Merry Christmas!

 

Memories of feelings and flavours of the Christmas holidays at my beloved school—Taluk High School, come flooding back. The story begins on a crisp winter night, over six decades ago, as I nestled into bed, cocooned in a thick, comforting blanket, the sound of church bells pierced the serene silence of the town. Their reverberations heralded the special Christmas services.  .  . But even in that dense night, their chiming made me to curl further inside the blanket …

The next morning as I walked along with my annayya to a store next to the towering church, I saw from the road the image of Jesus on the cross illuminated by the feeble light of a candle deep inside the Church. Crossing it, we stepped into a fancy store. As my brother picked up some cream-coloured cards with the words ‘Merry Christmas & Season’s Greetings’ printed in maroon under a pair of chiming bells, I saw for the first time how a greeting card looked like.  

Those were the wonders of childhood: kite flying, Merry Christmas greeting cards, Sankranti festival, new crop arrival, new clothes, supplication to Gods … all mechanically… with a little or no understanding of them. Nevertheless, full of joy … … real merriness all-around. 

As the years passed and I moved into college, new thoughts, and newer questions about God, prayers, rituals, and existence began to emerge… …  One evening, rummaging in the library, tumbled upon the poetry of Emily Dickinson. Oh, my God! What a sweet melancholy!

Wrestling with complex notions of God, faith and religious devotion, Emily Dickinson pronounces, “‘Faith’ is a fine invention”. And, she didn’t stop there. Rather followed it with a caveat: “When Gentlemen can see”. 

Is she suggesting that ‘faith’ being an invention of man for man, might not be a crucial natural phenomenon?   

But when she says, “I never saw a Moor – / I never saw the Sea – / Yet know I how the Heather looks / And what a Billow be”, is she not asserting that faith is an essential, authentic and paramount quality?   

Indeed in her admission, “I never spoke with God / Nor visited in Heaven / Yet certain am I of the spot / As if the checks were given – ”, we see an extension of her imaginative knowledge to the metaphysical realm and why, we could even see her devout faith in a Supreme Being.

Is she arguing through these two poems that proof of God’s existence is the Universe’s existence? Is her imagery in these poems taking us from natural to the supernatural? Perhaps, ‘Yes’: first by establishing that Moors and Seas exist despite her no personal contact with either, and then extending the same intellectual conviction, she confesses the existence of ‘Heaven’.    

That’s not the end of the story, for she takes us from this strong idealistic faith of “I never saw a Moor …” to scientific rationalism by declaring, “But Microscopes are prudent / In an Emergency”. Indeed, she says faith matters only “When gentlemen can see”.  In an emergency, when one ostensibly cannot see, “Microscopes are prudent”.

Thus, contrasting religion with scientific rationalism, she says that faith is less useful vis-à-vis microscopic evidence. Or, is she, through these lines, advising us to balance our spiritual beliefs with the cold realities of scientific observation. Maybe!

Her poems even suggest that God is allusive, indifferent and often cruel: the “happy flower”, perhaps with the apparent indifference of the “Approving God” was struck down by the frost’s “accidental power”.

This very poetess also muses on ‘Hope’ that rings true and soothes the parched heart with warmth: “'Hope’ is the thing with feathers— / That perches in the soul— / And sings the tune without the words — / And never stops—at all —”.

So, let me end these musings “spreading wide my narrow Hands” to bring in all of “Paradise” for you to enjoy this Christmas season.

HAPPY NEW YEAR

 

The New Year is around the corner. The current mood is nostalgic, excited, and optimistic. This is, perhaps, an apt occasion to invite the attention of our visitors to a pithy verse that is supposed to be offered as a respectful obeisance before every reciting of Mahābhārata. It runs as:

 

Nārāyaṇaṁ namaskṛtya naraṁ caiva narōttamam I

devīṁ sarasvatīṁ caiva tatō jayam udīrayet II

 

This verse directs us to first offer our salutations to Nārāyana. But who is this Nārāyana? Our Purānās say that— Nārāyaṇaḥ paro 'vyaktāt— Nārāyana is that invisible, formless transcendental pure consciousness that is the abode, support, and impeller of living beings. Maharshi directs us to first salute that Parabrahman.  He then directs us to salute the man too! This is a bit surprising, for it is all right to salute Parabrahman, but why bowing to a mortal man? 

