Theos-Talk Archives (January 1998 Message tt00247)

In a message dated 98-01-20 00:10:55 EST, you write:

Keith Price wrote:

<< I think that what passes for theosophy is a combination of Esoteric
Buddhism and Victorian morality from the Christian tradition. The hospitals in
the East are practically all run by the dreaded Christians because the
Buddhists have a "let them escape suffering through meditation attitude" and
let the poor people work out their karma without my earning bad karma through
interfering with their karma (that is helping them with a Christian handout!).
>>

This is always the dilemma. How much charity should be offered and when is
enough, enough. Even the current welfare system has been modified and welfare-
for-work has been adopted by many states to get families off the dole who have
been dependent for generations on government largess. The same concern arises
with third world nations. Do the more affluent countries give them fish or
teach them how to fish? And which is more compassionate in the long run? I
would have to say the latter. Currently, many would say that the IMF is
providing welfare to fiscally irresponsible countries.

In case of dire famine, richer countries would have to intervene immediately
with food and medicine but the big picture solution would have to deal with
the causes of famine and destitution by helping people come up with their own
solutions. The same principle applies on a smaller scale when focusing on
impoverished neighborhoods. Although food kitchens provide temporary relief,
the long-run solution would embrace the notion of the poor alleviating their
karma by modifying that karma themselves through the principle of self-help.
This is certainly in tune with the idea of "self-induced and self-devised
efforts" presented the Third Fundamental Principle of the SD.

Lmhem111