Ivomar Schüler da Costa

Charity and the relationship between intentions and resources

 
Chapter XIII of The Gospel According to Spiritism is of great importance because it presents some principles of action and makes some basic distinctions. Like most chapters of this fundamental work of Spiritism, all its parts, i.e., its sections and items, are linked in a way that they only make complete sense if viewed throughout the whole work, and by determining its specific functions in it. However, in order to understand what the chapter wants to convey, we must first understand what it actually says.

Let us take as an object of study the section "The Donation of the Widow", which contains items 5, which is the transcription of Mark 12: 41-44, and 6, which is the explanation given by Kardec. 

In the general sequence of the chapter, Kardec addresses in this section a fundamental question. He considers the intention of doing well as a topic, and divides it into two types. From this point of view, he associates this intention with the lack, or possession of resources that prevent or enable the individual to achieve his purpose, and above all, he deals with the attitude of the individual regarding the possession or not of these resources. In this sense, Kardec's position is clear. He states that the quality of intention tends to make the individual active or passive about the deed of doing well, considering the lack or abundance of material resources.

This section is divided into three moments, although it presents only two paragraphs. In the first moment a statement is made that can be summarized as follows: some people say they cannot do all the good that they want because they lack the resources and so they want to possess them to use them with the purpose of doing well. In the second paragraph the issue of the falsity of this desire and how it determines the attitude of the individual. In the third moment it is the sincere desire to possess sufficient material resources and how the individual should act regarding its lack.

Meaning of the expression "the poor man’s contribution"

Let us begin by understanding the text by explaining each of the important terms. Kardec, to give greater expressiveness, uses synonyms to refer to the same terms.

Many people regret that they cannot do all the good they want because they do not have sufficient resources and, if they wish to possess wealth, it is, as they say, to make good use of it. The intention is no doubt praiseworthy and may even be sincere in some. However, is it completely unselfish in all?

And this one,

[...] the contribution of the poor man, the one who gives, depriving himself of what is necessary [...], the gold of the rich man, who gives without depriving himself of anything.
And still this one,

[...] is it only with money that we can dry up tears […]? 

Let's see. The term wealth is used several times. When the expression "gold of the rich" and the word "money" are used they mean wealth. The phrase "sufficient resources" also has the sense of wealth. The word “resources” is used in the sense of means, possessions, of having, and "sufficient" means a lot, i.e., possessions that supply a certain need. Thus, all these terms and expressions refer to a quantity of goods that go beyond what is necessary - resources that someone has to spare. Therefore, rich are those who possess resources beyond their needs, abundance of resources - "riches."

The contrary of rich is poor. Consequently, poor people are those who only have the resources to satisfy their needs. When the expression - "the poor man's contribution, the one who gives depriving himself of what is necessary […]” - is used, it is clear that he is giving something that he will need.  

When the intention to help is disinterested

Obolus (contribution, donation) means literally a small Greek coin from the time of Jesus; but figuratively it means a small gift. Thus, the "poor man's contribution" is the small donation of the man who has only enough resources to meet his own needs.

Therefore, regarding the possession of resources, two situations were featured: the one of lack and the one of abundance.

Intent and desire, in this text, are used as synonyms. Kardec considers two types of intention: the selfish one and the disinterested one. Obviously he is referring to personal interest (selfishness) and disinterest, i.e., to the pursuit of rewards, advantages, personal benefits in the first case, and the absence of these in the second. Let us note that the desire to possess riches to help those who lack them may be praiseworthy, but only when the intention is sincere, or disinterested. Thus, when this intention is interested it will not be sincere, and it will not be worthy.

Then what would be the meaning of a sincere intention, the one with no personal interest involved, when one desires to be wealthy to be able to do well?

Is it not that many who desire to do good to others, would very much like to begin by doing good to themselves, by giving themselves some more pleasures, enjoying a little of the superfluous that they lack, and only then ready to give to the poor the rest?

