• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Poor and Homelessness

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member
What does your religion say about helping those that are less fortunate than oneself?

Is it recommended that you give to another who is in need?

I ask because modern politics oft seems divided on helping the poor, or just pretending they don't exist or should go away.

According to the Havamal, we have these verses on helping and being kind to others:

2.
Hail, ye Givers! a guest is come;
say! where shall he sit within?
Much pressed is he who fain on the hearth
would seek for warmth and weal.

3.
He hath need of fire, who now is come,
numbed with cold to the knee;
food and clothing the wanderer craves
who has fared o'er the rimy fell.

4.
He craves for water, who comes for refreshment,
drying and friendly bidding,
marks of good will, fair fame if 'tis won,
and welcome once and again.

30.
Let no man be held as a laughing-stock,
though he come as guest for a meal:
wise enough seem many while they sit dry-skinned
and are not put to proof.


Be content with what you have:

36.
One's own house is best, though small it may be;
each man is master at home;
though he have but two goats and a bark-thatched hut
'tis better than craving a boon.

37.
One's own house is best, though small it may be,
each man is master at home;
with a bleeding heart will he beg, who must,
his meat at every meal.



In regards to handicaps/disability:
70.
More blest are the living than the lifeless,
'tis the living who come by the cow;
I saw the hearth-fire burn in the rich man's hall
and himself lying dead at the door.

71.
The lame can ride horse, the handless drive cattle,
the deaf one can fight and prevail,
'tis happier for the blind than for him on the bale-fire,
but no man hath care for a corpse.

-------

134.
I counsel thee, Stray-Singer, accept my counsels,
they will be thy boon if thou obey'st them,
they will work thy weal if thou win'st them:
growl not at guests, nor drive them from the gate
but show thyself gentle to the poor.

135.
Mighty is the bar to be moved away
for the entering in of all.
Shower thy wealth, or men shall wish thee
every ill in thy limbs.
 

Sand Dancer

Currently catless
What does your religion say about helping those that are less fortunate than oneself?

Is it recommended that you give to another who is in need?

I ask because modern politics oft seems divided on helping the poor, or just pretending they don't exist or should go away.

It's a given. Ministries are made to help many groups, especially the poor. Missions are focused more on helping than proselytizing.
 

Exaltist Ethan

Bridging the Gap Between Believers and Skeptics
The Baha'i Faith has a 19% tithe on certain individuals on their disposable income and then uses that money to raise awareness of the religion and to help the poor, regardless if they are Baha'i or not. (Cultural Omnism/Exaltism/Pantheism/Syntheism/etc are theological and religious positions and not technically religious organizations that help people.)
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
What does your religion say about helping those that are less fortunate than oneself?

Is it recommended that you give to another who is in need?

It's more than recommended. Those that have surplus money or time and embody the spirit of "All Are One" love helping our brothers and sisters in need.
 

syo

Well-Known Member
I am suspicious of people in general. I want to help, but it's a gamble. If I were homeless I'd be infinite paranoid.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Direct donation or charity is a slapdash "solution."
Better to eliminate the causes of poverty and homelessness. Such multi-step solutions are not so intuitive as direct intervention, however, and seem to be lost on GOP conservatives.
 

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member
Direct donation or charity is a slapdash "solution."
Better to eliminate the causes of poverty and homelessness. Such multi-step solutions are not so intuitive as direct intervention, however, and seem to be lost on GOP conservatives.

But does this mean that direct personal intervention is pointless overall?

I would think not.
 

PureX

Veteran Member
It's an overwhelming problem that no one person can resolve. So I think we need to enter the question with great humility. We can only do what we can, and that without sacrificing our own lives and well-being except in some extreme instances. There is no one way, or one rule, or one solution.
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
Look to a time when the problem didn't exist, then consider what changes led to it.
Repeal the changes.
 

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member
Look to a time when the problem didn't exist, then consider what changes led to it.
Repeal the changes.

So... Agriculture.

Repeal agriculture.

Good luck.

Affluence creates poverty. The original affluent society of haves vs have-nots, can be traced to the first agrarian societies.
 

Sand Dancer

Currently catless
Depends on where and when methinks.

Also, what religion are we talking about here, from.your POV?

