The views, beliefs and philosophies of charity are quite different between Jews, Christians and Muslims.
I include brief exerpts from each to illustrate.
First, in Judiasm:
Thus Jewish law requires every individual to give tzedakah, even one who is himself sustained by the tzedakah of others. If the purpose of tzedakah were merely to rectify the unequal distribution of wealth between rich and poor, this law would make no sense. Tzedakah, however, is much more than that: it is the opportunity granted to every person to become a "partner with G-d in creation."
Giving tzedakah is, above all, a humbling experience. Before us stands a human being less fortunate than ourselves. We know that G-d could have just as easily provided him with everything he requires, instead of sending him to us for his needs. Here is a person who is suffering poverty in order to provide us with the opportunity to do a G-dly deed!
By the same token, if divine providence places us on the receiving end of a charitable act, we need not be demoralized by the experience. For we know that G-d could have just as easily provided us with all that we need Himself, and that our need for human aid is merely in order to grant another person the ability to do a G-dly deed. Our "benefactor" is giving us money or some other resource; we are giving him something far greater the opportunity to become a partner with G-d in creation.
In the words of our sages: "More than the rich man does for the pauper, the pauper does for the rich man."
The Islamic charities began with a way of enriching "the Prophet" and his near relatives from whatever the locals had to give.
According to the Shi'ite interpretation, also based on the Qur'an and reported speeches of the prophet Muhammad and his Household, there are two major forms of almsgiving: Khoms ("the fifth"), and Zakat. The Shi'ite consider both types to be a personal obligation, meaning that every Muslim has the full responsibility of purifying his own money, but the governor should have no force upon any individual to give up Zakat or Khoms. Khoms ("the fifth") is taken from war loots, metals, treasures, divings (pearls and so), and the money that is a mix between halal (pure) and haram (taboo). In modern days, the most common type of khoms that is extracted is of the last type mentioned before. Khoms for money is done by taking the fifth of the increment or the increase in the income stored after one lunar year, and this is done after paying debts or bills (if any).
An example calculation of the Khoms tithe: A man starts with $5000 in his bank account; on the same day after one lunar year passes, he has $5600 in his bank account (having already paid his bills and debts), and so must take the fifth of his $600 earnings, that is $120. What remains after the fifth (that is $5600-$120=$5480) is recorded; if after one lunar year the man has more than $5480, then he finds the new difference and extracts a fifth from it as before. If instead he has less than $5480, then he has no earnings on which to pay Khoms. The Khoms is paid specifically for: [Qur'an 8:41]
- (1) Allah
- (2) the Messenger of Allah
- (3) the near relative of the Messenger (Ahl ul-Bayt)
- (4) the orphans
- (5) needy
- (6) stranded traveler
Zakat on the other hand, according to the Shiite teachings, is assigned to specific goods. There are nine types of goods from which Zakat is paid out: gold, silver, camels, cows, sheep, wheat, barley, dates, and raisins. Each type has its own "nisab," or a limit under which Zakat need not be paid. Zakat is paid to the people mentioned in the overview of this article, although never to a Hashimite. Charity money or Sadaqah is never to be paid to a Hashimite since it is a taboo for a Hashimite to take such money, if it is not Khoms or a gift. Notice in that in both concepts, they are obligatory on the individual but should not be forced by the governor.
In modern days, Shi'ite muslims are concerned with Khoms more than Zakat mainly because few of them are farmers and own the goods by which Zakat is paid out. On the other hand, Khoms is given by many people starting from the middle class and above that, and especially by employees.
We are more familiar with Christian charity which is, actually, a corruption of Latinized agape' in the Septuigent.
The word "charity" entered the English language through the Old French word "charité" which was derived from the Latin "caritas". [1]
Originally in Latin the word caritas meant preciousness, dearness, high price. From this, in Christian theology, caritas became the standard Latin translation for the Greek word agape, meaning an unlimited loving-kindness to all others, such as the love of God. This much wider concept is the meaning of the word charity in the Christian triplet "faith, hope and charity", and notably as used by the King James Version of the Bible in its translation of St Paul's Letter to the Corinthians. However the English word more generally used for this concept, both before and since (and by the KJV at other passages), is the more direct love. (See the article Charity (virtue))
St Paul's agape was specifically not primarily about good works and giving to the poor.(And though I feed the poor with all my goods, and though I give my body, that I be burned, and have not love [agape], it profiteth me nothing - 1 Cor 13:3, Geneva translation, 1560). But in English the word charity has steadily acquired this as its primary meaning since being first used in this sense in Old French at least as long ago as the year 1200.
Under the Catholic Church, the policy of world domination (i.e. Missionary work) went by stages. First, send pious priests into poor areas and extend food, clothing and build shelter. Second, indoctrinate the populace in the peace of Jesus' message (turn the other cheek). Finally, armies followed to subjugate and dominate. This policy failed ultimately due to the duplicity of purpose.
Modern day Christian Charity is divided into TV evangelist promotional propaganda and genuine hand's on efforts to enable 3rd World countries to combat illness, ignorance and the ravages of corrupt government (and war.)
No charity has historically proved itself to be effective long-term except, perhaps, for the "Sweat Equity" programs which Jimmy Carter has promoted. (You are without a home, but; you expend your own labor in helping build habitation for others which earns you sweat equity toward, eventually, having a home built by others for you.)
