What is the meaning in this 兼？ My text is talking about charity. It contains this old saying:

(儒家提出)“穷则独善其身，达则兼济天下。”

(The Confucian School suggests)"When you are poor you can only help yourself,
when you become rich you can (simultaneously 兼??) help the whole world."

What is 兼 here? Is 兼济 1 word, something like 'multi-help'? (Not that that word exists in English， at least not yet!)
I think:
独： 独自， alone (but it has to become 'only' in English.)
达： 发达， get rich
兼： 兼顾， do more than 1 thing at a time
济： maybe 救济： help the needy
窮則獨善其身﹒達則兼善天下


the original verse should use the character "善", which is from 孟子　盡心上

the verse "窮則獨善其身﹒達則兼濟天下", using the character "濟" is a deviation.

the earliest one i found, is from the letter "與元九書", written by 白樂天, which was in 白氏長慶集　卷四十五.


  古人云﹒窮則獨善其身﹒達則兼濟天下﹒僕雖不肖﹒常師此語﹒大丈夫所守者道﹒所待者時﹒
  
  時之來也﹒為雲龍﹒為風鵬﹒勃然突然﹒陳力以出﹒
  
  時之不來也﹒為霧豹﹒為冥鴻﹒寂兮寥兮﹒奉身而退
  
  進退出處﹒何往而不自得哉﹒
  
  故僕志在兼濟﹒行在獨善﹒奉而始終之則為道﹒言而發明之則為詩﹒謂之諷諭詩﹒兼濟之志也﹒謂之閒適詩﹒獨善之義也﹒故覽僕詩﹒知僕之道焉


first of all, it's not talking about charity. then, such claim, implying it's confucianism; is falseness.

intepreting "達" as rich, "濟" as "help the needy", "relieve" is, imo, imaginative, and severely derived from orthodox.   

fortunately, the character "兼" is correctly interpreted.

edited.

let's examine the version of mr 白.

a manly man (大丈夫) behave (所守) according to the proper way (道), wait (所待) for [his] times (時).

when his times do not come (時之不來也), it's 窮; then (則), he make good (善 ) himself (其身) alone (獨)

when his times comes (時之來也), it's 達; which means he become high official, then (則), his governing accords to the proper way, brings goodness (濟) to all people in the nations (天下)

兼 (both), is used, because, in such state "達", he do goodness to himself, and, to others peoples.

imo, though the character "善" was replaced by "濟", mr 白's usage was similar to mr 孟's, without great difference.

classical text were interpreted, remarked through out history; so, it's better to use these remarks to understand the classical text. 

that's culture heritage.

now, my rant, related to the comments:

1　he know the orthodox meaning, and ask for a government post from the communist.

2　he does not know the orthodox meaning, use current usage of character meanings, mislead other by implying it's confucianism.

it's no virtue, or cheating :(

last, a metaphor:

"dog", "green", "hot" &amp; "house" are words taught in kindergarten, everyone know the meaning.

now, a "rich" man claims that "greenhouse" is a house with green color, "hotdog" is a dog that is hot.

how do you response?