• 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!

Redistribution of Wealth

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
Did Jesus and/or Siddhartha Gautama advocate for redistribution of wealth, or concern for the poor, impoverished, and disenfranchised?
 

MrMrdevincamus

Voice Of The Martyrs Supporter
King James Bible
Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

Jesus if alive today would be with the poor. He said on many occasions earthly wealth is useless because its not real. The real wealth is to achieve everlasting life via believing in God and by making this life easier for our fellow man by following ie applying his teachings.

: {>
 

BSM1

What? Me worry?
King James Bible
Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

Jesus if alive today would be with the poor. He said on many occasions earthly wealth is useless because its not real. The real wealth is to achieve everlasting life via believing in God and by making this life easier for our fellow man by following ie applying his teachings.

: {>

What did Jesus say about the poor when he was having his feet washed with some (evidently) very expensive oil?
 

Sanzbir

Well-Known Member
Did Jesus and/or Siddhartha Gautama advocate for redistribution of wealth, or concern for the poor, impoverished, and disenfranchised?

One seems to have advocated a life of poverty. The other favored a middle way.

Jesus called for giving away one's possessions, but that was for the benefit of the person embracing an aesthetic lifestyle as well as those who received his charity. Given the incredibly humble living standards Jesus advocated, I'd think he'd find most of what we, from a modern ethnocentric perspective, think of as "poor" to be living a life of luxury and in need of giving up their excess possessions.

Both really called for having a moderate amount of possessions, but that's mainly for the benefit of the one embracing an unmaterialistic lifestyle.

I don't think either called for forcible redistribution, if that is what you are talking about.

Most modern forms of a "wealth redistribution" mentality are fairly foreign from the ideas espoused by those two thinkers. In the modern era, earning as much money as possible and giving it to uplift those in need would be considered the ideal.

From a Jesus of Nazareth standpoint, the ideal would be giving up a pursuit of wealth, and living in a state of personally chosen poverty with a bare minimum amount of things needed to live. In fact, embracing that kind of lifestyle would make it very hard to give to charity, again reinforcing that this state of giving away one's possessions is more about benefiting the person embracing the lifestyle than it is about benefiting the people receiving his material possessions.
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
One seems to have advocated a life of poverty. The other favored a middle way.
as the road narrows you're forced into the middle.

But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.

Jesus called for giving away one's possessions, but that was for the benefit of the person embracing an aesthetic lifestyle as well as those who received his charity. Given the incredibly humble living standards Jesus advocated, I'd think he'd find most of what we, from a modern ethnocentric perspective, think of as "poor" to be living a life of luxury and in need of giving up their excess possessions.
being middle class is the center of the road.

Both really called for having a moderate amount of possessions, but that's mainly for the benefit of the one embracing an unmaterialistic lifestyle.
i agree.

I don't think either called for forcible redistribution, if that is what you are talking about.
coming to an understanding from multiple points of view is always beneficial to the observer.

Most modern forms of a "wealth redistribution" mentality are fairly foreign from the ideas espoused by those two thinkers. In the modern era, earning as much money as possible and giving it to uplift those in need would be considered the ideal.
as much as the wealthy would hopefully learn compassion, hopefully the poor that are slothful would understand the value of thing because of the labor involved in it. you can't help those who won't help themselves. you enable said person to remain dependent.

From a Jesus of Nazareth standpoint, the ideal would be giving up a pursuit of wealth, and living in a state of personally chosen poverty with a bare minimum amount of things needed to live. In fact, embracing that kind of lifestyle would make it very hard to give to charity, again reinforcing that this state of giving away one's possessions is more about benefiting the person embracing the lifestyle than it is about benefiting the people receiving his material possessions.
i agree. it frees one from attachment to inanimate things and hopefully increases their attraction towards people.
 

Kemosloby

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
King James Bible
Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be perfect, go and sell that thou hast, and give to the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in heaven: and come and follow me.

Jesus if alive today would be with the poor. He said on many occasions earthly wealth is useless because its not real. The real wealth is to achieve everlasting life via believing in God and by making this life easier for our fellow man by following ie applying his teachings.

: {>

But He did not tell King Herod to sell all the peoples stuff and give it to other people.
 

Sanzbir

Well-Known Member
being middle class is the center of the road.

Well, "Middle Class" is unquestionably "Upper Class" from the perspective of the times in which the two lived. A "Middle Class lifestyle", at least in a developed country, is way more than Jesus, at the very least, advocated ever owning.

From a perspective of the Buddha, Middle Class could be considered Middle Way, but only from a strictly modern, ethnocentric perspective. A "Middle Class" lifestyle in the Western World is usually a part of the "Upper 1%" globally.

Using the American definition for what the "Middle Class" is, the American "middle class" is actually nearly exclusively made up of the wealthiest 1% of the whole world. And as a whole, on a global scale, the American Middle Class is unquestionably part of the Global Upper Class. Even the lower classes in America, if you factor in the benefits they recieve, a good portion of them are pushed into the global 1% by those benefits as well.

So I'd say "Middle Class" in an upper class country wouldn't really be all that in keeping with the idea of a "Middle Way", at least if you're looking past your own localized culture and the privileges of the country one lives in.

But I do agree with pretty much everything else you are saying.
 

Lyndon

"Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
Premium Member
The middle way the Buddha spoke of was the middle between annihilationism and eternalism, not between wealth and poverty, that's just ridiculous.You can't just misapply "middle way" to everything, what's the middle way between being a child molester or murderer and not being one??
 