Pundits, of course, have an answer: Dehō devālayah prōktah jīvō devassanātanah— the body is a temple and the life enshrined in it is the eternal Lord. So, conceptually, they mean that man is Nārāyana. Maharshi therefore proclaims that there being no difference between jēvātma and Paramātma, man too deserves to be saluted.

Yet, we, the mortals, feel that there is a difference. And that difference is more due to a delusion—the belief that our physical body is the real “I”. Thus, man distanced himself from Nārāyana. Hence, he remained as a mere man. Now, the question is: How does a man who thinks that he is different from Nārāyana deserve a salutation along with Nārāyana?

 

It is perhaps to obviate this dilemma that the Maharshi tagged an adjective, narōttamam (the supermost human being ) to Nara man. In other words, he is saying that it is only the best of men and Nārāyana are the same. And that’s what even Gita says: uttamah purusas tv anyah paramātmety udāhrtah … … it is that man who realizes this indwelling spirit becomes an emancipated soul. Such a man of illumined consciousness and Nārāyana become one. It means if a man becomes Uttam purusha (supermost human being), he certainly deserves to be saluted along with Nārāyana.

 

Here, we must appreciate one fact: Nārāyana, by nature, is pure consciousness while man can only become that by ardent practice of Dharma and Nishkāma karma. As the saying goes— Manushyānām sahasreshu— it is one in a lakh that can become a super-being, a question arises: How does one become a super-being? 

The sage’s answer is: devīṁ Sarasvatīṁ. After narōttamam, we are directed to salute Saraswathi. Now, who is this Saraswathi? She is the Goddess of Vidya (learning). Vidya could be either para or apara. Apara vidya is knowledge of the physical world and para vidya is the knowledge about Aatma, which ultimately leads one to Mōksha— the summum bonum.  So, it is Para vidya that merges Nara man with Nārāyana— jēvātma with Paramātma. Sages say that Sa vidya ya vimktaye— “Knowledge is that, which liberates! It is by bowing to Devi Saraswathi that we are in a way praying to her to grant us that para vidya to join God.

There is yet another underlying meaning in our salutation to Saraswati: ‘Sara’ means to crawl and Maharshi, perhaps meant to say that it is by slowly crawling upwards to Nārāyana by shedding off one’s grossness/manliness that one can attain immutable oneness with Parabrahman.

 

It is only upon such liberation that man attains the Summum Bonum. That alone can be said as Jayam (victory) for man. Then alone it can be declared: tatō jayam udīrayet— Jayam be announced. In other words, it is vidya that leads us to liberation, and this liberation ultimately facilitates our merger with Nārāyana, and it is only upon reaching the divine destiny that man can be said to meet with Jayam. That’s why Maharshi is advocating namaskar to Nārāyana, narōttamam and Devi Saraswati.

 

There is another meaning hidden in the words ‘Devi Saraswati’: the authorless/Divine revelations. They are nothing but Vedic literature. And this Vedic literature introduces to us two doctrines: Dharma and Mōksha. It tells us that the practice of Dharma leads us to relative Jayam while realizing God within oneself leads to the absolute Jayam i.e. Mōksha.

 

It is about these two doctrines— Dharma and Mōksha— that the whole of Mahābhārata talks about through the journey of Pandavas, various Vākhyanas and Upākhyanas. Thus, the whole essence of Mahābhārata, as my māstāru often commented, Vyasa Maharshi decocted into this simple verse and highlighted its significance by placing it at its very beginning—perhaps, for our meditation. 

 

 

‘Mano Hi Hetuh…’ — Mind is Instrumental for Either Good or Bad Deeds

 

All the exertions of man emerge from the mind and hence the wise endeavor to steadying and stilling it.

 **

We all still remember Enron and its meteoric rise and fall. But what we have perhaps, forgotten or less noticed is: followers fudging the accounts as ordered by bad leaders with eyes wide open and on free will. That is what we learn from Wesley H. Colwell, former chief accountant of Enron, who admitted to manipulating earnings on two occasions in court. Similarly, Paula H Rieker, secretary to Enron’s board testified in court about Skilling’s order to make “last minute changes in earnings results to put them in line with analysts’ expectations”. Narrating this story, Barbara Kellerman, author of the book, ‘Followership’ frames an axiom: “To oppose a leader who is bad—ineffective and/or unethical—is to be a good follower”. 