Here is the answer. The desire of some to possess wealth in order to be good can only be considered disinterested when it is not intended to pamper themselves first before doing good to others. In another part of the text, Kardec refers to the disinterested intention as that which is free from any personal idea. 

Some people are controlled by selfishness

Kardec continues: This second intention that the person may be unware of, could be found in the depths of the heart, if the person were to peer at it. The second intention is precisely this: when they possess wealth, they seek to do good first to themselves. It is an intention that the person hides from herself, and it is deeply concealed. And if so, then it is hidden; and it is so hidden that most people seem to be unaware of it.

However, it is hidden from others, because if they thoroughly investigated their feelings, their desires, they would show their true intentions. Now, if there is a second intention, a hidden intention, it is clear that there is a first intention. What would it be? The first intention, unlike the second, is that which has been expressed, and therefore is not hidden. When it is said that some people "regret that they cannot do all the good they desire", it means that they lament and regret, and therefore there is an expressed intention.

Let us emphasize the following: in some people the expressed intention is disinterested, sincere; in this case there would be no hidden intention, because the person expresses what she really feels. If there is an interested, hidden intent, then the expressed one is only seemingly disinterested, it is therefore insincere. Thus, in these people, what prevails in this case is selfishness, because to do good to oneself before giving doing good to the other is one of its characteristics.

Another term, to which we must pay attention, for a good understanding of the text, is "faculty". The Encoder expresses himself in this way: [...] there is no one who, in the full enjoyment of his faculties, [...].

In a quick glance in a dictionary we will see that the word faculty has - among other meanings that do not apply specifically to the case under study – the meaning of "power to do", "capacity" and "moral power." There are extensive meanings. 

Importance of doing well

When C. Lhar (1) classifies the soul’s faculties, he calls them faculties of knowledge, sensitivity, and affectivity. He defines them as: "the power that the soul has to exercise certain acts or to undergo certain modifications". The faculties cannot be directly observed, but can be deduced from the logical principle which states that every act presumes a proportionate power within the being; different acts, therefore, presuppose different powers. If a person without previous studies paints a magnificent picture, this means that it has, in some way, the energy, the power to paint it, otherwise this would not be possible. No person can accomplish anything beyond his means. This author points out something extremely important that, notwithstanding, usually goes unnoticed to most Spiritists. There is an intimate correlation between faculties.

Using our words, we say that faculties influence each other; the action of one will affect the others, and vice versa. Therefore, to practice doing well is fundamental, since it is a factor of development of the Spirit.

Knowledge without the will is stagnant; sensitivity without intelligence makes us frivolous. Man is only complete when he uses all his faculties. This is the reason why the Spirits say that man must be whole in the act of Charity.

The text under analysis is divided into two major paragraphs. The first approaches intention with interest, and the second, intention with no interest.

In the first case, Kardec compares the “intention with interest” to one of the characteristics of Charity, self-denial (2): [...] when Charity is true, man thinks of others before he thinks of himself. It is based on this that Kardec states that those, who have the desire of possessing riches to give to those who lack them, however with the hidden intention of first taking advantage of them for themselves, and donating only the remainder, dissimulate their personal interests.  

The value of the small donation

Even in this paragraph, Kardec regrets that most of these people dream about reality, because they expect totally uncertain situations to occur, without making any effort, and dream in obtaining great fortunes to supposedly do well. Some, - going deep into their fantasy - intend to even count on the help of the Spirits to conquer them. What is evident here is that those who have a sincere desire to have enough resources to do well must not wait for casual situations at all; they must strive, and work to conquer them.

