The Significance And Propriety Of Donation

Giving of alms and charity go hand in hand and are believed to be equally beneficial. In parlance of spirituality, these are conferrer of supreme benefits like entry into heaven (Swarg or Bahisht) the ultimate deliverance from worldly bondage (mukti), acquisition of para-normal powers (siddhi), bestowal of divine grace, capability to perform miracles and the like; whereas colloquially Daan-Punya are said to be promoter of all-round progress, success in life and are also harbinger of superiority in all walks of life. The practice of Giving alms signifies that giving is an act of virtue, whereas Taking i.e. depriving one of rights is sin. The outcome of sin in this world and in the world beyond life is physical and moral decadence. In parlance of spirituality, this itself is metaphorically known as Narak (Hell or Dozakh). Man has been given full freedom by God to choose his own activities, which may either be related to virtue or to sin. It is true that at times the milieu exerts pressure against this choice, yet what transpires ultimately depends on where the power of will of the person converges as Sankalp (a firm resolve for action with unshakable conviction in its propriety). The foregoing hypothesis is amply substantiated by the life-events of well known historical personalities like Harishchandra, Karn, Bali, Dadhichi and Bhamashah. However, those aspiring for the highest goal of entry into Heaven or Absolute Salvation are required to make even greater surrender of personal interests. Devotion to God has only one expression i.e. homogenisation of one's desires and aspirations with those of the deity being worshipped. This is how an insignificant mass of fuel acquires the brilliance of a raging fire. God is known to be affectionately disposed towards the devotee. He readily entrusts his power to the totally -surrendering - devotee and acts according to Tatter's wishes. It is exemplified in events like personification of incarnate Shri Krishna as a dancing partner of Meera and as the faithful servant guiding the blind saint Soordas by holding his stick. Sudama, Chaitanya, Hanuman and Arjun belonged to that category of devotees, who liberally sowed the seeds of everything they had acquired by endeavours of their body and mind, in the field of god and in return filled and stocked their granaries with a million times more grants of divine gifts.

The elites amongst the noble are revered by the masses as Dev Manav (divine men or angels). Entire creation of God remains indebted to such persons for their unusual contribution to mankind. All super persons have found only one way for promotion of excellence in this world. They took a pledge and persevered to pay back a million times more to the humanity than what they gained from this world. Had they been obsessed with miserliness, irrespective of their riches, they would have been counted amongst the class of avaricious persons, who like ghosts and spirits are incapable of doing anything except disturbing others.

Absolute truths and ideals are eternal and self-sustaining. At times, one may find it difficult to adhere to them. Nevertheless, they continue to be dependable guides at all times, like the lighthouses in troubled sea. All human interactions are governed by an established law, according to which whatever is given is commensurately reciprocated. Attempts to befool others by pretentious displays beget only ridicule in return. There are persons who shirk from giving anything and in return of ostentations, expect to receive a multitude of benefits. However big castle in the air they build for quick returns of their conceited actions, what they actually get is only frustration, exhaustion and irritation.

Transactions in this world are governed by pragmatism. The supermarkets of this world are full of shelves decorated with things of beauty and joy, but none of them is available free. Those at tempting to acquire them surreptitiously either meet the fate of a shoplifter or are spurned for their naiveté.

It has been eternally established that contributions of any kind are reciprocated in one way or the other. Social recognition and cooperation are reserved exclusively for those who remain satisfied with minimal return for maximum contributions. On the other hand, there are those braggarts, hypocrites and swindlers who believe in having maximum returns for their minimal efforts. As a matter of fact, there is only one process of transactions prevailing in this world and the world beyond since time immemorial and in that, contribution always precedes the benefits of acquisition. Only cheats and dacoits follow the practice of first acquiring and then giving away a fraction as alms to satisfy their conscience, though even such persons are not always successful in their misadventure.

Unless one takes pleasure in building castles in the air or is prone to daydreaming, a pragmatic approach for solid achievements would necessarily require emulation of the practice being followed by the large-hearted benevolent supermen of yore, which brought them the double benefit of self- contentment on one hand and credit in the society on the other. It is this broad-mindedness and dedication to humanity which has provided saints, reformists, martyrs and social workers, profound advantages from this world as well as from God. Who in this world has ever got the gifts of celestial boons and paranormal powers without imbibitions of asceticism in life? Does one accumulate wealth without making any investment? Now and then one keeps on borrowing something or the other from people and nature. But do we care to keep an account of what has been paid back? Whenever some loan is taken for any business, it has to be returned with interest. Though this is also an eternal law of nature, paradoxically, everyone wants to be totally exempted from it. Here, in this world, everyone is always found looking for an opportunity to take something from just anyone. On the other hand, whenever one is asked- to make some contribution, the general tendency is either to exhibit a disinclination or polite helplessness.

