How Does Faith Inform Views on Money and Taxes?

As much as we may think of religion in terms of “pulling us out of the world,” or commanding us to “reject worldliness,” there is a great deal of discussion about monetary issues in the various canonical books of the world’s great religions. Part of the reason for the scriptural focus on monetary manners is the belief of many that religion is indented to teach us to be good “stewards,” and that requires that we have things to be stewards over, including a planet, personal possessions, people we care about, and money.

Various religious traditions focus on different aspects of monetary stewardship. Of course, there is crossover in beliefs and practices—particularly among sister religions (e.g., the Dharmic faiths or the Abrahamic traditions). So, we will examine individual religions, rather than approach the subject collectively. Nonetheless, certain principles will surface time and again.

Judaism

The Hebrew Bible (or Tanakh, as it is often called) establishes several monetary laws to guide YHWH’s “people.” Foremost among those is the law of Tithing, in which God commanded His people to give a “tithe” (i.e., a “tenth”) of everything they had to Him. They were to “tithe” the food they grew, the animals born through their herds, and certainly any money they earned. (Lev. 27:30-32; Deut. 14:22-29) The God of Israel also commanded His people to give freely to the poor, practicing what we today would call “charity.” As a singular example, YHWH directed: “If anyone is poor among your fellow Israelites…, do not be hardhearted or tightfisted toward them. Rather, be openhanded and freely lend them whatever they need… Give generously to them and do so without a grudging heart.” (Deut. 15:7-11) As a sign of that charity, the Jewish people were also commanded every seventh year to “cancel all debts” of those who owed them money. (Deut. 15:1-2) Not only were they to be generous in this regard, but the God of Israel instructed His people to “charge no interest” if they lent another Jew money. (Exo. 22:25)

Christianity

At least in part, Christianity’s views on monetary stewardship grew out of their Jewish roots.

So, for example, like the Jewish people before them, Christians (in the New Testament) paid a tithe of their income, in whatever form that came. (Matt. 23:23; Lk. 11:42). However, Jesus also suggested that Christians had a financial stewardship not just to the “church,” but also to the “state.” For example, He commanded is followers, “Give back to Caesar what is Caesar’s, and to God what is God’s.” (Matt. 22:21) In other words, Jesus said that believers owed the government taxes and that they should be willing to pay that. Much like YHWY did with the Jews, Jesus taught His followers (who would become known as “Christians”) that they needed to strive to meet the needs of the poor and the disadvantaged. Indeed, the Christian canon commands believers to give, but not reluctantly—telling followers of Jesus that “God loves a cheerful giver” but does not appreciate those who give simply because they are “under compulsion.” (2 Cor. 9:6–7; Acts 2:44–45) The Apostle Paul taught his Christian counterparts that greed, and a lust for the things of this world, would only lead to their downfall. (1 Tim. 6:1) And yet, Jesus preached that Christians needed to be wise stewards of their money (Matt. 25:14-30), and also that they should use the “unrighteous wealth” of the world to bring advantages to themselves and the Church. (Lk. 16:9)

Islam

As the third of what scholars call the “Abrahamic religions,” Islam shares several of these monetary principles with Judaism and Christianity. While Muslims are not commanded to pay a “tithe” (or “tenth” of their income), they are taught a similar principle, known as zakat. Essentially, Allah commanded every Muslim to give 2.5% annually of their net worth (i.e., “savings and wealth”) “for the poor and for the needy.” (Sūrha 9:60; 2:177) Notice, this is not 2.5% of the practitioner’s income but, instead, 2.5% of his or her net worth. (Various Muslims calculate this differently.) On top of one’s zakat, Muslims are also encouraged to give sadaqah (or voluntary charitable gifts beyond the mandatory 2.5%). Sadaqah is believed to be necessary if one hopes to “attain righteousness.” (Sūrha 3:93) As in Judaism, Islam forbids charging riba—meaning “excess” or “increase,” which refers to interest on top of what was loaned. (Sūrha 2:275–279). Finally, according to the Qur’an, God uses money to test us; wealth to see if we will be generous, and poverty to see if we will become bitter or jealous. (Sūrha 8:28; 64:15)

Hinduism

While Hinduism doesn’t directly teach practitioners to pay a specific amount, as Judaism, Christianity, and Islam have typically done; nevertheless, the principle of making offerings or making charitable donations (known as dāna) appears in various Hindu holy texts, like the Vedas, the Upanishads, the Bhagavad Gita, and the Manusmriti. For example, the Gita states that charity is “a matter of duty” and should be given “without expectation of return.” (Bhagavad Gita 17:20) Hinduism speaks of “legitimate aims” of life, and one of those is artha, which means the pursuit of wealth or prosperity. (The Sanskrit term literally means “wealth” or “property.”) While Hinduism believes it is appropriate to enjoy a comfortable or “prosperous” existence, it teaches that artha taken to excess (including being gained through unrighteous, immoral, or illegal ways) will lead to spiritual ruin. Thus, one must be temperate in one’s pursuit and use of wealth (regardless of its form). Like Jesus—who commanded His followers to pay taxes to the government—the Hindu Manusmriti also requires that believers pay their taxes, but it likewise commands the ruler who collects those levies to be “moderate” in the taxes he requires of his subjects, and wise in his use of the revenues collected. (Manusmriti 16.3.12.5 & 7; 17.14.2.2)

