How much is enough (charity)? (organizations, married, difference, choice)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
but explanation is given, and makes perfect sense to those who tithe.
to those who do not tithe, well they do not understand or implement. And yes it does vary, it is a range so sometimes less sometimes more. To say it is not, is to lack understanding in this area.
tithing of money yes actual money, is very much "a spiritual thing" to use phrase from post above. It is a physical act done for "spiritual reasons"
a person has free choice in this, whether or not to tithe, just like they do in every other place in life.
i can understand if someone does not tithe and it does not upset me.
however it baffles me when there are people who do NOT tithe, but take issue and get upset that the practice of tithing exists and is alive and well and put into practice.
I know, I shall not get far with this but I feel, you missed the point, of what was said. Any calculated action is of the head, not of the heart. I know, you know the difference.
I'll respectfully bow out of the further comment. It is absolutely great you do what you do.
Y'varechecha Adonai v'yishmerecha
PS. there are many ways to serve without calculated giving
What about it? Do you think that is going to make some sort of impression on me? See, I don't have to listen to you, although I am. I do that. I read posts, even ones I don't agree with. I respond however I see fit. Because I can do that. I am free from trying to make sense of it all, just like you are trying to make sense out of nonsense.
Some of us find other paths. There is no need to proselytize. We've all heard it. So, how was your weather today?
What about it? Do you think that is going to make some sort of impression on me? See, I don't have to listen to you, although I am. I do that. I read posts, even ones I don't agree with. I respond however I see fit. Because I can do that. I am free from trying to make sense of it all, just like you are trying to make sense out of nonsense.
Some of us find other paths. There is no need to proselytize. We've all heard it. So, how was your weather today?
Thank you. It's been very hot. Hope, yours is pleasant and refreshing
I know, I shall not get far with this but I feel, you missed the point, of what was said. Any calculated action is of the head, not of the heart. I know, you know the difference.
I'll respectfully bow out of the further comment. It is absolutely great you do what you do.
Y'varechecha Adonai v'yishmerecha
PS. there are many ways to serve without calculated giving
ukrkoz, there are many things we agree on and this is one. There has been no real evaluation of the impact of charity and government policies to alleviate poverty which is why they continue to destroy families and worsen the conditions. The intentions are good but the results are destructive, IMO.
Problem with charity and handouts is, they tend to spoil the recipient. What is hard worked for, is valued. What is given, is not valued by the most with few exemptions. Good example is totally failing welfare system.
Charity is a very very fine art. As it is, also, an open gate for fraud and embezzlement.
Don't give fish
teach, how to catch fish.
Maybe watch South Park Night of The Walking Homeless. Very on spot and up to date.
How in the world do you know how many of the 550,000 homeless on any given day (in the US) don't value the charity they've receive from others?
And if you don't think that standing on a street corner, begging for change in 110 degree heat or freezing cold isn't 'hard work', I suggest you try it for a day or two.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ukrkoz
Blind handouts may cause more harm, than good, as donator never knows.
And because a donator "doesn't know", they automatically assume the worst in ALL because of the few?
Quote:
From the kindness of your heart, you give a panhandler 5 bucks, he goes gets high and kills someone. Happens. Cruel example, but how many times have we seen stories, when society put its soul into helping someone and grew a murderer?
Also, I hate to do this to you, my dear Tzaphkiel, the Leader of Erelim, but a lot of charity is pride. I strongly, very strongly encourage everyone, interested in this topic, to read up on what OSHO said about dogooders.
True charity is not giving. True charity is educating. Raring the entire country so that its citizens become self conscious and then, they simply can not do any wrong and, really do not need any charity. Of course, such a country will be destroyed by its good willing neighbors way before it achieves such goal.
You're doing the same thing that so many other people do; you're taking an exception and treating it like a rule. Statistically, MOST panhandlers don't use drugs, nor do they have a propensity to go out and randomly murder someone, if they DO use drugs.
In fact, there is more crime committed against the homeless (including murder) than from the homeless.
MOST homeless people are not chronically homeless. They're transitionally homeless. That is, they've had some kind of catastrophe that rendered them homeless temporarily. The average amount of time that the transitionally homeless remain homeless is about 2.5 months to 4 months.
