Does Buddhism have anything special to contribute to our understanding of poverty?

Just like other religions, Buddhism is oftentimes criticized for encouraging a non-materialistic way of life that goes dislikable of our main desires and motivations. If we want to reduce poverty, we are referred instead to the science of economics, containing learned the regulations of economical growth that promote worldly well-being.

In fact, the alternative is more true. Contemporary economics is much more "idealistic" in that economists tend to are in an one-dimensional world of statistics and equations that do not accurately echo human values and dreams in the world we actually reside in.


In comparison to the calculating individuality that neo-liberal economics presupposes, Buddhism is more practical in the understanding of the sources of individuals ill-being and well-being. Their approach is also more similar to the way most pre-modern communities have understood well-being, and "undeveloped" societies today still do. This article considers the implications of Buddhist theories for their economical development.

Definately not ignoring or lessening poverty, Buddhist teachings are sensitive to it, offering both diagnosis and remedies. The most crucial thing, however, is that Buddhism challenges our usual comprehension of poverty by contextualizing the challenge in a different way, which questions the assumptions that still dominate our thinking about "undeveloped" societies.

According to Buddhism poverty is bad because it involves dukkha, best translated as "ill-being" in this context. The goal of the Buddhist path is to end our dukkha, and that does not imply any significant distinction between life dukkha and some other spiritual type. So Yoga would not and cannot value poverty that is a source of dukkha. Low income means lacking the basic material requirements for leading a significant life free from hunger, exposure and disease. The basic needs of a monastic provide an useful benchmark: food sufficient to ease hunger and maintain one's health, clothing sufficient to be socially decent and protect the body, shelter sufficient for serious engagement with creating the mind, and health care sufficient to treat and prevent disease. Persons who voluntarily renounce mundane possessions and pleasures in support of a life of such minimal needs belong to the community of "noble ones" (ariyapuggala).