Catholicism. Each church is different. Some offer more than others. The Second Vatican Council changed a lot, making it more about serving the poor and less about rigid dogma. Of course not all churches agree with 'Vatican II."
 

Valjean

Veteran Member
Premium Member
So... Agriculture.

Repeal agriculture.
Huh?
Affluence creates poverty. The original affluent society of haves vs have-nots, can be traced to the first agrarian societies.
That's the orthodox doctrine. It's not what we see in actual operation.Economics isn't a zero-sum game.
General affluence threatens the élite. "Too much prosperity" for the masses = less for the rich. When the middle class wants a bigger slice of the pie -- which they baked, after all -- there's less for the rich. This has been an ongoing struggle for 200 years.

Fifty or sixty years ago both sides were prosperous. It was America's Golden Age. Since war was declared in the Powell Manifesto (1971) the middle class has stagnated. Since Reagan's Neoliberal, "trickle down" economic revolution (~1981), America's treasure has become increasingly concentrated at the top, the middle class has diminished, nothing's trickled down, and the workers are angrily blaming the liberals, supporting their own oppressors.
The poor are living in tents and begging on street corners.
 
Last edited:

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
Direct donation or charity is a slapdash "solution."
Better to eliminate the causes of poverty and homelessness. Such multi-step solutions are not so intuitive as direct intervention, however, and seem to be lost on GOP conservatives.
If chronic regulation/ mandate syndrome left the crazy Democrats , the homeless issue would be arguably solved by now.
.
 

sun rise

The world is on fire
Premium Member
If chronic regulation/ mandate syndrome left the crazy Democrats , the homeless issue would be arguably solved by now.
.
BS. We have NIMBYs all over the place that have nothing to do with politics just self-centered refusal to allow affordable housing.

Even in CA where the state now allows counties to change zoning rules to have affordable housing the right went nutso about the change.
 

Vinayaka

devotee
Premium Member
Here is the chapter in the Tirukkural on it.
Chapter 23: Charity

Giving to the poor is charity; all else
have the quality of anticipating a return. 221
To receive is a vice, even if it is accepted as a good virtue;
to give, is good, even if the heaven is denied. 222
Charity, without mention of the distress of poverty, is present
only in those from a good family. 223
To be asked to give is bitter too, until seeing
the smiling face of the recipient. 224
The strength of the strongest is to endure hunger;
it trails the ability to eradicate that hunger. 225
To douse the destructive hunger of the destitute, is
the safe to store the riches of the rich. 226
Hunger, the deadly disease, never touches one who is
accustomed to share his food with others. 227
Do they not know to enjoy the joy of giving, those loveless people,
who keep their wealth only to lose it. 228
Eating alone to increase one’s accumulated wealth,
is more distressing than begging. 229
There is nothing more harrowing than death; that too seems sweet,
if one is unable to give a thing to the needy.
 

MikeF

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
Look to a time when the problem didn't exist, then consider what changes led to it.
Repeal the changes.

When would you estimate that would have been?

@The Hammer estimates there was no poverty in pre-agrarian culture.

I would suggest that there were no poor in pre-agrarian societies because they simply didn't survive.
 

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member
When would you estimate that would have been?

@The Hammer estimates there was no poverty in pre-agrarian culture.

I would suggest that there were no poor in pre-agrarian societies because they simply didn't survive.

I don't disagree completely. But there is evidence of pre-homo sapiens, neanderthals for instance taking care of their sick and wounded in ways where they would have died otherwise, without communal support.

Margaret "Mead said that the first evidence of civilization was a 15,000 years old fractured femur found in an archaeological site. A femur is the longest bone in the body, linking hip to knee. In societies without the benefits of modern medicine, it takes about six weeks of rest for a fractured femur to heal."

So the fact that this was a healed fracture, means someone fed this person for at least 6+ weeks (probably much longer), while they healed enough to help with hunting and gathering. Civilization and society began a long long time ago.
 

The Hammer

Skald
Premium Member

In most Anthropological circles and theories, "poverty" as we know it today, began with the advent of agriculture. About 7000 y/ago. Outside of that, everyone was as poor as their environment.

It's the ability to develop a surplus, that allows us to even conceive of poverty. The first surpluses came from our development of agrarian societies.
 
Top