Buddhism

In both the Theravāda and Mahāyāna Buddhist traditions monetary stewardship is emphasized. However, much of Buddhist teaching on this matter centers around the synchronistic relationship which should exist between lay Buddhists and monastics. As might be expected, the various branches of Buddhism preach that whatever wealth is acquired by a practitioner, it must be gained in ethical ways and through compassionate means. (Of course, monastics are not allowed to earn or raise money, and Theravāda monks can’t even make contact with money. So, the aforementioned directive is specifically targeted at lay Buddhists.) In Mahāyāna Buddhism, which is the larges of the major Buddhist denominations, there are six “paramitas” or “perfections” that one seeking “enlightenment” must pursue and cultivate. The first of these is dāna (which is “generosity,” as mentioned with Hinduism above). While monastics don’t have “paid employment,” they are still commanded to live lives of “generosity”—as much any Buddhist who hopes to escape the cycle of birth, life, death, and re-birth (known as Saṃsāra). Additionally, monastics traditionally live off the alms given them by the laity, which creates an inner dependence between the two—and which, by design, inspires both to avoid the accumulation of too much in the way of worldly goods.

Sikhism

Sikhism, being the youngest of the religions we’ve examined, places emphasis on what it calls the “three main pillars” of the faith, which are Naam Japna (a focus on God), Kirat Karni (earning an honest living), and Vand Chakna (freely sharing with others). The third of these (freely giving of what you have) tends to be the one that most non-Sikhs connect with Sikhism, as it is so well manifest in the lives and acts of practicing Sikhs. The Guru Granth Sahib repeatedly emphasized this pillar, with words like this: “One who earns by the sweat of their brow and shares with others, O Nanak, they have truly understood the way.” (Guru Granth Sahib Ang 1245) In addition to heavily emphasizing this principle of charity, Sikhism also has its own version of tithing, known as dasvandh (meaning “tenth part). In Sikh teachings, one is to give back to the community one-tenth of one’s earnings each year. This is part of the Sikh commitment to do seva (or “service”). One can contribute one’s dasvandh in money, food, goods, or service. Regardless of how one “pays” this, this law of the “tenth part” is a means of accomplishing the “third pillar” of Sikhism (Vand Chakna). Of course, whatever one earns, whatever one donates, and however one serves, it should be done in honest and ethical ways (Kirat Karni). While, for many religions, their laws surrounding monetary stewardship are an appendage to their faith, for Sikhs, theirs is much more at the heart of what it means to be a faithful and practicing “disciple”—which is essentially what the word “Sikh” means.

Conclusion

What do any of these ancient scriptural dictates have to do with the money we earn and the taxes we’re obligated to pay? One could certainly examine what one’s own faith tradition teaches about monetary stewardship, and determine accordingly what one’s duty to God, country, others is. However, if it’s possible to remove politics and even denominationalism from all of this, taken in the aggregate, there are some interesting messages about monetary stewardship in all that we’ve read. At the very least, this much could be said:

○ It is a universal principle, across all major religions, that believers should give and give generously.

○ Giving should encompass contributions to the religion one follows, the government under which he or she lives, and to those in need—whose suffering one might have the power to alleviate.

○ Generosity should not be limited to those who can pay back the kindness shown, nor should one take advantage of those who are in need. Thus, the equivalent of “loansharking” or “usury” (as it was often called) is commonly forbidden.

○ Because believers are consistently taught that they are stewards over what they have been given, one should manage one’s wealth well—being responsible in how it is used, invested, spent, and donated.

○ One should not have a fixation on the accrual of wealth or worldly goods. Greed is universally condemned.

○ Believers should embrace a spirit of reciprocal giving, meaning wealth (in whatever form it exists) should be used to further righteous causes, including taking care of those who are dedicated to serve (through the use of their time and abilities) in ways that the wealthy person might not be able to.

○ Because it is essentially impossible to live a day in this post-modern world without using or being impacted by money or that which it can provide (e.g., food, clothing, shelter, utilities, transportation, entertainment, etc.), believers should engage with monetary means in the spirit of honest earning and generous sharing.

Of course, all of this is clearly idealistic. No one meets all these aforementioned standards and, frankly, most don’t meet the ideal in their own religion, let alone in a composite look akin to the one we just summarized. Nonetheless, the lessons learned from these various religious traditions regarding monetary stewardships ought to stand as an invitation to self-assess one’s own interactions with and uses of money. If nearly every religion upon the face of the planet talks about the importance of being a good steward over personal wealth—and if each gives dictates about how to do this beyond simply giving to the religion one attends—then this principle might be worth thinking about. Clearly, religions universally see monetary stewardship as a chief means that God uses to develop believers into more holy, giving, and God-like beings. Thus, aside from the duty to give, this kind of stewardship appears to be more about one’s duty to “become,” and that offers something “money just can’t buy.”