This whole episode takes me to Vālmiki Rāmāyana, the oldest epic of India. We all know, at the behest of King Sugriva, Hanumān, Jāmbavan, and Angada proceed southwards along with the monkey force to search for Sita. Hearing that Sita is taken to Lanka, they wonder how to cross the ocean. Finally, encouraged by Jāmbavan, Hanumān, like a comet spanning the whole sky, takes his flight above the sea and having crossed it, lands on Mount Lamba in Lanka. 

Then going on to Mount Trikuta and taking a look at the city of Lanka, he wonders if it could be conquered. He then decides to first search for Sīta. His loyalty to the task can be gauged from his worrying that because of him Sīta should not be put into any trouble. He, therefore, adopts a crafty means, for there is no better way to outsmart crafty people than through craftiness. So, he assumes a microscopic shape. As the moon spreads coolness across Lanka, he starts the search for Sīta assiduously in the abodes of Prahasta, Kumbhakarna and others. There is no trace of Sīta. He then enters the interiors of Rāvana’s castle. Even there he cannot find Sīta. 

Then he enters the pleasure resort of Rāvana. Later, he enters Rāvana’s feasting room. Seeing the wives of others sleeping ... lying down in puris naturalibus, Hanuman wonders:  “dharma lōpaṅ kariṣyati” (5-11:37) might ruin his dharma”. Indeed, he questions himself, “Is he, by watching these ladies, transgressing the moral code?”

He then arrives at an answer: ‘Yes, I have seen these women of Rāvana, but not with any foul intention. Nor did any passionate feeling arise in my mind—“na hi mē manasaḥ kiñcid vaikṛtyam upajāyatē (5-11:40). Another bright assurance strikes his mind: manō hi hētuḥ sarvēṣām indriyāṇāṅ pravartanē / śubha aśubhāsv avasthāsu tac ca me suvyavasthitam (5-11:41)—it is the mind that propels all the sense organs to do good or bad deeds, and that mind of mine is firmly established in righteousness. 

Yet, this argument is likely to raise another doubt: “Is it alright to do a deed that is improper simply because the motive behind it is right?” It appears that even Hanuman faced this doubt, for he wonders: “Nānyatra hi mayā śakyā vaidēhī parimārgitum (5-11:42)—it is not possible for me to look for Sita elsewhere, for striyō hi strīṣu dṛśyantē sadā samparimārgaṇē—in such searching, one must perforce, look for a woman among women only, but not in the herd of female deer (5-11-:43). 

The takeaway from this introspection of Hanuman is: To be on the right path, one has to constantly introspect over the deeds being contemplated/performed. That alone enables one to detect one’s mistakes/follies. Identification of mistakes offers scope for negation: to correct the misdeeds committed. Following it, if one could substitute the negative feelings behind such misdeeds contemplated/committed with Sadbhavana goodwill, it paves the way for one to always remain on the path of righteousness. To sum up, introspection is the first step toward the path of good conduct. 

Now, let us transpose this discussion to organizational context and reconnoitre its implications for the workforce.  A company is after all an aggregation of humans working for accomplishing certain common goals. So, there would be a leader, leading the followers toward the goal. In its pursuit, followers are expected to be loyal to the organization and the leader. Examining the link between employee loyalty and profitability Benjamin Schneider, professor emeritus at the University of Maryland has shown that the employees’ loyalty-related attitudes precede a firm’s financial and market performance.  Researchers at the University of Pennsylvania found that spending 10 percent of a company’s revenue on capital improvements increased productivity by 3.9 percent while spending the same amount on developing employee capital simply doubled it — productivity increased by a whopping 8.5 percent. 

However, management theorists also point out that ‘loyalty’ here does not mean ‘blind loyalty’—of surrendering one’s values to the cause of the organization. It means that as the wise and prudent Hanuman introspected about his searching for Sita in the harem of Rāvana and fearing that it might ruin his dharma—“dharma lōpaṅ kariṣyati”—and analysing its righteousness or otherwise critically and only upon satisfying its correctness moving forward, even followers of a leader of an organization should not ignore their ‘moral compass’ while being loyal to their leader. For, according to Timothy Keiningham and Lerzan Aksoy (2009) —co-authors of the book, Why Loyalty Matters— loyalty, like any virtue, if it goes too far, there is a danger of it becoming toxic, as has happened in the case of Enron.

