches us that one should support a poor man even if he has already helped him four or five times.
What are the connotations of "Ger ve'Toshav"?
Rashi (based on the Sifra) and Targum Onkelos: "Ger" refers to a Ger Tzedek; "Toshav", to a Ger Toshav (a Nochri who has undertaken not to worship idols - and to observe the other six Mitzvos B'nei No'ach, and whom one is obligated to sustain - Rashi in Avodah Zarah, 20a), even though he still eats Neveilos. 1
Ramban and Ba'al ha'Turim ha'Aruch (citing Targum Onkelos 2 ) and Targum Yonasan 3 : They are verbs, and the entire Pasuk is actually discussing "Achicha" ? you shall support him, and he shall dwell, settle and live with you. 4
See Torah Temimah, note 186.
Their text of Onkelos reads 'Yidor ve'Yitosav'. However, all our editions of Onkelos read 'Dayar ve'Tosav', which concurs with Rashi's text. (I gathered this from Perushim on Onkelos - Minei Targima, Me'at Tzari, Ohev Ger and Maskil Doresh - P.F).
According to this explanation, there is no Mitzvah to support a Ger Toshav. It also resolves four difficulties with Rashi's explanation - (See answer #1): 1. Why is "va'Chai" singular? 2. Why is the Esnachta under "Imach", and not under "Bo" - seeing as until "Bo" the Torah is discussing "Achicha"). 3. Why is a Ger Toshav - from whom one may take Ribis - mentioned here? 4. Why does the Torah need to mention a Ger, who is included in "Achicha" (Tosfos in Bava Metzi'a, 111b DH 'mi'Gercha'. See also question 25:35:151 ? PF).
See Yayin ha'Tov and Na'ar Yonasan.
Why does the Torah insert the (otherwise uperfluous) words "Vachai Imach"?
Sifra: To teach us that one is not obligated to support him if, by doing so, one causes him to leave the path of Torah and Mitzvos. 1
Presumably, it is then even forbidden to support him.
QUESTIONS ON RASHI
Rashi writes that one must support even a Ger Toshav. If so, all the more so a Yisrael and a Ger Tzedek - So why did the Torah need to insert "Achicha" and "Ger"?