And during that 2.5 to 4 months they're homeless, SOME of them do panhandle. They're not doing it to 'get rich'; they're doing it to get by. Again, statistically, most homeless people spend the money they receive on FOOD and HYGIENE; not drugs and alcohol. They may also spend the money on transportation, getting a library card so they can use their computer/printer to look for jobs, amenities such as socks, toothpaste, shaving cream, etc.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ukrkoz
So the true charity, the pure one, is the one, that is done, as a natural inclination, without any attachment to it, without any thought of it and definitely without any thought of the others. It is like breathing. You breath and you do not even notice it. You have to concentrate on it, to notice it. If you do not, it is simply living. We never really pay attention to how we "live", mmm? Organs function, muscles act, body moves, life goes on, all this is naturally unnoticed.
So is true charity. [b]The very moment you notice it - a worm of sattiva, virtuous pride, enters your heart. Oh, I am such a great benefactor to someone/humanity. Mmm?
So what is this thread about?
Sorry, but not everyone who gives feels as you describe. Some people give, and their heart breaks because they can't give MORE at the moment. Is that 'pride' too?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ukrkoz
And, here's an example.
" I feel very sorry for someone". To feel sorry for someone, you must feel higher of yourself, mmm? It can't be any other way, as, otherwise, you do not feel sorry for....
And this is the sin of pride.
NO! You can feel sorry for someone and 'raise them UP' to your level without thinking highly of yourself. You can feel sorry for someone as a way of empathy and compassion; not of condescending.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ukrkoz
Originally Posted by Tzaphkiel View Post
post above makes an excellent point. regarding bold above, yes bingo. i agree.
although there is for me also (in the religion i follow) a formula that instructs how much to give also, which is a % of my income. This is not optional, it is required. It is an obligation and responsibility.
Commenting only on first part of post above, leaving second part for others to discuss.
Ah, the almighty CALCULATION. The very moment, something is calculated, it is of the mind, of the intellect. It's the "headed" thing, not the spiritual thing.
Though I do understand that, some time back in history, someone calculated that yey much must be given. Without explanation, where the number came from, why it is not less, or more.
Well, a tax is a tax, no matter, how convoluted.
With all due respects.
Quote:
Originally Posted by ukrkoz
I know, I shall not get far with this but I feel, you missed the point, of what was said. Any calculated action is of the head, not of the heart. I know, you know the difference.
I'll respectfully bow out of the further comment. It is absolutely great you do what you do.
Y'varechecha Adonai v'yishmerecha
PS. there are many ways to serve without calculated giving
What's bolded is soooo NOT true.
It seems that many people who give (to panhandlers, for example) do so on an impulse. That is, they may first feel a sense of empathy/compassion. THEN, they may 'calculate' ("Hmm...I have a twenty, two fives and a few one's. I need some one's for tolls, and about $17 for groceries. I'll give the homeless guy a $5)
The idea that someone may calculate what they can afford to give, DOES NOT lessen the act of giving. We are supposed to be generous with what we give, but not to the point were we become strapped for cash ourselves.
That person could have just as easily given $1 instead of $5. And while giving that $5 to the homeless guy, they may be thinking, "He may not be able to do too much with a $1. At least with $5, he'll be able to eat a meal today." Nothing wrong with THAT kind of 'calculation'.
Sorry Ukrkoz, but you seem to be stuck in a mindset that many other people believe as fact (about the homeless).
The following link just might enlighten you a bit. (about a 1-2 minute read)
How in the world do you know how many of the 550,000 homeless on any given day (in the US) don't value the charity they've receive from others?
And if you don't think that standing on a street corner, begging for change in 110 degree heat or freezing cold isn't 'hard work', I suggest you try it for a day or two.
And because a donator "doesn't know", they automatically assume the worst in ALL because of the few?
You're doing the same thing that so many other people do; you're taking an exception and treating it like a rule. Statistically, MOST panhandlers don't use drugs, nor do they have a propensity to go out and randomly murder someone, if they DO use drugs.
In fact, there is more crime committed against the homeless (including murder) than from the homeless.
MOST homeless people are not chronically homeless. They're transitionally homeless. That is, they've had some kind of catastrophe that rendered them homeless temporarily. The average amount of time that the transitionally homeless remain homeless is about 2.5 months to 4 months.
And during that 2.5 to 4 months they're homeless, SOME of them do panhandle. They're not doing it to 'get rich'; they're doing it to get by. Again, statistically, most homeless people spend the money they receive on FOOD and HYGIENE; not drugs and alcohol. They may also spend the money on transportation, getting a library card so they can use their computer/printer to look for jobs, amenities such as socks, toothpaste, shaving cream, etc.
Sorry, but not everyone who gives feels as you describe. Some people give, and their heart breaks because they can't give MORE at the moment. Is that 'pride' too?