 **

 

Political Parties & Adam Smith’s ‘Invisible Hand’

 

The other day a reader of my blog post on Covid-19, with quite an analytical mind, remarked: “I am glad the blogger has appropriately paid compliments to the Mumbai commissioner Mr Chahal for his commendable handling of the wave… He could have dealt in more detail the two main causes for the surge of second wave one is Kumbh mela and the second reason… the lack of attention of … The US has paid advance amount to Pfizer and booked large number of Vaccine doses even in the 1^st wave itself anticipating 2^nd wave. The blogger should have emphasized on these two super spreading events.” 

True, I should have also dwelt on these missing links, but as I was more concerned about drawing the attention of readers to the excellent work done by Mr Chahal and his dedicated team in addressing the challenge posed by the 2^nd wave so effectively, and kindle a question in their minds: “How is it no other city thought of at least emulating BMC?” I made only passing remark about the issues raised by the reader.

Nevertheless, ever since I read my esteemed reader’s remark, particularly about the US paying Pfizer and BioNTech $1.95 bn as advance to produce and deliver 100 million doses of their Covid-19 vaccine if it proves to be safe and effective and on receiving regulatory approval for emergency use, I have been wondering at this offbeat act of President Donald Trump as early as in July 2020. 

Indeed, the US government had made an attempt to assemble a portfolio of vaccines under its ‘Operation Warp Speed’ programme by entering into such financial agreements with vaccine developers such as Novavax, Johnson & Johnson, Moderna and AstraZeneca involving a financial outlay of about $3.70 bn.

I call this move of Mr Trump offbeat, because, a study carried out by Harvard TH Chan School of Public Health found that “errors were committed in the pandemic’s earliest stages.” The report further observed that the Trump’s administration’s initial US travel ban of January 31 was applied only to non-US travellers coming from China though the virus was “already known to be present in Italy, Iran, Spain, Germany and the UK”. It went on to say that “The evidence suggests that ineffective national policies and responses, especially as compared to those of other wealthy nations … have been driving the terrible toll of covid-19 … in the US”.

Nor did President Trump worried of the pandemic: While Dr Robert Kadlee, the top disaster response official at the Health and Human Services Department, was busy in convening the White House corona virus task force as early as on February 21 with an urgent agenda to arrest the spread of virus, President Trump was predicting that by April, “when it gets a little warmer, it [virus] miraculously goes away”. 

Noticing the disregard of the US President to corona virus, Prof. Tim Naftali, clinical associate professor of history at NYU, wrote on January 19, 2021 in The Atlantic: “in the face of a devastating pandemic, he [Trump] was grossly derelict, unable or unwilling to marshal the requisite resources to save lives while encouraging behaviour that spread the disease”. 

But this very President, surprisingly took a very right decision of paying advances to vaccine manufacturers to make the vaccines available—once they have proven their safety and efficacy and regulators have approved them—to vaccinate the citizens with no further loss of time. What a bold decision! 

Intriguingly, this timely and rightful decision of President Trump reminds us of what a Scottish philosopher and economist, Adam Smith said in his famous book, An Inquiry into the Nature and Causes of the Wealth of Nations, some 240 years back: “It is not from the benevolence of the butcher, the brewer or the baker that we expect our dinner, but from their regard to their own self-interest. We address ourselves not to their humanity but to their self-love, and never talk to them of our own necessities, but of their advantages.” 

Of course, Adam smith, introducing this as an economic thought that highlights how surprisingly “… an individual by pursuing his own interest, he frequently promotes that of the society more effectually than when he really intends to promote it”, set out the mechanism by which he felt economic society operated.  

Now my wonder is: Are political parties and their leaders any way differently operating from this principle? Take for instance our own political climate, we often hear every political party and its leaders talking about their intent to serve people, particularly the interests of the marginalised, those oppressed and the suppressed lot of the society. Leaders establish new parties to serve dalits, minorities and the downtrodden better. Even leaders change parties—yes, even quite frequently—all in their anxiety to serve people better. But the underlying intent is obvious: winning the elections, isn't it?  