Shadow Wolf

Certified People sTabber
Where do you get a no from, when Jesus said time and time and time again people are to take care of the poor, give their money to the poor, sell their belongings and give the money to the poor, and that rich people won't make it into the Kingdom anyways?
 

Fool

ALL in all
Premium Member
The middle way the Buddha spoke of was the middle between annihilationism and eternalism, not between wealth and poverty, that's just ridiculous.You can't just misapply "middle way" to everything, what's the middle way between being a child molester or murderer and not being one??


hmmmm, i thought it was more along the line of his awakening, revelation, and the here and NOW.


neither asceticism nor hedonism.......................


nothing to excess.......oracle at delphi
 

Sanzbir

Well-Known Member
The middle way the Buddha spoke of was the middle between annihilationism and eternalism, not between wealth and poverty, that's just ridiculous.You can't just misapply "middle way" to everything, what's the middle way between being a child molester or murderer and not being one??

Monks, these two extremes ought not to be practiced by one who has gone forth from the household life. (What are the two?) There is addiction to indulgence of sense-pleasures, which is low, coarse, the way of ordinary people, unworthy, and unprofitable; and there is addiction to self-mortification, which is painful, unworthy, and unprofitable.

Avoiding both these extremes, the Tathagata (the Perfect One) has realized the Middle Path; it gives vision, gives knowledge, and leads to calm, to insight, to enlightenment and to Nibbana. And what is that Middle Path realized by the Tathagata...? It is the Noble Eightfold path, and nothing else, namely: right understanding, right thought, right speech, right action, right livelihood, right effort, right mindfulness and right concentration.

From the Pali Canon.

There's not a "Middle Way" of everything but there was one in terms of lifestyle as described by Gautama Buddha.
 

Lyndon

"Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
Premium Member
Maybe middle way between asceticism and materialism, yes.
 

Lyndon

"Peace is the answer" quote: GOD, 2014
Premium Member
You actually see deluded Buddhists on the forum calling for a middle way between observing the precepts and not observing them, particularly with regards drugs and alcohol.
 

Sanzbir

Well-Known Member
You actually see deluded Buddhists on the forum calling for a middle way between observing the precepts and not observing them, particularly with regards drugs and alcohol.

Hah. I don't doubt it. Some people just like the sound of the label of "Buddhism".

But yeah, I think, from the Pali Canon at least, a person could make a case that material wealth could be something that the Middle Way applies to, in relation to materialism and aestheticism.

That's only if, though, as I stated earlier, they ignore the fact that the modern notion of a "Middle Class" is not a middle point between materialism and aestheticism, but highly skewed towards materialism.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
What did Jesus say about the poor when he was having his feet washed with some (evidently) very expensive oil?
Not only that, it also strikes me as odd It would suggest the trade-off of wealth for wealth.
 

Kelly of the Phoenix

Well-Known Member
Did Jesus and/or Siddhartha Gautama advocate for redistribution of wealth, or concern for the poor, impoverished, and disenfranchised?
Yes and no. They were really kinda specific. However, I do note that, at least with Jesus, Jesus never funded anything and bummed off everyone else. If he was put to the grindstone, he used magic to get out of having to do anything himself. Jesus' "charity" consists of photo op moments with no real mission to fix the social infrastructure so this crap will go away. Sure, it's nice to feed the widow, but how's about making it so her life isn't essentially useless without marriage to a man? Giving her rights would do way more than tossing her a bag of cookies every now and again, right?

What did Jesus say about the poor when he was having his feet washed with some (evidently) very expensive oil?
Oh no, a religious leader is a hypocrite -- look at my shocked face :eek:

But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it.
That's why you bring a jack hammer. :)

as much as the wealthy would hopefully learn compassion, hopefully the poor that are slothful would understand the value of thing because of the labor involved in it. you can't help those who won't help themselves. you enable said person to remain dependent.
My impression is that the superwealthy can't wipe their own behinds without 20 staff members. As most rich people got that way through everything BUT hard work (because if you're not on the floor, it's really your STAFF doing all that work, not you), they should really learn what using elbow grease is. Meanwhile, California is burning and apparently we're using slave labor with inmates getting 2 bucks for the "privilege of working". No one in their right mind would agree to those conditions in normal society.

But He did not tell King Herod to sell all the peoples stuff and give it to other people
No, from what I understand, Herod was doing that without Jesus' advice.

Let me put it this way: I have a dying friend. Her bills are mounting. I can't afford all of them. No one else helps her, not even her own flesh and blood. What she needs is a better network or infrastructure and that's something individuals can't accomplish. If private donations fix things better than the government, please show us where poverty is taking a dive thanks to all those private donations. No? Doesn't happen? And the government is beholden to people who don't want to help, so what to do? People are still getting hurt and dying. Jesus didn't have a solution. There has to be one. I refuse to believe that a planet full of people in the 21st century can't fix this.

.You can't just misapply "middle way" to everything, what's the middle way between being a child molester or murderer and not being one??
Doing it to virtual characters to get your jollies and not actually hurting real people.
 

Twilight Hue

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.
The middle way the Buddha spoke of was the middle between annihilationism and eternalism, not between wealth and poverty, that's just ridiculous.You can't just misapply "middle way" to everything, what's the middle way between being a child molester or murderer and not being one??
You raise a good point which is why discernment is key in striking balance and equanimity. The middle way plays more as a sliding scale than a specific "immovable" set point, especially when it's discernment involving extremes alone.
 
Top