NO! You can feel sorry for someone and 'raise them UP' to your level without thinking highly of yourself. You can feel sorry for someone as a way of empathy and compassion; not of condescending.
What's bolded is soooo NOT true.
It seems that many people who give (to panhandlers, for example) do so on an impulse. That is, they may first feel a sense of empathy/compassion. THEN, they may 'calculate' ("Hmm...I have a twenty, two fives and a few one's. I need some one's for tolls, and about $17 for groceries. I'll give the homeless guy a $5)
The idea that someone may calculate what they can afford to give, DOES NOT lessen the act of giving. We are supposed to be generous with what we give, but not to the point were we become strapped for cash ourselves.
That person could have just as easily given $1 instead of $5. And while giving that $5 to the homeless guy, they may be thinking, "He may not be able to do too much with a $1. At least with $5, he'll be able to eat a meal today." Nothing wrong with THAT kind of 'calculation'.
Sorry Ukrkoz, but you seem to be stuck in a mindset that many other people believe as fact (about the homeless).
The following link just might enlighten you a bit. (about a 1-2 minute read)
It's a common thing in the US especially to assume that everyone who needs help is a victim of ignorance and/or learned helplessness and the very help they need is the source of perpetuation their problems. Meanwhile here in reality, my experience has been that people (with a few edge case exceptions, as they always exist) prefer independence and self-sufficiency, but they exist in a system that does not offer them the opportunity that those in a position to give tend to take for granted. As a white, anglo-saxon Protestant heterosexual male, I have had a pretty easy time of it in life economically, and it'd be easy to assume that the same modest efforts that scored me a six figure income and professional reputation would do for anyone. But I know for a fact that women, minorities, and people who are trying to lift themselves out of poverty face both conscious and unconscious bias that I never have and never will.
Aside from all that, there are people who suffer from various maladies that can thrive with appropriate accommodations that often don't exist if there are a dozen able people willing to accept the same job offer. In other cases, they are too ill for even that to matter, and they simply need health care and social support to exist with at least minimal dignity. Providing this is not making them lazy, it is often the difference between surviving, or not.
It's a common thing in the US especially to assume that everyone who needs help is a victim of ignorance and/or learned helplessness and the very help they need is the source of perpetuation their problems. Meanwhile here in reality, my experience has been that people (with a few edge case exceptions, as they always exist) prefer independence and self-sufficiency, but they exist in a system that does not offer them the opportunity that those in a position to give tend to take for granted. As a white, anglo-saxon Protestant heterosexual male, I have had a pretty easy time of it in life economically, and it'd be easy to assume that the same modest efforts that scored me a six figure income and professional reputation would do for anyone. But I know for a fact that women, minorities, and people who are trying to lift themselves out of poverty face both conscious and unconscious bias that I never have and never will.
Aside from all that, there are people who suffer from various maladies that can thrive with appropriate accommodations that often don't exist if there are a dozen able people willing to accept the same job offer. In other cases, they are too ill for even that to matter, and they simply need health care and social support to exist with at least minimal dignity. Providing this is not making them lazy, it is often the difference between surviving, or not.
AS you indicate, it is a very complex phenomenon that does not lend itself to simple solutions like "throwing money at it." Our spiritual sensibilities place us directly in the midst of the abyss between Darwin's "survival of the fittest" and Herbert Specenr's "Social Darwinism." The diverse composition of human abilities and afflictions inevitably includes those who are the "poor who will always be with us."
Striking an acceptable balance in dealing with that inevitability is like trying to unravel the Gordian knot. Sadly, too little effort is made to assess the ACTUAL impact of the solutions we DO implement, IMO. That is why there are so many unintended negative consequences of our existing efforts.
And if you don't think that standing on a street corner, begging for change in 110 degree heat or freezing cold isn't 'hard work', I suggest you try it for a day or two. ...
But those are exactly the people I am not willing to give money to because they are most often chronically homeless. I don't want my money to solve a problem for a few hours. I want to contribute money that is more likely to lead to some long-term improvement; which is why I call it an investment.
I've told these before, but:
When I was living in the D.C. area there were always some homeless near some of the subway stations.
One had a sign that said something like "Tools stolen. Please give so I can go back to work"; he was there with that same message for well over 5 years.
Another always had a sign that said "Will work for food". So one year when I had broken my shoulder, I went to hire him to rake leaves and offered him much more than the hourly wage. I was told by him to "Go **** myself".
Other times I've given people money and they went an bought booze.