Isn’t that in their endeavour for winning the elections, political parties/leaders also do good things for the society without even knowing how much good one is doing? In other words, a leader is often “led by an 'invisible hand' (the desire for winning the next election) to promote an end which was no part of his intention”. 

That’s precisely the motive behind Mr Trump's paying advances to vaccine manufacturers for developing and supplying vaccines quickely—just three months ahead of Presidential elections. It is because of the invisibility of such underlying reasons behind leader;s action,often times we fail to understand easily why political parties and their leaders do what they do, why do and do not take certain decisions and the timing of such decisions, etc.   Sometimes their acts, of course, also prove futile to their own interests! 

In the same vein, some of their decisions go against the interests of the ruled. Hence, it is essential for leaders to always remember what Adam Smith said: “The learned [leader?] ignore the evidence of their senses to preserve the coherence of the ideas of their imagination". Indeed, it is expected of a leader to tolerate multifaceted truths and divergent points of view rather than "Subjection to his Empire tyrannous". And that's what commoners aspired for, since ages.  

Any way that is the game of politics, but what India needs in these Covid-days is  not quarrelling on who did what wrong and when, rather it is time for political parties of all hues to bury their differences, at least temporarily, and to come together as a monolith to focus on annihilating the corona virus from India sooner!

COVID-19 Lockdown: What Next

Ever since the lockdown was announced it has become a routine for me every morning to recline on the bed by the side of the window with a book in hand but intermittently staring at the mango tree and getting lost in a silent commune with it,  for how long I am not aware … …

One such morning, musing at the unusual summer holidays that the COVID -19 has granted me… which, of course, I am enjoying afresh, for such a boon has revisited me almost after almost five decades … suddenly, whispered at my friend of the holidays: How long do you think I would be under the lockdown?

Nodding its newly sprouted coppery leaves, it gently murmured: “No idea.”

Obviously, the way the corona virus is tearing its merciless path through the globe, no one could perhaps, guess an answer. 

As though rooting for it, a Cuckoo from a far-off tree cooed thrice. 

At the wandering voice of the cuckoo,  suddenly flashed in my mind those beautiful sentences that Camus wrote in his The Plague: “Everybody knows that pestilences have a way of recurring in the world; yet somehow we find it hard to believe in ones that crash down on our heads from a blue sky. There have been as many plagues as wars in history; yet always plagues and wars take people equally by surprise.”  

How true! This time too, we are all caught off our guard… … indeed, are torn between “conflicting fears and confidence.” When a pandemic occurs, we first take it as though it cannot stand against the intellect of the man. We even tend to believe that it will pass away soon… but unfortunately, it turned out to be men who are passing away…

What a wonder! A  mere algorithm (?) … ... a lifeless tiny single stranded RNA associated with a nucleoprotein within a capsid comprised of matrix protein… a spherical shaped particle lodging in man’s respiratory cells with the aid of its spikes around   …transcribing and translating its uncoated genome into the host cells’ genetic material… inducing it to replicate the viral genome…and as new virions form by budding from host cell membranes, making it impossible for the host cells to function normally…  making the living beings – men and women– gasping  for breath… indeed, it is rocking the whole globe.

Once multiplication started, symptoms begin to appear… with a median incubation period of 5.1 days, upper respiratory symptoms such as cough and sore throat, laboured breathing, etc., may start by 4-9^th day of infection… Following it, inflammation of lungs with acute respiratory distress may start troubling the patient during 8^th-15^th day of infection…  Aged people and people with co-morbidity such as high blood pressure, heart disease, lung disease, cancer or diabetes… find it extremely difficult to cope with the acute respiratory distress warranting their immediate placement on ventilators…

And this is what is rocking the world today, for none of the countries found themselves action-ready to handle this sudden surge in demand for such sophisticated medical facilities. To buy time to assemble such facilities …  to offer medical support to the infected, and knowing that this virus spreads primarily through droplets of saliva or discharge from the nose when an infected person coughs or sneezes, governments across the countries declared lockdown… or insisting for social distancing.

This has obviously brought the global economy to a grinding halt. Now this has become even a greater challenge to manage.  What is now bothering everyone on the street is: When things will become normal? For sure, it will take quite a long time.