                                                                                                      

It is an established law that for any significant gain in any field of human endeavour one has to make a commensurate contribution. There is absolutely no doubt that this law of nature covers all dimensions of time and space and sensory and extra- sensory transactions. This unwritten law of nature can be felt and seen working in all aspects of life. "Give and take", "Contribute and receive", "Sow and reap" and your bag will never be empty. Since time immemorial many miserly persons have attempted to circumvent this law, but they have failed miserably.

That brings us to another problem in this world abounding with "have nots". How does one receive something from those who have nothing to give? Would it not be childish to expect such people to follow the ideal of contributing for others and perform other virtuous benevolent acts which necessarily involve expenditure? Here, one aspect of the word "contribution" needs clarification. Generally, by "Giving" one means contributing monetarily by partaking one's personal resources. Unfortunately, the modern society measures acts of benevolence on scales of money or related resources and those persons who give away large amount of donation in cash or kind, earn name and fame are appreciated for their generosity. Being a current practice no doubt it has also been accepted as a norm. Persons having faith in the magic of greasing palms and clandestine gifts, claim that even God can be made favorable by making appropriate oblations of material things or by prayers and flattery. They believe that while bestowing favors, God hardly ever considers the ethics or propriety of the purpose of request.

Under these circumstances, one should not be surprised if philanthropy is understood merely as an act of donating money, property or articles for some socially useful purpose; or providing means of subsistence to needy persons. It is not surprising that today money being squandered for personal entertainment and egoistic displays is also being listed under the head of philanthropic expenditure. During the Middle Ages, one of the religious rituals accepted by the society was sacrifice of animals (Balidan). According to another custom prevalent in those days, the working-class (Harijans) were being given only leftover meals. This, they later rightly came to regard as a disgraceful practice and refused to accept such food. There was a time when the clothes discarded by sick persons were gladly accepted by the poor, a practice which today even the poorest self-respecting pauper would spurn. Now-a-days the concept of "Dan" (donation) has been very much misunderstood and exploited by the "merchants of religion". In the extravagance of a Hindu marriage, it has found various names like, Kanyadan and Vagdan. There is yet another common practice of giving Dan by donating money to some government - approved institution for the purpose of income tax relief. The do nor feels happy in the double advantage of, on the one hand savings in tax and on the other, social recognition as a philanthropist. Today, succumbing to pressure from person seeking donations; monetarily obliging family members and relations and going for a picnic on the pretext of pilgrimage are also considered as religious, virtuous or philanthropic acts. Some derive consolation in building places of entertainment such as gardens, parks and swimming pools, which they consider utilities of social welfare. With such a concept of donation, giving bribe should also be considered a kind of donation since it is given generously to benefit someone. Man has become so much conceited that drinks and drugs are also being considered consecrated after having been oblated to some deity (e.g. Bhang is offered to the deity Shiva). Exhibition of one's generosity by cash donations to an institution is also regarded as a virtuous act. That the personal image so built is encashed in some other way appears irrelevant to the donor. In a way in its present practice, giving donation may more appropriately be termed as a business transaction.

There can be only one criterion for considering donation as an act of virtue. The donation made must be made use of by a creditable agency for some noble purpose. On the contrary, any amount spent in the name of donation, which directly or indirectly promotes conservatism, hypocrisy, showmanship, addictions, dogmatism or superstitions, is likely to produce adverse reactions for the donor as well. Only when an activity results in promotion of excellence, it forms the basis for virtues which bring in multifarious benefits to the donor. On the other hand if donations tend to patronize vicious persons or evil designs, irrespective of the spirit behind giving, they are likely to produce a variety of disastrous consequences for the donor, the receiver and others.

An unduly given donation also produces many other problems. By making the recipient habitually dependent on the unearned money, the donor opens avenues of decadence for the former, who becomes prone to inaction. There is no harm in helping a class of persons in times of crisis, but making them habitually dependent on other's help, is like making a healthy person a paralytic recluse. There are no two opinions that in order to qualify as an act of virtue, the donation must accrue from one's honest earnings. Then there exists the problem of finding sufficient quantity of honestly earned money and resources in this vast majority of " have nots", which could be appropriately utilized for commendable welfare activities as virtuous donations. As a matter of fact, donations made generously by affluent persons are generally meant to redeem their own sins i.e. through an act of donation, they intend to lighten the burden of misdeeds on their conscience. 

Propriety implores each man to follow the living standard of an average citizen of his country. "Simple living and high thinking" must be the motto of life. One should feel contented with hard-earned money earned through honest means. Deceit and oppression should never form means of earning. Savings, if any, must be, without procrastination utilized for counteracting disorderliness and undesirable elements of society. The nursery of excellence and progressiveness is dying today because of lack of arrangements for augmentation of virtuous traits in the society. One has; therefore, to do whatever one can to save it. It has been a tradition during the past golden era (Satyug). It is as much relevant for modern times.