I think it's a very questionable situation when we may be helping them abuse themselves without any real change.
I was thinking and will try to explain, though it might offend some.
There are many ways to look at a human being and one of them is - by heart and mind.
Every human has an allegorical heart and allegorical mind. Without discussing what and why, let's presume that heart is that of the soul and of the spirit.
Mind a is that of the physical and, originally, was a tool for the soul/heart to be in the physical body and the physical world.
Per its nature, mind is analyzing, calculating, solving, theorizing, investigating, discussing, exploring etc etc in that plane.
Heart is in The Light and is natural as it is guided by The Light.
In a human, mind has taken over and, only in few, heart can be felt and, in even fewer, listened to.
Yet, being a servant to the heart originally, mind still does it best to "please it" in a manner of speech. It's like a poorly trained dog, that took over its master, awhile still knowing, that it is its master.
For mind, it is natural to measure, investigate, calculate everything.
Heart, through the voice of conscience, signals its love to others.
Mind, being what it is, offers a solution. While being, what it is, it only can operate in the terms of the physical. Nature objects in it variety. I'd say, sensual terms, as sensual is of the physical. And mind comes up with - only as example:
"Let's figure out a reasonable amount and start giving it to the others". Mind says - and justifies - it will be good thing to do. Or, give food. Give goods. Give shelter. No matter what's the option, it is always related to physical. And, when done, mind sends a " message upstairs" - see, we've done good. Justifier mind kicks in and justifies it. Heart is lulled into the conviction that it had done good.
See, mind always acts only in the realm of the material and physical. Its definition of good or bad is in material too. Whatever form of doing good mind chooses, it is always of the material nature. A bird is a bird and a fish is a fish. What is natural to the heart, is not natural to the mind, and vice versa. But, because mind, headed thinking, totally dominates human thinking, what is natural to the mind, appears to be natural to a human. Some may, deep inside, have that faint feeling that something is off but, most just go along with it.
That said, a question arises. What then is a true spiritual giving? And I have only one answer. It is my answer, as I can't find anything else.
Unconditional love. As the true love gives everything, without asking anything in exchange. It gives everything, without any attachment to the act of giving, as it is natural, like breathing. It gives everything without later pride or, any other emotion attached to it. It simply melts one in the others. It's saint.
I was thinking and will try to explain, though it might offend some.
There are many ways to look at a human being and one of them is - by heart and mind.
Every human has an allegorical heart and allegorical mind. Without discussing what and why, let's presume that heart is that of the soul and of the spirit.
Mind a is that of the physical and, originally, was a tool for the soul/heart to be in the physical body and the physical world.
Per its nature, mind is analyzing, calculating, solving, theorizing, investigating, discussing, exploring etc etc in that plane.
Heart is in The Light and is natural as it is guided by The Light.
In a human, mind has taken over and, only in few, heart can be felt and, in even fewer, listened to.
Yet, being a servant to the heart originally, mind still does it best to "please it" in a manner of speech. It's like a poorly trained dog, that took over its master, awhile still knowing, that it is its master.
For mind, it is natural to measure, investigate, calculate everything.
Heart, through the voice of conscience, signals its love to others.
Mind, being what it is, offers a solution. While being, what it is, it only can operate in the terms of the physical. Nature objects in it variety. I'd say, sensual terms, as sensual is of the physical. And mind comes up with - only as example:
"Let's figure out a reasonable amount and start giving it to the others". Mind says - and justifies - it will be good thing to do. Or, give food. Give goods. Give shelter. No matter what's the option, it is always related to physical. And, when done, mind sends a " message upstairs" - see, we've done good. Justifier mind kicks in and justifies it. Heart is lulled into the conviction that it had done good.
See, mind always acts only in the realm of the material and physical. Its definition of good or bad is in material too. Whatever form of doing good mind chooses, it is always of the material nature. A bird is a bird and a fish is a fish. What is natural to the heart, is not natural to the mind, and vice versa. But, because mind, headed thinking, totally dominates human thinking, what is natural to the mind, appears to be natural to a human. Some may, deep inside, have that faint feeling that something is off but, most just go along with it.
That said, a question arises. What then is a true spiritual giving? And I have only one answer. It is my answer, as I can't find anything else.
Unconditional love. As the true love gives everything, without asking anything in exchange. It gives everything, without any attachment to the act of giving, as it is natural, like breathing. It gives everything without later pride or, any other emotion attached to it. It simply melts one in the others. It's saint.
Namaste
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