Even after lifting the lockdown on May 3^rd nothing would ever be as normal as today, for a lot of our daily life will probably change forever:   Our very lifestyle is bound to change: family get togethers for eating in restaurants likely to become a practice of the past; gatherings of relatives at family ceremonies, dancing in the pubs…etc. etc., are sure to become out of fashion … indeed  everything will change, of course, for good! People will soon shun curry-points and start self-cooking. Travel to work places, schools, colleges and markets becomes a big challenge. This may compel people with a semblance of affordability to rush for acquiring own transport …    

Agriculture and construction work will be opened up and so would be the case with factories, schools and colleges. But industries such as hospitality, travel and tourism, IPLs and similar activities will take much longer time to come back to normalcy. With the virus in an exponential growth phase and in the absence of rapid testing of every single case and immediate isolation of positive cases, mere shutdowns turning ineffective, elimination of virus may not be possible, on the other hand, there is no wonder if cyclical waves of infection become a norm…. Secondly, maintenance of the kind of social distancing that its prevention calls for is perhaps daunting for India, as we live in tightly packed dwellings and its impact is being already felt in places such as Dharavi. Over it, the normal flu-season being a stone’s throw away, everything looks pretty disturbing. So, any improvement in these sectors have to necessarily wait for the discovery, approval and wide-spread manufacturing of vaccine, which is almost a year-and- a half away to happen, if at all happens….  

The cumulative effect of all this could be: an all-round contraction of economy. Overall buying capacity will be crippled. It means fall in demand for goods and consumables. It would have a spiralling effect on the real economy. One estimate by Goldman Sachs predicts India’s GDP growth to “nose-dive to a multi-decade low of 1.6% in the fiscal 2021 due to Covid-19 pandemic and the subsequent lockdowns”.  And there appears to be no exaggeration in the prediction, when the report argues that the “global COVID-19 crisis represents a physical (as opposed to purely financial) constraint on economic activity that is unprecedented in post-war history”.

In the backdrop of these developments, it is the poor who are going to suffer most, both physically and financially. For, all those who have such jobs which permit them to work from home will be least effected, while those who have to be necessarily on site would face the real wrath of the COVID-19 – both physically and financially.  People from other than IT services may even lose their jobs. Everyone has to learn new skills if he/she wants to be hired by businesses. Again, it’s a big challenge for the less-endowed.     

Over it, nations will be forced to move more and more towards digital world. Businesses such as restaurants, grocery shops, vegetable and fruit vendors, etc., have to not only build up a robust pickup and delivery service but also show-case their sanitization measures and cooking of their popular dishes on their websites to tempt the people to continue to look for outside food.      

Even event managers have to work for making celebrations virtual. Which means they have to build technology and even demonstrate its effectiveness freely till consumers catch up with it. So is the case with trainers – they have turn to online. Even tourism may turn into an interactive virtual walk along the ramparts of Jodhpur or Golkonda fort. No wonder, if in course of time, even court rooms and Parliaments go virtual.

So, what is certain is: Post COVID – 19, world will look differently. But if you ask me, “How much different?” I could only say as much as you could adapt to the unfolding scenario. And, talking about adaption, I get reminded of the concluding sentences of Camus in  The Plague which highly merit to be quoted as an apt conclusion to our current predicament: “that the plague bacillus never dies, never disappears for good; that it can lie dormant for years and years in furniture, and linen-chests; that it bides its time in bedrooms, cellars, trunks, and book-shelves; and that perhaps the day would come when, for the bane and the enlightening of men , it roused up its rats again and sent them forth to die in a happy city.”

Azim Premji: A Trailblazer in Philanthropy

Azim Premji, the Chairman of Wipro, has announced a fresh bequest to his philanthropic endowment—transferring approximately 34 percent shares of India’s fourth-largest software services exporter, Wipro, valued at 52,750 cr ($7.5 bn)—that supports the Azim Premji Foundation. With this, his total commitment to the trust stands at 1.45 lakh cr ($21 bn) which makes the endowment one of the five largest private endowments in the world and the biggest in Asia, besides placing Premji alongside the world’s most influential philanthropists like Bill Gates, George Soros and Warren Buffett. 