In the second case, an interesting inverse relation between the quantity of wealth and the moral value of them is exposed. The element that changes the value is the effort, the self-imposed privation for the benefit of others. The small donation (oblation of the poor), giving what one also needs, has more value than the great donation (gold of the rich) made without self-imposed privations. In this condition, despite the high quantitative value, it is surpassed by the qualitative or moral value. Another principle of action evidenced - if we can express ourselves like this - is that of activity: In fact, is it only with money that we can dry up tears, and should we do nothing, if there is no money? What Kardec asks is if we can relief others’ suffering only with material resources. Does wealth have such an importance in reducing the difficulties of others? And what would be the attitude of those who wish to help others who suffer, if they have no money? Should they stay quiet? Through this text we can arrive to the conclusion that material possessions, however large they may be, are not important as most people think they are. 

One can always help

If you sincerely wish to help others in their difficulties, you must not remain passive because you may lack the material resources to do so, for whoever sincerely desires to be useful to his brothers, will find a thousand ways to fulfill his intention. That is, who wants to do something, does it and does not wait, as says the Brazilian singer: "who knows the right time, does it, and does not wait for it to happen”. The effective attitude is also clear in this other statement: (occasions to do well). Search for them and they will come to you. In other words, whoever seeks finds it! From the principles of the inverse value of small donations made with self-imposed deprivation, of the intention with no interest whatsoever, and of activity, we conclude that resources must be sought elsewhere. But where are they? It is Kardec himself who points out where they are: [...] there is no one who, in the full enjoyment of his faculties, cannot render any service, provide consolation, relieve physical or moral suffering, or make a helpful effort. Don’t they have, in the absence of money, their labor, their time, their rest, to give all this to one another?

It is in our internal resources, within our capacities, that we must seek the means to practice goodness when we lack material resources by providing services, carrying out plenty consolation, reducing physical and moral suffering, and making helpful efforts. We realize that all the words used are active verbs. And all these actions are almost disregarded in everyday life, as if they have no value. However, they acquire great value when performed with self-denial. Finally, another point to emphasize is that these deeds are not required from those who cannot practice them, since they can only be exercised by those who are in the full enjoyment of their faculties.

In the first part we have some statements that complete and reinforce what was said in the second part. 

Conclusion

The person desiring to do good, but without the resources to do so, and putting the good of the other before his own good, contributes for Charity to reach its highest point when he seeks and finds resources in himself; thus, the sublimated point of Charity, in this case, would be to seek in his work, by the use of his strength, his intelligence, his talents, the resources he lacks to carry out his generous purposes. That is, when material resources are lacking, one should not stay still, but rather use his work, his abilities, and his physical and intellectual strength to accomplish the good he desires. The highest point of Charity is not the use of the internal rather than the external means, but the fact that one gives oneself to do good. 

Summarizing our brief study, it seems to us that the great question that Kardec wants to answer is this: to do well depends exclusively on material resources? The answer given by the co-author of the Doctrine itself is that the person without personal interests, even with a lack of material resources, will look for other types of resources to do the well he wants to do; one should not stop helping because of the lack of material resources. This proves that most of the times, when we say that we wish we were wealthy to be able to help others in need, this is only a disguise to do nothing, to claim our incapacity. In the case of the possession of such resources by persons with false intentions, two hypotheses arise: 1) the person actually applies such resources to help another, with the secret intention to be known as a charitable person; with this the person seeks social approval, popularity, and is in evidence to enjoy public esteem, or, 2) if selfish, the person first enjoys this wealth before he helps those he says he wants to serve.

Ultimately, we point out that - in our understanding - Kardec wanted to draw attention to the value of small actions that are not noticed by most people and the need to use all our faculties and potentialities to discover new ways of extending the good in this Earth, when we do not have sufficient material resources. We must do all that is within our reach, because the lack of material resources is not an impediment to practice Charity.

References:

1 LAHR, C. Manual of Philosophy. Chapter III. Faculties of the Soul; pages 26 and 27. 4th edition. Publisher: Livraria Apostolado da Imprensa. 1948. Porto. Portugal.

² COAST, Ivomar. Self-denial: doing well to others first.Http://www.oconsolador.com.br/ano9/409/ivomar_costa.html