This generous act of Premji, besides placing him far ahead of a rarefied group of Indians who have chosen to donate their wealth, has once again brought philanthropy, a word derived from the Greek term Philanthropos, which means “love of humanity”, to the forefront. Philanthropy is essentially an altruistic activity. It intends to serve others by addressing the root cause of the problems faced by the society as a whole, with no financial reward to the donor. It simply aims to effect desired change through giving.

Thanks to post-reforms rapid economic growth in the country, philanthropy has emerged in the recent years as a professional activity. Corporate philanthropy—the act of businesses to promote the welfare of others mostly through donation of funds or time, a program that often constitutes a part of the corporate mission statement—is slowly taking a tangible shape in the country. Corporate leadership is indeed today working towards best use of the resources for inclusive growth through an entrepreneurial approach to problem identification and to implement solutions.

Effective altruists like Premji are focusing more on mankind’s existential risks with a clear understanding that economic growth alone cannot improve India’s human development indicators unless they work in close association with governments in improving the basic requirement of future generation, namely quality education, to make them skilled-enough to get gainfully employed, affordable health care, environmental protection and so on. The significance of addressing existential risks can well be gauged from the mere fact that even a small reduction in the metrics of India’s Human Development Index and Sustainable Development Goals that remained almost stagnant for quite some time has a high expected value because millions of lives are at stake.  It’s against this backdrop that Azim Premji Foundation—a not-for-profit organization—is working towards a “just, equitable, humane and sustainable society” by facilitating “a deep, large scale and long-term impact on the quality and equity of education in India, along with related development areas such as child health, nutrition, governance and ecology”. 

Research reports indicate that income inequality in India is at its highest level since 1922: that India’s richest 1% hold 58% of the country’s total wealth. We have today 2% of the world’s millionaires and 5% of its billionaires. And wealth in the country has been growing at a higher rate than the global average for almost a decade. Yet, the relative corporate contributions to philanthropy are said to have fallen from 30% to 15% in 2011. It is pretty disturbing to note that the ultra-high net-worth individuals’ contributions to philanthropy have indeed registered a fall of 4% during fiscal 14 to fiscal 18, that too, despite the fact that their number has grown at a rate of 12% during the past five years.

Even the mandated Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) under which corporates over a particular size are supposed to contribute 2% of their profits to designated CSR programs could not better the position. Reports indicate that 15% of CSR funds remain unspent, while much is desired in their implementation mechanism, for most of the CSR-money is compliance-oriented as a result of which most of it goes to government-sponsored causes. And the end-result could as well be guessed!

Amidst this gloomy scenario, there emerged a very promising hope: the middle-class individual donors, particularly the young crop from the tech industry, have emerged as the new philanthropists of India. According to Bain & Company report, 100 million donors have joined philanthropy movement between 2009 and 2013. Another noteworthy feature of this group of donors is their focus on efficiency and impact measurement. They are using technology platforms to attract a wider range of donors to achieve scale besides for creating greater public awareness and motivating people to take part in the social change process. In their pursuit of impact investing, they are even adopting cross-sectoral collaborations.

Above all, this young lot is bold enough to address issues such as human rights violations and social injustices including gender-related challenges, which are generally shunned by business houses. This development is more heartening to note, particularly in the context of government crimping the inflow of foreign funds to NGOs that are known for addressing politically contentious causes and activists. There is a growing awareness among the youngsters about the importance of defending core democratic freedom and ensuring the space for civil society to freely operate by offering support to the rationalist groups engaged in defending human rights, and the environment.  

That said, we must also take cognizance of the so called ‘tainted philanthropy’, which according to some experts is not desirable. Some critics observe that for instance, businesses such as engaged in oil exploration, mining, pharmacy, etc., apparently use philanthropy to burnish their reputation that otherwise would have been eroded totally by the flames of the damage to environment and people that their business fans. There are experts around who also call for stop talking “about all these… philanthropy schemes"  and “start talking about taxes.”  There are yet another class of critics who comment that philanthropy is just another way of exercising power by the wealthy. The growing inequality in the society is perhaps breeding such cynicism across the society. But its spread will kill even good philanthropy that goes a long way in bettering the lives of the marginalized.

Reverting to the Azim Premji’s act of donating his ownership in Wipro, some critics have observed a flip-side to it. They argue that such a transfer of around 67 percent of Wipro’s equity stake out of corporate control might affect its overall performance, besides dampening its  share price.  Although there is an apparent force behind this argument, the experiences encountered in the case of Tata group of companies that are owned by Tata Trusts which are fully engaged in philanthropy, suggests otherwise. 

Given the growing inequalities in the country and the challenge governmental agencies are facing in addressing the developmental needs of different sectors, it is hoped that the business leaders come forward to follow the example set by Azim Premji and spend more of their wealth and entrepreneurial skills to gently nudge India’s human development index to sustainable levels. For, in that alone the very development of corporates’ wealth too rests.

Begin afresh, afresh, afresh.

It’s that time of the festive cheer when people often tend to make resolutions, of course, more as a habit.  And how could the beginning of 2019 be different!

It’s an annual ritual, perhaps, driven more by the undying craving for refining oneself. Yet, we often won’t see them through. They rather sprout more to flaunt than to execute, perhaps. Now the question is: Could this year’s resolutions be made differently?  Say, like adopting a resolution which is more realistic, may be more implementable, and within the reach of oneself. For, no one can afford to ignore one’s desire to become that which one admires most.

Well, if you say, “Why not?”, then I wish to share something interesting  that I have read with you. To begin with put your life on pause for a while, just sit quiet, take deep breath and reconnect with yourself. Once you feel being with yourself, reflect on the week that just passed off by putting a straight question to yourself: “What happened in the whole of the week?”

As one reflects on the week that just passed off—thoughtfully looks back at his/her experiences—with the question: “What happened?” , one is likely to end up with the following results:

i.             Some acts—what we did/said in the week—appear as quite pleasing to oneself.

ii.       There would be some incidents of which one is rather neutral about what had happened—there is no good or bad in them except that something just happened.

iii.          Looking at some other deeds, one realizes that he/she did something wrong or poorly.

Now, this result—classification of past deeds into good, neutral and wrong—can be used as learning-points for conducting oneself in the future. For that to happen, what one need to do is pretty simple: 

I       Pick all those actions that one thought as pretty good and examine how one could repeat them again and again in the future.

ii.        Coming to the second result i.e., neutral, one needs to analyse them as to how one can make them better in the future.

Iii      Moving to the last result that has shown one’s actions as wrong, one should question himself/herself as to what should he/she do to make it right next time? Further, in all such outcomes, it’s perhaps more desirable first to accept one’s committing the wrong and then straight go to the person effected by his/her such wrong deed and say something to the effect: “I am sorry, it’s my fault. I sincerely apologize for whatever harm I would have caused.” Secondly, one should guard himself/herself from repeating such wrong deeds. 

Thus, there emerges from this simple reflection-question—“what happened?”—two benefits to its practitioner: one, one could see one’s actions as they really happened rather than how one had wished they had happened; and two, use the outcome as learning points for future conduct.  

Next, as a sequel to this reflection, one may take up ‘discernment’ as the next exercise. Discernment is nothing but going deeper into what has happened with the question: “Why did it happen?” This question takes one to the very root of one’s past deeds. A focused meditation on this question i.e., “Why I did it?”/“Why I said it?” throws open new insights that might have not struck to mind when one actually did it. Such an exercise is sure to bring out something highly insightful. For, it explains the underlying ‘why’ of one’s wrong deeds. 

True, this new knowledge cannot be used for correcting the past deed, but can certainly be used to better one’s future performance, isn’t it?  Yes, it can be provided we are willing to put the new knowledge into practice. Which is why, we should strongly determine to put every such learning into practice. Then only the whole exercise becomes meaningful. Such constant acquisition of new knowledge and willingly putting it to use in our day to day transactions with the society is sure to make our lives better than yesterday.

That said, I must say here that it is always pretty inconvenient to have an appointment with oneself for introspection. But once put into practice, the experience of the benefits flowing out of such an exercise is certain to make one to go all out for it. Its sustained practice enables one live a better life. And to end this on a glimmering hope, let me borrow the sumptuous words of Philip Larkin: “…Last year is dead, … / Begin afresh, afresh, afresh.”

Happy New Year!

(Reference: Dan Coughlin (2018) The Tremendous Value of Personal Reflection and Discernment, EE, Vol XXI, No.4)